Talk:Carsharing

message: Traditional rental companies using an app to rent by the hour is not "car sharing".  Turo and Getaround, where car owners are connected to people who want to use their cars are car-sharing.  It's frustrating to see coverage of traditional rental companies taking over this article and this nomenclature. --Treekids (talk) 18:07, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hourly rental companies 

message: Tedernst, Jmabel.  Is there anyway that I can ask the two of you to lay off on this and give me say ten days to get it straight? I think by now you should have at least the first blush of the idea that I maybe know a mite [more about  our topic] than you do - nothing wrong with that, eh? We also have seen that I have a lot to learn in order to get this in full order. But it is frustrating for me when you go in and start to mess with subtle matters that require real hands-on expertise – and dear friends, I do have that. So, if for these next days you would just be so kind as NOT to make major editorial change but just give me useful hints and guidelines if I am too far off your WP path, which I promise I shall give my full attention. In the meantime, I can concentrate in the challenging task of giving you something you might end up being more than satisfied with. Something, better, denser, more useful than what you may have had in mind a couple of weeks ago when you first started on this bold venture.  (I would, and do, do the same for my brightest PhD students, so maybe a bit of reciprocity might be in order?)  PS. If you want to hop over to [World Carshare]  you’ll see on the top menu that we have put a Wikipedia link and are drawing the attention to our world forum to this entry – warts and all. I am hopeful that useful information will continue to flow in which either they will entry themselves or pass on to me for integration into the entry during this truce period.  ericbritton 16:24, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A truce would imply that we have a conflict.  I do not perceive any conflict here.  We're all just people collaborating on building an encyclopedia.  I will continue to edit to improve articles and I expect others to do the same.  I'm very glad to be working with you!  My philosophy is always to be bold. Tedernst | talk 18:02, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carsharing - Modest proposal 

message: please see Template:Car sharing to edit the section with the worldwide list - this might want to be made into a box the way most other templates are, but since it was a section before, I left it as a section for the time being - plus, I don't know how to make tables -- Tedernst | talk 21:13, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't normally turn sections of articles into templates like this. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:39, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, that's why maybe it needs to be a box.  The same section (different versions) appeared on 3 of the pages.  Clearly that doesn't make any sense.  Tedernst | talk 06:52, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's a box now. Tedernst | talk 17:12, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table carsharing organisations and countries/regions they cover 

message: I've cut this French-language link Covoiturage avec 123envoiture.com from the article, along with some French-language hype that went with it. Unless I misunderstand, this is about ridesharing. At the moment, our Ridesharing just redirects to Carpool. Since ridesharing is broader than that, we might want to start an article at Ridesharing (with a link to Carpool) that talks about other kinds of ridesharing. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:39, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Covoiturage/Ridesharing

message: The car club link doesn't appear to have anything to do with car sharing.  Is this a different use of the term?  What do we do about this? Tedernst | talk 18:04, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've placed a disambiguation note at the top of the car club article which points here. -- Adz|talk 04:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  differences with language 

message: Basically what I wanted to do was to develop – with a view to being as accurate as a respected international reference source on this important mobility strategy should be -- a more compete version – on the ground that your title “Worldwide car sharing companies and cooperatives” in fact covers only about ten percent of the carsharing operatives in the world.  I hope that I have not hurt your feelings on this, since indeed it was a good move as the entry was taking shape. 
 
I would have not dared do this Ted if I did not have a pretty fair background on the topic, which I invite you to check out at http://worldcarshare.com. And as you might well guess given the amount of time and attention have given to this rather strange little topic – but there is far more to it than one might at first guess, and for that have a look at our New Mobility Agenda at http://www.newmobility.org – I actually know not only each of the projects on that good initial list of yours but also the people who have worked so hard to bring them to life. Carsharing is not an easy deal, and the people who manage to keep them alive and in some cases even to prosper are outstanding social innovators.  It’s a tough life for them.
 
As to the UK, actually they are now using both car club and carsharing (and community car share and carplus and and), which is only natural since over the last two years or so it has finally, and at a considerable delay relatively to most of the more advanced European countries, started to take off. I had originally put all that inside on the grounds that it does not strike me as bottom line information on carsharing per se, but if you like it there well that’s just fine by me.  
 
