Live data from Hacker News

Bird CEO on scooter startup copycats, unit economics, safety and seasonality

techcrunch.com

61–70 of 132 posts

Re: Bird CEO on scooter startup copycats, unit economics, safety and seasonality

#61

I still think Bird's success is merely symptomatic of American shortsighted solutions to systemic US urban planning issues. I doubt this will reach the same level of popularity in cities/countries with great public transit, highly walkable streets, and good existing last mile solutions (bikeshares, bikelanes, high bus coverage), but I'm happy to eat my words if I'm just not seeing it and folks from Amsterdam, Seoul,…

> I doubt this will reach the same level of popularity in cities/countries with great public transit, highly walkable streets, I hope you are right. The littering / parking isn't the biggest problem or nuisance. It's the fact that the riders of these "e-scooters" almost always ride on the sidewalks / footpaths and cause safety hazard to pedestrians. Forget the fact that it's illegal[1] in most states to ride a motori…

> It's the fact that the riders of these "e-scooters" almost always ride on the sidewalks / footpaths and cause safety hazard to pedestrians.

It's more dangerous to ride them on streets, even on bike paths. Who cares if it's illegal? I'd rather ride on the sidewalk then get hit by a car trying to pass me at 45 mph.

Re: Bird CEO on scooter startup copycats, unit economics, safety and seasonality

#62
post #60
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except they were not. Cars are just too dangerous to have anywhere near people. They should be banned from cities and suburbs. 40,000 people die every year in the US because of cars. Dumbest idea ever.

> Except they were not. 99% of the streets for miles and miles around me were built after the invention of the car for near-dedicated use by automobiles, and those that were not were converted to that design. > Cars are just too dangerous to have anywhere near people. They should be banned from cities and suburbs. You say that, but I'd like to see you move your family to new house without using an automobile to move…

A single digit percentage of suburb and city traffic in the United States are for activities that genuinely benefit from cars. Use a commercial vehicle to move your stuff, but for day to day travel many people use trains, bikes, or legs to move their families from location to location. We should be investing our transportation budget into more efficient methods than residential vehicle usage for daily commuting.

Re: Bird CEO on scooter startup copycats, unit economics, safety and seasonality

#63
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I doubt this will reach the same level of popularity in cities/countries with great public transit, highly walkable streets, I hope you are right. The littering / parking isn't the biggest problem or nuisance. It's the fact that the riders of these "e-scooters" almost always ride on the sidewalks / footpaths and cause safety hazard to pedestrians. Forget the fact that it's illegal[1] in most states to ride a motori…

> It's the fact that the riders of these "e-scooters" almost always ride on the sidewalks / footpaths and cause safety hazard to pedestrians. It's more dangerous to ride them on streets, even on bike paths. Who cares if it's illegal? I'd rather ride on the sidewalk then get hit by a car trying to pass me at 45 mph.

> Who cares if it's illegal?

The pedestrians that are endangered by relatively high speed motorized vehicles riding on sidewalks care. It's totally reasonable for you to not want to ride a scooter on the street, but that doesn't entitle you to break the law and make sidewalks less safe for others.

Re: Bird CEO on scooter startup copycats, unit economics, safety and seasonality

#64
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I doubt this will reach the same level of popularity in cities/countries with great public transit, highly walkable streets, I hope you are right. The littering / parking isn't the biggest problem or nuisance. It's the fact that the riders of these "e-scooters" almost always ride on the sidewalks / footpaths and cause safety hazard to pedestrians. Forget the fact that it's illegal[1] in most states to ride a motori…

> It's the fact that the riders of these "e-scooters" almost always ride on the sidewalks / footpaths and cause safety hazard to pedestrians. It's more dangerous to ride them on streets, even on bike paths. Who cares if it's illegal? I'd rather ride on the sidewalk then get hit by a car trying to pass me at 45 mph.

At least for bikes, it's fairly well accepted that riding on the sidewalk is less safe than riding on the road: http://bicyclesafe.com/#crosswalk

The chance of getting hit from behind likely decreases on the sidewalk, but the chance of getting hit from turning vehicles increases greatly. The chance of being hit by turning vehicles is higher in general as far as I remember, too.

