Mike Isaac, a reporter for the NYT, wrote a book about unlicensed taxi company Uber, as it applies to Silicon Valley culture, and has an article going over some stuff. "Fun" bits:
In 2014, Uber added a "Safe Rides Fee". Uber said the fee was meant to pay for operational costs associated with safety. Turns out it was just there for profit.
In Indonesia, Uber was bribing cops.
In Brazil, Uber allowed riders to sign up with only an email, but because of the use of cash, signing up to Uber and robbing/assaulting drivers quickly became A Thing. Uber was unwilling to change the signup system, because they wanted growth more than they wanted to protect their drivers.
I would consider the core of the article to be:
Mr. Kalanick and other Uber executives were not totally indifferent to the dangers drivers faced in emerging markets. But they had major blind spots because of their fixation on growth, their belief in technological solutions, and a casual application of financial incentives that often inflamed existing cultural problems.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stephenmcbride1/2019/09/04/ubers-nightmare-has-just-started/#1a102375b7e0
(This is basically a blog, but the points are obvious.)
Uber's real problem is that they can't raise fares or cut costs.
They can't cut costs because their costs are almost entirely driver pay, and their drivers are already pissed off at how little they're making. If they cut driver pay more, their drivers would just move to a competitor.
They can't raise fares because their customers are extremely price sensitive, and there's a competitor in every market. All their competitors are also willing to run at a loss, because capitalism. (Even aside from them, there's the actual taxi companies to worry about.)
That leaves them losing money on every ride, with no real way to escape. They can't simply outlast their competitors, as most of them are real companies, with similar levels of funding. Even if they did manage to achieve a monopoly, it's too easy to create a competitor; all you need is an app and a marketing budget.
Taxi companies remain generally profitable, though Uber and Lyft have taken a big chunk out of them. Lyft is basically Uber-lite, also losing money (just under $1B last year), but not quite as quickly.
The special investigations team inside Uber, which fields complaints from riders and drivers, is not allowed to escalate those issues to law enforcement or file official police reports “even when they get confessions of felonies,” according to The Washington Post. They are also not allowed to advise victims or potential victims of crimes to seek legal counsel, according to the report, which was based on interviews with “more than 20 current and former investigators” who worked at Uber’s investigations unit in Arizona.
The investigators are also allegedly instructed to “first to protect Uber” and make sure it is “not held liable” for any crimes that are committed by people using the company’s ride-hailing platform. In that vein, the investigators told the paper that even the language they use when communicating with alleged victims is carefully worded to avoid the appearance that Uber is taking a side. The investigators also said they’re not supposed to specifically ask alleged perpetrators about claims against them.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stephenmcbride1/2019/09/04/ubers-nightmare-has-just-started/#1a102375b7e0
(This is basically a blog, but the points are obvious.)
Uber's real problem is that they can't raise fares or cut costs.
They can't cut costs because their costs are almost entirely driver pay, and their drivers are already pissed off at how little they're making. If they cut driver pay more, their drivers would just move to a competitor.
They can't raise fares because their customers are extremely price sensitive, and there's a competitor in every market. All their competitors are also willing to run at a loss, because capitalism. (Even aside from them, there's the actual taxi companies to worry about.)
That leaves them losing money on every ride, with no real way to escape. They can't simply outlast their competitors, as most of them are real companies, with similar levels of funding. Even if they did manage to achieve a monopoly, it's too easy to create a competitor; all you need is an app and a marketing budget.
They can exist as a sort of uber-lite form in the majority of large US cities where there is no taxi service worth mentioning
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stephenmcbride1/2019/09/04/ubers-nightmare-has-just-started/#1a102375b7e0
(This is basically a blog, but the points are obvious.)
Uber's real problem is that they can't raise fares or cut costs.
They can't cut costs because their costs are almost entirely driver pay, and their drivers are already pissed off at how little they're making. If they cut driver pay more, their drivers would just move to a competitor.
