Uber enters dockless bike wars with Jump acquisition

Post by emmelaich » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 6:00 AM UTC

maherbeg wrote: post #34

wpietri wrote: post #7

This is a puzzle to me. Uber faces some critical issues ahead. If they can solve them, the bikes will be a rounding error. If they can't, the bike business won't be enough to save them. Why add the complexity when they could buy or build something later? I especially can't figure out why the Jump CEO would do it. The odds of their work surviving to the 10 year mark seems so small. It reminds me of something like Dodg…

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.

Post by jgalt212 » Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 1:03 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #190

jgalt212 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The extremely cynical view is that Dara is trying to curry favor with Menlo Ventures (backer of both Jump and Uber).

That's interesting. They only took money in January, though so it seems early (and expensive) for a mercy killing. Do you have more theory as to motivation?

Post by tejasmanohar » Sat, Apr 21, 2018, 11:38 PM UTC

nlh wrote: post #227

tejasmanohar wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also a cyclist, and I think one of the reasons share bikes haven't taken off as much in SF is the terrain. Bikes are a convenient way to get from place to place, but who wants to get sweaty and scared riding around SF hills?

And that’s precisely why Jump bikes are awesome in a city like SF. The electric assist is just enough of a boost that you feel the hills but not so much that you’re breaking out in a sweat going over them.