8 ms·

Is it just me, or are there seemingly far more people trying to invest and profit off bikeshares than there are using them? I've lived in several cities in eur

Is it just me, or are there seemingly far more people trying to invest and profit off bikeshares than there are using them? I've lived in several cities in europe and i'm not actually sure i've ever seen anybody using them. Yet there seems to be tons of competing companies putting out bikes in the street. On top of that, they don't even seem to bother marketing or anything. The first I'll hear of a new company is seeing a new colour of bike. The idea is sound in practise, but people seem to place great value owning their own transportation and the flexibility it affords them.

jxcl 7y ago
Edit: I'm an idiot. Ignore the below. This article is about a company that was building bicycles to sell directly to consumers, not a bikeshare company.
- martin_ 7y ago
  Most of the article is about why the consumer business failed because the sister company tried to do bikesharing
- baxtr 7y ago
  You are not an idiot :)
ChuckMcM 7y ago
It isn't just you. In a capital rich environment (where getting money for new ventures is easier than normal) a single success (even if it is just perception) and a low barrier to entry, can lead to many copycat companies appearing. And yes, they over saturate the market, and no you can't easily tell which will win and which will lose from the outside. For the "serial entrepreneurs" this is an easy way to stay employed (it can be surprisingly hard to get a job at BigCorp with CEO on your resume). These folks might just start a new company, raise some money, and voila they are once again on an "incredible journey." In my experience for each "successful" exit (where the investors made some money) you get a ticket for one free "future" company from those investors. Once you don't have enough tickets to get another company funded you either have to change venues (new people, less history), or change markets (also new people but can be in the same locale).
- DanFeldman 7y ago
  > it can be surprisingly hard to get a job at BigCorp with CEO on your resume Why do you think that is? It's so common to hear advice that bigco's will always want to hire people w/ Startup experience, but does that not extend to the founders?
  - ChuckMcM 7y ago
    I can only speak for places where I've worked and hired folks, but the consensus seemed to be that people who seek out the CEO role are highly correlated with a need to control everything and less well correlated with "team players" (or people who can work with peers in a give and take sort of situation). In acquisition scenarios such companies are sometimes much more keen on keeping the VP of Engineering ("get things done") person than the CEO ("I'm the boss") person. That and the cited "common knowledge[1]" that the population of CEOs contains a higher percentage of sociopaths than the general population. I have yet to work at a company that considered sociopathic characteristics as a "positive" for the company. [1] I really have heard this from multiple sources but have yet to find any well executed study that shows it to be actually true so I treat such pronouncements with a bit of skepticism. I have heard more than a few people who are disgruntled at losing their job will blame it on their boss being a sociopath. Such externalization of causes feels good psychologically but it is also self serving.
    - arkades 7y ago
      There is such a series of studies - but they were all done by the same PI, who has built his career on redefining "sociopathy" over-broadly, more or less to enable him to have headlines like "20% of CEOs are sociopaths!" edit: I don't know why this is being downvoted. Is it because I'm lampooning a "common knowledge" that people like? For pete's sake, the research paper that spawned this meme even got retracted by the authors: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23744006.2016.1232537?journalCode=rcrm20 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23744006.2016.12...
    - bsder 7y ago
      > In acquisition scenarios such companies are sometimes much more keen on keeping the VP of Engineering ("get things done") person than the CEO ("I'm the boss") person. I think it's less "The Boss" than the fact that the CEO is generally more marketing/finance focused (far less relevant after a buyout as the purchasing company already has that established) than the CTO or VP of Engineering. There are, of course, exceptions where a company gets bought specifically to install their CEO in the CEO role of the purchasing company.
