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

Andreessen Horowitz-Backed Leap Buses Are Hitting SF Streets This Week

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 87 posts

Re: Andreessen Horowitz-Backed Leap Buses Are Hitting SF Streets This Week

#61

Post by alanctgardner3 »

cryptoz wrote: post #24
AWolfAtTheDoor wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What aspect of a fancy bus that drives in normal traffic like any other bus (or car, assuming there are not bus-only lanes) makes it any more capable of getting a person to their destination sooner? Addendum: this is a private company that technically speaking does not have to adhere to any schedule and isn't liable for various things (according to the TOS posted in this tree), so if anything you're more likely to be…

Not sure about SF, but in Toronto, the only problem is scheduling and management. Also, I won't vouch for Leap or make any assumptions about SF's transit, but if it's anything like Toronto, the only thing you need to change is scheduling. Traffic is not a problem. ONLY SCHEDULING. The problems in Toronto result in 30-60 minute waits for a bus or a streetcar in the wintertime (during -20°C weather too). Then you will…

> If Leap schedules things correctly, in part because they are a private company and have incentive to do so

I don't know what you think the TTC does all day, but it's not sit around and say "if only we had competition, we'd make the busses better". It may not be possible to schedule to avoid busses bunching up during peak times, if that's how traffic behaves. The only way to fix it might be to run an excess of under-utilized busses, which cuts into profit margins. Which is something a private company with higher rates might be able to do, but the TTC is limited because service has to be accessible to everyone.

The risk of a private company like this showing up is that it'll decide to focus intensively on the 20% of routes that yield 80% of profit. This bleeds the public transit service of funds needed to run less profitable services at off times that are used by people without 9-5 jobs, or people in less privileged areas. So the rich get better bus service, and no longer subsidize the service for the poor.

Re: Andreessen Horowitz-Backed Leap Buses Are Hitting SF Streets This Week

#62

Post by michaelt »

krschultz wrote: post #19
untog wrote: post #8

I'll be interested to see how this works from afar in New York. To my mind it's likely to just make for more traffic and not take a sizable number of cars off the road, but I'd love to be proven wrong.

Why would you think it would just make more traffic and not take cars off the road? A bus takes up the space of 3-4 cars. If there are more than 4 people on the bus, it is increasing the capacity of the road. Surely there are some negative effects because busses stop & take longer to turn, but I also don't think their business plan involves driving busses with only 4 people on them.

"Emergent demand" is the idea that there are people who would like to drive in the centre of big cities, and the only reason they don't is because the congestion is so bad.

This often comes up in the context of building more roads to alleviate congestion. It won't work, the theory goes, because when congestion reduces more people start driving, until the congestion reaches equilibrium again.

If buses take cars off the street and reduce congestion, the same argument applies; emergent demand will mean any cars taken off the street will soon be replaced.

Personally emergent demand has always struck me as a rather defeatist idea :)

Re: Andreessen Horowitz-Backed Leap Buses Are Hitting SF Streets This Week

#63

Post by michaelt »

lotsofmangos wrote: post #38
dagw wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make it sound like they completely forgot about disabled passengers, when the reality is almost certainly that they intentionally excluded them because they are a pain to deal with (slow getting on and off, take up more space than an able bodied passenger etc.)

The article presents it as though it was merely an unfortunate oversight. I assumed incompetence rather than maliciousness for my comment, purely out of a sudden fit of politeness. I completely agree however that assuming pure idiocy rather than malignancy is stretching probability more than slightly in this case, given we are talking about highly experienced profiteers.

The article says they "bought old NABI buses and refurbished them"

Replacing seats doesn't need structural changes to the bus - but if you've brought a coach that has six steps and a sharp right turn as you board, there's just no way to adapt them.

Re: Andreessen Horowitz-Backed Leap Buses Are Hitting SF Streets This Week

#64

Post by peterwwillis »

jusben1369 wrote: post #46
AWolfAtTheDoor wrote: post #4

It seems like San Francisco is one of the few places where you can have a company completely fail, only to see it revamp its product in a way that it will probably completely fail again. While I can't speak for San Francisco's bus system, everything about this product video screams to me that the solution that is being provided here does not actually solve a problem other than "I am white, privileged, and want to rid…

I'll admit the video is a little cringe worthy with hipsters and Vita Coco. But your criticisms are unfair and unfounded. Airplanes sell a range of seating options that have a price to comfort ratio. Train travellers have always had multiple cabins and pricing choices. Car services range from cheap taxis to black cars to take you to the airport. So there's no reason bus transportation can't offer an alternative to th…

The examples you give are examples of privilege which benefit the wealthy [who happen to be mostly white] and the only thing that's affected is "rider comfort", which is not real value when you consider the business is a transportation company and not a day spa. There's no reason they can't offer an alternative. But the reason they can and do offer an alternative is pretentious.

Re: Andreessen Horowitz-Backed Leap Buses Are Hitting SF Streets This Week

#65

Post by cauterized »

whatok wrote: post #27
krschultz wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you think it would just make more traffic and not take cars off the road? A bus takes up the space of 3-4 cars. If there are more than 4 people on the bus, it is increasing the capacity of the road. Surely there are some negative effects because busses stop & take longer to turn, but I also don't think their business plan involves driving busses with only 4 people on them.

untog was mentioning NYC. Majority of people commuting in that I know already catch public transportation into the city. I can't imagine this working very well for transportation within Manhattan but I could be wrong.

Manhattan's buses are already extremely frequent on popular routes (double-length buses scheduled every 2-3 min during rush hour on routes that aren't redundant to subway service, and even on a few that are -- and still packed) and limited by traffic more than anything.

