Contents PART 1: EXISTING AND EVOLVING GLOBAL FARE COLLECTION INDUSTRY 1 1.1 Introduction 2 1.2 Transit ticketing industry 6 1.2.1 Overview 6 1.2.2 System components and value chain 7 1.2.3 Market size 8 1.2.4 Development of standards 9 1.2.5 Recent AFC procurements 14 1.2.6 Pilot projects and upcoming technologies 16 1.2.7 Key trends and developments 20 1.3 Fare product categories 22 1.3.1 Paper tickets and tokens 22 1.3.2 Magnetic-stripe tickets 23 1.3.3 Contact-based and contactless smartcards 23 1.3.4 Bank cards 25 1.3.5 Mobile ticketing 26 1.3.6 NFC devices for ticketing 27 1.3.7 E-purses and smart wallets 27 1.3.8 Comparative analysis of alternative fare media 28 1.4 Analysis of integration and interoperability 30 1.4.1 Integration and interoperability 30 1.4.2 Ticketing for single mode 31 1.4.3 Ticketing for multiple modes, single operator 32 1.4.4 Multi-modal and multi-operator ticketing 33 1.4.5 Regional integrated ticketing systems 34 1.4.6 Nation-wide systems 35 1.4.7 Partnerships with financial services companies 42 1.4.8 Improving transit operations efficiency 43 1.4.9 Delivery of value-added services to passengers 45 1.5 Analysis of regional trends and opportunities 47 1.5.1 North America 47 1.5.2 Latin America 49 1.5.3 Asia-Pacific 50 1.5.4 Europe 52 1.5.5 Middle East and Africa 55 Global Mass Transit Research i
Global Transit Fare Collection Systems Report 2016 1.6 Opportunities and outlook 57 1.6.1 Growth drivers 57 1.6.2 Evolution of fare policy 58 1.6.3 AFC procurement opportunities 61 1.6.4 Key issues and challenges 62 1.6.5 Outlook 63 PART 2: PROJECT PROFILES 65 2.1 North America 66 2.1.1 Canada 67 2.1.1.1 Calgary 68 2.1.1.2 Ottawa 73 2.1.1.3 Region of Waterloo 79 2.1.1.4 Toronto 83 2.1.1.5 Winnipeg 92 2.1.2 United States 96 2.1.2.1 Boston 97 2.1.2.2 Chicago 106 2.1.2.3 Honolulu 116 2.1.2.4 Los Angeles 123 2.1.2.5 New York 132 2.1.2.6 Philadelphia 140 2.1.2.7 Phoenix 146 2.1.2.8 Portland 150 2.1.2.9 Salt Lake City 155 2.1.2.10 San Francisco 163 2.1.2.11 Seattle 171 2.1.2.12 Washington, D.C. 179 2.2 Latin America 189 2.2.1 Argentina 190 2.2.1.1 Buenos Aires 191 2.2.2 Brazil 197 2.2.2.1 Goiânia 198 2.2.2.2 Porto Alegre 201 2.2.2.3 Rio de Janeiro 204 2.2.2.4 São Paulo 210 2.2.3 Colombia 217 2.2.3.1 Bogotá 218 2.2.4 Ecuador 222 2.2.4.1 Cuenca 223 2.2.4.2 Quito 225 2.2.5 Peru 228 2.2.5.1 Lima 229 ii www.globalmasstransit.net
