5 ms·
I wonder who these bikes are supposed to appeal to. If you are a cyclist then you have your own bicycle, or you have a choice of bicycles. You don't leave the d
by Theodores 9y ago
I wonder who these bikes are supposed to appeal to. If you are a cyclist then you have your own bicycle, or you have a choice of bicycles. You don't leave the door with your bike left behind so you can take the heavier, possibly vandalised, possibly unavailable public transport bike in order to get to your destination later.
Sometimes when catching the train I cannot take a bicycle. In theory I could hire a bike at the far end and just leave my bike at the start station. However, this I never think to do. I might think of getting a bus or even a taxi but I would never think to get a hire bike. Even though there is a rack of them outside the station.
Out of my non-cycling friends, the people that drive to work or just walk, these people have not taken their bicycles out of the shed for many, many years. They are no likely to re-orient their entire commuting experience around some hire bikes as they decided a long time ago that being on the streets with no crumple zones was not for them.
I do know people that do get about on Boris bikes once in a while, as a fun way to get around London with friends on a weekend, but not as part of a serious commute.
There are better ways to get bikes on the road, the bike to work tax free scheme being one of them. This has got a lot of people cycling in the UK. It is also about time that normal bicycles are a bit more legally sensible. With cars we no longer allow 1970's standards (e,g, no seat belts). I am not saying we add airbags to bicycles but we could update the law so bicycles have to have lights the minute they get put in the showroom, mandatory and part of the bike. LED lighting makes that doable.
Similarly, tyres could be made to be 'road legal' with some puncture protection made mandatory. There could also be a small tax benefit for bicycles designed for utility purpose, taxed differently to the sport bikes that have no mudguards.
With a lower tax on 'utility' bikes a subtle shaping of bikes sold could result in safer roads with more people riding year round, mostly for commuting reasons. People would be able to pay the extra for their carbon fibre road bikes that don't have the lights, mudguards and sensible lock, that would be standard VAT, not the bargain 'utility' rate.
A defined 'utility' bike that is personally owned could be insured very differently to a 'sports' bicycle, perhaps more affordably, with reasonable third party cover. Meanwhile 'fixies' such as that one that was involved in a tragic accident killing a pedestrian, those bikes would not be as cheap to ride or likely to be so prevalent on the roads.
- devit 9y agoThe main advantage is that you can combine them with public transportation: you take a dockless bike to an underground/bus station, then once you get off you take another dockless bike to the destination, which effectively gives you very cheap and very fast transportation from anywhere to anywhere. The other advantages are not having to worry about theft, being able to get a bike wherever you are even if you didn't anticipate it, and being able to get somewhere by bike and go back in a car with someone else or vice versa.
- icebraining 9y agoHowever, this I never think to do. Well, some of us do think to do so. Until recently I had a commute that required me to take a bus that stopped 2km from my house; using the shared bikes was perfect for that connection, whereas using my bike would have required leaving it all day on the street, and taking a bus/tram was slower than walking. I don't know about London, but the Brussels system had 1.5M rides in 2016 and more than 40 000 long-term subscribers.