121–130 of 516 posts
It seems unfathomable the rate at which some of these companies lose money. When I think of asking an investor for money, I imagine having a to put together a pretty foolproof plan of action to get a return. How do companies like Uber, Tesla, or even Amazon early on convince investors to lose money year after year? Investors have never struck me as the patient type.
Uber and lyft are both on the way down. The price at which they need to operate to be profitable is not a price that most americans are ready to pay. As simple as that. For now they delay this reality by subsidizing rides in order to generate business. In some cities like San Francisco, most incentives were removed and among my friends we all stopped using Uber (unless we really have to). It simply became way too exp…
The difference between taxi fares and Uber/Lyft fares has all but vanished. People were willing to pay taxi rates all along, now they are doing so and getting what is arguably a much better service.
Virtually all of the cab companies still around now have mobile apps and many of them have all the features that Uber/Lyft have (card payment via app, car-tracking, etc).
It's still a win for the consumer, even if you're using old school cab companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW, I don’t think self driving cars would have made them a good business. Once you no longer need drivers, all you’re doing is deploying a fleet of automobiles. We already have companies that do this: taxi services and auto rental companies. They’re shitty, low margin businesses with tons of competition. The promise of Uber was being a monopoly because they were first mover on a market with network effects. Much li…
You aren't going to rent a car to take a fifteen minute trip across town, so that isn't really comparable. And yes, they would be a taxi service. But they would be a taxi service with lower costs since they don't need pay for a driver.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> now they are doing so and getting what is arguably a much better service. Only until Uber and Lyft run out of cash (a few more quarters based on cash on hand), at which point taxi fares will rise to properly reflect the actual cost of the service. People will choose a combination of walking, public transit, traditional cab companies, and perhaps an e-scooter and/or bicycle. We lived before Uber and Lyft, we'll live…
After my experiences having grown up with cabs, I am honestly willing to pay a significant premium to use Uber and Lyft. It is not an understatement to say that I hate traditional taxis. I hate the terrible service. I hate having them refuse fares based on where I'm going. I hate calling to schedule a pickup in advance and the driver just not bothering to show up. I hate being pressured to pay in cash instead of cred…
- Accusations of racism
- Dangerous driving
- Detours/no idea where they're going
- Being held hostage (took 4 very strong demands to be let out)
- Given a lecture because the driver couldn't find the address and told if you don't like the service to get out.
The grass isn't always greener
Stupid question: but how is this the case? The fare I pay for an Uber or Lyft seems much higher than the time/car/insurance cost of driving myself ($30-$50 for a 25 min ride to SFO). But the drivers don’t get much of that fare, so I assumed the bulk of the money went to Uber/Lyft. But they’re badly in the red... so where is the money going? I’m missing something here.
Ridestar claims that 61% goes to the driver; 39% to Lyft/Uber.[0]
Their S-1[1] shows lots of sales and marketing, lots of R&D (remember, they're working on self-driving cars, among other things), and lots of general/admin (I suspect they spend a lot on legal).
[0] https://www.ridester.com/uber-fees/
[1] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1543151/000119312519...
Glad they're down, and hope the whole "gig economy" burns down too. Where gig economy = padding the loss of decent jobs by replacing the bottom end with desperate deals where "non employed" employees, without regular salary, benefits, company provided work tools, etc., make a pittance, while the organizing company gets a cut from millions of transactions. In some cases, no jobs is better than subsistence/dead-end/exp…
Sure, but neither you or I get to decide that qualification. Only the person doing the job does. We don't really know what fits their lives or what options they have.
I don't like gig stuff/sharing economy (or the big 'unicorns' associated with it) either...but it is "another option" for many people that wouldn't have one, esp. lower skilled immigrants, minorities, retired and young people.
Glad they're down, and hope the whole "gig economy" burns down too. Where gig economy = padding the loss of decent jobs by replacing the bottom end with desperate deals where "non employed" employees, without regular salary, benefits, company provided work tools, etc., make a pittance, while the organizing company gets a cut from millions of transactions. In some cases, no jobs is better than subsistence/dead-end/exp…
I guess it’s possible that Uber does so badly financially, they cease to exist. I just find it really hard to imagine that they would be forced to raise prices enough to make the old days of taxis you hailed by waving your hands on the street come back. So to me, Uber doing badly is just bad news for their drivers.
The recent realization by cities that these services are making traffic worse will induce more regulation which will make these services even less viable than they already are.