8 ms·
I've never owned a car in a city as dense as SF or New York so maybe it's different in places like that, but this strikes me as yet another example of the "Uber
by danhak 10y ago
I've never owned a car in a city as dense as SF or New York so maybe it's different in places like that, but this strikes me as yet another example of the "Uber-For-X" SV startup that doesn't solve any real problem. Stopping by the gas station once a week on my way home is simply not a big enough annoyance for me to subscribe to yet another service.
I'm also skeptical of the long-term prospects of this business model based on the rise of transportation-as-a-service and the inevitable demise of gasoline in favor of EV's. Both of those factors will be especially pronounced in the Bay Area, where this startup hopes to gain a foothold.
- lallysingh 10y agoAgreed. What would be better is if they were full service and actually had good coffee that they'd bring to your window.
- sealthedeal 10y agoNow this is a business. Coffee delivery on a motor cycle, they deliver it to you when you are sitting in traffic. #trafficoffeebro
- nick007 10y agoHm, I like this idea. But our customers aren't usually at their cars while we're filling them up, so the coffee might often get cold
- lallysingh 10y agoI meant for regular gas stations. I'm in NJ so I'm used to sitting while getting full service refueling.
- noer 10y agoFurthermore, Uber solved a problem in a market with inefficiencies and use regulation arbitrage to do it. This is just an on demand service betting on the fact that people are lazy enough to not want to put gas into their car. IMO, there are bigger (or actual) problems to solve. Honestly, I wonder why they didn't launch in Chicago or Boston in the winter when weather would make people not want to bother going outside.
- sealthedeal 10y agoBecause you cant't be a Ycombinatorbro in Boston bro.
- sedachv 10y ago> Furthermore, Uber solved a problem in a market with inefficiencies and use regulation arbitrage to do it. What is "regulation arbitrage?"
- serge2k 10y agoIgnoring regulations and using your influence to try to force governments to change regulations when they finally come calling.
- SilasX 10y agoProfiting from legal loopholes[1], esp where two things accomplish the same goal, but one of them is more vigorously enforced/regulated than the other. In this case, both taxis and limo/livery services[2] provide the same good -- "rides to somewhere" -- but taxis are more regulated in terms of rate, driver training, equipment, and how many can be active (medallion limits). Limo/livery services (or something passed off as one), by contrast, are less regulated, and what regulations they have aren't as closely monitored because (until recently) no one cared. The analogy to arbitrage is that it's a case of same good, but different prices on different "markets". (Whether you market it as a "livery" or "taxi" service.) Side note: IMHO, such arbitrage can't fully account for the success of Uber/Lyft, which have actually obeyed the major "no street hails" rule. They provided a better service (reliability and seeing when your ride is coming), squeezed out enormous efficiencies from harnessing IT, and solved major public goods/incentive problems that the regs were failing at -- how to fairly allocate the undesirable fares and get people to provide feedback on bad drivers. [1] http://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/regulatory-arbitrage.asp http://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/regulatory-arbitrage.asp [2] The legal difference between the two is that a taxi can do street hails -- on-the-spot arrangements found by line of sight -- while limo/livery services must be pre-arranged through some booking service that logs the specific driver/vehicle assigned to chauffeur a specific person + guests to another place.
- technofiend 10y agoI guess I'm one of those weird outliers who has a use case but still won't use the service. My wife works nights and rarely remembers to fuel our vehicle. I commute via Uber or bus so I never have it either. $15/mo is still too much for the service. Sooner or later my wife will run out of gas and then she'll do a better job of remembering to fuel the truck.
- nostromo 10y agoI imagine it's quite a bit more than $15 a month. They probably bake some healthy margins into the price of gas.
- michaelmior 10y agoThey claim their prices for members are designed to be competitive with lower-priced gas stations in the area.
- rconti 10y agoI had never heard of this kind of service until a couple of weeks ago when I saw a Booster fuels truck. The advertised prices on the truck were a good 20 cents/gallon lower than the Chevron across the street from where it was parked. OTOH, I don't know if they use top tier fuels with whatever detergent packages or if it's Arco-quality gas, or what.
