I agree on your first point, why would Lyft/Uber not want you to get in a car? If they only charge $3 for a whole day of a bike rental, instead of $20-40 per car ride (lets say at least 2-4 rides for people visiting a town or going out for a night) who is going to fight for the $3 or for that matter the $150 for a year? Point taken, as far as two vendors with a common membership fee. That is a little different approach, why not have more then one vendor and let the customer decide who they want to support via their wallet, as it will come out similarly to your point at the end. If you look at where motivate operates they have contracts with the cities up to a certain year. This is the not way things are done in D.C. and San Francisco, they have 3-5 bike shares each that are all working really extremely hard to get customers. Granted in the end there may only be 2-4 that will survive the biggest ones I can think of are motivate, Jump, Ofo, and B-cycle. My thinking on this is; have a contract for 1-2 docked bike system (as those take up the most space, as mentioned before) and give them a 5 year contract. The ones that follow that contract most closely in terms of bike availability, safety, functioning docks, etc.. Then bring in 2-4 dockless systems with a similar contract to the docked bikes, and do not follow the way that China did it. Look up mountain of bikes on google and you can see what I am talking about. I know that there are sections of NYC that are bringing in dockless bikes, and hopefully they do a great job because competition breeds innovation.

Here in the US there has to be more structure to where these bikes are able to be operated. Will that happen hopefully but only time will tell.