Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Future of Mobility
Mobility Trends & Services Overview, and Findings from Frost & Sullivan’s MaaS
project with Helsinki Business Hub and Finpro
Martyn Briggs
MaaS Summit, Finpro November 10th
2
Transport = Door-to-door
Mobility
• New Vehicles: BRT, EV,
High Speed Rail
• New Business Models:
Vehicle Sharing, Car Pooling
• Inter- Connectivity: Inter-
modality
• Urban Planning:
Reallocation of street space
• Integrated Mobility: New
technology enabled multi
modal integration
Paradigm Shift from Vehicle Ownership to Vehicle Usage We are moving very quickly from public and private transport being separate businesses, to a more
Integrated Multi Modal Mobility Network, due to changing demographics, preferences, and technology
Transport =
Private Vehicle
• Freedom
• Convenience
• Status
• Progress
• No Real Alternative
Gen Y
Connectivity
Population
Growth
Urbanization
Social
Responsibility
Natural
Resources
Pollution
Congestion
Globalization
Virtualization
Mobility Integration: Paradigm Shift from
Vehicle Ownership to Vehicle Usage
3
…already nearly 7m people use these shared services globally
• Round-trip/station based
services – vehicles rented
& returned to same location
(e.g. Zipcar)
• One-way fixed point to
point journeys (e.g. Autolib)
• One Way – Free Floating
services; vehicles rented
from or two anywhere in a
specified zone (e.g. car2go,
DriveNow)
• Short rental/a few days
• Insurance - key to the
operating model/platforms
• Key Players incl.
Getaround, RelayRides,
Wheelz, Buzzcar, Tamyca
• Asset Light business
• Dedicated fleet of vehicles
at company premises for
the shared use amongst
the company’s employees.
• Integrated keyless
operations, vehicle
telematics, and analytics
technologies key
• Key Players incl. AlphaCity,
Ubeeqo
5,300,000 Members
93,000 Vehicles
1,500,000 Members
147,500 Vehicles
60,000 Members
4,000 Vehicles
Carsharing Business Models There are already several well established vehicle sharing business models catering to several customer
groups and use cases, by the minute, hour or longer term corporate carsharing/leasing
Traditional Peer to Peer Corporate
4
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
2006 2008 2010 2012 2013 2014
Mem
bers
(M
illio
n)
Year
North America Europe Asia Australia Latin America
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
100.00
2006 2008 2010 2012 2013 2014
Veh
icle
s (
‘000)
Year
North America Europe Asia Australia Latin America
11,501
19,403
31,952
49,817
73,287
93,152
Traditional Carsharing Market Growth: Membership and Fleet Size, Global, 2006–2014
Source: Frost & Sullivan aggregation of operators, associations, academics data sources obtained through primary & secondary research
0.35
0.67
1.16
2.12
3.45
5.29
Global Carsharing Membership and Fleet Size By 2014, (traditional) carsharing membership grew to over 5 million, and the number of vehicles to
>93,000, increasing the member-to-vehicle ratio to 57:1
5
Corporate
Car-Sharing
Bike Sharing
Parking
Car Rental
Ecosystem
Partnership
Integrated
Mobility
E-Mobility
Micro-mobility
Public Transport
Car Sharing
Ridesharing
Taxi Services
Mobility Landscape – Many Players, New Partnerships, New Models In both B2C and B2B environments customers are demanding intuitive services; many actors investing
significantly in order to deliver the ‘killer’ seamless proposition & user experience
Travel
Management
Companies
OEMs
Car Rental
Companies
Public
Transport
Operators
Leasing
Companies
Software
Platform
Providers
Integrated
Solution
Providers
Fleet
Management
Providers
Integrated
Mobility
6
Car On Demand, and Mobility on Demand – The Rise of “Asset Light” The true disruptive forces in Mobility are taking place via platforms linking supply & demand, a marketplace
phenomenon; customers now expect mobility services on demand
Didi
Taxi
P2P Rental Car on
Demand Ridesharing Parking
Integrated Mobility
Tech-enabled Mobility Services growing rapidly, due to “Asset Light” scenario, with platforms
matching supply and demand to reduce spare capacity and improve the user experience
Customers now expect on-demand solutions and are happy to use shared services
7
Business Model Categories in the Sharing Economy Most of the sharing economy industry is based around peer to peer proposition, a few B2C examples
exist, and the first examples are seen expanding or targeting the B2B market as well
Peer to Peer
Definition A marketplace that lets individual owners rent out their assets to other users or members, making up the vast majority of current sharing economy businesses
Examples AirBnB (accommodation), BlaBlaCar (ridesharing), Peerby (goods)
Business to Consumer
Definition A company buys and maintains an asset (e.g. a car) and makes it temporarily available for rent to a pool of users or members
Examples Zipcar (carsharing), Regus (office space)
Business to Business
Definition A business that owns & maintains an asset and allows it to be shared with a pool of other business users
Examples MyWheels (offset leasing); several more are expected in mobility particularly
“There is no more B2B or B2C, It’s H2H (Human to Human)”
Bryan Kramer, author of Shareology, 2014
8
Beyond Car Clubs: “Asset Light” is the New Focus Area . . .
