Chariot is shutting down

https://blog.chariot.com/2019/01/10/important-update-from-chariot/

by muzz • 8 years ago

179 191 8 years ago

blog.chariot.com

kgwgk• 8 years ago

zapzupnz2• 8 years ago

I'd not heard of Chariot before this. Was it widely used? It looked like Uber meets carpooling, or perhaps some sort of fancy work shuttle — and work shuttle companies open and close all the time, so I don't see what's newsworthy.

They don't state why they're closing down, so I'm a bit puzzled on this one.

k_sh• 8 years ago

It's probably on the front page because Chariot was part of YC W15, and later acquired by Ford.

zapzupnz2• 8 years ago

Thanks, that fills things in.

idoh• 8 years ago

I used Chariot a bit a couple years ago. Sad to see it go. For people who haven't heard of it, it worked like this: I live in SF, and worked in Redwood City. Every day, there was some type of large van that would pick me up a couple blocks from where I lived and dropped me off a couple blocks from where I worked. So it was like a middle ground between public transportation and Uber / Lyft.

aniketpant• 8 years ago

Isn't what you described an example of how buses work. I know very little about the state of public transport in SF but if it was better won't it solve what Chariot tried to do?

lykr0n2• 8 years ago

Chariot is a Point A to Point E services. Busesses are a Point A -> B -> C -> D -> E service.

One is more efficient if you have a large number of people going to the same place at the same time, the other is more efficient if a lot of people need to go to different places.

rconti3• 8 years ago

San Francisco and Redwood City are roughly 30 miles apart. In the Bay Area, in particular, buses tend to work on a city or county level, which would mean to make this trip, assuming buses were conveniently located, timed, and without too many stops, it would involve using several transit systems, unfortunately. San Francisco and Redwood City not only have dozens of other cities between them, but they're also in 2 different counties (San Francisco and San Mateo county, to be specific). I don't want to say we don't have cooperation between transit agencies, but they are at least distinct entities for these services.

A better solution would be the train. Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) serves many counties and cities, but does not go that far south.

Caltrain serves both San Francisco and Redwood City quite well; however, the nearest station is miles from the Marina district, and depending on destination, would require a transfer on the other end as well.

Of course, I'm sure Chariot involved multiple stops as well, but presumably most riders took it every day, so it was a route that was tailored to the riders of that van, rather than a generic public transit service that might have inconveniently timed transfers, too many stops, or other issues.

EDIT: Actually, it looks like I am incorrect. SamTrans (San Mateo County) actually does go from Redwood City to San Francisco by bus, at least on the 397 and 398 routes, but only midday and it will take almost 2 hours, as it's entirely on surface streets for those ~30 miles (and the terminus on either end is not particularly more likely to be more convenient than the much faster train) http://www.samtrans.com/schedulesandmaps/maps.html

dsl• 8 years ago

SF public transit is pretty disfunctional and Chariot was trying to offer an alternative.

- Timeliness - Busses and trains reliability are a joke compared to developed countries

- Cleanliness - Due to an unmitigated homeless problem, the busses and trains operate as "day shelters"

- Organization - There are dozens of different transit operators for what is one major metro region. Schedules are poorly synced, and even with a unified payment card you still have to buy different passes for multiple agencies

- Reliability - The union bullies the city around, and there is no accountability.

RobLach• 8 years ago

Chariot was a shuttle bus service.

muzz• 8 years ago

Chariot is private so can span multiple cities, counties, etc without a problem (for example, Palo Alto is 2 counties away from San Francisco)

Chariot had a lot of smaller busses, like the size of those airport parking lot shuttles.

Personally, I'm really surprised at this. Chariot seemed to have a lot of corporate accounts (for things like shuttles to/from CalTrain to Company X), that I would have guessed they could charge a premium for.

ng12• 8 years ago

There is a bus that does that route. It follows El Camino (35-40mph most of the way) from San Jose to San Francisco. I used to take it as a broke college student and it was absolutely a last resort. Not only does it make dozens of stops but the bus is generally dirty and a hangout for transients. It ran 24/7 and took well over 2 hours each way, so homeless people would ride it basically all day.

abalone• 8 years ago

It's correct to describe Chariot as a midpoint between buses and Uber/Lyft. Buses operate on a fixed route that takes years to change. Chariot was minibuses with more dynamic, niche routes.

