Stockholm eBikes is Sweden’s most successful loan bike system. Since the start eight months ago, over 600,000 trips have been made by over 60,000 registered users. The reason for this rapid success is, among other things, that the electric bicycles are easy to use and are appreciated by the users, and that the system is easily accessible and open 24/7. Perhaps the main explanation for the success is the low price, which makes the system very attractive for Stockholmers and for city visitors. The city of Stockholm has chosen to procure a loan bike system that is partially financed with advertising revenue on the bikes and on the city’s streets. An annual subscription therefore costs as much as a single taxi journey within customs or a couple of journeys with an electric scooter. For this, users get 90 minutes of free usage per occasion on an unlimited number of occasions.READ MORE Here you can find all the articles about Stockholm’s loan bikes Our travel habit surveys show that the majority of trips replace an inactive motorized trip with, for example, a car, taxi, public transport or electric scooter. Every fifth trip connects to traditional public transport, which means that the loan bike system is an important cog in a larger climate-smart transport system that takes users from door to door. From user patterns and seasonal differences, we can also deduce that the system is popular for tourists and that it can become an important factor for Stockholm as both an attractive and sustainable visitor city. The Stockholm eBikes rental bike system challenges other traffic solutions and alternatives. Initially, the system also had problems, mainly as a result of delayed deliveries of electric bicycles, which in turn was caused by component shortages in the world’s supply chains. These problems were of course not good, but they should not obscure the fact that the system is successful and that Inurba Mobility follows the agreement with the city. Namely, there are many inaccuracies in Andrea Sundstrand’s post where she falsely claims that there are grounds for canceling the agreement. Sundstrand seems to have read the agreement very thoroughly but despite that missed a couple of important details that put the cross-certain claims to rest. She claims that we have the wrong number of bicycles in operation, which we do not have because we follow what the agreement says about the number of bicycles during the winter.Furthermore, Sundstrand makes incorrect claims about technical deficiencies in Stockholm eBikes’ electric bicycles, information that Sundström writes that she has seen in the media . It would have been better if she went to the source. The claim that we would have broken and dangerous bikes available for hire is flat out wrong and comes across as a way of trying to attribute failings to the loaner bike system that do not exist. That safety is absolutely central to us as a company is shown not least by our immediate action to temporarily close the entire system when we received reports of overheated batteries in some cases. Sundstrand claims that the balance in the agreement has been shifted as Inurba Mobility has not had to pay the right fine. The statement is incorrect as the city has not remitted any fines. Thus, Sundstrand’s main claim that the financial balance in the agreement has been disturbed falls flat. On the contrary, the agreement is very clear in the sense that the financial balance cannot be shifted in favor of either Inurba Mobility or our advertising partner. The number of advertising spaces is fully dependent on the number of bicycles, and in the event that the bicycle system does not meet the agreed requirements, a substantial fine is issued. Unlike the city’s other advertising agreements, the city of Stockholm has thus signed an agreement that ensures that taxpayers do not risk being left without compensation for the land lease. The city of Stockholm has another advertising agreement to finance public toilets, which was signed seven years ago. Despite the fact that the expansion of toilets has been greatly delayed and is not yet fully developed, the city’s penalty clause is so vaguely worded that no fines have been issued in this case. Here, Sundstrand has a real opportunity to question whether the supplier fulfills its part of the agreement and why the fine has not been issued. The solution to the challenges that occurred in connection with the establishment of the new loan cycle system is not to terminate the agreement. Then Stockholmers risk being left without a climate-smart and affordable micro-mobility solution for several years. On the contrary, the development is pointing in the right direction and the city’s agreement ensures that the agreement is fulfilled and that the taxpayers get what they are supposed to get.READ MORE Here you can find all articles about Stockholm’s loan bikesDaniel Mohlin is Nordic manager for Inurba Mobility, which runs the Stockholm eBikes loan cycle system. The opinions expressed in the article are the writer’s own.
Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]