Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Disrupting Uber

jacobinmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 230 posts

Re: Disrupting Uber

#191

Post by tux1968 »

morgante wrote: post #184
honkhonkpants wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the problem with Uber is not that sellers are listing too high, it's that Uber keeps jacking up the spread. This is not a true functioning marketplace because the buyers and sellers don't have good information. Only the market maker itself has all the information. Also it isn't really true that Uber lowers prices for riders when they lower prices for drivers. Uber practices active price discrimination to discover…

> If you get ten people together on the same street corner and everyone calls for an UberX, you'll get ten different prices. That would be a huge story and would be much more interesting than the typical Uber hit job. If it were true, I have to imagine that it would have been covered by a journalist intent on attacking Uber. Care to share some actual evidence?

Wouldn't it be simple to claim that more demand (for any given corner or area) is immediately reflected in the price? That doesn't sound like a scandal; it's harder to arrange for 10 cars to arrive at a spot than 1.

Re: Disrupting Uber

#192

Post by morgante »

tux1968 wrote: post #191
morgante wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you get ten people together on the same street corner and everyone calls for an UberX, you'll get ten different prices. That would be a huge story and would be much more interesting than the typical Uber hit job. If it were true, I have to imagine that it would have been covered by a journalist intent on attacking Uber. Care to share some actual evidence?

Wouldn't it be simple to claim that more demand (for any given corner or area) is immediately reflected in the price? That doesn't sound like a scandal; it's harder to arrange for 10 cars to arrive at a spot than 1.

I don't think the Uber surge threshold is so sensitive that you're likely to be the marginal customer driving pricing up.

More importantly, there's simply no way that you would have 10 different prices. Ten people on a corner might be enough to flip that area into surge pricing, but each individual would not get their own personal price.

It's not like this is something which is untestable. If people actually think Uber is discriminating on price between different users, that's trivial to test.

Re: Disrupting Uber

#193

Post by hiou »

imh wrote: post #163

This prompted me to try to understand what a co-op really is. I read the wikipedia page, and still don't really get what keeps it separate from a regular business, except for ideals. At a co-op like this, they would still need programmers to fix inevitable bugs in the app, marketing/logistics people to figure out how to get traction (because that doesn't just happen by itself) and expand to new cities, and managers t…

Investors, shareholders, owners etc.

Re: Disrupting Uber

#194

Post by gesman »

artrlee wrote: post #180
pfarnsworth wrote: post #63

Good luck with the co-op idea. The problem is that drivers feel like their services are worth a lot, and passengers simply don't believe it. The reason why Uber is a success is that they created new demand by dropping prices. Everyone I know, including myself, would never have taken an Uber as frequently as we do if the prices were as high as taxis. You can't replicate this unless you keep pushing prices down, and th…

In Hong Kong taxi drivers operate private networks known as "80% taxi's". You'll see many taxi's with multiple phones in them with different drivers operating on a few networks. http://hk-magazine.com/article/inside-hk/mr-know-it-all/1145...

Someone ought to disrupt market and create an app allowing Uber/Lyft/Blah drivers to use 1 device per bunch of providers.

Re: Disrupting Uber

#195

Post by fineIllregister »

xseven wrote: post #125
cbHXBY1D wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They truly don't. They own the best technology but no driver OR customer loyalty. If a cooperative treats their employees better and with higher wages then why should the best, most active drivers stick with Uber?

because that is where the customers are

If a coop doesn't have to pay investors, they can split that between the drivers and the consumers. Customers will switch apps for cheaper fares, all else being equal.

Re: Disrupting Uber

#196

Post by davidf18 »

mahyarm wrote: post #172
davidf18 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I disagree completely. Uber's inception/success was partly because of existing taxi services' "barriers to entry". Medallions were worth about $1 million each when Uber started in NYC ( http://bloom.bg/2aCEeQA ). That's a textbook case of an economic rent. I live in NYC and if you look at my other posts to this article, you'll see I made the point that before Uber/Lyft the medallions went for $1.2 million. Still,…

Most of the uber price goes to the driver. So higher prices means more money for the driver. Since NYC is a more expensive place to live, and people have more money, you have to charge higher prices to get enough drivers to drive. Make NYC as cheap as new mexico to live in, and you will see new mexico prices.

Because of the limit on taxi medallions, the market value of a medallion was as high as $1.2 million. When drivers lease the medallion it can cost $125 per 12 hour shift or about $85,000 per year -- an amount Uber drivers don't have to pay and thus should result in much lower fares. Other US cities that are still expensive gave much lower fares.

Also there are many elderly on a fixed income that can't drive or negotiate mass transit easier.

Re: Disrupting Uber

#197

Post by stokedmartin »

ma2rten wrote: post #30
skybrian wrote: post #16

What they're missing is that higher wages depend on some barrier to entry (there are many kinds) that protects the people who have jobs at the expense of anyone who is looking for a job. As someone who works for a company with high hiring standards and correspondingly high pay, I have mixed feelings about this. It seems like there should be some jobs that are easy to get without much training, and taxi driver is a go…

I think the most valid complain about Uber as an employer is that it is advertised as well a paying job but that there are hidden costs that most drivers won't consider. It's similar to how programmers often look at consulting rates, but don't factor in non-billable hours.

There is an option to lease a car[0] with no limit on mileage at a fixed price/week which imho covers majority of maintenance charges also. Yes, there is a risk attached if the driver doesn't get enough rides.

[0] https://www.uber.com/p/carousel-vs-2/?exp=xcl_t1

Re: Disrupting Uber

#198

Post by honkhonkpants »

morgante wrote: post #192
tux1968 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't it be simple to claim that more demand (for any given corner or area) is immediately reflected in the price? That doesn't sound like a scandal; it's harder to arrange for 10 cars to arrive at a spot than 1.

I don't think the Uber surge threshold is so sensitive that you're likely to be the marginal customer driving pricing up. More importantly, there's simply no way that you would have 10 different prices. Ten people on a corner might be enough to flip that area into surge pricing, but each individual would not get their own personal price. It's not like this is something which is untestable. If people actually think Ub…

It's the surge multipliers that I am talking about and yes it is trivial to test. During surge I've been with friends all of whom get different multipliers.

Outside of surge everyone pays a published rate.

Re: Disrupting Uber

#199

Post by ktta »

Spooky23 wrote: post #164
barney54 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The incentives likely don't matter in the future because the future of Uber is driverless cars.

In the future, we'll have unicorns towing magic carpets, so Uber won't matter.

I'd also like unicorns towing magic carpets and appreciate the sarcasm, self driving cars are not the 'unicorn' anymore. Uber is actively investing in prepping for a self-driving world.[0][1]

https://newsroom.uber.com/mapping-ubers-future/ http://www.theverge.com/2016/7/31/12338268/uber-maps-investm...

Re: Disrupting Uber

#200

Post by dzhiurgis »

artrlee wrote: post #180
pfarnsworth wrote: post #63

Good luck with the co-op idea. The problem is that drivers feel like their services are worth a lot, and passengers simply don't believe it. The reason why Uber is a success is that they created new demand by dropping prices. Everyone I know, including myself, would never have taken an Uber as frequently as we do if the prices were as high as taxis. You can't replicate this unless you keep pushing prices down, and th…

In Hong Kong taxi drivers operate private networks known as "80% taxi's". You'll see many taxi's with multiple phones in them with different drivers operating on a few networks. http://hk-magazine.com/article/inside-hk/mr-know-it-all/1145...

Somewhat similar in Sydney, you can only haul taxis from Uber app and then it filled with tons of devices, cameras, etc.
Post reply on HN