- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
I can’t believe people were buying into their “franchise”. They approached me in 2020 when they were trying to expand into the town I live and I had a downtown warehouse to operate out of. After they got done explaining everything, I laughed until they hung up.
You had to buy the scooters from them at around $600 each, you were responsible for all the recovery/batteries/maintenance/damage/theft caused by customers, warranty was non-existent (“call our chinese supplier and they will totally hook you up”), and after that they took 20% off the top. Some quick math put it at over 6 months before each scooter became profitable IF nothing happened to it in that time. Someone throws it in the canal just to be a dick? Sucks to be you, you’re out $600 + whatever else you’ve put into it every time it happens.
Really came off to me that they were making their money selling to suckers who thought they were going to be entrepreneurs.
Edit: They did apparently did get someone here into it because I saw them around for a few months before disappearing completely.
The scooters are really popular in our city. Currently we have 2 companies operating: Bird and Neuron. The positives have definitely outweighed the negatives. Hope they can keep going.
I’m of the total opposite mindset. I love having them where I travel, and I will fight to my dying breath to keep them out of my city lol.
Before I am called a hypocrite I am totally fine with other cities keeping them out. But if they’re there, I’m using them (and putting them where they belong instead of leaving them scattered everywhere like an asshole)
You’re right, it’s very NIMBY sounding
As much as the scooters used to annoy me, the Atlanta ban demonstrated that their presence has a significant positive effect on both pollution and traffic, so now I’m fine with them.
Hence why I clarified that I have no issue with them being removed. They’re terrible when you’re not the one using them.
It’s my same outlook with cruises. I don’t do them, but if my family wanted to take one I would probably join. I am also super cool with them being banned from the world. Feels pretty consistent to me lol
I agree that you’re consistent, that’s why I said the strong initial statement sounded hypocritical
Dude honestly sounds proud of being a NIMBY
That’s not what the term means. NIMBY refers to people trying to prevent other people from using their own property in ways they don’t like, not people who don’t want shitty companies actively throwing trash in the commons.
a person who does not want something unpleasant to be built or done near where they live
a colloquialism signifying one’s opposition to the locating of something considered undesirable in one’s neighborhood.
Maybe one more?
opposition to the locating of something considered undesirable (such as a prison or incinerator) in one’s neighborhood
None of those contradict my definition.
Not wanting a company dumping fucking trash in the streets is not and does not even vaguely resemble NIMBYism.
You’re omitting the part where OP is fine with the “trash dumping” in the streets of other locales. That’s what makes it NIMBY (as OP admits).
edit: whelp egg on my face on this one. Wasn’t even directed at me.
He said he’s all for them banning it as any reasonable jurisdiction must do. He’ll just use them if they decide to ruin their streets.
Those certain contradict your attempt to place a weird limit on for ‘NIMBY’ can be used.
Not in your backyard huh?
I’m fine with them in no backyards. They are corporate waste the way people treat them 90% of the time. If people were better about them (and wore helmets!!!) and the companies actually lifted a finger to keep them out of waterways and blocking sidewalks then I’d be down to have them here.
I get you were trying to cleverly call me a NIMBY but please actually read what I am writing. Including the original comment. I was very clear.
Good fucking riddance. I hate these things, people leave them just lying across the sidewalk all the time.
Sounds like a people problem
If people are being a problem, then it’s a design problem.
The business model failed to deal with people leaving scooters in the way. It was a problem in every city.
I sort of agree. These things appeared overnight in a bunch of cities. It’s not surprising to me that we didn’t and don’t have cultural best practices around them.
There are always going to be inconsiderate people, like those who don’t pick up after their dogs or don’t follow traffic laws. We don’t respond by getting rid of dogs and cars.
Bird, Lime, and others should have invested in acclimating the culture to the presence of the scooters, helping ensure people weren’t going to react like the top level poster (“I hate these things, get rid of em.”)
I personally used them when they were first out and I happened to be visiting LA. They were useful, convenient, fun, and affordable. And most of all, low-impact compared to the alternative.
It’s a loss to not have something like them as a transportation option. But considering the carelessness of the approach, I suppose it wasn’t long for this world. Typical silicon valley pirate stuff; “disrupt” the culture on VC dime, try to push expenses onto someone else, and try to cash out ASAP. I like them; just wish they had been done better.
I don’t know if I’m weird but I’ve always been careful to park scooters in a way that doesn’t hinder others. Also never thrown a scooter in a river or kicked them over and i don’t get people who have the desire to do something like that. Not trying to pat my own back by saying this but it seems to me that it is possible to have micro-rental scooter services and treat it in a way that doesn’t make it a nuisance or danger to others. Don’t take my scooters away just because some people don’t know how to behave. Like i don’t imagine banning cars universally (though reducing them and promoting foot traffic would be nice) because some people are bad drivers, instead they get policed and fined/thrown in jail. I’m probably thinking way too naive about it but i like using scooters to go short distances.
IMHO it’s a “negative externality” issue. Each individual saves precious seconds by leaving the scooter in the middle of the sidewalk. So a good way to internalize the cost might be to impound scooters left in the way, at the company’s expense (like cars). Then the company can go through their data to determine if it was the last user’s fault, or just some random jerk.
It’s ultimately the company’s problem, not the sidewalk-using public’s problem, especially wheelchair users who can’t move the scooters themselves.
(FWIW I used to charge these things as a side hustle and don’t want them taken away either.)
🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
In a press release today, Bird confirmed that it had entered into a “financial restructuring process aimed at strengthening its balance sheet,” with the company continuing to operate as normal in pursuit of “long-term, sustainable growth.”
Founded in 2017 by former Lyft and Uber executive Travis VanderZanden, Bird is one of numerous startups to introduce dockless micromobility platforms around the world, allowing city-dwellers to pay for short-term access to electric scooters or bikes.
Things didn’t improve, and with its share price continuing to plummet, CEO VanderZanden departed in June with the company eventually delisted from the NYSE in September.
“This announcement represents a significant milestone in Bird’s transformation, which began with the appointment of new leadership early this year,” Washinushi said.
We remain focused on our mission to make cities more liveable by using micromobility to reduce car usage, traffic, and carbon emissions.”
This latest news comes just a day after competitor Micromobility.com was delisted from the Nasdaq over its failing stock price, three years after it too went public via a SPAC merger.
Saved 62% of original text.