camjohnson26 7y ago
The main problem with bike shares is the ridiculously short time limit. If you could check one out for a few hours they’d be more useful, instead most are time limited to about 30 minutes. My sister used one once to bike by a lake front and she said she was stressed the whole time about not making it to the next station to reset the time limit before it expired.
- nradov 7y ago
  They only charge an extra dollar or two to keep the bike longer. For most people it's not worth getting stressed about. I've used bikes shares in a several cities for 3+ hours and it was never a problem (although riding one of those crappy bikes for a few hours is kind of torture).
  - Scoundreller 7y ago
    What, you don’t like pedalling a tank on 2 non-pneumatic wheels when you have to get somewhere?
- Someone 7y ago
  The main Dutch bike share system doesn’t have silly time limits. It has a fixed price of €3,85 (about $4,35) for a day. That allows you, for example, to cycle from a train station to a business meeting, park the bike there for a few hours, and cycle back to the station in the afternoon. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OV-fiets https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OV-fiets. It also features halfway decent (for the task at hand) bicycles. Both are good for consumers, but I don’t think such a system makes venture capitalists happy.
- 121789 7y ago
  was that in Chicago? I felt the same stress
Scoundreller 7y ago
In Paris, the private bikeshares seem to have been entirely replaced with scooters and a smaller number of e-bikes. The publicly sanctioned bikeshare is in shambles after an operator change. The only thing keeping the public system alive is it’s offerings outside the city’s core.
- orbifold 7y ago
  The Parisian one is the only one I’ve used and it was much better 5 years ago compared to 2 years ago.
Knufen 7y ago
I live in Denmark and I see 10-15 people ok bikeshare bikes each time I commute. They either use the government ones or rent from private companies.
zn44 7y ago
In London it's hard to find a free bike around the rush hour. They are all gone in case of tube strike or other public transport distraction
simlevesque 7y ago
I live in Montreal, where it all started, and they are everywhere.
cafard 7y ago
I don't know. I see a lot of people on "Citi Bikes", but Washington is a big tourist destination.
luqa 7y ago
In my city (Milan, Italy) bike-sharing is an extremely common solution. I feel like the business model is the main problem. Low margins high-costs (you frequently need to replace thousands of bikes) and basically no moat. Every few years a new startup can enter the marketing with a better bike. The incumbents have to improve their or risk losing the entire market in a matter of weeks.
- Barrin92 7y ago
  >Low margins high-costs (you frequently need to replace thousands of bikes) and basically no moat. the story of the sharing economy right there. I seriously don't know how bike / taxi / scooter rental companies have become a favourite of tech investors. It seems like some Robin Hood scheme to distribute money from investors to customers
- bonestamp2 7y ago
  Can you help us understand why bike-sharing is popular in Milan? For example, why wouldn't someone just buy a bike?
  - icebraining 7y ago
    Seems like a subscription to their BikeMi system costs 36€/year for unlimited free rides (up to 30mins/ride), so quite cost competitive with bike ownership. This is becoming common in main European cities (I know of Brussels, Paris and Lisbon).
  - crummy 7y ago
    It's genuinely less hassle. Where do I park my bike? How do I prevent it from being stolen? It got a flat tire, what do I do? These seem like simple questions but bike sharing provides such a simple solution to them, plus more: you caught a ride to the park but don't want to pay for a taxi back? Missed the bus? Need to get to a meeting a few blocks away but don't want to arrive sweaty from a run? The answer is there's a share bike already within sight of you that you can rent for (literally) pennies in seconds. (They're also pretty heavy for anything but short distances and not always in great condition. And at least in Berlin where I lived you can get your own bike for $50 or so, which I had. But I still like the idea.)
