New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior • Hacker News Board

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#171

Post by smsm42 » Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 7:10 PM UTC

ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #124

untog wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are all important aspects, but it's also important to factor in accessibility (in the monetary sense, not physical - although that as well!), because that's one of the main reasons for public transit to exist. Yes, Uber and Lyft will provide better opportunities for transporting two large suitcases across town. But at what cost to the person who needs an affordable journey to work? Neither can come close to rep…

But most people don't bring luggage to work. It is doable with (ugh, they really do impact transit usage) multiple bus/light rail transfers to work without luggage. And good luck getting transit to get you to the airport at 0500 on a Saturday morning.

There's not only luggage. There are groceries. There are other purchases. There's just a strain of standing on your feet for an hour, which may not be easy for someone who is not in the peak physical condition.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#172

Post by mcguire » Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 7:11 PM UTC

yardie wrote: post #18

I’m a big proponent of mass transit and when it’s available I use it if I can. But I can get Lyft door to door for just $1-2 more than a bus or train. If mass transit wants to keep with rideshare and livery they need to: expand routes, increase availability, update their equipment. When I was a kid I knew how to read a bus schedule and train map to plan my trip. Now, there is an entire generation of kids in school an…

"If mass transit wants to keep with rideshare and livery they need to:"

...attract VC funding to subsidize trip costs.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#173

Post by ilamont » Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 7:13 PM UTC

abalone wrote: post #107

tl;dr People use ridesharing mostly to go out to eat and drink (62% of trips). Riders are actually more likely to own cars. They don't want to drive when they're going out because they don't want to deal with parking or drive drunk. They don't ride the bus because it's too slow, unreliable or unavailable. If ridesharing didn't exist, two fifths of the time they'd walk, bike or use public transit instead, and a fifth…

Does anyone know the impact of ride-sharing on restaurants, entertainment venues, shopping, and other activities not close to rapid transit or bus stations?

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#174

Post by ibejoeb » Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 7:13 PM UTC

abalone wrote: post #161

samstave wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may increase the "total miles traveled" but doesn't it also increase occupancy density in the cars, thus reducing the fuel/pollution consumption? I'm tired of shitty data coming out of Uber and Lyft: I want to know about fuel consumption and the impact on auto insurance rates/accident frequency. Given the known population of drivers, what is their average insurance rate, fuel consumption etc vs the general pop who…

> It may increase the "total miles traveled" but doesn't it also increase occupancy density in the cars If it did then it wouldn't increase total VMT. Again there are "deadhead" miles in those cars without any passengers at all, a fifth of those trips wouldn't have happened in the first place, and two fifths would have used alternatives that don't contribute to VMT. (According to the study.)

The fifth of those trips that don't happen sounds bad to me. Does this mean that, for example, people are not going to get groceries because they can't carry all of that on a bicycle or a bus?

From the article, "Ride-hailing users have higher personal vehicle ownership rates than those who use “transit only”: 52% versus 46%." This point seems like a non-point. First, that's not a very big gap. Also, Do richer people pollute less or congest less than poorer people? I don't think so, so having the car in the garage is better than having it on the road, and no different than not having it at all.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#175

Post by toomuchtodo » Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 7:14 PM UTC

bluedino wrote: post #167

abalone wrote: post #107

tl;dr People use ridesharing mostly to go out to eat and drink (62% of trips). Riders are actually more likely to own cars. They don't want to drive when they're going out because they don't want to deal with parking or drive drunk. They don't ride the bus because it's too slow, unreliable or unavailable. If ridesharing didn't exist, two fifths of the time they'd walk, bike or use public transit instead, and a fifth…

>> because they don't want to deal with parking or drive drunk. That's what my friends use it for. It's a shame, because in the smaller midwestern towns, we don't really have Uber yet so it can't be used. Drunk driving here isn't even given a second thought.

