> fare capture
Terminology "fare capture" refers to the % of rides that are paid (vs "stowaways"), not the $ of expenses that are paid by fares.
> So, the government is paying $9 subsidy for each rider.
This isn't quite right. A proper analysis needs to separate marginal cost from overhead. If the system is not running at capacity, adding more rides would decrease the subsidy per ride.
You're right. The correct term is "farebox recovery ratio". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farebox_recovery_ratio
I knew the government subsidized public transit, but I had no idea it was to that degree. Wow. I wonder if buses will prove more competitive if/when they're self-driving. Do you happen to know how much of that bus ride cost is for drivers? For vehicle maintenance? Would love to see a breakdown.
Looking at how municipalities subsidized dial-a-ride, are any subsidizing ride-sharing (uber, lyft) systems? Many uber/lyft rides inside of SF are cheaper than the cost of a muni trip.