Transit agencies across the country are examining opportunities to increase revenues as decreasing subsidies from federal, state, and local governments and increasing funding needs become ever more pressing. The appeal to transit agencies to contract with an advertising agent who will sell advertising space on and in buses, trains, stations, shelters, and other agency property is completely understandable-advertising provides revenue. With what appears to be a modest investment in personnel and time, the transit authority is usually guaranteed a minimum annual revenue flow and a share of net revenues above an agreed upon minimum. In addition, the transit authority can include trades with media for unsold space. They can also use unsold space to promote the system's transportation services and to offer ad space for public service announcements and to nonprofit organizations. This is a time when corporations and industries with previously conservative approaches to advertising are showing up on buses, kiosks, and other forms of outdoor advertising in record numbers. It has been called the golden age of out-of-home advertising as the fashion industry and the media, to name but two relatively new categories of outdoor advertising clients, discover the potential for exposure beyond the traditional realms of print and broadcast ads. Is transit aware of the value of their inventory as a commercial resource and are they making the most of those assets? There are those who argue that permitting advertising on publicly supported transit systems demonstrates responsible stewardship and respect for the taxpayers' hard-earned dollars by maximizing every opportunity to use less of them. Others express concern about the visual impact the ads have on the public landscape. This synthesis describes the existing transit advertising environment and agency experiences. It also explores new areas of innovative revenue-generating practices. Twenty-six transit authorities-large, medium, and small, bus-only, rail-only, and mixed modes, from Newark, New Jersey to Honolulu, Hawaii-were surveyed. Care was taken to include transit agencies of all sizes and from every region in the nation in a survey conducted in the early months of 1997. The Kowloon Motor Bus Company is the 27th transit system included in the survey and the only foreign transit agency represented in the survey analysis, The questionnaire is provided in Appendix A. Of the surveyed agencies, 85 percent sell or lease advertising space and more than three-fourths of them contract for the service. Annual revenues from advertising range from a low of $1,000 a year in Dayton, Ohio-where only public service ads are permitted and a nominal fee is charged-to $17 million in New York City. If additional revenues are the biggest plus, some of the areas for concern by transit authorities still thinking about whether to start an advertising program include legal, operational, safety, and aesthetic issues. Some cities that have laws regulating outdoor advertising and sign codes may prohibit some forms of advertisements. Transit agencies that allow advertising on their vehicles and property have varying degrees of control over ad content. Although every agency has advertising policies and standards that prohibit false, obscene, or vulgar content, the fact is that people differ in their interpretations of what constitutes false, obscene, or vulgar material and law suits have been brought and continue through the courts on these matters. Lawsuits that are currently wending their way through the appeals process may help to clarify the issue of content control. Operational concerns include restrictions of buses with certain ads to those routes that have specific demographics of interest to an advertiser. This requirement could be viewed as reducing a transit authority's flexibility in assigning buses to garages and routes and adding associated costs. Another maintenance issue is related to the use of paint and direct application ads and the need to touch up or repaint vehicles that have been painted or covered with adhesive material. Most contracts now call for the advertising contractor to bear the costs of such maintenance for painted or whole-wrapped buses. Safety concerns range from decreased visibility - because ads on shelters and windows could limit clear views and natural sight lines - to concerns about opportunities for increased vandalism and graffiti. Transit authorities with no advertising revenue program may worry that selling ads might detract from a positive public image. The subject of ad content is highly volatile. Proponents of free speech often find themselves at odds with those who worry about community standards and the images that young people are exposed to in public places. Clearly, these issues deserve and are receiving careful consideration. Advertising is but one area of revenue enhancement under exploration by transit authorities. From fees collected for vending machines and pay phones to marketing merchandise and expertise, transit authorities continue to evaluate many opportunities for new revenue sources. Agencies with rights-of-way are leasing space for cables, pipelines, and utilities. Real estate leases, including air rights above and around stations bring added revenues into transit agency coffers. One of the most frequently cited examples of "mining every possibility" is the Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (LYNX) in the tourist mecca Orlando, Florida. This 250-bus operation using an in-house staff of two commissioned sales people reports a $2.5 to $3 million annual revenue stream from advertising, sponsorships, merchandising sales and, in their own words, "everything we can think of." They are currently contemplating using on-board videos and broadcasting from their buses to tap additional revenue. Advertising dollars represent a small percentage of transit agency budgets and are, in fact, even a small percentage of annual fare box revenues. However, in this era of increasing demands on ever-shrinking dollars, the chance to leverage revenue from existing passive resources is sought and welcome, but not necessarily in every way or in every venue. In Montreal, for example, the transit authority has used hub cap ads, bus hand-straps shaped like Coca-Cola bottles, and has even wrapped whole trains in ads. They are exploring a station commercialization program that would turn a station over to a company and let that company paint the entire station with its colours and logo, add stores, demonstrate new products, and distribute information. While some people may find such commercialization crass and offensive, others may find it opening exciting possibilities. The debate is far from over. The board of directors of one major East Coast transit agency terminated its whole bus advertising program in December. 1996 and rejected a $1.8 million guaranteed revenue stream over a 5-year period, because it believed that whole bus ads were incompatible "with the local environment." The lawyers are now working out the impact of that decision on their contractual obligations. The idea of whole bus advertising is made more palatable for some people as transit authorities consider a discount "cultural affairs" rate for museums and opera houses. Most major transit authorities in the country allow advertising on some portions of their vehicles and property. Transit authority boards across the country continue to debate the shape and scope of acceptable advertising policies. (A)
Samenvatting