They can't raise fares because their customers are extremely price sensitive, and there's a competitor in every market. All their competitors are also willing to run at a loss, because capitalism. (Even aside from them, there's the actual taxi companies to worry about.)
That leaves them losing money on every ride, with no real way to escape. They can't simply outlast their competitors, as most of them are real companies, with similar levels of funding. Even if they did manage to achieve a monopoly, it's too easy to create a competitor; all you need is an app and a marketing budget.
They can exist as a sort of uber-lite form in the majority of large US cities where there is no taxi service worth mentioning
Or if they really want to get out from having employees with benefits, they could customize and sell their app to the cab companies so they could have digital dispatch and ride hailing.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stephenmcbride1/2019/09/04/ubers-nightmare-has-just-started/#1a102375b7e0
(This is basically a blog, but the points are obvious.)
Uber's real problem is that they can't raise fares or cut costs.
They can't cut costs because their costs are almost entirely driver pay, and their drivers are already pissed off at how little they're making. If they cut driver pay more, their drivers would just move to a competitor.
They can't raise fares because their customers are extremely price sensitive, and there's a competitor in every market. All their competitors are also willing to run at a loss, because capitalism. (Even aside from them, there's the actual taxi companies to worry about.)
That leaves them losing money on every ride, with no real way to escape. They can't simply outlast their competitors, as most of them are real companies, with similar levels of funding. Even if they did manage to achieve a monopoly, it's too easy to create a competitor; all you need is an app and a marketing budget.
They can exist as a sort of uber-lite form in the majority of large US cities where there is no taxi service worth mentioning
Or if they really want to get out from having employees with benefits, they could customize and sell their app to the cab companies so they could have digital dispatch and ride hailing.
They could as long as it's the same app globally
But that wouldn't fix the problem of most cities having no taxis
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
The number of women alleging sexual assault by Lyft drivers has been growing rapidly over the last several months. At least 34 women have either filed or joined lawsuits against the ride-hailing company since August. The victims' lawyers say Lyft hasn't done enough to protect riders from sexual assault, kidnapping and rape. And these suits allege that perpetrators are drawn to Lyft to prey on vulnerable women.
After Uber, Lyft is the second largest ride-hailing service in the country. The 7-year-old company says it has more than 2 million drivers and 30 million riders throughout the US and Canada. With operations in all 50 states, it coordinates millions of rides every day.
Neither Lyft nor Uber have released data on how many assaults are linked to their drivers, and they've declined to say how many sexual assault lawsuits have been filed against them. But according to lawyers representing victims, the numbers are steep.
"If the public realized how many women are assaulted daily [by ride-hail drivers] they would be flabbergasted," said Michael Bomberger, a lawyer at Estey Bomberger, which is representing Gutierrez. "These companies have fostered an environment to let these things happen."
Lyft, on the other hand, has acted like a bully in most of these cases, they said.
"The attitude of Lyft and the attorneys that they've hired to work on their behalf has been very aggressive and, in my opinion, bush league tactics," Bomberger said. "They came at us like they're an 800-pound gorilla and they're gonna smash us."
The lawsuits, which cover incidents in 19 US states, bring up a series of issues victims say they've experienced with Lyft. While the company promotes itself as offering "safe rides," the lawsuits claim Lyft does substandard background checks on drivers and often doesn't deactivate them from the platform after sexual assault allegations. The lawsuits also allege that Lyft tends to stonewalls victims -- ignoring, dismissing or downplaying their claims.
The night Gutierrez was attacked, she called Lyft immediately. A company representative told her the driver's behavior was "highly unacceptable" and that they'd "fire him instantly," she recalls.
But, she said, she's been unable to get a response from Lyft ever since. When she filed a police report, she couldn't get any information from Lyft about the driver. Gutierrez said every time she called the company, she was placed on long holds and representatives weren't helpful. And, she said, Lyft wouldn't confirm whether the driver still worked for the company. When CNET asked about her case, a Lyft spokeswoman said the driver was permanently banned after Gutierrez reported the incident.
