Tech Crunch coined a new term, JerkTech. according to them:
“All of these apps are essentially tools for scalping a public good or open resource. They don’t deserve to take something that’s supposed to be free and first come, first serve so they can sell it.”
Politicians have picked it up. They are running after Monkey Parking and Haystack certain that the two apps and others like it will end civilization as we know it. In some cases, like the app Uber which is going eye to eye with the taxi industry or Airbnb which is taking hotels by storm they have become multi billion dollar industries.
In the case of Uber, you use your smart phone to get a clean cheap ride in a ‘private’ car. Taxi’s hate it because their monopoly is gone. Tens of thousands of car owners, mostly young, are working part time giving people a lift. Uber says they are all insured, and all the financial details are handled on line. You just ride in comfort. So if taxis are to survive, they will have to change the way they operate. Doesn’t seem like a bad thing.
Airbnb is turning the travel industry on its ear. If you have an apartment or house somewhere and aren’t going to be using it, list on Airbnb and most likely someone will sigh up to take it off your hands for a few days. Its self policing and if your place turns out to be a dump, you will never get another visit. I’ve used it three times and found it just what I needed.
But, what about Haystack. Its an app that allows you to notify other members of Haystack when you are about to leave an onstreet parking spot and sell that information to someone who want’s a spot in that neighborhood. You wait until the other person shows up, pull out and they pull in. I’m assuming that the money clears through the app. Neat and Clean.
Not so, says San Francisco and Boston. In Beantown the mayor said :
“Here we have a company that wants to come in here, create an industry, and profit from it,” Walsh told the Boston Business Journal.
O good heavens, the humanity… The mayor goes on:
“They’re basically squatting in publicly owned spots and selling those spots. You’re selling something that’s not yours… It’s just not fair.”
He sounds like a three year old in a sand box.
But hold on. How is this app affecting the city. They are getting full revenue from the parking spots. No one is taking anything away. If they are so concerned about driver A giving driver B the rest of the time on the meter, get with the program and reset the meter when driver A leaves. I’m not in favor of that, but you could do it.
Pass an ordinance and tax Haystack, so much a transaction, or a percentage of the take.
Everyone is threatening law suits, but I can’t figure out who is harmed here. This month in PT we had a cover story about Monkey Parking by Lenny Bier, lawyer, executive director to the New Jersey Parking Institute and all round good parking guy. He comes down pretty hard on the app, basically saying that it will cause congestion and cause a ripple in the force of dynamic parking. Don Shoup call your office.
It seems to me that Lenny’s concern about taxi drivers making this a second business is a stretch since they will have to pay to park at the meter and it takes them out of circulation. If they get only about $3 to 5 bucks a go but end up paying the same amount to park, it seems to me that those shrewd cabbies will learn quickly there is no money in this.
As for getting cars off the street quickly, if someone snags a space on main street through Haystack and has to be there in 3 minutes or it is gone, it seems like we are getting cars off the street pretty quickly. But what do I know.
I do know that the city could make more money by taxing these apps than complaining about them.
Taxis are going to have to clean up their act because of Uber, maybe on street parking will have to do the same because of Haystack.
People love their pets like children. They buy them personalized collars, beds and blankets; they buy them strollers and sweaters; they take them everywhere they go and pick up their poop; some even purchase special doggie seat belts so Fido doesn’t fly through the windshield if they’re in an accident.
Strangely, some of these same people who take their dogs everywhere and pick up their poop also leave their dogs in hot cars in parking lots. According to click2houston.com, a Texas man has been arrested and charged with a misdemeanor for leaving his dog in his car while he bought groceries.
Investigators said a witness first noticed the dog inside the car at 5:10 p.m. The car was off and the windows were rolled up. The dog could be seen on the floorboard and looked to be distressed. The witness told the store manager, who then paged the owner of the car several times inside the store. No one answered the page. At 5:30 p.m. they called police.
It’s just as hard for me to imagine why this individual would leave his dog in the car on a hot Texas day as it is to imagine why he was arrested for it. The man said he forgot to crack the windows. He paid a $1,000 bond and will likely accrue heavy costs to defend his mistake.
I don’t have a dog, but if I did I don’t think I’d take it to the grocery store. I see dogs in cars often and most of them look distressed – most of them are barking their heads off and bouncing around the interior of the car trying to protect their territory from each window. Dogs don’t really travel well.
Read the article here.
I have known Jim Bond for over 30 years. I can’t say we were close, but Jim was always friendly. He worked at many levels at Central, but except for the first decade of his 41 years there, he was at Monroe Carrels right hand. What Monroe visualized, Jim put into action.