rdiddly 7y ago
I've pondered that question too. Something like Uber or Lyft works partly because of the cost and burden of car ownership. It's attractive to use someone else's equipment if you don't have to buy, maintain, finance, fuel, insure, and store (park) similar equipment yourself, to the tune of thousands of dollars per year. But then you look at bike ownership. I almost want to put "bike ownership" in quotes because even the mere phrase makes it sound so much more serious and demanding than it is. It's so easy and cheap, it seems obvious you would just do that. Or put it this way, I don't find myself going "I just don't want & can't handle all that responsibility of a bike!" It's like, boy you better not get any houseplants then, that much responsibility will stress you right out!
- analog31 7y ago
  Interestingly, a thing about Uber/Lyft is that the number of cars is limited because they are based on converting existing private cars to hired use. So Uber/Lyft don't eliminate private cars. The number of bike shares that can be pumped into a city is limited only by the capital that can be pumped in.
  - alvah 7y ago
    Are you sure nobody specifically buys or leases a car to do Uber / Lyft gigs?
    - analog31 7y ago
      I'd be shocked if the economics made sense, but not all investments produce a return.
      - TeMPOraL 7y ago
        Uber had (probably still has) it structured so that if the investment fails, it's the driver that suffers, not the company.
  - ac29 7y ago
    Judging by a billboard that I pass reasonably frequently, Uber is more than happy to "help" potential drivers without cars get them and start driving for Uber [0]. In theory, the number of cars available to Uber is also only limited by the capital that can be pumped in. I don't know if the prices are currently subsidized, but there's no reason they couldn't be. [0] I'm assuming it's this program: https://www.uber.com/us/en/drive/vehicle-solutions/ https://www.uber.com/us/en/drive/vehicle-solutions/
fooblitzky 7y ago
Seattle collects data on bike share usage, available here: https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs/programs/bike-program/bike-share https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs... Seems in the sunnier months they get about 200,000 trips, from a fleet of 10,000 bikes. I think a lot of people start riding the share bikes before deciding to purchase a bike themselves too. Overall ridership is up 12% this year.
- breuleux 7y ago
  In Montreal, the figure ranges from 600,000 (May) to 900,000 trips (July) from a fleet of 7,500 (there are no bikes from mid-November to mid-April). They're everywhere. Edit: I was still on the 2017 figures for some reason. 800,000 trips last May, 975,000 last August. (https://montreal.bixi.com/en/open-data https://montreal.bixi.com/en/open-data)
  - Belphemur 7y ago
    Even with those ridership number the company went bankrupt in 2014 and had to be bought by the city that made it non profit. In other words, not really a profitable market.
    - alexanderdmitri 7y ago
      Companies targeting great markets fail all the time due to other factors. It not like all that needs to happen is someone point their finger at a good market and magically money starts piling up.
- mdorazio 7y ago
  Great link, thanks for sharing. A couple more stats for other readers here: - In May 2019, bike share users took about 218,400 trips on a fleet of about 4,400-5,100 bikes. (~43 trips per bike average during the month) - Around 95,000 individual users - ~2 trips per individual user during the month So, realistically not that great on a per-user basis and it seems like a lot of users are only trying it out a few times or grabbing a bike once in a while. That meshes pretty well with the idea that people who find themselves using the service frequently probably just buy a bike.
twic 7y ago
> i'm not actually sure i've ever seen anybody using them As a datapoint, i almost crashed into someone riding one in London an hour and a half ago. The front lights on the Lime bikes are evidently not very reliable.
- kohtatsu 7y ago