Any time a company says that it complies with all federal laws I just assume they're full of shit. "Our operations are not technically illegal" is not the ringing endorsement they want it to be.
...
On a completely different topic - what happens if you get to the end of a taxi ride, the driver goes "Sorry, cAsH oNLy," and you say, truthfully, "I don't have cash"? What are they gonna do, kidnap you? Honest question.
+6
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Any time a company says that it complies with all federal laws I just assume they're full of shit. "Our operations are not technically illegal" is not the ringing endorsement they want it to be.
...
On a completely different topic - what happens if you get to the end of a taxi ride, the driver goes "Sorry, cAsH oNLy," and you say, truthfully, "I don't have cash"? What are they gonna do, kidnap you? Honest question.
Well, nowadays it would probably be something like "oh, the reader is working now"
Any time a company says that it complies with all federal laws I just assume they're full of shit. "Our operations are not technically illegal" is not the ringing endorsement they want it to be.
...
On a completely different topic - what happens if you get to the end of a taxi ride, the driver goes "Sorry, cAsH oNLy," and you say, truthfully, "I don't have cash"? What are they gonna do, kidnap you? Honest question.
Well, nowadays it would probably be something like "oh, the reader is working now"
...which is a perfectly acceptable outcome, IMHO. You caught them being shitty and you both know it. (Independent of any price gouging that may also be happening, of course.)
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
generally yea, which is why the card reader magically works when you just get out of the cab or threaten to call whichever city department does livery oversight.
Any time a company says that it complies with all federal laws I just assume they're full of shit. "Our operations are not technically illegal" is not the ringing endorsement they want it to be.
...
On a completely different topic - what happens if you get to the end of a taxi ride, the driver goes "Sorry, cAsH oNLy," and you say, truthfully, "I don't have cash"? What are they gonna do, kidnap you? Honest question.
As already mentioned, this is precisely the reason that in most major markets it’s illegal to operate without a working reader. What they’re hoping is that people won’t know that they’re full of shit, and/or that social pressure will get people to pay cash rather than call them on it.
I imagine the actual remedy for a reader that legitimately stops working mid-ride or mid-shift varies. Personally I’m not letting them take me to an ATM, and we’ll be contacting the police if they tried. It seems like the correct answer is they take your contact information and mail you a bill, or do an offline CC transaction.
Any time a company says that it complies with all federal laws I just assume they're full of shit. "Our operations are not technically illegal" is not the ringing endorsement they want it to be.
...
On a completely different topic - what happens if you get to the end of a taxi ride, the driver goes "Sorry, cAsH oNLy," and you say, truthfully, "I don't have cash"? What are they gonna do, kidnap you? Honest question.
As already mentioned, this is precisely the reason that in most major markets it’s illegal to operate without a working reader. What they’re hoping is that people won’t know that they’re full of shit, and/or that social pressure will get people to pay cash rather than call them on it.
I imagine the actual remedy for a reader that legitimately stops working mid-ride or mid-shift varies. Personally I’m not letting them take me to an ATM, and we’ll be contacting the police if they tried. It seems like the correct answer is they take your contact information and mail you a bill, or do an offline CC transaction.
Or just eat the cost, since they can't legally claim to be providing taxi service if their reader is broken?
+3
Options
Lord_AsmodeusgoeticSobriquet:Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered Userregular
Any time a company says that it complies with all federal laws I just assume they're full of shit. "Our operations are not technically illegal" is not the ringing endorsement they want it to be.
...
On a completely different topic - what happens if you get to the end of a taxi ride, the driver goes "Sorry, cAsH oNLy," and you say, truthfully, "I don't have cash"? What are they gonna do, kidnap you? Honest question.
As already mentioned, this is precisely the reason that in most major markets it’s illegal to operate without a working reader. What they’re hoping is that people won’t know that they’re full of shit, and/or that social pressure will get people to pay cash rather than call them on it.
