Car Sharing / Rental (Car2Go, HourCar, etc.)

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
mulad
Moderator
Posts: 2753
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 6:30 pm
Location: Saint Paul
Contact:

Re: Car Sharing

Postby mulad » June 18th, 2014, 7:27 pm

The Saint Paul City Council has approved an agreement to expand Car2Go into the city, starting next month (July):

http://www.startribune.com/local/blogs/263736811.html

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2625
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: Car Sharing

Postby RailBaronYarr » June 18th, 2014, 8:25 pm

I assume a membership means you can pass between the two free of charge, right? The article wasn't clear.

Also, I hope Car2Go pre-empts ZipCar's one-way service with bigger car options. The two seater is great and I'm sure many users are satisfied, but it would be great for families to go car light with a small 4-door like what ZipCar proposes.

talindsay
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1533
Joined: September 29th, 2012, 10:41 am

Re: Car Sharing

Postby talindsay » June 18th, 2014, 9:25 pm

I assume a membership means you can pass between the two free of charge, right? The article wasn't clear.

Also, I hope Car2Go pre-empts ZipCar's one-way service with bigger car options. The two seater is great and I'm sure many users are satisfied, but it would be great for families to go car light with a small 4-door like what ZipCar proposes.

Given that it's owned by Mercedes and their only affordable car in north America is the smart, I wouldn't be holding my breath on that.

exiled_antipodean
Landmark Center
Posts: 286
Joined: December 3rd, 2012, 8:20 am

Re: Car Sharing

Postby exiled_antipodean » June 18th, 2014, 10:03 pm

I'm probably projecting a little too much of my own usage patterns into car2go's business model, but I see car2go as aiming somewhat at a market of people who already have a car in the household. The car2go lets one adult separate from the rest of the family when necessary to get somewhere quickly in a way not possible with transit/bike.

The ZipCar model with the return to base and the larger car is more aimed at people without a car in the household, and they need to do a big grocery shop or go to Ikea or whatever.

Even the advertising hints at these differences in the market segment.

The Twin Cities metro is a one-car per adult place, on average. But in the core cities there are lots of households that could go to one car per adult couple, and I think car2go has the bigger potential market.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Car Sharing

Postby FISHMANPET » June 18th, 2014, 10:31 pm

What we call a "Smart" car is the Smart Fortwo, in Europe they sold a Smart Forfour from 2004-2006, and it looks like they're reintroducing it. It's obviously not as small as a Fortwo, but it's pretty small (but, 4 inches longer than my car, a Chevy Spark).

Chava
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 180
Joined: March 29th, 2014, 7:24 pm
Location: NE MPLS

Re: Car Sharing

Postby Chava » June 19th, 2014, 6:47 am

I'm probably projecting a little too much of my own usage patterns into car2go's business model, but I see car2go as aiming somewhat at a market of people who already have a car in the household. The car2go lets one adult separate from the rest of the family when necessary to get somewhere quickly in a way not possible with transit/bike.

The ZipCar model with the return to base and the larger car is more aimed at people without a car in the household, and they need to do a big grocery shop or go to Ikea or whatever.

Even the advertising hints at these differences in the market segment.

The Twin Cities metro is a one-car per adult place, on average. But in the core cities there are lots of households that could go to one car per adult couple, and I think car2go has the bigger potential market.
You may be projecting, but geeze, that is exactly how we used it before we bought a car! I'm considering cancelling my zipcar membership because it seems like too much, but sometimes my wife and I need to be in two different places at once, and pubic transit isn't the best way. Car2Go might be the solution. Upshot of zipcar: your membership allows you to use their cars anywhere in the country, which has come in handy a few times during my family travels.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6368
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Car Sharing