But like any mass transit system it needs a critical mass to break even. And they faced heavily subsidized competition on both sides.[1] (Buses subsidized by taxpayers, Uber/Lyft subsidized by VC.)

[1] https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/San-Francisco-s...

hadlock• 8 years ago

In Latin/South America, routes like this are handled by private transport called Combis in similar looking vans. They supplement public transport and have been wildly successful as a public/private partnership.

Also, San Francisco and Redwood city are in different counties with different politics, private enterprise is sometimes faster at filling gaps in transit than public government, especially in the short term.

Zhenya• 8 years ago

In Russia and eastern Europe this sort of transportation is called a Marshrutka: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshrutka

Works really well.

mc32• 8 years ago

My impression is it was like a super express bus, so it was local at pickup, then many miles on freeway, then a few miles on local again eith drop offs.

hashhar• 8 years ago

There are very similar services operating in metro cities in India which can attributed to overcrowded public transportation during peak hours.

Shuttl is one which immediately comes to mind and seems to be doing good. They have a concept of you buying a fixed number of rides instead of paying per ride. The fixed package cost less and then you are locked into their service for a while / try it for a while.

It has solved the first mile problem but the last mile travel still remains to be solved.

hinkley• 8 years ago

Seattle subsidizes a similar program, including providing the vans ('vanpool'). I know this has been going for around 10 years, and I'm somewhat sure it's much older than that.

https://kingcounty.gov/depts/transportation/metro/travel-opt...

eCa• 8 years ago

It sounds a bit like marshrutka[1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshrutka

dmazin• 8 years ago

Every time I return to Russia these fascinate me. They have many routes and will stop wherever you request. The general term is Share taxi: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Share_taxi

princekolt2• 8 years ago

Oh we had plenty of those where I grew up in Brazil. Usually they were supposed to be hired only by neighborhood associations and to transport only those people that hired them, but effectively they were clandestine bus lines and would pickup anyone who hailed them. That, added to how immensely imprudent and dangerous their driving usually was caused them to be outlawed completely some 8-10 years ago.

syassami• 8 years ago

It was even once a thing in SF https://archives.sfweekly.com/sanfrancisco/the-last-ride-of-...

mncharity• 8 years ago

NYC has "dollar vans", legal and otherwise.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/08/nyregion/inside-the-dolla... https://projects.newyorker.com/story/nyc-dollar-vans/

tim--• 8 years ago

I really appreciate how the NSW Australian Government is working on a solution to this.

They are currently running trial on-demand services, where a mini-van will come and pick you up after a request from an app[0].

I don't understand why the US cities are so adverse to setting up similar systems.

[0] https://transportnsw.info/travel-info/ways-to-get-around/on-...

dwd• 8 years ago

Sound similar to ConXion who I've used in the past to avoid paying airport parking.

For the Sunshine Coast > Brisbane Airport trip they pick you up at your door in a smaller 12 seater to meet up near the highway with the larger coach for the hour or so run in. They run hourly trips each way.

bernatfp• 8 years ago

FWIW Citymapper offers a similar service in London. Essentially carpooling with more seats. Admittedly though, they don't cover such long distances.

samstave• 8 years ago

Will they be selling off their fleet?

driverdan• 8 years ago

That's my first question too. I wonder if there will be some good deals on the vans.

dawnerd• 8 years ago

Probably off to auction where a lot of rental cars end up too. I’m sure if you keep an eye out on the various auto auction sites you’ll see some pop up.

capkutay2• 8 years ago

I used Chariot for about a year commuting from the Marina district of SF to Caltrain. It was basically an adult version of a soccer mom taking the neighborhood kids to practice in a mini van. It's definitely an improvement over taking MUNI...but its not any better than using UberPool. It wasn't 'fancy' by any means. You were just crammed into a sprinter van.

