a statista dossier plus on mobility services for … · the mobility-as-a-service market connects...
TRANSCRIPT
MOBILITY SERVICESA STATISTA DOSSIER PLUS ON
MOBILITY SERVICES FOR PASSENGERS
Terminology
▪ Car-sharing
▪ Ride-hailing
▪ Transportation networks
Supply- and demand-side factors
▪ Vehicle miles traveled by mode
▪ Impact on light vehicle sales
▪ Related costs
Competitive landscape
▪ Investments
▪ Financial figures
▪ Implications
Market potential and outlook
▪ Market size
▪ Emerging markets
▪ Market outlook
2
Table of contents
The 2019 zeitgeist is revolving around the primacy of use over
ownership. There appears to be an underlying assumption that
today's passengers have a desire to reach their destination fast,
at low cost, and in a manner that is environmentally sustainable.
As a result, Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) business models have
begun to conquer the industry. The conventional taxi market is at
risk of going extinct due to the emergence of ride-hailing
programs. Concurrently, the car rental market is facing stiff
competition from innovative car-sharing companies. The
combined market for ride-hailing, ride-sharing, car-sharing, and
smart parking is expected to exceed 400 million U.S. dollars by
2025 (chapter 4).
In light of arising business opportunities, the number of startups
in the field continues to grow, and prices are unlikely to increase
in a highly competitive environment. It remains to be seen how
many of the startups that have entered the scene will eventually
be financially sustainable. As of now, there is only a handful of
transportation network companies (TNCs) that are publicly
traded, the most prominent ones being Uber and Lyft. With 2018
EBITDA of -1.8 billion U.S. dollars and -0.9 billion U.S. dollars
respectively (chapter 3), both companies have yet to prove their
business models’ worth. Ultimately, TNCs will seek ways to take
the human driver out of the equation (chapter 2). The advent of
autonomous vehicles is projected to transform mobility business
models and make them more financially sustainable.
Since they are home to offices, stores, and cultural venues,
urban areas are forecast to spearhead the trend towards a new
breed of passenger vehicles that are autonomous, electric,
connected, and shared. It is projected that urban passenger
mobility demand will almost double from just under 26 trillion
passenger kilometers to almost 50 trillion in 2050 (chapter 2).
Not only are travelers expected to become more mobile overall
and expand the amount of vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) per
person, but they are also projected to switch from more traditional
transport modes, such as public transportation or private cars, to
shared mobility. If the industry continues to increase its focus on
electric drives, the use of car-sharing and ride-sharing vehicles
has the potential to drive down carbon dioxide emissions.
Executive Summary
3
Terminology
▪ Car-sharing
▪ Ride-sharing
▪ Transportation networks
01
The Mobility-as-a-Service market connects regulators,
infrastructure providers, transport providers, platform
providers, and IT service providers to customers. The latter
demand a large number of vehicles they can summon or
borrow, e.g. via apps provided by transportation network
companies (TNCs).
If commuters and travelers changed their travel behavior and
ditched their private cars in favor of sharing, this could
ultimately lead to higher vehicle capacity utilization levels and
fewer automobile sales. A trend towards declining vehicle
sales growth rates can already be witnessed in several mature
markets: North America and Western Europe expect to see
plateauing light vehicle sales in 2019 (chapter 2).
In this report, the terms car-sharing, ride-hailing, and ride-
sharing will be used as follows:
▪ Car-sharing programs enable motorists to borrow cars for a
short period of time and at low cost. Car-sharing is different
from renting inasmuch as car rental customers keep
vehicles for a longer time period, and there is also typically a
designated drop-off zone for rental cars.
▪ Ride-sharing: Vehicle owners and riders use personal
vehicles to share their trips.
▪ Ride-hailing programs enable their users to summon a
vehicle driven by a designated driver.
▪ Transportation network companies use technology to
connect passengers and vehicles.
The Mobility-as-a-Service terminology
5
19.8
16.5
15.4
13.9
4.2
0 5 10 15 20 25
Tokyo
Moscow
Beijing
Shanghai
Guangzhou
Fleet size in thousands of vehicles in 2018
6
Car-sharing providers and car rental
companies serve people who require a
vehicle temporarily.
Usually, car rental customers keep said
vehicle for longer time periods and return it
at designated zones, while shared cars are
available for brief periods of time and at a
cost that is economically viable for short
journeys. Car-sharing programs enable
motorists to rent cars either from a company
(free-floating) or from private automobile
owners (peer-to-peer or P2P). Depending
on the program, free-floating car-sharing
customers may borrow and return vehicles
either at designated pick-up and drop-off
zones or wherever it is convenient. P2 car-
sharing is different insomuch as it enables
automobile owners to rent their personal
vehicles to peers.
The top cities for car-sharing were mostly
located in Asia in 2018, and no U.S. city
made the cut. Car-sharing programs in the
United States have yet to gain the same
popularity as rental cars or taxis.
Car-sharing: Tokyo and Moscow among leading cities
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Bloomberg; Government of Moscow; Frost & Sullivan
Car-sharing markets based on vehicles in fleet in 2018
5.1
13
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
2017 2018
Reve
nu
e in
bill
ion
Russia
n r
ub
les
7
Russia’s capital was the second biggest
car-sharing market in 2018 with 16.5
million shared vehicles. According to
PwC, car-sharing was available in 14
Russian cities as of August 2018,
including Moscow, Sochi, Saint
Petersburg, and Krasnodar.
Many Russians, especially Moscovites,
are turning to car-sharing and ride-
hailing services in an effort to mitigate
the growing costs of car ownership and
maintenance they face.
High costs in combination with a lack of
infrastructure and affordable parking in
Russia’s cities seem to have translated
into a rapid growth of the Russian car-
sharing market.
Russia’s car-sharing market grew by a factor of 2.5
Car-sharing market revenue in Russia between 2017 and 2018
Note: Russia
Source(s): TIARCENTER
+7.9 bn ₽
=2.5x growth
8
Notwithstanding the fact that only about
one third of under 30-year-old holders
of driving licenses were registered
users of at least one car-sharing
program in 2018, the younger
generation seems to be the cohort that
is most receptive to sharing over
owning.