Postby twincitizen » June 19th, 2014, 7:29 am

I wonder if they will re-brand at all, or simply expand the service area. Currently our local branch is "Car2Go Minneapolis". Everything from the URL on down is "Minneapolis": https://www.car2go.com/en/minneapolis/
Presumably they will not have a separate website for St. Paul, or *gasp* a separate system requiring transfers :lol:

exiled_antipodean
Landmark Center
Posts: 286
Joined: December 3rd, 2012, 8:20 am

Re: Car Sharing

Postby exiled_antipodean » June 19th, 2014, 7:50 am


You may be projecting, but geeze, that is exactly how we used it before we bought a car! I'm considering cancelling my zipcar membership because it seems like too much, but sometimes my wife and I need to be in two different places at once, and pubic transit isn't the best way. Car2Go might be the solution. Upshot of zipcar: your membership allows you to use their cars anywhere in the country, which has come in handy a few times during my family travels.
car2go has rolled out "Regional Access" where you can use in other cities in North America. Of course, not in as many cities (I think), but handy.

Elliot Altbaum
City Center
Posts: 42
Joined: June 5th, 2014, 9:10 pm

Re: Car Sharing

Postby Elliot Altbaum » September 19th, 2014, 9:16 am

Great piece written about the problems of ride-sharing companies. This was the thread that seemed the closest.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/09/against-sharing/

Rates for drivers have been cut by more than half in the last year. Drivers are being forced to worker longer and longer hours to repay the capital investments they made in buying approved cars for the service. Many drivers in large cities are already striking and forming relationships with current driving unions.

Hopefully this sheds light on the dark core underneath the shiny allure of technocapitalist solutions that are being "innovated" in silicon valley. We need a transportation system that's good for the workers and the riders. This aint it.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Car Sharing

Postby mattaudio » September 19th, 2014, 10:28 am

Nobody is forced to drive for Uber or to ride with them. Heck, I think the company's business practices are abhorrent so I lyft instead (not sure how much better they are). Of course the magazine that's the "leading voice of the American left, offering socialist perspectives" is against a technocapitalist solution. Of course technocapitalist solutions aren't perfect. But that's why we can choose not engage in transactions with such companies.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Car Sharing

Postby FISHMANPET » September 19th, 2014, 10:41 am

They're not forced into it, but in some ways they're being forced to stay, because there's not much they can do once they've invested into buying a new car etc etc.

However it probably wasn't a good idea to buy a car to do UberX, those are "supposed" to be average Joes driving their normal car to get a little extra cash. Uber is luxury car drivers that could otherwise be getting some business from their car service business.

In the end the problem is that there's an over supply of drivers. That's great for riders, not so much for drivers. Drivers should be able to exit the market freely, but things have conspired for that to not work out.

For what it's worth, I've got a friend that does UberX some nights to make some extra cash, and he loves it.

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2424
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: Car Sharing

Postby EOst » September 19th, 2014, 11:47 am

I'm shocked, shocked to hear that the price savings in Uber/Lyft come at the expense of the drivers. It's not as though this weren't already a low-margin business with high fixed costs.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Car Sharing

Postby mattaudio » September 19th, 2014, 11:52 am

High fixed costs? Isn't it targeted at people who a) already have a car and b) have some extra time, so they can make some cash off their asset that's already a sunk cost?

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Car Sharing

Postby FISHMANPET » September 19th, 2014, 12:03 pm

According to that story, people were buying and financing cars to become UberX drivers.
Drivers rushed to sign up, and thousands leased and bought cars just to work for Uber — especially immigrants and low-income people desperate for a well-paying job in a terrible economy. But over the last year, the company has faced stiff competition from its arch-rival, Lyft. To raise demand and push Lyft out of the LA market, Uber has cut UberX fares nearly in half: to $1.10 per mile, plus 21¢ a minute.
They're clearly talking about people buying cars for UberX, unless the Jacobian is being disingenuous and putting UberBlack and UberX drivers in the same bucket. However Uber does bring this on themselves, they provide financing for people to buy new cars. So by Uber tying UberX drivers to these car loans, they're trapping them. But I have to disagree with the conclusion, that pure unadulterated capitalism is to blame here, because that's not the case. If this were some sort of "pure" capitalism then these people could easily exit the market. But they can't.

I also don't think unionizing or whatever is going to work if the goal is to raise prices. That's not going to help the market equalize in any way. Unfortunately I don't know what the good way for these people to get out of their car loans is, because that's what it would really take.