As far as I remember, UberPool either wasn't available or popular at the time Chariot started. Obviously the concept of Chariot wouldn't seem viable at all if you tried to do it in 2019.

dr_• 8 years ago

I’ve seen them around NYC, downloaded the app and waited for them to expand their routes but they never did. I’m not sure why. Seems like a good idea - but I suppose it may have been a challenge to compete with the wide variety of services, including public transportation, that are available in the city.

sethhochberg• 8 years ago

I've seen a lot of startups that have success in SF struggle with NYC because they treat it like the same kind of city. Between the half-dozen mass transit services operating in and around the city, a robust network of express commuter buses (both public _and_ private), dollar vans and gypsy cabs, there is an extremely robust transit network here - even if unconventional at times, and maligned with delays at others. By comparison, despite having roughly comparable density within the city itself, transit in SF just sucks. I'm not surprised they never gained much traction in NYC. Via seems to fill the niche Chariot would be trying to occupy, if we're looking for a direct startupy comparison, and Via additionally operates outside of commute hours. NYC has some kind of "legacy" provider for most kinds of problems, everything from on-demand delivery of food and goods 24hrs to transportation to light laborers and most of the other trendy app platform services.

neom• 8 years ago

I thought it would be useful when the L train shuts down and had planned to use them then, but now that's not happening I suppose they lost that advantage (also amusingly lyft has spent a boat load advertising the shut down around williamsburg recently).

pianoben• 8 years ago

I have such a strong feeling of deja vu right now - didn't they shut down once before already, and sell off their fleet? Is this their second shutdown?

rconti3• 8 years ago

You're thinking of the luxury bus services, whose name I forgot, even though I knew the founder. I believe that was SF-only.

ceocoder• 8 years ago

I think you are thinking of Leap[1], one that offered "luxury" buses, barista made coffee on bus etc.

https://www.wired.com/2015/05/leap-suspension-shows-regulato...

paxys2• 8 years ago

I tried the service out for a little while, but it ultimately didn't make sense to me. Routes were too rigid, schedule not frequent enough, had to schedule trips in advance, and it cost as much or even more per ride than Uber Pool/Lyft Line.

diiaann• 8 years ago

I know some people are very critical. I'm a big transit enthusiast but I still see how some work routes are long to walk, but not well served via transit, i.e. NoPa to Brannan St (Airbnb, Pinterest). Friends that were faced with trickier public transit options didn't seem enticed by Chariot. They seem to settle on biking/scootering, long walk, or choosing to take rideshare everyday.

dzonga• 8 years ago

in Africa, we've the 'taxi' system or aptly named Kombi's after the VW model. It picks you from say downtown and drops you by the stop sign or intersection to your house. Pretty much covers almost every neighborhood and street in a decent southern african city. Guess here in the west, it got complicated via apps. & these taxis run pretty frequently i.e maybe every 10 mins depending on capacity. I live in Austin and saw Chariot and bastard westernized appified version of the african taxi system.

olivermarks• 8 years ago

Ford owned, and Ford are making major cutbacks this week. https://www.businessinsider.com/ford-buys-chariot-65-million...

dopamean• 8 years ago

Man. I feel bad for the employees. They probably thought getting bought by a big company like Ford meant they would stick around for a while.

aezed• 8 years ago

Getting bought by a big company rarely means that the acquired employees are going to stick around for awhile.

pastor_elm• 8 years ago

great name. Wonder how much they plan to sell it for.

Tiktaalik• 8 years ago

Pls stop trying to re-invent public transit.

NeonVice• 8 years ago

Please, keep trying to re-invent public transit if you can come up with something better.

paulie_a• 8 years ago

Public transit sucks. In a lot of cases if I am with a friend I can get an Uber pool or express for the same price as public transportation. I might have to pay a small premium of 50 cents at times but the convenience is far better, and no transfers. Hell I can even use commuter benefits.

danso• 8 years ago

A successful company could play a part in revitalizing the public’s interest in having good transit.

optimusclimb• 8 years ago

This service was a godsend when I lived there, due to how abysmal Muni was. Sorry to hear it didn't work out for them.

badwolf• 8 years ago

I've been using it daily here in Austin. Sad to see it go. :(

raz32dust2• 8 years ago

Seems like such a great idea on paper. I've seen these parked in various spots in SF. Why do you think they failed? Too asset heavy? I am guessing the cost of vehicles and maintenance, parking spots, regulations etc. was too much? A similar service based on uber model might be more successful, where the company doesn't own the vehicles? Not sure how to provide reliable service that way, though. Perhaps a hybrid?

gkoberger• 8 years ago

I think you answered your own question inadvertently! Uber has something called Express Pool, which is about the same service/cost but more convenient. And Uber Pool / Lyft Line are only slightly more expensive but deliver you directly door to door.