As to “autopartage” this term is increasingly being used across the French speaking world, and if you go to http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopartage you will see better how that is working its way out.  (Incidentally we have just created a French national carsharing NGO which you can see at http://www.ecoplan.org/autopartage -- the Forum International de l'Autopartage. The reason we are doing this is that France being what it is, this kind of structure is needed if we are to get into the big leagues.  (I attach a copy of a background talk that I gave at a meeting just organized last week at the French Senate to honor this new initiative.
 
Finally, and to get a taste of what is going on world wide I can point you to the last three “external links” which identify more than  600 cities world wide with carshare operations today. Ain’t that a pleasure to know that this kind of progress is going on.  And the fact is that the North American model is only one of many and beyond that there are actually several different models currently going in the States (San Francisco presently has three competing suppliers) while Canada is hardly less varied in its approach. In fact if you compare the present Wikipedia Cities list (last item under externals) with its older version, you will see that we are taking the countries one at a time and bringing them up to date. And as possible with the corresponding web sites.  Now THAT becomes a useful resource.
 
Let me close this probably too long note – but I wanted to do you honor for your good work – with the following short statement that comes from the opening page of World Carshare:
 
Why we support carsharing? 
Why does The Commons support a concept that may to some appear to be so off-beat and marginal as carsharing? Simple! We think it's a great, sustainable, practical mobility idea whose time has come and whose potential impact is quite simply huge. Carsharing: the missing link in your city's sustainable transport system.
 
Hope this works for you, and maybe we can even get you to follow the flow from the exchanges on the World Carshare “Idea Factory” to which more than five hundred people involved in carsharing world wide are members. I think you should find it quite useful for your own interests in the field.
 
That’s it. Back to work.  And whatever you want to do with carsharing on the Wiki is just fine by me.  I am an anarchist at heart so who I am to tell anyone else how to live. And especially not on a Wiki. ;-)
 
Best,
 
Eric Britton
 
PS and finally, Jane Jacobs?  I know her very well and for many years, having collaborated with her on a number of occasions. If you are interested to talk about her and her wonderful approach to all these important things, give me a telephone number and  a good time to call. I will be pleased to share some of my memories of all that with you, and the lessons I have learned from her.
ericbritton 08:23, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  differences with table “Worldwide car sharing companies and cooperatives”  

message: Looks great Wildcat. I am getting there and the entry at the same time.  As you will have spotted I am one of those who learns by doing and then when he actually does it proceeds in iterations.  Couple of points that I would like to share with you quickly, if you will:.
: 1. I like the “Contents” and see how it works.  Any problem now that you have added the (absolutely necessary, and whatever was I thinking about) Reference section, if I kick over some of the sources that do that job into that category.  These are great since they serve to give a variety of perspectives – important here because of the great heterogeneity of these operations. We don’t want anyone who is genuinely curious to get the idea that there is just one set of perspectives and one basic model. Just ain’t so.
:2. As to the ‘origin’ of the famous quote, I guess as authoritative a single source as we can find is just maybe me (though I prefer to cite the World Carshare Collaborate rather than myself – I always feel that only schmucks quote themselves).  But after all, who knows more about it than we do?  Also since WCS thus becomes the cited source, we can use exactly our wording (which incidentally has been on the opening page of http://worldcarshare.com untouched since 1999 – and believe me if it did not rhyme with the people we have coming into that program, we would have been hooted out of the ballpark a long time ago.)
:3. Next and before I take this any further, I will be a good lad and get back to your “How to write a great article” entry and its extensions.  (I believe the expression is “Duh”)
:4.  If you have a minute to have a quick look at The Commons: Open Society Sustainability Initiative at www.ecoplan.org you will see that what we try to do is create ‘knowledge and action zones” (poorly said Eric, but it’s late) which invite a very wide range of people with interests in the specific area (carsharing being just one example) to “build knowledge and consensus to support change”.  Again, the basic themes are (a) better understanding technology change as it effects people in their day to day lives. And (b) the difficult struggle toward sustainable development and social justice.
:5. I am now (as we used to say in Mississippi cogitatin’ on a new project that you can catch at http://www.xwork.org (New Ways to Work in an Information Society) – the specific goal of which will (may) be to create and help propel a “Self-Organizing Collaborative Network” that will look specifically and creatively at improved the supply/demand mesh of IT and SD (sustainable development).  One of the main reasons for doing this is that most of the international organizations and bilateral aid programs just do not seem to be able to get anything of much use done.  And I think that if we bring together a couple of hundred bright and diverse people and put them in the right learning/collaboration environment we may be able to blaze some useful new trails. The site at present is just getting underway, and certainly needs work and maybe some cutting and dicing. But the reason I bring this to you attention is that there are definitely some important object lessons to be learned from you great on-going experiment.  (And who knows, you might even be interested to keep an eye out on this one as it moves along.
Sorry to be so loquacious, but I am half Irish.  Good thing it’s only half, and good night.
ericbritton 22:46, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beyond sourcing 

