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

231–240 of 315 posts

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#231

Post by r27d »

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.

You should get renter's insurance ($8/mo) which covers your Boosted Board or bike even when it is locked up somewhere other than your home.

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#232

Post by r27d »

ghostly_s wrote: post #194
r27d wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure who you are but I bet we were friends. Left MPLS for SF. MPLS is "the best city" for nearly anything if you ask a local. Too bad they wasted the Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot $20M on shitty latex paint bike lanes at $75,000 per block.

What do you think they should have spent that on?

They treated it like a slush-fund with no accountability. All of the projects were late and gave a feeling of "a little paint cost how much?" Now they're spending more money to make better bike lanes they could have built in the first place. That's a MPLS thing though. They're always trying to reinvent the wheel instead of using the good infrastructure that's been tried other places.

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#233

Post by mulmen »

I can't figure out why e-bikes are considered bicycles and not mopeds or motorcycles. How does this not require a drivers license, with or without a motorcycle endorsement? Is the output limited (like the 50cc moped)?

Why are motorized vehicles allowed on bike lanes just because they have electric motors instead of gas?

I'm also totally blown away by Seattle's disregard for helmet laws to enrich some venture capitalists. We didn't even bother repealing the helmet law, we just don't enforce it.

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#234

Post by mulmen »

prolikewhoa wrote: post #80
fataliss wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would take a lot of political will to do something like that though and it would take YEARS! I don't think the US is a great market (right now) for city-bikes. Outside of maybe Manhattan & SF I can't think of any major city where a bike would take you places faster/better than another way of transportation would. When you consider all the hassles that biking as a transportation comes with, I doubt this has any l…

Seattle seems like it's doing well with Ofo, Limebike, and Spin however it will never be a replacement for a car, and they're 40-70lb bikes that can't make it up Seattle's hills which makes them kind of useless outside of downtown. They are used often and I see people riding them all day down by the waterfront, especially in the late spring/summer. I unfortunately don't see them being any kind of major replacement fo…

Are any of them actually making money? We had Pronto too but it was hopeless as a business.

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#235

Post by kibibyte »

mulmen wrote: post #233

I can't figure out why e-bikes are considered bicycles and not mopeds or motorcycles. How does this not require a drivers license, with or without a motorcycle endorsement? Is the output limited (like the 50cc moped)? Why are motorized vehicles allowed on bike lanes just because they have electric motors instead of gas? I'm also totally blown away by Seattle's disregard for helmet laws to enrich some venture capitali…

They're basically regular bikes, but with an electric motor that helps you with pedaling. Unlike a moped or motorcycle, you still need to pedal an e-bike to get it moving.

The Jump bikes in SF use 250W motors, which, when going uphill, is similar to having an extra person helping you pedal.

People should be a little more careful on these because these bikes can go pretty fast. That said, from my own experience using Jump bikes in SF, people on road bikes still zoom by me regularly on streets.

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#236

Post by mulmen »

kibibyte wrote: post #235
mulmen wrote: post #233

I can't figure out why e-bikes are considered bicycles and not mopeds or motorcycles. How does this not require a drivers license, with or without a motorcycle endorsement? Is the output limited (like the 50cc moped)? Why are motorized vehicles allowed on bike lanes just because they have electric motors instead of gas? I'm also totally blown away by Seattle's disregard for helmet laws to enrich some venture capitali…

They're basically regular bikes, but with an electric motor that helps you with pedaling. Unlike a moped or motorcycle, you still need to pedal an e-bike to get it moving. The Jump bikes in SF use 250W motors, which, when going uphill, is similar to having an extra person helping you pedal. People should be a little more careful on these because these bikes can go pretty fast. That said, from my own experience using…

Yeah I get that but where is the line? Can I put a 10hp electric motor on a bicycle and ride it through a park? If so why can't I do that with a small gas motor? Are there actual regulations on this? If they go fast enough that people "need to be careful" where is the line where we ask them to prove they can be careful?