I know that the company was his foremost thought. Once, when my company had invited him to join us at a ski retreat he walked into the opening night dinner in his ski sweater, sat down, got a phone call, told us he had a company emergency, and left. Never did see the slopes.
When Central opened an airport operation called Park One at LAX, Jim flew in to check the place out. He was left standing for 45 minutes at the curbside, waiting for his own shuttle to pick him up. History does not record what happened when he finally got to the location.
Through our brief interactions, I always found Jim to be professional, and a gentleman. Jim Bond added much to the parking industry.
John Van Horn
Editor, Parking Today
The following, taken from his obituary in the Tennessean:
Jim Bond, 41 year veteran of Central Parking, passed away in early August following a long illness. He was 72. Jim served in many capacities at Central, beginning as a Vice President in St Louis, MO and, prior to his retirement in 2012, President of the Company’s International Division.
James Hardy Bond was born in Chicago, Illinois on June 2, 1942. Jim attended the University of Kentucky, where he graduated with a B.S. in Civil Engineering in 1964. His business career began first as a design engineer with the Kentucky State Highway Department before being called into military service in 1967.
in 1971, Jim began a 41-year career with Central Parking System. His first ten years were as Regional Vice President, positioned in Saint Louis, MO. During this time, Central Parking System grew from operating in three cities to eleven. In 1981, he was appointed as the company’s Chief Operating Officer, which brought Jim and his family back to Nashville. The company experienced strong growth through the 1980s and he was named Central Parking’s President in 1990. By 1991, the company had expanded to 41 cities, including its first international operations at Heathrow Airport and Canary Wharf in London, England. It was also during his time as President that Central Parking System purchased all of the operating contracts from Myers Parking System, which provided the company further expansion in the Northeast (New York City, Boston) and to the West Coast (Los Angeles, San Francisco).
By 1995, Central Parking became a public company listed on the New York Stock Exchange. This access to capital resulted in a series of acquisitions culminating in the purchase of Allright Parking in 1999. This acquisition made Central Parking the largest company worldwide in the parking industry, operating 4,500 locations in 120 cities and 14 countries. In 2007, Central Parking was purchased by a private equity and subsequently merged with Standard Parking in 2012. Jim was widely respected in the parking industry by colleagues and competitors for his business knowledge, his sophisticated yet humble demeanor, and his incredible professionalism. He was a mentor and role-model to many. As testament of the lasting impact Jim made with Central Parking and the parking industry, Standard Parking has named its new Nashville operations support office in his honor.
Jim is survived by his wife, Gwen Bond; sons, Paul (Suzanne) Bond, Andrew (Libby) Bond and daughter, Emily Bond, all of whom loved him dearly and relied on his wisdom and guidance every day. He also leaves behind five grandchildren, Alex, Cooper, Lucy, Watts and Jake.
Our Cover this month show a “monkey” parking a car. OK, photoshop is wonderful, it’s our fauna challenged art department and editorial staff that can’t tell the difference between a monkey and a chimpanzee. Apologies to Hominidae, or the “Great Apes.” That means you, too.
You can see the entire issue by clicking here.
There are a lot of words in that headline, but when it comes to hot topics like “self driving” and “automated parking” there’s no use being coy. The system, called Ray, is a parking solution with a stylish twist. According to Extremetech.com, Ray’s maker, Serva Transoprt Systems, tried to make it attractive, as well as useful. Its streamlined profile can pack up to 60% more cars into the same parking area. Read the article and see the pictures here.
The user experience on Ray is seamless — just park your car in Ray’s little area, pay for parking, and walk away. The system performs a 3D scan of the vehicle, and Ray adjusts its tines and tires to perfectly slide beneath each car and lift it by the tires.
Ray is meant to fill a narrow niche serving the luxury parking market. It’s also a quick solution for almost any facility with the need and the cash because it can be put in use with little to no retrofit needed, reports Extreme.com.
For now, Ray is more expensive than valet, but decreases service time and comes with complete insurance. It’s also got a high tolerance for crowds, complicated garage floor plans and snobbish luxury-car owners.
Every so often I come across a term of which I am unfamiliar. Typically I nod sagely and then run to Google to see what’s what. In this case its
Cooptition: Cooperative competition. Practice where competitors work with each other on project-to-project, joint venture, or co-marketing basis.
I was on the phone today with a Venture Capital Firm discussing money that has been flowing into the new start ups in the parking industry. Cooptition came up a number of times. My contact felt that tech start ups in the parking business needed to be deeply involved in cooperative competition to enable them to thrive and grow.
Venture Capitalists, it seems, are “rising tide raises all boats” folks. As one company thrives, others in the same genre will thrive. Working together will only make that happen faster.
He believed that the parking business needs to see customers not as just cogs in a wheel, but to strive to make parking easy and as importantly, pleasurable. He said we need to answer questions like:
- How can I bring customers more services?