19.4%
10.8%
2.6%1.1%
66.2%
15.7%
7.4%
1.6%0.5%
74.8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
One programTwo programsThree programsFour programsNone
Licensees worldwide who were registered with at least one car-sharing program in 2018
Under 30s All age groups
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Arthur D. Little
Car-sharing more popular among the young
More than one third of under 30-year-old drivers were registered with at least one car-sharing program in 2018
9
Contrary to car-sharing, members of
ride-sharing programs keep out of the
driver’s seat, unless they themselves
own the vehicle and offer rides to
others, which would make them
members of peer-to-peer ride-sharing
(P2P ride-sharing). P2P ride-sharing (or
carpooling) enables vehicle owners and
riders to share personal vehicles.
Ride-hailing programs enable their
users to summon a vehicle driven by a
designated driver. The ride-hailing
market is very similar to the traditional
taxi market, but connects passengers
and drivers via technology, and
sometimes lacks the type of regulation
that typically puts a cap on the number
of vehicles in taxi fleets. Technology has
given rise to the term e-hailing.
Eastern Asia is expected to remain the
largest market globally. The Statista
Mobility Market Outlook estimates that
this market will grow from 56.8 billion to
105 billion U.S. dollars and serve some
700 million customers in 2023.
Ride-hailing: Asia leads the market
Global revenue comparison - ride-hailing market as of 2019
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Statista Mobility Market Outlook
55,00050,00045,000
East Asia
56,813million
U.S. dollars
North America
52,877million
U.S. dollars South Asia
30,744million
U.S. dollars
27.2%
30.8%
34.2%
37.0%
39.4%
41.2%42.7%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Penetration rate
10
Singapore’s ride-hailing penetration rate among the highest worldwide
Singapore has a population density of
about 20,000 people per square mile.
Road taxes, parking fees, and vehicle
entry permit fees were introduced to
mitigate congestion and air pollution.
As a result, the country’s ride-hailing
penetration rate is expected to grow to
almost 43 percent by 2023.
Note: Singapore
Source(s): Statista Mobility Market Outlook
Projected penetration rate in Singapore’s ride-hailing market between 2017 and 2023
398,437
347,726
308,129
264,822
138,750
249,579
376,509
521,912
18,198 41,472
101,323
142,930
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
Yellow Cab Uber Lyft
11
Ride-hailing companies continue to gain market share
Trips per day taken in New York City with selected taxi/ridesharing services throughout April 2019
2016 2017 2018 2019
Taxi operators serve people
who need a ride but do not
necessarily want to use car-
sharing because they either feel
uncomfortable driving in an
unfamiliar environment or do
not hold a driver’s license.
Ride-hailing operators have
already begun to eat into the
taxi market. At approximately 28
billion U.S. dollars, the United
States is the world’s largest taxi
and limo market. However, the
growing popularity of ride-
hailing services, including Uber
and Lyft, has caused the
number of trips taken by taxis to
decline in the United States.
Note: United States
Source(s): NYC Taxi and Limousine Commission
12
0.8 0.7 0.6
1.9
2.6
4.2
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
2016 2017 2018 (projection)
U.S
. ta
xi a
nd
TN
C
rid
ers
hip
in b
illio
n r
ide
s
U.S. shared mobility grows at the expense of taxi ridership as of 2018
Young people in the United
States appear to be more
receptive to using ride-hailing
services than older generations;
hence, the level of U.S. taxi
ridership decrease is most
prevalent among Generation Z
and Millennials.
Although the number of rides
given by transportation network
companies has increased for the
third year straight, the car rental
industry continues to appeal to a
large customer base.
Transportation network companies (TNCs): growing popularity in the United States
Note: United States
Source(s): Morning Consult; Schaller Consulting; Various sources (Transportation Research Board, news reports)
36% 31%17% 13%
5% 8%
13%11%
13% 16%17%
10%
46% 45% 53%66%
0%
100%
Generation Z Millennial Generation X BoomersSh
are
of re
sp
on
de
nts
wh
o u
se
d a
ri
de
-ha
ilin
g a
pp
, ta
xi o
r b
oth
in
20
18
Ridehailing app Taxi cab Both a ridehailing app and taxi cab Neither
13
Rental cars: still receive the most U.S. mobility service online bookings
The U.S. is home to some of the
world’s largest car rental
companies: Hertz, Avis, and
Enterprise are located in Florida,
New Jersey, and Missouri,
respectively.
Against all odds, the U.S. rental
car market increased from 16
billion U.S. dollars in 2002 to
almost 27 billion U.S. dollars in
2017.
These companies could benefit
from providing a combination of
car rental and sharing services.
22%
19%
11%
10%
8%
7%
4%
2%
2%
54%
0% 20% 40%
Rental cars
Ride-sharing (short distanceincl. driver)
Local public transportationtickets
Taxis
Car-sharing (short term)
Ride-sharing (long distance)
Bike-sharing (short term)
Motor scooter sharing (shortterm)
Bike rentals
None of the above
Share of respondents who have booked any mobility service during the 12 months prior to March 2019
16.43
21.49
23.63
28.63
0 10 20 30 40
2002
2007
2012
2017
U.S. rental car market size in billion U.S. dollars
Note: United States
Source(s): Statista Global Consumer Survey; Cox Enterprises; Auto Rental News
Car-sharing and car rental may become complementary services as of 2019
14
The U.S. market can be split into
three major conglomerates:
Enterprise Holdings, Hertz
Group, and Avis-Budget Group.
The top three business groups
had a combined share of almost
94 percent of the U.S. car rental
market in 2017.
Enterprise Holdings owns
Enterprise, National, and Alamo;
Hertz Group comprises Hertz,
Thrifty, and Dollar; Avis-Budget
Group is the parent company of
Avis, Budget, and Payless.
U.S. rental car market is dominated by key conglomerates
Note: Worldwide and U.S.
Source(s): Bloomberg; Auto Rental News; Euromonitor; Fortune
Three major groups shared 94 percent of the U.S. market between them in 2017
Enterprise 43,9%
Hertz 14.7%
Avis 10%
National 7.7%
Alamo 7%
Budget 5.5%
Dollar 3.0%
22.3
19.4
16.4
8.8
9
10.8
8.8
8.5
7.9
0 5 10 15 20 25
2017
2015
2013
Global revenue in billion U.S. dollars
Enterprise
Hertz
Avis Budget
Thrifty 1,9%
U.S. market
share in 2017
U.S. market share of car rental companies in 2017
Supply- and demand-side factors
▪ Vehicle miles traveled by mode
▪ Impact on light vehicle sales
▪ Related costs
02
16
“When people want transportation, they want it now.”
