I've pondered that question too. Something like Uber or Lyft works partly because of the cost and burden of car ownership. It's attractive to use someone else's equipment if you don't have to buy, maintain, finance, fuel, insure, and store (park) similar equipment yourself, to the tune of thousands of dollars per year.
But then you look at bike ownership. I almost want to put "bike ownership" in quotes because even the mere phrase makes it sound so much more serious and demanding than it is. It's so easy and cheap, it seems obvious you would just do that. Or put it this way, I don't find myself going "I just don't want & can't handle all that responsibility of a bike!" It's like, boy you better not get any houseplants then, that much responsibility will stress you right out!
The 'problem' you're looking to solve is not the hassle of bike "ownership" but bike access. If I take the car or bus to work I can't then take my bike to meet a client. If I take my bike into town I can't then take the bus home if the weather turns bad or I have a lot shopping to carry. If I take my bike into a 'bad' part of town to go to a bar I have to worry about the very real chance that it won't be where I left when I want to go home at night. Bike sharing solves all these problems.
If you take the bus home because of bad weather one day, and leave your bike at work, it's there for you to go meet a client the next day! :P
No but seriously. Sounds like your transit agency doesn't have bike racks on the buses. That's what enables the integration with transit. Around my area you can take a bike on the bus or light rail.
All the other problems have pre-existing solutions though too:
Groceries to carry → Get panniers, and don't buy more than they can hold (you can always get more tomorrow, and it'll be fresher).
Rain → Wear rain gear.
Bad part of town → Own a modest bike and a good lock.
The extreme mode flexibility you mention sounds nice, but I've never found I've needed it. With a little advance planning and the extra bits above, you can just commit to one mode.
> I have to worry about the very real chance that it won't be where I left [it]
On the other hand, a personal bike that is only half as shitty as the typical bikeshare will be extremely loyal and never leave you for another rider.
But I get it, it's the public transport freedom which people who never experienced it rarely understand: if you always return to your personal vehicle having to do so feels perfectly fine. But when you got accustomed to ad-hoc modeswitching itineraries, being confined to returning to your personal vehicle feels strangely limiting, despite all the "wherever, whenever" of your own car/bike/boat.
For me, the use cases are very different. I use rental bikes mostly as a complement to public transport - a metro/tram/bus line might take me 90% to where I need, then I'll get some bike in the area to make the 10% left rapidly. I also own a bike, but I mostly use it for local trips or pleasure rides. Plus, unlike the rentals, it's not electric.
> But then you look at bike ownership. I almost want to put "bike ownership" in quotes because even the mere phrase makes it sound so much more serious and demanding than it is.
Well, depends. Bikes take shitload of space inside the house, which in a city is often a low double-digit m² flat for singles, or slightly larger double-digit m² for families. Unlike cars, you can't keep bikes outside for too long, as they can get stolen quickly. Then, unless you know how and like doing it yourself, you'll end up bringing it into a repair shop for checkup and maintenance just as often as you would a car. At least you don't have much insurance paperwork.
Interestingly, a thing about Uber/Lyft is that the number of cars is limited because they are based on converting existing private cars to hired use. So Uber/Lyft don't eliminate private cars. The number of bike shares that can be pumped into a city is limited only by the capital that can be pumped in.
Judging by a billboard that I pass reasonably frequently, Uber is more than happy to "help" potential drivers without cars get them and start driving for Uber [0]. In theory, the number of cars available to Uber is also only limited by the capital that can be pumped in.
I don't know if the prices are currently subsidized, but there's no reason they couldn't be.
But then you look at bike ownership. I almost want to put "bike ownership" in quotes because even the mere phrase makes it sound so much more serious and demanding than it is. It's so easy and cheap, it seems obvious you would just do that. Or put it this way, I don't find myself going "I just don't want & can't handle all that responsibility of a bike!" It's like, boy you better not get any houseplants then, that much responsibility will stress you right out!