Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#31

Post by randyrand » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 6:30 AM UTC

sschueller wrote: post #19

In the end you will have a service costing the same as a regular Taxi but without all the benefits of them being licensed. Taxi licensing may be screwed up and unfair in the US but in many parts of the world it works well.

Taxis had artificially restricted supply. I think you're forgetting how expensive taxis were.

https://www.theawl.com/2012/07/how-much-more-do-taxi-fares-c...

2012 $2.50 first 1/5 mi. $2.50 per mile. $0.50 per 1 min.

uberX 2019 (without counting inflation - ~10% since 2012): Per Minute: $0.66 Per Mile: $1.46 Minimum Fare: $7.19

Taxis are competitive for very short trips, but 3+ miles they're almost double (175%)!

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#32

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 6:31 AM UTC

omeid2 wrote: post #18

quickthrower2 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As well as walk, bus, train, using own car and not drinking, etc.

Defs, I used to use Uber until it become cheaper to drive and pay for carpark, and mind you, parking in Australia is extortionist.

[deleted]

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#33

Post by TheSpiceIsLife » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 6:31 AM UTC

zaarn wrote: post #27

icebraining wrote: post #24

I won't, since I can already use Bolt, Kapten or Cabify. The idea that Uber will somehow manage to keep people from building an app and competing is silly. There's almost no barrier of entry.

There is a barrier to entry: building a network of drivers. If there is no drives, nobody will buy a ride over your app, drivers will then not install it because nobody is buying rides.

Wouldn't this also have prevented Uber and others from getting started?

I believe there may be a missing element here, namely marketing.

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#34

Post by omeid2 » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 6:31 AM UTC

zaarn wrote: post #27

icebraining wrote: post #24

I won't, since I can already use Bolt, Kapten or Cabify. The idea that Uber will somehow manage to keep people from building an app and competing is silly. There's almost no barrier of entry.

There is a barrier to entry: building a network of drivers. If there is no drives, nobody will buy a ride over your app, drivers will then not install it because nobody is buying rides.

Drivers are not exactly emotionally attached to Uber, you will be surprised how often they have multiple apps. I regularly see cars with at least two of Uber, Taxify, Ola signs in Sydney.

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#35

Post by kuzehanka » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 6:32 AM UTC

zaarn wrote: post #30

kuzehanka wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm fine with Uber costing the same as a regular taxi. Riding in a taxi is a garbage experience compared to uber. Drivers making excuses not to take you after learning your destination, rude drivers, drivers who have no clue how to navigate, drivers who pretend the card machine is broken, or try to take you on winding routes to increase the fare. Despite all the supposed downsides of ridesharing, it continues to be i…

In my country, a taxi driver is legally required to drive you to your destination unless it exceeds reasonable distances (around 50km, which far above what anyone would use a taxi for here). Drivers with broken cashier machines or taxameters aren't allowed to take passengers, especially a broken taxameter might mean that passenger will pay a very much reduced fare. Most of them have GPS, and if they don't they can be…

In my country, the driver is also legally required to drive you to your destination. It doesn't stop them from making random excuses like 'oh sorry my gps is broken'. That is an actual excuse I got from not one but two cab drivers in a row when travelling between offices in the city.

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#36

Post by ivalm » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 6:32 AM UTC

randyrand wrote: post #28

"Uber's success has been based on two unsustainable tactics: subsidizing fares and exploiting drivers" Considering Uber loses a billion dollars a quarter, I think the only people that are being 'exploited' are investors. Investor money is going straight to drivers and riders.

Investors presumably know the risks involved. On the other hand, many drivers are inexperienced and do not know the full cost of driving for Uber (vehicle depreciation and increased liability).

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#37

Post by icebraining » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 6:32 AM UTC

zaarn wrote: post #27

icebraining wrote: post #24

I won't, since I can already use Bolt, Kapten or Cabify. The idea that Uber will somehow manage to keep people from building an app and competing is silly. There's almost no barrier of entry.

There is a barrier to entry: building a network of drivers. If there is no drives, nobody will buy a ride over your app, drivers will then not install it because nobody is buying rides.

Why wouldn't drivers install it, when it costs them nothing? And then if they're at the end of an uber ride and a notification for the other service pops up, they can take that.

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#38

Post by arcticbull » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 6:33 AM UTC

randyrand wrote: post #28

"Uber's success has been based on two unsustainable tactics: subsidizing fares and exploiting drivers" Considering Uber loses a billion dollars a quarter, I think the only people that are being 'exploited' are investors. Investor money is going straight to drivers and riders.

In a way, everyone's being exploited except the rider. The drivers are barely making minimum wage once all expenses are factored in, the investors money is being set ablaze. The riders, on the other hand, get to enjoy taxi-like service for about half what it costs to deliver.

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#39

Post by arcticbull » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 6:35 AM UTC

dia80 wrote: post #21

The last time I had this feeling was when shorting groupon. The emperor has no clothes, I can't see how UBER ends up being materially different from a donut.

The only thing I can see being successful for them is JUMP. It's an awesome service, there's no better way to get around San Francisco -- and Seattle! I assume it's as effective in other cities too. On the other hand scaling and acceptance seem pretty far off.

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#40

Post by masonic » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 6:35 AM UTC

zaarn wrote: post #27

icebraining wrote: post #24

I won't, since I can already use Bolt, Kapten or Cabify. The idea that Uber will somehow manage to keep people from building an app and competing is silly. There's almost no barrier of entry.

There is a barrier to entry: building a network of drivers. If there is no drives, nobody will buy a ride over your app, drivers will then not install it because nobody is buying rides.

I think drivers would jump simply to pursue a market realm with far fewer suppliers (initially, at least), knowing they can go back anytime, or toggle between sites in response to incentives.