– Logan Green, Co-founder and CEO of Lyft
17
Demand and supply in the field of Mobility-as-a-Service
While regions such as Asia and the Pacific have yet to live up
to their car-sharing market potential in the short- to medium-
term, North America and Europe seem to already have
reached their peak (chapter 4). In terms of ride-hailing
services, the Statista Mobility Market Outlook sees ample
room to grow in all markets, with Africa showing the largest
potential for growth. The leading market in terms of ride-
hailing network user penetration is Singapore (chapter 1).
This market is expected to grow at a compound annual
growth rate of about 5.7 percent between 2019 and 2023.
Rising demand for ride-hailing, car-sharing, and other mobility
services is anticipated to result in fewer car deliveries. Tepid
growth rates of car sales in saturated markets are indicative of
a downward trend, and the return on R&D investments will
determine the fate of the industry.
In an effort to mitigate climate change and thus tackle
carbon dioxide emissions, communities will seek ways
to prioritize electric cars, bicycles, or scooters. MaaS
providers need to factor in that the price of electric
vehicles is often higher than that of conventional cars.
Consumers are less likely to hang on to private cars
than previously thought but demand low costs and
widespread availability of vehicles.
Autonomous vehicle technology enables the
introduction of robo-taxis, which are likely to be more
profitable than conventional chauffeur service offers,
albeit only after R&D costs associated with the
technology have been amortized.
TNCs face risks related to the digital network
infrastructure, and opposition from regulatory bodies
looms.
As a result of increased population levels, mobility
demand among urbanites is on the rise.
18
Supply
transport
Demand
transport
Supply
infrastructure
Supply- and demand-side factors
Companies
offering
transport
Use the app
(among others) to
plan and book trips
Provide IT
infrastructure
Regulators
Supply transport
Offering the
appSupply
infrastructure & data
Supply
data
Demand
mobility
solutions
CustomersIT / service
providers
Demand
mobility solutions
Lacking
government
support
No definition
of standards
Generate
and send
data
Transport
providers
Supply
mobility
solutions
Use infrastructure
Define
regulations and
standards
Infrastructure
providers
Demand infrastructure & data
Platform
providers
Lacking agreement &
collaboration across
authorities & operators
No joint vision of
intermodal
transport
Uncertainty
regarding privacy &
data ownership
Critical
mass
required
Wi-Fi, tracks,
streets
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Roland Berger
19
Number of mobility service users and vehicles on the rise globally
Not only has the number of
vehicles increased between the
third quarter of 2017 and the
second quarter of 2018, but the
number of users has also surged
to a record-breaking 938 million,
only about 62,000 users shy of
the one billion mark.
630.49668.3
838.13
938.18
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Q3 '17 Q4 '17 Q1 '18 Q2 '18
Num
be
r o
f d
igita
l ri
de
-ha
ilin
g u
se
rs in
mill
ion
s
134.9
178
199
258.8
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Q3 '17 Q4 '17 Q1 '18 Q2 '18
Num
be
r o
f ve
hic
les in
ca
r-sh
ari
ng
fle
ets
in
th
ou
sa
nd
s
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Bloomberg New Energy Finance; Bloomberg
User base grows in tandem with vehicle fleet as of 2018
750.91
1354.22
2290.23
3981.5
5172.92
6679.76
0.0
1,000.0
2,000.0
3,000.0
4,000.0
5,000.0
6,000.0
7,000.0
1950 1970 1990 2015 2030 2050
Num
be
r o
f p
eo
ple
liv
ing
in
urb
an
are
as in
mill
ion
s
Africa
Asia
Europe
Latin America and Caribbean
North America
Oceania
Total
25.8
35.1
48.4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2010 2030 (projection) 2050 (projection)
Passenger demandin trillion kilometers
20
Urban areas are expected to spur demand throughout 2050
Population growth in urban areas will continue to fuel mobility demand
Innovative mobility solutions
facilitate movement between
home, work, and leisure
locations. Since these places
are often located in cities,
urban areas are expected to
push mobility demand, with
Asia positioned at the
vanguard of the trend.
Note: Worldwide * The values for 2030 and 2050 are projections
Source(s): UN DESA; OECD; Arthur D. Little; United Nations
21
Shared mobility will account for just under one fifth of passenger miles worldwide
Global shared mobility: percentage of passenger miles between 2025 and 2035
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): BCG
4%
9%
18%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
2025 2030 2035
Sh
are
d m
ob
ility
as a
pe
rce
nta
ge
of
pa
sse
ng
er
mile
s
22
Asia has also witnessed a
significant elevation in metro
system ridership, unlike the MENA
and North American regions.
Unsurprisingly, the private car
remains the preferred transport
mode in cities such as Dubai and
Vancouver. Meanwhile, Buenos
Aires and Mumbai have surfaced
as top cities for public transport.
While they produce low levels of
carbon dioxide emissions, trains
require an elaborate infrastructure
that would need to be extended in
virtually all markets, and hence
road vehicles will remain the
weapon of choice for as long as
TNCs need to rely on existing
physical infrastructure.
North American and MENA regions fall short on metro ridership
Annual ridership of metro systems worldwide by region between 2012 and 2017
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Global Rail News; UITP
20.8919.66
21.122.32
24.426.69
9.719.59
9.9510.36
10.52
10.754.99
5.275.48
5.65.64
5.91
4.874.97
4.894.77
4.74
4.7
3.353.4
3.63.7
3.64
3.73
1.25 1.37 1.651.77
1.86
1.99
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
An
nu
al p
asse
ng
ers
in b
illio
ns
Asia-Pacific Europe Latin America Eurasia North America MENA
23
Road infrastructure is best suited for mobility services
Road network length is more extensive in key markets as of 2018
Road network length in million
kilometers as of 2018
150,966
85,545
67,36867,278
48,150
33,488
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
Total railroad route length in kilometers as of 2017
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): CIA; World Bank
6.59
4.774.7
2
1.281.221.051.04
0.870.680.63
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7The U.S. leads both in terms
of rail as well as road network
length. As is the case in
virtually all markets, the
country’s road networks are
more extensive than its rail
networks: U.S. roads
encompass 6.59 million
kilometers, which dwarfs the
150,966 kilometers of railroad
lines.
24
While urbanites might be willing to travel
more and thus increase their vehicle
mileage overall, mobility demand can be
expected to come largely from other
forms of transport, most notably public
transport and private cars.