I imagine the actual remedy for a reader that legitimately stops working mid-ride or mid-shift varies. Personally I’m not letting them take me to an ATM, and we’ll be contacting the police if they tried. It seems like the correct answer is they take your contact information and mail you a bill, or do an offline CC transaction.
Or just eat the cost, since they can't legally claim to be providing taxi service if their reader is broken?
Well yes technically, but assuming an honest malfunction that's outside of their control a good faith effort to pay someone for a service they provided is reasonable as long as they're not an asshole about it, I feel.
Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
Any time a company says that it complies with all federal laws I just assume they're full of shit. "Our operations are not technically illegal" is not the ringing endorsement they want it to be.
...
On a completely different topic - what happens if you get to the end of a taxi ride, the driver goes "Sorry, cAsH oNLy," and you say, truthfully, "I don't have cash"? What are they gonna do, kidnap you? Honest question.
As already mentioned, this is precisely the reason that in most major markets it’s illegal to operate without a working reader. What they’re hoping is that people won’t know that they’re full of shit, and/or that social pressure will get people to pay cash rather than call them on it.
I imagine the actual remedy for a reader that legitimately stops working mid-ride or mid-shift varies. Personally I’m not letting them take me to an ATM, and we’ll be contacting the police if they tried. It seems like the correct answer is they take your contact information and mail you a bill, or do an offline CC transaction.
Or just eat the cost, since they can't legally claim to be providing taxi service if their reader is broken?
Well yes technically, but assuming an honest malfunction that's outside of their control a good faith effort to pay someone for a service they provided is reasonable as long as they're not an asshole about it, I feel.
If their card reader is actually busted then I am guessing you can call dispatch and do it over the phone. And the driver probably doesn't want to report to dispatch that their reader is busted.
Any time a company says that it complies with all federal laws I just assume they're full of shit. "Our operations are not technically illegal" is not the ringing endorsement they want it to be.
...
On a completely different topic - what happens if you get to the end of a taxi ride, the driver goes "Sorry, cAsH oNLy," and you say, truthfully, "I don't have cash"? What are they gonna do, kidnap you? Honest question.
As already mentioned, this is precisely the reason that in most major markets it’s illegal to operate without a working reader. What they’re hoping is that people won’t know that they’re full of shit, and/or that social pressure will get people to pay cash rather than call them on it.
I imagine the actual remedy for a reader that legitimately stops working mid-ride or mid-shift varies. Personally I’m not letting them take me to an ATM, and we’ll be contacting the police if they tried. It seems like the correct answer is they take your contact information and mail you a bill, or do an offline CC transaction.
Or just eat the cost, since they can't legally claim to be providing taxi service if their reader is broken?
Well yes technically, but assuming an honest malfunction that's outside of their control a good faith effort to pay someone for a service they provided is reasonable as long as they're not an asshole about it, I feel.
Fuck that. It's never that it was working all day but just broke for you just then, you were the unlucky discoverer of a faulty machine, what an embarrassing predicament.
's a fuckin scam every time. Get you stuff and bounce, let the cabbie lose their shit and magically fix the reader for you or go cry to dispatch, and if they won't stop call 911 and report that you're being abducted. Put your phone on speaker so the driver knows you're legit.
Same if they don't turn the meter on. "Thanks for the free ride pal, next time don't try and scam people". Feel free to call whatever number is in the cab and let the driver try and explain how you managed to get all that distance from your home and there's nothing on the meter.
There's a reason why Uber is a billion times better than a cab, it's similar to how a ham sandwich is a billion times better than a shit sandwich.
I am only slightly amazed at how cab services have utterly failed to bridge the technological gap that makes uber so popular in the first place
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Any time a company says that it complies with all federal laws I just assume they're full of shit. "Our operations are not technically illegal" is not the ringing endorsement they want it to be.
...
On a completely different topic - what happens if you get to the end of a taxi ride, the driver goes "Sorry, cAsH oNLy," and you say, truthfully, "I don't have cash"? What are they gonna do, kidnap you? Honest question.
