San Francisco bans parking space apps • Hacker News Board

Re: San Francisco bans parking space apps

#31

Post by moron4hire » Tue, Jun 24, 2014, 1:23 PM UTC

danielweber wrote: post #10

derwiki wrote: post #4

"creates a predatory private market for public parking spaces that San Franciscans will not tolerate" Right, because I've never driven around Nob Hill for an hour trying to find parking, only to have to give up and pay $25 for a garage. The response from the city makes more sense if you've never actually had to do street parking in the city. When I'm at my wit's end, driving around the same streets continuously, I'd…

It's easy to see this as a foolish reaction of "there is a market? But markets are unfair because money, so let's stop it!" by the city of San Fran. In fact, it would take remarkably little to make me believe San Fran was that foolish. However, these apps also create incentives for people to not give up their spots until someone pays. It's an incomplete market, where someone sits on a shared resource until paid to mo…

Are there not meters for these spots, for which time the squatters need to pay? It seems like this is a problem of arbitrage. The spots are worth more on the 2nd hand market than they cost in the first place.

Supply/demand problems really pricing problems.

Re: San Francisco bans parking space apps

#32

Post by Nursie » Tue, Jun 24, 2014, 1:23 PM UTC

viraptor wrote: post #26

Nursie wrote: post #16

Hey, I should do this with tables at popular restaurants during peak hours too. That's not being an asshole, it's letting the market decide!

You can book a table at restaurants. Maybe booking a parking would be a thing to look at instead. Being paid for leaving the place actually creates market for people who would bend the rules for profit. For example get a low-mpg/electric car that you drive around, take any space, then immediately resell it. Even worse, if you get together with others, you probably could create enough artificial resource scarcity to l…

Not all restaurants. Maybe that lunch place that's real popular, you know the one, where seating's unreserved. I could really draw out my meal until the right person comes along and pays me to move on.

But yes, I agree, this whole thing creates incentives that add up to a bad situation for an allegedly public resource.

Re: San Francisco bans parking space apps

#33

Post by gambiting » Tue, Jun 24, 2014, 1:23 PM UTC

danielweber wrote: post #10

derwiki wrote: post #4

"creates a predatory private market for public parking spaces that San Franciscans will not tolerate" Right, because I've never driven around Nob Hill for an hour trying to find parking, only to have to give up and pay $25 for a garage. The response from the city makes more sense if you've never actually had to do street parking in the city. When I'm at my wit's end, driving around the same streets continuously, I'd…

It's easy to see this as a foolish reaction of "there is a market? But markets are unfair because money, so let's stop it!" by the city of San Fran. In fact, it would take remarkably little to make me believe San Fran was that foolish. However, these apps also create incentives for people to not give up their spots until someone pays. It's an incomplete market, where someone sits on a shared resource until paid to mo…

Aren't the places made for,and maintained with public money though?

Re: San Francisco bans parking space apps

#34

Post by derwiki » Tue, Jun 24, 2014, 1:24 PM UTC

bkmartin wrote: post #24

danielweber wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to see this as a foolish reaction of "there is a market? But markets are unfair because money, so let's stop it!" by the city of San Fran. In fact, it would take remarkably little to make me believe San Fran was that foolish. However, these apps also create incentives for people to not give up their spots until someone pays. It's an incomplete market, where someone sits on a shared resource until paid to mo…

Why "should" SF be auctioning off these spots? To maximize revenue? Is that why public services exist? Are they doing a larger disservice to the people of SF by NOT auctioning them off, thus raising the price to park, over having a lower price solution to $25 parking garages? Maybe SF should build a couple of public parking garages themselves if they, as a public service, wish to continue to offer more affordable pub…

When I had my car in the city, I took public transit every chance I could because I didn't dare lose my parking spot. I only used the car for out of town trips. Then I realized how ridiculous it was to own a car that I was stressed out to use. I switched to Zipcar and never looked back (in fact, my local Zipcar garage is closer than how far away I normally had to park).

Re: San Francisco bans parking space apps

#35

Post by bobcostas55 » Tue, Jun 24, 2014, 1:24 PM UTC

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #8

I don't know what to think. Devilishly clever. Instant new market. But so detrimental if it catches on... People who live paycheck-to-paycheck wouldn't be able to afford this. If it becomes very popular, those without disposable income may be unfairly abused by the system. Till now, finding a spot has been random lottery. Pay-for-privilege will leave struggling families out in the cold (perhaps literally). Yet to pun…

You can get paid for the spot when you leave it in the same way you paid for it when you took it. So I don't see how this is supposed to disproportionately affect poor people.

