Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is just corporate propaganda. Studies have repeatedly shown that a significant number of people are using Uber INSTEAD of public transport
Make public transportation infrastructure more convenient than cars and cheaper than cars, and the problem solves itself.
SF wants startups to behave, so why did it reject the ‘nice guy’ of e-scooters?
111–120 of 174 posts
Re: SF wants startups to behave, so why did it reject the ‘nice guy’ of e-scooters?
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
Traffic jams are bad for the environment because in general acceleration is more costly than constant speed. This is about every bodies right to clean air and a world permitting organized human life.
Right, and in order to get to this new better world with cleaner air and less stop and go traffic, who will be granted the special driving right and who will get denied? Please be as specific as possible. I want to know if I'm getting to drive on the traffic free roads or if I'll be stuck in public transportation with the peasants. This will impact my vote.
Re: SF wants startups to behave, so why did it reject the ‘nice guy’ of e-scooters?
#113Uber and Lyft would not exist if they had "played nice". We can imagine a world where certain regulation would have improved their service for riders and drivers. But in the real world, if they had complied with every ask, cities would have crippled them with requirements when they first started. (Ok, you can do your Lyft thing, but let's start with 100 cars, for say, the first 3 years).
A lesson for regulators, regulation creates environments where the people who succeed are the ones who work the refs and skirt intent. These are probably less likely to be the best companies or the nicest people.
So a quick call, like "hey, put A3 in here or we can't count it" could make the world a little better. And if you would prefer to regulate people who follow the intent and not the letter of the law, you need to govern that way.
Re: SF wants startups to behave, so why did it reject the ‘nice guy’ of e-scooters?
#114In lots of arenas of life --- this one included --- if you naively follow the advice that nice and well-meaning people give you, you're going to get hosed.
Re: SF wants startups to behave, so why did it reject the ‘nice guy’ of e-scooters?
#115And what a disaster Airbnb and Uber have been for the cities they have invaded. That’s why people legislate against them.
Yes, what a disaster having affordable car transportation that doesn't turn you away for being a minority and having cheaper alternatives to hotels available that let people make money renting out extra rooms.
And if it still comes out cheaper it’s for a reason e.g. no security, no housekeeping, no amenities, no one to help you.
Re: SF wants startups to behave, so why did it reject the ‘nice guy’ of e-scooters?
#116A lesson for entrepreneurs, it really is better to go around the bureaucracy. Uber and Lyft would not exist if they had "played nice". We can imagine a world where certain regulation would have improved their service for riders and drivers. But in the real world, if they had complied with every ask, cities would have crippled them with requirements when they first started. (Ok, you can do your Lyft thing, but let's s…
I hardly ever see anyone riding scooters in SF. The scooter companies keep raising their prices in lock step because they have to, but it’s now gone from $.15/min to $.32-.33/min, which is more than $20/hr with tax. It’s cheaper to just use an Uber.
Have no idea who they are targeting with those prices. Kids can’t afford that. Adults would rather take an Uber at those prices.
Re: SF wants startups to behave, so why did it reject the ‘nice guy’ of e-scooters?
#117Re: SF wants startups to behave, so why did it reject the ‘nice guy’ of e-scooters?
#118Re: SF wants startups to behave, so why did it reject the ‘nice guy’ of e-scooters?
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, what a disaster having affordable car transportation that doesn't turn you away for being a minority and having cheaper alternatives to hotels available that let people make money renting out extra rooms.
Airbnb is hardly cheaper than a hotel when you factor in the obscene service and cleaning fees in addition to the hotel taxes they collect. And if it still comes out cheaper it’s for a reason e.g. no security, no housekeeping, no amenities, no one to help you.
Why is this a bad thing? It's just unbundling security and housekeeping and lowering the price correspondingly. If you want the full-service option hotels still exist
Re: SF wants startups to behave, so why did it reject the ‘nice guy’ of e-scooters?
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, and in order to get to this new better world with cleaner air and less stop and go traffic, who will be granted the special driving right and who will get denied? Please be as specific as possible. I want to know if I'm getting to drive on the traffic free roads or if I'll be stuck in public transportation with the peasants. This will impact my vote.
[flagged]