However, travelers are unlikely to trade
in their personal cars, unless the costs
related to mobility services are
significantly lower compared to the
costs of car ownership, maintenance,
and parking.
In many other fields, price sensitive
customers have shown low brand
loyalty, suggesting that the market will
favor fast followers who avoid the
mistakes made by first movers and offer
their service at a lower cost.
Private cars and public transport among key passenger flow sources
83%
72%72%
57%
39%
28%
14%14%13%
15%
14%16%
35%
30%
36%
70%
78%
46%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
DubaiVancouverMelbourneNew YorkHelsinkiBeijingMumbaiBuenos AiresNairobi
Pe
rce
nta
ge
sh
are
of tra
nsp
ort u
se
in
se
lecte
d c
ities a
s o
f 20
17
Private car Public transport Walking Bicycle Other
Modal split of passenger transport in selected cities by transport mode as of 2017
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Deloitte
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
Em
issio
ns in
mill
ion
me
tric
to
ns
25
Considering that plug-in electric
vehicles (PEVs) currently only account
for a small percentage of the market,
more cars on the road ultimately mean
higher levels of air pollution.
As a result of tightening environmental
standards in many markets, MaaS
programs with electric bikes, scooters,
and motor vehicles in their fleets - such
as Lime, Bird, Ola Electric, VW’s MOIA,
or bike-sharing programs, including
Uber’s JUMP and Lyft’s Motivate - may
have a role to play in climate change
mitigation, especially in car-centric
countries such as the U.S. Here, the
motorization rate exceeded 800 motor
vehicles per 1,000 people in 2018, and
the country is among the most prolific
producers of carbon dioxide emissions.
Global CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes 1757-2017
Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions rise in tandem with growing car parcs
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Global Carbon Project
26
Rising U.S. VMT is fueled by work related business and commuting
Americans traveled some 3.2 trillion
miles on U.S. roads in 2017.
Generally speaking, trips for
commuting were longer than trips
for social purposes. At the same
time, work-related trips are the kind
of trips that could easily be made
using mobility services (e.g. car-
pooling) if such services are
available.
25.9
11.58.7
7.16.86.4
37.5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Work-relatedbusiness
To/ from workSocial andrecreational
ShoppingOther family/personal errands
School/ churchOther
3.0 3.03 3.10 3.17 3.21
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Nu
mb
er
of U
.S.
ve
hic
le-m
iles o
f tr
ave
l in
tri
llio
ns
U.S. person trip length is shorter for social and recreational purposes as of 2017
U.S
. p
ers
on
tri
p le
ng
th in
20
17
in
mile
s
Note: United States
Source(s): Federal Highway Administration; St. Louis Fed; Bureau of Transportation Statistics
27
Widespread access to mobility
services might dissuade some of
the 76 percent of American
commuters to use their personal
vehicle.
However, this is easier said than
done in rural areas where
widespread access to mobility
services is still limited. Ride-hailing
is expected to thrive in large
metropolitan areas, such as San
Francisco and New York City.
These areas are already
experiencing rising adoption rates
for mobility services such as ride-
hailing, and yet, car traffic is still
high enough to clog the roads.
Americans prefer private vehicles to commute
Mode of transport commonly used to commute to work as of 2017
Note: United States
Source(s): US Census Bureau
Personal vehicle
Car-pool
Public transportation
(excluding taxicab) 5.0%
Walk 2.65%
Bicycle 0.55%
Taxicab or other
means 1.27%
76.4%
28
TNCs in the United States attract more riders in ultra-connected metropolitan areas
Note: United States; * Includes Manhattan and four other boroughs.
Source(s): Federal Highway Administration; Schaller Consulting
Annual ride-sharing trips in the U.S. in millions in 2017
159
75
45
35
20
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
New York City*
San Francisco
Washington DC
Boston
Seattle
Transportation network companies – total number of trips in selected cities in the U.S. as of 2017
29
Interest in car-sharing most likely be triggered by lower prices
Drivers interested in car-sharing programs: globally by incentive as of 2018
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Arthur D. Little
Percentage of drivers who would increase use as of 2018
44%
24%
20%
20%
0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 40.0% 45.0% 50.0%
Lower price
Free float
More pickup/drop-off stations
Higher availability of cars
30
Motorists would be most likely
willing to leave their cars in the lot
and use a shared vehicle if they
had widespread access to such
services, if more cars were
available, and if sharing programs
were to offer lower prices.
There are several opportunities
arising with car owners’ willingness
to trade in private cars for shared-
mobility services, including lower
road congestion levels, a reduction
in greenhouse gas emissions, and
fewer lives lost in traffic.
Policymakers need to take matters
into their own hands and tackle the
issues related to the growing needs
of an increasing population.
Lower costs of shared mobility are the main reason to ditch cars
Global shared mobility: reasons why consumers would trade in car as of 2018
Note: China, Germany, and the U.S.
Source(s): McKinsey
29%
27%
19%
8%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Costs have to be significantlylower
Pickup has to be guaranteedalways
Waiting time close to zero
Access to wide range of vehicletypes
Reasons why respondents would trade in car as of 2018
31
Congestion levels are highest in Asia and South America as of 2018
Populous cities need to solve the traffic jam problem
It remains unclear whether
mobility concepts will reduce
road traffic, but there is hope
that those options with a focus
on PEVs will reduce air
pollution in cities with large
populations where emissions
from congestion have already
become a problem.
52%
41%
38%
36%
34%
32%
32%
31%
30%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Mexico City
Los Angeles
Vancouver
New York
San Francisco
Toronto
San José
Seattle
Miami
65%
63%
58%
58%
56%
53%
53%
53%
52%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Mumbai
Bogota
Lima
New Delhi
Moscow (oblast)
Istanbul
Jakarta
Bangkok
Mexico City
Longer travel time relative to uncongested traffic in selected North American cities as of 2018
Note: Worldwide and North America
Source(s): TomTom
Longer travel time relative to uncongested traffic in selected cities worldwide as of 2018
17.1
36.8 37.117.9
20.6 20.113.7
14.2 14.2
3.2
3.7
3.83.1
3.4 3.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2000 to 2015 (annual average) 2018 2019 (preliminary value)
Sa
les in
mill
ion
un
its
Asia North America
Western Europe South America
Eastern Europe
+23.7million units
stagnation
32
Tightening regulations and the cost-
competitiveness of mobility services
coupled with higher utilization rates of
shared vehicles may lead to stalling
light vehicle sales, while the demand
for car-sharing and other mobility
services is projected to rise.
