Disrupting the Disruptors: Peer-to-Peer Car Sharing Service Launches Nationally
from the yet-some-people-are-still-worrying-about-CD-sales-for-chrissakes dept
One of the points we often try to make at Techdirt is that the effects of disruptive technologies are going to be felt far beyond the entertainment and publishing industries—they are not limited to the online world. The internet creates abundance of information, but it also creates a push towards decentralization in all things, and that's one of the big ways it intersects with the physical: although you can't download a car, you can create whole new systems for buying, selling, renting, reviewing and maintaining cars, and those systems will replace established but less-efficient ones.
Nobody is immune—not even the last disruptor. Companies like Zipcar changed the game with their car-sharing services, but they are already facing new challengers. RelayRides, launching nationally this week, has a model that takes things one step further:
While those companies own fleets of cars, RelayRides is entirely peer-to-peer — if you have a car, then you can make it available for rental when you're not using it. RelayRides says the average car owner makes $250 a month from the program.
Since it takes advantage of the cars already on the road, founder and chief community officer Shelby Clark argues that peer-to-peer carsharing can have a big impact—after all, a fleet-based company couldn't simply declare one day that it's launching nationally.
That's especially true in non-urban areas. For example, Zipcar doesn't have any cars available in the Los Angeles suburb where I grew up, and it's hard to imagine that establishing a fleet there would make economic sense anytime soon.
How big and how successful this approach will become remains to be seen, but it's a creative idea that makes a clear point: disruption can happen anywhere, to anyone. As the entertainment industry continues to fight progress, experts from every side of the debate love to make profound-sounding statements about how the internet has changed our media consumption habits, but that's old news. From mobile-based taxi & limo services to the coming era of 3D printers and things like the Pirate Bay's Physibles site, digital technologies are disrupting a lot of things, not just media. Governments and industries cannot continue getting bogged down in tiresome debates about saving obsolete business models—not if they want to have any hope of embracing the opportunities, and solving the potential problems, of a fast-approaching future.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: car sharing, disruption, peer to peer
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Huh?
I can just imagine the nightmare once a vehicle breaks down thru no fault of the driver and the owner freaks out. That is one scenario of many I see plaguing such an idea.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wait. Marcus thinks it's good. That seals it, it's a dumb idea.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
But we wouldn't expect you to read... that's too hard.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Now I wonder if this is a sort of reverse psychology?
But, seriously, aside from the trolls, I do have my reserves about this kinda service.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Anyhow, I was interested because I recently got a job working from home, and so my commuter car (I used to drive ~100 miles/day) is now sitting in the driveway wasting away.
I've been considering selling it and sharing my wife's vehicle, but now I might consider something like this. The only problem is, I don't want to destroy the vehicle. If I still had my previous commuter (an older "beater" car), I wouldn't have any qualms though.
Furthermore, I think a lot of people have a spare car that they kept when they bought a newer one - or have a spare truck they only use for utility. I think this program offers an interesting option for those people to monetize and otherwise make those vehicles useful instead of rotting int he driveway/garage.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
The FAQ is also very light on details. Who provides the coverage? How much is the coverage? Does it apply in all states / provinces?
It also doesn't address issues such as car licensing. In many places, cars used for commercial purposes (such as rental) must be plated differently or with a different class of license plate. How would that line up?
There is so much here to deal with, in all sorts of angles, and way too many moving parts to get right. It's a lawsuit looking for a place to happen, when some unlicensed driver who "borrowed" your car plows into a crowd and kills a few people, and suddenly you are left on the hook - with your insurance company dumping you for a non-covered commercial rental business, and potentially the "rental company" insurance not covering a car that isn't registered to the company or properly registered for that type of use.
You also don't want to know what a lawsuit would look like if your car has a known defect (like that leaky brake line) and you let it get "borrowed" anyway.
I worked a long enough time in the car rental industry to know the deal. It's not as easy as it looks.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
The site is remarkably light on actual information, plenty of vague generalities and reassuring statements with no names.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Insurance policies can be written to cover any eventuality - sure, maybe there will be a catastrophic claim, and RelayRides will incur a large loss. But if such a situation occurs, their insurance rates will likely increase and they'll have to find a way to cover them.
Now, as for vehicle licensing, I'm not well versed in that. Considering RelayRides is working directly with GM, I'm guessing they're not just some fly-by-night group by college kids who threw this idea out there overnight.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
But, it's just a matter of requesting a certificate of coverage once you've signed up and having your insurance company review it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The problem is that as soon as your are renting your car out to people, you really need one of those crazy complicated insurance policies.
