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

Uber and Lyft drivers' median hourly wage is just $3.37, report finds

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 273 posts

Re: Uber and Lyft drivers' median hourly wage is just $3.37, report finds

#151

Post by Dylan16807 »

foepys wrote: post #138
lotsofpulp wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds insane, even with American medical prices. How much are insurance premiums in Germany? I just don't see how anyone could cause that much damage with their vehicle.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16499582 It's pretty easy to do so much damage. Imagine turning left without looking and an oncoming truck tries to avoid a collision and drives into a store front. Property damages will be very high and the injured people inside the store will need medical attention, too.

Also sounds like the truck's fault.

Re: Uber and Lyft drivers' median hourly wage is just $3.37, report finds

#152

Post by throwaway0255 »

flomo wrote: post #100
throwaway0255 wrote: post #50

This doesn't surprise me at all and it's because of hidden costs incurred by the driver, combined with an implicit bidding system that drives down wages. Hidden costs: 1. Vehicle wear and tear (cars cost you money when you drive them) 2. Vehicle depreciation (cars cost you money even when you aren't driving them) 3. Interest and fees associated with auto loans and leases 4. Insurance premiums 5. Gas 6. Unexpected/unp…

I drove a cab for beer money back in college, and a year or so ago, I had an interesting discussion with a cab medallion owner, after some typical uber driver cut us off. He thought it was a suckers' game where it looked like you were making money - until you had your first breakdown and you had no money and no income. He was pretty confident the average cab driver couldn't plan for this, and the whole thing would co…

So, Googling "they're all from turnip town" led me to this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuKvUf7cr0s

And I still don't know what it means to be from turnip town.

That video has 300 views and is one of the weirdest things I've ever seen.

Re: Uber and Lyft drivers' median hourly wage is just $3.37, report finds

#153

Post by Kluny »

jimmywanger wrote: post #140
Kluny wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did the math on working for SkipTheDishes last year (Uber doesn't operate in my city). I really wanted it to be a good idea, but once I calculated gas, insurance and wear and tear on the car, it was an incredibly poor deal. That's with a paid off, cheap, car, too. Not for me.

Yeah. Do you think that depreciation shouldn't be 39 cents a mile for an old bucket? Or do they have requirements for the age of your car? If you have like a 2000 camry (which runs forever) depreciation seems to be virtually 0, especially if you buy the car used and only pay like 1 grand. Also, I can imagine if you're just shuttling food around instead of passengers, you can get away with a worse car. Nobody wants to…

I use Mr Money Mustache's figuring that each mile costs $1.55, then convert it to Canadian. $1.19 per km. Even a 2000 Camry will depreciate if you put enough mileage on it - if I was shopping for one I'd pay $5000 for under 120,000km, but not even a thousand for over 280,000km. But yes, you can get away with a bucket for food delivery. I'd say the best way to do it is on a scooter, but then you're really putting your life on the line every night.

Re: Uber and Lyft drivers' median hourly wage is just $3.37, report finds

#154

Post by acmustudent »

seibelj wrote: post #8
procinct wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are basically biding their time until driverless cars take off it seems.

Driverless cars in urban areas are decades away

I see a lot of driverless ubers here in pittsburgh

Re: Uber and Lyft drivers' median hourly wage is just $3.37, report finds

#155

Post by chrismcb »

em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #129
foobarian wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get it. Taxicabs such as in NYC are famously expensive to buy into, and yet drivers somehow afford it and make livings on them. So if they are clearly not losing money, why is it that a company that's supposed to be vastly more efficient due to use of computers can't make a profit? Are the tech overheads really that high?

Taxicabs such as in NYC are (were) monopolies. The price you paid was far above what the market rate should have been, which is why drivers were able to make livings on them. Uber/Lyft are simply forcing prices back down to the market rate which is where the prices should be in a free market. Driving isn't really something that should be a career. > "Why is it that a company that's supposed to be vastly more efficien…

If the GP is correct and the companies are losing money and subsidized by venture capital... Then no, they aren't fixing the process down to market rate. They are artificially delaying the market rate with venture capital.

Re: Uber and Lyft drivers' median hourly wage is just $3.37, report finds

#156

Post by lhorie »

foobarian wrote: post #81
UncleEntity wrote: post #18

> “The companies are losing money. The businesses are being subsidized by [venture capital] money … And the drivers are essentially subsidizing it by working for very low wages.” Last time I pointed that out I was downvoted for some unknown reason. My neighbor was talking about buying a new car to drive for lyft/uber and I was like "the trick is to tear up somebody else's car." We'll see if he heeds my advice though…

I don't get it. Taxicabs such as in NYC are famously expensive to buy into, and yet drivers somehow afford it and make livings on them. So if they are clearly not losing money, why is it that a company that's supposed to be vastly more efficient due to use of computers can't make a profit? Are the tech overheads really that high?

