DOCSLIB.ORG

Going Small the Transition to Urban Micromobility 2 Content Overview

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Going Small the Transition to Urban Micromobility 2 Content Overview Going Small The transition to urban micromobility 2 Content overview Transition to urban micromobility 3-4 Forefront of urban movement – Key insights 11 Key challenges for our cities 5 Global Young Advisory Network – Policy approach – Seven cities 6-7 About us 12 Operator approach – Seven operators 8-9 User change response behaviour 10 3 Transition to Urban Micromobility We live in an increasingly connected world. Background Key Client Questions/Findings The ways in which we live work and play is highly influenced by interaction with others, use of The rise of micromobility stems from the following: Operators are deployed in cities without notice due to technology and sharing of spaces and resources. rapid initial growth and rising investment capital. Deploy- • Emerging trends in the everyday lives of urban area ment in cities also improves the rides per unit ratio, which Transit in cities is also experiencing a shift residents are impacting their mobility patterns and ensures a sustainable business model. towards shared mobility: ride hailing, carpooling needs. and short-term car lease have all experienced Price per kilometre is higher compared to traditional public • Circular economy growth encourages more travelers transport and targets a specific demographic, typically from a rapid rise in urban areas worldwide. to share ride or carpool. higher-income areas. This trend of small single-person flexible modes • Increased access to information via smart phones, There is no evidence deployment is linked to neighborhoods’ of transport termed as micromobility includes: rise of digitalization and technology advancements. income. Deployment primarily occurs in central areas mopeds, bicycles and scooters, electric or manual, due to higher public density. Smaller operators may focus docked or dockless. In just a few years they • Flexible workplaces can help smooth the daily traffic on more regional areas as to complement transport in have experienced rapid growth, often without flow and increase demand for hours traditionally non-centred areas. prior engagement with cities, leading to regula- seen as off-peak. tory and operational challenges. Cooperation and joint planning prevail as operators and cities • Rise of new transport modes and increased demand collaborate on deploying and developing infrastructure/policy for short trips to city centre. We examined the models and interrelationships to manage micromobility. which exist between micromobility operators, Future ready cities have advantages: they have long-term users and cities where they are located. We transport plans and a strong nexus to complement the assessed the emergence of various models micromobility technology. of regulation and operation as micromobility Capacity Flexibility has spread to cities across the world, and iden- Going urban micromobility to Small — The transition tified characteristics of successful ventures as VEHICLE CAPACITY well as insights that could be applied to future operations. Train Bus Flexi-bus Car-sharing Car-sharing Private car Definition (station-based) (free-loat) Use of small scale devices (e-bikes, e-scooters and Scope mopeds) to address key mobility gaps within our trans- portation network (walking/cycling, public transport Dock-based Dock-free and driving). Rental moped Shared moped Shared moped Private moped Rental bike Shared bike Shared bike Private bike Micromobility Rental scooter Shared scooter Shared scooter Private scooter SERVICE FLEXIBILITY Flexibility in O-D, route, time of use 4 Transition to Urban Micromobility 1 Pro-active City policy Stable and NOW approach 2 Re-active Micromobility services well-functioning introduced to cities market 3 Free entry FUTURE 4 Outlawed Around the globe the approach to policy and regulation on micromobility A “pro-active” approach is the preferred option can be classified into four (4) categories: in which cities, local regulators and operators collaborate to put appropriate policy and regu- lation in place. “Free entry” ultimately results in 1 Pro-Active: “re-active” measures following negative atten- Regulations imposed before technology tion. A complete micromobility ban (“outlawed”) implementation in the city. is not suitable either as this can discourage innovation and lessen the intermodality potential. 2 Re-Active: Regulations imposed after technology implementa- tion in the city and incidents occurred (i.e. user inju- ries, complaints from residents/commuters). 3 Free Entry: Technology implemented without any regulations in place. 4 Outlawed: Technology implementation is banned by the city. 5 Key Challenges for our Cities Parking and littering issues might become one of the key challenges to arise from the micromobility services emergence. As a result of the arrival of micromobility services, As micromobility vehicles are a new feature in the urban the various aspects of traffic safety have been landscape and transportation system, objections are a primary focus of policy makers. Traffic safety raised in regard to their negative impact on cities due challenges are a common concern for cities. to littering and reckless parking. P Traffic Safety 1 2 Parking and Littering Unseized Policy & Intermodality ? Potential 6 Regulations 3 Unclear Policy Integration of micromobility services to existing The policy and regulations around micromobility transport modes remains a key challenge and a key services remain a key challenge for policy- opportunity. A WSP study on unseized opportunity makers around the world due to the aggressive suggests the use of micromobility services to solve growth approach. As a result, unclear policies Going urban micromobility to Small — The transition last mile issues in existing transportation systems. have a direct impact on the user response. 