Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Friday June 26 2015, @01:08PM   Printer-friendly

Ford doesn't think everyone needs to own a Ford, but it still wants non-car-owners to drive them. The company said this week that it will be testing a car-sharing pilot program to learn about how willing Ford owners are to share their vehicles. As part of the program, people who buy their cars through the company's credit arm, Ford Credit, will be invited to offset their monthly payments by allowing drivers to rent their cars by the hour. The company also launched an in-house car-sharing program in London.

The pilot program in the US will take place through Getaround—an existing mobile platform that lets users list their cars and rent them out to pre-screened drivers. Getaround already operates in California in Berkeley, Oakland, San Francisco, as well as Portland, Oregon; and Washington, DC. Ford's pilot program, called "Peer-2-Peer Car Sharing," will also take the program to Chicago, where Getaround has yet to launch, and to London through a car-sharing service called easyCar Club.

Ford will reach out to 14,000 US car owners who financed their Fords on credit, asking they if they'd like to participate in the program. It will do the same for 12,000 such customers in London.

Predictions on how private-car sharing will play out? However it does, Ford seems to have been ahead of other American car manufacturers with its integration of information technology.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Geezer on Friday June 26 2015, @02:03PM

    by Geezer (511) on Friday June 26 2015, @02:03PM (#201501)

    Who gets to decide on the makeup of the happy couple? I know I'd not want to be sharing a car with someone else's old pizza under the seat or who-knows-what sticking to the floor. The hygiene issue alone makes me think this idea won't fly.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 26 2015, @02:46PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 26 2015, @02:46PM (#201516)

    Car-sharing has been up and running [washingtonpost.com] in major US cities for awhile.

  • (Score: 2) by scruffybeard on Friday June 26 2015, @04:33PM

    by scruffybeard (533) on Friday June 26 2015, @04:33PM (#201575)

    They could implement a feedback system for both the owner and renter. You could ask a few questions like was the car returned clean, and on time? The renter could enter comments about mechanical problems. Future owners/renters could see these comments before deciding to enter in an agreement.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 26 2015, @07:55PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 26 2015, @07:55PM (#201725)

      But don't give any bad comments about the tattooed thug who cleaned his nose on your upholstery, or he might kill you. Just smile and walk away. And stop renting your car afterwards saying you need the car 24 hours a day now.

      It didn't work with online thugs (bad reviews get taken down quickly and they sue you), and it definitely won't work in real life. In real life people can and will harm you.

  • (Score: 1) by tftp on Friday June 26 2015, @05:14PM

    by tftp (806) on Friday June 26 2015, @05:14PM (#201594) Homepage

    I know I'd not want to be sharing a car with someone else's old pizza under the seat or who-knows-what sticking to the floor.

    Forget pizza. How about a plastic bag with leftovers of a drug? How will you prove to the police dog that it isn't from your stash?

    • (Score: 2) by tathra on Friday June 26 2015, @05:31PM

      by tathra (3367) on Friday June 26 2015, @05:31PM (#201601)

      hopefully it'd learn people to stop volunteering away their rights and consenting to searches. if they search without consent and with bullshit, made-up-on-the-spot probable cause then its an illegal search, which should be thrown out. maybe that'd be the first step in waking people up to just how totalitarian, oppressive, unfair, and unconstitutional prohibition is so we can get rid of it.