Contents 2.2.6 Venezuela 233 2.2.6.1 Los Teques 234 2.3 Asia-Pacific 237 2.3.1 Australia 238 2.3.1.1 Sydney 239 2.3.2 Bangladesh 245 2.3.2.1 Dhaka 246 2.3.3 China 250 2.3.3.1 Beijing 251 2.3.3.2 Chengdu 255 2.3.3.3 Hong Kong 258 2.3.3.4 Shanghai 268 2.3.4 India 274 2.3.4.1 Ahmedabad 275 2.3.4.2 Bengaluru 278 2.3.4.3 Chennai 284 2.3.4.4 Delhi 288 2.3.4.5 Hyderabad 295 2.3.4.6 Kochi 298 2.3.4.7 Lucknow 300 2.3.4.8 Mumbai and Navi Mumbai 303 2.3.4.9 Nagpur 312 2.3.5 Indonesia 315 2.3.5.1 Jakarta 316 2.3.6 Japan 324 2.3.6.1 Tokyo 325 2.3.7 Kazakhstan 337 2.3.7.1 Astana 338 2.3.8 Malaysia 340 2.3.8.1 Kuala Lumpur 341 2.3.9 Pakistan 350 2.3.9.1 Lahore 351 2.3.10 Philippines 354 2.3.10.1 Manila 355 2.3.11 Singapore 363 2.3.11.1 Singapore 364 2.3.12 South Korea 374 2.3.12.1 Seoul 375 Global Mass Transit Research iii
Global Transit Fare Collection Systems Report 2016 2.3.13 Taiwan 381 2.3.13.1 Kaohsiung 382 2.3.13.2 Taipei 387 2.3.14 Thailand 393 2.3.14.1 Bangkok 394 2.3.15 Vietnam 403 2.3.15.1 Hanoi 404 2.3.15.2 Ho Chi Minh City 407 2.4 Europe 411 2.4.1 Bulgaria 412 2.4.1.1 Sofia 413 2.4.2 Croatia 417 2.4.2.1 Split 418 2.4.2.2 Zagreb 420 2.4.3 Denmark 423 2.4.3.1 Copenhagen 424 2.4.3.2 Odense 429 2.4.4 England 432 2.4.4.1 Birmingham 433 2.4.4.2 London 438 2.4.4.3 Manchester 450 2.4.5 Finland 457 2.4.5.1 Helsinki 458 2.4.5.2 Tampere 468 2.4.6 France 471 2.4.6.1 Bordeaux 472 2.4.6.2 Paris 477 2.4.7 Germany 485 2.4.7.1 Bremen 486 2.4.7.2 Cologne (Köln) 490 2.4.7.3 Frankfurt 494 2.4.8 Greece 499 2.4.8.1 Athens 500 2.4.8.2 Thessaloniki 505 2.4.9 Hungary 508 2.4.9.1 Budapest 509 2.4.10 Italy 514 2.4.10.1 Bergamo 515 2.4.10.2 Milan 518 2.4.10.3 Rome 524 iv www.globalmasstransit.net
Contents 2.4.11 Norway 528 2.4.11.1 Oslo 529 2.4.12 Netherlands, The 538 2.4.12.1 Amsterdam 539 2.4.13 Poland 543 2.4.13.1 Kraków 544 2.4.13.2 Warsaw 548 2.4.14 Romania 552 2.4.14.1 Bucharest 553 2.4.14.2 Galati 559 2.4.15 Russia 561 2.4.15.1 Moscow 562 2.4.15.2 St Petersburg 572 2.4.16 Scotland 577 2.4.16.1 Edinburgh 578 2.4.17 Serbia 583 2.4.17.1 Novi Sad 584 2.4.18 Spain 587 2.4.18.1 Barcelona 588 2.4.18.2 Madrid 599 2.4.18.3 Málaga 607 2.4.18.4 Santander 611 2.4.18.5 Valencia 614 2.4.19 Turkey 618 2.4.19.1 Istanbul 619 2.4.20 Ukraine 624 2.4.20.1 Dnipropetrovsk 625 2.4.20.2 Kiev 627 2.4.20.3 Vinnytsia 630 2.5 Middle East and Africa 633 2.5.1 Iran 634 2.5.1.1 Tehran 635 2.5.2 Kenya 638 2.5.2.1 Nairobi 639 2.5.3 Morocco 644 2.5.3.1 Casablanca 645 Global Mass Transit Research v
Global Transit Fare Collection Systems Report 2016 2.5.4 Qatar 650 2.5.4.1 Doha 651 2.5.5 Saudi Arabia 655 2.5.5.1 Jeddah 656 2.5.5.2 Mecca 659 2.5.5.3 Riyadh 663 2.5.6 South Africa 667 2.5.6.1 Johannesburg 668 2.5.7 United Arab Emirates 677 2.5.7.1 Abu Dhabi 678 2.5.7.2 Dubai 682 PART 3: KEY PLAYERS 689 3.1 Profiles of key players 690 PART 4: APPENDIX 844 4.1 Contact information of developers and operators 845 2.1 North America 847 2.2 Latin America 856 2.3 Asia Pacific 863 2.4 Europe 885 2.5 Middle East and Africa 910 4.2 Sources and methodology 917 4.3 List of tables & figures 918 vi www.globalmasstransit.net