Open Navigation

Mobility startups can be equitable, accessible and profitable

Rebecca Bellan 3 years

Mobility should be a right, but too often it’s a privilege. Can startups provide the technology and the systems necessary to help correct this injustice? Shared micromobility, in particular, offers an opportunity for more equitable and accessible mobility within cities, but only if done intentionally. Building equity and accessibility into the business model is not always top of mind for startups looking to pay back investors and make money, and it’s a time-consuming task. Is it still possible to achieve those goals while remaining profitable?

At our TC Sessions: Mobility 2021 event, I sat down with Revel CEO and co-founder Frank Reig, Remix CEO and co-founder Tiffany Chu, and community organizer, transportation consultant and lawyer Tamika L. Butler to discuss how mobility companies should think about equity, why incorporating it from the get-go will save money in the long run, and how they can partner with cities to expand accessible and sustainable mobility.

What does equity mean?

Shared mobility services have often directly appealed to the young, able-bodied and affluent, especially when they first dropped into cities around the world. Older populations and communities of color have been less likely to either have access to or to use shared mobility services, but that’s beginning to change. As mobility startups consider how to weigh providing equitable service while maintaining a profit, Butler outlined the importance of thinking about those who are most vulnerable.

Who isn’t this helping? And it doesn’t matter if that’s a small amount of people, right? So you might say something like, people with disabilities might be proportionally a smaller number of people, Black people might be proportionally a smaller number of people. But if you make things better for folks with a disability, say, by adding curb cuts into sidewalks, that actually makes things better for a ton of people. And so you may be thinking of it … only helping a small group of people. And I think we really have to shift the way we think about equity. It’s not just numbers, who is this going to help the most, it’s … who is often intentionally neglected or pushed aside because their numbers aren’t big enough? (Timestamp: 19:10)

Build equity into the business model from the start

Many startups are just trying to keep their idea alive and start a business at the beginning. They want to solve an essential problem, like lack of socially distanced mobility options, and prove their unit economics so they don’t come back to their investors empty handed. Some companies might even be of the mindset that building equity and accessibility into their business model isn’t their concern. But delivering on those core values will just be the price of doing business in the future, so it certainly should be their concern, Butler said.

I think for companies, I would say that people like to say it takes too much time or costs too much money to do things equitably. But whether or not you’re retrofitting a house or whether or not you’re retrofitting your company, whenever you retrofit something, it costs more money. And so if you think about equity as something you just build in from the beginning, it will actually save you money and take less time than if you try to do it later because someone tells you to do it or you’ve had some controversy or you all of a sudden feel bad. (Timestamp: 4:50)

Reig chimed in to talk about Revel’s access program, which gives 50% off to riders who are on any form of public assistance.

So the access program, for instance, was something from day one. That wasn’t something we added in a year or two later after venture funding … that was still when we were bootstraped, you know, a company in North Brooklyn with 70 mopeds. From day one, I’ve never used the gig economy, customer service agent mechanic battery swapper, from day one, every single person on the team is a regular employee. And I think that’s just a cultural ethos I’ve always wanted in the company. (Timestamp: 6:04)

Micromobility’s potential to alleviate transit deserts

According to Lime’s Comprehensive Transit Equity Report, subway stations, docked bike stations and bus stops are geographically biased toward communities of higher incomes in New York City, even though 58% of low-income New Yorkers rely on the subway and buses as their main form of transportation and spend 10% of their income on it. Chu says micromobility definitely has a role to play in alleviating transit deserts by placing last-mile vehicles in those neighborhoods.

Micromobility is adding optionality to a city’s kit of tools when it comes to addressing mobility issues across the spectrum. I think transit is amazing and will always be the backbone of our cities and communities. And there’s many, many places that have not invested in transit and will take a very long time. For example, you’re probably not going to get a subway system in Arlington, Texas. However, there might be other opportunities, such as medical mobility programs, car sharing programs, on-demand programs like the ones Via provides, to basically knit together a different type of transportation network that might work for its residents in place of the nothing that might have existed prior. (Timestamp: 8:34)

Cities have come a long way in accepting micromobility companies

It’s perhaps understandable that when micromobility companies first began plopping scooters on streets, cities didn’t quite take them seriously. More often than not, the vehicles were a public nuisance, not a method of increasing mobility for a larger population of residents, and they were given the boot. Now, micromobility companies have not only made better, safer vehicles and technology like geofencing that helps keep scooters off of sidewalks, but they’ve also learned how to play ball with government proceedings. As a result, Reig said cities are starting to see dockless electric vehicles as part of the infrastructure, and startups as trusted city partners.