  Oh no. My girlfriend and I recently rented some Lime bikes in Calgary. The brakes on hers weren't reliable enough to go down hills, let alone stop in an emergency. Mine weren't much better. We left appropriate reviews, and were able to tell the next rider which to use, but they really need a quick maintenance survey, even just for brake shape, and perhaps a "flag bike as dangerous" button. Also found the e-assist awkward, particularly at low speeds around pedestrians. Would ride again, but just double check the brakes/mainteance.
Johnny555 7y ago
I make regular use of bike share -- I have 2 bus options to take me home, one drops me off 2 blocks from home, one drops me off 2 miles from home. When I take the farther bus, I usually use a bike-share bike for those last 2 miles (the route is on a dedicated bike path). Works great for me and apparently someone uses the bike in for their commute in the mornings since the bike is usually gone in the morning when I get to the bus stop.
sethhochberg 7y ago
There's a definite network effect... its hard to justify riding a shared bike somewhere if you can't be reasonably sure there will be one for you to ride back when its time to return. Maybe you could cobble a trip together with multiple vendors in cities where there are competing systems, but thats more hassle and makes it difficult if you're buying a yearly pass or some other monthly discount. If you want some real data from a large program with good public support, CitiBike in NYC publishes open ridership data: https://www.citibikenyc.com/system-data https://www.citibikenyc.com/system-data The tl;dr is that the system is very popular, and they're constantly expanding it - currently averaging around 62k trips per day on 12k bikes across 750 stations. I own my own bike, but I'll use a Citibike for a one-way trip or to bridge a gap when I'm already out away from home without my bike. There is also a ton of utility for people who ride more casually, or don't want to carry bikes up stairs, or don't have room in their apartment, etc, etc.
megaremote 7y ago
> I've lived in several cities in europe and i'm not actually sure i've ever seen anybody using them. Used them all the time in London and Paris, and visiting other cities. They were great. Loads of people used them in the cities I saw. I think there are a sort of people who will only use cars for everything, and don't really notice anything not car related.
benj111 7y ago
"they don't even seem to bother marketing or anything. The first I'll hear of a new company is seeing a new colour of bike" Is that not the best marketing? Actually paying for inner city marketing is probably expensive, online marketing is probably going to reach more people that this isnt relevant to. If you're seeing the bike you probably are the target market and can see its a somewhat legit company (in the sense that they do actually have bikes at least).
mruts 7y ago
I've seen tons of people riding the CitiBikes in NYC. They seem fairly popular.
kgutteridge 7y ago
I used the Boris Bikes in London 249 times last year, theres an annual pass that costs £90. I commute into the city by train so its a lot easier than using my own bike. In London at least the scheme seems fairly well used with around million hires a month in the summer months http://content.tfl.gov.uk/santander-cycles-quarterly-performance-q3-1819.pdf http://content.tfl.gov.uk/santander-cycles-quarterly-perform...
wastedhours 7y ago
I see the Santander Cycles used in London all of the time (not calling them by their slang name because #politics) - it flies in the face of the notion that you have to be dockless to succeed in bike sharing. Honestly, I hate the litter these dockless sharing companies have spread across the city.
stevekemp 7y ago
Like many of the other people to reply, I can only say that here in Helsinki the local council operates a scheme which is very very popular. It costs €30 for a "season", and that gives you 30-minutes free ride from the bicycles you'll find all over the place in their stands. You can pay a small fee to get more time, or you can do what most people do which is to ride to a stand, and swap your bike for another. The only problem with the scheme is that it only runs around the summer, but I guess fewer people are interested in cycling in the snow/ice-heavy part of the year. More details here: https://kaupunkipyorat.hsl.fi/en/helsinki/products https://kaupunkipyorat.hsl.fi/en/helsinki/products