Oh, and I didn't mention the tax liability as well. Will your income get 1099'ed? Will it move you into a new tax bracket? As a renter, will you be required to collect and submit state sales taxes? What about fuel taxes? If you loan out your pickup and it's used to haul cargo for hire, you could run into issues there as well - such as is the vehicle licensed and insured for commercial use (delivery)?
Once you start taking money for something, it starts getting weird.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It clearly indicates that the vehicle cannot be used for commercial services and it clearly states that you are responsible for your own taxes: "RelayRides will need certain information from you to ensure we can report income paid to you as required by law."
It's clear you just can't comprehend that perhaps all of these things might have been considered before they decided to offer this service...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
As for the tax issue, vague statements in a FAQ are not exactly clearing it up. 1099? What happens if the car is registered in one name, and payment comes to another (wife's car, example).
Lot's of holes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Anyhow, I guess we'll see if it sinks or floats.
I might even try it out myself... not because I consider it a way to make money, but because I consider it an interesting idea. The car owner has the ultimate say for each renter, so...
Speaking of taxes - I wonder if I could write off the car payment... Something tells me my tax lady wouldn't be too happy ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
another idea
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Huh?
Like when this happens by a vehicle owned by Hertz, Avis, Enterprise, etc...
sarc
Yeah, I see where you're going with this...
/sarc
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
So hard to follow links...sheesh!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Terms of Use for AVIS.
Terms of Use for Hertz.
Terms of Use for Enterprise.
Now: The challenge to the Anonymous Coward: Explain to us poor Techdirtbags why an individual cannot rent their car to an individual under these same (or similar) Terms of Use under current law [Citations Needed (of course)]. :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
As for the tax issue, vague statements in a FAQ are not exactly clearing it up. 1099? What happens if the car is registered in one name, and payment comes to another (wife's car, example).
Lot's of holes.
All your objections are answered by one simple fact. They are already doing it!
They could not possibly have got this far if the problems you outline had not been overcome.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Actual Scarcities (To Richard, #20).
You don't generally need a national service to provide an essentially local product. When someone does a national start-up under those conditions, I always wonder whether he expects to make money from his ostensible customers-- or from an IPO. Things like chain restaurants grow organically, starting with one restaurant, and gradually adding more locations, generally on the principle of local management buying in through the franchise system. MickeyD's does not say, "everyone take turns using the griddle and the fryer to cook your own lunch." They hire kitchen and counter help instead, and they are experimenting with robots.
Automobiles per se are not a scarcity-- you can always get a "beater" for a couple of thousand dollars, and at that level, the capital cost of owning the automobile, the foregone interest if you had kept the money in the bank instead, is less than than the price of gasoline and the wear and tear on the automobile itself.
Don't forget that downtown parking space is usually fairly valuable. Once you begin to have skyscrapers, they tend to outrun the available space for parking. It is generally easier and cheaper to build an elevator leading to more office space than it is to build ramps leading to sub-basement parking. Since the scarcity is the parking space, not the automobile, it makes sense to put a driver in the automobile, so that it can get in, pick up its passenger, and leave quickly. In short, a taxicab. A taxicab driver can control his risk, by not allowing the customer to drive.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Why are you so anti-innovation?
Every time anyone has a new idea, you run yourself ragged trying to find every possible problem with it, every possible reason it won't work.
You really are the worst kind of person. If everyone was like you, we'd still be living in caves with you sitting there saying "Make fire never work. Too hard! Rub sticks take too long. Tam-Tam MAD!"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You know what else would never work?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Which, in his/their mind(s), would be a perfect world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
For large companies...
I have very little faith in our government and legal system so long as this is a reasonable strategy. I am fairly certain that his company isn't alone in this.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I am all for innovation. The difference? I don't want innovation at any cost, innovation by ignoring the law, or innovation by ignoring the rights of others.
Look, this product is just something that may have some limited demand, but as I noted, the risks and the issues surrounding it are significantly larger than the benefits. Just because you CAN do something doesn't make it right. You cannot have innovation without consideration for how that innovation works within (and around) existing systems and laws.
Example: If you rent a car, you could be considered to be running a business (home based or other) and you may require a permit. You may also require, if the people come to your home to pick up the car, to have liability insurance for operating that business.
There is just too much here for this to be a great idea. Zip car and other "car share" companies have the right idea, with ownership (and the risks and liabilities that come with them) centralized to one place. It's a model that makes a ton more sense, and fits way more easily into existing rules, laws, and legal requirements.
As for the rest of the insults, honestly, grow a thicker skin child. The worst kind of person is the type that addresses those critical of their views with insults and such. I suspect that's why Mike hired you, they two of you have a very similar approach when you are pointed out to be wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I guess the easiest way to explain it to people who don't get it (like Marcus) is that there are too many moving parts on this one, and they are not really directly compatible parts either. The legal implications of private car ownership versus fleet ownership, commercial use versus non-commercial use, vicarious liability, trickle down liability, and so on all conspire against it. There are reasons why rental cars are more expensive than your monthly car payment (and no, it's not just for making a profit), and they are all reasons why this one looks like a legal minefield.