The world’s
largest taxi
company, owns
no vehicles
The world’s most
popular media
owner, creates no
content
The world’s most
valuable retailer,
has no inventory
The world’s largest
accommodation
provider, owns no
real estate
What is the next world’s most?
The world’s largest rail company, owns no trains
The world largest parking company, owns no parking
The world largest mobility company, owns no asset
The world largest car company, manufacturers no vehicles
. . .
Source: Tom Goodwin (Tech Crunch)
9
What are the Implications of “Car On Demand”? The rise of new mobility solutions to access cars will lead to a substitutional effect away from private car
ownership in urban areas; the industry is quickly reacting to provide mobility as a service
Reduction in Car Ownership?
One Carsharing vehicle can remove 10-15
privately owned cars from the road, and one Uber vehicle removes 4
Value Creation in Platform, not
asset?
Uber is valued at $50bn, more than
Ford, Avis and Hertz combined
Value Chain to become Mobility Service Providers
OEMs, Leasing, Rental, Suppliers, Public
transport providers, cities, tech firms…
convergence?
The interface is where the profit is – why should this be confined to only urban mobility?
10
Roadmap towards Integrated Mobility The Services of Journey Planning, Booking, Payment & Reconciliation are needed to truly enable Integrated
Mobility – this encompasses several well established industries, and presents significant opportunity
Source: Frost & Sullivan
Journey Planning Booking Payment & Reconciliation
Multi Modal Planning of journeys via
smartphone or web platforms
(business model: usually advertising
or commissions)
Integrated Mobility
Booking of transportation modes via
technology platforms, including
referrals from third parties (business
model: direct revenue or commisison)
Facilitating payment for transportation
services and clearing / expense
management (business model either
commission or service fees)
11
Mobility Models – Expansion, Partnerships, Integration with Car Clubs Car clubs are partnering with other mobility services and leasing companies to diversify their business models,
and include existing private vehicle owners in their member base.
Mobility Service Integration
With Car Clubs
Source: Frost & Sullivan
P2P Rental
Car Leasing
Ridesharing
Integrated Mobility
Bike Sharing
Public Transport
• Partnerships with Public Transport (e.g.
Moovel) > towards integrated mobility
• Partnerships with leasing co.s > towards
flexible leasing
• Partnerships with Bike Sharing > towards
sustainable active mobility
• Car clubs by transit companies &
acquisitions (SNCF Ouicar) > public &
private transport convergence
• P2P & leasing partnerships (e.g.
Snappcar) > sub-leasing in B2B
• Emergence of OEM Partnerships (e.g.
Ford/Getaround) > new car based
mobility services
• Multi-product agreements, e.g. Opel Car
Unity (P2P & Ridesharing), Ubeeqo
(carsharing, rental, PHV) > Expanding
mobility platforms
12
Key Trends & Outlook for the Mobility Market With considerable business model innovation, investment, and public sector support, the mobility ecosystem is
set to become more integrated with existing transit networks
Ultimate blurring of
business models towards
one integrated solution –
the smartphone
Increasing peer to
peer (for parking,
cars, rides, taxis)
Investment &
Partnerships from
OEMs
Dynamic Pricing
Increased Tenders
from Cities & Public
Support
Parking Reservation,
valet/automated
parking
“Car on Demand”
analytics & Big Data
Mobility-As-A-Service
Source: Frost & Sullivan
13
What’s Required to deliver the future of Collaborative Mobility? A combination of New Business Models, supportive policy and technology led innovation are required to
achieve fully collaborative mobility
Technology & Innovation
• Smart Ticket/Payment
• Reporting/Reconciliation
• Everything Mobile!