5 4 Biased Negative Vehicle Life Public Opinion Cycle As history has shown, the public tend to view new The growing supply of electric scooters can support features introduced in our transportation systems more governments in meeting the zero-emission vehicles negatively than other transport modes. This can lead to adoption standards. However, quantifiable objections are irrational opinion. For instance, a micromobility related raised regarding the life cycle of these vehicles. Could accident can be perceived as worse than a car accident. their contribution to sustainable urban transports be jeopardized by their short life cycles? 6 Policy Approach – Seven Cities Auckland Dubai London San Francisco The Lime e-scooter operator was the first Micromobility has been available in the There are 32 local authority districts in San Francisco has followed a “Pro-active” micromobility entrant in Auckland back in region since 2013, with 85 rentals spots in Greater London, each governed by a London approach as one of the first US cities to October 2018. Other operators now include Downtown Dubai, the Dubai Marina and borough council. This situation can be a develop regulatory and permit frameworks Wave, Flamingo and Onzo, who are taking the Palm Jumeirah. However, the integration hurdle for widespread rollout of micro- to cover the rapidly emerging micromobility part in the second phase of the e-scooter was intended for casual use around parks mobility across the city. Most new entrants and shared bicycle options in the city. Back assessment trial, which is ending in October and tourist areas. E-scooters were intro- have elected to pursue pilot operations with in January 2018, JUMP launched operation 2019. In the first phase trial, safety and duced into the market in early 2019 with one or two boroughs, before scaling up. of 250 e-bikes as part of an 18-month trial appropriate regulation were major concerns. global brands such as Qwickly and KIWI The launch of Mobike as a shared bicycle program. At the time JUMP was the only There were 155 random braking events implementing dockless scooter options. service coincided with TfL’s Code of Con- company able to meet San Francisco’s pri- reported across New Zealand, as a result In March 2019, the Roads and Transport duct for dockless bicycle operators. This orities for a safe, equitable and accountable of a glitch in the e-scooter technology Authority (RTA) “outlawed” rental of demonstrates a “Pro-Active” response from shared bicycle service. Currently, JUMP which caused the wheels to lock during e-scooters, stating, “The RTA is currently the city to put regulations in place before bicycles cover the core area of San Francisco, use. For the second phase, a 15 km/h speed considering the technical and legislative widespread use. A similar approach is along with some key communities defined limit will be imposed and geofencing GPS requirements to allow the operation of being followed with e-scooters, with the as “disadvantaged communities in the city”. technology will identify e-scooters parked electric scooters in addition to the conditions UK government currently banning their The San Francisco Municipal Transport outside of designated areas. Non-compliant and commitment of scooter drivers.” The use until appropriate operating regulations Agency is in the process of expanding the e-scooters will need to be removed within RTA position only applies to the rental are developed. Stationless Bikeshare Permit citywide to three hours or be fined. All e-scooter riders of e-scooters and does not extend to the between 10,000 and 11,000 shared bicycles must be 18+ years old and possess a valid purchase of the equipment for personal and e-bikes. driver’s licence. Helmet use is optional. use. E-scooters
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Why Mobike Is a Hit by Lin Chen
    COVER STORY 14 Why Mobike is a Hit By Lin Chen icycles with bright orange wheels Mobike’s operational model is simple: perfectly in line with the post ’80s are now a common sight along download the app, deposit RMB300 and ’90s generation lifestyle trend of Bthe streets of Shanghai and and then pay RMB1 per half-hour “own nothing, reject nothing and be Beijing. It began last fall when mobike ride. The app provides the location of responsible for nothing”. became all the rage. But why has this nearby bikes and they can be dropped Tencent Holdings-backed start-up become off anywhere after use. One reason Thus despite the fact that the such a hit? behind mobike’s success is that it mobike business model is makes customers feel as if they are commercially illogical in many ways, getting a great bargain, paying RMB1 it has sparked public interest with to enjoy a RMB3,000 bike. Second, some even going as far as calling the mobike looks cool and many it a Unicorn in the making. But users have taken to sharing WeChat is mobike really a money-making Moments of themselves riding them. machine? Mobikes have now become a kind of social currency, synonymous with According to the company’s own cool, green (environmentally friendly) projections, its annual profit may and definitely in. Finally, the mobike be as much as RMB1.6 billion yuan; was destined to be a hit because of that’s more than the profit level of its flexible return system which is 90% of A share listed companies! “Own nothing, reject nothing and be responsible for nothing.” Lin Chen is Assistant Professor of Marketing at CEIBS.