My comment of the day is pretty simple: Just because something is technically possible doesn't mean it's right or a good choice.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
2. *CONSTANTLY* bitching about posters calling you names is both un-manly, AND hypocritical in extremis...
now, here's the thing, *most* of us here are big boys and grrls, and a few choice insults and random curse words are no big deal; but it takes a real dickless wonder to bitch about being cursed, whilst cursing everyone else out...
*IF* you were the superior being you *CONSTANTLY* claim to be, you would be above the fray... instead, you wallow in the virtual mud with the rest of us tech-piggies, then complain because your wingtips got doo-doo on them...
man-up, wormtongue...
3. *NOT* that thinking of downsides, potential gotchas, etc is 'wrong', but -again- you are simply a dick about it...
(oddly enough, many dicks are self-righteous pricks, as well!)
of course, if you started acting like a human bean, instead of a parasite-on-society, er, lawyer, at least half your posts would be unnecessary...
really, you do your 'cause' far more harm than good with your *CONSTANT* asshattery...
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
art guerrilla at windstream dot net
eof
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You seem to derive a lot of glee from figuring out why everything will fail. Guess what? A lot of things will fail, and the people creating them know that. The investors pouring millions of dollars into services like this know that too. But the reason they are successful, while you are nothing but an idiot anonymously trolling a blog, is that they are not afraid of failure.
You, on the other hand, are terrified of it. Actually, worse: you seem to get off on it. You don't have any good ideas of your own, so you put all your effort into tearing down the good ideas of others.
You know what would have been a great reaction to this piece, with all your thoughts about how it might go wrong? "Hey, cool idea, here are some things to consider, some problems that may come up, and some of my thoughts on potential solutions."
But no, you are 100% sure this and everything else even slightly innovative will fail - and that leaves you in this hilarious state of angry stasis, railing against every attempt at progress. You should work on that, or you're never going to accomplish anything.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Innovation without consideration of the implications is innovation at any cost. No concern about what it does, no concern for how it might conflict with laws, no concern for legal ramifications... just innovation no matter what. That's not really helping.
As for my attitude, it's not awful - it's realist. Sorry if that doesn't mesh up with your pie in the sky look out your Mom's basement window (and that is where you live, right?)
"that they are not afraid of failure.
You, on the other hand, are terrified of it. Actually, worse: you seem to get off on it. "
Nope, not terrified of failure at all. More power to them if they get it right, and too bad if they fail - their problem. My concerns aren't bout success or failure, but rather what else they take out while they are figuring it out. When you pay attention, you can see the risks, and you work to mitigate them. If you want innovation no matter what, you don't care.
"You don't have any good ideas of your own"
Oh, how far from the truth little one. Too bad you just don't know and don't understand. As a side note, I am also a better rapper than you... ;)
"you are 100% sure this and everything else even slightly innovative will fail "
Again, not at all. They may succeed in some ways, but in other ways it might not be practical. Again, just because something is physically possible doesn't make it the right choice or the right path to take. Careless innovation, especially if it hurts other people not involved, is the worst thing possible.
"you're never going to accomplish anything"
Oops, too late, already did. You just don't know it. Too bad! Marcus, you really need to learn that you don't have all the answers, and that your naive way of looking at the world (encouraged by Mike's cheerleading) just isn't the whole answer to anything. I see you trying, but mostly you are flailing about trying to "be innovative" or "be about innovation". Your ideas have to work in the real world, not just on paper, not just "it's possible". You have to have some solid ideas as to where you are going, and then you might do it.
One day, you might even have enough money to move out of Mom's house, meet a nice boy, and have a relationship.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Your car isn't insured as a rental vehicle.
Your car isn't inspected as a rental vehicle (required in many states).
Your standard insurance policy doesn't have enough liability coverage for third party usages.
Your business (renting cars) isn't registered with the city, state, or other licensing jurisdiction.
Real world lesson for you: All the terms and conditions in the world cannot bypass the state and federal laws regarding motor vehicles, business, and so on. You cannot T&C something that is no legal and claim it as legal.
Sorry to disappoint you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Actual Scarcities (To Richard, #20).
The reason for the lack of cars in those areas isn't as much lack of street or on property parking as it is that just about anything you can think of was available within walking distance or businesses would provide delivery, It certainly wasn't because people couldn't afford them!
If conditions are right, the price is right and the service is relatively convenient then I can see this or something like it succeeding. While it isn't exactly "green" it certainly doesn't add to the number of vehicles on the road and may reduce emissions some.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Are you too stupid to look at it and see it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Actual Scarcities (To Richard, #20).