- How can I partner with other companies to success
- Just what is ‘parking’ and what could it be?
We seem to have accepted that parking is a necessary evil. Drivers hate it but must use our services. So why do we need to anything more than provide space for a price.
Tech companies that are being supported by venture capitalists are providing services that will, they hope, provide answers to the above questions and make parking a pleasurable experience. If we give drivers parking choices, make their actual experience a good one, and perhaps provide other services that they may want at the same time (wash, oil change, dry cleaners, coffee bar, valet services) they may be willing to pay more for the service.
Some garages make a run at these services, but fall down when it comes to communication with parkers. Technology is on the cusp of enabling vehicles to be in contact with their destinations and enabling drivers to partake of services that will make their experience easier.
These money guys believe that the companies that connect parking locations, drivers, and services will carry the industry in the nest few years. The parking ecosystem, if you will, will grow and the typical horrible parking experience will be a thing of the past, and parkers will line up to pay for the more pleasurable parking space.
Companies who ‘stay the course’ and don’t look for a new experience in parking do so at their peril. We shall see. In the meantime, Cooptition is the word.
When Astrid posted this article from “Cult of Mac” a Bay Area Blog on Parknews.biz I was excited. Wow, something that worked and worked well. The Title was catchy: “This app will guide you to parking, and may get you a ticket, too.” The article spoke highly of the creator of the new app and how it was going to make San Francisco a parking paradise.
Its neat. The App works like Garmin and tells you verbally how to get to a parking space you select, both on and off street. No need to look at your phone and run into the police car in front of you.
The article infers that the infrastructure behind the app was 8000 sensors located on- street in San Francisco. - That the new sensors replaced the existing sensors installed as a part of SFPark that were turned off in 2013 and these new puppies were merrily sending data back to the app and letting people park easily and quickly in Baghdad by the Bay, saving according to the app creator, 3,000,000 driving minutes a day.
Anything smell a bit fishy? Your intrepid blogger contacted the app’s creator, David Leboa at VoicePark and asked a few pertinent questions.
1. Did you use the sensors provided from Streetline and Streetsmart in San Francisco for your tests there.
A: Yes, but their data was not good enough for use to reliably provide information to the app users. The data was in the 70% range of accuracy and we needed something better, at least 95% or people won’t use the app.
2. So you didn’t really have a viable test of the app in San Francisco.
A. If we had had good data, it would have worked perfectly.
3. So what sensor do you use and did you deploy it in San Francisco>
A. We use a sensor from Smartparking. Its in use to great success in London. We have not deployed in San Francisco because there are some legal issues to be worked out.
3. So where have you deployed sensors.
A. Mumble, mumble, mumble
4. Where are you going to deploy?
A. Next Month in a small town in the wine country north of San Francisco.
5. So basically the article about deployment and success in San Francisco was bogus?
A. Well, ahem, when you discuss software, hardware deployment, apps, and the like with reporters, sometimes the resulting article is jumbled.
Somebody with a can of spray paint is telling Queens-area parkers they’re doing a bad job. Critical comments were painted on two cars overnight, reports Newyork.cbslocal.com. One driver had profanity painted on her car for taking up more space than she needed – although she says there wasn’t room for another car either way. Residents are concerned about this escalation in an already tough parking scenario.
A note on a windshield is one thing, but neighbors said a spray-painted message reading, “Learn how to park S-bag,” is another.
I can relate to the frustration that arises when parking is tight and other parkers don’t park efficiently, but, obviously, I don’t support vandalizing their cars as a good outlet for that frustration.
What I do support is the leaders of this city recognizing that the local parking situation is nightmarish and it’s bringing out the worst in people. If finding parking is so stressful that individuals are pushed to more and more illegal and destructive behaviors, then city rules and regulations need to alleviate that stress. I don’t know how you find more parking in a place like Queens, but maybe the answer is fewer cars. Just a thought.
Read the article here.
Sometime PT correspondent Jeff Pinyot wrote a blog for the IPI site which peaked by curiosity. He seems to relatively successfully hold both sides of a controversy. Here’s the blog in toto — and my comments following:
If you want good dinner conversation, place at least one liberal and one conservative together at a dinner table, insert a bottle of Pinot Grigio, a nice appetizer, and perhaps the suggestion of Global Warming as dinner conversation.
Being that the parking industry is so often referred to in discussions of the impact of environmental change, it seems that we have the right to have an opinion on the subject. When our company is asked what environmental impact our lights have on carbon emissions, we often equate it to X numbers of cars being taken off the road. For a company that does business with parking garage owners and operators, it actually seems a little stupid to tell Denison Parking that if they use our lights, it will be like taking 50 cars (paying customers) off the road. I know it really doesn’t impact the number of cars in actuality, but it does seem like a stupid analysis given the facts. Perhaps we should talk about the impact as X number of new trees planted.
