DOCSLIB.ORG

14-R-16 Divvy Bike Operator Motivate Agreement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
14-R-16 Divvy Bike Operator Motivate Agreement 2/3/2016 14-R-16 A RESOLUTION Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Operator Agreement with Motivate International, Inc. for the operation of the Divvy Bike Share System in the City of Evanston NOW BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION 1: City selects Motivate International, Inc., a Delaware corporation, to operate the Divvy Bike share system in Evanston. The operation of the system involves the procurement of various equipment and technology necessary to assemble, install, develop, implement and operate such equipment and technology for the 1O Evanston Divvy Bike share stations, and to provide on-going operational support and maintenance of the system. SECTION 2: The City Manager Is hereby authorized to negotiate any remaining terms and thereafter execute the Operator Agreement with Motivate International, Inc., attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by reference. The Agreement will be approved as to form by the City's Corporation Counsel prior to execution. SECTION 3: Resolution 14-R-16 shall be in full force and effect from and after its pas.sage and approval, in the manner provided by law. 14-R-16 -2- 14-R-16 EXHIBIT 1 DIVVY BIKE OPERATOR AGREEMENT - 3 - OPERA TOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EVANSTON AND MOTIVATE INTERNATIONAL INC. FORA BICYCLE SHARING SYSTEM 1 Execul/on Vetsion TABLE OE CONTENTS AGREEMENT ......... ... .............................. .............. ... ........................................ ...... ......................... 5 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ........................................................... ........................................ .. 5 ARTICLE 1. INCORPORATION OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION ......................................... 5 ARTICLE 2. DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Definitions .... ........................................................................................................... 5 2.2 lnterpretalion ............ ........ .................................. .................................................... 7 2.3 l~oration or Exhibits ......................................................................................... 8 2.4 Order or Precedence ............................................................................. ................. 8 ARTICLE 3. DUTIES ANO RESPONSIBILITIES OF OPERATOR ................................. .............. 8 3.1. Scope of Work ........................................... ................................... ............... ........... 8 3.2. Advertisement and Sponsorship ....... ...................................................................... 9 3.3. Compliance with Federal Grant Requirements ....................................................... 9 3.4. Ownership of Equipment and Compuler Hardware ................................................ 9 3.5. Software licenses ................................................................................................ 10 3.6. Deliverables .... ...................................................................................................... 11 3. 7. Standard or Performance ......................................................................... ............. 11 3.8. Standard of Performance Project Management and Personnel... ......................... 11 3.9. Insurance ........................................................... .................... .................. ............. 12 3.10. lndemniftealion ......... ............................... .. ........................................................... 12 3.11. Ownership or Documents and Data ...................................................................... 13 3.12. Copyright Ownership ............................................................................................ 14 3.13. Records .. .................................................................... ................. ......................... 14 3.14. Confidentiality of City Data .................................................................. ................. 14 3.15. Assignments and Subcontracts ............................................................................ 15 3.16. CoUateral Assignment. .......................................................................................... 16 3.17. Prevailing Wage Provisions .................................................................................. 16 ARTICLE 4. DURATION OF AGREEMENT ............................................................................... 16 4.1. Term of Performance ......................................................................... ...... ......... .... 16 4.2. Timeliness of Performance ....... ............. .................................. ................... .... ...... 16 4.3. Agreement Extension Option ............................................................................... 16 ARTICLE 5. COMPENSATION .................................................................................................. 17 5.1. Fees and Invoices ................................................................................................ 17 5.2. Taxes ........................................... ... ................. ... .................................................. 17 5.3. Funding ......... ................................................... ................... .................................. 17 5.4. Non-Appropriation ... ......... ......................................................... .................... ....... 