jxcl 7y ago

Edit: I'm an idiot. Ignore the below. This article is about a company that was building bicycles to sell directly to consumers, not a bikeshare company.

martin_ 7y ago
Most of the article is about why the consumer business failed because the sister company tried to do bikesharing
baxtr 7y ago
You are not an idiot :)

ChuckMcM 7y ago

It isn't just you. In a capital rich environment (where getting money for new ventures is easier than normal) a single success (even if it is just perception) and a low barrier to entry, can lead to many copycat companies appearing. And yes, they over saturate the market, and no you can't easily tell which will win and which will lose from the outside. For the "serial entrepreneurs" this is an easy way to stay employed (it can be surprisingly hard to get a job at BigCorp with CEO on your resume). These folks might just start a new company, raise some money, and voila they are once again on an "incredible journey." In my experience for each "successful" exit (where the investors made some money) you get a ticket for one free "future" company from those investors. Once you don't have enough tickets to get another company funded you either have to change venues (new people, less history), or change markets (also new people but can be in the same locale).

DanFeldman 7y ago
> it can be surprisingly hard to get a job at BigCorp with CEO on your resume Why do you think that is? It's so common to hear advice that bigco's will always want to hire people w/ Startup experience, but does that not extend to the founders?
- ChuckMcM 7y ago
  I can only speak for places where I've worked and hired folks, but the consensus seemed to be that people who seek out the CEO role are highly correlated with a need to control everything and less well correlated with "team players" (or people who can work with peers in a give and take sort of situation). In acquisition scenarios such companies are sometimes much more keen on keeping the VP of Engineering ("get things done") person than the CEO ("I'm the boss") person. That and the cited "common knowledge[1]" that the population of CEOs contains a higher percentage of sociopaths than the general population. I have yet to work at a company that considered sociopathic characteristics as a "positive" for the company. [1] I really have heard this from multiple sources but have yet to find any well executed study that shows it to be actually true so I treat such pronouncements with a bit of skepticism. I have heard more than a few people who are disgruntled at losing their job will blame it on their boss being a sociopath. Such externalization of causes feels good psychologically but it is also self serving.
  - arkades 7y ago
    There is such a series of studies - but they were all done by the same PI, who has built his career on redefining "sociopathy" over-broadly, more or less to enable him to have headlines like "20% of CEOs are sociopaths!" edit: I don't know why this is being downvoted. Is it because I'm lampooning a "common knowledge" that people like? For pete's sake, the research paper that spawned this meme even got retracted by the authors: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23744006.2016.1232537?journalCode=rcrm20 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23744006.2016.12...
  - bsder 7y ago
    > In acquisition scenarios such companies are sometimes much more keen on keeping the VP of Engineering ("get things done") person than the CEO ("I'm the boss") person. I think it's less "The Boss" than the fact that the CEO is generally more marketing/finance focused (far less relevant after a buyout as the purchasing company already has that established) than the CTO or VP of Engineering. There are, of course, exceptions where a company gets bought specifically to install their CEO in the CEO role of the purchasing company.

camjohnson26 7y ago

The main problem with bike shares is the ridiculously short time limit. If you could check one out for a few hours they’d be more useful, instead most are time limited to about 30 minutes. My sister used one once to bike by a lake front and she said she was stressed the whole time about not making it to the next station to reset the time limit before it expired.

nradov 7y ago
They only charge an extra dollar or two to keep the bike longer. For most people it's not worth getting stressed about. I've used bikes shares in a several cities for 3+ hours and it was never a problem (although riding one of those crappy bikes for a few hours is kind of torture).
- Scoundreller 7y ago
  What, you don’t like pedalling a tank on 2 non-pneumatic wheels when you have to get somewhere?
Someone 7y ago
The main Dutch bike share system doesn’t have silly time limits. It has a fixed price of €3,85 (about $4,35) for a day. That allows you, for example, to cycle from a train station to a business meeting, park the bike there for a few hours, and cycle back to the station in the afternoon. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OV-fiets https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OV-fiets. It also features halfway decent (for the task at hand) bicycles. Both are good for consumers, but I don’t think such a system makes venture capitalists happy.
121789 7y ago
was that in Chicago? I felt the same stress

Scoundreller 7y ago

In Paris, the private bikeshares seem to have been entirely replaced with scooters and a smaller number of e-bikes. The publicly sanctioned bikeshare is in shambles after an operator change. The only thing keeping the public system alive is it’s offerings outside the city’s core.

orbifold 7y ago
The Parisian one is the only one I’ve used and it was much better 5 years ago compared to 2 years ago.

Knufen 7y ago

I live in Denmark and I see 10-15 people ok bikeshare bikes each time I commute. They either use the government ones or rent from private companies.

zn44 7y ago

In London it's hard to find a free bike around the rush hour. They are all gone in case of tube strike or other public transport distraction

simlevesque 7y ago

I live in Montreal, where it all started, and they are everywhere.

cafard 7y ago

I don't know. I see a lot of people on "Citi Bikes", but Washington is a big tourist destination.

luqa 7y ago

In my city (Milan, Italy) bike-sharing is an extremely common solution. I feel like the business model is the main problem. Low margins high-costs (you frequently need to replace thousands of bikes) and basically no moat. Every few years a new startup can enter the marketing with a better bike. The incumbents have to improve their or risk losing the entire market in a matter of weeks.