Automotive manufacturers might see
car-sharing operators as major
customer group.
Projected light vehicle sales are expected to fall in mature markets
Light vehicle sales growth is anticipated to come to an end in 2019
4%
9%
18%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
2025 2030 2035
Pa
sse
ng
er
mile
s a
ttri
bu
tab
le
to s
ha
red
mo
bili
ty
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Scotiabank; AlixPartners; BCG
4.26 4.385.65
1.24 1.06
1.611.4 2.35
1.641.34
1.561.39
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
UK Germany U.S.Costs
in
20
17
in
th
ou
sa
nd
U.S
. d
olla
rs
Car ownership Parking Congestion Parking pain
2.8 2.4
0.4
3.95.3
1.2
66.9
3.8
12.3 12.8
3.4
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
European Union United States China
Pri
ce
fo
r 5
km
city r
ide
as o
f
20
18
in
eu
ros
Public transport
Car-sharing
Robo-taxi (onceavailable)Taxi
33
Costs are the driving factor between MaaS demand as of 2018
Falling costs of mobility services and the advent of autonomous vehicles lead to ‘car cutting’
The price of a robo-taxi ride ranges
well below that of a taxi ride in most
markets - with the exception of China.
In markets where parking costs or
other charges are high, the total cost
of vehicle ownership already exceeds
the costs of car-sharing services.
8.24
Total
9.34
Total
10.29
Total
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): INRIX; PwC; Strategy&
34
Almost 80 percent of license
holders are willing to switch to
autonomous vehicles (AVs),
and drivers are more likely to
replace own cars with AVs than
any other form of transport.
It is anticipated that AVs will
become a game-changer once
smart cities have become
reality.
1,161
472
243
188
80
71
50
30
23
10
5
0 500 1000 1500
Robo-taxi service
In-car time monetization
AV production & sale
Fleet management
Sensor modules
L2-3 ADAS options
AV Op. System
Semis: compute
Semis: sensors
Maps
Semis: memory
Projected global AV market size in 2030 in billion U.S. dollars
44%
29%
22%
9%
2%
21%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Own car
Publictransport
Taxi
Bicycle
Other
None
Transport modes that will be replaced by AVs, according to a 2018 global survey
Autonomous vehicles might make transportation cheaper, safer, and less congested
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): UBS; Arthur D. Little
Motorists who are willing to give up their personal vehicles may drive AV demand by 2030
35
TNCs are expected to thrive once
human drivers and associated labor
costs are taken out of the cost
equation.
AVs would also most certainly solve
issues related to parking, as they could
just keep roaming the streets even
without passengers on board.
That said, AVs require a fully
developed digital network, and
research and development costs
related to AV technology are often
considered excessive: Uber incurred
about 457 million U.S. dollars in AV-
related R&D costs in 2018. Between
2016 and 2018, the company has
spent over a billion U.S. dollars on its
self-driving unit. 0.1% 0.17% 0.29% 0.49%
0.84%
1.7%
3%
5%
8%
12%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Ma
rke
t p
en
etr
atio
n r
ate
Projected autonomous vehicle market penetration worldwide between 2021 and 2030
Autonomous vehicles are anticipated to account for 12 percent of worldwide vehicle sales
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): UBS; Intel; Nvidia
36
Uber has spent more than a billion U.S. dollars on its self-driving unit
Uber’s worldwide research and development expenses attributable to its self-driving unit between 2016 and 2018
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Uber; Bloomberg
230
384
457
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2016 2017 2018
Exp
en
se
s in
mill
ion
U.S
. d
olla
rs
Competitive landscape
▪ Investments
▪ Financial figures
▪ Implications
03
38
“The opportunity for mobility services to generate revenue is
there, and it’s true, but getting from here to there is messy.”
– Stephanie Brinley,
principal automotive analyst at IHS Markit
In 2019, Daimler and BMW joined forces to launch their new car-
sharing joint ventures. Earlier that year, General Motors had
started scaling back its car-sharing company, Maven, and Ford’s
ride-sharing service, Chariot, went out of business due to low
ridership levels. Furthermore, the most recent financial results of
the likes of Uber or Lyft have failed to impress. All this can be
seen as indicative of an industry struggling with high costs and
weak prices. In the wake of both companies’ initial public
offerings (IPOs), shareholders have begun questioning the high
valuations of Uber and Lyft (chapter 3).
Is the technology that lies at the core of many MaaS business
models enough to justify the valuation? As it stands, mobility
apps do not seem to be unique enough to be immune to copying.
As a result, various competitors with very similar applications
have entered the scene, all of which are vulnerable to the
bargaining power of buyers: Low prices are necessary to attract
customers, but high costs prevail, and it is easy for customers to
switch operators. Since travelers will be inclined to use the
service that is most familiar to them, effective branding will gain
in importance.
At the same time, incumbent rental car businesses have not
remained idle. Enterprise Holdings and Avis Budget are eagerly
adding to their car-sharing fleets. The current strategy of many
operators active in the field seems to consist of going through
trial phases in order to find out which use cases work best for
them.
Transportation network financials
39
TNCs will require large investments for testing and
to maintain dense networks, as well as to support
research efforts; however, there is no guarantee they
will succeed in a cut-throat environment.
Individual business models need to become more
unique and add more value to win over consumers
and merit their loyalty. While some companies,
including SIXT, are betting on an integrated
approach towards several services within the
mobility field, others have begun to offer additional
services, the most noteworthy ones being Uber Eat
and GM’s Maven Gig.
40
When compared to startups in
other segments, e-hailing
startups received the highest
amount of funding between the
beginning of 2014 and
February 2019.
While Lyft and Uber may no
longer count as startups, both
companies will have received a
fair amount of funding ahead of
their initial public offerings
(IPOs) and over the course of
the past four to five years.
E-hailing startups garnered the most investments in the past 5 years
11.4
7.4
5.6
3.9
3
2.3
2.1
1.9
1.4
0.6
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
E-hailing
Semiconductors
AV sensors and ADAS components
Connectivity/ infotainment
EV and charging
AV software and mapping
Batteries
Telematics and intelligent traffic
Back end/ cybersecurity
HMI and voice recognition
Global investments between 2014 and 2019 in billion U.S. dollars
Mobility startups - global investments by technology between 2014 and 2019
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): McKinsey; Capital IQ; PitchBook
41
Car-sharing is another market segment
with big potential for growth. Asia and
Europe are expected to become the
leading car-sharing markets by 2021
(chapter 4).
