The argument seemed more that the value of bike sponsorship was significantly higher than the cost. Then, there’s the credible accusation that Citibank’s conduc

The argument seemed more that the value of bike sponsorship was significantly higher than the cost. Then, there’s the credible accusation that Citibank’s conduct has caused harm, and it is therefore reasonable, though debatable and possibly naive, to suggest that Citibank take action out of social goodwill in addition to whatever settlements they have made (https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-federal-and-state-partners-secure-record-7-billion-global-settlement https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-federal-an... has a 90 million NY settlement) It’s not just up to Citibank, though, as the bikes have Lyft (I believe?) as an owner and whatever contractual agreements with the city. Further, there would still need to be some sort of deposit system to prevent casual theft/neglect.