Not so in any way.oops 5000 bikes
Still, anyone notice the main point of the article seemed to be the big advertising company wanting some government assistance? Anyone think its coincidence that this happens to co-incide with a recession?
These problems were complained of more than once long before the present troubles. For example, in the first six months of the scheme when one would expect moderate maintenance costs with new bikes, the maintenance costs were 20.5 million euros, a rate double what the eventual annual income was to eventually reach, and as we see, the situation has worsened considerably.
Also, early in the scheme there was a considerable added cost when it was realised that people wouldn't ride into the hilly areas of the city and just dumped the bikes at the foot of those areas, creating a shortage of parking facilities there. This left loads of bikes where they weren't needed since after proceeding on foot the riders returned from the top of the hilly areas on other bikes, creating a shortage there. As a result a small fleet of electric vans had to be bought with driver operators employed to load up those bikes, carry them up the hills and re-park them at the top. How utterly useless is that? The drivers might just as well have been driving buses and carrying passengers in the normal way that happens in cities.
I believe Decaux have the whip hand since no-one else is going to take on this white elephant, so either the scheme collapses or Paris will have to face up to the true crazy costs.
With respect to Intex who says the scheme works well for him, that is no measure of success. If he were to make out a standing order in favour of my bank account for 100 Euros a week, that scheme would work well for me, but I doubt he'd accept that was a good scheme.
.