- shostack 10y agoHaving seen but never used Arco--is there a significant difference in gasoline quality? I had always been under the impression that it was largely a commodity product with the various additives largely being used to help differentiate from a branding standpoint and not actually doing much.
- ams6110 10y agoThere is basically no difference in gasoline brands. They all buy from the same area wholesalers. Some may vary on ethanol percentage and other additives but generally it's nothing significant.
- ssharp 10y agoI can stop for gas, go in for a cup of Starbucks and be back to my car that now has a full tank in less than 5 minutes. Would I pay $15 a month for this even though my normal routine doesn't suck? Maybe. But what about the actual gas cost? That's more important than the $15 subscription fee if the spread is large enough and I'm guessing it is since they have to pay for the drivers, carry some kind of insurance I presume, and whatever other costs are involved.
- michaelmior 10y agoThey claim their prices for members are designed to be competitive with lower-priced gas stations in the area.
- jakobegger 10y agoIf you buy a Starbucks coffee every time at the gas station, doesn't that also add up to $15/month?
- ams6110 10y agoYou're not supposed to leave a running gas pump unattended. The auto shutoff doesn't always work.
- pjc50 10y agoSome US states require a pump attendant to do it for you.
- soheil 10y agoI can see this being a great service. Yeah maybe bike packed, dense SF is not going to be their ideal market, but places like LA where there are more cars than sands on a beach can definitely benefit from a service like this. An average commuter in LA has to fill up their tank every one or two weeks. Not having to think about gas ever is a game changer. I also never really enjoyed going to greasy gas stations.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- hx87 10y agoIf you're filling up once every 1 or 2 weeks, that's not much thinking at all, so it doesn't seem like a game changer to me. Not all gas stations are greasy either--many are clean and shiny. Sure, you'd have to pay 20-40 cents more per gallon, but it's still a better deal than Yoshi.
- mikestew 10y agoNot having to think about gas ever is a game changer. Then maybe the solution is not yet-another-subscription, but an electric car. I mean if it's that big a deal to you, such that you would describe it as "a game changer". Personally, meh, it's an additional five minutes every couple of weeks. Since the only gas vehicle I regularly drive is a motorcycle, I don't even have to "exit" my vehicle, just zip the card through the reader, shove nozzle in tank.
- SonicSoul 10y agoI agree with your points. The only way i'd subscribe to this service is if the delivery went something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUQ-ds9LIvw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUQ-ds9LIvw *EDIT: off topic, Always Sunny In Philadelphia solution to this problem.
- softawre 10y agoThis comment says nothing for the people not willing to go watch random youtube videos to hear your point. Could you have not articulated it with a bit of text and used the link to further clarify what you mean?
- kilroy123 10y agoSeriously. Is it really that painful to stop for gas like twice a month? Not to mention many people like to stop for gas for an excuse to grab a snack or drink.
- randyrand 10y agoFor most no. For some, probably.
- selllikesybok 10y agoTwice a month? Try 2x per week.
- ehnto 10y agoI have a decent commute plus after work commitments and I fill my 70 litre tank once a week. It still isn't that much of a pain point, but if I were busier and less interested in cars I could see the appeal.
- bubbleRefuge 10y agoAdditionally, what about liability? Even though the chances of a static electricity induced explosion from metal to metal contact during refueling is infinitesimal, it exposes all the other cars in the area to that risk unwittingly.
- vollmond 10y agoIs that any different (legally) than if you refill your own car with a gas can?
- hkmurakami 10y ago> I'm also skeptical of the long-term prospects of this business model based on the rise of transportation-as-a-service and the inevitable demise of gasoline in favor of EV's. Both of those factors will be especially pronounced in the Bay Area, where this startup hopes to gain a foothold. IIRC they're also pushing for traction in Tennessee where one of the founders is originally from, so they've split their eggs into at least 2 markedly different baskets.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]