17 ARTICLE 6. DISPUTES .......................................... ............................................... .................... 17 ARTICLE 7. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL LAWS ... ........................................................................ 18 7 .1. Compliance wilh All Laws Generally ............................ ................................... ...... 1a 7. 2. Nondiscrimination ................................................................................................ 18 7 .3. Deemed Inclusion ......................................................................................... ........ 19 ARTICLE 8. SPECIAL CONDITIONS ...................................... ........................ ......................... 19 8.1. Warranlies and Representations ................................ .......................................... 19 82. Ethics ............. .......... ................................................................................. ............ 20 8.3. Joint and Several Liability ..................................................................................... 20 8.4. Business Documents .............................. ............................... ... .......... ... ............... 20 8.5. Confticls of Interest ................................. ........................ ... .. .. ... ....................... ..... 20 8.6. Non·Uability of Public Officials ...................................... .................... ................... 21 8.7. Certification Regarding Suspension and Debarment... ......................................... 21 ARTICLE 9. EVENTS OF DEFAULT, REMEDIES. TERMINATION. SUSPENSION ANO RIGHT TO OFFSET ............. .... ...... ... ..................................... ........................................................ 21 9 .1. Events or Default Defined ....................................... .............................................. 21 2 Execullon Version 9.2. Remedies ............. .............. ....................... ..................................................... ...... 22 9.3. Suspension ........... ............................................................................. ................... 23 9.4. Right to Offset.. ........ ................. ........................ ................. ................... ................ 23 ARTICLE 10. GENERAL CONDITIONS. .... .......... ... ....... ... ........ .......................... .......................... 24 10.1. Entire Agreement. .... ....... .......... ............. .... ................. ................... ....................... 24 10.2. Counterparts ............ .... ... ....... .................... ................. ................... ........... .. ........ .. 25 10.3. Changes, Modifications, and Amendmenls .. .... ..... ...... ............. .................. .......... 25 10.4. Governing Law and Jurisdiction .. .......................................... ... .................... ......... 25 10.5. Severability ........................................................................................................... 25 10.6. Assigns .................... ............................................................................................. 25 10.7. Cooperation ............. .............................. .... .. ......................................... .............. .. 25 10.8. Waiver .................. ........................... ..................................................................... 26 10.9. Independent Contraclor ... ................ ............................. ..... ................ ................... 26 10.10. Electronic Ordering and Invoices ................... ....... ................ ............. .......... ... ...... 26 10.11 . Participation by Other Local Government Agencies ............................................. 27 ARTICLE 11. NOTICES ................ ................. .......... .......... .... ......................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NIKE,$Inc.$To$Sponsor$Portland
    ! FOR$IMMEDIATE$RELEASE! ! Contact:$ John!Brady! Portland!Bureau!of!Transportation! 503957798236! [email protected]! Twitter!@PBOTinfo! ! NEWS$RELEASE:$ NIKE,$Inc.$to$Sponsor$Portland$Bike$Share$ $ Commissioner$Steve$Novick,$the$Portland$Bureau$of$Transportation$and$Nike$ announce$$10$million,$five$year$partnership$agreement$for$Portland$Bike$Share$$ $ Nike$unveils$BIKETOWN$and$innovative$visual$bike$identity$ $ With$partnership$in$place,$system$set$to$grow$66$percent$to$1000$bikes$ $ (January!7,!2016)!–!This!morning,!Transportation!Commissioner!Steve!Novick,!Nike!Vice! President!of!Global!Community!Impact!Jorge!Casimiro!and!Bureau!of!Transportation!Director! Leah!Treat!announced!Nike!as!the!title!sponsor!of!the!city’s!new!bike!share!system.!The! agreement!is!valued!at!$10!million!and!has!an!initial!term!of!five!years.!! The!partnership!with!Nike!will!allow!the!City!to!expand!the!initial!number!of!bike!share!bicycles! available!to!the!public!and!puts!the!system!on!a!trajectory!of!sustainable,!long9term!growth.! When!the!Portland!City!Council!voted!unanimously!to!create!Portland!Bike!Share!last! September,!it!authorized!a!system!with!600!bikes.!With!Nike!as!title!sponsor,!the!system!will! now!launch!with!1000!bikes,!a!66!percent!increase.!! The!bike!share!program!and!bicycles!will!be!called!BIKETOWN,!and!Nike!revealed!the!innovative! visual!identity!for!the!program’s!standard!bike!at!a!press!conference!with!city!officials!and! community!partners!at!its!Portland!Community!Store!in!Northeast!Portland.!The!store!is!near! the!site!of!a!proposed!bike!share!station.!As!part!of!the!unique!collaboration!between!Nike!and!
