[lkbm]

I agree, but right now it feels like the scooter companies have decided it's easier to inconvenience pedestrians than to ally with us and fight car culture.

I'm a huge fan of the idea of plentiful, cheap scooters for short trips, and was excited to have a new cohort of people who would want more safe bike (and scooter) routes. Alas, as much as I love the concept, I've developed a strong dislike for the companies.

I've little doubt that they could dramatically reduce the amount of improper scooter parking, but it would involve punishing their customers, and that would hurt their growth in the short term, for the unimportant benefit of avoiding crushing regulatory responses on the long term.

We didn't choose for them to be our enemies. We were natural allies. But they decided they'd fight us than have to combat the real problem.

[derivagral]

Complaints like this are typically run through the city or campus that leases operation rights to the fleet. These entities usually get fairly forceful in (competitive) markets. Your local scooter outfit(s) are not going to want to risk a market with a ton of complaints and bad operations feedback.

That said: given GPS limitations, the time it takes for a van with humans to arrive (and park!), as well as lagging feedback loops... this isn't an easy problem. Last I was in the industry, they were just starting to concept customer reputation systems, but generally they were more concerned with winning markets and decreasing operating costs.

[mulmen]

The fact that scooter companies are focused on “winning markets” makes me think they are a negative. For this to work the price has to be low. That means competition.

In my neighborhood both Comcast and CenturyLink provide service. When the CenturyLink installer showed up he explained the install would take longer than estimated because he couldn’t use the line directly in front of my house. That’s a “Comcast line”. Apparently Comcast techs will literally cut competing lines off theirs.

I wonder what the scooter van equivalent is. Is there someone leaving competing scooters in the middle of the sidewalk as a psy-op to disrupt competing marketshare?

[derivagral]

I haven't heard of direct antagonism as such, but I do know there've been social media groups dedicated to defacing/destroying property, incl hacking/theft. Unless maybe you're one of the top 2-3, I don't think anyone has time (in eng at least) to do such things. From what I could tell, everyone does use custom software.

To your point about ISP competition, the original company in the space I was at was developing generic operations software. Our main (large) client decided to inhouse instead of continue the contract, and a smaller competitor bought us. Sharing platforms isn't really in the cards; the best you'll get is MDS[0] or GBFS[1], but those initiatives are typically led by municipalities or their vendors. The former is usually restricted to regulators, and the latter isn't always reliably implemented unless the market specifies it. These are also moving specs (markets want different versions, ofc), it was great fun!

As far as "winning" vs other motivations, remember that (afaik) none of these companies are profitable yet and the VCs aren't dong this for fun. The people I worked with cared very much about the mission, but the board doesn't always agree.

[0] https://github.com/openmobilityfoundation/mobility-data-spec...

[1] https://gbfs.mobilitydata.org/

[mulmen]

I understand VC motivation. I’m just not convinced it aligns with the public interest.