you know what would squash that instantly?

bump 4 goofy

Welcome back to the price gouging debate, every economist ever knows that price caps make things worse yet we see the same arguments trotted out over and over again.

1) create incentive for people to overconsume parking
2) observe someone create a method to increase efficiency of the use of that scarce resource
3) freak out

people respond to incentives. If you don't like this then stop creating perverse incentives for them to respond to.

Gonna have an army of homeless lie down in every empty spot in Boston and pay them in 40's and get riiiiiiiich, bitch.

But... you seem to begrudge the owners setting the rules under which this parking they are giving away free to the public is shared.

WTF is wrong with Kroger banning the 'selling' (actually conversion) of their own parking spaces ??

Not quite sure why pvn is being kind of a dick about this but I actually think this is a pretty interesting subject.

My gut reaction is to hate these guys just like ticket scalpers but if I think about it I think I like these guys. It's so American. It's classic entrepreneurship. They've spotted a resource that is being sold for less than the market values it for. They're buying that resource wholesale and selling in a more dear market. I gotta respect poor people (I'm assuming being employed takes you out of the parking spot flipping game) seeing an opportunity and working to make a buck.

It does sound like San Francisco should raise its parking meter rates as for sure it sounds like the quantity demanded greatly exceeds the quantity supplied at the current price. I actually think that a better idea of San Francisco might be to monitor this app and collect data on what the going rate is for parking at different locations and times. They can then adjust the meter prices accordingly. The scalpers get pushed out of the market, San Fran gets the extra revenue, and the parking space market more accurately reflects supply and demand.

Of course, the city has reasons not to charge full market parking rates (angry dumb voters) just like Katy Perry has reasons not to charge full market rate for concert tickets (angry dumb parents). Of course, when you create these shortages people pay in other ways like time circling the block, camping outside the ticket office, etc.

Good summation.

They are selling the right to take that space. Five people who drove past it looking for a space whilst the person in it waited for the 6th guy who uses the app lost.

Now I am not expressly against the concept of an electronic queue system but the way this one was set up and how it profits by leeching from the wider community for the benefit of itself and it's pay customers is wrong and I have no issue with the city shutting it down with a cease and desist.

If I plug a parking meter, I'm leasing that space for x amount of time. This is just subleasing.

Nice post. The ticket scalper is an interesting analogy.

If I understand San Francisco properly it's always going to have a shortage of parking, so it's largely a problem that requires an acceptance of limited solutions.

I'm not totally opposed to parking meters, but those things do require more bureaucracy. Parking tickets and tire boots suck. I do like the idea of the city teaming up with this app to make pay parking easier. I think it's fair to keep free parking available and off-limits from, uh, "scalpers".

LOL no <insert Unchained name-calling>.

First, a landlord can disallow subleasing in the primary lease. That's exactly the situation with free parking -- both private and public. Read the fine print on the back of your next parking stub... or variously read the public parking regulations.

Second, just no. The original driver vacates the space, and ceases feeding the meter (or parking for free)... and then the new driver occupies the space, and begins feeding the meter (or parking for free). LOL at calling that kinda situation a "sublease".

What "comparison"? That's what you're doing when you pay for parking: renting space.

stop for a second before you go any further and ask yourself why nobody has bothered to create an app for this purpose.

Now, to answer your question, I wouldn't really care if they did that. But for lots of reasons, they wouldn't.

I also don't really care if the city tries to make such a rule, though I do think them trying to have this app squashed is overstepping their authority and that trying to actually enforce such a rule is counterproductive, and society would be better off in general if the city didn't try to give parking away at below market rates and then try to micromanage what people do with that parking when it doesn't match up with what they want people to do with it.

And the actual point here is that the freakout from the likes of yourself, goofyballer, etc just illustrates a very embarassing lack of understanding of economics, which we see routinely whenever the topic of price caps comes up.

Thats not the scenario though. The person occupying the spot has every right to be there, yes? This is about whether they are incented to move somewhere else.

Right. The city gave them the right to that space for apparently an unspecified period of time. Do you think the general public is better off if that guy just stays parked there forever since he has no incentive to get out of the spot?

if the price for consuming parking is set correctly there will not be a shortage.

tickets and boots suck, but so do extra cars on the road caused by people circling around looking for a space. There's no free lunch here.

maybe the city should get out of the business of providing parking spaces. that space could be used for bike lanes or (gasp) BUS STOPS.

I think the next step for the anti app crowd here is probably to argue that holding a space solely to sell it to someone who wants is not a legitimate use of the spot. Which, frankly, opens the door to a lot of compelling questions.

Is sitting in a spot waiting for someone to finished getting dressed so they can get in your car legitimate?

Is taking a spot just to window shop, with no intention of buying anything (I think this would meet Phills criteria of leeching from the broader community), a legit use of the space?

What about hanging out chatting after finishing your coffee with a friend? People are driving by not getting to use that space because you want to talk! Those people are thirsty yo. Leeching obv.

I'm sure San Fran is charging for parking; they really need to be. People are consuming a limited resource. Like you said, space is limited so high parking prices probably won't have too much effect on stimulating parking facility production. But it will incentivize people to use less of the limited resource. PVN will hustle out of Crocs R Us, Goofy and Suzzer will ride the bus with the piss-soaked bums, steelhouse will choose to walk and hand out copies of his manifesto, and when my lazy ass continues to drive I'll actually be able to find a place to park.

I'd love it if parking could get into the 21st century. I'm picturing an E-pass type thing like they have for toll booths. I just pull into a space and it detects that I'm there and charges me by the minute. Way better than charging in blocks of time.

with demand-based pricing, of course!

It is free parking, not metered parking. The city is providing parking, forgoing profiting, at set terms including that you can't profit from that parking they are providing. If you want to do so then go change the terms.

The better comparison is setting up meters at the side of the road hoping no one from the city notices.

Implicit in City meters is you can stay as long as you want to pay. Implicit in free parking is you don't hog spaces for your own benefit - it is literally communal use.

The app doesn't free up spaces faster, in fact it would do so slower as people wait around for a payer to come and take the spot.

There is no incentive for someone to leave the space faster with the app.

What the **** are you talking about? Getting paid is a incentive to leave faster. This isn't that complicated.

Jolly good!