So, I digress….Why is it that every celebrity believes that they are an authority on politics, global warming, hunger, health plans, etc. Is it because some of them have played Presidents, Senators, Scientists, Doctors, etc. on TV and the big screen? Could you imaging George Clooney saying this: “In Gravity, I played the role of an astronaut, which means that I would have probably gone to Purdue University, which means that I should probably be pretty smart, so, yes, I have no real reason to say this, but I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt, Global Warming is for real…I think.”
In reality, here is exactly what he did say about Global Warming: “If you have 99 percent of doctors who tell you ‘you are sick’ and 1 percent that says ‘you’re fine,’ you probably want to hang out with, check it up with the 99. You know what I mean? (not really George) The idea that we ignore that we are in some way involved in climate change is ridiculous. What’s the worst thing that happens? We clean up the earth a little bit?”
While I have no idea what he is saying exactly, at the end, he does come back down to earth. George Clooney and I agree on his last statement, “What’s the worst thing that happens? We clean up the earth a little bit?” YES, let’s start with common ground! Who can argue that his statement is not true? The way I say it is similar… This is me talking… and I am quoting me… “Whether Global Warming is true or not doesn’t really matter, the bottom line is, we should leave the world in at least the same shape as we got it, no worse or preferably, better. We should try to get our Security Deposit back!”
Don’t hug a tree, climate!
Let me say that I agree completely with Jeff’s last two sentences. We should leave the world in better shape than we got it. But at the same time, I disagree with George Clooney when he says “What’s the worst than can happen.
Here’s the problem – We can do a lot of harm. Emerging countries where people are freezing in the dark want to give their citizens a fighting chance. But if everyone from the UN on down fights them as they try to develop, there is plenty of harm. Here at home, people that get hurt aren’t the gazillionaires like Clooney, but the working poor, who pay more for electricity, for gasoline, for food, for clothing. All because the Clooneys of the planet stop development, not just clean development, but all development. They live in enclaves in the west side of LA, between San Francisco and San Jose, on the Upper East Side of New York or in the counties around DC and Boston. They have no feel for what it costs to live, since they have tons of disposable income.
I’m with you on the concept that we must be good stewards of our planet, and must clean up our environment. But a clean environment and a bustling economy must not be mutually exclusive. If all the effort put into stopping economic growth was put into clean water and electrification in emerging countries, how many more kids would grow up healthy, how many families would thrive.
When a idea, a crusade, a cause takes on a religious zeal, and dissenters are silenced, then one can be certain there is hubris. There are laws of unintended consequences. We double the price of gasoline, but offer no transportation alternatives. We stop building new housing, but offer no replacement, thus sending the cost of housing sky high, we halt the building of any type of energy facility (nuclear, natural gas, coal) and stop manufacturing in its tracks, costing millions of jobs.
When the people of India, China, Central Africa reach the point that every waking moment isn’t spent searching for food, clothing, and shelter, and they have some time to enjoy their lives, they will begin to think about cleaner air, unpolluted water, and white sandy beaches. They will realize they don’t need 15 children for the family to survive. They will, just as have Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, North America, and western Europe begin to clean their environment, too.
Environmental cleanliness must make economic sense, too. And it can. Just as Jeff sees creating light in parking garages using less electricity, buildings can be constructed so they use the space around them more effectively, food can be grown less expensively, but the land preserved. Forests can be replaced, fuel can be produced without destroying the earth, power can be created without destroying the air. And it can be done economically, if we allow it.
…except he wasn’t the parking attendant.
In Denver, a parking lot employee poseur has been taking money from parking patrons, even though the signs state clearly for them to “pay machine only.” According to denver.cbslocal.com:
“Police hope to catch the man before he strikes again.”
I hope they catch him before he strikes again, too. But I’m also going to have a little laugh at the folks who feel for his ruse. You don’t just hand over your money to anyone who asks for it. You don’t just pull into a parking lot without making yourself aware of the pay system. Or do you? We all give our keys and cars to the valet and we all pass bills to the guy sitting in the pay booth, but we don’t have any real assurance that these are actual parking lot employees. They don’t all have badges or uniforms or a certificate tied around their necks. And there’s no time to run a background check. All it takes is one trickster in a white shirt, black pants and industrial-strength black shoes and any of us could be short a vehicle.
“Definitely he is roaming the area looking for any extra cash he can get,” said Town Park Manager Tanner Rogers. “If somebody asks you for cash, be wary.”
Sound advice, I say. Be wary.