• Big Data
• Analytics
• Door to Door
New Business Models Smart Policy & Governance
• Open Data
• Framework for New Mobility
• Integrated Platforms
• Technology Incubation
• Incentives
CAR ON DEMAND SMART PARKING MICRO-MOBILITY
COLLABORATIVE MOBILITY
CAR SHARING & RIDESHARING
PUBLIC TRANSPORT (Intra/Inter city)
14
Source: Frost & Sullivan
New Mobility Business Models New mobility business models can be segmented into services where the customer has access to a vehicles,
services where the customer has access to a ride and services which allow the customer to potentially plan,
book and pay for journeys, parking and electric charging.
• Integrated mobility
apps
• Journey planning apps
• Smart parking apps
• Emobility apps
• Ridesharing
• Taxi hailing
• Chauffeur service
• Bus/Shuttle Transit
• One way carsharing
• Two way carsharing
• P2P carsharing
• Corporate carsharing
Drive Be Driven App based services
New Mobility Business
Models
15
Subsidiary
Premium OEMs Mobility Business Models – Disaggregation of
Service Offering Premium OEMs such as Daimler and BMW are leading the way in new
mobility services, with mobility business models as an integral part of their corporate strategy.
Drive yourself business models Be driven Business Models
Inte
grat
ed
Mo
bili
ty
Smart Parking Emobility
OEM
On
e w
ay C
S
Two
Way
C
S
P2
P C
S
Co
rp.
CS/
Flex
ible
leas
ing
Rid
esh
arin
g
Taxi
Hai
l
Pri
vate
Tax
i
Ch
auff
eur
serv
ice
Bu
s/Sh
utt
le
Tran
-sit
Park
ing
Mgm
t.
P2
P
Park
ing
EV
Ch
argi
ng
Ren
ewab
le
ener
gy
Daimler
BMW
JLR
Audi
Volvo
Source: Frost & Sullivan, relates to operational mobility products and services only
Through VC arm Strategic
Partnership with investment
Collaboration without investment Future Launches
16
Subsidiary
Comparative Analysis of Volume OEMs Mobility Business Models –
Disaggregation of Service Offering Volume OEMs have a much smaller mobility
footprint with a number of OEMs initiating pilots in the carsharing space. Ford is the only volume OEM
exploring a range of products and services.
Drive yourself business models Be driven Business Models
Inte
grat
ed
Mo
bili
ty
Smart Parking Emobility
OEM
On
e w
ay C
S
Two
Way
CS
P2
P C
S
Co
rp.
CS/
Flex
ible
leas
ing
Rid
esh
arin
g
Taxi
Hai
l
Pri
vate
Tax
i
Ch
auff
eur
serv
ice
Bu
s/Sh
utt
le
Tran
-sit
Park
ing
Mgm
t.
P2
P P
arki
ng
EV C
har
gin
g
Ren
ewab
le
ener
gy
VW
Ford
PSA Renault Nissan
Toyota
Honda
GM
FCA
Hyundai
Through VC arm Strategic
Partnership with investment
Collaboration without investment
Future Launches
Source: Frost & Sullivan, relates to operational mobility products and services only
17
Recommendations to the City of Helsinki City of Helsinki to evaluate the viability of the mobility business model locally and the synergies between
the existing transportation landscape and the potential partner.
Segments Recommended next steps
Carsharing
Documentation of information on the areas of existing carsharing level of operations, city parking
structure, parking policy governance, policy and regulation of carsharing, evaluation of impacts of
carsharing in Finland, city demographic structure, as well as requesting information from the potential
operator (eg: impacts realised in other cities, service agreements and potential scale for Helsinki)
Ridesharing
Documentation of information on the areas of existing scale of ridesharing operations in Helsinki,
Helsinki travel data, policy and regulation, competitive impact on other existing services, both public and
private (eg. Taxis and car rentals) as well as requesting information from the potential operator (eg:
impacts realised in other cities, proposed business model, compliance within Helsinki regulation and
potential scale for Helsinki)
Smart Parking
Documentation of information on the areas of existing parking infrastructure, existing and potential
parking technology applications, parking challenges, parking data, parking policy and regulation as well
as requesting information from the potential operator (eg: potential for parking innovation in Helsinki,
proposed business model and potential scale for Helsinki
Integrated
Mobility
Documentation of information on the areas of existing level of integrated mobility, commercial
agreements and governance, confirmed and interested partners, policy and regulation, impact of the
provision of integrated services, services, existing mobility landscape. As well as requesting information
from the partner stakeholders (eg: proposed business model, investment requirements, technical
standards, compliance within Helsinki regulation and potential scale for Helsinki
Source: Frost & Sullivan
18
Conclusions and Recommendations to Helsinki Consortia to evaluate two business models – a partnership with an OEM who provides the entire range
of mobility services or an open platform that links a range of service providers.