As I understand, it tends to be profitable in cities where it has operated for longer time, but it operates at a loss in cities where they've entered more recently due to costs related to marketing for driver acquisition, customer support, fraud, etc while ramping up the fleet size and establishing a stable physical presence.

As for drivers, my anecdata is that many claim to make "good money" (in their words). I've had a guy say Uber doesn't make him money, but then he followed up by saying he's a retired guy just doing it to keep active and that he owns two convenience stores...

Re: Uber and Lyft drivers' median hourly wage is just $3.37, report finds

#157

Post by chris11 »

prostoalex wrote: post #144
maxharris wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's sustainable because we're on the cusp of the autonomous vehicle revolution. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/26/technology/driverless-car... This is similar to how the huge army of people stuffing DVDs into envelopes at Netflix is going away. It might be slow, but I don't think there will be tons of people watching DVDs from them in 2030... https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/23/netflix-dvd-business-still-a...

The driverless revolution (whenever it takes place) seems to favor fleet management companies, not dispatch companies. It lowers the barrier for entry to pretty much anybody, with fleet manager taking care of car washes, interior clean-ups, refueling, parking at idle hours, ongoing maintenance and fixing occasional flat tires. What part of Uber/Lyft business model makes them more sustainable when compared to Hertz, A…

I'd say that Uber/Lyft would be better positioned to take advantage of driverless vehicles. The hard part is the tech, personal for fleet management is a cost center. They have already mastered outsourcing low-skill cost center type jobs to large numbers of poorly paid contractors. And both companies have business relationships with fleet management companies.

So once either company successfully develops proprietary IP that enables fully autonomous cars they should have a clear road to profitably. They can use their existing relationships with fleet management companies to handle that part. And that is a mature industry, so the presence of a lot of capable competitors will keep costs down for Uber/Lyft. If they do need to do a bunch of hiring for new low-skill positions they can probably outsource it easily. I think the major winners will be tech companies and car makers. I don't think the fleet management industry will capture the majority of the profits, but they will probably get a minor portion.

Re: Uber and Lyft drivers' median hourly wage is just $3.37, report finds

#158

Post by oh_sigh »

This headline is a confusing a statement based on what the paper says. The paper[1] claims "Results show that per hour worked, median profit from driving is $3.37/hour before taxes". The profit has subtracted from it amortized losses associated with vehicle wear and tear/deprecation. This makes sense knowing the nature of the business, but if a Domino's delivery driver, who similarly uses his own car for the job, says to you that is hourly wage is $9, would you assume that he was subtracting out vehicle deprecation?

[1] PDF: http://ceepr.mit.edu/files/papers/2018-005-Brief.pdf

Re: Uber and Lyft drivers' median hourly wage is just $3.37, report finds

#159

Post by bfuller »

nraynaud wrote: post #3
astrodust wrote: post #2

Uber is losing billions and their drivers are making peanuts. That sounds sustainable.

I am a bit curious about the dockless bike shares too, I suspect the same thing.

My city recently got them, and we currently have more bikes than NYC. It was rough at first but people are taking them a lot now, and its increased bicycling in general even outside of bike shares.

Re: Uber and Lyft drivers' median hourly wage is just $3.37, report finds

#160

Post by shakna »

TangoTrotFox wrote: post #150
Clanan wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of giving in to a gut reaction, you should read the paper. All research must get funding in one way or another. If you exclude research due to funding sources and potential conflicts of interest, you wouldn't be left with much.

How exactly would you suggest people read the paper? The article linked to a brief [1] which says literally absolutely nothing about how they conjured up their numbers. And the paper itself is here [2]. It's rather worse than a paywall. Instead the paper is restricted to their "sponsors" until an embargo of up to 6 months. This sort of behavior should not instill confidence in the paper's conclusions. And I think it…

I'm not sure if it's purposeful, or how long the hole will remain open, but you can see the full paper. Remove the "-Brief". [0]

The paper is fairly open about their methodology, and give access to things like the actual survey being answered, rather than just saying "a survey matching these criteria was used".

Most of their data apparently has come through Harry Campbell [1], and his yearly survey, which has it's own data and methodology out in the open [2].

I'm not remotely qualified to analyse it, but you can see the data from therideshareguy's survey if you're looking to critique the results of this paper. (I've edited this paragraph to try and get less push/offensive. I'm still not happy with it, but the aphasia is kicking my butt. Rest assured, I'm just trying to be helpful, and just wanted to point the direction to discussing the data. Still not happy with this phrasing either.)

[0] http://ceepr.mit.edu/files/papers/2018-005.pdf

[1] https://therideshareguy.com

[2] https://therideshareguy.com/2018SurveyReport

Post reply on HN