INDISCRIMINATE PARKING OF BISCYCLES
- Thread starter Yappy
- Start date
Sigh. When it comes to share services/facilities, we have a long way to go. A decade ago I joined the Honda car-sharing scheme, and one of the staff told me about discarded food being left behind, and the issues they had trying to get users to top up fuel. And look at the issues with PMDs now -- they are useful but users are seriously pushing it on shared paths.
I have an OBike account (haven't used it in months now) and they have a carrot/stick approach. Park indiscriminately and your rates go up. Doesn't seem to be working huh?
Normal bicycles already are trash here and also, created a lot of nuisance on pavement and road as most don't respect pedestrian and drivers. Singapore is too small for so many kind of transportation devices, walk also cannot be peaceful unless that location restricted the use of bicycle, e-bikes etc. This type shared program don't last long, after some time, people will get sick of it liao.
China is WAY ahead of us! Do we have time to learn from their experience?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/02/world/asia/china-beijing-dockless-bike-share.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/02/world/asia/china-beijing-dockless-bike-share.html
This is correct
Government should not use taxpayer money to help these companies
In other countries there is a dock where you must return the bike to
The "stationless" bike system like oBike is just useless garbage
Even in Melbourne they all hate obike already
1) You might have missed it, but all of these companies have their vans going around at night collecting bikes left by irresponsible users to place them in designated spots.
2) No company can have vans everywhere at very time.
3) Rules that cannot be enforced are useless. Ask your friendly neighborhood police officer whether they prefer to attend the burglary next door or running after bike companies.
Isn't that the very purpose of all companies? None of those bike rental companies states that they are a charity organization.
Have you tried to think about it from the perspective of a bike sharing company?
Before you roll out something, don't they think of the consequences and problems they created rather than just their own profits? If they cannot pick up the bikes, then they just let these bikes block the passageways and endanger other public users including wheelchair and prams?
Why didn't they ensure there are enough docking stations to ensure these bikes have to be released or parked back? Why didn't the share a car scheme also let users park their cars anywhere they wish? I thought this was one of the schemes that failed sometimes back?
It is a very irresponsible act and yet they are dragging their feet and allowing more players. We are in a very sad stage when come to responsibility.
This morning, I also saw a few of those bicycle parking on the pavement. Then I wonder, what if someone bring some of those bicycle and place it on the pavement and caused inconvenience for other? Got once, I saw the seat was gone, not sure is this a good business or bad one? In china, all those rented bicycles piled up in the junkyard. Maybe this type wouldn't last, let's wait and see.
I guess: because the regulations as set out by LTA and other approving bodies did not stipulate this. Why would any company that needs to make profit forego Dollars for anticipatory compliance to rules that are nowhere laid out? I can imagine this could happen in Scandinavian countries, there the people indeed have a different mindset and analyze side effects earlier, less in a 'trial and error' way.
Again I guess: this is not required by any currently valid regulations. (Also, cars and bicycles are somewhat different.) Start-ups usually begin with a business idea, a very lean budget and close to zero assets (= property). Your idea of docking stations would require a massive amount of installations and related infrastructure (= link to Internet), which will require a large a mount of upfront investment. In addition, the paperwork will me far more extensive and will need months to be completed. Finally the owners of all the locations will also start demanding some sort of compensation since space is used for a business purpose. Which in return will kill the entire business before the first bicycle is on the roads. It is the very nature of start-ups to bring up new ideas in all aspects, thus testing the rules and challenging the current set of regulations.
Indeed, where is the responsibility of the users to park their bicycles where they should? Why do you always ask for 'someone else' to do something? Go after the users, get them, educate them. Why? Because sitting behind your keyboard won't change anything. A civilized conversation can.
before the ignorance one complain Singaporean doesn't appreciate this and that, watch this :
china : https://www.facebook.com/sixthtone/videos/1946879265630924/
china : https://www.facebook.com/sixthtone/videos/1946879265630924/
Last edited:
These are the few to consider
1. Responsibility - Our attitude.. who care. Look at the leftover at the food court and hawker center most leave without clearing the table.. a long way to go! How many generation? Education???
2. Enforcement - less speeding as there are more speed traps- It burnt your pocket and also...bike sharing companies make money. They have the social responsibility to clear the leftover or make them pay for it! Why waste public fund using LTA or ROV. They have better thing to do!
So 1 or 2?
1. Responsibility - Our attitude.. who care. Look at the leftover at the food court and hawker center most leave without clearing the table.. a long way to go! How many generation? Education???
2. Enforcement - less speeding as there are more speed traps- It burnt your pocket and also...bike sharing companies make money. They have the social responsibility to clear the leftover or make them pay for it! Why waste public fund using LTA or ROV. They have better thing to do!
So 1 or 2?
why do we band chewing gums? So do we feel the current bicycle situation is bad or we can live with it? why didn't we tried public education for chewing gun instead of banning it?
what works in another country may not work here. we have to be careful of the impacts. coordination between government agencies is given. if it didnt work then it is about time to start looking at it. Christmas is round the corner.
I think that gum example actually illustrates how slowly our gov (actually most govs) moves. According to this nlb article, the problem was raised in 1983, the ban came into effect 1992. 9 years. I'm sure in that time they did their fair share of public education, which must have failed. At that same pace, it'll be 2026 before we get a solid response from the authorities. 
Another one I can think of is airbnb. They launched here around 2012, only this year in 2017 did we see new laws being passed in relation to it, and the first people being charged, after how many neighbours and estates have been inconvenienced and disrupted, after rounds and rounds of consultation, after how many people have gotten away with it... So that took about 5 years. I suppose you could say they have improved their response :bsmilie:
But it certainly will always lag behind the pace of innovation/tech, so we just have to grit our teeth while it gets sorted out, eventually. All we can do is feedback. Beyond that, not sure what else we can do since we aren't policymakers.
Another one I can think of is airbnb. They launched here around 2012, only this year in 2017 did we see new laws being passed in relation to it, and the first people being charged, after how many neighbours and estates have been inconvenienced and disrupted, after rounds and rounds of consultation, after how many people have gotten away with it... So that took about 5 years. I suppose you could say they have improved their response :bsmilie:
But it certainly will always lag behind the pace of innovation/tech, so we just have to grit our teeth while it gets sorted out, eventually. All we can do is feedback. Beyond that, not sure what else we can do since we aren't policymakers.
Last edited:
Yeah, I wish they would act faster too.
I do think gum litter had pretty huge impact and would have grown greater over time. Back then hdb was spending $150K annually to clean it up, and it caused two train disruptions, inconveniencing many. Nowadays, local councils in England spend 60 million pounds annually on cleaning it up. But yes, I digress, back to bikes.
I do think gum litter had pretty huge impact and would have grown greater over time. Back then hdb was spending $150K annually to clean it up, and it caused two train disruptions, inconveniencing many. Nowadays, local councils in England spend 60 million pounds annually on cleaning it up. But yes, I digress, back to bikes.