BMW’s DriveNow and Daimler’s car2go
were merged in 2019 to form part of both
carmakers’ new mobility services family
joint venture, which will be comprised of
FreeNow, ReachNow, ParkNow,
ChargeNow, and the moovel app.
Through this app, customers will be able
to book shared services offered by
Daimler and BMW, as well as those
offered by competitors. Car2go was
among the top three car-sharing services
already prior to the joint venture.
72
56
11.5
7.1
6
3.8
1.6
0.4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Uber
DidiChuxing
Lyft
Daimler
Grab
Ola
BlaBlaCar
BMW
Daimler & BMW are ahead of other OEMs in the mobility services market
Global mobility service* market value by key operator as of May 2018
Note: Worldwide; * The term mobility services was represented as ride-hailing in the original report.
Source(s): UBS; Various sources (Media reports and company data)
Market value as of May 2018 in billion U.S. dollars
42
India is the leading market in terms of ride-
hailing usage frequency, ahead of China
and the United States. However, the latter
two countries are not only important
markets for frequency, but they have also
emerged as the largest markets for ride-
haling services in terms of revenue.
Considering the sheer sizes of both
countries, policymakers in China and the
United States alike are in dire need to
provide the infrastructure and services
required to satisfy their citizens’ mobility
needs.
Ride-hailing services seem to be best
suited to cater to travelers in both markets.
China’s most successful TNC so far, DiDi,
kept its crown in 2018 but faces stiff
competition from several Alibaba-backed
startups.
When it comes to mobility services in the
United States, Uber and Lyft have certainly
taken center stage, and the U.S. market is
divided between a de facto Uber-Lyft
duopoly.
86%
80%
42%
61%
17%
10%
11% 18%
46%
34%
69%
64%
3% 2%
12%
5%
14% 26%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Japan Germany U.S. South Korea China India
Sh
are
of re
sp
on
de
nts
wh
o u
se
d s
erv
ice
as o
f 2
01
8
Never Rarely At least weekly
India, China, and the U.S. are the leading e-hailing markets
Ride-hailing: frequency of usage according to respondents as of October 2018
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Deloitte
43
Uber, DiDi, and Lyft are the leading ride-hailing operators globally
Ride-hailing: market value globally by key operator as of 2018
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): UBS; Various sources (Media reports and company data)
72
56
11.5
7.1
6
3.8
1.6
0.4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Uber
Didi Chuxing
Lyft
Daimler
Grab
Ola
BlaBlaCar
BMW
Market value in 2018 in billion U.S. dollars
44
How DiDi and Uber compare
11.56bn USD
15.70bn USD
Funding Valuation
69 bn USD
50 bn USD
Transportaion
network
for ride hailing
(private and taxi),
car pooling
Transportaion
network for
ride hailing
and
ride sharing
Cities
About 400
Over 400
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Statista
Over 100 mn
40 mn
Monthly Users
2009
2012
2005
2010
2015
Launched
Core Business
Main differences between DiDi and Uber as of July 2017
45
DiDi was king of the Chinese
ride-hailing market in 2018, but
the company had come under
scrutiny after amassing losses of
around 1.6 billion U.S. dollars (or
10.9 billion Chinese yuan) in
2018.
Therefore, it must have come as
a boon when the Toyota Motor
Corporation announced in July
2019 that it would invest about
600 million U.S. dollars in DiDi.
China is one of the key markets
for ride-hailing. The other major
regional market in this field is the
United States, where Uber and
Lyft remain the most important
operators.
250
10,900
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
2017 2018
Lo
sse
s in
mill
ion
Chin
ese
yu
an
DiDi is burning through cash
DiDi losses between 2017 and 2018
Note: China.
Source(s): DiDi Chuxing; Caixin
-370
-4,033
997
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
0
1000
2000
2016 2017 2018
Net
Inco
me
or
loss a
ttri
bu
tab
le
to U
be
r in
mill
ion
U.S
. d
olla
rs
-682.79
-988.3-911.34
-1200
-1000
-800
-600
-400
-200
0
2016 2017 2018
Lyft
’s n
et in
co
me
or
loss in
m
illio
n U
.S.
do
llars
46
Net losses soar at Uber and Lyft
In light of both firms’ initial public
offerings in 2019 and their Form S1-
filing releases, investors have begun
questioning the respective levels of
profitability of Lyft and Uber.
Share-prices dwindled, as
shareholders remained unconvinced
that the bet on AV technology was
enough to turn a profit.
Note: Worldwide.
Source(s): Uber; Lyft
Net losses hint at weak business model as of 2018
47
Uber and Lyft were off to a bad start following initial public offerings (IPOs)
Uber and Lyft - share-price changes in May 2019
0.00%
-10.80%
3.40%
0.00% -0.10%
-1.50%-2.80%
-34.70%
-38.50%
-29.00%
-30.20%
-27.10%
-27.30%
-26.40%
-45%
-40%
-35%
-30%
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
May 10 May 13 May 16 May 20 May 24 May 28 May 31
Pri
ce
ch
an
ge
Uber Lyft
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Wall Street Journal; FactSet
Gross Bokings Revenue
Uber Lyft
48
Due to their user-friendly apps and low
prices, Uber and Lyft are the leading
companies in the area of ride-hailing in
the United States. While the majority of
car-sharing businesses, such as
Zipcar or Enterprise CarShare, is
incorporated into larger companies,
investors were able to catch a first
glimpse of Lyft and Uber’s financial
figures shortly before both companies
went public.
The financial figures of both firms can
be seen as an indicator that MaaS
business models have yet to prove
their financial sustainability.
As it stands, mobility apps do not
seem to be immune to copying.
Moreover, consumers might attempt to
minimize the number of mobility
companies they interact and share
data with. This has resulted in the
emergence of various competitors with
very similar applications and has made
e-travel aggregator apps, such as
Whim or moovel, enter the scene.