    [Show full text]
  • Electric Scooters and Micro-Mobility in Michigan
    CLOSUP Student Working Paper Series Number 46 December 2018 Electric Scooters and Micro-Mobility in Michigan Perry Holmes, University of Michigan This paper is available online at http://closup.umich.edu Papers in the CLOSUP Student Working Paper Series are written by students at the University of Michigan. This paper was submitted as part of the Fall 2018 course PubPol 475-750 Michigan Politics and Policy, that is part of the CLOSUP in the Classroom Initiative. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy or any sponsoring agency Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy University of Michigan Perry Holmes December 10, 2018 PUBPOL 750: Michigan Politics and Policy Final Research Paper Electric Scooters and Micro-Mobility in Michigan This paper examines the emerging international trend of dockless electric scooters and evaluates how Michigan’s state and local policymakers can best respond. While there are important public safety and other concerns that must be addressed with regulation, the scooters are a promising last-mile mobility option. Communities should aim to address these concerns while allowing the scooter companies to operate safely and optimize their services. BACKGROUND The scooters, the companies, and their business model 1 Electric scooters are battery-powered, internet-enabled personal vehicles. They typically have a brake on one handle, an accelerator on the other, and a small kickstand that allows them to be parked upright. The maximum speed is around 15 miles per hour, with a range of 20 miles, although most rides are much shorter.2 The two largest scooter companies in the country are Bird and Lime, but several other startups are operating in cities across the country.3 In Michigan, Bird, Lime, and Spin are 1 Bird, https://www.bird.co 2 Lime, https://www.li.me/electric-scooter 3 Irfan, Umair.
    [Show full text]
  • What Killed Ofo? Efficient Financing Pushed It Step by Step Into the Abyss
    2018 International Workshop on Advances in Social Sciences (IWASS 2018) What Killed ofo? Efficient Financing Pushed it Step by Step into the Abyss Nansong Zhou University of International Relations, China Keywords: ofo, Efficient Financing, dilemma Abstract: ofo is a bicycle-sharing travel platform based on a “dockless sharing” model that is dedicated to solving urban travel problems. Users simply scan a QR code on the bicycle using WeChat or the ofo app and are then provided with a password to unlock the bike. Since its launch in June 2015, ofo has deployed 10 million bicycles, providing more than 4 billion trips in over 250 cities to more than 200 million users in 21 countries. However, negative news coverage of ofo has increased recently. In September 2018, due to missed payments, ofo was sued by Phoenix Bicycles In the same month, some netizens claimed that ofo cheats and misleads consumers. On October 27, another media outlet disclosed that the time limit for refunding the deposit was extended again, from 1-10 working days to 1-15 working days. Various indications suggest that ofo is in crisis. What happened to ofo? How did the company come to be in this situation? This paper will answer these questions. 1. Introduction Bicycle sharing is a service in which bicycles are made available for shared use to individuals on a short-term basis for a price or for free. Such services take full advantage of the stagnation of bicycle use caused by rapid urban economic development and maximize the utilization of public roads. The first instance of bicycle-sharing in history occurred in 1965 when fifty bicycles were painted white, left permanently unlocked, and placed throughout the inner city in Amsterdam for the public to use freely.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustaining Dockless Bike-Sharing Based on Business Principles
    Copyright Warning & Restrictions The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a, user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of “fair use” that user may be liable for copyright infringement, This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law. Please Note: The author retains the copyright while the New Jersey Institute of Technology reserves the right to distribute this thesis or dissertation Printing note: If you do not wish to print this page, then select “Pages from: first page # to: last page #” on the print dialog screen The Van Houten library has removed some of the personal information and all signatures from the approval page and biographical sketches of theses and dissertations in order to protect the identity of NJIT graduates and faculty. ABSTRACT SUSTAINING DOCKLESS BIKE-SHARING BASED ON BUSINESS PRINCIPLES by Neil Horowitz Currently in urban areas, the value of money and fuel is increasing because of urban traffic congestion. As an environmentally sustainable and short-distance travel mode, dockless bike-sharing not only assists in resolving the issue of urban traffic congestion, but additionally assists in minimizing pollution, satisfying the demand of the last mile problem, and improving societal health.
