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

Bird leaves S.F., blaming ‘the most onerous regulations’ in the world

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 83 posts

Re: Bird leaves S.F., blaming ‘the most onerous regulations’ in the world

#11

Post by xenospn »

Zak wrote: post #5

I've noticed a significant drop in the availability of scooters where I live (a major European city) over the past year or so, including Bird exiting the market. Prices have increased substantially, and high-use subscription plans have disappeared. I wonder how much of that is a change in regulations, and how much is the end of early price competition that was never sustainable.

It was never a viable business model. This is just a byproduct of VCs looking to create a bag and offload it to a bigger fool. The scooters themselves are just a random product mutation that will not survive.

Re: Bird leaves S.F., blaming ‘the most onerous regulations’ in the world

#12

Post by uberman »

santoshalper wrote: post #2

Bird is a plague on cities. Good riddance.

I consult for a company that is based in a city with scooters. My view is that they are essentially industrial garbage. People leave them on the sidewalk blocking pedestrians at best. At worst they end up in the canal or in the middle of the road.

When they do get used it is often on the sidewalk.

If the owners and users respected these things it would be a different story but at the rush for market dominance noone cares a lick about the hardware or where it ends up.

In my opinion they are a plague and I'm glad I dont have to deal with the accumulating detritus. Someone does though and I dont envy the people who have to fish these things out of the canal.

I have to imagine one leaking in the river undoes any environmental gain from the rest combined.

Re: Bird leaves S.F., blaming ‘the most onerous regulations’ in the world

#13

Post by jaclaz »

Once said that the "too high fines" sounds like an excuse, I am not sure to understand the logic of the fines (i.e. the attributing them at least partially to the company).

When you rent a car, the driver/renter pays all fines during the rent period, except maybe those related to the car itself not being fit for street use.

Why is this different for these scooters?

Re: Bird leaves S.F., blaming ‘the most onerous regulations’ in the world

#14

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

garbagecoder wrote: post #4

In the world? My god, I own a business in Costa Rica. Don’t even try me.

I was at a gun shop in Costa Rica, about three minutes into a conversation with the owners, I realized they had a lot more patience than I do.

Re: Bird leaves S.F., blaming ‘the most onerous regulations’ in the world

#15

Post by roughly »

There’s no way to profitably run a company like Bird without foisting the externalities on someone else. Their model is literally to dump a bunch of electric scooters on the side of the road with QR codes on them and just hope for the best. Of course they’re going to get fined when their property is left blocking driveways, of course they’re going to be expected to clean up the piles of scooters that get thrown in the bay, of course their scooters are going to get stolen. Yes, all of that is ruinously expensive to deal with - it’s not a viable business plan. It’s not “onerous regulation,” it’s holding the company accountable for the costs of its business model.

Re: Bird leaves S.F., blaming ‘the most onerous regulations’ in the world

#16

Post by bagels »

jaclaz wrote: post #13

Once said that the "too high fines" sounds like an excuse, I am not sure to understand the logic of the fines (i.e. the attributing them at least partially to the company). When you rent a car, the driver/renter pays all fines during the rent period, except maybe those related to the car itself not being fit for street use. Why is this different for these scooters?

Are they referring to the fines from littering their scooters all over town?

Re: Bird leaves S.F., blaming ‘the most onerous regulations’ in the world

#19

Post by BurningFrog »

andrewfromx wrote: post #3

I always thought S.F. would have made a great "city of the future" and ban cars and go full in on birds. Like https://culdesac.com/ (wow, when you look at the pictures from culdesac it looks like Sesame Street!)

SF is fully committed to being the "city of the past".

Re: Bird leaves S.F., blaming ‘the most onerous regulations’ in the world

#20

Post by oceanplexian »

jeffbee wrote: post #6
Zak wrote: post #5

I've noticed a significant drop in the availability of scooters where I live (a major European city) over the past year or so, including Bird exiting the market. Prices have increased substantially, and high-use subscription plans have disappeared. I wonder how much of that is a change in regulations, and how much is the end of early price competition that was never sustainable.

It's all the second thing. The economics never made sense. It doesn't have one damned thing to do with "onerous regulations". It has to do with bird losing $300 million on revenues of $70 million.

I don’t know.. it’s a little bit of both.

The scooters are super convenient when you can park it anywhere, the whole idea of micro-mobility actually works and is more convenient than taking an Uber or a Lyft. It’s also the most fun you can have with $3 in a city.

In theory it cuts down on unnecessary car traffic, and you don’t have to get sweaty on a bicycle. The problem is, cities started forcing by the scooters to add arcane geofencing rules requiring you to park it or pick it up far from your origin or destination. That sort of ruins the whole point of the scooters.

Post reply on HN