JCDecaux Pull Out

Sponge Bob

..of Paris .

A popular bicycle rental scheme in Paris that has transformed travel in the city has run into problems just 18 months after its successful launch. Over half the original fleet of 15,000 specially made bicycles have disappeared, presumed stolen.

It would take about 18 weeks for yer typical Dublin skangers to have a similar impact on the stock there :cool:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7881079.stm

But the bikes have suffered more than anticipated, company officials have said.


Hung from lamp posts, dumped in the River Seine, torched and broken into pieces, maintaining the network is proving expensive. Some have turned up in eastern Europe and Africa, according to press reports.

Since the scheme's launch, nearly all the original bicycles have been replaced at a cost of 400 euros ($519, £351) each.
The Velib bikes - the name is a contraction of velo (cycle) and liberte (freedom) - have also fallen victim to a craze known as "velib extreme".

Various videos have appeared on YouTube showing riders taking the bikes down the steps in Montmartre, into metro stations and being tested on BMX courses.

Remi Pheulpin, JCDecaux's director general, says the current contract is unsustainable. "It's simple. All the receipts go to the city. All the expenses are ours," he said.

The costs, he said, were "so high that a private business cannot handle it alone, espcially as it's a problem of public order. If we want the velib set-up to keep going, we'll have to change the business model," he told Le Parisien newspaper.

The original contract gave the advertising company a 10-year licence to exploit 1,600 city-wide billboards in return for running the scheme, plus a share in the revenue, estimated at 20m euros for the first year of operation.

City hall has recently agreed to pay towards the costs of replacing the stolen or trashed bicycles but is refusing to bail out the company.

Not all the bicycles receive rough treatment however. One velib repairman reported finding one of the bikes customised with fur covered tyres.
The scheme was modelled on one in Lyon, which appears to have been less troublesome, and has been extended to other cities in France. It is also being copied overseas with London, San Francisco and Singapore all intending to set up similar schemes

PARIS CYCLE SCHEME IN NUMBERS
20,000 bicycles
1,250 stations
Cost 400 euros each to replace
7,800 "disappeared"
11,600 vandalised
1,500 daily repairs
Staff recover 20 abandoned bikes a day
Each bike travels 10,000 km a year
42 million users since launch

Source: Velib

Chris_533976

Bets that they'll disappear here and the entire scheme will be abandoned but the ads will be completed and will remain?

Type 17

JC Deceaux seem to be having a hard time of it with their bikes in Paris... I wonder if they are still as keen on their agreement for Dublin...

BBC News Article

Stark

I'm sure the cost of replacing 450 bikes will be trivial compared to the cost of replacing 15,000 or compared to the advertising revenue they're currently making.

I'm wagering that they're still hoping we'll have all forgotten about the actual bikes come spring/summer and we won't see them at all. Bold you for bumping this thread!

By the way, does anyone know the names of the councillors who approved this scheme and the names of the councillors who had it postponed pending the health and safety assessment? Local elections are coming up you know Edit: I got John Tierney for the scheme, Councillors Christy Burke (pity he's a shinner) and Emer Costello against from Madsl's video.

Type 17

Stark wrote: »

I'm sure the cost of replacing 450 bikes will be trivial compared to the cost of replacing 15,000 or compared to the advertising revenue they're currently making.

...Bold you for bumping this thread!

Yes, but how many times do you think that the 450 bikes will have to be replaced? - I'm in no way condoning or suggesting theft or vandalism, but I see Paris as a more sophisticated city than Dublin (remember what happened to the fibreglass cows a few years ago?), and look at the trouble that they're having there.

I only bumped the thread because of 'new and relevant information'

Stark

There's more to Paris than the Champs-Élysées. It has its fair share of inner city rough areas just like Dublin. I mean "bold you" in a good way btw;)

Anyway, I think this should definitely become an issue for the upcoming elections. Anyone want to help compile a comprehensive list of councillors involved? We could put it somewhere like the biki maybe.

Zoney

Hah! As if there will be any replacement of bikes here! They'll simply be gone in a week and the billboards will remain.

Type 17

Stark wrote: »

There's more to Paris than the Champs-Élysées. It has its fair share of inner city rough areas just like Dublin.

I mean "bold you" in a good way btw;)

Indeed, there's always a bad bit to every city (I've even been to the rough part of the otherwise jewel-like Florence in Italy) - but I suspect that Dublin's average level of sophistication may be lower than Paris's (sad though I am to say it as a native Dubliner).

I wasn't sure about the "bold" bit, it's sometimes frowned upon...

I don't have details of the councillors but judging by the posts in this thread, others will probably know.
I reckon that it will make a good door-step conversation. :pac:

Type 17

Zoney wrote: »

Hah! As if there will be any replacement of bikes here! They'll simply be gone in a week and the billboards will remain.

You're so cynical, this is JCD and DCC we're talking about! Oh, wait...

