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

Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–88 of 88 posts

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#81

Post by balfirevic »

gnopgnip wrote: post #52
randyrand wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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%)!

Uber pricing is not actually based on the distance and time for most trips, it is a set amount decided ahead of time, usually much more than that base cost.

Not where I live, here it's entirely based on distance and time except for rides to the airport.

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#82

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

icebraining wrote: post #79
dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always use fake data for services like Uber.

How do you use fake payment data?

Via Paypal. So unless Paypal sells them my real data, I'm covered. I do the same with mytaxi which is quite popular in Europe.

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#83

Post by ubercow13 »

latchkey wrote: post #75
ubercow13 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Grab is already more expensive than conventional taxis in some places I've been recently.

...or is it that taxis have lowered their pricing to compete?

Don't think so, for example in Bangkok the taxi rate is regulated and I believe it hasn't changed for ages.

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#84

Post by ac29 »

Mistri wrote: post #2

I've always used Uber because I've assumed that it's cheaper than Lyft and other rideshare services. I just realized I have no idea how much it is compared to others. Does anyone have a formal comparison up online?

It depends on the market, time of day, and other factors. In my experience, Lyft is actually generally cheaper, but the two are usually within 5-10% of each other in cost.

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#85

Post by arcticbull »

twelve40 wrote: post #70
arcticbull wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

you're kidding, right? I gave up on using jump bikes for my own travel needs long time ago, better off just walking and getting some exercise instead of hunting down some random thing in some random direction. But I try to use the bikes (the actual ride is pretty good, if you manage to get one) to show my friends around SF when they visit. In my experience, it's almost impossible to get two (or more, god forbid) bike…

Take another look, they’ve doubled the number of bikes in the city. They were originally limited by the city as part of their pilot program which is since expanded.

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#86

Post by malandrew »

icebraining wrote: post #55
arcticbull wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It might be hard to compete with municipal systems; the one in my city already has electric bikes, and it costs €25/year (~$30). The advantage of JUMP is being able to leave them anywhere, but that probably won't last once cities get enough complaints. The bikes are nicer too, but not enough to justify the massive price difference.

Go to Berlin and see how amazing dockless bikes are for getting around when the city doesn't artificially limit their availability. It's trivial to find them when you need them.

The problem here isn't the product. It's governance.

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#87

Post by malandrew »

icebraining wrote: post #78
twelve40 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you're kidding, right? I gave up on using jump bikes for my own travel needs long time ago, better off just walking and getting some exercise instead of hunting down some random thing in some random direction. But I try to use the bikes (the actual ride is pretty good, if you manage to get one) to show my friends around SF when they visit. In my experience, it's almost impossible to get two (or more, god forbid) bike…

Your difficulty in finding available bikes might be because they're very popular and constantly in use, no?

It's also government artificially restricting supply to certain numbers. Asymptotic regulations are bad regulations. Variable regulations are better. For example, instead of saying that there can be N bikes allowed, they should instead determine metrics they want to achieve like utilization (rides per day) or complaints per number of bikes and let operators put as many bikes on the streets so long as the quality of life metrics they establish are satisfied.

Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides

#88

Post by inflatableDodo »

smartbit wrote: post #80
inflatableDodo wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't be ridiculous, donuts are both tasty and worth paying for.

Donuts are very unhealthy for humans

Am immediately suspicious that you may travelled here from a very long way away in order to steal all the donuts.
Post reply on HN