Business Models
1
• To present clear and coherent Maas vision that is targeted at collaboration with an OEM –
eg: outlining where OEMs are required, potential commercial arrangements and concrete
pilot proposals.
• To engage with multiple OEMs on Maas and potential for partnership in Helsinki.
• OEMs with existing services to discuss how to implement these services in Helsinki.
• Consideration to be made regarding branding – eg. OEMs could expect to launch IM
services under their own brand as opposed to the Maas.fi brand
2
• To engage with multiple service providers in the value chain both OEMs for specific
mobility offerings and independent mobility service providers. Maas to function as an
open platform which allows stakeholders for different service streams to be seamlessly
integrated; creating a comprehensive network of mobility services.
Source: Frost & Sullivan
19
Indicative discussion framework: Carsharing Carsharing operators and Helsinki stakeholders should explore the existing carsharing, the parking
infrastructure, regulatory framework and potential impacts of carsharing services to Helsinki
1
Existing level of car sharing operations in the city of Helsinki.
• Number of one way and two way operators
• Scale of operations (Members/Vehicles)
2
City parking structure:
• Availability of public/on street parking
• Private parking – key operators
3
Proposed parking governance structure
• Service contract – geographical spread of carsharing operations
• Number of parking spaces allocated to the carsharing operator
• Price of the parking permit –
• Supply of parking permits and supply of car share vehicles
• Benefit to the operators – easy access and visibility to customer base
• Impact to current revenue – loss of pay and display revenue and other permit
revenue
4 Policy and regulation of carsharing – eg: service level agreements, limitations on number of
carsharing vehicles
5
Evaluation of the impacts of carsharing on car ownership, economic impact, social benefits,
congestion, emission levels – eg: while carsharing could reduce the total traffic count and the
number of parked vehicles it could also possibly replace some zero-emission trips made on
foot or by bike or shift usage of public transport
We recommend a combination of Helsinki documenting information of these areas and requesting information
from the operator (eg: impacts realised in other cities, service agreement s and potential scale for Helsinki).
Source: Frost & Sullivan
20
Conclusions and Recommendations Helsinki should present MAAS vision to potential partners to explore synergies, and to evaluate the
viability of the mobility business model in Helsinki and the synergies between the existing transportation
landscape and the potential partner.
1
Confirmed interest from vehicle manufacturers.
OEMs enthused by the concept of ‘Mobility as a service’ and open to exploring partnership
opportunities.
2 Skepticism from OEMs lies in collaboration. Questions likely to arise around the incentive for
collaboration, the business model, the contractual agreement and the competitive landscape.
3
Helsinki Business Hub, Finpro and stakeholders to provide
• Institutional analysis of stakeholder collaboration
• Blueprint of business model
• Framework for the contractual agreement
• Structure of the competitive landscape
4
Helsinki has the option of partnering with existing market participants with well established
mobility programs or alternatively with OEMs who do not have existing products and
services, but intend to enter the space, typically with smaller pilot projects.
5
Engage with OEMs based on our analysis and rankings. During the course of interactions
with the OEM to identify
• Helsinki Business Hub’s & consortia value proposition to the OEM
• Commercialization strategy
Source: Frost & Sullivan
21
Summary from Today’s Presentation The Future of Mobility is set to become integrated, multi-modal, and door to door, giving customers on-
demand access to transportation through technology enabled services
There is a convergence in the mobility landscape – increasing collaboration
and consolidation among mobility players
The lines between B2B, B2C and P2P are blurring and creating space
for new players
Digital transformation is having a profound impact and becoming
integral to the mobility industry to service its clients
Whilst services have largely targeted B2C markets thus far, business
customers are the next priority targets with Corporate Mobility solutions
Mobility is becoming far more connected, asset light, and integrated – Customer
expectations are shifting from ownership to tech-enabled mobility
22
Future of Mobility Video
Martyn Briggs Industry Principal, Mobility,
Direct: (+44) 2079157830
Mobile: +44 (0) 753 428 2371
Join our discussions on LinkedIn and connect
with us on @FS_automotive @BriggsMartyn
Watch our latest Video on the Future
of Mobility, filmed live at Frost &
Sullivan’s Annual Mobility Workshop
Thank You & Keep in Touch!
#IntelligentMobility
Join us in London, June 28th and 29th 2016!