MadsL

Stark wrote: »

Edit: I got John Tierney for the scheme, Councillors Christy Burke (pity he's a shinner) and Emer Costello against from Madsl's video.

Tierney is city manager (official, not a councillor)

Give Andrew Montague a pasting on the bikes/ads

Emer has been great, along with Dermot Lacey in being vocally against the scheme.

If they come around your door - ask if they have seen the contract, and if DCC will have to shell out like Paris are being asked to keep the scheme going.

As it stands it looks like Paris is a bit of a FAIL

MadsL

450 bikes times €400 = €180K replaced say 10 times = €1.8m

Decaux advertising revenue for 72 signs over 15 years = €185m

Hmmm....

AlekSmart

Some have turned up in eastern Europe and Africa

,

Perhaps these were discovered thrown into the Fingan County Council wheely-bins,hundreds of which are apparently to be found in rural Romania... :rolleyes:

BrianD

Well surprise surprise, the Dublin City/JCD "deal" is about to be revealed from the crock it is.

On paper it's a worthy idea but a city council should have no role in private bike hire and this project serves no use for either the tourist or a city resident. What city resident would have need for a short term hire of a bike. If you want one buy one, it doesn't encourage cycling. A tourist can hire one from the many private hire companies.

DCC should have taken a percentage of the ad revenue and if they wanted to encourage cycling, give it to the budget that maintains and builds cycling infrastructure.

It seems that DCC's colleagues in Dun Laoghaire RD opted for the cash with Clear Channel.

There was a lot of fuss about the positioning of the signs etc. which was possibly unwarranted. I've got quite used to them myself but I can understand citizen annoyance with the poor deal, in my opinion, the city fathers drove on this one. ON yer bikes I say!

monument

MadsL wrote: »

As it stands it looks like Paris is a bit of a FAIL

I don't think it's that straight forward.

Even if the system in Paris was scraped tomorrow (which there are no signs of such happening) the system has encouraged a large increases in normal bicycle use.

What is happening is more like the business model JC Decaux signed up to has been damaged by the downturn and massive drop in advertising. So, now the company is making nose. JC Decaux are in a contract too you have to remember. One they no longer like.

In any case, the company looks to be wanting a rework of the contract... As the quote from the company says: "It's simple. All the receipts go to the city. All the expenses are ours." And, remember, Paris apparently secured far, far better terms than Dublin did.

There's lots of unanswered questions here too: On stolen bikes is the security deposit being used by JCD or is it also going to the city of Paris? Where and how are the bikes being stole?... If at the docking stations, does security need to be improved? If after somebody rents a bike, does the security deposit needed to be increased to account for a larger percentage of the cost of replacements?

Also on costs: How much do the bikes actually cost? Have the actual cost of the bikes gone down since JC Decaux started working with Lapierre last year? (Lapierre are a large bicycle manufacturer, according to their website they only starting working with the ad company in 2008)

And, I'm wondering why the BBC are using a downmarket Paris-based tabloid newspaper as a source. Maybe cuts at the Beeb are affecting standards? As the tabloid looks to be the main (only?) source of the very high number of bikes which have gone missing, I'd question how accurate it is.

Type 17 wrote: »

but I suspect that Dublin's average level of sophistication may be lower than Paris's (sad though I am to say it as a native Dubliner).

You have a rose-tinted view of Paris, or an overly dim view of Dublin, or a mixture of both.

Seth Brundle

Zoney wrote: »

Hah! As if there will be any replacement of bikes here! They'll simply be gone in a week and the billboards will remain.

Typical. The scum will damage the bikes but not the advertising stands!

Type 17

monument wrote: »

You have a rose-tinted view of Paris, or an overly dim view of Dublin, or a mixture of both.

Well, time will tell, and I'd be delighted to be proved wrong on my prediction for the bicycles' damage rate.

It's hard to remain upbeat sometimes when you hear stuff such as that a female swan was killed in Herbert Park recently (January) by someone throttling it with wire (Gardai are investigating). Its male mate and their single offspring have left the pond in the park and have not been seen since. If there are people out there who think that killing a swan is fun, imagine how they'll view trashing a public bike?

BrianD

Monument wrote:

Even if the system in Paris was scraped tomorrow (which there are no signs of such happening) the system has encouraged a large increases in normal bicycle use.

I find that hard to believe but I am happy to be proved otherwise. Are there any links etc. online reporting this?

Ste.phen

The bike idea is a good one, it seems to work quite well in Barcelona, at least.
The "deal" DCC agreed to was nothing short of madness.

loyatemu

BrianD wrote: »

What city resident would have need for a short term hire of a bike. If you want one buy one, it doesn't encourage cycling. A tourist can hire one from the many private hire companies.

this is nonsense - the Paris scheme has been hugely popular so clearly there is a demand for casual bike-hire among the public. I work in the city centre - I'd use this if it was available and I needed to go another part of the CC - it would be quicker than walking or getting the bus...