message: I very much appreciate the more structured framework that you have now created here. It's a big improvement. But on the other hand we have some real problems with what is now being proposed on the content side. Let me take one example alone: the History section.
Sorry but this information is seriously inaccurate. The fact is that there is a great deal of mis-information that pops up cheerfully in the media and other sources on this new mobility form. However at this point since I am not a seasoned member here, I quite frankly do not know what to do next. On the one hand, I really don't want to hurt anyone's feelings or dampen their enthusiasm. Life is too short for that. But I would hope that there is a premium here on accuracy. Let me know and I'll get to work on it. (Incidentally this is important for us in terms of accuracy, since I have popped the reference right at the top menu of the World Carshare site, and I certainly cannot leave it there if it says in this form.  I would not be able to stand the laughter.) Salamaat, Shalom, and Peace on Earth. ericbritton 16:27, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improved organization, but . . . 

message: One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that, in the event of a collision, a user will not be able to take advantage of his or her credit card's collision damage waiver coverage. This is true of at least Visa and Mastercard -- the underwriters for both companies' collision programs have rules that explicitly exempt car-sharing services from coverage. Thus, a member could find herself staring down a rather large insurance deductable, as I once did.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.39.221.20 (talk • contribs) 
:Some carsharing programs have their own arrangement with the credit card companies. Cooperative Auto Network in Vancouver waives the deductible if the member's bill is paid pre-authorised with a Visa Gold card, for instance. I'm not sure how to work this into the article or where a reference for the mention could be found, though. — Saxifrage ✎ 19:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Before you feed any of this into the article, be aware that insurance is very country-specific. I have never heard of credit card companies giving automatic collision damage waiver coverage, where does this happen? With Mobility, third party is covered (which is a legal requirement), you pay the first CHF 2500 for damage to the car, but you can reduce this to CHF 300 by paying an additional CHF 125 per year []. And they do not accept credit cards to pay bills. TiffaF 08:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drawbacks to Carsharing 

message: The introductory sentence currently says "Carsharing is a system where a fleet of cars (or other vehicles) is jointly-owned by the users".  While reading through the discussion, I saw an earlier disagreement over referring to carsharing as a cooperative.  Unfortunately, I do not feel that the current text is much of an improvement; it merely says "cooperative" with different words.  Furthermore, it's probably completely incorrect when describing a commercial CSO.  An alternate phrasing, while still not perfect, might be: "Carsharing is a system where a fleet of vehicles is available for use by the members".  I took out the text in parentheses, since the name "carsharing" implies clearly enough that cars are the primary types of vehicle.  --Scott McNay 03:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wrong. You apparently is the owner of a car rental company, and have hijacked the term car sharing to promote your business. Such things happen to language, and it might be reflected in the sentence in this way: "Carsharing originally was system where a fleet of cars (or other vehicles) is jointly-owned by the users. The system's relative success has later also made car rental companies adopt the term". Anyone agrees? Gabriel Kielland (talk) 22:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: First, don't make personal attacks. Before you posted your commnent I had changed the intro sentence to reflect that fact that many car sharing organizations are for-profit companies. A note on the history of car sharing would be appropriate, but it would have to be verified by reliable sources (especially a claim that the success of cooperatives led to commercial entry in the market). MrVibrating (talk) 22:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro sentence 