Likewise, outside of New York, very few American cities have "forests of residential high rise towers." Americans make every possible effort to drive out of the urban congestion. In extreme cases, such as Los Angeles, significant numbers of commuters drive over four-thousand foot mountain passes to get to work, and live in the desert on the other side of the mountains. When one finds "forests of residential high rise towers" in an American city, they usually turn out to be welfare projects, as in the case of Chicago. In New Orleans, to get still more to the heart of the matter, the welfare projects were built on the site of the old brothel district. I realize of course that Vancouver has its own special geographic issues, but Americans would have resolved those issues by dynamiting road tunnels under mountains, and connecting up the tunnels with freeways, not by building high-rise apartment buildings.
The kind of people who would want to use shared cars in the United States would be people who commute downtown by public transit, as a matter of economic necessity, but who want to be able to drive around downtown at need. They have automobiles at their suburban homes, but they cannot afford downtown parking on a regular basis. Auguste C Spectorsky's _The Exurbanites_ (1955) is the classic book about the conflicts of people who try to live a long way from their work. Fleet-based car-sharing service such as Zipcar work for people like this. I understand that Zipcar has a special arrangement for students living on college campuses, where congestion is enforced by administrative fiat (*). Zipcar's economics are not materially determined by the cost of the automobile itself, since they only have about one automobile for every hundred members. The annual membership fee of $60, by itself, pays for the automobiles in about three or four years. Zipcar uses computer systems built into its cars to reduce the cost of running what is basically a conventional auto-rental operation, and to make it feasible to rent cars by the hour, instead of by the day, and to create "franchise locations" which are nothing more than reserved parking places. Of course, under certain circumstances, a reserved parking place may cost quite a lot more than an automobile, but this is reflected in the local rental rates. The minimum hourly rate would appear to be more or less competitive with a taxicab (or a delivery service), based on reasonable assumptions. I don't think most Zipcar customers are saving very much money using Zipcar instead of taxicabs. It's probably mostly a matter of emotional comfort. Either you like saying "Home, James," or you don't.
The problem with RelayRides is that it is attempting to expand into the non-congested zones where Zipcar does not find it profitable to go. In these zones, people have their own automobiles, stored in the garages built into their houses, even if they only drive them thirty miles a week or so. The idea is that one can go and visit the drive-through window of a fast-food restaurant without ever going outside, and people are willing to pay a bit extra for that. That is why they choose to live in suburbia in the first place. Obviously, for that kind of user, RelayRides is a step in the wrong direction, because the customer first has to go somewhere and get a car. At urban densities, of, say, 100,000 people per square mile, Zipcar can afford to put a car within a hundred or two hundred feet of every customer, especially because nearly every resident is a potential customer. In a suburban area, with a population density of, say, a thousand people per square mile, where shared cars are a minority taste, the nearest shared car might have to be a mile away from a potential customer. Someone might have to drive it to the customer, and be driven back again, and dropped off when the customer goes wherever he wants to go. And the same thing in reverse when the customer brings the car back.
(*) One will often see a college dormitory, ten or twenty stories high, built with state money, in a district where private builders and landlords concentrate exclusively on tract houses. Freshmen are required to live in this dormitory, and to buy meal tickets to the attached cafeteria, and, if applicable, a season ticket for the bus which takes them to and from the center of the main campus, and the administration deliberately refuses to build sufficient parking, so that it can forbid the students to bring cars to school. The whole point of the exercise is to make the freshmen insular, to force them to live AT school. It's like making children eat their Brussels Sprouts. In short, "No, we won't assist you in getting transportation to go and see a Harry Potter movie at the multiplex out at the mall, but we _will_ show an Ingmar Bergman movie in the Student Union, and educated people are supposed to understand references to _The Seventh Seal_, but they are not required to know about Harry Potter."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Car Service
ou'll convince us all that you're a super-successful genius
thanks
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Car Service
The kind of people who would want to use shared cars in the United States would be people who commute downtown by public transit,
[ link to this | view in thread ]
When will the truth come out
Ref https://www.npd.com or
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/3/prweb9255211.htm
So if the major labels claim their sales are down yet overall sales are up then it must be golden days for Indie artists.
The majors missed the boat. Sorry, that boat is sailing to the future without you lot on board.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Huh?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
great idea for city dwellers
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Cheap Short Term Car Insurance
Again thank you for sharing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Insurance policies is written to hide any happening - certain, perhaps there'll be a ruinous claim, and RelayRides can incur an outsized loss. however if such a state of affairs happens, their insurance rates can probably increase and they will need to realize the way to hide them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]