There was a time (ironically, I read this in the MUNI museum near the Ferry Building) when SF had multiple, competing services. They would compete with each other on getting people from the Ferry Building to (wherever) the fastest.
MUNI gets a good chunk of its funding from the City government; it averages around $1/ride. Services like Chariot (I have never used it, and don't know anyone who uses it either) should be able to get similar funding from the government, if they are providing local transportation. It's only fair.
The larger problem is that Muni's quality of service is terrible on all of its routes. The buses are usually filthy, late, slow, vastly overcrowded, falling apart, and frequently contain dangerous and/or insane people.
If the bus system were better on any routes, there would be proportionately less need for private mass transportation.
Combine this with Muni's seeming inability to run enough trains and buses on high-demand routes, and inability to even operate what would be very profitable routes on high-demand corridors such as the Marina to downtown, and we have our situation today.
Most of the riders who suffer daily on MUNI are monthly pass holders anyways, so the MUNI already has taken their money; there is no economic incentive for MUNI to provide better service.
Your Muni is slow. With an average vehicle speed of 8.1 mph, it is far and
away the slowest major urban transit system in the nation. While some of
this can be blamed on San Francisco's congestion and density, there are
myriad methods of speeding up service other agencies have adopted that Muni
hasn't. This isn't just an inconvenience for Muni's declining ridership;
it's a major financial drain on a beleaguered system. Slow vehicle speeds
force Muni to spend more money to provide less service. Muni's lethargy is
literally costing it millions.
For these and other reasons, Muni spends more to operate its vehicles than
virtually any comparable transit agency. For every mile Muni runs a bus in
this city, it spends $19.21; comparable agencies nationwide pay between $10
and $13. For every mile Muni runs a light-rail vehicle, it throws down
$24.37; comparable rail services spend between $12 and $22.
http://www.sfweekly.com/2010-04-14/news/the-muni-death-spiral/
It's unclear how Chariot is getting around San Francisco's anti-jitney regulations. My guess is they're just ignoring it and operating illegally.
From the article:
"... Vahabzadeh says it has received support from SF city Supervisors in neighborhoods that it currently serves."
Seems like they have at least some political support.
Which was great, but there are PLENTY of days when it's either rainy, or cold, or I just don't feel like dealing with the bike. Chariot makes those days sooo much better than facing the 30 (or whatever I'd have to take if I were still working in SOMA.)
There's apparently so much of a market here (for a commuter service not as terrible as Muni) that another company, Loup, seems to be completely cloning what Chariot is doing, complete with having people go up and directly try and steal customers while they are waiting at Chariot's stops.
That logic is backwards. If 90% of funding came from riders, then reducing ridership would be a real threat to the system. Since only 30% comes from riders, the implication is that even if ridership went to zero they could probably keep something going.