The first 200 to use the link in the description get 20% off their annual premium subscription.

You've probably seen them around. Electric scooters dumped just about anywhere.

Litter bikes. Litter bikes. They've been littering the streets lately. And by littering, I mean littering. The scooter invasion. Wheel-mageddon.

They've got the green ones and the orange ones and it's basically litter.

They are bringing out the worst in some people.

Last September, the city of Santa Monica, California woke up to a surprise: sidewalks

everywhere were filled with small, electric scooters you could rent by the minute.

It's not an entirely new idea, Scooters, in some form, have been around forever.

And you've long been able to rent them in cities like San Fransisco.

But this company, called Bird, made it irresistibly cheap.

And simple.

All you do is download their app, point your phone at the scooters' QR code, I guess

we finally found a use for those, and off you go at about 15 miles an hour.

They're fast, convenient, if I'm honest, a little bit ridiculous looking, and… a

lot of fun.

Unless you're an investor, In which case, scooters are no laughing matter.

Bird became a unicorn, a startup with a billion dollar valuation, faster than Uber, Airbnb,

or Facebook.

Actually, faster than any company in history.

And today, still just over a year since it was founded, it's valued at over two billion

dollars,

about as much as Reddit or 23AndMe.

Remember, we're talking about scooters.

and it's just one of many, including Spin, Lime, who is also a unicorn, JUMP, and about

a dozen others.

Meanwhile, Google, Uber, and Lyft have all invested millions of dollars.

Now, depending on who you ask, these are either:

ridiculous numbers for barely 1-year-old startups in a fad industry,

or, smart investments in what's clearly the future of transportation.

So, which is it?

Are scooters a useful means of mobility or an invasion of our sidewalks?

Let's imagine you live in Seattle, say, an apartment here in the Queen Anne neighborhood.

And you work downtown, here at Amazon corporate headquarters.

You could walk a couple of blocks and take the bus, but it'll cost two dollars and

seventy-five cents, or five fifty a day.

And it'll take at least 20 minutes, which is just as slow as walking.

Biking would be quick and cheap, but then you have to store, lock, and maintain it.

Plus, no-one wants to arrive at work or school sweaty.

So, scooters are a nice alternative.

It's faster than walking, Cheaper than the bus, and more convenient than a bike.

Maybe not revolutionary, but pretty handy.

Now, let's say, you live here, near Lakewood.

In this case, the bus can drop you off right at work.

And the beauty of public transportation is that it reduces redundancy.

Even if nobody commutes the exact same route, there's always going to be a lot of overlap

in the middle,

If we all share 90% of our journeys, it's weird that we take 100% of it in… our own

separate cars.

So, putting people together saves time, space, and money.

Here's the thing though: Transit is designed for the average person, but almost no-one

is exactly the average person.

In other words, it's mostly convenient for most people, but totally convenient only for

a few.

Because, if the bus stopped everywhere, it would also… stop being useful.

In this example, it's a 24-minute walk from home.

This is The First and Last Mile problem,

The hardest and least efficient part of a trip is the beginning and the end - getting

to a transit station, and then, to your final destination.

In most cities, the obvious solution is to walk or bike.

But many people just… don't.

It's too far away, or too inconvenient, so, they drive instead.

That's probably what you'd end up doing here, even though transit is technically available.

Now, whether scooters are ultimately good or bad kinda depends on what exactly they're

replacing.

If people scoot instead of walking or biking, like in the first example, they've lost

some exercise and gained some convenience.

Not a huge win or loss.

But if scooters replace cars, that's a different story.

That would mean less traffic congestion and fewer carbon emissions.

Of course, it sounds ridiculous, Even with their 20 or 30-mile range, they aren't really

practical for long trips.

But, they don't actually have to be.

Not directly.

If scooters make it easier to get to and from the bus station, you're more likely to take

it.

All they need to do is make transit a more desirable option.

The effect is fewer cars on the road.

