Cadillac is just about to launch a new subscription-based car service in New York City. It’s called “BOOK by Cadillac” and the inspiration for the idea is as follows (taken from this Cool Hunting interview):
“We believe there is an as-yet untapped space between traditional ownership (leasing, financing, buying) and the rental, ride or car sharing options available today (Car2Go, rental, Zipcar, Uber) — a space where experience is more important than ownership, but a luxury experience is paramount.”
The way it works is that you pay a flat fee of $1,500 per month, which includes repairs & maintenance, insurance, taxes, unlimited mileage, and the ability to swap out your Cadillac vehicle 18 times per year. The idea here is that you can have one car in the city, one car when you drive to the mountains, and one car when you land in LA and are just feeling something a little different. It’s also commitment-free. Cancel any time.
It’s all done through their app and there’s a concierge to take care of every little detail, including moving your stuff (sunglasses, phone charger, and so on) to whatever new car you’re swapping to. My understanding is that you can also make the swapping as carefree as you’d like. Meaning: “Oh look, there’s a new Escalade in my parking spot.”
Cadillac is just about to launch a new subscription-based car service in New York City. It’s called “BOOK by Cadillac” and the inspiration for the idea is as follows (taken from this Cool Hunting interview):
“We believe there is an as-yet untapped space between traditional ownership (leasing, financing, buying) and the rental, ride or car sharing options available today (Car2Go, rental, Zipcar, Uber) — a space where experience is more important than ownership, but a luxury experience is paramount.”
The way it works is that you pay a flat fee of $1,500 per month, which includes repairs & maintenance, insurance, taxes, unlimited mileage, and the ability to swap out your Cadillac vehicle 18 times per year. The idea here is that you can have one car in the city, one car when you drive to the mountains, and one car when you land in LA and are just feeling something a little different. It’s also commitment-free. Cancel any time.
It’s all done through their app and there’s a concierge to take care of every little detail, including moving your stuff (sunglasses, phone charger, and so on) to whatever new car you’re swapping to. My understanding is that you can also make the swapping as carefree as you’d like. Meaning: “Oh look, there’s a new Escalade in my parking spot.”
Here’s their marketing video (click here if you can’t see it below):
Now, $1,500 is not cheap. But the value prop here is effortless luxury. I think it’s interesting to see car companies experimenting with new and different business models.
My view has always been that the most cost effective way to have a car is to buy a 2-year old model, pay it off, and then drive it for as long as it remains respectable. I am currently in that camp. But even that approach is starting to feel antiquated to me.
So much is changing in this space. Pretty soon, I don’t believe we’ll be thinking about car ownership in the same way.
I am reading about the Dashilar Platform this evening. I am sure that some of you are already familiar with what’s happening in this Beijing neighborhood since the platform was founded in 2011. But I am just turning my attention to it.
The Dashilar Platform is an approach to urban regeneration that grew out of a perceived failure, namely the redevelopment of Beijing’s historic Qianmen neighborhood in the lead up to the 2008 Summer Olympics.
In this latter case, a top-down tabula rasa approach was adopted and the entire precinct was demolished to make way for what – I am told – is now a kitschy tourist area that has lost most, if not all, of its urban authenticity.
The Dashilar approach runs counter to this and is trying to work bottom-up. Below is a description of their strategy from the Dashilar Platform website. (It feels like it was written using Google Translate.)
Dashilar Platform is an open platform founded by Beijing Dashilar Investment Limited. As opposed to the conventional concept of blanket development, Dashilar Platform will utilize key nodes which act as catalysts for change in the area. Through research and design investigation, Dashilar Platform will promote certain archetypes, modules, and best-practice examples for both residents and outside investors. The aim is to encourage the community to move independently yet coherently towards the strong yet flexible goal of creating a sustainable community with increasing depth and diversity. All parties are welcome to join Dashilar Platform and participate in our [progressive] Dashilar Project.
Some view this “urban acupuncture” strategy as simply a way to promote gentrification through small injections of culture and design. But gentrification, without displacement, strikes me as being the point given that the area was in decline. It was also probably one of the only sensible approaches given the fragmented ownership and illegal structures in the area.
What stands out for me as I read up on the Dashilar Platform, is the acknowledgement that the market alone will not preserve all of which is thought to be currently desirable in the neighborhood.
Here is an excerpt from a Medium article written by Masha Borak – a journalist and translator based in Beijing:
Collaboration is not the only interesting thing about the [Dashilar] project. In the words of their representative, the platform wants to take on the role of a “urban curator" that would decide which kind of businesses could get cheaper rent so they wouldn’t be left to the market.
Given the discussion that is going on in Toronto right now about 401 Richmond Street West – a non-profit and cultural hub in an area of the city seeing significant development pressures – this struck me as being particularly timely and relevant.
Markets are not perfect.
If any of you have any familiarity with the Dashilar Platform and what has been happening in this neighborhood, I would love to hear your thoughts in the comment section below.
Here’s their marketing video (click here if you can’t see it below):
Now, $1,500 is not cheap. But the value prop here is effortless luxury. I think it’s interesting to see car companies experimenting with new and different business models.
