[Hovertruck]

> If we imagine for a moment that you work in an office in Palo Alto, you could now choose to live in Hayward (5 min flight, $25), downtown San Francisco (10 min flight, $50), or even San Rafael (15 min flight, $70).

This is a strange example to include in here – that's a pretty expensive (one-way?) commute.

[looping__lui]

I guess they address the pressing problems of their investors? Like people with too much money to spend and a bit detached from reality? ;-)

[notatoad]

yeah, looking at the size of their aircraft and their proposed "vertiports", they're not suggesting that hundreds of thousands of people can move to san rafael and commute to sf, they're talking about more like 12 people. and tbh they could probably find a dozen people in the bay area with a $36k/year commuting budget

[FireBeyond]

Right? Because SF isn't already expensive enough without having to compensate employees for $700/week ($36,000/yr) in commuting expenses. (Or for employees to be able to justify that on their own dime...)

[gojomo]

It wouldn't have to be every day; it'd save 1hr+ over driving or train; many people in the Bay Area market for this have an effective rate of compensation over $100/hour.

With sufficiently-enlightened regulation (for which I wouldn't hold my breath), these could run, for example, from the rooftops of Google buildings in Mountain View to the rooftops of their Embarcadero-SF building. Or downtown Palo Alto to a downtown SF pier. Etc.

If physically possible, safe, & available for the prices they're claiming, this would have a big market. And, competitors, like the Larry Page-backed 'Kitty Hawk': https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2020/06/04/larry-pa...