I recently came across a news article on the mylondon.news website reporting that one short London Underground journey is the most expensive in the world.
mylondon says “The one-stop journey on the London Underground Piccadilly line from Leicester Square to Covent Garden costs £2.40 for a single on Oyster or Contactless and £5.50 cash for the 260 metre journey.”. This is immediately followed by a sentence saying that this is equivalent to £14.77 per mile.
mylondon compares the cost of the Leicester Square to Covent Garden journey with the two closest stations in Brooklyn, New York. The journey between Cortelyou Road and Beverley Road in Brooklyn, New York is given as 300 metres and costs “$2.75 (£1.99) equating to just under £10 per mile”.
It is clear that mylondon has followed the widespread convention of using metres for short distances and miles for long distances. This obscures the relationship between the different units because it is not easy to see how the distance and cost are related. Why do media outlets do this?
If they used metres for short distances and kilometres for long distances, the relationship would be a lot clearer as you can multiply or divide by 1000, the number of metres in a kilometre. Or move the decimal point 3 digits to the left or right. As the Leicester Square to Covent Garden journey is about a quarter of a kilometre, it is easy to work out that the Oyster or Contactless single costs about £9.60 and the cash fare costs about £22. When using miles, it is hard to see whether the £14.77 per mile relates to the Oyster/Contactless fare or the cash fare.
You can read the full report at the following link:
https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/london-underground-journey-most-expensive-21158932 (“This London Underground journey is the ‘most expensive in the world'” by Callum Marius, published on 27 July 2021)