As already mentioned, this is precisely the reason that in most major markets it’s illegal to operate without a working reader. What they’re hoping is that people won’t know that they’re full of shit, and/or that social pressure will get people to pay cash rather than call them on it.
I imagine the actual remedy for a reader that legitimately stops working mid-ride or mid-shift varies. Personally I’m not letting them take me to an ATM, and we’ll be contacting the police if they tried. It seems like the correct answer is they take your contact information and mail you a bill, or do an offline CC transaction.
Or just eat the cost, since they can't legally claim to be providing taxi service if their reader is broken?
Well yes technically, but assuming an honest malfunction that's outside of their control a good faith effort to pay someone for a service they provided is reasonable as long as they're not an asshole about it, I feel.
Fuck that. It's never that it was working all day but just broke for you just then, you were the unlucky discoverer of a faulty machine, what an embarrassing predicament.
's a fuckin scam every time. Get you stuff and bounce, let the cabbie lose their shit and magically fix the reader for you or go cry to dispatch, and if they won't stop call 911 and report that you're being abducted. Put your phone on speaker so the driver knows you're legit.
Same if they don't turn the meter on. "Thanks for the free ride pal, next time don't try and scam people". Feel free to call whatever number is in the cab and let the driver try and explain how you managed to get all that distance from your home and there's nothing on the meter.
There's a reason why Uber is a billion times better than a cab, it's similar to how a ham sandwich is a billion times better than a shit sandwich.
Since human error and variance is a thing, I approach this question from a statistical standpoint. I have taken well over a hundred of taxi, limo ("call-ahead" taxi), Uber and Lyft rides in all corners and the middle of the continental United States. Looking at the distributions of service quality, there is no overlap. I.e., my worst Uber (and it was Uber) trip was better than my best taxi trip. Statistically speaking when testing for a difference in mean quality, I would be looking at a very low p-value.
Mind you, those are the results for the United States. German Yellow Taxis? Good to very good. London Black Cabs? Fucking awesome.
I took an uber to the airport this morning. A very pleasant lady picked me up and chatted about how nicely her day was going. On the way, the app pinged me and asked if I minded a 2 minute delay in exchange for a $3 credit to pick up two more people. I said yes, and we all merrily went to the airport together. Uber showed up within 5 minutes at 4:30 am, and turned my solo ride into a carpool. Uber is better than the very best cab services anywhere in the world at actually getting you where you want to be.
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
I feel like I must be nuts, because on the infrequent occasion I need a taxi, it's been okay. Not fantastic, but okay. West Coast and NYC only, however.
Regular taxi in NYC from La Guardia or JFK always has been a nightmare. Plus they say it's the city that never sleeps, but some neighborhoods have abominable taxi service. Taxi service quality falls rapidly outside the few major cities on the coasts and Chicago.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Yeah, "hailing a cab" is a thing that only happens in movies for most people.
Calling a cab, though, happens everywhere. I've taken taxis in cities across the U.S. and never had a terrible experience.
It's always been an unremarkable transaction. I need a cab at X time to take me to a place. Cab comes at that time and takes me to the place.
Yep. Barring some cabbies that didn't know the right shortcuts in Boston (100% fine, Uber does that too) I haven't had a really terrible cab experience. I think the big game changer of Uber/Lyft are for underserved communities like smaller cities, as those can rarely support the competition you need for decent service.
Yeah, "hailing a cab" is a thing that only happens in movies for most people.
Calling a cab, though, happens everywhere. I've taken taxis in cities across the U.S. and never had a terrible experience.
It's always been an unremarkable transaction. I need a cab at X time to take me to a place. Cab comes at that time and takes me to the place.
Yep. Barring some cabbies that didn't know the right shortcuts in Boston (100% fine, Uber does that too) I haven't had a really terrible cab experience. I think the big game changer of Uber/Lyft are for underserved communities like smaller cities, as those can rarely support the competition you need for decent service.