AFAICT most people who drive to work in Manhattan on a regular basis do so because they live far enough out in the boroughs or suburbs that getting to the subway/commuter rail is a PITA.

There is a large contingent in residential areas of Manhattan above 59th St. that take cabs to work -- especially on the East Side where the subway is often too crowded to get on. Although the 2nd Ave subway (if it opens as projected in 2017) will probably make the subway a more palatable option, I could see something like this being an alternative for some of those riders -- cabs can be difficult to find in the morning, and this would be far less expensive.

Re: Andreessen Horowitz-Backed Leap Buses Are Hitting SF Streets This Week

#66

Post by icebraining »

TarpitCarnivore wrote: post #15

Can someone please explain the benefit of having Wifi on a bus? I know for some the bus ride may be long, especially if you're going from the SoMA to the Outer Sunset or Richmond. But in most cases I've used MUNI there it's 10 minute bus ride, even going from the Haight to Soma. There is an argument to be made for getting work done, but how much work care you possibly going to get done on a 10-15 minute bus ride?

The reason is (probably) simply avoiding having bored passengers.

You can cringe and say that people ought to be able to withstand a 15 minute ride without needing a dopamine hit, but if you're making a business out of it, providing Wifi is a cheap way of increasing customer happiness and loyalty.

Re: Andreessen Horowitz-Backed Leap Buses Are Hitting SF Streets This Week

#67

Post by ProblemFactory »

michaelt wrote: post #62
krschultz wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you think it would just make more traffic and not take cars off the road? A bus takes up the space of 3-4 cars. If there are more than 4 people on the bus, it is increasing the capacity of the road. Surely there are some negative effects because busses stop & take longer to turn, but I also don't think their business plan involves driving busses with only 4 people on them.

"Emergent demand" is the idea that there are people who would like to drive in the centre of big cities, and the only reason they don't is because the congestion is so bad. This often comes up in the context of building more roads to alleviate congestion. It won't work, the theory goes, because when congestion reduces more people start driving, until the congestion reaches equilibrium again. If buses take cars off th…

> It won't work, the theory goes, because when congestion reduces more people start driving, until the congestion reaches equilibrium again.

While this sounds plausible, it doesn't follow that building roads or adding buses is a bad idea. Even if the congestion stays constant, now more people get to travel.

Re: Andreessen Horowitz-Backed Leap Buses Are Hitting SF Streets This Week

#68

Post by pcwalton »

rayiner wrote: post #57
drzaiusapelord wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I am white, privileged, and want to ride on a fancy looking bus where I can buy a Vita Coco. Uh, lets not place the race card here. In all major US cities we have 100+ years of political corruption, union protectionism, bad planning, kick the can mentality, etc that have led to a shitty level of public services. A non-government competitor can help to keep the government honest as people see how much better things…

> I would love to take a non-CTA bus to work. I can't see how anyone could possibly do worse than the CTA bus system. I don't know where you are in Chicago, but tooling around Streeterville/Gold Coast/Lincoln Park, I always found the CTA buses clean and punctual. I don't think CTA is a great example of union protectionism or bad planning in Chicago (I'd level those at CPS/CPD). If you can't see how anyone could do wo…

> I don't know where you are in Chicago, but tooling around Streeterville/Gold Coast/Lincoln Park, I always found the CTA buses clean and punctual.

I regularly waited 45 minutes for the 55 Garfield or X55 Garfield Express (years ago, before budget cuts killed it). It's supposedly on a 10-15 minute schedule.

Re: Andreessen Horowitz-Backed Leap Buses Are Hitting SF Streets This Week

#69

Post by hsod »

peterwwillis wrote: post #64
jusben1369 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll admit the video is a little cringe worthy with hipsters and Vita Coco. But your criticisms are unfair and unfounded. Airplanes sell a range of seating options that have a price to comfort ratio. Train travellers have always had multiple cabins and pricing choices. Car services range from cheap taxis to black cars to take you to the airport. So there's no reason bus transportation can't offer an alternative to th…

The examples you give are examples of privilege which benefit the wealthy [who happen to be mostly white] and the only thing that's affected is "rider comfort", which is not real value when you consider the business is a transportation company and not a day spa. There's no reason they can't offer an alternative. But the reason they can and do offer an alternative is pretentious.

"rider comfort" is not real value?

What if busses had no seats at all? What if they were 100 degrees? What if they didn't have shock absorbers? What if they smelled bad (worse)?

Rider comfort IS real value. You've just anchored your perspective at the current level and decided that anything above that is "pretentious" which is itself kind of pretentious.

Also, it seems tautological that luxury services benefit the wealthy. What's the alternative? Socialism?

Re: Andreessen Horowitz-Backed Leap Buses Are Hitting SF Streets This Week

#70

Post by jusben1369 »

peterwwillis wrote: post #64
jusben1369 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll admit the video is a little cringe worthy with hipsters and Vita Coco. But your criticisms are unfair and unfounded. Airplanes sell a range of seating options that have a price to comfort ratio. Train travellers have always had multiple cabins and pricing choices. Car services range from cheap taxis to black cars to take you to the airport. So there's no reason bus transportation can't offer an alternative to th…

The examples you give are examples of privilege which benefit the wealthy [who happen to be mostly white] and the only thing that's affected is "rider comfort", which is not real value when you consider the business is a transportation company and not a day spa. There's no reason they can't offer an alternative. But the reason they can and do offer an alternative is pretentious.

I'm trying to work out the logical conclusion to your line of arguing though. How do you justify the range of eating establishments that exist? Is any restaurant charging more than $10 for a nutritious meal simply another example of bourgeois excess? A hotel room that charges more than $50 for a clean bed and bathroom? Apple devices vs their Windows/Android equivalents? Automobiles?
Post reply on HN