That's especially useful in underserved and far away neighborhoods.

Here, scooters aren't just a novelty, they're a means to greater mobility.

Lime showed this in 2017, when it reported that 40% of riders started or ended their

bike rides at public transit stations.

All of this is possible because there's always a scooter nearby.

Instead of docks or stations, you pick them up and leave them wherever.

Problem is... well, people pick them up and leave them wherever.

Technically, you're required to wear a helmet, park out of people's way, and not drive

on the sidewalk.

In practice, ehh, not so much.

I've yet to see anyone wear a helmet, and many streets just… don't have bike lanes.

Companies can explain the rules, but they can't enforce them.

Sooo… cities aren't the biggest fans.

It doesn't help that many of these companies move in to an area before getting permission,

hoping that by the time they notice, people will have already gotten used to them.

If this sounds familiar, it's no coincidence.

Bird's founder previously worked for Lyft and Uber, who famously used the same strategy.

This time, cities were ready.

They've already been banned in San Francisco, Beverly Hills, Cambridge, and Columbus.

And, like Uber, there isn't much to set companies apart.

They all cost the same dollar to start plus 15 cents a minute,

They even have similar sounding 4-letter names.

So, which scooter do people choose?

Well, the one that's in front of them.

The first app you download will also likely be your last.

Why bother with several?

That's why everything is happening so quickly: they saw what happened with Uber.

This is their second chance, and nobody wants to be left out.

In China, it happened with bikes.

Companies dumped them on every street and corner until there was more bike than sidewalk.

Demand just couldn't keep up with supply, and now they sit in trash piles so big they'd

impress Wall-E.

But with enough market share, the economics are good:

Most companies use the Xiaomi M365, which, let's assume they buy in bulk for about

$250.

Lime says they're used an average of 8 to 12 times a day, so let's say, 10 rides,

at an average of about $3 each.

Of course, there's also charging.

Anyone can sign up to become a charger, or as Lime calls them, juicers.

At night, they pick them up off the streets, take them home, and plug them in for about

$5-10 a scooter.

So, we'll subtract seven fifty.

That means the average scooter makes something like twenty-two fifty a day.

And pays for itself in under two weeks.

Even accounting for things like maintenance and theft, which Lime says affects less than

1% of its scooters, there's money to be made.

But what's most interesting about The Scooter Wars, may have nothing to do with the scooters

themselves.

Companies aren't just competing for space on the sidewalk, they're also competing

for this space - a slot on your home screen.

This is where Uber starts salivating.

Anyone with their app can already ride their scooters.

It's a built-in advantage.

And if you're already on people's phones, why stop there?

There's no reason to be the taxi company or the scooter company when you can be, as

Uber's new CEO said, “the Amazon of transportation”.

Because a smart business sees itself from the perspective of a customer.

People think about outcomes, not business models.

If you want to watch something, you automatically go to YouTube.

If you want to buy something, you go to Amazon.

And soon, if you want to go somewhere, you open Uber.

Everything else is unnecessary complexity companies convince themselves we care about.

We're still in the early days of The Scooter Wars, but there is good reason to get excited.

And the big picture is really about platforms, the relationship between government and private

corporations, and, increasingly, battery technology.

The future of everything from cars, to scooters, and phones depends on how efficiently we can

store energy.

And the best way to learn the science behind batteries and energy storage, among other

things, is with today's sponsor, Brilliant.org.

What's great about Brilliant is you actually apply the knowledge as you learn it, rather

than just memorizing formulas.

You solve puzzles, analyze graphs, and answer questions to understand the topic on a deeper

level.

I especially like how there are lessons at all different difficulties,

You can start from the very beginning - what an atom looks like, and work your way up to

the science of nuclear energy.

To get started or dive deeper into the world of science, math, and technology, go to brilliant.org/Polymatter

and sign up for free.

The first 200 people to use that link will also get 20% off the annual Premium subscription.