Jon Mays

Now that Lime has decided to pull their bikes out of participating cities, it leaves many wondering what’s next.

Last week, the company announced it was pulling bikes, and looking to replace them with scooters. For cities in San Mateo County, there was a bit of frustration and, um, wonder about the decision. South San Francisco was the first city to have them, then Burlingame, then San Mateo. San Mateo actually made the switch from docked bikes to Lime bikes after the green bikes proved to be more popular. The city also said it was not interested in scooters after some controversy in San Francisco with the proliferation of those little vehicles. So after trying one company (Social Bicycles, the blue ones) and switching to another (Lime, the green ones), San Mateo is facing an immediate future without those rentable bikes. But that won’t last long. The city may turn to another company (Jump, the red ones), but we will see.

Recommended for you

Recommended for you

(3) comments

vincent wei

Jon, in terms of HSR and Europe/Asia compared to the United States....
It seems density is a big factor..... in that Europe/Asia have it and we, comparatively, don't......Large subsidies......Only 2 HSR lines - world wide, one in France and one in Japan, are profitable......in the EU, the cheapest European rail line costs more than $50,000 per seat to operate annually......Options, like coach buses and even airplanes, are often cheaper...... Mobility, as you mentioned, remains an issue with HSR.

https://reason.org/wp-content/uploads/files/high_speed_rail_lessons.pdf

CarolStone

The City's contract with the previous vendor--for which it paid $90k setup then $50k/year---ended when that company just pulled out. So the City then called LimeBike (which some residents had promoted before, since it is free to cities--but the City staffer told us that wasn't true, which was incorrect). THAT is why the switch occurred, not because City staff made the switch. In December 2018, the City staff asked City Council to approve a moratorium on scooters, which it did, despite some residents objecting. Then Lime decided this business model didn't work. It is not a public/private partnership. It's all private. The City should have used the $140,000 it spent on the previous vendor instead on improving bike/ped non-car infrastructure so those of us with bikes would be happier to use them more often instead of cars.

CarolStone

To add to my comment below:
LimeBike was free to cities (not users, of course).
City Council banned scooters tentatively.
Lime decided it would not make enough money on its bikes and not-always-helpful e-bikes.
So City staff is probably both taken aback AND embarrassed.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.

Thank you for visiting the Daily Journal.

Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading. To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.

We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.

A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!

Want to join the discussion?

Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.

Already a subscriber? Login Here