Uber and Lyft form a de-facto duopoly in the U.S. market
EBITDA
50bn USD
8.1bn USD
11.3bn USD
2.2bn USD
-1.8bn USD
-0.9bn USD
Note: Worldwide; * Uber’s earnings exclude proceeds from the sale of its Russia and Southeast Asia businesses; EBITDA stands for adjusted
earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, amortization
Source(s): Uber; Lyft
How Uber and Lyft measured up in 2018*
2.1
4
5.23
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
2016 2017 2018
Ube
r’s a
nn
ua
l ri
de
rsh
ip in
b
illio
ns
162.6
375.5
551
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
2016 2017 2018 (forecast)
Lyft
’s a
nn
ua
l ri
de
rsh
ip in
m
illio
ns
49
Uber’s ridership is almost 10 times higher than that of Lyft as of 2018
Uber dwarfs Lyft in terms of ridership
Due to its global presence, which was
expanded through the acquisition of
Emirati TNC, Careem, in 2019, Uber’s
ridership figure in 2018 was about ten
times higher than that of Lyft, but both
companies have total costs and
expenses exceeding their revenue
streams.
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Business Insider; Lyft; Forbes; Trefis.com
0.34
1.06
2.16
-3.5
-2.5
-1.5
-0.5
0.5
1.5
2.5
2016 2017 2018
Reve
nu
e in
bill
ion
U.S
. d
olla
rs
Revenue in billion U.S. dollars
50
Lyft’s global revenue shows steady growth
Lyft's revenue worldwide between 2016 and 2018
-1.04
-1.77
-3.13Total costs and expenses
in billion U.S. dollars
Cumulative cash flow in
operating activities
between FY 2016 and
FY 2018:
-1.2 billion U.S. dollars
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Lyft
51
Global net revenue of Uber crosses the 10 billion U.S. dollar mark
Uber's net revenue worldwide between 2013 and 2018
6.5
7.5
11.3
-16
-11
-6
-1
4
9
14
2016 2017 2018
Ne
t re
ve
nu
e in
bill
ion
U.S
. d
olla
rs
Cumulative cash flow in
operating activities
between FY 2016 and
FY 2018:
-5.9billion U.S. dollars
Total costs and expenses
in billion U.S. dollars
Revenue in billion U.S. dollars
-6.87
-12.01 -14.3
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Business of Apps; Business Insider; Fortune; CNBC
52
Lyft’s total assets amount to just under 3.8 billion U.S. dollars
Total assets of Lyft between 2017 and 2018
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Lyft
3.02
3.76
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
2017 2018
To
tal a
sse
ts in
bill
ion
U.S
. d
olla
rs
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Computer equipment
Construction in progress
Leasehold improvements
Leased computer equipment
Building and site improvements
Land
Internal-use software
Furniture and fixtures
Leased vehicles
Dockless e-bikes
53
In its 2018 fiscal year, Uber held about
24 billion U.S. dollars in total assets,
some 10 billion of which were
categorized as investments. These
investments were mainly divestitures
Uber made (in exchange for a non-
controlling interest or equity ownership
interest) to competitors such as DiDi
and Grab, as well as Yandex, the
Russian parent company of MLU.
The gains Uber made from investments
were also the main reason for the
company’s positive net income in 2018.
At the same time, leased vehicles only
contributed 34 million U.S. dollars to
Uber’s property and equipment assets,
which totaled about 1.6 billion U.S.
dollars in the 2018 fiscal year. As Uber
keeps losing its first-mover advantage,
the sources of future profits are waning.
Computer equipment is the main driver of Uber's property and equipment assets
Uber's property and equipment assets by component in 2018
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Uber
P&E asset value in million U.S. dollars
Market potential and outlook
▪ Market size
▪ Target groups
▪ Emerging markets
04
55
“At the end of the day you still have to make something
people want. You have to find a way to produce it. You have
to find a way to distribute it.”
– Travis Kalanick, co-founder of Uber
Between 2025 and 2030, the market for mobility services is projected to grow at an annual compound growth rate of just over eight
percent and reach 250 billion U.S. dollars by 2030.
In the long run, micro-mobility (i.e. bicycle- and scooter-sharing) will be at one end of the spectrum, while eVTOL (electric vertical take-
off and landing) drones and hyperloops will be positioned at the opposite end of the spectrum. While the market for micro-mobility looks
most promising in bicycle-centered cities such as Copenhagen or Amsterdam, eVTOLs will most likely struggle outside affluent markets.
Size of the Mobility-as-a-Service market
56
New market potential will arise in the field of eVTOLs,
hyperloops, and micro-mobility with electric scooters at
the vanguard of the trend.
Transportation networks are a good opportunity for
carmakers to sell vehicles into network fleets. This
procedure cuts out the dealership, and carmakers
need to become increasingly service focused. Daimler
and BMW lead the pack by operating one of the most
prolific car-sharing joint ventures.
Policymakers should not leave
mobility strategies to private
firms alone.
57
New mobility technology is expected to account for 40 percent of automotive industry profits
New mobility tech – projected share of global auto industry profits between 2025 and 2035
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): BCG;
17%
26%
40%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
2025 2030 2035
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
ind
ustr
y p
rofits
58
China will become the mobility services market leader by 2030
Mobility services: global market size by region in 2017 and 2030
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): PwC; Strategy&
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2017 2030
Ma
rke
t siz
e in
bill
ion
U.S
. d
olla
rs
U.S. EU China
350
43.1
10.1
9.1
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Ride-hailing
Smartparking
Ride-sharing
Car-sharing
59
By 2025, the market for new mobility
services is projected to be in full swing
with the ride-hailing segment holding
the highest potential for revenue
generation.
While the total addressable market for
passenger drones seems small, this
segment might receive some extra
attention from those policymakers who
are concerned with the growing
congestion in the political geographies
under their auspices. Similar things can
be said about the smart parking
segment and the market for micro-
mobility services, which is anticipated
to reach a size of 330 to 500 billion
U.S. dollars by 2030.
The ride-hailing segment holds the largest market potential
New mobility services: global market forecast by type in 2025
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Frost & Sullivan; UBS
Projected revenue in 2025
in billion U.S. dollars
127,765
153,591
183,677
216,810
251,268
285,585
318,765
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
60
Revenue in the ride hailing market
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Statista Mobility Market Outlook
Market size in million U.S. dollars between 2017and 2023
61
North America’s market share is
projected to decline over the next
couple of years. One reason for this
may be that North America has
already fulfilled its potential.
At the same time, markets outside
Europe and North America are
expected to grab almost 50 percent
of the global market by 2021.
Insurance costs are among the
main barriers of entry into this
market.
