Originally Posted by
oddjob2
I don't have the answer for the first question, but I would doubt it, given the answer to the 2nd question. It just seems like it would be cheaper to have a rent to purchase program.
A rent to purchase program doesn't do what a bike share does. The assumption is that ownership is always preferred or that ownership makes a bike share system useless. That's not the case. I own 2 bikes and have access to a couple more. I still find the bike share system valuable. I don't always want to use my own bike and worry about it getting stolen or damaged. I also don't always have it with me.
A rent to own program also doesn't provide a means for visitors to the city to travel by bike.