ryanbertrand2• 8 years ago

They were acquired by Ford. Doesn’t seem like a failure...even if shitting down after 2 years.

raz32dust2• 8 years ago

I meant failure in the larger context, not silicon valley failure :)

dawhizkid2• 8 years ago

I recently watched the Anthony Bourdain episode where he goes to Nairobi and rides on a "matatu", which are essentially privately operated party buses for commuters. I thought that was actually a pretty neat idea and could definitely see a market for that.

https://explorepartsunknown.com/kenya/matatus-rule-nairobis-...

tnolet• 8 years ago

These are called mikrolet or minibus in countries like Indonesia. Super cheap, super convenient. Haven’t seen a similar thing in the Western world.

brenschluss• 8 years ago

They exist in NYC. https://projects.newyorker.com/story/nyc-dollar-vans/

stickfigure• 8 years ago

In Mexico and most of Latin America they are called collectivos. They're a great way to get around.

mlevental2• 8 years ago

matatu just means taxi or something like that (it actually comes from 'three' in Swahili because the conductors used to yell "give me three" at potential passengers). they are absolutely no fun to ride since the operators pack them to the brim with people and other cargo (animals too) and they wait until full to take off (so sometimes, for infrequently traveled routes you end up waiting hours). this is all to say nothing of being in terrible disrepair. here is the taxi park in Kampala http://photos.wikimapia.org/p/00/00/37/50/05_big.jpg. each minivan is a matatu.

source: lived in Uganda for 2 years. rode matatus countless times. almost died many times. shat myself exactly twice.

dawhizkid2• 8 years ago

haha I'm not saying an exact replica - I mean the general idea of a themed privately operated bus is interesting. obviously it would be subject to more regulatory scrutiny than over there. you could have a party bus vibe, or a meditation one, or a social one, etc etc.

subsaharancoder• 8 years ago

technically matatu's are mass transit privately owned minivan buses and not taxis, Nairobi as well as other Kenyan cities are well served by ride sharing services like Uber and Taxify which fill the taxi need. The "tatu" or three came about because they used to charge 3 cents when they started out way back before my time. There have been some changes in the sector to address some issues like safety but it's got a long way to go. Interesting innovations popped up around the space e.g. Google launched NFC transit payments, Bebapay https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BebaPay, in Nairobi a couple of years back but killed off the project (I was part of the local team when this took off)

marnett• 8 years ago

Same thing exists in Barbados. Vans that circle the country and pick you up if you’re on the side of the road. Flat cash cost. Super convenient.

iblaine• 8 years ago

This is generally how the CEO of Lyft got the idea to create Lyft.

badusername• 8 years ago

Uber launched a similar service in Africa last year..

https://techcrunch.com/2018/12/12/uber-bus/

thrownaway954• 8 years ago

Probably because there is absolutely NOTHING on their homepage or about page that describes what their service is in a simple manner. Their tag is "Mass Transit Reinvented"... great!!! How exactly are you doing that in layman's terms.

SilasX• 8 years ago

Wasn't it profitable when Ford acquired? Isn't there a pretty reliable userbase? How did they mess it up?

I don't mean to be the conspiracy guy, but it matches the pattern of the streetcar thing: Buy car-obviating service, shut it down.

debt• 8 years ago

"How did they mess it up?"

All I know is once I was driving down Cesar Chavez in San Francisco and I looked over and there was a massive lot filled with Chariot commuter vans. It was the daytime on Saturday.

I thought dang they must be wasting a ton of money just having a whole fleet of commuter vans parked in a lot, unused simply because it was the weekend. I imagine this same mentality transferred to non-peak hours during the week as well.

Aeolun3• 8 years ago

It seems that there would be a lot of ways to put those vans to use during the weekend as well. I cannot imagine that was the main factor.

canada_dry• 8 years ago

You're getting downvoted, but it's a valid question. What was Ford's real purpose for acquiring them in the first place?

roymurdock• 8 years ago

to see if it was a viable business and they could make the numbers work (they couldn't), to show the board and investors they were staying on top of the latest trends in "micro mobility", and to acquire the software dev and startup strategy talent which it can now put towards other efforts such as self-driving or other ride hailing efforts

fouc• 8 years ago

I think it's a fairly common pattern by now, startup gets bought out, and then shut down a few years later. There is probably strategic reasons for doing things like this.. Even if it does screw over the customers of the startup.