Rawr

loyatemu wrote: »

this is nonsense - the Paris scheme has been hugely popular so clearly there is a demand for casual bike-hire among the public. I work in the city centre - I'd use this if it was available and I needed to go another part of the CC - it would be quicker than walking or getting the bus...

+1
I live in a city where a similar scheme is in action, and for travelling around short distances in the city, it is almost always faster than taking the bus/tram.

The idea is sound in my opinion.

However, the 'deal' the DCC got, as Ste.phen put it, is nothing short of madness.

crocro

Misleading thread title: JC Decaux are not pulling out of Paris. They're just spinning a story to try to renegotiate their contract.

7800 bikes @400euro for a total of 3m replacement cost is tiny money. It's amazing that their bikes are doing 10,000km/year and testament to the success of the scheme. 200 million bike kms per year is a huge number. It's a very handy system in Paris that complements the public transport system well. You can make short connections in the city using one-way bike rentals, pick up a bike at the bus stop, leave it when you reach the metro.

There is a credit card security deposit of 150/bike. So, unless the bikes are being stolen directly from the stands, then a lot of the replacement cost is recoverable.

The Dublin deal is bad value: we're getting just 450 bikes vs the 20,000 in Paris and we're giving a huge number of poster sites in return. JC Decaux has prior convictions for bribery and Dublin City council hasn't been white as snow in the past. Incompetence or corruption? You decide.

monument

BrianD wrote: »

I find that hard to believe but I am happy to be proved otherwise. Are there any links etc. online reporting this?

I'm sure I read it else where too, but the PBS 'e2' series episode on Paris and Velib there is the claim that the real increase is in use of other bicycles, which has apparently doubled. You can view it here http://www.e2-series.com/ it's about half way where this is mentioned, it adds that bicycle shops were against it at first but their business has never been better.

As part of a wider project Paris has also decreased speed limits, and installed cycle lanes (including allowing cyclists to use one-way streets both directions).

But if you think about it a barrier to cycling usage growth is often people thinking cycling is not possible, and a system like this can show it is. An element of the 'safety in numbers' concept likely has an effect too (ie safety in numbers, but because more people are cycling it looks safer too).

Stupido

simple maths....

20,000 bikes @ €400 a pop = €8m
42,000,000 journeys = €0.19 a journey

They charge €1 (i think) = €0.81 profit


even take away other associated costs that is not a bad investment...

I wonder what savings the authorities & others made in the reduction of car journeys in Paris as a result?

Victor

Posts moved from other thread.

Type 17

Not my comment on the JCD scenario, but someone else's, that I saw on a DCC lamp post in Dublin city centre (pics edited for language on Boards, but unedited in reality):

monument

Advertising bad, graffiti lovely?

MadsL

monument wrote: »

Advertising bad, graffiti lovely?

I think Banksy summed it up...

They say graffiti frightens people and is symbolic of the decline in society, but graffiti is only dangerous in the mind of three types of people; politicians, advertising executives, and graffiti writers….

The people who truly deface our neighbourhoods are the companies that scrawl their giant slogans across buildings and buses trying to make us feel inadequate unless we buy their stuff. They expect to be able to shout their message in your face from every availiable surface but you’re never allowed to answer back. Well, they started this fight and the wall is the weapon of choice to hit them back.

In case you are wondering, no these stickers are not my work. I and others who have been campaigning against the JCDeceit deal, decided to only use legal means. Had we gone illegal, it would have been angle-grinders not stickers .

Run_to_da_hills

Type 17 wrote: »

Not my comment on the JCD scenario, but someone else's, that I saw on a DCC lamp post in Dublin city centre (pics edited for language on Boards, but unedited in reality):

Those stickers are all over Dublin, different varieties on stainless cycle racks some funny. looks like the work of students or someone who worked in competition that had a grudge against them . More examples here.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055495336

Seth Brundle

They are brilliant!
Well done to the person/s who did them!

MadsL

The French do it louder and harder!!

Babel fish transaltion not the best....(mensonge = a lie or falsehood)

Twenty hours of police custody for 6 militants anti-pub of the " Déboulonneurs" PARIS - Six members of the collective antipublicitaire of Déboulonneurs spent 20 hours as a police custody after having " barbouillé" three billboards in IXe district of Paris, one learned Sunday from police source. " In 34 actions, c' is the first time that daubers are not slackened by the police force with l' four hours exit lawful d' interpellation" , s' the collective is made indignant, which each month organizes such actions of civil disobedience in order to denounce l' giant posting. Saturday afternoon, the six militants had registered slogans antipublicitaires on three panels of l' bill-poster Future (group JC Decaux), located Rochechouart boulevard, in IXe district. Inter alia slogans, one could read " window of the mensonge" , " violence économique" or " legitimate réponse". With l' exit of this action, the daubers were challenged and led to the police station of VIIIe district. They n' were slackened that Sunday midday, with l' 20 hours exit of police custody. According to the police source, an preliminary investigation for " dégradation" was open on instruction of the parquet floor. The déboulonneurs say not to want " to remove the publicité" but " to give to its place". They claim that the billboards are limited to 50 X 70 cm, like l' associative posting.

http://www.romandie.com/ats/news/090301152509.346hujju.asp

By the way - despite my sig. the stickers aren't me - fair play to whoever it is.

lostexpectation

well as pointed out before the latin motto on the lamppost already says

'The obedience of the citizens produces a happy city'

jill_valentine

The stickers are brilliant. Fair play.

