Bicycling
Which bikeshare system has the most members? Ours!
The Federal Highway Administration has released a report with a lot of interesting information on the country's bike sharing networks, including previously-unavailable statistics on the numbers of annual members.
| City | System | Stations | Bikes | Annual members | Casual members |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Washington/ | Capital Bikeshare | 140 | 1,200 | 19,200 | 105,644 |
| Boston | Hubway | 60 | 600 | 3,600 | 30,000 |
| Minneapolis | Nice Ride | 145 | 1,300 | 3,521 | 37,103 |
| Denver | B-Cycle | 52 | 520 | 2,659 | 40,600 |
| Miami Beach | Deco Bike | 91 | 800 | 2,500 | 338,828 |
| Boulder | B-Cycle | 15 | 110 | 1,171 | 6,200 |
| San Antonio | B-Cycle | 23 | 200 | 1,000 | 2,800 |
| Spartanburg | B-Cycle | 2 | 14 | 127 | 828 |
| UC-Irvine | Zotwheels | 4 | 28 | 100 | - |
Bike sharing is expanding so quickly in this country that some of the report's information is already out of date. For example, their information for Capital Bikeshare is from February, before dozens of new stations were added. Also, the report oddly leaves out a few cities with sizable networks, such as Madison.
Nevertheless, it's interesting information. Capital Bikeshare is really blowing away the other cities by this metric, although it's not exactly a fair comparison for the systems that haven't had as long to mature, or that close during winter.
Notice that when the information was gathered for this report, Capital Bikeshare had temporarily slipped to second place according to the number of bikes available. Presumably it's back in first by now with this year's expansions on the streets, although when New York launches this coming spring, we can expect to drop from the top permanently.
Cross-posted at BeyondDC.
Comments
- Young kids try to assault me while biking
- Metro bag searches aren't always optional
- Focus transportation on downtown or neighborhoods?
- Endless zoning update delay hurts homeowners
- Redeveloping McMillan is the only way to save it
- DDOT agrees to repave 15th Street cycle track
- Vienna Metro town center won't have a town center






by charlie on Sep 6, 2012 11:27 am • link • report
by Tom Veil on Sep 6, 2012 11:34 am • link • report
by Xavier on Sep 6, 2012 11:34 am • link • report
The data is obviously not evenly accurate - some systems offer precise numbers for members (3,521 in Minneapolis) while others offer rounded figures.
That said, interesting metrics to me are more than the count.
Look at annual members per station: Assume that annual members are residents and casual members are tourists/visitors/first timers. CaBi has ~137 annual members per station, higher than all the rest. Boulder is next at ~78 annuals per station. Perhaps this reflects the size of the network, perhaps the density surrounding the stations...
Looking at casual members per station is also interesting, as it might be a measure of tourism. CaBi has about 750 casual members per station. DecoBike has a whopping ~3700 casual members per station (compared to only 27 annuals/station). Again, this could truly show the difference in the user base, or it could just be indicative of the scope of the system (e.g. if CaBi were just on the mall, what would that ratio look like?)
Finally, I think it's interesting to look at the percent of annual members compared to total members (annual+casual). For CaBi, that's ~15%. For DecoBike, it's 1%. Better yet would be to try and weight this data by usage, but that's a lot more data crunching...
by Alex B. on Sep 6, 2012 11:36 am • link • report
P.S. Is anyone else getting asked to submit Recaptcha words in non-latin alphabets?
by reneade09 on Sep 6, 2012 11:46 am • link • report
by AlanF on Sep 6, 2012 11:47 am • link • report
Seems to me that membership numbers are important for how much of operating you will recover, but if we really want to judge the success of these systems we need to look at the number of trips taken in relation to the size of the system.
by MLD on Sep 6, 2012 11:52 am • link • report
But between that and the DC system, I'd say places that get a lot of tourists -- and the Outer Banks is a great example -- have a large built in market for bikesharing.
Benefits for residents and members is just gravy.
by charlie on Sep 6, 2012 11:55 am • link • report
That Miami Beach stat is stunning.
