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

Uber, Lyft drivers manipulate fares at DCA causing artificial price surges

wjla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 303 posts

Re: Uber, Lyft drivers manipulate fares at DCA causing artificial price surges

#121

Post by icebraining »

kubatyszko wrote: post #26
Konnstann wrote: post #6

"On average, Lyft drivers earn over $20 per hour." I wonder if this figure takes into account all the waiting time, or just driving time on the app. If it is the latter, then that's a pretty scummy thing to say, considering that most drivers spend less than a third of the time actually driving people to their destination, putting the actual number closer to 7.00 an hour.

I've had rides that cost me $15 and took 45 minutes, the math does not add up at all. In fact, I commute with Lyft nearly every day and my average 40 minute ride costs somewhere around $20. Even with another ride directly like mine it's unlikely there's enough earnings within an hour to cover Lyft's fees and pay the driver $20...

Uber and Lyft are both losing money for a reason, though.

Re: Uber, Lyft drivers manipulate fares at DCA causing artificial price surges

#122

Post by codedokode »

tzs wrote: post #23

I wonder if this is legal? With the drivers classified as independent contractors rather than employees would cooperation between drivers to manipulate prices run afoul of antitrust law?

Is not a ridesharing company the one who sets and manipulates the prices?

Re: Uber, Lyft drivers manipulate fares at DCA causing artificial price surges

#123

Post by eropple »

NotPaidToPost wrote: post #106
gdhbcc wrote: post #5

I dont see how Lyft gets off calling this fraudulent. Seems to me it's the system working as intended, and as it should. Drivers dont want to drive for under a certain value, so they simply inform the app who adjusts the value to fulfill demand. Seems like its what you want to happen.

This seems the very definition of fraud, though. Edit: Fraudulent: "intended to deceive someone in order to get money or property". The collusion is intended to deceive Lyft (and in the end customers) for financial gains.

By leveraging the supply controls, which are explicitly theirs to use to communicate willingness to take on work, in a two-sided market where you're not allowed to directly set prices? Please substantiate how that is fraudulent.

If Lyft and Uber allowed direct pricing, this wouldn't happen. Drivers would set the price they're willing to work for. Instead, drivers--who, once more for emphasis, are supposed to use price fluctuations as incentive or disincentive for working, that's what "surge pricing" was in the first place--only have one message that they can send: "nope, not at that price".

Or they can be obligated to work cheap because rich people demand their labor.

Hrm. I think I now understand where the claim of "fraud" comes from.

Re: Uber, Lyft drivers manipulate fares at DCA causing artificial price surges

#124

Post by icebraining »

giaour wrote: post #8

As much as I would be displeased if my fare were manipulated, I can only blame Uber and Lyft for this. They created an incentive for drivers to act as a unit, and groups of drivers are figuring it out. Really makes you long for the transparent, posted pricing of municipal taxis

Uber/Lyft prices are totally transparent: they show you the fixed price before the ride.

Meanwhile, municipal taxis may not have been able to charge more per minute and/or unit of distance, but they could control how many of those units the ride took.

Re: Uber, Lyft drivers manipulate fares at DCA causing artificial price surges

#125

Post by eropple »

duxup wrote: post #85
netsharc wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't they check using the passenger app?

I the rate that the passenger sees always the rate that the driver is paid? If so then yeah, but I'm not sure they're always 1:1.

It used to be almost exactly proportional. Lyft and Uber have been progressively trying to disconnect the two values, though; these days it's probably not possible to tell.

Re: Uber, Lyft drivers manipulate fares at DCA causing artificial price surges

#126

Post by mikeash »

bena wrote: post #120
mikeash wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When these services first introduced surge pricing, they told us that it was a good thing because it encourages more drivers to get on the road and take care of demand. It’s working exactly as designed.

The drivers are already there though. They've already committed to taking these passengers. Imagine walking up to a taxi and having them say "wait 5 minutes until I can charge you more".

They’re not in any way committed.

Imagine waking up to a taxi and offering $10 to go somewhere, and they tell you no thanks but they’ll do it for $15.

These drivers are just negotiating the price. The platform tries to block negotiation but it does not quite succeed.

Re: Uber, Lyft drivers manipulate fares at DCA causing artificial price surges

#127

Post by gsnedders »

codedokode wrote: post #102
leereeves wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Under the theory that Uber/Lyft employees are contractors and allowed to set prices, wouldn't coordinating ("conspiring") to do so en masse be considered price fixing? Personally I think they should be considered employees, but a pro-management federal prosecutor could make some trouble for them.

I don't think they are allowed to set prices. Furthermore, they are probably somehow punished if they don't accept the orders that app offers.

They aren't, and the furthermore is also true beyond a certain percentage. This is part of the reason why in a number of jurisdictions the courts have ruled that the drivers aren't independent contractors.

Re: Uber, Lyft drivers manipulate fares at DCA causing artificial price surges

#128

Post by bena »

eropple wrote: post #114
bena wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did I say this was a good or bad thing? Nowhere. I described things that could happen if the practice becomes too exploitative. Also, I can see the argument that it violates the TOS for the drivers. The drivers agree to drive for the price determined by the service. They are then using exploits to manipulate that price. If they don't want to drive for X fare, then they shouldn't be in their car. And this is an…

> Where did I say this was a good or bad thing? Nowhere. You didn't. But nobody perturbs that many electrons if they don't have an opinion on the topic (and I'll be real, I've got one too but I'm not trying to cloak it in neutrality). And then we get this: > In some way, the passenger is being taken advantage of. This is nonsensical. It also proves out the hunch I expressed from my last post, so thank you for doing t…

> This is nonsensical. It also proves out the hunch I expressed from my last post, so thank you for doing the legwork for me.

How is it nonsensical? Is the end-consumer just supposed to sit and watch drivers and the company fight to see how much money they can extract from their wallet?

Stop trying to make outside forces seem like some sort of sinister scare tactic. It betrays _your_ bias.

The agreement is that Uber/Lyft set the prices based on the number of drivers in the area. It's ok by the very nature of the agreement both the drivers and the passengers agree to for using the app.

It's ok for the drivers to say "I won't drive for less than $X". What's not ok is saying "I'll sit here and not drive and force a surge so I can then take advantage of a situation I caused." If they weren't at the airport, that's one thing. But they sit at the airport and pretend to not be waiting for fares so they can force a surge. Then they turn on the app so they can both be readily available and get the surge.

Uber/Lyft get their cut either way. The people getting the brunt of the higher fares are the passengers. So dismissing them as a concerned party is only a tactic to defend the drivers.

Are the passengers also not part of the "poor people"?

Re: Uber, Lyft drivers manipulate fares at DCA causing artificial price surges

#129

Post by Tade0 »

leereeves wrote: post #90
radcon wrote: post #59

This seems like it could also torpedo their Contractor vs. Employee argument. Contractors get to set rates, employees don't. So you can't say they're contractors AND accuse them of committing fraud when they try to set their own rates. Now if only someone would develop an app that does this for entire cities. The app could be their version of a union.

Under the theory that Uber/Lyft employees are contractors and allowed to set prices, wouldn't coordinating ("conspiring") to do so en masse be considered price fixing? Personally I think they should be considered employees, but a pro-management federal prosecutor could make some trouble for them.

At least in Uber's case this seems to have been an emergent thing originally, as in: drivers independently of each other found under which conditions the prices were surging and acted appropriately.

Re: Uber, Lyft drivers manipulate fares at DCA causing artificial price surges

#130

Post by chrismeller »

eropple wrote: post #123
NotPaidToPost wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems the very definition of fraud, though. Edit: Fraudulent: "intended to deceive someone in order to get money or property". The collusion is intended to deceive Lyft (and in the end customers) for financial gains.

By leveraging the supply controls, which are explicitly theirs to use to communicate willingness to take on work , in a two-sided market where you're not allowed to directly set prices? Please substantiate how that is fraudulent. If Lyft and Uber allowed direct pricing, this wouldn't happen. Drivers would set the price they're willing to work for. Instead, drivers--who, once more for emphasis, are supposed to use pri…

So go drive a cab instead. I hear that’s a great life.

They agreed to drive for a service for x. They can’t then complain that they are making x or manipulate the system to earn more than x.

Post reply on HN