Metrobest

The stickers are mildly amusing.
But they're also stupid and juvenile.
Whoever put them up should really think of another target for their Marxist ire.

JC is a professional advertising agency with a proven track record in making these schemes work. Their Paris scheme has been a rip roaring success - for JC and for the people of Paris.

The free bike scheme will do wonders for cycling in Dublin and will introduce thousands of Dubliners to this sustainable transport mode. Best of all, they won't have to pay for it. Who knows, it might even prove so successful that DCC will provide a competing scheme funded from parking meters a-la Bicing in Barcelona. But first let Velib do its magic for Dublin.

Type 17

Metrobest wrote: »

Their Paris scheme has been a rip roaring success - for JC and for the people of Paris.

So, how long have you worked for JCD?

Stark

You're right.

Now let's everyone stop complaining and take those free bikes out for a spin tomorrow!

Except there's no sign of the bikes and even if they do materialise, they aren't "free bikes"; it's a bike rental scheme being run by JC Decaux.

Seth Brundle

Metrobest wrote: »

Their Paris scheme has been a rip roaring success - for JC and for the people of Paris.

Can you back this up please?

Metrobest wrote: »

The free bike scheme will do wonders for cycling in Dublin and will introduce thousands of Dubliners to this sustainable transport mode. Best of all, they won't have to pay for it.

How will it do wonders for cycling in Dublin?
* They will have to pay for it (and it could be viewed that Dublin is in fact losing money over it!) as its a bicycle rental scheme (note the word rental)

MadsL

Metrobest wrote: »

JC is a professional advertising agency with a proven track record in making these schemes work. Their Paris scheme has been a rip roaring success - for JC and for the people of Paris.

Not quite...

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/Are_the_wheels_falling_off_the_Vlib_scheme_article_276976.html
From a fleet of 20,600 bikes, 7,800 have been stolen or gone missing since 2007 with 11,600 damaged or deliberately vandalised

http://www.kptv.com/travelgetaways/18698095/detail.html
That's too expensive, the company says, and it wants to get out of its 10-year contract with the city because its revenue sharing program doesn't cover the costs of maintaining the bikes, the BBC reported

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7881079.stm
Remi Pheulpin, JCDecaux's director general, says the current contract is unsustainable. "It's simple. All the receipts go to the city. All the expenses are ours," he said.

The costs, he said, were "so high that a private business cannot handle it alone, espcially as it's a problem of public order. If we want the velib set-up to keep going, we'll have to change the business model," he told Le Parisien newspaper.

Half of Paris rental bikes stolen
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/4570107/Half-of-Paris-rental-bikes-stolen.html
Rémi Pheulpin, JCDecaux's director general, said that he was losing out on the deal as "the extent of the vandalism could not have been foreseen".

The free bike scheme will do wonders for cycling in Dublin and will introduce thousands of Dubliners to this sustainable transport mode. .

Don't we have a cycle to work tax scheme, that has been a complete flop. It's not 450 'free-except-you-have-to-pay-for-them' bikes that Dubliners need, its decent cycling infrastructure.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5697094.ece
"So far five people have been killed on the bikes"

Despite fewer numbers of bikes promised for Dublin, I wonder what the 'attrition' rate will be, both in terms of bikes vandalised and deaths due to the awful conditions for cyclists in Dublin. I'm not sure tempting novice cyclists and tourists onto the pseudo bikes lanes is that wise.

Best of all, they won't have to pay for it.

Actually...don't supposed anyone mentioned that "terms and conditions apply" and "free may not actually mean free"

Who knows, it might even prove so successful that DCC will provide a competing scheme funded from parking meters a-la Bicing in Barcelona.

It's a great idea, and I would support such a scheme, if and it is a big if, the infrastructure were in place to support it. You do however realise that this scheme is a unprecendented 15 year deal worth some €180m in advertising revenue to JCD. The city gets only the revenue from 450 bikes, spread over 40 bike stations. That's an average of 11 bikes at each station. That's one (yes one) bike per 1100 odd people living in Dublin [*]. You'll be lucky to see one!

