In Part 1 of this blog series, we explored the rapid rise of the dockless model—why both operators and users prefer it, and how it’s reshaping global bike sharing. We also examined the hidden societal costs of making this model work. When a system is designed around profit and short-term convenience, is it truly serving the wider public interest?

In Part 2, we shift the focus. Why is the docked model losing ground? And can we imagine a better, more balanced model—one that combines the convenience of shared mobility with long-term public value?

Why the Docked Model Is Losing Ground

In the early days of bike sharing, docked systems were the default. Cities like Paris, New York, and London invested heavily in public schemes, citing improved urban behaviour, tidy streets, and reduced vandalism as key benefits.

Docked systems made sense: they were predictable, easier to maintain, and visibly integrated into the public realm. By physically anchoring bikes to stations, they curtailed misuse and simplified fleet management. Importantly, they signalled a sense of civic order—bikes belonged somewhere, not anywhere.

However, the costs were substantial. Docked systems required custom-built infrastructure, planning permissions, ongoing maintenance, and long-term public investment. Even before the first trip, upfront costs could run into tens of millions—a level of investment most cities can no longer justify.

As low-cost, flexible dockless systems emerged, many municipalities began to step back. Private operators asked for no infrastructure investment, and sometimes even paid cities to operate. In tight fiscal environments, the appeal of a zero-cost alternative was hard to ignore. Why commit to an expensive docked system, when dockless bikes could be rolled out quickly and cheaply?

But this short-term win comes with long-term trade-offs.

Cities Are Stepping Back—But At What Cost?

In stepping away from infrastructure-led schemes, many cities have unintentionally ceded control over shared mobilityto private operators. While the financial appeal is clear—minimal public spend, quick deployment, even some revenue—the trade-offs are significant.

Without strong public planning and oversight, the promise of equitable, sustainable urban mobility is at risk of being lost.

What If the Cost and Rigidity of Docked Systems Could Be Solved?

The limitations of docked systems—cost, rigidity, scalability—are real, but not insurmountable. What if we reimagined the docked model with flexibility and affordability at its core?

Emerging technologies are already pointing the way:

• New systems—like Mosa—are enabling compact, mobile docking hubs that can be installed in minutes and relocated as needed.

These approaches challenge the assumption that docked systems must be expensive and slow. With thoughtful design, docking can be made modular, adaptable, and scalable. We believe the sector needs more innovators willing to join us in building this new generation of infrastructure.

Equity and Access: A Policy Imperative

Accessibility is not just about efficiency—it is a matter of social justice. If shared cycling is to contribute meaningfully to sustainable transport, it must serve entire communities, not just profitable segments.

Leaving bike sharing entirely to private operators risks deepening inequalities. Without incentives or mandates, operators will always cluster in high-margin zones—leaving others behind.

By contrast, public or hybrid schemes can be designed with equity at their heart. Cities can:

• Ensure docking stations in underserved areas
• Offer concessions for low-income users
• Integrate bike sharing into broader transport and planning strategies

Equity isn’t a luxury—it’s a necessity.

What Can We Learn from New York?

New York City’s Citi Bike programme offers a useful example. One of the world’s largest bike-sharing systems, it is:

• Primarily docked and funded in partnership with the city
• Operated by a private firm (Lyft)
• Designed with equity and geography in mind
  

The model is strategic. The core of the city is served by well-maintained docked stations, ensuring order and reliability. In outer boroughs and lower-density areas, dockless or semi-docked models are tested where docks may not be practical.

The result? A tiered, hybrid approach, where docked is the default, and dockless is used selectively. It’s not perfect—but it’s far more sustainable than relying solely on unregulated free-floating systems.

6. Beyond the Big Cities: Expanding the Vision

So far, the bike sharing conversation has focused on

Tier 1 cities—London, Paris, New York, Berlin. But if we believe in the power of cycling for mobility, health, and sustainability, we must look beyond them.

In smaller cities, towns, and rural areas, the need for shared mobility may be even greater—but the business case for private operators is weaker. Areas with populations under 50,000 often lack both public transport and private interest.

This is where we see the potential of public-led or community-led schemes. With the right tools—like low-cost docks, regional partnerships, or cooperative ownership models—it is possible to build viable systems outside the commercial spotlight.

The future of bike sharing should not be dictated solely by profitability. It must be guided by public purpose.

7. The Road Ahead: Time to Rebalance the Model

Dockless bike sharing has brought speed, scale, and convenience—but it’s also exposed the limitations of profit-led mobility.

The core issues—clutter, inequality, lack of permanence—are not just growing pains. They are the natural consequences of a model optimised for growth, not inclusion.

Now is the time for cities and innovators to rebalance the model:

• Build hybrid systems that offer both flexibility and reliability
• Invest in scalable docking infrastructure that works for cities large and small
• Introduce policy and regulation that centres equity, safety, and public benefit
• Hold private operators accountable to more than just shareholder returns

The next phase of bike sharing will not be decided by the fastest rollout or the biggest valuation. It will be shaped by those who design with intention—for permanence, access, and the public good.

Let’s not chase what’s easy. Let’s build what lasts.

Mosa is working in this direction, and we sincerely hope more startups will step up—not to replicate the Lime playbook, but to innovate where it truly matters.