Barrin92 7y ago
>Low margins high-costs (you frequently need to replace thousands of bikes) and basically no moat. the story of the sharing economy right there. I seriously don't know how bike / taxi / scooter rental companies have become a favourite of tech investors. It seems like some Robin Hood scheme to distribute money from investors to customers
bonestamp2 7y ago
Can you help us understand why bike-sharing is popular in Milan? For example, why wouldn't someone just buy a bike?
- icebraining 7y ago
  Seems like a subscription to their BikeMi system costs 36€/year for unlimited free rides (up to 30mins/ride), so quite cost competitive with bike ownership. This is becoming common in main European cities (I know of Brussels, Paris and Lisbon).
- crummy 7y ago
  It's genuinely less hassle. Where do I park my bike? How do I prevent it from being stolen? It got a flat tire, what do I do? These seem like simple questions but bike sharing provides such a simple solution to them, plus more: you caught a ride to the park but don't want to pay for a taxi back? Missed the bus? Need to get to a meeting a few blocks away but don't want to arrive sweaty from a run? The answer is there's a share bike already within sight of you that you can rent for (literally) pennies in seconds. (They're also pretty heavy for anything but short distances and not always in great condition. And at least in Berlin where I lived you can get your own bike for $50 or so, which I had. But I still like the idea.)

rdiddly 7y ago

I've pondered that question too. Something like Uber or Lyft works partly because of the cost and burden of car ownership. It's attractive to use someone else's equipment if you don't have to buy, maintain, finance, fuel, insure, and store (park) similar equipment yourself, to the tune of thousands of dollars per year. But then you look at bike ownership. I almost want to put "bike ownership" in quotes because even the mere phrase makes it sound so much more serious and demanding than it is. It's so easy and cheap, it seems obvious you would just do that. Or put it this way, I don't find myself going "I just don't want & can't handle all that responsibility of a bike!" It's like, boy you better not get any houseplants then, that much responsibility will stress you right out!

analog31 7y ago
Interestingly, a thing about Uber/Lyft is that the number of cars is limited because they are based on converting existing private cars to hired use. So Uber/Lyft don't eliminate private cars. The number of bike shares that can be pumped into a city is limited only by the capital that can be pumped in.
- alvah 7y ago
  Are you sure nobody specifically buys or leases a car to do Uber / Lyft gigs?
  - analog31 7y ago
    I'd be shocked if the economics made sense, but not all investments produce a return.
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      Uber had (probably still has) it structured so that if the investment fails, it's the driver that suffers, not the company.
- ac29 7y ago
  Judging by a billboard that I pass reasonably frequently, Uber is more than happy to "help" potential drivers without cars get them and start driving for Uber [0]. In theory, the number of cars available to Uber is also only limited by the capital that can be pumped in. I don't know if the prices are currently subsidized, but there's no reason they couldn't be. [0] I'm assuming it's this program: https://www.uber.com/us/en/drive/vehicle-solutions/ https://www.uber.com/us/en/drive/vehicle-solutions/

fooblitzky 7y ago

Seattle collects data on bike share usage, available here: https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs/programs/bike-program/bike-share https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs... Seems in the sunnier months they get about 200,000 trips, from a fleet of 10,000 bikes. I think a lot of people start riding the share bikes before deciding to purchase a bike themselves too. Overall ridership is up 12% this year.

breuleux 7y ago
In Montreal, the figure ranges from 600,000 (May) to 900,000 trips (July) from a fleet of 7,500 (there are no bikes from mid-November to mid-April). They're everywhere. Edit: I was still on the 2017 figures for some reason. 800,000 trips last May, 975,000 last August. (https://montreal.bixi.com/en/open-data https://montreal.bixi.com/en/open-data)
- Belphemur 7y ago
  Even with those ridership number the company went bankrupt in 2014 and had to be bought by the city that made it non profit. In other words, not really a profitable market.
  - alexanderdmitri 7y ago
    Companies targeting great markets fail all the time due to other factors. It not like all that needs to happen is someone point their finger at a good market and magically money starts piling up.
mdorazio 7y ago
Great link, thanks for sharing. A couple more stats for other readers here: - In May 2019, bike share users took about 218,400 trips on a fleet of about 4,400-5,100 bikes. (~43 trips per bike average during the month) - Around 95,000 individual users - ~2 trips per individual user during the month So, realistically not that great on a per-user basis and it seems like a lot of users are only trying it out a few times or grabbing a bike once in a while. That meshes pretty well with the idea that people who find themselves using the service frequently probably just buy a bike.

