In Melbourne a single ticket can cover your journey on the trams and trains (and buses too I think). On the trams there are coin-only ticket machines, but at the main railway station at Flinders Street larger machines also accept notes. Conveniently, there’s also an ATM right next to one of these machines, in case you find yourself without any cash at all…

However there’s a catch… The largest denomination note the machine will accept is $10. The smallest denomination the ATM will deliver is $20. In close proximity are a number of newsagents, snack vendors, etc. All with signs saying “No change without a purchase.”

Three-way collusion between the retailers, the bank, and the transport authority?

Filesharing insurance, perchance? Pay a few dollars a month; if the RIAA ever sends you one of those “pay us $3000 now, or face the wrath of our lawyers” notices they will furnish the $3000 to make the RIAA go away.

Slightly off-topic, but I’d be interested in your thoughts on the following way of circumventing what might broadly be linked to architectures of control.

A few years ago, I was living in Finland at a time when the Helsinki tram authority was also attempting to introduce changeless ticketting (timed, if I remember correctly to coincide with the introduction of the euro). In this instance, enforceability of ticket purchasing was slightly attenuated by the ease with which passengers can board a tram without paying, since ticket machines are external (in shops and at stops) and there are relatively few conductors. In response to perceived price-hikes, disgruntled commuters set up the Helsinki Freeriders Association. At a modest €30/year, subscription entitled you to full reimbursement of the fines for not having a ticket.

I suspect the council found a way to curb it eventually, but the scheme was hugely successful in the short-term!

That’s a very interesting way of ‘insuring’ oneself against something fairly unlikely (getting caught) – I wonder in what other contexts something like that could work?

Presumably the tram authority was still able to operate the trams viably even with a significant proportion of travellers not paying, otherwise enforcement would have been rapidly improved. So, overall, the system ‘balanced’.

Does anyone have any more information or other examples of this kind of thing working?

@Joost: Thanks for the comment – I suppose parking prices (and hassle) are probably a factor in drop-off in trade in city centres compared with the free parking at large out-of-town superstores. There seems little reason (other than encouraging overpayment) for not offering smaller time increments.

Thinking further, the very nature of being required to estimate how long you will need to park for, and paying, beforehand, rather than when exiting the car park, could be construed as encouraging overpayment. I think most people end up paying more when guessing how long they’ll be – you pay for longer than you need ‘just in case’ – whereas a system where you pay on exit at least allows more accurate assessment.

Don’t get me started on ‘tickets not transferable’ policies: I’ll save that rant for a future post…