Re: San Francisco bans parking space apps

#36

Post by marcuskaz » Tue, Jun 24, 2014, 1:24 PM UTC

jerf wrote: post #20

untog wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about people who can't pay $7? That's what public services need to think about.

How much does a parking meter cost in San Francisco normally? (Honest question, since I don't live anywhere near there.) Frankly, if private prices for parking spaces really did start to soar, that would be an Enormous Clue for the city, though I fully trust them to bitch about the market long before they actually listen to it. (And by "listen" to it, I do not mean "mindlessly obey it"... I mean, listen to it. It wou…

Parking varies greatly throughout the city. If you are downtown, it is really difficult to find a spot at all, so garages are usually the main option. Garage runs around $2 for 20 minutes, but then rate declines over more time with typically a $20 cap.

If you do find a street spot, its probably metered which now has adjustable rates depending on location and time. A meter will run about $1 for 15 minutes, but no upper cap and most of time limits.

If you get out of downtown, there is street parking in most neighborhoods for free, but typically with 2-hour limits, permit zones or weird street cleaning hours which if you leave it there you will get towed.

The app will probably benefit the neighborhoods the most, since a free spot with no street cleaning the next day is a gold mine.

Re: San Francisco bans parking space apps

#37

Post by valdiorn » Tue, Jun 24, 2014, 1:25 PM UTC

cabalamat wrote: post #17

minimax wrote: post #13

The problem with this business is not that it forces people to pay high prices for high value parking spaces, rather it's that it incentivizes people to camp out in high value spaces, and that the revenue accrues to the campers and not to the city. If this app is popular at all, it's probably an indication that the city isn't charging enough for parking.

> and that the revenue accrues to the campers and not the city Then the city should build their own version and get the money that it feels it is entitled to.

Parking is a service, provided by the city. The people who pay taxes have already paid for that parking spot. If you, or somebody else (Even the city!) try to profiteer in excess of that, it's predatory and against the rules.

If this was in a private parking lot; knock yourself out. Charge whatever you want. Charge a hundred dollars a minute. But it's public space, and you cannot hold public property hostage and expect me to pay. You would be no better than a group of highwaymen holding up a bridge for a "crossing toll". It's not yours to profit from!

Re: San Francisco bans parking space apps

#38

Post by apostate » Tue, Jun 24, 2014, 1:25 PM UTC

Perhaps regulating a cap is better than banning the practice outright. If the max price is equal to the minutes left on the meter * fare per minute, the seller will never get back more than they put in. They will just be selling back the unused minutes, which can be useful if someone puts a few hours on the meter because they don't know how long they will need it. This would prevent scalping, and if parking is considered a public good, it will bring the minutes paid for / minutes used ratio closer to 1, which should be the goal. I understand that it's probably not the goal of the app creators, but it is a reasonable compromise. Of course, this type of efficiency means more social benefit and lower revenues for the city, so that's not likely to happen.

Re: San Francisco bans parking space apps

#39

Post by rayiner » Tue, Jun 24, 2014, 1:26 PM UTC

bkmartin wrote: post #24

danielweber wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to see this as a foolish reaction of "there is a market? But markets are unfair because money, so let's stop it!" by the city of San Fran. In fact, it would take remarkably little to make me believe San Fran was that foolish. However, these apps also create incentives for people to not give up their spots until someone pays. It's an incomplete market, where someone sits on a shared resource until paid to mo…

Why "should" SF be auctioning off these spots? To maximize revenue? Is that why public services exist? Are they doing a larger disservice to the people of SF by NOT auctioning them off, thus raising the price to park, over having a lower price solution to $25 parking garages? Maybe SF should build a couple of public parking garages themselves if they, as a public service, wish to continue to offer more affordable pub…

Parking is an inefficient use of land in a dense city. Cheap parking just subsidizes this inefficiency.

Re: San Francisco bans parking space apps

#40

Post by sillysaurus3 » Tue, Jun 24, 2014, 1:27 PM UTC

davidw wrote: post #30

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #8

I don't know what to think. Devilishly clever. Instant new market. But so detrimental if it catches on... People who live paycheck-to-paycheck wouldn't be able to afford this. If it becomes very popular, those without disposable income may be unfairly abused by the system. Till now, finding a spot has been random lottery. Pay-for-privilege will leave struggling families out in the cold (perhaps literally). Yet to pun…

> What if the company wasn't based in California? The article says it was built in Rome, Italy.

I assumed that California couldn't issue fines against a company unless the company is based within its borders. Every app is de facto international nowadays, so does that mean California can issue fines against any company with a popular app? I'm rather ignorant of the legal dynamics in play here, so it'd be wonderful to hear from someone with experience.