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring the Relationship of Bikeshare and Transit in the United States of America
    Portland State University PDXScholar Civil and Environmental Engineering Master's Project Reports Civil and Environmental Engineering Summer 2018 Exploring the Relationship of Bikeshare and Transit in the United States of America David Soto Padín Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cengin_gradprojects Part of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Soto Padín, David, "Exploring the Relationship of Bikeshare and Transit in the United States of America" (2018). Civil and Environmental Engineering Master's Project Reports. 52. https://doi.org/10.15760/CCEMP.51 This Project is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Civil and Environmental Engineering Master's Project Reports by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. EXPLORING THE RELATIONSHIP OF BIKESHARE AND TRANSIT IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY DAVID RAFAEL SOTO PADÍN A research project report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING Project Advisor: Kelly J. Clifton Portland State University ©2018 Final Draft ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my gratitude for the academic guidance provided by my advisor Dr. Kelly J. Clifton. This project would not have been possible without the support and feedback of my fellow graduate students in the transportation lab of Portland State University. Any errors or omissions are the sole responsibility of the author. The author would like to thank bikeshare operators for making their data available, including Motivate and Bicycle Transportation Systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Citi Bike Expansion: Draft Plan
    Citi Bike Expansion: Draft Plan New York City Department of Transportation Presented to Manhattan Community Board 10 Transportation Committee, April 12, 2016 What is Citi Bike? • • CitiCiti Bike Bike is Newis New York York’s City’s bike bike shareshare system system • A network of bicycle rental stations uniformly spread across a defined service area • A network of bicycle rental stations • Intendedlocated for an short, easy onewalking-way distancetrips under 30-45 minutesapart • Convenient for trips that are too far to walk but too short for a taxi or the subway • Ideal for cross-town travel 2 How Does Citi Bike Work? • Users purchase annual or short- term memberships • Members can take unlimited rides for no additional cost: − Up to 45 min. for annual − Up to 30 min. for short-term • Additional fees for rides longer than 45/30 minutes • Bikes can be returned to any station in NYC • System operates 24/7 3 Benefits and Uses • Useful for all types of trips: commuting, running errands, recreation • Cross-town travel • Compliments existing transportation network • Cycling consistent with a healthy lifestyle • No need to store bike when not in use • No need to own a lock • No need to perform bike maintenance 4 Citi Bike To Date • Launched in May 2013 with 6,000 bikes at 332 stations • Extensive public outreach • Public-private partnership • No city funds used Citi Bike To Date • Original owner, Alta Bicycle Share, acquired by Motivate in late 2014 • Under new management, Citi Bike has grown to approximately 7,500 bikes available at 475 stations
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda ● January 11, 2017
    MCHENRY COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (PTAC) AGENDA ● JANUARY 11, 2017 Public Meeting Conference Room A 1:30 PM 667 Ware Rd., Woodstock, IL 60098 I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call B. Introductions II. MINUTES APPROVAL A. Public Transportation Advisory Committee (PTAC) - Public Meeting - Nov 9, 2016 1:30 PM III. PUBLIC COMMENT Any members of the public wishing to address the committee may do so at this time. IV. MEMBER COMMENTS Any members of the committee wishing to address the committee may do so at this time. V. SUBCOMMITTEES A. MCRide Subcommittee At the November 9, 2016 PTAC meeting the MCRide Subcommittee was formed. Members of this subcommittee include the municipalities and townships that financial support the MCRide program. Proposed Meeting Dates April 12, 2017 - 3:00pm July 12, 2017 - 3:00pm October 11, 2017 - 3:00pm All MCRide subcommittee meetings will start immediately following PTAC meetings. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. MCRide Program Update B. PTAC Goals for 2017 C. Transportation Network Company Pilot Program VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Restructuring of Local Government Contributions for MCRide B. Bike Share System Feasibility C. People in Need Forum McHenry County Page 1 Updated 1/5/2017 10:00 AM Agenda Public Transportation Advisory Committee January 11, 2017 VIII. ADJOURNMENT A. Next Meeting Date and Location April 12, 2017 - 1:30 pm McHenry County Administration Building Conference Room 667 Ware Road Woodstock, IL 60098 McHenry County Page 2 Updated 1/5/2017 10:00 AM 2.A MCHENRY COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (PTAC) MINUTES ● NOVEMBER 9, 2016 Public Meeting County Board Conference Room 1:30 PM 667 Ware Rd, Administration Building, Woodstock, IL 60098 I.
