- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
The theory is simple: instead of buying a household item or a piece of clothing or some equipment you might use once or twice, you take it out and return it.
The theory is simple: instead of buying a household item or a piece of clothing or some equipment you might use once or twice, you take it out and return it.
Even better would be that Arcimoto MUV thing. Sadly it appears they went bankrupt
Cool
These things always fail because ultimately it’s just a motorcycle with extra garbage.
And how is that a bad thing?
No one wants it. The people that are comfortable in a car don’t want to be outside and will replace their current car with another car. The people with a motorcycle don’t want it because they already have a bike. The cyclists would rather just have a cargo bike. Ultimately, there’s no market for these things, so they always, always fail.
Ultimately, people would rather buy a Caterham than one of those stupid things for about the same price.
https://caterhamcars.com/en/find-buy?model=Any
There is a roof. People aren’t getting exposed. There are also optional door coverings I’ve seen.
The rest of your argument sounds like it works against any new vehicle purchase, not to mention the added comfort this has over many bikes. At around $19000, the FUV is cheaper than any of these silly, roofless and less capacious Caterhams you’ve linked. Not to mention gas prices.
LOL mate you don’t have to convince me. Your argument is irrelevant [just look at sales.] and I don’t give a shit.
Looks a lot like a BMW prototype I saw almost 20 years ago. I kept hoping they’d bring it to market, but I guess it’s safe to give up on it by now!
They brought it to market for six glorious years but couldn’t achieve mass-production and spent way too much on a ton of SKUs most people don’t want before they basically went bankrupt.