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2424
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: Car Sharing

Postby EOst » September 19th, 2014, 1:37 pm

High fixed costs? Isn't it targeted at people who a) already have a car and b) have some extra time, so they can make some cash off their asset that's already a sunk cost?
That's Uber's marketing bullshit, but that's not what actually happens, just like Airbnb's marketing about local people going out of town obscures the illegal all-but-hotels that have sprung up around it. A good number if not the majority of UberX drivers do it full-time; since they have the same costs as a taxi company (car, fuel, insurance) but lower prices, the cost has to come out of their own pocket.

Elliot Altbaum
City Center
Posts: 42
Joined: June 5th, 2014, 9:10 pm

Re: Car Sharing

Postby Elliot Altbaum » September 19th, 2014, 3:15 pm

Heck, I think the company's business practices are abhorrent so I lyft instead (not sure how much better they are).


Lyft is pretty much the exact same business model so it's definitely not better.
Of course the magazine that's the "leading voice of the American left, offering socialist perspectives" is against a technocapitalist solution. Of course technocapitalist solutions aren't perfect. But that's why we can choose not engage in transactions with such companies.
Just "not engaging in transactions with such companies" is a rather weak response to a business that is bad for workers (and eventually riders once taxis are "disrupted"). Urbanists support this model as a way to get people to give up their cars and the way of the future. Supportive policies were crafted that enabled their existence (they operate illegally to start). Instead urbanists could craft policy that creates transportation networks that work for both the workers and the riders.
Nobody is forced to drive for Uber or to ride with them.
Except people are forced to work degrading, minimum wage jobs to pay the bills and feed their families. The market forced them to need a job, however degrading. Not many good ones around anymore (though more here than elsewhere).

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Car Sharing

Postby FISHMANPET » September 19th, 2014, 3:19 pm

Sounds like step 1 is destroy capitalism (not that I agree with that idea)?

Elliot Altbaum
City Center
Posts: 42
Joined: June 5th, 2014, 9:10 pm

Re: Car Sharing

Postby Elliot Altbaum » September 19th, 2014, 3:36 pm

Sounds like step 1 is destroy capitalism (not that I agree with that idea)?
Corporate capitalism has worked for almost no one except the small number of billionaires. It has made life considerably more difficult for millions of people and has supported a fossil fuel economy that is causing global climate change.
Don't you think we could do better than that?

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Car Sharing

Postby FISHMANPET » September 19th, 2014, 3:50 pm

I generally agree that Americas form of capitalism isn't working, and I think we'd be much better off with more socialism to ensure things like some kind of guaranteed minimum income and other useful social services.

However even in that kind of environment, people will still be motivated by financial incentives one way or the other. Criticisms like this seem to ignore that people respond to incentives. If somehow the fair was raised back to $2.75, do the organizer think that suddenly everything will be fine? That many people will still be riding and everybody will get paid? Because if the fare goes up, ridership will go down, and suddenly the same number of drivers will be fighting for a smaller pie (pool of riders). Taxis at least have the silly relief valve of medallions to keep the supply of drivers low.

Uber doesn't have that same barrier to entry, which is on one side a benefit. People have bought cars just to drive for UberX (and I'll say right now, that's dumb) but they've been financed, either by Uber or a regular bank, so they don't require a huge pile of money upfront to join. Now, if we had a guaranteed minimum income, the people that financed cars to become UberX drivers (again, a dumb decision) could just hand the keys to the car back to the bank or Uber and walk away. But they can't do that.

I guess my problem with far leftists commentaries of economics (and I say this as a pinko commie leftist) is that it assumes that in a "better" system that people will no longer respond to financial incentives and will instead respond to social incentives (or something, I don't know, I've read some pretty stupid stuff in my day). I think we should fix the incentives that have distorted our economy in such a way that huge corporations have all the power. And I think in this case that means giving these UberX drivers some way to walk away from this stupid situation they've gotten themselves into.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Car Sharing

Postby mattaudio » September 19th, 2014, 3:55 pm

Couldn't they sell their expensive car?


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 55 guests