I agree that whereas bikes haring wouldn’t be where it stands now without Decaux and ClearChannel, advertisement has nothing to do with bikes and is more of a pollution than a solution.

Therefore linking it to a global answer to transportation (solution #1) makes much more sense (just look at the price of a bus!). It’s done in cities like Berlin and Munich in Germany, or Avignon and Montpellier in France, a mass transportation company, like the Deutsch Bahn for callABike or the local city transportation company, deals with the bike sharing system, coupled with buses and trolleys: hop out of a bus and take a bike then a trolley with the same pass. Very convenient.

But I guess solutions #2 and #3 are possible as well: make money out of it, whether through ads or directly from the customer. #2 means, whether Decaux replaces ClearChannel or bundling together another ad company and a bike sharing solution.

The solution I am talking about in Berlin or Avignon are different from Decaux/ClearChannel as well because the bike stands themselves are passive or inexistent; in Avignon it needs just a few bolts and screws in concrete, no electrical network, the bike itself is doing the talking with the customer and locks itself up. That means you can have very large stations, or even no stations at all, just bike stands here and there.

I have seen one or 2 bikes thrashed on bicycle stands during the Avignon theater festival but still secured to it and none littering the streets like Velib’s in Paris. And of course none in the very civilized Berlin. One of the reasons is that, unlike all other solutions I know, they can not be used when not properly unlocked, because the wheel (CallABike) or direction (Smoove) is jammed with the lock, while for bixi or velib or Spanish bicing, if a hooligan succeeds in freeing the bike from its lock (just break it free), it is still in pretty good shape. And I am not sure, as Susan King is suggesting that vandalism is not much, I have the feeling that it is taxing them heavily.

I don’t know which solution is going to be put forward in SF, if any, but it certainly opens up the debate to have ClearChannel out of the game. I wish you guys good luck from France.

Ads could be placed at stations, away from stations, or on the bikes themselves. What is possible in SF depends on local ordinance, existing contracts and laws governing advertisements on vehicles.

- Direct subsidy by the transit authority or city (such as Barcelona)
- Advertising (such as Velib in paris)
- User fees (such as Bixi in Montreal).

San Francisco will probably mean the third. The downside is youll probably pay 50% more to use the service (90$ instead of $40 per year)

“I’m not going to leave this office without getting something substantive done,” he said.

Does this mean Gav is going to refuse to step down when his term ends!?

i hope we can put together a local consortium to run the program — maybe Bike and Roll and others, who can do local hiring, be guaranteed some decent, but not exorbitant profit, who have experience with bikes taking a beating, who are local (with all the advantages that brings), who can guarantee work to poorer communities (because we San Franciscans will demand it), etc.

This is actually good news to know we can find a vendor who is invested in creating better transportation solutions through bike sharing, and one who will consider user needs over advertising client’s marketing benefits.

By the way, BAC meets tonight (Thurs, 12/3), City Hall, room 416 (Date and room changed due to Thursday holidays in Nov and Dec).

Also, if structured like montreal or boston, the city wouldnt pay a dime. These things are run by private companies.

San Francisco isn’t exactly swimming in cash, and if enough bikes are taken out of commission that they become difficult to find, the whole program will become useless, since it’s predicated on the idea of ubiquitous bikes everywhere. And while we may be short on cash, bike thieves is one natural resource that we’ve got in abundance.

* cf

How can he get so furious over this but does not seem to give a rat’s ass about MUNI service cuts. Even the pittance that will be spent putting out a RFP is money we could use for existing MUNI. Now is not the time for pie in the sky initiatives.

Getting a dedicated bike share provider is much much better