Car-sharing markets outside North America have the greatest potential
Car-sharing: global market size by main region in 2015 and 2021
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Roland Berger
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2015 2021
Sh
are
of th
e m
ark
et
Asia Pacific & others Europe North America
62
Fleet-based and peer-to-peer car-sharing segments are anticipated to grow
The car-sharing market is poised
for growth, both in its peer-to-peer
and in its fleet-based segment.
It is expected that peer-to-peer
programs will have twice as many
vehicles as the fleet-based
counterpart, though.
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): Merrill Lynch; Bank of America
200
440
990
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
2015 2020 2025
Ve
hic
les in
pe
er-
to-p
ee
r ca
r-sh
ari
ng
pro
gra
ms th
ou
sa
nd
un
its
110
220
430
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2015 2020 2025
Ve
hic
les in
fle
et-
ba
se
d c
ar-
sh
ari
ng
pro
gra
ms in
th
ou
sa
nd
un
its
Peer-to-peer car-sharing programs are expected to increase the most between 2015 and 2025
30
50
100
150
200
300
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Low estimate High estimate
Mic
ro-m
ob
ility
ma
rke
t siz
e in
20
30
in
bill
ion
U.S
. d
olla
rs
China
Europe
United States
1
4
21
0
5
10
15
20
25
2025 2030 2035
Urb
an
pa
sse
ng
er
ma
rke
t siz
e in
bill
ion
U.S
. d
olla
rs
63
Outlook: micro-mobility and urban passenger drones will be next
(Electric) bike-sharing and scooter-
sharing operators have already
begun to pop up, and passenger
drones are predicted to take off
soon. They are anticipated to
become the next form of passenger
transport; the sky is no longer the
limit.
Note: Worldwide
Source(s): McKinsey; Porsche Consulting
The United States is projected to become the leading micro-mobility market by 2030
Demand trends
As a result of increased population levels in urban
areas, mobility demand among urbanites is on the rise.
Younger generations are already receptive to MaaS,
indicating that the market has untapped growth
potential among the more senior age groups.
In an effort to mitigate climate change and thus tackle
carbon dioxide emissions, communities will seek ways
to prioritize electric cars, bicycles, or scooters.
Consumers are less likely to hang on to their private
cars than previously thought but demand low costs
and widespread availability of vehicles.
New market opportunities will arise in the field of
micro-mobility with electric scooters spearheading the
trend.
Risks and opportunities
Policymakers should not leave their nations’ mobility
strategy to private companies alone.
TNCs will require large investments to maintain their
dense networks and support research efforts;
investments need to be made in the field of
autonomous vehicles, digital network infrastructure,
and marketing.
Individual business models need to become more
unique and add more value to win over consumers and
merit their loyalty.
Autonomous vehicles hold the promise to introduce
robo-taxis, which are likely to be more economical than
conventional chauffeur service offers, but prices need
to reach financial sustainability to cover costs first.
Transportation networks are a good opportunity for
carmakers to strengthen their brands by selling
vehicles into network fleets. This may be important in
times of slowing light vehicle sales growth.
Key takeaways
64
AV – Autonomous vehicles
BEV – Battery electric vehicles
CO2 emissions – Carbon dioxide emissions
EBITDA - Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization
EV – Electric vehicle
eVTOL – Electric vertical take-off and landing
IPO – initial public offering
MaaS – Mobility-as-a-Service
Micro-mobility – vehicles that carry one or two passengers: (electric) scooters, pedelecs, bicycles, skateboards
OEM – Original equipment manufacturer
PEV – Plug-in electric vehicle
Robo-taxi – autonomous car operating for an on-demand mobility service
TNC – Transportation network company
VMT – Vehicle-miles traveled
Glossary
65
Alix Partners
Arthur D. Little
Auto Rental News
Bank of America
BCG
Bloomberg
Bloomberg New Energy Finance
Bureau of Transportation
Statistics
Business Insider
Business of Apps
Caixin
Capital IQ
CIA
CNBC
Cox Enterprises
Deloitte
DiDi Chuxing
Euromonitor
FactSet
Federal Highway Administration
Forbes
Fortune
Frost & Sullivan
Global Carbon Project
Global Rail News
Government of Moscow
IHS Markit
Intel
INRIX
Lyft
McKinsey
Merrill Lynch
Morning Consult
Nvidia
NYC Taxi and Limousine
Commission
OECD
PitchBook
Porsche Consulting
PwC
Roland Berger
Schaller Consulting
Scotiabank
Statista
St. Louis Fed
Strategy&
TIARCENTER
TomTom
Transportation Research Board
Trefis.com
Uber
UBS
UITP
United Nations
UN DESA
US Census Bureau
Various sources (media reports
and company data)
Wall Street Journal
World Bank
Sources
66
Recommendations
67
Dossiers
Car sharing in Europe
Car sharing in Germany
Car sharing in Italy
Lyft
Mobility-as-a-service fleets
New mobility solutions in China
Peer-to-peer travel in the United Kingdom
Ridesharing services in the U.S.
Uber Technologies
Mobility Market Outlook
Online Mobility Services
Digital Market Outlook
Ride Hailing
eTravel
68
Author
E-M ail: [email protected]
Released: March 2019
Imprint
Statista, Inc. ▪ 55 Broad Street, 30th floor ▪ New York, NY 10004 ▪ +1 (212) 433 2270 ▪ www.statista.com
Disclaimer
Statista, Inc. shall not be liable for any loss, injury, claim, liability, or damage of any kind resulting in any way from (a) any errors in or omissions from the Statista, Inc. industry report(s) or
any Materials available or not included therein, (b) the unavailability or interruption of the Statista, Inc. industry report(s) or any features thereof or any Materials, (c) An Authorized User or
Member's use of the Statista, Inc. industry report(s), Online Services, or Materials, (d) the loss or corruption of any data or equipment in connection with the Statista, Inc. industry report(s), (e)
the content, accuracy, or completeness of Materials, all regardless of whether you received assistance in the use of the Statista, Inc. industry report(s) from a Covered Party, (f) any delay or
failure in performance beyond the reasonable control of a Covered Party, or (g) any content retrieved from the Internet even if retrieved or linked to from within the Statista, Inc. industry
report(s).
Isabel Wagner
Senior Researcher
Isabel Wagner is the Statista
specialist for research on
transportation, metals, and
electronics in the U.S. She is
an expert for mobility-related
trend topics such as electric
and autonomous vehicles.