Posted on 09/12/2018 4:24:04 AM PDT by Kaslin
I just zipped down a city street on an electric scooter. It cost me 15 cents a minute. Fast and fun!
My scooter was just lying on the ground. I picked it up, activated it with my phone and rode away. When I was done, I simply abandoned it.
Won't it be stolen? No, because you need an app to activate the scooter and a GPS device keeps track of it.
My wife loves using the newish Citi Bike shared bicycles that are locked in a big dock near our apartment. They were a good innovation.
But then entrepreneurs came up with "dockless" bikes. They're even better.
Better still are these shared scooters. They're small, flexible, cheap and convenient. Maybe these scooters will be the next revolution in urban transit!
But politicians may kill them off before we get a chance to find out how useful they are.
Some places have already banned the scooters. San Francisco said they "endanger public health and safety." City attorney Dennis Herrera complained about "broken bones, bruises, and near misses."
Sigh. Yet San Francisco also complains about not having enough transportation options.
In San Francisco and other cities, scooter companies tried doing what Uber and Airbnb did: They dodged destructive regulation by simply putting their services out on the street, hoping that by the time sleepy regulators noticed them, they would be too popular to ban.
That worked for Uber and Airbnb. We consumers got cool new ways to travel and alternatives to hotels, and investors got rich -- all because they didn't ask for permission. Permissionless innovation brings good things.
But flying under the radar is harder for scooter companies. Scooters on sidewalks are very visible.
"Unfortunately," Mercatus Center tech policy analyst Jennifer Skees told me for my latest video, "cities haven't learned from their experiences with companies like Uber and Airbnb. They want innovators to come ask for permission and go through the regulatory processes."
But the "regulatory processes" take years. "That prevents consumers from accessing a transportation option that could be accessible now!" said Skees.
After a four-month ban, San Francisco granted permits to two small scooter companies. The politicians stiffed Lime and Bird, the innovators that started the business -- presumably because they didn't kiss the politicians' rings and beg for permission first.
Still, even I acknowledge that there may be a role for government here. A public square needs some rules. Scooters, especially speedy electric scooters, can be dangerous.
"We haven't seen a large number of accidents or injuries," says Skees. "We don't ban bicycles because somebody might get hurt. ... Social norms (like hand signals) will evolve."
Whenever there's something new, the media hype the problems. The L.A. Times reports that some people hate the scooters so much that they "have been crammed into toilets, tossed off balconies and set on fire." Internet videos show scooters abandoned in the Pacific Ocean.
But scooter companies say the vandalism isn't so bad.
"It's a low percentage," said Lime's Maggie Gendron. In one city, "we had 10,000 rides and 18 vandalism complaints."
I wanted to try out scooters in my state, New York, but I couldn't, because craven politicians who claim to represent me banned scooters.
So I took our camera crews to a city that's been more reasonable.
Oddly, that's a place that overregulates most everything: Washington, D.C. But the capital embraced scooters.
So, the district has transportation that is green and good exercise and takes up less space than cars.
Maybe politicians will find it in their hearts to leave scooters, their makers and customers alone.
One innovation can make many others possible.
Cars take people to jobs they couldn't do in their own neighborhoods, allowing them to collaborate with people they might never have met if they walked or rode horses.
Planes, trains and ships bring down costs by allowing inventors to use exotic materials they can't find in their own back yards.
If any of those forms of transportation had been crushed by regulation, we'd never know how many benefits we'd lost.
Don't kill scooters. Let's see where they take us.
When I see no fewer than 8 of these things laying scattered willy-nilly on the sides of the road and the sidewalks, dropped with no regard for other users of those same areas, then YES, that is the very definition of “litter”.
This is along a 2 mile stretch of a main thoroughfare within 1 mile of downtown.
I wasn't equating Uber with unregistered and uninsured vehicles. I was simply pointing out that even those who support these services based on "free market" principles recognize the need for regulation on some level.
Personally, I think Uber is eventually going to disappear. There's going to be a huge public outcry against it once you have large numbers of illegal immigrants among the drivers, undercutting American citizens who simply want to earn an honest living.
I would love to run it by Rebecca De Mornay.
Good Lord! Social justice scooters! Soon they will track LBQWERTY riders, tranny riders, by color, etc. Cannot have discrimination in scooter usage, even though they are out in the open and anybody can use them. More SF liberal insanity at work.
How will they collect the data? Will their apps ask for your last 1040 income?
I bet you hate bicycles too?
Nope. However, if it were up to me I’d never allow bikes and motor vehicles to operate in mixed traffic in urban areas.
>>Nope. However, if it were up to me I’d never allow bikes and motor vehicles to operate in mixed traffic in urban areas.
LOL. Bicycles are freedom!
The tragedy of the commons
Google it.
There is a detailed map on the 'net; what MORE could you want??
I just, and this is the literal just, not the internet just, rode one of those app bikes to the microbrew where I am enjoying a pint of a nitro stout and reading this on their wifi. It took about fifteen minutes and cost 1.33. The other evening my wife and I went to a concert and rather than parking at the venue, we grabbed a couple of those app bikes and rode 15 minutes across town and spent about 4.00 doing it, both bikes. They are hecka cool.
Really?
Unfortunately, most of them use public sidewalks, which transfers their injury-death risk to completely innocent pedestrians, like me.
Don’t solve the problem, just come up with compassionate web sites and media articles.
Math isn’t the strong point of your argument.
1) The scooters are about 6-700 a pop.
2) To activate the scooter, it’s $1.15.
3) Additional $0.15/minute.
The scooters are everywhere here in Charlotte, and easily paid themselves off by now.
If you have 10 riders a day, and each one goes 5 minutes, that’s $11.15 to activate and $5.75 for time. That’s a total of $16.85/day on average they make. (Some are more, some are less).
After 40 business days (8 weeks), you’ve made $674. In other words, by week 9, you’re profitable.
If you have 500 of them, you’re making $67,400/week. If you have employee costs of $12,000/week, you’re still making an over $55,000 profit per week. That’s over 2.8 million a year. And that’s one city. When you have it to 200 cities, you’re looking at $572 million a year profit.
I’d say the business model is VERY high. Their marketing consists of literally driving them out to locations and placing them around a city and they have to pay a programmer somewhere nationally (or 3 or 4) to write a web site. Their labor and expenses is VERY low.
Not mine to solve.
Fair enough. Factor in repairs, replacements, insurance, personnel. The advantage they have over Uber is: no driver nor driver support.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.