Most bars have the names of taxi services to call if you're over the limit. To still drive because that's inconvenient is quite literally criminal.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#176

Post by sueders101 » Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 7:15 PM UTC

ibejoeb wrote: post #162

ctoth wrote: post #150

I cannot drive. I take Uber to and from work every day using a Uber pass. If my alternative were public transit, a bus to a train to another bus or train depending, it would take me 1.5 hours per trip, for a total of 3 hours a day. I would not work in the corporate world if this were the case. Does this study capture these positive externalities? For blind people, these often-derided services are the difference betwe…

Do you regularly get offered the Uber Pass? I've gotten it once, and I used the hell out of it, so now I'm pretty convinced that I'll never be offered again.

I'm not the parent comment, but I used to get offered Uber pass immediately after the previous one expired. Recently they switched over to option to auto-renew rather than having to manually buy a new pass each time. I'm in Portland, OR so it may be location specific.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#177

Post by colechristensen » Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 7:15 PM UTC

bdcravens wrote: post #129

colechristensen wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm regularly bothered by the fact that mass transit is more expensive than driving. Alone it is definitely cheaper disregarding sunk costs (price of car, etc.), it's still cheaper as long as I don't have to have a new car every few years, and if I have passengers mass transit is many times as expensive as driving. Shouldn't it be the opposite? I figure I can take 4 people from Mountain View to San Francisco and back…

Isn't mass transit generally planned for those without vehicles?

I calculate a different way.

Right now it's $322 to fly SFO to JFK for a trip of 5172 miles that's 3.1¢/mile. Compare a $8.25 trip Mountain view to San Francisco round trip at 20.6 ¢/mile. Are trains so inefficient that it's cheaper to fly than to ride?

Excuse me while I create a commuter airline between cities in the bay area.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#178

Post by madeofpalk » Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 7:16 PM UTC

WisNorCan wrote: post #30

otterley wrote: post #9

Link to the actual report: https://itspubs.ucdavis.edu/wp-content/themes/ucdavis/pubs/d... What it actually says: "Directionally, based on mode substitution and ride-hailing frequency of use data, we conclude that ride-hailing is currently _likely to_ contribute to growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the major cities represented in this study." (Emphasis mine)

Other than in mathematics (broadly interpreted), there is no definitive proof. There are just different degrees of confidence. Even though Uber has been saying that they are improving urban transportation, I have always been skeptical. As new substitutes are introduced to mass transit - mass transit use should decline. If those new substitutes are heavily subsidized by VCs, mass transit will decline more.

I mean, what does "improving urban transportation" actually mean?

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#179

Post by beager » Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 7:16 PM UTC

ctoth wrote: post #150

I cannot drive. I take Uber to and from work every day using a Uber pass. If my alternative were public transit, a bus to a train to another bus or train depending, it would take me 1.5 hours per trip, for a total of 3 hours a day. I would not work in the corporate world if this were the case. Does this study capture these positive externalities? For blind people, these often-derided services are the difference betwe…

I’m sure the positive anecdotes and trends are accounted for in the data, but nevertheless the data still says what it says. Uber and Lyft aren’t here to solve for transit access and commute optimization, they’re here to serve as many rides as possible.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#180

Post by harigov » Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 7:17 PM UTC

ProAm wrote: post #164

harigov wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Subsidies are here to accomplish economies of scale. And when they have that scale, the cost of ride will also decrease dramatically (run buses instead of cars, electric cars/buses?), so my bet is that there will be an increase in price but it won't be order of magnitude more than current price.

Subsidies here are not for economies of scale, but for market share. Your bet is a risky one vs proven methodology.

It depends on what you consider as market in which Uber/Lyft operate. If it's entire personal transportation market, then one can think of them as in a zero-sum game with other players. I believe that the ride share market (even if you include taxis) is a growing market. Sure, it is very competitive so there is some struggle to gain market share, but there is also incentive to grow so as to get that economies of scale because whoever has that can price extremely competitively and be the winner.