I think something that cities are also learning, as well, is that U.S. companies like Revel, they no longer see us as just a dollar sign, a way to get money or funding. And a great example of that is … Washington, D.C., where our permit per moped … is $0. That would not have been the case three or four years ago. They would have seen us as a way to just generate money, whereas now they see us as a partner to provide transportation in their city. But let’s make sure this company is getting to profitability or else they won’t be here. (Timestamp: 7:03)

Chu also noticed this, particularly in the way cities are embracing new technologies to help them solve old problems, as well as breaking down government silos to work together to advance mobility.

In Remix, what we have seen is that traditionally, if you think about how city staff are structured, there was historically like the transit agency, and that department would basically be in charge of running the buses and the subway if it existed, and that was it. And then there was a separate city agency that dealt with the city streets, and that might be the Department of Public Works or Department of Transportation or what have you. And then there might have been like another … fancy department … like the Department of Innovation that got to deal with all the cool bleeding-edge tech that might have dealt with mobility. And what we’re noticing at Remix in our back end is that all of these … departments are becoming stakeholders and ushering in a new era of mobility. They’re collaborating with each other, sending plans to each other, commenting on them. You know, the agency is looking at not only transit, but working with the city, who’s working with the mayor’s Office of Innovation on micromobility. And all that needs to really be thought [through] holistically together, or else you’re just gonna have a siloed resident community experience. (Timestamp: 9:52)

Cities still have a long way to go

That said, it’s also the city’s job to ensure that they’re putting equity and accessibility priorities top of mind in selecting and deploying micromobility programs, Butler said.

I also think that we need cities to step up. And we need to make sure that cities are, you know, setting up systems where it’s not advantageous for providers to just check a box and deploy, but to actually do the concrete work. (Time stamp: 4:34)

In cities, the best cycling infrastructure tends to be found in wealthier neighborhoods, even though low-income households in America are more likely to cycle. Chu has a background in urban planning and spoke to the importance of infrastructure in creating a more accessible micromobility environment, one that not only protects those that are already riding, but also encourages more riders to embrace greener forms of mobility.

I would say one very important piece of the puzzle that I’ve been devoting a lot of my brain cells to recently is how to make it easier for cities to build safer infrastructure for all the new forms of mobility that are arriving, or have already arrived, and we’re not ready for them. So what that means is things like, very simple things, not super high tech: a protected bike lane, maybe even a protected intersection, if you want to go that crazy. And everything from, you know, shared spaces to mobility hubs, and what parking for mobility hubs looks like. All of those small environmental design pieces of urban planning are so crucial to nudging behavior change in a way that allows people to embrace … the most possible multimodality options that they can possibly embrace. But if you look around today, in most places, especially in the U.S., multimodal is a foreign term because it’s basically just cars and walking. And if your infrastructure continues to be designed with those two modes in mind, we’re never going to be able to get ourselves out of the climate crisis. (Timestamp: 26:04)

Engaging with communities is non-negotiable

Companies can say they want to be equitable until they’re blue in the face, but that means nothing if they don’t do the actual work. You can’t just increase the number of vehicles in a low-income neighborhood that no one in the company is familiar with without first seeking input from residents. This might take some time, but it’s non-negotiable, Reig said.

It’s just something that has to get done. profitability aside, everything else aside — you have to engage with communities. You know, for instance, in Brooklyn and Queens, which is probably the one area of any market we’ve been in where I personally have been in front of most of those community boards, as we’ve grown as a company, my team has sort of taken that on in places like San Francisco and Miami, but in Brooklyn and Queens where we started in grew and 2018 and 2019, that was me at those community board meetings, listening, understanding what we’re doing wrong. And I think one of the great things when you’re in front of those community boards is that you’re not going to please everybody. But it’s also interesting, where if you’re just there to listen, and you’re genuine, and you actually are trying to understand what is going wrong, and let me try and fix that, folks in the audience will stand up and support you. (Timestamp: 15:28)

Butler talked about her experience bringing bike-shares to low-income neighborhoods.

