San Francisco's $20,000 trash cans
Will Salt & Pepper or Slim Silhouette win the hearts of city residents?
Hello and welcome to Oversharing, a newsletter about the proverbial sharing economy. If you’re returning from last time, thanks! If you’re new, nice to have you! (Over)share the love and tell your friends to sign up here.
Road bumps.
In December 2019, Lyft launched a consumer-facing car rentals business in a handful of U.S. cities. Lyft Rentals was supposed to add to Lyft’s bundle of mobility options, along with bikes, scooters, and of course its signature ride-hail service. The idea was to cater to customers who might want to rent a car for day trips, errands, business trips, or other scenarios where ride-hail wasn’t the best option. Lyft even said it would cover rides to and from the rental lot up to $20, in an effort to solve what everyone knows is the worst part of dealing with a rental car.
In retrospect, December 2019 was an ill-fated time to launch anything, other than maybe a grocery delivery service, and Lyft Rentals was no exception. Lyft confirmed last week that it has shuttered the car rental program and laid off about 60 people, less than 2% of staff. “Our road to scaling first party rentals is long and challenging with significant uncertainty,” Cal Lankton, VP of fleet and global operations, wrote in a memo seen by the Wall Street Journal, adding that the “economy made the business case unworkable.” Uber Rent, a similar consumer-facing car rental service Uber debuted in 2018 in partnership with peer-to-peer car-sharing startup Getaround, lasted less than a year before Uber called it quits.
By now we’ve all heard about the tech selloff, but even in that context, Lyft is having a remarkably bad year on the market. Shares of Lyft are down about 75% over the past 12 months, far worse than the Nasdaq Composite index (-21%) and even Uber (-50%) over the same period. Lyft’s latest closing price of $13.31 is less than a fifth of its $72 IPO price from March 2019. Its $4.6 billion market cap is closer to the private valuations Lyft received in late-stage funding rounds in 2015 and 2016 than to the $20ish billion valuation it received in its public offering. Lyft’s covid recovery has so far gone less well than Uber’s, with investors expressing concern over the volume of subsidies Lyft has been forced to pay to drivers. Lyft’s second quarter results are due next Thursday, Aug. 4.
The fate of Lyft Rentals was likely sealed by shortages and supply chain woes that have plagued the broader rental car market since last year. The global chip shortage and other supply chain barriers limited vehicle supply at the same time as consumer demand for travel started to rebound, driving up rental car prices. The same conditions boosted car-sharing marketplaces like Turo, which said in its IPO prospectus earlier this year that “more consumers have turned to peer-to-peer car sharing for their vehicle needs” with traditional providers unable to meet demand.
Gucci garbage.
San Francisco has launched its hotly anticipated, $536,000 contest to find the city’s next trash can. The two-month pilot pits three custom-built bins against three off-the-shelf models after 3.5 years of designs and planning. Because this is San Francisco we’re talking about, the program also comes with its own website, complete with names and descriptions of each trash can contestant. The custom models are Salt & Pepper (“The bold form also communicates the city’s efforts to usher in a new, cleaner era on the streets of San Francisco”); Slim Silhouette (“longer lasting beauty with easier cleanability and less flat surface for graffiti”), and Soft Square (“an identifiable trash can silhouette while bringing the aesthetic into the 21st century”). The off-the-shelf options are BearSaver, Ren Bin, and Open Wire Mesh, which sadly lack the effusive descriptions afforded to the customized options.
San Francisco’s yearslong, half-million dollar search for its next top trash can has been widely ridiculed, which, I mean, of course it has. Each custom prototype reportedly cost $10,000 to $20,900, but what else would you expect from the city that birthed Juicero? The off-the-shelf models price in at $630-$2,850 apiece, while the city’s existing 3,000-odd trash cans cost $1,218 each. (At scale, the custom models would reportedly drop to $2,000-$3,000 apiece.) During the 60-day pilot, a total of 26 prototype cans—five of each custom one and three to four each of the others—will be placed around the city in different locations for 30 days at a time, with QR codes attached so that the public can leave feedback. The Department of Public Works is supposed to select a final design and manufacturer in the fall, but hasn’t given a timeline for when the new cans will roll out.
Why, you ask, does San Francisco need custom-built trash cans?
Public Works officials argue they wanted a custom-designed bin because the city is unique.
Cool cool, glad we settled that. Concerned San Franciscans may want to drop by a meeting Public Works is hosting tonight at 7:30pm PT on the trash can pilot (register here). For a more in depth discussion of urban garbage and all the downstream issues that come with it, check out my interview from this weekend with Uber’s Josh Gold.
Parking.
Oregon last week approved the “largest rollback to parking mandates in modern U.S. history.” The rule change, effective Jan. 1, 2023, liberates Oregon from minimum parking mandates in several major metros and grants more flexibility in urban choices about off-street parking and the curb. That’s a big deal in a country that has eight parking spaces for every car, thanks to decades-old building codes. Car-first zoning rules are one of many culprits for urban congestion, pollution and carbon emissions, and America’s stubborn dependence on personal vehicles, making parking reform a hugely important step in moving to a greener and more sustainable future. Nonprofit think tank Sightline Institute has a useful rundown on how the new parking rules have the potential to transform urban Oregon communities, including by making it possible to restore vacant buildings to use, jumpstarting housing construction, and freeing up city planners to focus on better managing the curb.
Other stuff.
Why can’t America build trains? Chinese Regulator to Fine Didi More Than $1 Billion Over Data-Security Breaches. This VC fund wants to invest in startups that can break even quickly. U.S. towns and cities are luring tech workers from Silicon Valley with cash grants and other perks. Amazon workers launch campaign to unionize in Albany. Startup employees are using company benefits to pay for electricity. DoorDash will now scan your ID to deliver alcohol. Food delivery companies revamp for cost-of-living crunch. London judge lets case alleging racism in Uber Eats facial recognition software proceed. Hawaii offers e-bike subsidies to people who don’t own a car. Ola Electric investing $500 million in battery innovation. Men Make 48% More Than Women in the Gig Economy, Study Finds. Pony.ai gets permission to pilot paid robotaxi rides in Beijing. ‘Godfather mansion’ lists on Airbnb. Swedish design collective crafts furniture from e-scooters fished out of canals. Inside Saudi Arabia’s Plan to Build a Skyscraper That Stretches for 75 Miles. Los Angeles exploring recycled water for tap supply. Inside the global gig economy of werewolf erotica. “Why are we ordering DoorDash? Let’s just go pick it up.” So-Called ‘Wolf of Airbnb’ Now Has the FBI Knocking at His Door.
Minor comment on Other Stuff: America can do TRAINS, just not PASSENGER trains. Rail's share of European FREIGHT movement is about 15%, USA's is about 30%. America does okay moving stuff, but that might be part of the reason we are so bad at moving people. Priorities, priorities...