Live data from Hacker News

The Dark Side of Zipcar

blurpr.com

1–10 of 15 posts

Re: The Dark Side of Zipcar

#2
I used Zipcar for a couple of years but in the end found it too inconvenient for my use case (lots of high-mileage multi-day trips). Since I hate traditional car rental places as much as the author I ended up just getting a car, which has been considerably more expensive (but also more convenient) than the old Zipcar.

Near the end of my time with them, I really felt Zipcar was trying to reduce costs... the cars started getting older, they were poorly maintained, and as the service increased in popularity there didn't seem to be a commensurate increase in number of cars available. I wonder if this was just my local neighborhood experience or if those sorts of problems are widespread.

Re: The Dark Side of Zipcar

#3
I think his suggestion #3 (more competition) is sort of the crux of all the problems. Zipcar is the only game in town, doing what they do. If you don't like them, your only resort is taxis or daily rentals (or owning your own car).

The solution is for someone to compete with Zipcar, but that might be made difficult by the sweetheart deals they've made in some metro areas (reserved parking spaces on streets in key areas). Municipalities should keep in mind the dangers of creating a monopoly when they hand out those deals -- not to discourage them from doing it, but making sure that they give any future competitor the same access to the market.

Re: The Dark Side of Zipcar

#4
post #3

I think his suggestion #3 (more competition) is sort of the crux of all the problems. Zipcar is the only game in town, doing what they do. If you don't like them, your only resort is taxis or daily rentals (or owning your own car). The solution is for someone to compete with Zipcar, but that might be made difficult by the sweetheart deals they've made in some metro areas (reserved parking spaces on streets in key are…

In San Francisco, there is a competing service called City Car Share. There was also FlexCar, which Zipcar absorbed.

I was initially a member of City Car Share because they had better prices. Also, they kept giving me bonus deals for cheap day long car rentals. I ultimately switched because Zipcar had far more locations and better cars.

As a counterpoint to this article, when I lived in San Francisco I had an amazing experience with Zipcar. Cars were always available and there were locations everywhere. There were cool cars like BMWs and useful vehicles like trucks. Once I ran out of gas on the 101 and Zipcar sent someone out to help, no questioned asked. The guy on the phone acted like it was Zipcar's fault that I forgot to fill the tank!

I've been less pleased with Zipcar in NYC because there aren't enough cars near where I live. However, there is so much public transportation, I've not had as much of a need.

Re: The Dark Side of Zipcar

#5
post #3

I think his suggestion #3 (more competition) is sort of the crux of all the problems. Zipcar is the only game in town, doing what they do. If you don't like them, your only resort is taxis or daily rentals (or owning your own car). The solution is for someone to compete with Zipcar, but that might be made difficult by the sweetheart deals they've made in some metro areas (reserved parking spaces on streets in key are…

I use I-GO in Chicago.

http://www.igocars.org/

I originally chose I-GO because of the insurance issue. I had read that Zipcar's included coverage was minimal and I-GO's coverage was more comprehensive. I generally don't have any of the problems that were mentioned in the article other than people returning a couple minutes late sometimes.

Re: The Dark Side of Zipcar

#8
Without knowing how common these problems are, it's really hard to say how much this sort of stuff affects the average user. Reading through the list of problems, I had a momentary freaked out feeling that made me think I'd never use the service, but the author still loves zipcar, which makes me think these problems aren't all that common. Or, not common enough to outweigh the benefits of using the service.

Still, it's nice to hear a fan of a service talking about problems with it. It's very considerate to mention the problems with something whenever you recommend it.

Re: The Dark Side of Zipcar

#9
"...if a Zipster before you didn’t report their scratch and dent (and the Zipster after you does), that you’ll end up on the hook for the $500 damage deductible for something you didn’t do since you didn’t do the walkaround and report the damage"

It seems like the author is really stretching for things to complain about. If you neglect to inspect the vehicle for damage prior to driving it, what do you expect?

Re: The Dark Side of Zipcar

#10
post #9

"...if a Zipster before you didn’t report their scratch and dent (and the Zipster after you does), that you’ll end up on the hook for the $500 damage deductible for something you didn’t do since you didn’t do the walkaround and report the damage" It seems like the author is really stretching for things to complain about. If you neglect to inspect the vehicle for damage prior to driving it, what do you expect?

Yes, but since Zipcar is meant for renting very often but for short lengths of them, I can definitely see how checking it every single time would get tedious. Imagine if you had to inspect your car every time you drove it.
Post reply on HN