Asher
Well-Known Member
Mostly agree, but the scooters were actually worse since their lifespans were short, but this seems to have improved.A couple years ago I did a back of the envelope analysis of the point to point rental scooter business in SF and came out with annual revenue numbers that would be adequate for a single 7/11 store. For point to point bike rental I think it's a bit worse, because the capital and maintenance costs for rolling stock are a bit higher. There's just no real business there. (note that I said "point to point rental"). I think there is a real business oppo for small rent-by-the day operations oriented to tourists, but that is something different.
So why all the noise and expansion around bike and scooter point to point rentals? They're either running on a subsidy (eg. the carbon penalty offsets car manufacturers pay), or they're in the business of selling stock to suckers. Or both. The only consumer advantages I can see to ad hoc renting vs. private ownership are if you have limited storage, are worried about theft, don't want to do maintenance, or your usage rate is less than two trips a month. Right now the services are priced at a loss; the incentives to own grow even stronger if they price to sustain the business or even to (gasp) turn a profit.
I could maybe see point to point bike&scooter rental operating successfully as a co-op, but there's no big windfall exit strategy there. But perhaps thats the reason uber and lyft refused to sell their fleets when they retired obsolete models and junked them instead. Don't give the co-ops any help getting started.
Investment is a stumbling block because the services don't garner enough interest to pay for themselves in the places they're operated. LA's bikeshare cost $10+ in ops costs per trip (and trips average 1-1.5 miles for systems). The Pasadena version was $35+, I calculated from one news article (Pasadena shut it down). Even subsidizing it to the amount transit is, $1 a mile, won't get you a lot of bikeshare. It's just not a good system unless you have a very high density of short multidirectional trips all day, ideally with low car ownership and/or great bike infra. Which describes very few places in the US. I've worked in transport and raised these issues and no one has any response beyond 'but we like bikeshare!' it's (lame*) bikes for people who find bike ownership icky. The irony is it's not even that popular among casual bike riders either, except maybe if their bike is broken and they want to do something touristy.Investment certainly seems to be the stumbling block as this Streetsblog article discussing the Bikeshare Transit Act of 2021 describes “87 percent of all shared-cycling trips take place in just six metro areas: San Francisco, Boston, Chicago, Honolulu, New York, and Washington, D.C., all of which have made significant local investments into docked systems”.
Perhaps making bikeshare eligible for federal transit funding treating them like buses would provide more stability and encourage more corporate sponsorship.
*Except Jump bikes, those are great.