Old 06-12-19, 12:39 PM
  #6  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,800

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 75 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3517 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
I don't think this has much to do with Uber. Lyft signed a contract with San Francisco to be an exclusive bike share provider and now they and the city are arguing about the details of the contract. Lyft thinks the contract covers both docked and dockless bikes, and San Francisco thinks it only covers docked bikes and that the city can give contracts for dockless bikes to other providers.

It's good that San Francisco is regulating bike shares in the city, so the taxpayer isn't on the hook for cleaning up the aftermath of failed bikeshare companies abandoning their bikes, and the streets aren't awash in bikes from multiple providers lying all over the place creating nuisance and risk - they just have to sort out the correct interpretation of the Lyft contract.

EDIT: Okay, yes, Lyft might hypothetically want an exclusive contract so they can limit the availability of shared bikes to encourage people to hail cars instead, but again that would be a contract issue where the contract would spell out how many bikes should be available for hire.

Last edited by cooker; 06-12-19 at 12:45 PM.
cooker is offline