What's more stunning is how successful it is in spite of rusted, crappy bikes and very high daily use charges (and no annual memberships). It seems like the system is designed to gouge tourists or other pleasure riders rather than serve as a real transportation alternative for residents.
by Falls Church on Sep 6, 2012 11:59 am • link • report
It shows that Washingtonians, given the option, will bike.
by Jasper on Sep 6, 2012 12:15 pm • link • report
by Rebecca on Sep 6, 2012 12:58 pm • link • report
by Kevin on Sep 6, 2012 2:31 pm • link • report
There of course no question that there are more users in the DecoBike's Public Bike Share system than all of the other public bike share systems combind in the United States - Why?
1. DecoBike is just simply the best operator.
2. Miami Beach is simply the best location (so far) for a public Bike Share system.
3. The SandVault system is just plain simple to use.
It is nice to see that the facts have finally arrived about Public Bike Share in the United States!
Great job!!
by Derrick on Sep 6, 2012 3:14 pm • link • report
How many trips does DecoBike have right now? CaBi hit a million in 12 months (Deco took 14) and hit two million after 8 more months. So I'd say we're doing pretty well here in DC.
by MLD on Sep 6, 2012 3:32 pm • link • report
Um, these stats show members, not ridership.
by Alex B. on Sep 6, 2012 3:48 pm • link • report
by Dno on Sep 6, 2012 4:17 pm • link • report
The real question is what makes a public Bike Share system successful?
Memberships are a factor, and DecoBike has done a great job marketing and operating (point number 1), but like MLD states ridership is also a factor, If I am not mistaken Miami Beach maybe a very close second to Washington on ridership but that wont last due to the seasonal weather conditions of each city.
(Point number 2).
There are pros and cons to all public bike share systems. I personally think the DecoBike system in Miami Beach is the simplest, but this is a personal opinion, (point number 3).
Another point to be made is the cost for the system to the taxpayers.
By the way I work with SandVault, and have a blog: publicbikeshare.com, but a better place for information is the blog by Paul DiMiao and Russell Maddin http://bike-sharing.blogspot.ca/
by Derrick on Sep 6, 2012 5:52 pm • link • report
by Jerome on Sep 6, 2012 7:29 pm • link • report
Some interesting facts:
DecoBike and CaBi are the only US bikehshares to exceed 1mil trips. To contrast, in April 2012, Bcycle (acording to one of their own press releases) stated that the ridership of all of their programs combined was under 500k which is ironic since Denver was open the for the longest period of time versus any other program.
DecoBike Miami Beach features 14 stations per square mile on average, while CaBi is less than 4 per square mile. Deco also has the highest usage per-bike, per-day on average, with the entire fleet going out about 5 times per day average (not just peak usage).
DecoBike features about 1 bike per 88 residents. CaBi is 1 bike per 1,000 residents. The population of Wash DC is 6 times greater than that of Miami Beach, so you should (in theory) have at least 6 times the number of members and ridership in DC than Miami Beach, but that is definitely not the case. CaBi also runs more bikes and stations for a longer period of time, which of course skews the stats higher.
Deco did not use government funding/tax payer dollars while CaBi used millions of govt funding, hence there is difference in pricing for the end user.
BOTH are amazing programs in their own right. Both are pioneers and risk takers for which efforts have paid off. Hats off to both.
by FactChecker2012 on Sep 7, 2012 12:30 pm • link • report
by aces on Sep 7, 2012 9:41 pm • link • report
OTOH, the pricing system they use is what you need to make such a system work economically, but as you see, it reduces regular membership significantly. OTOH/2, you could argue that you want a lower membership price, like Cabi, to encourage transportational use.
OTOH/3, yes you get the "blocking" issue if you don't provide enough bikes/stations.
OTOH/4, I haven't read the report (yet) so I don't know if they included a few nonUS case studies, which would have made it significantly more useful. E.g., the Montreal system has 2x the membership of Cabi and 3x+ the number of stations and 2x+ the number of bikes.
The basic problem with Cabi is that it doesn't follow the "industry recommended metric" based on Paris of about 29 stations/square mile in the primary service area.
One of the problems with these types of reports is that people try to define every project as successful, which makes it very hard to learn and grow and improve.
by Richard Layman on Sep 9, 2012 11:01 am • link • report
That's only a problem if the "industry recommended metric" is valid. And if it's applicable to DC/Arlington. Who is the recommending authority on this anyway.
It's more accurate to say that this is what Paris does. Not that it is therefore right for DC.
by David C on Sep 9, 2012 1:05 pm • link • report
Add a Comment