    [Show full text]
  • Bike Sharing 5.0 Market Insights and Outlook
    Bike Sharing 5.0 Market insights and outlook Berlin, August 2018 This study provides a comprehensive overview of developments on the bike sharing market Management summary 1 Key trends in > Major innovations and new regulations are on the way to reshaping the mobility market innovative mobility > New business models follow an asset-light approach allowing consumers to share mobility offerings > Bike sharing has emerged as one of the most-trending forms of mobility in the current era > Digitalization has enabled bike sharing to become a fully integrated part of urban mobility 2 Bike sharing market > Bike sharing has grown at an extremely fast rate and is now available in over 70 countries development > Several mostly Asian operators have been expanding fast, but first business failures can be seen > On the downside, authorities are alarmed by the excessive growth and severe acts of vandalism > Overall, the bike sharing market is expected to grow continuously by 20% in the years ahead 3 Role of bike sharing > Bike sharing has established itself as a low-priced and convenient alternative in many cities in urban mobility > The three basic operating models are dock-based, hybrid and free-floating > Key success factors for bike sharing are a high-density network and high-quality bikes > Integrated mobility platforms enable bike sharing to become an essential part of intermodal mobility 4 Future of bike > Bike sharing operators will have to proactively shape the mobility market to stay competitive sharing > Intense intra-city competition will
    [Show full text]
  • Cardiff City Bike Share a Study in Success
    Narrative, network and nextbike Cardiff City Bike Share A study in success Beate Kubitz December 2018 About the author Beate Kubitz is an independent researcher and writer on innovative mobility. She is the author of the Annual Survey of Mobility as a Service (2017 and 2018) published by Landor LINKS, as well as numerous articles about changing transport provision, technology and innovation including bike share, car sharing, demand responsive transport, mobile ticketing and payments and open data. Her background is in shared transport – working on the Public Bike Share Users Survey and the Annual Survey of Car Clubs (CoMoUK). She has contributed to TravelSpirit Foundation publications on autonomy and open models of Mobility as a Service and open data and transport published by the Open Data Institute. About the report This report is based on interviews with Cardiff cyclists carried out online and a field trip to Cardiff in August 2018 including interviews with: • Cardiff City Council Transport and Planning Officer • Cardiff University Facilities Manager • Pedal Power Development Manager • Group discussion with Cardiff Cycle City group Membership and usage data for Cardiff, Glasgow and Milton Keynes bike share schemes was provided by nextbike. In addition, it draws on the Propensity to Cycle Tool, the 2017 Public Bike Share User Survey (Bikeplus, now Como UK), Sustrans reporting, local government data and media and social media scanning. Photographs of Cardiff nextbike docking stations and bikes were taken by the author in August 2018. The report was commissioned and funded by nextbike UK in order to understand how different elements affect the use and success of a bike share scheme.
    [Show full text]
  • The Market Does Not Believe in Tears—Brutal Growth of Bike-Sharing Vs Well-Behaved Public Bicycles
    The Market does not Believe in Tears—Brutal Growth of Bike-sharing Vs Well-Behaved Public Bicycles Deng Han, Liu Shaokun, Li Wei, Huang Runjie@ ITDP Institute for Transportation and Development Policy With the rise of sharing economic concepts, and great development of payment technology on smart phone via the Internet as a medium in recent years, bike-sharing quickly entered the major cities in China in 2016. Virtually overnight, red, yellow, blue and other colors shared bikes spring up in every corner of the street. Same as the solution for “the last kilometer”, bike-sharing quickly go beyond traditional docking public bicycles in terms of quantity, radiating face, influence, user experience and other aspects. In the face of brutal growth of bike-sharing, many cities such as Guangzhou have pressed the “pause button” on public bicycles. Development status of public bicycles in Guangzhou: Guangzhou public bicycle system was officially launched in June 2010, and the stations were located along the BRT corridor of Zhongshan Avenue. Public bicycle stations are mainly distributed in the BRT stations, surrounding residential and commercial areas to meet the "the last kilometer trip" and the short trip along BRT corridor. Guangzhou public bicycle system received a warm welcome from the general public since it was put into use. According to the data provided by Guangzhou public bicycle company, as of December 2016, the system expanded to 8850 vehicles, more than 110 service points from the initial 1000 vehicles, 18 service points, and provided bike rental service for 35,382,400 passengers in total. Distribution Map of Guangzhou Public Bicycle Phase I (Source: ITDP) In order to further promote green travel, energy conservation and improve the atmospheric environment, Guangzhou government proposed the Work Program for the Development and Promotion of Guangzhou Public Bicycle Project in 2015.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • AWARE in Openlca
