Dockless Bikeshare is a thing now.

[MetroShadow]

I've had the pleasure to not only work on Transit and TDM programs in Chicago, but in the Bay Area. Now overseeing transit programs at UC Berkeley, I've had the pleasure (or dread, depending on how I feel) to field questions to my students about dockless bikeshare programs. Not that it is a problem in Chicago-proper (Divvy is popular and I miss it), perhaps a lot of the suburbs (that aren't Evanston) might want to start a Dockless BikeShare program of their own.

One thing that stands out: gotta read your audience and that Chicago is vastly different than the Bay Area. Accessibility and low-income program access is another, but you really don't want to have eleventy billion bikes clog the ROW. Thankfully I predict that the competition may eat each other or will fold in the next year. 

More here.

[Busjack]

It isn't so much competition, since  the  cost of entry is nearly nil, but the issues raised in the article about vandalism, theft,  and is the system reliable if one can drop off a bike anywhere. If you are assuming suburbs, what happens if the  bike is left in Robbins, for example? If not destroyed, would anyone go there to hire a  bike?

You being on campus makes it  a much easier proposition (if that's the comparison).

[MetroShadow]

2 hours ago, Busjack said:

It isn't so much competition, since  the  cost of entry is nearly nil, but the issues raised in the article about vandalism, theft,  and is the system reliable if one can drop off a bike anywhere. If you are assuming suburbs, what happens if the  bike is left in Robbins, for example? If not destroyed, would anyone go there to hire a  bike?

You being on campus makes it  a much easier proposition (if that's the comparison).

Theoretically, yes. We still have to work with the City of Berkeley due to exclusivity agreements with Motivate (the parent company of FordGoBike and Divvy). We can still launch, but when it comes to off-campus trips, we have to be cognizant of spaces and use of parking spots. This is something that many companies have reached out to us, but still need to solve that problem - you're only as effective as to telling your clientele to "park within the geofenced zones."

As a separate entity from, say, the City of Berkeley; but thinking in a Chicago context is that there's not much competition, unless say, if you wanted to do it in Schaumburg - if you leave a bike in Robbins, you'll be paying a surcharge (or, what some companies do is write it off). It's hilarious what I've found in the Bay Area as of late (either on fire, in a lake, or a chop shop). 

[Busjack]

The issue in Chicago (and derivatively for Evanston and Oak Park) is while CDOT owns the bikes, someone is administering it, and I suppose is paying the city a fee for doing so. This sounds analogous to the city barely tolerating Uber and Lyft until the city let them have privileges at the airports if they paid the fee. Although the article suggested that Washington DC wouldn't mind competition with itself, Chicago will. This is similar to the on-campus, off-campus situation you mentioned.

As  you acknowledge, whoever invests will have to expect the write-offs.