Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 315 posts

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#281

Post by dx034 »

bradly wrote: post #45
saudioger wrote: post #6

Does anyone know if going dockless increases ridership in any significant way? The consumer benefits seem great but it seems like such a nightmare to maintain compared to a docking system.

Yes, because docked bikes need to be done in cooperation with a city or business to install a dock station. With dockerless, the streets where I live have just been littered with bikes and scooters.

And you get NIMBYism. In London, some neighbourhoods are excluded from bike-sharing because communities didn't want to have docking stations in their streets (takes away parking space and can create noise).

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#282

Post by dx034 »

wpietri wrote: post #8
saudioger wrote: post #6

Does anyone know if going dockless increases ridership in any significant way? The consumer benefits seem great but it seems like such a nightmare to maintain compared to a docking system.

Just the other day I saw some very dubious people on BART with dockless bikes. I had to wonder if there's a good secondary market in bike parts that makes those things worth stealing.

They're all custom made. Maybe selling scrap-metal could be worth it but if the GPS track of a lot of bikes ends at certain addresses, they'll probably start investigating.

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#283

Post by kahnpro »

I've seen these types of bikes around from time to time (in London), but certainly not enough to consider them a reliable form of daily transport. Whereas the station near my work, and near home, always has a healthy supply of docked Boris bikes waiting for me.

Does anyone have experience with these?

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#284

Post by spiderfarmer »

balls187 wrote: post #248
wpietri wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been cycling in SF for more than a decade and am a SF Bike Coalition member, so I doubt I'm underestimating it all that much. But even if you are right I don't understand why Uber is eager to buy in now . If this takes off so much that Uber is obliged to get in on the action, they can wait. It strikes me as like Apple with MP3 players or smartphones or smartwatches: it's cheaper and easier to let somebody else p…

Second Mover Advantage is as valuable as First Mover Advantage. > it's cheaper and easier to let somebody else prove the market and then just come in and crush everybody. before there is a dominant player WRT to your Apple and MP3 market, Microsoft tried the same thing with it's Zune, and failed miserably.

The Zune was not just late but also very ugly.

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#285

Post by imtringued »

Swizec wrote: post #187
r27d wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personal e-bikes for $1000-2000 (same experience as Jump) can easily be under $.25 per ride. I have 1000+ rides and 4500 miles on my $1800 ebike in under a year and I could sell it for $1400.

Yeah but if it gets stolen you're out $2000 and since you said Jump benefits the not-poor, I assumed you meant "People who can't shell out $2000 on a bike". I also use a Boosted Board because I break even wrt Uber every 3 months or so. But if I didn't have $1600 to spend on that purchase, then all the future savings in the world wouldn't mean shit.

A poor person is much more likely to get a used bike for $100 to $200 than spend $100 every month on bike sharing.

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#286

Post by [deleted] »

baud147258 wrote: post #273
bfuller wrote: post #75

I live in the biggest dockless bike market currently and its an eyesore. Our corrupt government has decided not to even think about making legislation about the companies until September. People are getting very sick of seeing them laying all around and its starting to go the way of Paris, whose people rose up against the bike share companies and got them to pull out through sheer vandalism. Someone cut one in half a…

> the way of Paris, whose people rose up against the bike share companies and got them to pull out through sheer vandalism. I think you're confusing the cause for the vandalism, it is much more "casual", the bikes are vandalised because they are there and the companies stupidly provided fragile bikes. Also the opposition from the city council did not help.

[deleted]

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#287

Post by bfuller »

baud147258 wrote: post #273
bfuller wrote: post #75

I live in the biggest dockless bike market currently and its an eyesore. Our corrupt government has decided not to even think about making legislation about the companies until September. People are getting very sick of seeing them laying all around and its starting to go the way of Paris, whose people rose up against the bike share companies and got them to pull out through sheer vandalism. Someone cut one in half a…

> the way of Paris, whose people rose up against the bike share companies and got them to pull out through sheer vandalism. I think you're confusing the cause for the vandalism, it is much more "casual", the bikes are vandalised because they are there and the companies stupidly provided fragile bikes. Also the opposition from the city council did not help.

I'm not confusing anything. I can point you to many social media posts urging people to vandalize them because they are annoyed at the bike share. The bikes being absolutely littered everywhere does create a lot of opportunistic vandals, but there FOR SURE is a concerted effort to fuck over the companies.

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#288

Post by yoz-y »

janekm wrote: post #262
fragmede wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you've been bicycling in the city for more than a decade, then you're definitely underestimating it. In that "over a decade", you've internalized the mountain of suck that bicycling is, sometimes , and have accepted that as "just how it is to bicycle in the city". Jump, in particular, doesn't have to contend with some of those. In particular, you've had to lock up your bike and still had it/parts stolen - not your…

I live in a city with ubiquitous (non-E) shared bicycles (Shenzhen), and unfortunately maintenance does become your problem... You have to go from bike to bike performing basic maintenance tests (is the brake working? Is the chain non-rattly? Seat adjustable? Anything broken?) and still sometimes end up with a non-working bike that doesn't work quite right. For the bike sharing company it's an even bigger problem (th…

Ah, the getting on a public bike ritual. But I imagine that this is a problem that could be solved by more money, however I have no idea where the bike sharing company would get it except if they hike the prices.

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#289

Post by bfuller »

baud147258 wrote: post #271
bfuller wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>everybody like them. not entirely true concerning the bike share companies. when they are fighting for dominance like they are in Dallas, the city gets littered with the bikes and people start vandalizing them. This happened in Paris so much that the dockless bikeshares pulled out.

The dockless bikeshares pulled out of most of the city where they tried to deploy in France.

I can only hope we in Dallas can achieve the same.

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#290

Post by baud147258 »

bfuller wrote: post #287
baud147258 wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the way of Paris, whose people rose up against the bike share companies and got them to pull out through sheer vandalism. I think you're confusing the cause for the vandalism, it is much more "casual", the bikes are vandalised because they are there and the companies stupidly provided fragile bikes. Also the opposition from the city council did not help.

I'm not confusing anything. I can point you to many social media posts urging people to vandalize them because they are annoyed at the bike share. The bikes being absolutely littered everywhere does create a lot of opportunistic vandals, but there FOR SURE is a concerted effort to fuck over the companies.

I did not see any of these, but maybe it's because of my near-zero use of social media. So I'll take your word for it, that some of the bike degradations were caused to fuck the companies.
Post reply on HN