But first let Velib do its magic for Dublin

The only magic I have seen is the 'magic' of the planning process in rubber-stamping permission for the advertising, and the magic of the disappearing road-safety audit that was a condition of the planning permission. Oh, and the magically 'appearing and then disappearing' 48-sheet billboards of which 100 were supposedly taken down.

Trust me, this scheme stinks.

[*] 2006 Census of people in DCC Area. If you take into account 'greater Dublin' that means nearer 1 bike per 4000 people.

monument

MadsL wrote: »

....That's too expensive, the company says, and it wants to get out of its 10-year contract with the city

MadsL you know all too well that JCD are now not happy with the contract in Paris and that's why they have been making nose on this recently.

Correct me if I get this wrong, but were you not previously pointing out how Dublin got such a bad deal compared to Paris? Maybe Dublin's deal was more realistic for the ad company after them seen what was happening in Paris?

And why should Paris care about them crying now? If the contract is broken, the city can bring them to court. But in realty, it looks like the city can see the benefit the bike rental system has brought so it has agreed to give JCD some of the money from the rentals.

Don't we have a cycle to work tax scheme, that has been a complete flop.

We do have a cycle to work tax scheme, and I don't know how you can call it a "complete flop" when it has just started recently?

It's not 450 'free-except-you-have-to-pay-for-them' bikes that Dubliners need, its decent cycling infrastructure.

You seem to time and time again forget about what has already been said to you -- Paris has seen a massive increase in cycling numbers outside the rental system. As I've referenced in a post above, up to a 50% increase.

And like in Paris, the rental system is only one of many things that is happening in relation to cycling promotion.

Despite fewer numbers of bikes promised for Dublin, I wonder what the 'attrition' rate will be, both in terms of bikes vandalised and deaths due to the awful conditions for cyclists in Dublin. I'm not sure tempting novice cyclists and tourists onto the pseudo bikes lanes is that wise.

Could you please quantify what exactly you mean by "awful conditions"?

Would you suggest banning all bike rentals in Dublin or are you just engaging in scaremongering?

It's a great idea, and I would support such a scheme, if and it is a big if, the infrastructure were in place to support it.

What infrastructure are you talking about? Bicycles can use roads as has been happening for more than 150 years. There's a growing idea that cycling "infrastructure" is often a complete waste (not their words, but see http://www.cyclist.ie) and all is needed is enough room for motorised traffic and cyclists on most roads.

You do however realise that this scheme is a unprecendented 15 year deal worth some €180m in advertising revenue to JCD.

That's the worth as estimated last year, right? If so, it is no longer valid as advertising has declined.

The city gets only the revenue from 450 bikes, spread over 40 bike stations.

But in return don't they get the bikes and the maintenance of the same?

Which -- if your right -- is going to me a massive cost. So, from that, the city could be getting a good deal all along? No?

That's an average of 11 bikes at each station. That's one (yes one) bike per 1100 odd people living in Dublin
[*]. You'll be lucky to see one!
...


[*] 2006 Census of people in DCC Area. If you take into account 'greater Dublin' that means nearer 1 bike per 4000 people.

Meaningless as the stations are only in the city centre and not across all of the whole DCC area.

And why on earth would you bring up the Greater Dublin Area which includes other counties?

Trust me, this scheme stinks.

Yes, it does. But since you're attacking the whole idea, rather than just the parts that really stink, I think you're losing a bit of credibility.

Metrobest

The media is fickle. First the angle was about paris going "cycling mad"http://http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/aug/16/ethicalliving.france, and now they're focusing on bike thefts. Don't you see - the scheme is brilliant for users but it's tricky to run properly.

Conditions for cyclists in Dublin are terrible, I agree with you, but were equally bad in Paris before Velib. But the critical mass of cyclists Velib created ensured better conditions became a political imperative. It's a case of chicken and egg. Cycling conditions in Dublin will never improve while the mode is viewed as something for fitness junkies and marxist trinity students.
Velib has the power to bring cycling to a whole new audience and create the political capital needed to improve the city's cycling infrastructure. Trust me, it will happen.

I have used Velib on trips to Paris and I am a regular user of Bicing in Barcelona. I have seen with my own eyes a complete transformation of cycling in Barcelona from a fringe pasttime to an everyday mode of mass mobility. New cycle lanes are being constructed all over the city. It's still no Amsterdam, but it's getting there...

Bicing and Velib are two different models for funding the system, and they also have differences in what they offer. The big advantage Velib has over Bicing in Barcelona is that you don't need to pre-register. With Velib anyone can just insert your credit card, choose "24 hour ticket" and away you go! That's what I do in Paris - the 24 hour ticket costs 1 euro but bike rental is always free for the first half hour. Velib is good for "try and see" individuals, tourists, and locals as well you can buy an annual subsciption. The RPA should get in on the act in Dublin and let its smart card users get a Velib add-on.

