Here is the News.

Public transport / infrastructure (which I'm classifying this as) shouldn't need to make a profit. Especially when the mode we're subsidising is good for the climate.

Public transport, public health, education, road networks, even energy, all suitable to be run in a way that delivers to the public a good, reliable service at a cost effective price. It is hard to argue that the private sector has done better than state enterprises in any of these areas.

We have Beryl Bikes in Hereford, fabulous. No idea if Beryl is making money or not, but if not, the council should take it on and ensure what is a positive for society is maintained.

E scooters are very new and these rental schemes even newer. They are being tried all over the world via various different models. We really don’t know if they are a net public benefit, what they cost, what journeys they replace, what infrastructure might be needed etc etc.

The notion that the way forward is clear enough that it is already something that you can confidently argue that government should be doing (and funding) is baffling to me.

Of all the things that governments could/should be spending money on and aren't, I'd have a faddy, dangerous form of personal transportation that's only usable by people between the ages of about 15 and 35 as long as they're completely able bodied so far down the list you'd be getting blowjobs on the NHS and free beer between 5 and 7 every day before that got a penny.

Governments haven't been spending money on escooters, they've been licensing private companies to operate. Considering the fuckton of money governments spend on subsidising road transport, any teeny, tiny amount that goes into escooters is a completely negligible cost.

And this 55 year old man has been using one to get into and out of the city centre because they are cheap, reliable and safe (cycle paths 90% of the way) and mean I'm not driving and parking my petrol-engine car in town.

Yes. Nobody is saying that they were. Tricky seemed to think they should but drifted off onto some wider issue when tested.

Well their cheapness is up for debate, given that you weren’t covering your costs.

I use them occasionally. I don’t know if the economics in Melbourne are stacking up for the providers. If they are doing ok or subsisting me with a lake of Private Equity cash while they try and figure out what works then great. If it turns out it’s not a viable business without a public subsidy I’d want to know what that subsidy is and what the benefit will be before being happy to see it given. As someone who can pay more, and has numerous non-car alternatives available to him, my usage is irrelevant.

Russ was saying that they shouldn't. I was saying that they haven't.

I was saying they should in the case of Hereford. A small city, about 4 miles diameter, with a population of about 200,000. Whilst not being large enough to sustain a regular bus service, despite heavy subsidies, Hereford is too big to get to town and back on foot. Personal, electric (assisted) transport is ideal in this situation and will work for most people up to retirement age, and some beyond (whoever said teens to 35 needs their head tinkering with!). The alternative is cars and with only a single river crossing point it clogs up fast.

That doesn't mean it would be ideal in Nottingham, where it is a bit more hilly and the bus/tram service is fabulous.

I often wonder what the thinking is choosing scooters over bicycles. Or is an addition to bikes?

I suppose scooters are easier to ride and park?

I never have cause to use them as I usually either get the train into Nottingham and walk or drive there. If I lived in the area I’d use them as they seem a good idea.

Company what went bust also had the same system in place in some European and USA cities.

Apparently the poor sods that were tasked with rounding up all the scooters in the back of vans on Xmas eve had been told that was their last job to do. Merry Christmas!

Nottingham has (had!) scooters and bikes. I used scooters because a) there was a pick-up point near me and b) a scooter requires no effort (stand on it) whereas a bike requires some effort (pedal it).

I think they broadly think they're a good thing and help with getting people out of cars which has many benefits. But they're scared that legalising them will be used as a stick to beat them with. So they're just sitting on the fence.

Sounds like the infrastructure (what’s the situation with bike lanes etc?) should be in place for wide usage of ‘thing that are not cars’ and then, before throwing public money at e-scooters, trying to figure out what the usage patterns would be to work out whether a subsidised rental scheme would be better than, say, people who want an alternative getting their own bike/scooter. Shared schemes might instinctively seem like the more efficient solution, but in a smaller city without the diversity of journeys (and, thus, natural spread of the hardware) that might not be the case.

I know that I can always find a choice of scooters within a hundred yards of home. That’s because this is the sort of place that scooter-types ride too, as well as from. Therefore a shared/public scheme is reliable enough that I can plan around it. The fact that the ten scooters I can walk to will be ten different scooters an hour later means those scooters are getting lots of use from lots of people (so a much more efficient use of resources than me having my own). I imagine Hereford might be quite different… so what you really want is some private bastards taking the risk and doing 50 experiments in 50 Hereford-like places around the world so that if it turns out it’s a good public investment, the public knows how to do it. And that is what is currently happening in lots of bigger cities (which, if needed, at least will provide some useful data if smaller places want to get in on the act.)

So I am not saying there’s never going to be a case for public provision, just that we very much in the experiment/innivate/pissing-capital-in-the-trent phase of it all, and as that experimenting is very much happening, it’s silly to complain that the government isn’t getting involved.

Also, if they turn out to be a disaster, it’s a hell of a lot easier to terminate a contract than it is to deal with thousands of angry people who suddenly own very expensive garden toys.

And, of course, if everyone went crazy buying personal scooters, that would still be monetisation. Probably a lot more of it. So it would be a silly argument even if the companies running these schemes weren’t regularly failing in their monetisation plans.

London has a really weird situation whereby there are 5-6 hire schemes running in the city, so 100s (1000s?) of scooters about. But using your own private one on the streets or cycle lanes is actually illegal. However the police don't even attempt to enforce it and loads of people have and use them daily. It's not just teens dealing drugs either - hang around Bank at 8:30am and you'll see hoardes of smartly dressed business people flying by on them. It's quick, easy, cheap, lots of fun, and you don't tend to get as sweaty (like you can on a bike).