    [Show full text]
  • DATE: January 4, 2019
    DATE: January 4, 2019 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Director of Public Works VIA: Derek Johnson, City Manager ENC: NACTO Guidelines for the Regulation and Management of Shared Active Transportation (Version 1: July 2018) PREPARED BY: Greg Hermann, Interim Deputy City Manager Adam Fukushima, Active Transportation Manager SUBJECT: SHARED ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION DEVICES The purpose of this memorandum is to respond to inquiries about the proposed operation of shared active transportation devices, such as scooters and bicycles. This memo provides pertinent background information, an overview of relevant City ordinances, policy and safety considerations and potential next steps for City Council consideration. Background In September 2018, the City was informed that Bird, an electric scooter sharing company, had unannounced plans to launch in San Luis Obispo without the proper permits or licenses. City staff reached out to Bird representatives and invited them to take part in a dialogue before beginning a “rogue launch” similar to the company’s practice in other cities. Bird responded favorably, traveled to San Luis Obispo and met with City staff to discuss their business model and has so far agreed to follow City policy and procedures relating to their business. Since then, four other scooter share companies have also inquired about operating in the City. They include Lime, Spin, Gotcha, and Uscooter. Staff has been in discussion with these companies and has informed them that a memo would be distributed to the Council outlining issues and potential paths and that no City actions would take place until such time as Council provided direction on whether to proceed with any ordinance changes and provide input on outreach, vendor selection, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 in the United States District Court for the Eastern
    Case 1:15-cv-06398 Document 1 Filed 11/06/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) PBSC URBAN SOLUTIONS, ) ) Civil Action No. 1:15-cv-6398 Plaintiff, ) ) Judge v. ) ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MOTIVATE INTERNATIONAL INC. and ) NYC BIKE SHARE, LLC, ) ) Defendants. ) COMPLAINT Plaintiff, PBSC Urban Solutions (“Plaintiff”), by its attorneys, for its complaint against Defendants, Motivate International Inc. and NYC Bike Share, LLC, (collectively, “Defendants”), states as follows: Jurisdiction and Venue 1. This action arises under the Patent Laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. 2. This Court has jurisdiction of this action based upon federal question pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338. 3. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b). The Parties 4. Plaintiff is, and at all times relevant to the matters alleged in this complaint has been, a Canadian corporation with its principal place of business located at 1120 Marie-Victorin Boulevard, Longueuil, Quebec, Canada. Plaintiff engages in the research, development, and commercialization of public bicycle sharing systems. Plaintiff’s bike-sharing bicycles, bicycle 1 Case 1:15-cv-06398 Document 1 Filed 11/06/15 Page 2 of 10 PageID #: 2 docks, and electronic locking systems are used in public bicycle sharing systems for cities and municipalities in Canada, the United States (including this District), and abroad. 5. Defendant, Motivate International Inc. (“Motivate”), formerly known as Alta Bicycle Share, Inc., is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located at 5202 3rd Avenue, Brooklyn, New York 11232.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Update to Nice Ride Nonprofit Business Plan
    2018 Update to Nonprofit Business Plan This Business Plan Update has been approved by the Nice Ride Board of Directors. It is subject to approval by the City of Minneapolis and is incorporated by reference in the proposed Third Amendment to Grant Funded Agreement by and between the City of Minneapolis and Nice Ride Minnesota. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Since its launch in 2010, Nice Ride has followed the core elements of the December 3, 2008, Nonprofit Business Plan for Twin Cities Bike Share System (“2008 Business Plan”). Core elements included: station-based bike share; capitalized through combination of public funds and title sponsorship by Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota (“Blue Cross MN”); operated by nonprofit staff with costs covered by sales revenue plus station sponsorship. In 2010, NRM and The City of Minneapolis entered into a Grant Funded Agreement (“GFA”), which expires in August of 20211. In that Agreement, Nice Ride agreed to operate “the Program” using the grant-funded equipment. “The Program” was the 2008 Business Plan. Core goals included: establishing bike sharing as a convenient and reliable form of transportation, increasing bicycle mode share, and increasing cultural acceptance of active transportation. The 2008 Business Plan was successful. NRM has achieved public goals, expanded using funds from multiple public sources, and become a model for over 50 similar nonprofits in other cities. In 2017, the market and technology assumptions underlying the 2008 Business Plan fundamentally changed. Over $3 billion in private capital flowed into the bike sharing industry worldwide. Over 20 million bikes were deployed in cities worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Bikesharing Research and Programs
    Bikesharing Research and Programs • Audio: – Via Computer - No action needed – Via Telephone – Mute computer speakers, call 1-866-863-9293 passcode 12709537 • Presentations by: – Allen Greenberg, Federal Highway Administration, [email protected] – Susan Shaheen, University of California Berkeley Transportation Sustainability Research Center, [email protected] – Darren Buck, DC Department of Transportation, [email protected] – Nick Bohnenkamp, Denver B-Cycle, [email protected] • Audience Q&A – addressed after each presentation, please type your questions into the chat area on the right side of the screen • Closed captioning is available at: http://www.fedrcc.us//Enter.aspx?EventID=2345596&CustomerID=321 • Recordings and Materials from Previous Webinars: – http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/revenue/road_pricing/resources/webinars/congestion_pricing_2011.htm PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS Susan A. Shaheen, Ph.D. Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley FHWA Bikesharing Webinar April 2, 2014 Bikesharing defined Worldwide and US bikesharing numbers Study background Carsharing in North America by the numbers Operator understanding Impacts Acknowledgements Bikesharing organizations maintain fleets of bicycles in a network of locations Stations typically unattended, concentrated in urban settings and provide a variety of pickup and dropoff locations Allows individuals to access shared bicycles on an as-needed basis Subscriptions offered in short-term (1-7 Day) and long-term (30-365
    [Show full text]
  • Pioneer Valley Regional Bike Share System Pilot
    Pioneer Valley Regional Bike Share System Pilot Pioneer Valley Regional Bike Share System Pilot April 2016 Alta Planning + Design | Page 0 Pioneer Valley Regional Bike Share System Pilot Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................................................ 2 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 2. Business Models ......................................................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Overview .............................................................................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Business Model Matrix ................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Proposed Business Model............................................................................................................................................. 7 3. System Costs and Revenues .................................................................................................................................................. 9 3.1 Cost Components ............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • MOBY - Living Lab E-Micromobility