    openLCA (1.7.4) Case study: Bike sharing openLCA Version: 1.7.4 Document version: 1.0 Date: 09. November 2018 Authors: Francesca Recanati, Andreas Ciroth GreenDelta GmbH Tel +49 30 48496030 Kaiserdamm 13 Fax +49 30 4849 6991 14057 Berlin GERMANY Bike sharing Outline 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Goal and scope definition ................................................................................................................ 2 3 Inventory analysis – baseline and alternatives .......................................................................... 3 3.1 Bike production .................................................................................................................................. 3 3.2 Bike use phase and maintenance ................................................................................................. 4 3.3 Baseline and alternatives cases ...................................................................................................... 5 3.4 Urban (public) transportation means – comparison ................................................................. 7 4 Summary of modelling approach and cases under study ....................................................... 7 5 Life Cycle Impact Assessment method ........................................................................................ 8 6 Results .................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bike Share Users Survey 2019 2019 Survey Result Key Findings
    86% OF RESPONDENTS AGREED WITH THE STATEMENT THAT bike share makes “ the city a better “ place to cycle Bike Share Users Survey www.como.org.uk 2019 2019 Survey Result Key Findings THE GENDER SPLIT OF BIKE SHARE SHARED EBIKE SCHEMES USERS IS MUCH MORE EVEN THAN FOR SUPPORT USERS TO CYCLE TO WORK GENERAL CYCLING MORE FREQUENTLY 60% OF THOSE USING EBIKES SHARE REPORTED THAT THEY WERE 40% 58% COMMUTING FEMALE MALE DATA AVERAGED OVER 4 YEARS OF RESULTS BIKE SHARE ENABLES USE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT BY OFFERING A LAST MILE SOLUTION. 48% SPECIFICALLY REPORTED ON EXERCISE/PHYSICAL HEALTH BENEFITS AS REASONS WHY THEY CHOOSE TO USE THE BIKE SHARE SCHEME 23% RESPONDENTS USE BIKE SHARE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE BUS BIKE SHARE IS A TOOL FOR RE-ENGAGING CYCLISTS. – 35% RESPONDENTS USE BIKE SHARE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE TRAIN DATA AVERAGED OVER 4 YEARS OF RESULTS 46% BIKE SHARE USERS SAID THE BIKE SHARE SCHEME WAS THE CATALYST TO CYCLING (AGAIN) This report presents the results of the fourth annual Bike Share Users Survey; the only such research being carried out across The survey is a key tool for understanding the impacts of bike share schemes, and how the UK’s bike share sector the UK. The survey is key to is performing. It has been a year of mixed It can be argued that now, providing the evidence of the fortunes for bike share. New more than ever, there is a schemes have developed need to understand the scale in Edinburgh, and Cardiff and range of impacts of bike social and environmental impacts plus there are many new share.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rapid Growth of Bike Sharing in China – Good News for City Mobility?
    Viewpoint The rapid growth of bike sharing in China – good news for city mobility? The explosive growth of the bike sharing business in China, and the implications for new mobility With significant venture capital injected, bike sharing has been booming rapidly in China since the second half of 2016, and already looks to be impacting the future development of the urban mobility ecosystem. Arthur D. Little considers the market dynamics and competition landscape, as well as some key takeaways for different stakeholders, including city authorities, the existing bicycle supply chain, and the new entrant bike-sharing companies themselves. Since the second half of 2016, the bike-sharing parked in defined areas and locked up to posts, Chinese users business has been booming in China can pick up and drop shared bikes anywhere, which is very convenient, compared to the option of a private bike. When the China used to be the “Kingdom of bicycles,” the biggest bike is locked up again, the user pays a fee calculated based on market for bicycles in the world. Since the start of the 21st the length of time taken during the ride. Depending on brands, century, however, with the rapid increase of private cars and the the payment for a 30-minute ride can be as little as 0.5 or up to convenience of public transportation such as metro rail, the use 1 RMB. Due to its convenience and ability to address last-mile of private bikes has dropped. However, thanks to the prevalence transportation, such business models have gained popularity of smartphones, mobile payment via Alipay and WeChat, and the rapidly.
    [Show full text]