The big change I can see is the on-demand service and the ability to hire cabs in neighborhoods where established companies refuse to service. I've been in very small places - rural towns of 5k and the like - where the hotel called the cab in the evening to schedule a morning pickup. It's quite likely that if I had needed a ride "right then", I would have had a longer wait than with Uber/Lyft.
Of course, I've also had several recent experiences with both Uber and Lyft searching and searching for a driver to the point where I started getting worried. A coworker with a similar experience ended up calling and getting a cab to take her to the airport.
Probably isolated incidents, but it did make me wonder if the glory days of these services might be ending.
For call in taxi service, I usually have to call the day before planned early morning taxi pickups, and I don't get much information like arrival time, transit time, or even fare. If there are any delays (usually the opposite, they arrive 30 minutes to an hour early and I have to rush out the door) I am not notified, nor is there an easy way to call in close to arrival if something happens: I usually have to wait a while for the dispatcher who might not even be there in the early morning. These are all things Uber does better.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
also cabbies never want to talk to you which is a big plus. every lyft driver i get when i'm by myself wants to discuss everything which is god awful.
generally though, it's really hard to compare uber/lyft and livery on the merits because one loses money on every ride while also barely paying their employees after expenses, and the other has to actually operate in the realm of normal business, not silicon valley unicorn bullshit.
As with many things, that's going to vary person to person, and location to location.
Cabbies and Uber/Lyft in Toronto? Usually pretty chill.
Cabbies in Vegas? Oh, believe me, they want to wheel and deal. Had one challenge me to identify a bunch of songs on a CD he'd made, double or nothing for my fare depending on how many I got. I of course immediately declined. I mean, I played along when he went ahead with it just for fun, and I'm glad I did decline, because even after giving him a decade to work with, I only got like 4 out of 12 (though he didn't expect me to get No Rain, apparently that one gets a ton of people).
I've had one or two pull the 'oh sorry my reader is broken' thing, but it has been a while since that happened, especially since I go with Uber moreso these days, and that's maybe 1 ride per month or two most of the time. For all the reasons discussed in these threads, I'm not a fan of Uber trying to kill off competition, screwing their employees, etc, etc, but on the other hand, my means do have limits, and being able to occasionally get an on demand ride for a low fare that I know in advance and can pay without questions or snags holds appeal. So I try to do so responsibly, saving it for times when I absolutely need to and can't just walk or take mass transit or hitch a ride with a friend or something.
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
also cabbies never want to talk to you which is a big plus. every lyft driver i get when i'm by myself wants to discuss everything which is god awful.
generally though, it's really hard to compare uber/lyft and livery on the merits because one loses money on every ride while also barely paying their employees after expenses, and the other has to actually operate in the realm of normal business, not silicon valley unicorn bullshit.
"normal business" being government created artificial monopolies via medallion and licensing schemes. I live in Milwaukee 600k people, plus 700k in the "urban metro" until a lawsuit in 2013 there were only 321 tax cabs permitted in the city. Just think of what that means in terms of things like special events, sport games concerts, bar close etc. There were enough cabs for like section 107 and no one else- in the entire city.
If a group of us wanted to go out it wasn't uncommon to call for a cab and wait an hour to take a 12m ride into downtown. Milwaukee is still a shitty city to live in without a car, but 10 years ago it was pretty close to impossible.
Posts
In 2014, Uber added a "Safe Rides Fee". Uber said the fee was meant to pay for operational costs associated with safety. Turns out it was just there for profit.
In Indonesia, Uber was bribing cops.
In Brazil, Uber allowed riders to sign up with only an email, but because of the use of cash, signing up to Uber and robbing/assaulting drivers quickly became A Thing. Uber was unwilling to change the signup system, because they wanted growth more than they wanted to protect their drivers.
I would consider the core of the article to be: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/23/business/how-uber-got-lost.html
In AB5 news, Uber and Lyft have a counter-offer: a $21/hr minimum wage for drivers. Except...it's really closer to $15/hr, because it only counts time actually driving. (Remember that this has to include car expenses.)
https://www.columbian.com/news/2019/sep/02/uber-lyft-floating-21-minimum-wage/
(This is basically a blog, but the points are obvious.)