If you talk to the grandmother who’s looking out of her window, the teens hanging out on the corner, the mom sitting on the stoop watching their kids, they can tell you a lot about transportation in the community, they can tell you a lot about what’s happening on the street and where the gaps are. So I think part of it is just listening to people. When bike-share first launched, people were unsure. You took cities like LA, where some of our low-income communities of color were like, These things just showed up. You heard about this in in New York, too. This just showed up outside the projects. Are they even for us? We don’t know. But then you went to a place like Philly, where from the beginning, they partnered with community-based organizations, and every bike-share station looked different. But every bike-share station also had kind of like an OG in the community, who was like, No, no, I’ve been part of this. Let me tell you, these bikes are for us. You can tell they’re for us based on you know, the art around here that so and so down the street did, or whatever. … How do you listen to people? And how do you involve people from the beginning so that it doesn’t feel like there’s just something landing on them? You’re not just using technology to solve a problem they didn’t even know they had, but you’re actually listening to them articulate themselves, what their problems are, and how what you might be able to provide could be a solution and then you’re looking at a “co-powerment model,” not an empowerment model. (Timestamp: 13:47)

Asking the hard questions

The Black Lives Matter movement resulted in companies across all sectors talking openly about equity and trying to make good on their public promises. But Butler said that by looking outward into communities before looking internally at your own staff and practices, you can do more harm than good.

So I do think that people have started thinking this is more of an issue in the last year as it’s, you know, captivated the nation. But I would ask people who are just turning to this work, I would say, please keep doing it. And you need to spend resources and time on it. But also ask yourself why you weren’t doing it before, who you were ignoring, who you weren’t listening to. And as you sit around your companies, and you look at the decision-making tables, do you have diversity? Because all the people at the lower levels, the mechanics, the folks who are out in the field, the folks who are doing your outreach, are they diverse? But when you get further up, is there not inclusion because none of the decision-makers reflect the diversity of the folks you’re hoping to serve? (Timestamp: 22:31)

On the challenges of being as accessible as possible

Revel’s access program has helped save riders thousands of dollars collectively, said Reig. But in certain communities where Revel operates, the presence of an access program might not be enough, in large part because of challenges around obtaining government assistance, especially if they’re from immigrant backgrounds and don’t speak English as a first language. How do they know to look out for these opportunities? In addition, almost all shared micromobility modes require a smartphone to use, as well as a debit or credit card. This is a problem in neighborhoods like the Bronx, where 19% of residents are unbanked or underbanked. But Reig said offering customers a chance to pay with cash isn’t in his company’s hands.

Just to talk, like what is wrong with sort of maybe the macro system, this is not a bike or a scooter. This is a motor vehicle. So our insurance carrier doesn’t allow us anyone that doesn’t have a debit or credit card. We also allow debit cards; most rental car companies don’t even allow that. So the fact that it’s a motor vehicle, we have to talk differently than bikes and scooters. And there’s a structural issue there with insurance. So that’s something to keep in mind. (Timestamp: 17:26)

On pitching equity to funders

The conversation around equity and accessibility is becoming far more mainstream, even in the upper echelons of venture capitalism. That said, funders want to see a return on their investments, and they may have a bias against the stigma that says equitable does not equal profitable. Chu said instead of worrying about how a funder will react, stand strong in your values and seek out funders who are aligned with them.

I would say it is definitely illuminating about the funder, if you’re asking questions like that. I think for folks who are trying to support civic tech or urban tech, or just technology in communities in general, if you don’t understand the value of equity, as somebody who’s pushing capital into the ecosystem, I think that person kind of needs to reevaluate who they are and what they care about. If it’s not the first thing that they raise as the No. 1 priority, it should be one of them. I do think that there’s a really deep argument to be made around longevity and the amount of trustworthiness that you as a brand are building within the community with regards to the public sector. Gov tech is one of those communities. If you’re working with the government, in some sort of fashion, it’s not going to be a customer that comes and goes; they’re going to want to partner with you for a long time because cities don’t go out of business. … So I think my response to funders is, if you don’t care about equity, you’re probably in the wrong business. (Timestamp: 20:14)

You can read the entire transcript here.

Related sessions from TechCrunch Mobility 2021: