Boris's £50 a day commuter bikes are daft

bice

Article in today's Standard on London's cycle hire scheme ...up to 30 mins free; £4 for up to 90 mins

BUT £50 for all day and £150 if you are late. The usual rip-off local government mentality at work in short. And 0nly 6000 bikes. After such a build-up, this scheme is pathetic.

Specialized Needs

You work for the Daily Mail, and I claim my £5.

Why latch on to the extreme example, the one designed specifically as a deterrent charge?

As I understand it, the bikes are in zone 1 as they are designed initially to expand casual use of cycles for short journeys in that area. Why would you need one for more than (a free!) 30 minutes?

You are not supposed to hang on to them when not in use; you are supposed to return them to a rack.
That way they are used efficiently and not hidden, locked away, out of use for hours. By returning the bike you are increasing the available bikes at any one time.

What would your alternative suggestion be for bikes intended for short journeys in zone 1?

Also, wait to see if 6000 is too few before criticising. If they are used, then more public (your and my) money might be used to expand it. If they are not used, why waste more money at this stage?

nyanza

Totally agree with duncedunce. The fact it's 50 quid for all day suggests that the scheme is not intended for all-day users, wouldn't you say? It's not a 'high fare' - it's a deterrent against long term use which is against the aims of the scheme. Calm down.

However, I would say that 45 quid just to get easy access to the thing is rather excessive. You've got to be a fairly committed to the scheme to shell out that sort of cash.

cedargreen

The basis of the scheme is that you take a bike, ride it, then deosit it at a hire station where it can be used by others, so each bike can be used many times a day. the high charge for longer periods is to deter people from hiring a bike, riding it to work and keeping it all day 'til they use it in the evening.
6,000 is the initial figure which will be gradually increased. Starting with a relatively small number while the scheme 'beds in' and problems are ironed out is perfectly sensible.
There are lots of potential problems with this kind of scheme- such as theft etc, but eventually this kind of thing has to be made to work if we're going to have low-carbon transport. It will almost certainly come in for criticism from the press who will seize on any problems and claim it's all a huge waste of taxpayers money etc.

colintrav

During the early part of the century horse drawn carriages were all the thing then came bikes .. then came the cars .. and now the local goverment are tryin to entice drivers etc ..


Back to Bikes ...


Well in all honesty the prices for a good reliable bike ain't cheap ..

colintrav

nyanza wrote:

Totally agree with duncedunce. The fact it's 50 quid for all day suggests that the scheme is not intended for all-day users, wouldn't you say? It's not a 'high fare' - it's a deterrent against long term use which is against the aims of the scheme. Calm down.

However, I would say that 45 quid just to get easy access to the thing is rather excessive. You've got to be a fairly committed to the scheme to shell out that sort of cash.

Tourists will lap it up imo ...

lost_in_thought

If the bike pickup/dropoff points are plentiful enough it should be fine, I can't imagine many people using the scheme for rides over about half an hour anyway, 90 minutes at the very most, perhaps a pootle down the towpath.

I don't think many tourists will use it though, they'll be scared of navigational issues and London traffic, and not unfairly - I spent most of my first few weeks on a bike in London getting lost! Look out for numpties on hire bikes though.

jackthelad

The whole thing should have been setup as sight seeing and placed in all the big cities.A local guy at the front of a party of cyclist and a local guy at the rear.Combined with cheap accommodation,and it would have encouraged people to sight see different cities,rather than just seeing the main couple of streets of the city they visited.People would also feel confident to go on the bike tours around cities if accompanied with local residents,who are street wise.These coukld be made up of 2 hour tour,4 hour tour and allday tours.Cities could also stop all visitor traffic from entering the city within a 5 mile circular.These peaple could have their cars parked at a dedicated massive carpark, with cheap parking and a hop on bus to take them to their accomodation.By stoping all visitor traffic and bringing in free hop on buses,this would reduce traffic in cities.It would reduce taxi fares,but at the same time create jobs in other area.Taxis could be taken out of the equation and replaced with electric bike carriages for local runs.These are just some ideas to reduce the traffic load in big cities.In Sidney I went to the national football stadium,which is setup with massive carparks leading straight onto motorways,and small free hop on buses to take you to your dedicated carparks,and i have never seen a stadium 60000 people empty so quickly.

Just a thought from a keen cyclist

Aidy

Access fee is only £1/day though, and 30 minute intervals are free after that.

So you could theoretically take one, drop it off, take another... ?
Although, as pointed out, it's zone 1 only, and 30 minutes should be plenty to get all the way across it.

FCN of a TfL hire bike?

loltoride

£50 is for 24 hours i.e. 1 Day & 1 Night why anybody would need that long to get around zone 1 god knows but I think it is something just to make people bring bikes back. Also the access fee covers the 1st 1/2 hour of use not matter how many bikes you use then charging goes £1.00 for next 1/2 hour, £4.00 for next 90 minutes and £6.00 for 2 hours.

Personally I think pricing is good just fail to see what the benefit is to London or even tourists but we will see.

Simon the Pieman

I would hope it would give people a quick chance to see what it is like to ride a bike. Obviously, in London it may be a bit fruity but once you get going it is not that bad.

Get a few mates out who do not ride, hire a few bikes and take them on a nice little trip. Should be great fun. It is pretty dead around most of the City on the weekends and some great sights to see.

One thing that worries me would be experienced riders looking down their noses at the people on the hire bikes. Everybody has to learn. We should look to help them where can and bring them in to the fold.

Oddjob62

Simon the Pieman wrote:

One thing that worries me would be experienced riders looking down their noses at the people on the hire bikes. Everybody has to learn. We should look to help them where can and bring them in to the fold.

Don't worry... there's already enough inexperienced cyclists for them to look down their noses at. 6000 more won't make a difference.

I was wondering... surely some parking areas will sometimes get full and others empty... will people be hired to move bikes from area to area?

chuckcork

I wonder how many will be locked to railings and then disposed of by property owners?

prj45

Some pretty interesting stuff here:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/ ... ov2008.pdf

lost_in_thought

Oddjob62 wrote:

Simon the Pieman wrote:

One thing that worries me would be experienced riders looking down their noses at the people on the hire bikes. Everybody has to learn. We should look to help them where can and bring them in to the fold.

Don't worry... there's already enough inexperienced cyclists for them to look down their noses at. 6000 more won't make a difference.

I was wondering... surely some parking areas will sometimes get full and others empty... will people be hired to move bikes from area to area?

That's how it works in Paris, unfortunately they use trucks to do it rather than cyclists...

Oddjob62

lost_in_thought wrote:

That's how it works in Paris, unfortunately they use trucks to do it rather than cyclists...

Wonder if the truck drivers are taught to drive in a "cyclist friendly" manner, or are we going to have to look out for trucks loaded with bikes lefthooking us now? :P

biondino

bice wrote:

Article in today's Standard on London's cycle hire scheme ...up to 30 mins free; £4 for up to 90 mins

BUT £50 for all day and £150 if you are late. The usual rip-off local government mentality at work in short. And 0nly 6000 bikes. After such a build-up, this scheme is pathetic.

bice

duncedunce wrote:

You work for the Daily Mail, and I claim my £5.

Why latch on to the extreme example, the one designed specifically as a deterrent charge?

As I understand it, the bikes are in zone 1 as they are designed initially to expand casual use of cycles for short journeys in that area. Why would you need one for more than (a free!) 30 minutes?

You are not supposed to hang on to them when not in use; you are supposed to return them to a rack.
That way they are used efficiently and not hidden, locked away, out of use for hours. By returning the bike you are increasing the available bikes at any one time.

What would your alternative suggestion be for bikes intended for short journeys in zone 1?

Also, wait to see if 6000 is too few before criticising. If they are used, then more public (your and my) money might be used to expand it. If they are not used, why waste more money at this stage?

Sorry I had forgotten about this post.

Withering. (Unless you're part of Central Office's 'spinternet' team, in which case, I would claim rather more than £5.)

This £57 million scheme is the mayor's major transport initiative - with 6,000 bicycles and 400 pick-up locations (no railways stations). Paris had 20,000 and 1,450 pick-up locations.

The big build-up and the modest realisation are a little disappointing, surely?

"The bikes will help make the capital one of the world's great cycling cities," said the mayor. They will do nothing of the sort, of course. Londoners will still have to trespass on dangerous and congested streets with numerous - very unhelpful - cycle lanes and prohibitions, where the motor vehicle is king. London is nowhere near coping with its cycling traffic, or attempting to reduce the inevitable fatalities.

I don't think this scheme addresses any of the core issues to encourage cycling in London. Boris has made a big noise of it, but 6,000 hire bikes - which sharp discouraging charges - don't add up to very much.

Christophe3967

biondino wrote:

bice wrote:

Article in today's Standard on London's cycle hire scheme ...up to 30 mins free; £4 for up to 90 mins

BUT £50 for all day and £150 if you are late. The usual rip-off local government mentality at work in short. And 0nly 6000 bikes. After such a build-up, this scheme is pathetic.

I think we need another one. The hint's not been taken.

bice

Christophe3967 wrote:

biondino wrote:

bice wrote:

Article in today's Standard on London's cycle hire scheme ...up to 30 mins free; £4 for up to 90 mins

BUT £50 for all day and £150 if you are late. The usual rip-off local government mentality at work in short. And 0nly 6000 bikes. After such a build-up, this scheme is pathetic.

I think we need another one. The hint's not been taken.

Not brilliant. Why not try text, if you can manage it.

Christophe3967

You've put forward a point of view that appears to have received little support so far, although there haven't been many posts.

Several people explained why they don't agree.

You have restated your preconceived, jaundiced views without dealing with the points raised.

As we haven't actually seen how the cycle scheme will work in practice, the consensus seems to be that we should wait and see before judging it.

I think that London is already a great cycling city.

bice

Christophe3967 wrote:

You've put forward a point of view that appears to have received little support so far, although there haven't been many posts.

Several people explained why they don't agree.

You have restated your preconceived, jaundiced views without dealing with the points raised.

As we haven't actually seen how the cycle scheme will work in practice, the consensus seems to be that we should wait and see before judging it.

I think that London is already a great cycling city.

Well done. You see you can do it, without ripping off someone else's gag. But can you answer my principal point: is this initiative what you would have done to encourage cycling in London?

biondino

A picture speaks 1000 words, and it's funnier than I can manage in writing.

However, if you really need me to: if there are not significant charges for holding onto a bike for 24 hours/indefinitely, then the bikes will not be returned to their stands promptly, or even at all. The point is to provide a short term transport solution, whereby you borrow a bike, go from a) to b), then drop the bike off. If it covers, say, zone 1, then it's hard to see how even the slowest rider could actually ride it for more than an hour or so.

However, sometimes you want to stop off for some shopping, have a coffee, or whatever, so journeys of 2 or 3 hours are acceptable, albeit a little more expensive. But once you get beyond this, the reality of the bike being out of service for all this time is one that will not work if it's to be a viable form of public transport. So, it is discouraged with substantial price hikes.

When you get a cab, do you expect the cab to wait around for you while you have a picnic, or perhaps do a morning's work in the office? Of course not. So why do you expect the same, when the bike hire scheme fulfils, in theory, a very similar purpose?

lost_in_thought

bice wrote:

Christophe3967 wrote:

You've put forward a point of view that appears to have received little support so far, although there haven't been many posts.

Several people explained why they don't agree.

You have restated your preconceived, jaundiced views without dealing with the points raised.

As we haven't actually seen how the cycle scheme will work in practice, the consensus seems to be that we should wait and see before judging it.

I think that London is already a great cycling city.

Well done. You see you can do it, without ripping off someone else's gag. But can you answer my principal point: is this initiative what you would have done to encourage cycling in London?

Not brilliant, why not try responding to the points other posters have raised, if you can manage it.

biondino

This initiative isn't "to encourage cycling (as a hobby)", it's to provide a viable method of transport to ease crowding on road and rail. If more people take up cycling, great.

Bice, go to Paris and try the Velibs. See what they're used for, how the system works. I assure you, your odd preconceived opinions will take a very different tack thereafter.

jedster

Hmmmmm,

This £57 million scheme is the mayor's major transport initiative - with 6,000 bicycles and 400 pick-up locations (no railways stations). Paris had 20,000 and 1,450 pick-up locations.

1. major transport initiative? It's tiny compared to crossrail isn't it? And that is just to show my mastery of understatement.

2. Smaller scale than Paris? So what? The French to wade into infrastructure investments waving a huge chequebook. It is not necessarily te right thing to do. I'm perfectly happy that we start small and build from there if it is successful. Why not?

And to your question on another post, yes this is the policy I'd have tried to promote cycling. It is a great way of getting people to give it a go. I'd also probably invest a chunk more in cycle training and/or marketing the cycle training that is available.

bice

OK, I concede you have a point about the charges and these do have to be sharp to prevent pratting about. (Although I reckon it can easily take more than half an hour to get from, say, London Bridge to Hyde Park corner in bad traffic, and then charges kick in.)

But these bikes are equivalent of £9,500 each - so far, before thefts, breakages etc add to the scheme's costs - and are not going to be available near railway stations.

If you had £57 million to spend to improve cycling in London would you have blown this figure on a modest cycle hire scheme for mainly recreational users?

Wouldn't secure 24-hour parking at railway stations have been better (so commuters can leave their bikes in town) or a kerbed cycle lane along the Embankment, or massive restriction on non-commercial vehicles in the centre?

The iniative is gesture politics, surely? (And the mayor is anti-congestion charge and pro 4x4 Chelsea Tractor use). Where is the coherence?

It will be triumphed in the Standard (of course), but just buying 285,000 £200 hybrids and handing them out might have been more effective.

BigJimmyB

I'm not stepping ito the debate.

All I want to say is that the cost/hassle of me having a folder and combining it with the train for commute is just that, a hassle. The alternative is to lock one of my 3 bikes at the station and have it nicked.

OK, and I'm also too lazy to get the shower/change thing sorted out (even though I could do both).

Anyway, if for any reason I am running late, I often hop into a cab to get to the office quickly.

The cycle scheme will hopefully allow me to pick up a bike, ride closer to work and drop it off. Then perhaps do the same in reverse - and probably for free as opposed to £5+ each way for a cab.

I may invest in some overclothes and bring my lid with me for such eventualities.

I would imagine many other people will do similar things, so this is a great thing, no?

More cyclist, less short carbon-emitting journeys. It won;t kill cabbies or bus drivers off either and I'll burn a few more calories.....

At the end of the day, should we not give it a chance and see if it works? I'm sure there'll be creases to iron out, but that's life.

il_principe

bice wrote:

If you had £57 million to spend to improve cycling in London would you have blown this figure on a modest cycle hire scheme for mainly recreational users?

Wouldn't secure 24-hour parking at railway stations have been better (so commuters can leave their bikes in town) or a kerbed cycle lane along the Embankment, or massive restriction on non-commercial vehicles in the centre?

Do you actually cycle in London??

asprilla

Just had a look on the TFL website and it states that the pick up / drop off points will be every 300m or so. Assuming that's right (and although it probably won't be in all cases we can take the average) you aren't going to be more than 150m from a bike.

I think that means you don't have to worry about needing one for the long term, and I wouldn't have any worries about them 'not being close to stations'.

bice

Il Principe wrote:

bice wrote:

If you had £57 million to spend to improve cycling in London would you have blown this figure on a modest cycle hire scheme for mainly recreational users?

Wouldn't secure 24-hour parking at railway stations have been better (so commuters can leave their bikes in town) or a kerbed cycle lane along the Embankment, or massive restriction on non-commercial vehicles in the centre?

Do you actually cycle in London??

Only every day.