    Activity Deliverable MOBY - Living lab e-micromobility Description of business models EIT Urban Mobility - Mobility for more liveable urban spaces EIT Urban Mobility Stockholm | 2020-10-09 eiturbanmobility.eu Reporting year 2020 Activity code 20034 Deliverable No. DEL04 Deliverable title Description of business models Document information Author(s) and contributing partner(s) - if any Name Organization Contribution Mats Engwall KTH Royal Institute of Qualitative business model analysis Technology for Stockholm Frida Borin KTH Royal Institute of Qualitative business model analysis Technology for Stockholm Gyözö Gidofalvi KTH Royal Institute of Quantitative business modelling Technology analysis Coordination Elina Merdymshaeva KTH Royal Institute of Quantitative business modelling Technology analysis Amnon Frenkel Technion - Israel Institute of Qualitative business model analysis Technology for Tel-Aviv Clement Lemardelé UPC Technology Center Qualitative business model analysis for Barcelona Quantitative business modelling analysis Mireia Gilibert Junyent Seat SA Qualitative business model analysis for Barcelona and Madrid Sebastian Pretzsch Fraunhofer Society for the Qualitative business model analysis Advancement of Applied for Munich Research 1 Contents Document information ................................................................................................................................. 1 1. Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Strategies for Engaging Community
    Strategies for Engaging Community Developing Better Relationships Through Bike Share photo Capital Bikeshare - Washington DC Capital Bikeshare - Washinton, DC The Better Bike Share Partnership is a collaboration funded by The JPB Foundation to build equitable and replicable bike share systems. The partners include The City of Philadelphia, Bicycle Coalition of Greater Philadelphia, the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) and the PeopleForBikes Foundation. In this guide: Introduction........................................................... 5 At a Glance............................................................. 6 Goal 1: Increase Access to Mobility...................................................... 9 Goal 2: Get More People Biking................................................ 27 Goal 3: Increase Awareness and Support for Bike Share..................................................... 43 3 Healthy Ride - Pittsburgh, PA The core promise of bike share is increased mobility and freedom, helping people to get more easily to the places they want to go. To meet this promise, and to make sure that bike share’s benefits are equitably offered to people of all incomes, races, and demographics, public engagement must be at the fore of bike share advocacy, planning, implementation, and operations. Cities, advocates, community groups, and operators must work together to engage with their communities—repeatedly, strategically, honestly, and openly—to ensure that bike share provides a reliable, accessible mobility option
    [Show full text]
  • Operational Challenges in Servicizing the Transportation Industry Kelly Cavanagh
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Senior Theses Honors College 5-10-2017 Operational Challenges in Servicizing the Transportation Industry Kelly Cavanagh Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/senior_theses Part of the Business Administration, Management, and Operations Commons Recommended Citation Cavanagh, Kelly, "Operational Challenges in Servicizing the Transportation Industry" (2017). Senior Theses. 140. https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/senior_theses/140 This Thesis is brought to you by the Honors College at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Senior Theses by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SERVICIZING TRANSPORTATION 1 OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES IN SERVICIZING THE TRANSPORTATION INDUSTRY By Kelly Cavanagh Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Graduation with Honors from the South Carolina Honors College May 2017 Approved: Mark Ferguson Director of Thesis Carolyn Queenan Second Reader Steve Lynn, Dean For South Carolina Honors College SERVICIZING TRANSPORTATION 2 Table of Contents Page # Title Page 1 Table of Contents 2 Abstract 3 Chapter 1: Introduction to Servicizing 4 Chapter 2: The Car-sharing Revolution 4 Chapter 3: Bike-sharing in Urban Populations 10 Chapter 4: The Introduction of Scooter Rentals 16 Appendices 34 References 39 SERVICIZING TRANSPORTATION 3 ABSTRACT As a result of declining consumer spending, more companies have been “servicizing” their business models, moving away from the typical product-centric model and offering their goods as services. This trend has been especially popular in the transportation industry, with cars and scooters now being rented by the minute, with no transfer of ownership. Apps like Uber and Lyft have disrupted the taxi service industry, effectively side-stepping expensive regulations due to their “car-sharing” business model.
    [Show full text]