In Seattle you have to wear seatbelts in cars and helmets on motorcycles and bicycles. In the case of bike shares and e-bikes we seem to just ignore those rules. If we can ignore them in one case why not ignore them in all cases?

It strikes me as a double standard that benefits venture capitalists more than the public.

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#237

Post by unexpected »

fataliss wrote: post #46
maherbeg wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you may underestimate the impact e-bikes are going to have on major (non-car centric) cities. They'll likely reshape cities significantly as infrastructure gets improved for biking. You can get significant traffic density improvements by pushing bikes instead of cars, and e-bikes make this more accessible.

That would take a lot of political will to do something like that though and it would take YEARS! I don't think the US is a great market (right now) for city-bikes. Outside of maybe Manhattan & SF I can't think of any major city where a bike would take you places faster/better than another way of transportation would. When you consider all the hassles that biking as a transportation comes with, I doubt this has any l…

This seems to be a little bit of coastal elitism. Do you know what the largest market is right now for Bike Share?

It's....Dallas! We have over 20,000 bikes in the city now.

http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/dallas-bike-share-regulat...

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#238

Post by golemiprague »

mulmen wrote: post #233

I can't figure out why e-bikes are considered bicycles and not mopeds or motorcycles. How does this not require a drivers license, with or without a motorcycle endorsement? Is the output limited (like the 50cc moped)? Why are motorized vehicles allowed on bike lanes just because they have electric motors instead of gas? I'm also totally blown away by Seattle's disregard for helmet laws to enrich some venture capitali…

Electric bikes are usually limited to certain speed and output which is lower than a 50cc moped and more equal to bicycle speeds. Most countries don't require helmets, especially not for inner city rides in bicycle lanes or footpath.

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#239

Post by foolfoolz »

syndacks wrote: post #216

I think these bikes miss the mark on two major fronts: - Why do they need to be electric? Bicycles are phenomenally efficient, even for people who aren't in "good shape." In SF you can find routes around the really crazy hills. Furthermore, electric bikes reduce the barrier to entry for douches to "go cruising". Every day (NYC) I almost get hit by one of these things buzzing around. I'm sure these bikes are less powe…

i am very for dockless for a couple reasons

- fan out / fan in. in the morning commute centers (bart, caltrain) will have X bikes in the dock and many times that riders that want a bike. in the evening commute centers will have X dock spots, but many times that riders trying to drop off a bike

- building docks is extremely expensive and time consuming. they should be designed into cities? sure, i agree. but you are talking about doing a public construction project that has to get approved by a planning committee, funded, scheduled, passed all kinds of environment and safety checks, and then a few years and $3,000,000 later a 10-space dock appears on some streets. having the space for docks is not the problem

Re: Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

#240

Post by kibibyte »

syndacks wrote: post #216

I think these bikes miss the mark on two major fronts: - Why do they need to be electric? Bicycles are phenomenally efficient, even for people who aren't in "good shape." In SF you can find routes around the really crazy hills. Furthermore, electric bikes reduce the barrier to entry for douches to "go cruising". Every day (NYC) I almost get hit by one of these things buzzing around. I'm sure these bikes are less powe…

Where I live in SF, it's pretty hard to avoid the hills if I want to ride back to my apartment from downtown, even if I ride the Wiggle. Unless I take a rather circuitous route, there just isn't a way to get around having to go up more than 250 feet. I get the exercising bit, but I already get quite a bit of a workout on one of the Jump bikes.

The dockless bit has been a very big draw for me because the Ford bikes do not have docks out in my neighborhood and do not plan to in the near future. My neighborhood is also somewhat NIMBY: the local merchants association has been very opposed to the BRT project that is going to happen on the main street through the neighborhood because they claim that the decrease in car parking spaces and traffic will cause them to lose business. I wouldn't be surprised if they would resist bike docks as well. For now, dockless is a good short-term solution.

Post reply on HN