message: Aside from being completely uncited, I think some of the points here are pretty weak and have little relevance to the actual uses of carshares. I'm definitely not saying this section shouldn't exist (there ARE obvious limitations to such a system), I'm just saying that these critiques should be specific to the goals of carshares, and not be a general comparison between the obvious limitations of carshare membership as compared to the freedom afforded by full-on car ownership.  This makes sense, right?  Specifically, some of the "disadvantages" focus on how it's not very feasible on a daily basis.  From my knowledge, people who use these types of services don't need these cars on a daily basis.  It's more for the occasional user.  Please disabuse me if I'm wrong.
Specifically: "it is felt to be irrelevant given the scope of the problems that especially the larger and more traffic strangled mega-cities face."
While the impetus for many users is definitely a concern for the environment, some users just do it because it's cheaper.  Therefore, the overall impact (or lack thereof) of the carshare is not a drawback.  I think this one could just be reworded.
In general, the lack of citations is what bothers me.. some good points are brought up, but this reeks of OR--Hraefen Talk 06:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've rewritten this and combined it with other sections, removing a lot of problematic, unreferenced claims. -- Beland (talk) 20:08, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Disadvantages and limitations section: no sources and kinda bad

message: Ok, let's revisit this quote: "if you live in a city and drive less than ten thousand kilometers a year, you should probably look into carsharing".  I haven't looked to see if it's in the current version of the article, but it seems too good to leave out, and if it really is correct, it should be fairly easy to whip up a formula to back up the statement (the exact result will vary with location), and someone can plug in sample numbers (such as from the American Automobile Association) and put it on an authoritative website that WP can then refer to (Eric, are you awake?).
Here is what I came up with.  I'll let someone else do the algebra to determine the breakeven point for distance (or just let Excel do a whatif calculation, which is what I'd do).  That'll give a number that can be quoted if someone does NOT drive less after joining a CSO.  Don't forget to document the reduced average distance driven when people join a CSO (several CSOs have quotes for this on their websites); that'll give a second breakeven-point value.
Operating costs per kilometer:
  Fuel
  Maintenance
  Tires
Ownership costs per year:
  Insurance
  License, registration, taxes
  Depreciation
  Finance charges
Ownership costs per kilometer:
  Ownership cost per year / Average kilometers driven per year
Cost per kilometer:
  Operating costs per kilometer + Ownership costs per kilometer
Annual cost per year for ownership:
  Ownership cost per year + Operating costs per kilometer * Average kilometers driven per year
Carsharing annual time charge:
  Average number of hours spent driving per year * CSO hourly charge
  (each trip should be rounded up to the next hour)
Carsharing annual distance charge:
  Average kilometers driven per year * CSO per-kilometer charge
Average charge per year for carsharing:
  Carsharing annual time charge + carsharing annual distance charge
  (The actual charge may be less, because many CSOs have various discounts)
--Scott McNay (talk) 05:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revisiting 10,000 km 

message: Request to change the title of this article to carsharing (US). I am planning to write an article called 'Car-sharing (UK)' which will relate to the British use of the term car-sharing, which US users would know as 'carpooling'. Currently, UK users will read the 'carsharing' article, which describes what we know as 'car clubs'. To avoid confusion I propose there being a separate UK and US version of the article.
Claxt (talk) 16:36, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change name request 

message: 319,000 members
7,500 vehicles
204.52.215.13 (talk) 22:36, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 2009 North American Stats

message: The UK definition of car-sharing is when two or more people share a car journey, (car pooling is the term used in the US). The definition given on this Wikipedia page of car sharing is what would be called  a car club in the UK. I am concerned that people in the UK will be getting mislead by the article. 
I have produced an article on the topic of car-sharing (UK definition) and would like to post it online so that UK users are able to be find the relevant info. Are there any suggestions of how this could be done? As currently car pooling has some info which is correct for UK users but this terminolgy is not widely used in the UK. Car-sharing is but this obviously leads to the US definition of the term. Any thoughts on how to resolve this would be much appreciated, thanks Car-share10 (talk) 11:51, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There is already a note at the head of the article that says 'For the activity of private sharing arrangements between car owners, see Carpool' which should take such people to the proper article. I don't think anything else is needed. - MrOllie (talk) 15:34, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Car-sharing page not relevant for UK users 