Uber's real problem is that they can't raise fares or cut costs.
They can't cut costs because their costs are almost entirely driver pay, and their drivers are already pissed off at how little they're making. If they cut driver pay more, their drivers would just move to a competitor.
They can't raise fares because their customers are extremely price sensitive, and there's a competitor in every market. All their competitors are also willing to run at a loss, because capitalism. (Even aside from them, there's the actual taxi companies to worry about.)
That leaves them losing money on every ride, with no real way to escape. They can't simply outlast their competitors, as most of them are real companies, with similar levels of funding. Even if they did manage to achieve a monopoly, it's too easy to create a competitor; all you need is an app and a marketing budget.
https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/14/didi-reported-1-6-billion-loss/
DiDi lost 1.6 billion USD in 2018.
https://news.finchcapital.com/post/102flag/an-analysis-of-gojek-and-grabs-valuations-and-profitability-prospects
Grab and Go-Jek are downplaying their ride-sharing bits in favor of branching out into more segments, probably because that's the only way to actually make money.
https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/04/30/forget-uber-and-lyft-yandex-is-a-better-ride-haili.aspx
Yandex.Taxi seems to actually be profitable.
https://qz.com/1028866/yandex-taxi-yndx-bested-uber-in-russia-it-wasnt-cheap/
This indicates that they successfully pulled off eliminating Uber from Russia. Shortly thereafter they started making a profit.
They can exist as a sort of uber-lite form in the majority of large US cities where there is no taxi service worth mentioning
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Or if they really want to get out from having employees with benefits, they could customize and sell their app to the cab companies so they could have digital dispatch and ride hailing.
MWO: Adamski
They could as long as it's the same app globally
But that wouldn't fix the problem of most cities having no taxis
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
...
On a completely different topic - what happens if you get to the end of a taxi ride, the driver goes "Sorry, cAsH oNLy," and you say, truthfully, "I don't have cash"? What are they gonna do, kidnap you? Honest question.
Well, nowadays it would probably be something like "oh, the reader is working now"
...which is a perfectly acceptable outcome, IMHO. You caught them being shitty and you both know it. (Independent of any price gouging that may also be happening, of course.)
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Technically, that is kidnapping if I don't consent to it.
As already mentioned, this is precisely the reason that in most major markets it’s illegal to operate without a working reader. What they’re hoping is that people won’t know that they’re full of shit, and/or that social pressure will get people to pay cash rather than call them on it.
I imagine the actual remedy for a reader that legitimately stops working mid-ride or mid-shift varies. Personally I’m not letting them take me to an ATM, and we’ll be contacting the police if they tried. It seems like the correct answer is they take your contact information and mail you a bill, or do an offline CC transaction.
Or just eat the cost, since they can't legally claim to be providing taxi service if their reader is broken?
Well yes technically, but assuming an honest malfunction that's outside of their control a good faith effort to pay someone for a service they provided is reasonable as long as they're not an asshole about it, I feel.
If their card reader is actually busted then I am guessing you can call dispatch and do it over the phone. And the driver probably doesn't want to report to dispatch that their reader is busted.
Fuck that. It's never that it was working all day but just broke for you just then, you were the unlucky discoverer of a faulty machine, what an embarrassing predicament.
's a fuckin scam every time. Get you stuff and bounce, let the cabbie lose their shit and magically fix the reader for you or go cry to dispatch, and if they won't stop call 911 and report that you're being abducted. Put your phone on speaker so the driver knows you're legit.
Same if they don't turn the meter on. "Thanks for the free ride pal, next time don't try and scam people". Feel free to call whatever number is in the cab and let the driver try and explain how you managed to get all that distance from your home and there's nothing on the meter.