Bicing is slighly different. It is funded by revenue from the parking meters in Barcelona (which were increased to fund the scheme). With Bicing, you have to pre-register on the website and wait for a card to arrive in the mail, and there is an annual fee, I think 25 euros. So it's specifically for locals, excluding tourists for example. Like Velib, the first half hour is free, and there are incremental fees for any extra use that appear on your credit card bill. However, so long as you return the bike within 30 minutes it's free. And you can pick up another bike if you want to have another free spin!

I realise that the number of bikes (450) is small, but 3.5million+population Barcelona started off with 1,500 and due to demand the number grew. Hopefully this will happen too in Dublin - in other words the scheme will be a victim of its success!

At the end of the day, most of negative comment about Velib is that it's funded by advertising. But in Barcelona it's just funded another way - out of people's pockets. Either way, it has to be funded. And in the first instance it has to get off the ground.

Don't knock it will you try it.

Dublin must be the only the city in the world actively opposed to getting free bicycles; whereas in Paris the Socialist mayor is the scheme's biggest fan! Oh the irony of it all...

Seth Brundle

Metrobest wrote: »

Don't knock it will you try it.

Try what? We have nothing yet to try!

Metrobest wrote: »

Dublin must be the only the city in the world actively opposed to getting free bicycles; whereas in Paris the Socialist mayor is the scheme's biggest fan! Oh the irony of it all...

We are not getting free bicycles!

(I also note that you didn't answer my questions!)

MadsL

monument wrote: »

MadsL you know all too well that JCD are now not happy with the contract in Paris and that's why they have been making nose on this recently.

Correct me if I get this wrong, but were you not previously pointing out how Dublin got such a bad deal compared to Paris? Maybe Dublin's deal was more realistic for the ad company after them seen what was happening in Paris?

When does a bad deal get better? Is it better when the ad company gets more out of it?

And why should Paris care about them crying now? If the contract is broken, the city can bring them to court. But in realty, it looks like the city can see the benefit the bike rental system has brought so it has agreed to give JCD some of the money from the rentals.

I'd like to see the contract we have in place, still not made available to the public or councillors.

We do have a cycle to work tax scheme, and I don't know how you can call it a "complete flop" when it has just started recently?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055501374

You seem to time and time again forget about what has already been said to you -- Paris has seen a massive increase in cycling numbers outside the rental system. As I've referenced in a post above, up to a 50% increase.

You seem to think I'm knocking cycling, on the contrary, just looking for the best deal for Dublin.

And like in Paris, the rental system is only one of many things that is happening in relation to cycling promotion.

Really? What real improvements do you anticipate?

Could you please quantify what exactly you mean by "awful conditions"?

I think I could pull any number of threads bemoaning the conditions for cycling in Dublin, potholes, no cycle light filters, part-time cycle lanes. Probably anything that cyclopath has posted in the past year.

Would you suggest banning all bike rentals in Dublin or are you just engaging in scaremongering?

What advice would you give to a Dutch tourist renting a bike in Dublin?

What infrastructure are you talking about? Bicycles can use roads as has been happening for more than 150 years. There's a growing idea that cycling "infrastructure" is often a complete waste (not their words, but see http://www.cyclist.ie) and all is needed is enough room for motorised traffic and cyclists on most roads.

Proper education of drivers would be good, fewer man-eating potholes, provision for bike racks on buses and space for bikes on the Dart, room for cyclists - not necessarily bike lanes but well thought out cycle routes supported by cyclist priority lights etc.

That's the worth as estimated last year, right? If so, it is no longer valid as advertising has declined.

aww..bailout for the advertising industry?

But in return don't they get the bikes and the maintenance of the same?

Which -- if your right -- is going to me a massive cost. So, from that, the city could be getting a good deal all along? No?

Absolute tops the replacement cost is €1000, therefore even if they have to replace every bike every year we are looking at €6-7m. Not exactly a huge chunk of even half the valuation of the deal.

Meaningless as the stations are only in the city centre and not across all of the whole DCC area.

And why on earth would you bring up the Greater Dublin Area which includes other counties?

Commuters. What percentage of those who work in Dublin live in the DCC area?



Yes, it does. But since you're attacking the whole idea, rather than just the parts that really stink, I think you're losing a bit of credibility.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, Metrobest brings out the worst in me You are right, there is a whole debate on how best to cater for cycling across the city, however getting into bed for 15years with one company seems to me to be the height of eggs in one basket strategy, as Paris seems to be finding out. Other furniture schemes by advertising companies seem also to be costing cities more than they bargained too...I'll dig up some links.

monument

MadsL wrote: »

When does a bad deal get better? Is it better when the ad company gets more out of it?

I said maybe it's more realistic, I did not use the word better in relation to the Dublin deal.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055501374

It's only two months since it started, thus there are currently no solid stats on it so-far. The article made up of mostly hot air.

You seem to think I'm knocking cycling, on the contrary, just looking for the best deal for Dublin.