justapassenger• 8 years ago

There's few common reasons: - Startups focus mostly on growth. Once you're part of a big company, they may look at your business and see that there is a lot of fraud (even if it wasn't intentional by the startup, but they just didn't focus at it) that makes it unsustainable - Lots of startups operate in space that just not profitable, but big companies buy them, out of fear of missing out. Then they realize, that there's really no money to be made there - Acqui-hiring - Startups often overrepresent what they can actually do or deliver

kelp2• 8 years ago

This is purely my own speculation informed by some Clayton Christiansen, but it's possible that someone at Ford sees Ford as a transportation company, not a car company. So the job to be done is moving people and things around. Ford also sponsors the Ford GoBikes that you see all over San Francisco. This could be seen as competing with the Ford the car company. Or it's just part of the portfolio of products from Ford the transportation company.

That kind of thinking could help them mitigate disruptive pressure, especially in markets like SF where driving is pretty awful, but so is transit.

ijustwanttovote• 8 years ago

Ford just stopped the GoBike sponsorship, so I think they are moving out of alternative means of transportation.

ghaff2• 8 years ago

What you’re describing is actually Theodore Levitt Marketing Myopia. Probably overapplied. https://www.cnet.com/news/marketing-myopia-isnt/

hnick• 8 years ago

I understand your point but if true, doesn't it mean it's a proven business model with a ready market that can be tapped into by someone else?

The acquire and kill model should only really work when there's a barrier to entry that limits replacements.

eaurouge• 8 years ago

The Ford CEO famously/stupidly announced his plans to grow Ford into a data company on NPR [0]. So it’s likely he saw Chariot as a software acquisition.

0. https://threatpost.com/ford-eyes-use-of-customers-personal-d...

savrajsingh• 8 years ago

I hope the founders did well. I remember meeting the founder and he’s a good guy!

scrumbledober2• 8 years ago

I had a chariot driver cut me off on my bike while i was riding down second street and he was turning left onto second across my lane. He stopped once in my lane and I didn't have enough time to stop so I hit the side of his van, somewhat damaging my bike. He looked right at me and then drove away. I tried to contact chariot about this and got absolutely nowhere. Glad to see them go.

michaelleslie• 8 years ago

Their vans are an absolute terror whenever I ride down Market Street on my commute. Muni clearly has higher driver hiring standards.

beardedwizard• 8 years ago

I have had frequent encounters with these drivers as well as the Bauer drivers.

ryanbertrand2• 8 years ago

I had an encounter with one of their drivers tailgating me for ~1 mile until they finally sped past me and cut me off. I was going above the speed limit. Not sure if there were customers in the car, but I would hope not.

jelling• 8 years ago

PSA: Via Pass is a great alternative in NYC and works with commuter benefits too

xaybey• 8 years ago

I used Chariot daily for my commute when I lived in the outer richmond (24th ave). Its existential purpose was to ensure you would only travel with fellow commuters, and not the raving lunatics who rode the muni. It was a kind of bridge above the fray.

wmab• 8 years ago

It's a shame to say goodbye to something that is quite synonymous with San Francisco life. From the comments a lot of people don't "get it" and then think that this is the reason it failed. I'm sure it's a decision based on the complexities of scaling and working with each city and county to make a truly successful business that they ran into too many problems.

Not all businesses need to grow to huge heights to not be considered successful. It's a shame they can't continue to operate in the areas that it works well in (such as here in SF). Scoot have had a hard time growing, but are as successful as ever in SF, so that should be seen as a success in itself. We now have very lofty expectations for businesses either Blitzscaling [1] or dying, but surely it doesn't need to be that binary.

Clearly private solutions to commuting need to exist, people are not satisfied with the public transit in most cities. In a capitalist country, the markets will reward those who succeed. Lyft/Uber are helping somewhat, but you can point to as many articles [2] showing how over congested cities become because of them (even with pooling), which take up much more road space than buses. Let's hope someone else gives this another shot, and we don't shoot them down if they don't become a unicorn.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Blitzscaling-Lightning-Fast-Building-... [2] https://www.chicagotribune.com/bluesky/technology/ct-uber-ly...

save_ferris• 8 years ago

We're beginning to feel the crunch of car culture in the US, and not everyone is excited at the prospect of footing the bill to overhaul infrastructure and transportation systems at the public level.