There's a reason why Uber is a billion times better than a cab, it's similar to how a ham sandwich is a billion times better than a shit sandwich.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
A tow truck driver did this to me in a middle of a Blizzard with my car on his flatbed after he pulled me out of a ditch.
Since human error and variance is a thing, I approach this question from a statistical standpoint. I have taken well over a hundred of taxi, limo ("call-ahead" taxi), Uber and Lyft rides in all corners and the middle of the continental United States. Looking at the distributions of service quality, there is no overlap. I.e., my worst Uber (and it was Uber) trip was better than my best taxi trip. Statistically speaking when testing for a difference in mean quality, I would be looking at a very low p-value.
Mind you, those are the results for the United States. German Yellow Taxis? Good to very good. London Black Cabs? Fucking awesome.
As has been noted, part of the issue is unsustainable pricing.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
I assume the real market price is the black/lux which would be less enticing but I'd still use if we regulated it into the only option.
The problem here is taxi companies continue to be shitty from a customer experience angle and blame it on everything else.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Calling a cab, though, happens everywhere. I've taken taxis in cities across the U.S. and never had a terrible experience.
It's always been an unremarkable transaction. I need a cab at X time to take me to a place. Cab comes at that time and takes me to the place.
Yep. Barring some cabbies that didn't know the right shortcuts in Boston (100% fine, Uber does that too) I haven't had a really terrible cab experience. I think the big game changer of Uber/Lyft are for underserved communities like smaller cities, as those can rarely support the competition you need for decent service.
The big change I can see is the on-demand service and the ability to hire cabs in neighborhoods where established companies refuse to service. I've been in very small places - rural towns of 5k and the like - where the hotel called the cab in the evening to schedule a morning pickup. It's quite likely that if I had needed a ride "right then", I would have had a longer wait than with Uber/Lyft.
Of course, I've also had several recent experiences with both Uber and Lyft searching and searching for a driver to the point where I started getting worried. A coworker with a similar experience ended up calling and getting a cab to take her to the airport.
Probably isolated incidents, but it did make me wonder if the glory days of these services might be ending.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
also cabbies never want to talk to you which is a big plus. every lyft driver i get when i'm by myself wants to discuss everything which is god awful.
generally though, it's really hard to compare uber/lyft and livery on the merits because one loses money on every ride while also barely paying their employees after expenses, and the other has to actually operate in the realm of normal business, not silicon valley unicorn bullshit.
Cabbies and Uber/Lyft in Toronto? Usually pretty chill.
Cabbies in Vegas? Oh, believe me, they want to wheel and deal. Had one challenge me to identify a bunch of songs on a CD he'd made, double or nothing for my fare depending on how many I got. I of course immediately declined. I mean, I played along when he went ahead with it just for fun, and I'm glad I did decline, because even after giving him a decade to work with, I only got like 4 out of 12 (though he didn't expect me to get No Rain, apparently that one gets a ton of people).
I've had one or two pull the 'oh sorry my reader is broken' thing, but it has been a while since that happened, especially since I go with Uber moreso these days, and that's maybe 1 ride per month or two most of the time. For all the reasons discussed in these threads, I'm not a fan of Uber trying to kill off competition, screwing their employees, etc, etc, but on the other hand, my means do have limits, and being able to occasionally get an on demand ride for a low fare that I know in advance and can pay without questions or snags holds appeal. So I try to do so responsibly, saving it for times when I absolutely need to and can't just walk or take mass transit or hitch a ride with a friend or something.
"normal business" being government created artificial monopolies via medallion and licensing schemes. I live in Milwaukee 600k people, plus 700k in the "urban metro" until a lawsuit in 2013 there were only 321 tax cabs permitted in the city. Just think of what that means in terms of things like special events, sport games concerts, bar close etc. There were enough cabs for like section 107 and no one else- in the entire city.
If a group of us wanted to go out it wasn't uncommon to call for a cab and wait an hour to take a 12m ride into downtown. Milwaukee is still a shitty city to live in without a car, but 10 years ago it was pretty close to impossible.
The latter.