I was mealy replying directly to what you had said. My point being is infrastructure is just one part of cycling promotion.

Really? What real improvements do you anticipate?

There has been a number of good signs in relation to cycling -- namely the appointment of the cycle office / engineer, the cycle to work tax incentives, and cycling numbers increased in the last city traffic count and hopefully the latest one will confirm another increase.

The Green Schools Initiative pilot has shown positive results and is set to be expanded.

On a policy level, the recently released Sustainable Transport Policy is also very positive.

What advice would you give to a Dutch tourist renting a bike in Dublin?

Act like they would in any other non-cycle culture.

aww..bailout for the advertising industry?

I was just pointing out that there is little point quoting numbers which are no longer valid.

Absolute tops the replacement cost is €1000, therefore even if they have to replace every bike every year we are looking at €6-7m. Not exactly a huge chunk of even half the valuation of the deal.

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but does this not mean that all your posts about the system being unworkable are nonsense then? Or at the very least one long mute point?

In any case the top price for one of these bikes is likely under €400.

Commuters. What percentage of those who work in Dublin live in the DCC area?

Is this a trick question? Is Dublin in this case the city centre, or the city, or the county?

Seriously tho, were talking about a small network of stations and bikes at the start, the percentage your asking for and its real number has little relevance.

But, there you go, there's a valid answer to how the ad hoardings can be outside the city centre and those near to the centre will benefit most -- it's quite simple, those in the city have to put up with traffic from those further away.

MadsL

Seriously tho, were talking about a small network of stations and bikes at the start, the percentage your asking for and its real number has little relevance.

And the point I'm making is that it is such a small network compared to the value that the ad company is getting (regardless of market conditions now, this is a 15 year deal and probably the ads will be hard to remove given their history of lack of planning compliance)

The numbers of bikes provided under this deal will probably not be workable, leaving DCC facing a hard choice of abandoning the scheme or being forced into sanctioning more and more ads to make it work. 11 bikes close to a Dart station outlying the city centre will likely be gone by 7am and the bike stations in the centre full. With falling revenues there will be little incentive for the ad company to maintain the system through bike vans reloading outlying stations. I predict when, finally, the bikes arrive, they will be bleating about falling revenue and be looking for even more ad sites.

This is a trojan horse scheme that will leave Dublin plastered in ads over the next 15 years. In the meantime think about the lack of compliance with planning conditions so far.

1. Has the independent road safety audit of the signage been done? Or are there still signs (like at the median of Parnell St, that are active pedestrian hazards?)

2. Have 100 billboards actually been removed? There appears to be no clear documentation of what has been removed. Lists of 50 removed have been circulated, however it has been shown that many of these are old removals or numbers of removals oddly inflated, or the addresses are so vague as to be meaningless.

3. Is there any clarity as to the terms of the contract, we have not seen this contract or know any details about the terms of the supposed 'expansion' of the scheme.

To agree with Metrobest (:eek:) a scheme run from parking revenue would much more controllable by the city and I believe be much more encouraging to cycling. The bike scheme is tarnished by citizen's anger at the lack of consultation and the way this deal was done. I wonder whether a truly consultative scheme would suffer less vandalism and be more widely respected?

Terrontress

I live in Donabate and frequently use the Luas Green Line at weekends. I would love to be able to hop onto a bike at Connolly, cycle it up to SSG and drop it off there.

For this reason, I think the population of the greater Dublin area as opposed to those within the Dublin city boundaries should be used when assessing the viability of this project.

monument

MadsL wrote: »

And the point I'm making is that it is such a small network compared to the value that the ad company is getting (regardless of market conditions now, this is a 15 year deal and probably the ads will be hard to remove given their history of lack of planning compliance)

Well you've been going on about how the Paris deal is unworkable for the company, so they needed a better deal here.

The numbers of bikes provided under this deal will probably not be workable, leaving DCC facing a hard choice of abandoning the scheme or being forced into sanctioning more and more ads to make it work. 11 bikes close to a Dart station outlying the city centre will likely be gone by 7am and the bike stations in the centre full. With falling revenues there will be little incentive for the ad company to maintain the system through bike vans reloading outlying stations. I predict when, finally, the bikes arrive, they will be bleating about falling revenue and be looking for even more ad sites.

From the Sunday Buisness Post a few weeks ago: "However, a spokesman for Dublin City Council said the situation in Paris would not have any impact on plans for the Dublin scheme. He said the council had a 15-year contract with JCDecaux, which sees the advertising firm bear sole responsibility for the replacement and maintenance of the bicycles".

So, your point is a mute one.

To agree with Metrobest (:eek:) a scheme run from parking revenue would much more controllable by the city and I believe be much more encouraging to cycling. The bike scheme is tarnished by citizen's anger at the lack of consultation and the way this deal was done. I wonder whether a truly consultative scheme would suffer less vandalism and be more widely respected?

