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

In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

toddwschneider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 147 posts

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#121

Post by ethanbond »

xapata wrote: post #115
ethanbond wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's about Uber's very expensive lawyers clearing the regulatory path for competitors (who are only app installs away) to then utilize for free from here until the heat death of the universe? Clever strategy.

You seem to think it's easy for customers to switch. I think there's enough barrier that they can keep the network intact.

What are you talking about? I have like 4 ridesharing apps on my phone concurrently and switch between them based on whoever has the lowest time-until-pickup.

What barrier do you think is there?

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#122

Post by CPLX »

prophetjohn wrote: post #107
imagist wrote: post #74

Brooklynite here. In theory, I want to be behind taxi drivers. They're a local business owners with ties in the community, and I would rather support them than a Silicon Valley startup with a questionable stance on privacy and poor treatment of their workers. In reality though, taxis need to fix a few issues: 1. I don't need to be able to hail a cab anywhere--I can't really hail Ubers, either. But if I call a cab, I'…

Also Brooklynite. I'd just like to another: The confidence of knowing that the driver will get me where I need to go. I have, on more than one occasion, gotten in a cab in Williamsburg (which is in Brooklyn), asked to go to Park Slope (also in Brooklyn) and after staring at my phone for a while, looked up to find myself on a bridge headed to Manhattan (not in Brooklyn and not on the way between the two). With Uber, I…

I live and work in and near downtown Brooklyn. I have had Uber try to route me over the bridges to get to Williamsburg or Greenpoint, repeatedly and inexplicably. So I'm not sure if that's a solved problem yet.

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#123

Post by Symbiote »

bogomipz wrote: post #104
vkou wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AirTrain is also responsible for getting you around the terminals. You can't expect the subway to have a stop at each terminal. $8 is steep, but it is essentially an airport fee. Who pays airport-related taxes is relevant to this conversation - you were talking about residents getting tax-gouged when they had to go to the airport.

My comment was that there is "no single" train that takes you to the airport. Which is 100% accurate as it is two completely separate trains and two distinct payments and tickets with zero integration. The downvote is for what? Being correct? And while you can take two trains to get JFK you can take no trains to LaGuardia. So yes a rush hour surcharge to take a taxi to the airport is insulting. You don't need a separ…

London Heathrow uses public railway for going between terminals, though there are also buses.

The metro has three stations at the airport, and the national railway network also has three. Using either system within the airport is free.

There are shuttle trains to travel within terminal 5. I guess that shows how huge the airport is.

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#124

Post by ThomPete »

vkou wrote: post #76
ThomPete wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe it will take that long.

Solving the self-driving car problem in busy urban centers is vastly more difficult then solving it for freeway driving. (Where this technology still manages to fail in a very spectacular way.)

You mean like here:

https://www.instagram.com/p/BK0z7oZgOia7zfdlJ4ygJqEDBW8e17lq...

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#125

Post by ThomPete »

ethanbond wrote: post #84
vkou wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solving the self-driving car problem in busy urban centers is vastly more difficult then solving it for freeway driving. (Where this technology still manages to fail in a very spectacular way.)

Never mind solving the self-driving car problem in the thousands of legislatures throughout the US alone.

Well uber begs to differ. Doesn't really look like it's 1-2 decades away to me.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BK0z7oZgOia7zfdlJ4ygJqEDBW8e17lq...

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#126

Post by EdHominem »

AncoraImparo wrote: post #54

Uber are terrible though. Here in Austin we voted and got rid of them. Fasten is cheaper, has better service, and the app is way more complete.

Not even slightly true. If Uber was a worse experience you wouldn't have had to vote to keep them out.

Besides, that vote was massively skewed by all the city's propaganda about driver-rape which is less of an issue than choking on party balloons while blowing out birthday candles.

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#127

Post by EdHominem »

CPLX wrote: post #122
prophetjohn wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also Brooklynite. I'd just like to another: The confidence of knowing that the driver will get me where I need to go. I have, on more than one occasion, gotten in a cab in Williamsburg (which is in Brooklyn), asked to go to Park Slope (also in Brooklyn) and after staring at my phone for a while, looked up to find myself on a bridge headed to Manhattan (not in Brooklyn and not on the way between the two). With Uber, I…

I live and work in and near downtown Brooklyn. I have had Uber try to route me over the bridges to get to Williamsburg or Greenpoint, repeatedly and inexplicably. So I'm not sure if that's a solved problem yet.

Thankfully with Uber (Lyft, etc?) you get a trip map afterward.

I had an Uber in SF make a wrong turn onto the bridge to Oakland so he stopped the "meter" and at least I didn't have to pay for it.

With a Taxi it'd be my word against theirs, and the police would take their side. I'd be out the extra fare until I could sue the taxi company and I'd have to hope they didn't delete the video which is my only proof. No thanks.

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#128

Post by chefkoch »

Declanomous wrote: post #116
imagist wrote: post #74

Brooklynite here. In theory, I want to be behind taxi drivers. They're a local business owners with ties in the community, and I would rather support them than a Silicon Valley startup with a questionable stance on privacy and poor treatment of their workers. In reality though, taxis need to fix a few issues: 1. I don't need to be able to hail a cab anywhere--I can't really hail Ubers, either. But if I call a cab, I'…

I agree with everything you've said. I live in a Chicago neighborhood people might describe as "sketchy," and while cabbies were fine driving me there, getting a cab from my neighborhood was and is an exercise in futility. Before ridesharing became common, I had the same experience flagging cabs for black people. One time I watched several cabs drive past a young black woman with a child in a stroller. I stood slight…

>In certain areas, more than half of the young adult males are unemployed. Lyft and Uber, and the gig economy, have created access to economic opportunities that they wouldn't have otherwise had.

Only as long as drivers are needed.

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#129

Post by EdHominem »

imagist wrote: post #117
CptJamesCook wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory you want to support a group of people that are blatantly racist, provide terrible service, and are create a noisy, stressful environment? This is actually one of most convincing pro-Uber comments I've ever seen.

Sure, by removing all nuance from what I actually said, you can argue for anything.

I think you need to read between the lines of your own post. That's some pretty serious Stockholm Syndrome going on there... Despite horrible service, a forced monopoly, and continual racist crimes, you want to support the incumbent system.

You also got the business aspect totally backwards. Very few taxi drivers own their own medallions so the money almost always flows to a rent-seeking corporation anyways, and at least Uber drivers don't have to rent the medallion each day - if they want to leave early they aren't under any penalty. Taxi drivers pay ~$200 a day to rent their medallion - if they don't make more than that, they've worked all day for a loss.

If you support taxi companies you're abusing the drivers by perpetuating a broken system.

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#130

Post by bogomipz »

imagist wrote: post #74

Brooklynite here. In theory, I want to be behind taxi drivers. They're a local business owners with ties in the community, and I would rather support them than a Silicon Valley startup with a questionable stance on privacy and poor treatment of their workers. In reality though, taxis need to fix a few issues: 1. I don't need to be able to hail a cab anywhere--I can't really hail Ubers, either. But if I call a cab, I'…

I agree with all of you points. However, most taxi drivers are just leasing the taxi though from the medallion owners. The medallion owners are the small business owners. That being said I do wonder if more medallion owners drove their own taxis if the things you mentioned would change.

This is an interesting read on the medallion/leasing system if anyone is interested:

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2015/12/taxicab-med...

Post reply on HN