[jusben1369]

I'll admit the video is a little cringe worthy with hipsters and Vita Coco. But your criticisms are unfair and unfounded. Airplanes sell a range of seating options that have a price to comfort ratio. Train travellers have always had multiple cabins and pricing choices. Car services range from cheap taxis to black cars to take you to the airport. So there's no reason bus transportation can't offer an alternative to the current offering that's more expensive and therefore has better amenities.

In general I'm completely bearish though on these new types of public transportation options. We're about 10 - 15 years away from self driving electric cars that could fit 2 - 4 or 8 people based on design that will optimize route choices and pick you up from your door and drop you at the door you want to go whether that's 3 miles away or intercity. And the economics are already there ($6 probably gets you a long way is a Lyft rideshare right now) Leap could pivot to support that new model but I think super large vehicles on fixed routes is going the way of the dinosaur.

[peterwwillis]

The examples you give are examples of privilege which benefit the wealthy [who happen to be mostly white] and the only thing that's affected is "rider comfort", which is not real value when you consider the business is a transportation company and not a day spa. There's no reason they can't offer an alternative. But the reason they can and do offer an alternative is pretentious.

[hsod]

"rider comfort" is not real value?

What if busses had no seats at all? What if they were 100 degrees? What if they didn't have shock absorbers? What if they smelled bad (worse)?

Rider comfort IS real value. You've just anchored your perspective at the current level and decided that anything above that is "pretentious" which is itself kind of pretentious.

Also, it seems tautological that luxury services benefit the wealthy. What's the alternative? Socialism?

[peterwwillis]

Sometimes, rider comfort determines value. Such as on an airplane, where a couple inches can determine if your neck and back are screwed up for hours. Or on a bus in Dubai, where air conditioning may determine if you look like you just stepped out of a lake of perspiration.

In this case, the Leap is doing what someone else already alluded to: giving you a Lexus version of a bus. It's not like it's providing air conditioning where it didn't exist, or needed room where it didn't exist [in fact, it does the opposite].

Added value is when you get more for your money. Like when you get a free bag of peanuts with your ride, or your ride costs less, or introduces air conditioning. Adding luxury changes the value, but while also increasing the cost. And things introduced purely as a luxury tend to be pretentious.

As it's designed now, there are less seats, higher prices, and increases the amount of traffic on the roads. If this service became popular they'd either have to raise the price (ala Uber/Lyft surges) or increase the number of buses, which forces you to choose between increased cost or increased traffic, neither of which improves transportation.

I wasn't trying to suggest we shouldn't have luxury items. Just that when it comes to an alternative bus [transportation means], what we don't need is a luxury bus. We need a more efficient bus. Less seats, higher prices and a potential increase in traffic does not seem more efficient to me.

--

Let's be honest. This service is intended to cater to people who are "too classy" for the bus, but too cheap for an expensive car service. It's not getting them there faster, and definitely not cheaper, but it is giving them fancy drinks and a space to open up their laptops away from the poor, unwashed masses. It's the upper-middle-class bus service. "Tired of looking at poor people? Need a place to USB charge your phone? Like the idea of going to work in a mobile coffee shop? Try Leap!"

Now that's pretentious.

[dgomez1092]

I agree it is a little pretentious. But at the same time what does it say about the user? Being pretentious means a user is attempting to sway you by affecting, say knowledge of culture (an emotive response) to an object than it inherently holds. In this case the aesthetic appeal to the interior of a bus, less seats and maybe they're made of leather but to the seat itself, there is no significance in its functionality -- we give it its meaning. That to me is materialistic and gives us insight as to how we can understand users.

Say there response is to recommend to their friend, "Oh, I only use Uber when I come back home after a night out, but when I go to work I use Leap, I love that I can put my feet up on the leather seat across from me while typing away!"

Your user seems to have issues rooted in self-identifying through external means. Why is it that they feel compelled to compare Leap to Uber? To note I think it increases their socio-economic status (in their mind) for that brief moment thus generalizing them to the specific core of typical Uber users. This is a self-transformation expectancy that keeps them coming back to the product, Leap! They're not happy with themselves to a certain (obviously monetary) extent. As a business it should follow a categorical imperative to come up with a way to (a) accept the pretentious user (b) be pretentious product (c) BUT help user keep some measure of progress, allow them to get rid of that maladaptive urge >> make them begin a drawing, everytime they ride have them sketch one line at a time. Over the course of a month if they're active then they will have become a amateur artist in that timeframe -- a transformation. (d) feel good.

[jusben1369]

I'm trying to work out the logical conclusion to your line of arguing though. How do you justify the range of eating establishments that exist? Is any restaurant charging more than $10 for a nutritious meal simply another example of bourgeois excess? A hotel room that charges more than $50 for a clean bed and bathroom? Apple devices vs their Windows/Android equivalents? Automobiles?