twic 7y ago

> i'm not actually sure i've ever seen anybody using them As a datapoint, i almost crashed into someone riding one in London an hour and a half ago. The front lights on the Lime bikes are evidently not very reliable.

kohtatsu 7y ago
Oh no. My girlfriend and I recently rented some Lime bikes in Calgary. The brakes on hers weren't reliable enough to go down hills, let alone stop in an emergency. Mine weren't much better. We left appropriate reviews, and were able to tell the next rider which to use, but they really need a quick maintenance survey, even just for brake shape, and perhaps a "flag bike as dangerous" button. Also found the e-assist awkward, particularly at low speeds around pedestrians. Would ride again, but just double check the brakes/mainteance.

Johnny555 7y ago

I make regular use of bike share -- I have 2 bus options to take me home, one drops me off 2 blocks from home, one drops me off 2 miles from home. When I take the farther bus, I usually use a bike-share bike for those last 2 miles (the route is on a dedicated bike path). Works great for me and apparently someone uses the bike in for their commute in the mornings since the bike is usually gone in the morning when I get to the bus stop.

sethhochberg 7y ago

There's a definite network effect... its hard to justify riding a shared bike somewhere if you can't be reasonably sure there will be one for you to ride back when its time to return. Maybe you could cobble a trip together with multiple vendors in cities where there are competing systems, but thats more hassle and makes it difficult if you're buying a yearly pass or some other monthly discount. If you want some real data from a large program with good public support, CitiBike in NYC publishes open ridership data: https://www.citibikenyc.com/system-data https://www.citibikenyc.com/system-data The tl;dr is that the system is very popular, and they're constantly expanding it - currently averaging around 62k trips per day on 12k bikes across 750 stations. I own my own bike, but I'll use a Citibike for a one-way trip or to bridge a gap when I'm already out away from home without my bike. There is also a ton of utility for people who ride more casually, or don't want to carry bikes up stairs, or don't have room in their apartment, etc, etc.

megaremote 7y ago

> I've lived in several cities in europe and i'm not actually sure i've ever seen anybody using them. Used them all the time in London and Paris, and visiting other cities. They were great. Loads of people used them in the cities I saw. I think there are a sort of people who will only use cars for everything, and don't really notice anything not car related.

benj111 7y ago

"they don't even seem to bother marketing or anything. The first I'll hear of a new company is seeing a new colour of bike" Is that not the best marketing? Actually paying for inner city marketing is probably expensive, online marketing is probably going to reach more people that this isnt relevant to. If you're seeing the bike you probably are the target market and can see its a somewhat legit company (in the sense that they do actually have bikes at least).

mruts 7y ago

I've seen tons of people riding the CitiBikes in NYC. They seem fairly popular.

kgutteridge 7y ago

I used the Boris Bikes in London 249 times last year, theres an annual pass that costs £90. I commute into the city by train so its a lot easier than using my own bike. In London at least the scheme seems fairly well used with around million hires a month in the summer months http://content.tfl.gov.uk/santander-cycles-quarterly-performance-q3-1819.pdf http://content.tfl.gov.uk/santander-cycles-quarterly-perform...

wastedhours 7y ago

I see the Santander Cycles used in London all of the time (not calling them by their slang name because #politics) - it flies in the face of the notion that you have to be dockless to succeed in bike sharing. Honestly, I hate the litter these dockless sharing companies have spread across the city.

stevekemp 7y ago

Like many of the other people to reply, I can only say that here in Helsinki the local council operates a scheme which is very very popular. It costs €30 for a "season", and that gives you 30-minutes free ride from the bicycles you'll find all over the place in their stands. You can pay a small fee to get more time, or you can do what most people do which is to ride to a stand, and swap your bike for another. The only problem with the scheme is that it only runs around the summer, but I guess fewer people are interested in cycling in the snow/ice-heavy part of the year. More details here: https://kaupunkipyorat.hsl.fi/en/helsinki/products https://kaupunkipyorat.hsl.fi/en/helsinki/products