You -- and Metrobest -- already know parking revenue is already used. And if the money for bicycles was taken from parking I'd bet there'd be a backlash from motorists just because of such.

Unless people like you are going to turn into vandals then consultative makes little difference to if there will be less or more vandalism.

Stark

monument wrote: »

Well you've been going on about how the Paris deal is unworkable for the company, so they needed a better deal here.

Why should we care about whether the deal is better for the company? We're not JC Decaux, we should be looking for a deal that's good for us.

monument

Stark wrote: »

Why should we care about whether the deal is better for the company? We're not JC Decaux, we should be looking for a deal that's good for us.

That's a very good question, I don't know the answer. Maybe try asking that to the people here who seem to be a little too interisted in JCD's crying about their Paris contract?

Stark

Chances are the contract between DCC and JC Decaux isn't as strict as the one for Paris. If they're whining about having to maintain the bikes in Paris, what's the betting they won't bother maintaining or replacing the Dublin bikes at all? Has anyone actually seen the contract to confirm that there's a maintenance clause in there?

monument

Stark wrote: »

Chances are the contract between DCC and JC Decaux isn't as strict as the one for Paris. If they're whining about having to maintain the bikes in Paris, what's the betting they won't bother maintaining or replacing the Dublin bikes at all? Has anyone actually seen the contract to confirm that there's a maintenance clause in there?

We can start betting on pretty much anything.

Stark

Hence the need to see the contract. If they're not contractually obliged to do something, then they won't do it. That's a certainty.

Metrobest

MadsL wrote: »

The bike scheme is tarnished by citizen's anger at the lack of consultation and the way this deal was done. I wonder whether a truly consultative scheme would suffer less vandalism and be more widely respected?

How much consulting did they do in Paris and Barcelona? Hardly any in Barcelona I can tell you! In fact, Bicing started off very small. the city never even advertised it. Bike stands just started appearing randomly around the city and many people didn't know what they were, but word spread. I registered in the first wave and I remember people would approach me as I liberated one of the nifty three-gear bikes. One old lady beamed: "how can I get one of those bikes, they look great!" Within months, thousands and thousands signed up on the Bicing website. People who thought bikes were for loony lefties suddenly found themselves on two wheels. The talk turned to suggestions to improve the scheme. For example, people wanted more vans roaming the city moving the bikes from stand to stand. They complained that it was impossible to find bikes in particular areas (ie. hilly parts) and impossible to find a spare docking station to leave the bikes in other stands (eg. the beach)

The Barcelona approach was not consultative. Planners just took the decision to implement the scheme and that was it. The media didn't weigh in with the dreary "how much is this going to cost?" ramblings the Irish media is prone to. People just saw the scheme for what it was - not perfect, but a hell of a lot better than nothing. Letters started to appear in the newspapers, always prefaced with: "First, let me say how much I like the Bicing scheme. But in my area there are never any spare bikes.."

Every city goes through a process of adjustment to get the right number of bikes to suit the needs of the city. There's little doubt 450 bikes won't do for Dublin in the long run, but remember that these bikes circulate, each one is used dozens of times per day. Journey times in Dublin will average at about 10-15 minutes. These bikes are for short hops, not punishing trips up the Wicklow mountains!

I'd like to see a scheme funded from parking metres too but realistically it wouldn't fly with motorists. The phones on Liveline would be jammed! Furious callers would say: "it's a disgrace, joe! first the M50 went up and now the parking meters. Nobody asked for those city bikes. Dublin isn't like of those European cities. The bikes will get wrecked..etc etc.."

Ironically, in this case, while the socialists in Paris were Velib's biggest fans, in Dublin Marxists have logged onto Adobe Photoshop to create some anti bike propaganda against the capitalist beast that is JCD.

A particular complaint is that Dublin has got a "bad deal". But Dublin is not Paris with its wide traffic-filled boulevards, the kind of captive audience advertisers love. Dublin is narrow streets and narrow pavements. The billboards in Dublin won't make anything like the revenue they draw in Paris.

But the contract is not written in stone. There's nothing to stop DCC from subsidising the scheme at a later date and beefing up the bike numbers. Maybe they can plaster a few giant billboards on the M50 which would pay for hundreds more bikes in the city centre!

A word of caution.Two crucial factors will affect the success of Velib in Dublin. First, it must be launched before summer. Sunny days are when the "I'd like to try that" brigade will go for a spin. If it launches in Autumn it could well end up being a flop because of point number two...

The constant drip feed of negativity. It's coming from this forum and it will have to stop. With the ecoomy on the slide, JCD might well decide that the scheme is too risky to implement in the cantankerous streets of Dublin. In which case, Dublin might well win the dubious honour of being the first city in the world to lose a free bike scheme before it even began and instead gain a set of ugly street advertisements for 15 years!

That would be some irony for the Marxists and their photo-shopped stickers.