In a capitalist country, the markets will reward those who succeed.

This may be true, but markets will favor a solution that involves maintaining control of the system in order to generate profit.

If we want our transportation system to rival that of Europe's, it won't be done through market competition for transportation services/technology. Why? Because services like ridesharing don't incentivize the development of solid public-use transportation infrastructure. They represent the next revolution of US car culture, which isn't going to benefit as many people directly once cars become unaffordable for too many Americans, a trend that is already being observed[0].

Once this happens, we're going to rely on cars more than ever because we won't have a viable alternative. I'm not sure how comfortable I am with that idea.

[0] http://fortune.com/2017/06/28/car-buy-price/

jeffbax3• 8 years ago

Not true. The best train systems in the world are private businesses. The problem is having to compete with the government. The NYC subway used to be two private systems and the government put them out of business and now it's death by politics

A business focused on transit could otherwise profit and maintain for less cost than government fails to do.

elektor2• 8 years ago

For the people that used this and are upset about Chariot shutting down, you should give Waze Carpool a try.

gnicholas• 8 years ago

Can you share some experience on how you’ve used Waze Carpool, or how the economics work? I’ve wondered about it but not tried it out.

elektor2• 8 years ago

It's essentially a simplified Uber/Lyft app where I put in my home/work address and a window of time when I make my commute. Afterwards, I see a list of people who are on my route. Then, I can offer someone a ride or request a ride.

Right now Google is subsidizing rides so I think it's $2 a trip. Otherwise it's less than a dollar a mile, whatever the IRS sets the gas write-off as.

BurritoAlPastor• 8 years ago

Good riddance; my exposure to Chariot was mostly of them blocking the Golden Gate Transit commuter bus pickup zones.

ctime• 8 years ago

I'm assuming the ease and likely success of UberPool[1] was the straw that broke the camel's back. Even Waze has a similar offering [2].

Yet I'm not at all surprised they ran out of cash (I'm assuming) and had to shutter. I do feel bad for the folks (drivers and support type folks) who are now out of a job.

[1] https://www.uber.com/ride/uberpool/

[2] https://www.waze.com/carpool

eob• 8 years ago

I just wanted to chime in to thank Chariot for the service they provided.

In my experience, few startups literally make your entire day better. I’ve been using Chariot to commute across SF for about two years and it has given me more time at home with my wife and son, better ability to predict when I’ll arrive at work, and a way to use my commute as a quiet space for the reading I could never quite manage on a crowded bus.

So thanks to the whole team. Very sorry that the numbers didn’t quite work out at the end of the day, as it often turns out in the startup game.

ctab• 8 years ago

Thanks for the kind words. The ability to improve people's daily lives, as you described, was a big reason a lot of us chose to work there and something we were hoping to see at a larger scale eventually. Today's news came as a shock to most of us.

leroy_masochist• 8 years ago

Sad to hear this.

People talked a lot of shit about Chariot -- "Silicon Valley tech bros got funding and invented a bus route", blah blah blah -- but urban minibus routes are AWESOME when well-executed.

Seriously we were promised flying cars and we can't even get marshrutki.

laurentoget• 8 years ago

Not very surprising. There is a problem with trying to fund urban transit by selling it as a service for those who use it. urban transit is a service which benefits every member of the community it serves , both individuals and corporations, by reducing congestion. In most places with an efficient transit network, fare revenue is not the biggest source of funding.

This is shocking for americans who grow up in the post Reagan era, but some things are easier done by governments.

hrktb• 8 years ago

In most places with an efficient transit network, fare revenue is not the biggest source of funding

It was eye opening to me to hear about train companies that heavily invest in land development and partnered with the cities to build places to go. In Japan they own department stores and actively participate in business development to grow whole areas, wherever they see opportunities.

Aeolun3• 8 years ago

I was so surprised to see a whole town just basically stamped out of the ground next to a new shinkansen station. Right up until I found out it was all built by the train company.

SergeAx• 8 years ago

In Russia we call it "marshrootka", like "routed taxi", missing link between taxi and bus. It is a large and demanded industry, cash-only and poorly regulated. Check out the variety of minivan models and conditions with single Google Images search: https://www.google.com/search?q=%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%88%D1%...

Chariot is shutting down

Related Stories