After Lyft/GoBike removed all their electric bikes, SFMTA decided to expand dockless bikeshare so people can continue to commute by bikeshare.
But Lyft decided to sue instead: https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/7/18657312/lyft-bike-share-l...
I was in SF this week and had a chance to try this out. They have 0 (zero) e-bikes despite their app has a column to list the count.
They also force you to pick up the bike from designated racks and drop-off at designated racks which is a pain in the ass.
On the other hand JUMP has a fully e-bike fleet, but bikes were impossible to come by. I parked a JUMP bike that had full battery. An hour later I came back and the app didn’t let me unlock it (reason unknown to me). It seemed like things are really glitchy.
I found the entire bikeshare situation in SF to be miserable, in brief. Scooters are no different.
It’s funny to see that Seattle were like this 4 years ago. Now LIME and JUMP dominate Seattle with fleets entirely consisting of E-bikes. They are super ubiquitous, and there’s no shortage of them, no “glitches”, and no need to park them at a designated rack.
My wife and I use Ford GoBike every day and are quite happy with it. It's probably the reason we still don't have a car.
Why doesn't the city just run it's own scooter/bike share? Seems like it would exist in the same domain as things like MUNI and in theory would allow the city to make a profit instead of LYFT/UBER etc.
I like these commute options that make it easier to get around but starting at $2/ride seems a bit high. If I were to use this twice daily for 200 days a year, I'd be looking at $800/year! I'd rather buy a bike in that case, and just use the bikeshare for one offs.
I've never used a GoBike, but are those prices real & what are the typical usage patterns?
Edit: I see, there are monthly and yearly plans that make it much more competitive with ownership. Great!
I remember Lyft partnered with Ford on self-driving, but does that have anything to do with Lyft choosing to take this over? Bike shares seems outside the core-competency of Lyft. Is it simply for marketing?
I'm confused why the company would take this on as part of some larger strategic plan.
Ford GoBike have to be some of the worst, most ill-maintained bikes in the city. The product quality is terrible compared to the competition - half the bikes have mechanical issues, the electrical bikes were hazardous.
I was an early subscriber given how cheap it was, but I often struggled to find a bike that worked.
I pay $50 CAD a year for bike share across Toronto. This seems pretty expensive, to be honest.
That is until Lyft gets bored with it and axes it like Lime did to their bikes. Now my town is vacant if any rental bikes, despite their promise of fixing our "last-mile" problem to our train station.
Another nail in the coffin of Bird?
A bike share being owned and operated by one of the biggest threats to cyclist safety is, well, it’s something.
I recently read that Uber/Lyft keeps even 75% of money for themselves. I wonder if there is an opportunity for third large ride-sharing app where business model would be based on bidding and company would keep much lower fee, just to cover overhead. So you want to go from point A to B, all local drivers are contacted and they have 45 seconds to bid who would charge less. Requester would see how much sorted by less $ and also ratings so he/she can chose someone more expensive but with better ratings.
Such model would kill Uber/Lyft overnight - they would not be able to adjust to that model because then their stocks would be cut down 95%. However, it is a win-to-win situation to both drivers and ride-takers - drivers get paid more and more stays in their pocket, while takers can chose if the ride is affordable, and at over 50% cheaper than what Lyft/Uber charge, it sure would be!
I wonder why bike sharing is still a thing in business world. Hasn't this business venture been proved to be a fiasco in China, where user base is larger in magnitude, operation cost is residual and virtually no regulation friction, compared to the u.s.? Why do lyft, uber and others think it is viable(profitable) in the u.s.?
Another thing beyond me is although the business model/development of this kind seems to be bound to fail, why they are still chased by enormous amount of capital.
My cynical suspicion is these so call tech start ups are just instrument of a grand new ponzi scheme in which a bunch of investors use borrowed money(from banks, insurance company and the likes) to set up a start up and increase the value of it(manufacture hype to justify the inflation along the way) and the sell to public, which is mainly pension funds, 401k, government backed institutions and so one, that is, ordinary folks.
I hope someone would correct me and shed some light on this matter.