Re: Bird CEO on scooter startup copycats, unit economics, safety and seasonality

#65
post #63
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's the fact that the riders of these "e-scooters" almost always ride on the sidewalks / footpaths and cause safety hazard to pedestrians. It's more dangerous to ride them on streets, even on bike paths. Who cares if it's illegal? I'd rather ride on the sidewalk then get hit by a car trying to pass me at 45 mph.

> Who cares if it's illegal? The pedestrians that are endangered by relatively high speed motorized vehicles riding on sidewalks care. It's totally reasonable for you to not want to ride a scooter on the street, but that doesn't entitle you to break the law and make sidewalks less safe for others.

It's the cars that kill and maim pedestrians and drive scooter riders to the sidewalks. They're your real enemy.

Re: Bird CEO on scooter startup copycats, unit economics, safety and seasonality

#66
post #62
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Except they were not. 99% of the streets for miles and miles around me were built after the invention of the car for near-dedicated use by automobiles, and those that were not were converted to that design. > Cars are just too dangerous to have anywhere near people. They should be banned from cities and suburbs. You say that, but I'd like to see you move your family to new house without using an automobile to move…

A single digit percentage of suburb and city traffic in the United States are for activities that genuinely benefit from cars. Use a commercial vehicle to move your stuff, but for day to day travel many people use trains, bikes, or legs to move their families from location to location. We should be investing our transportation budget into more efficient methods than residential vehicle usage for daily commuting.

[deleted]

Re: Bird CEO on scooter startup copycats, unit economics, safety and seasonality

#67
post #59
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very hard for a cyclist to hit and run. On a bicycle, even when it's not your mistake, a mistake will usually end up killing or hurting the cyclist. It's not like a car where you can kill a non-trivial amount of people and see zero repercussions.

It's very hard for a cyclist to hit and run Actually, in most SF bike-pedestrian collisions resulting in pedestrian injury, the cyclist flees. Example: https://patch.com/california/san-francisco/pedestrians-hospi...

You say in most cases but then link to a single case. You can find a single case of anything on the internet. Doesn't make it meaningful.

Re: Bird CEO on scooter startup copycats, unit economics, safety and seasonality

#68
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what purpose other than locking kids and poor people out of the world and worsening traffic and health issues. If 2 cyclists crash in to each other they will cause minimal property damage and any medical costs should be covered by the government. There are so many other situations where people can accidentally cause property damage that don't require insurance. Its just the cars have a very high risk of causing h…

If 2 cyclists crash in to each other they will cause minimal property damage Cyclists hitting pedestrians have caused death in SF.

Not if your a 25 year old coder.

Re: Bird CEO on scooter startup copycats, unit economics, safety and seasonality

#69
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it's a given bike riders should be licensed and plated. It's insane that in many places bike riders using the public roads don't require 3rd party insurance.

> it's a given bike riders should be licensed and plated No, it's not a given. I've never heard anyone want that before

Pretty common position here in australia.

Re: Bird CEO on scooter startup copycats, unit economics, safety and seasonality

#70
post #62
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Except they were not. 99% of the streets for miles and miles around me were built after the invention of the car for near-dedicated use by automobiles, and those that were not were converted to that design. > Cars are just too dangerous to have anywhere near people. They should be banned from cities and suburbs. You say that, but I'd like to see you move your family to new house without using an automobile to move…

A single digit percentage of suburb and city traffic in the United States are for activities that genuinely benefit from cars. Use a commercial vehicle to move your stuff, but for day to day travel many people use trains, bikes, or legs to move their families from location to location. We should be investing our transportation budget into more efficient methods than residential vehicle usage for daily commuting.

> A single digit percentage of suburb and city traffic in the United States are for activities that genuinely benefit from cars.

Citation needed. Your use of "genuinely" indicates to me that there's a large subjective component to that statistic. I'd believe that it's physically possible to replace 99% of "suburb and city traffic" with "trains, bikes, or legs." However, I'm not at all convinced that 99% does not "genuinely benefit" from cars. My guess is that such replacement probably requires a strong ideological commitment to car-disuse [1] in order to persevere in the face of real drawbacks.

[1] I know several people with such ideological commitments.

Post reply on HN