My view has always been that the most cost effective way to have a car is to buy a 2-year old model, pay it off, and then drive it for as long as it remains respectable. I am currently in that camp. But even that approach is starting to feel antiquated to me.
So much is changing in this space. Pretty soon, I don’t believe we’ll be thinking about car ownership in the same way.
I am reading about the Dashilar Platform this evening. I am sure that some of you are already familiar with what’s happening in this Beijing neighborhood since the platform was founded in 2011. But I am just turning my attention to it.
The Dashilar Platform is an approach to urban regeneration that grew out of a perceived failure, namely the redevelopment of Beijing’s historic Qianmen neighborhood in the lead up to the 2008 Summer Olympics.
In this latter case, a top-down tabula rasa approach was adopted and the entire precinct was demolished to make way for what – I am told – is now a kitschy tourist area that has lost most, if not all, of its urban authenticity.
The Dashilar approach runs counter to this and is trying to work bottom-up. Below is a description of their strategy from the Dashilar Platform website. (It feels like it was written using Google Translate.)
Dashilar Platform is an open platform founded by Beijing Dashilar Investment Limited. As opposed to the conventional concept of blanket development, Dashilar Platform will utilize key nodes which act as catalysts for change in the area. Through research and design investigation, Dashilar Platform will promote certain archetypes, modules, and best-practice examples for both residents and outside investors. The aim is to encourage the community to move independently yet coherently towards the strong yet flexible goal of creating a sustainable community with increasing depth and diversity. All parties are welcome to join Dashilar Platform and participate in our [progressive] Dashilar Project.
Some view this “urban acupuncture” strategy as simply a way to promote gentrification through small injections of culture and design. But gentrification, without displacement, strikes me as being the point given that the area was in decline. It was also probably one of the only sensible approaches given the fragmented ownership and illegal structures in the area.
What stands out for me as I read up on the Dashilar Platform, is the acknowledgement that the market alone will not preserve all of which is thought to be currently desirable in the neighborhood.
Here is an excerpt from a Medium article written by Masha Borak – a journalist and translator based in Beijing:
Collaboration is not the only interesting thing about the [Dashilar] project. In the words of their representative, the platform wants to take on the role of a “urban curator" that would decide which kind of businesses could get cheaper rent so they wouldn’t be left to the market.
Given the discussion that is going on in Toronto right now about 401 Richmond Street West – a non-profit and cultural hub in an area of the city seeing significant development pressures – this struck me as being particularly timely and relevant.
Markets are not perfect.
If any of you have any familiarity with the Dashilar Platform and what has been happening in this neighborhood, I would love to hear your thoughts in the comment section below.
It’s a picture of “The College” by Tribute Communities. What you’re looking at is the northwest corner of the building and a 20,000 sf grocery store fronting onto College Street.
I took a picture of the building for really two reasons.
1. The colored balcony enclosures on the west elevation (right side of the picture) are not something I’ve ever seen done on a Toronto condo before. I like color. I also wonder if they create interesting interior lighting effects and greater privacy when you’re outside.
2. I have been noticing more Juliet/French balconies on new builds as of late (could be an availability bias). Here they’re on the north elevation fronting onto College Street. Once the building steps back, you get conventional balconies.
I think Juliet balconies create a much nicer streetwall, particularly when used on a building’s lower floors. But I would be curious to get end-user thoughts on this. If you were looking for a place, would you rather more interior space + Juliet balcony or less interior interior + conventional balcony? Are balconies a deal breaker?
This is something that a lot of people in the industry debate. And it varies by city. In Toronto, conventional wisdom dictates that you need to provide balconies of any size, even if nobody ends up using them, other than to store a bike.
In other cities – sometimes because of liability and sometimes because exterior balcony space gets counted as part of the building’s overall Gross Floor Area (GFA) – balconies can be a real rarity.
What are your thoughts? Please leave a comment below. Thanks!
It’s a picture of “The College” by Tribute Communities. What you’re looking at is the northwest corner of the building and a 20,000 sf grocery store fronting onto College Street.
I took a picture of the building for really two reasons.
1. The colored balcony enclosures on the west elevation (right side of the picture) are not something I’ve ever seen done on a Toronto condo before. I like color. I also wonder if they create interesting interior lighting effects and greater privacy when you’re outside.
2. I have been noticing more Juliet/French balconies on new builds as of late (could be an availability bias). Here they’re on the north elevation fronting onto College Street. Once the building steps back, you get conventional balconies.
I think Juliet balconies create a much nicer streetwall, particularly when used on a building’s lower floors. But I would be curious to get end-user thoughts on this. If you were looking for a place, would you rather more interior space + Juliet balcony or less interior interior + conventional balcony? Are balconies a deal breaker?
This is something that a lot of people in the industry debate. And it varies by city. In Toronto, conventional wisdom dictates that you need to provide balconies of any size, even if nobody ends up using them, other than to store a bike.
In other cities – sometimes because of liability and sometimes because exterior balcony space gets counted as part of the building’s overall Gross Floor Area (GFA) – balconies can be a real rarity.
What are your thoughts? Please leave a comment below. Thanks!