message: Would you object to an alteration to first line to make absolutely clear which nations this applies too? ‘Car sharing (or Carsharing) in the United States, Canada and some other nations is defined as a model of car rental where people rent cars for short periods of time, often by the hour.’
I believe this would make 100% clear whether this was the correct site of reference for particular users and not be detrimental to the current article that exists.Car-share10 (talk) 14:36, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That version makes it sound like Carsharing only exists in certain nations, which is not true. What exactly is the problem? Give UK readers a little credit, as soon as they read the definition in the first line they'll figure out if they are in the right place or not. I also note that in the description section the article already states: 'owever, there is a slight terminological hitch in the UK where the term car sharing (two words in this usage) is used for what in the U.S. is called "ride sharing".', which is probably the right place for such a clarification. We don't need another one in the lede. - MrOllie (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further discussion:Car-sharing page not relevant for UK users 

message: I have created an article on the new international CarSharing Association.  Anyone who would like to assist with it would be greatly appreciated.  MakeBelieveMonster (talk) 03:20, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  CarSharing Association 

message: I’ve added table detailing the major carsharing companies, which is well sourced and organized. It adds encyclopedic understanding of the topic to the reader by knowing who are the major companies in this industry, which market they operates in, their size, etc. This is a foundational knowledge required to every industry or marketMushmush123 (talk) 20:31, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry but I'm with MrOllie on this. If the references were better quality - such as from a recognised industry body - it would really help. (And a word of advice - please use the  templates in keeping with the rest of the article instead of your rather odd citation style) --Biker Biker (talk) 22:39, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  CarSharing Companies 

message: Perhaps Snappcar should be mentioned at the see also section and an article should be made ? See [htttp://www.snappcar.nl/ Snappcar]
KVDP (talk) 09:48, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Snappcar seems to be an example of Peer-to-peer carsharing. There are many such companies around. Gabriel Kielland (talk) 15:31, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: see also

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Carsharing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110810030924/http://www.independent.co.uk:80/life-style/motoring/volkswagen-becomes-latest-automaker-to-enter-carsharing-business-2283656.html to http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/volkswagen-becomes-latest-automaker-to-enter-carsharing-business-2283656.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130122035859/http://ir.zipcar.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=719904 to http://ir.zipcar.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=719904
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120301110941/http://www.organicgreenandnatural.com/2009/09/16/car-sharing-good-for-the-environment-and-the-budget/ to http://www.organicgreenandnatural.com/2009/09/16/car-sharing-good-for-the-environment-and-the-budget
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:26, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There has been some earlier discussion of including examples of Peer-to-peer carsharing. This is an increasingly common alternative to cooperatives or commercially-owned fleet models. I would like to add some information on it. Would this fit within the scope of this page, in the group's opinion? Willdavies1 (talk) 04:29, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  New models of car sharing to be referenced? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Carsharing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131021081101/http://76.12.4.249/artman2/uploads/1/UCD-ITS-RP-98-14.pdf to http://76.12.4.249/artman2/uploads/1/UCD-ITS-RP-98-14.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160207050811/http://pubs.its.ucdavis.edu/download_pdf.php?id=1283 to http://pubs.its.ucdavis.edu/download_pdf.php?id=1283
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:39, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I stubbed List of carsharing organizations. It could use some help in terms of what columns should exist. I will then try to add info. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:32, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of carsharing organizations 

message: Where are the cars actually placed and made available by employees ? At the company car park ? But then how does the company deliver these vehicles at the employee house when he needs it (probably not by another employee as he needs to get home too, so would then need to take public transport or a bike, perhaps with an autonomous drive system that delivers it, but these are not yet widely available and most governments don't allow legal use of them -when operating fully autonomous-)? Or just by a scheme in which the car is taken home by the employee himself to his driveway ? But then how is the car shared with other employees ? Just by setting a rent out limit to say a few days to a week per month allowing other employees to rent the car the other weeks of the month ? Or by cooperation with existing carsharing companies, of which there may be cars placed and available near the employees house or in his street ? The latter seems to be the most effective as the car can then be shared maximally, so multiple times per day by different people. But in the latter case, why would an employee use the company's carsharing service rather then a regular carsharing company ? Is there financial benefit for him to do so, i.e. lower fee due to the government tax benefit that may be given to companies and/or perhaps lower maintenance cost due to having multiple (similar) cars ?
Clarify in article section
--Genetics4good (talk) 09:56, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: By conventional companies