This article is statistics-based propaganda, designed to promote the message that SF's bikeshare system is failing and that Spin is the remedy. The evidence presidented ranges from irrelevant to outright lies.
Take, for example, the density statistics presented on DC. The numbers used, 440 stations, 3700 bikes, 680000 residents, and 68 square miles are facially accurate. But the resident and size figures are of DC itself, ignoring the fact that only 239 of those stations are actually in DC - the rest are in Maryland or Virginia [1].
Looking at the station maps, it's easy to see what's going on. SF's program is much less developed than many of the others mentioned [2][3][4][5]. This is fine. It takes a lot of time and money to put all those stations in place. That doesn't mean the program is a failure.
Bikeshare programs, like all transmit programs, have a major network effect - you need a station both near the start and end of your journey. As SF adds stations in more residential neighborhoods, you'll see the ridership statistics climb. In its current state, there's nothing bad or surprising about any of the numbers presented.
Spin is trying to divert interest in SF bikeshare programs to its model before the current program becomes too successful and entrenched. Don't let it distract from the fact that we're off to a great start.
Oh, and I can't believe they have the gall to say SF is a great biking city.
[1] https://www.capitalbikeshare.com/press-kit
[2] https://member.bayareabikeshare.com/stations
[3] https://secure.capitalbikeshare.com/map/
[4] https://member.citibikenyc.com/map/
[5] https://member.divvybikes.com/stations
Take, for example, the density statistics presented on DC. The numbers used, 440 stations, 3700 bikes, 680000 residents, and 68 square miles are facially accurate. But the resident and size figures are of DC itself, ignoring the fact that only 239 of those stations are actually in DC - the rest are in Maryland or Virginia [1].
Looking at the station maps, it's easy to see what's going on. SF's program is much less developed than many of the others mentioned [2][3][4][5]. This is fine. It takes a lot of time and money to put all those stations in place. That doesn't mean the program is a failure.
Bikeshare programs, like all transmit programs, have a major network effect - you need a station both near the start and end of your journey. As SF adds stations in more residential neighborhoods, you'll see the ridership statistics climb. In its current state, there's nothing bad or surprising about any of the numbers presented.
Spin is trying to divert interest in SF bikeshare programs to its model before the current program becomes too successful and entrenched. Don't let it distract from the fact that we're off to a great start.
Oh, and I can't believe they have the gall to say SF is a great biking city.
[1] https://www.capitalbikeshare.com/press-kit [2] https://member.bayareabikeshare.com/stations [3] https://secure.capitalbikeshare.com/map/ [4] https://member.citibikenyc.com/map/ [5] https://member.divvybikes.com/stations