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

141–147 of 147 posts

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#141

Post by ethanbond »

xapata wrote: post #137
ethanbond wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's an anecdote to explain how awful of a position Uber is in. As mentioned elsewhere, I use Juno almost exclusively in NYC when traveling for personal reasons. How did I end up using Juno? First, I was offered a steep discount via beta invite. By whom? My Uber driver. Problem 1. I sat on the invite for a few weeks through which I had numerous bad experiences with Uber (long wait times, bad drivers, second riders…

> promotions don't buy their way out I'm not talking about a give-away. A prepay program is similar to an airline loyalty program. Delta can charge me higher ticket fares than a competing airline on the same route, because it's good for me to consolidate my "miles" with one airline. Now that I'm "elite" they can manipulate my ego and get me to pay more so I have a chance at a "free" upgrade to a fancy seat. If Uber c…

You really think starting an airline is as easy as starting an Uber competitor? Yeah I guess besides the gargantuan barrier to entry.

I've got a bridge to sell you.

No point in discussing this further, really.

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#142

Post by evanelias »

bogomipz wrote: post #81
vkou wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? Not served by any single train line? I've always taken the train to and from JFK. Also, airport-related taxes are disproportionately paid by visitors, rather than residents.

In order to take the train to the airport you need to take the E train to Jamaica station. From there you will need to exit the underground an go upstairs and buy an $8 dollar ticket on AirTran. This is a separate purchase and a separate train line. Your monthly card will not cover this "special train." I wasn't referring to airport-related taxes, I was referring to the taxi surcharge to take a taxi to the airport du…

AirTrain fare is $5, not $8. If you're referring to the $7.75 amount listed on their web site, that's including $2.75 subway fare since it assumes you're coming from midtown.

If you use a pay-per-ride metrocard, this can be used for AirTrain. It's only the monthly unlimited that does not.

The E train isn't the only option; the A train connects to AirTrain, as does the J/Z. But personally I take the LIRR -- it's more expensive but much faster and more pleasant. At rush hour it's typically faster than a cab, and more reliable / less variance in travel time.

Yes, you're technically correct that there's no one-seat ride to your terminal. But this is the case in some other cities as well.

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#143

Post by xapata »

ethanbond wrote: post #141
xapata wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> promotions don't buy their way out I'm not talking about a give-away. A prepay program is similar to an airline loyalty program. Delta can charge me higher ticket fares than a competing airline on the same route, because it's good for me to consolidate my "miles" with one airline. Now that I'm "elite" they can manipulate my ego and get me to pay more so I have a chance at a "free" upgrade to a fancy seat. If Uber c…

You really think starting an airline is as easy as starting an Uber competitor? Yeah I guess besides the gargantuan barrier to entry. I've got a bridge to sell you. No point in discussing this further, really.

You think running an Uber competitor is easier than running an airline? I've got a great investment for you...

If a barrier to entry is just financial, it's no barrier at all.

Let's think through the dynamics of the situation you describe. You say Uber is doomed because competition is too fierce. Yet you say the competitors are also doomed. Somebody will go bankrupt first. That will reduce competition and profits will go up. Maybe another competitor shows up and it's back to doomed. But then they go out of business, too. Eventually, people will stop entering this doomed industry and if Uber is still around, it'll start turning a profit. Every industry goes through times of competition and times of consolidation.

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#144

Post by ThomPete »

vkou wrote: post #139
ThomPete wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like here: https://www.instagram.com/p/BK0z7oZgOia7zfdlJ4ygJqEDBW8e17lq...

What is that supposed to prove? It's a test vehicle. It's being driven by a human. There's no roadmap, there's nothing that's passed certification, there's no roadmap for when there will be something that passes certification.

Its proving that we arent necessarily two decades off.

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#145

Post by imagist »

EdHominem wrote: post #133
imagist wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Despite horrible service, a forced monopoly, and continual racist crimes, you want to support the incumbent system. That's half of what I said. I also described why I want to support the current system. > 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. So is the solution to that reform of the medallion system, or is it switching over to a…

> I also described why I want to support the current system. Right "Local business owners". But Taxi drivers aren't. They're contractors without any of the benefits of being an employee, or of owning the business. Uber drivers meet all those criteria and more. Taxi drivers pay to rent their medallion, guaranteeing the rent-seeking owner their profits even on days when the poor driver goes negative. Uber drivers don't…

Just like store owners pay rent for their building...

I'm not saying the rent seeking is good--on the contrary, I think it's very bad. But the fact is that your views on which is better for drivers are not shared by drivers. You're also only looking at the current situation--I have a lot more trust that taxi laws can be reformed than that a large amoral corporation whose business is built around loopholes in regulation will self-regulate against their own interests. Even if you think Uber is better for drivers now, I doubt that will be the case for long.

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#146

Post by malandrew »

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'…

https://www.eff.org/who-has-your-back-2016

Re: In Brooklyn, Uber is now bigger than taxis

#147

Post by EdHominem »

imagist wrote: post #145
EdHominem wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also described why I want to support the current system. Right "Local business owners". But Taxi drivers aren't. They're contractors without any of the benefits of being an employee, or of owning the business. Uber drivers meet all those criteria and more. Taxi drivers pay to rent their medallion, guaranteeing the rent-seeking owner their profits even on days when the poor driver goes negative. Uber drivers don't…

Just like store owners pay rent for their building... I'm not saying the rent seeking is good--on the contrary, I think it's very bad. But the fact is that your views on which is better for drivers are not shared by drivers. You're also only looking at the current situation--I have a lot more trust that taxi laws can be reformed than that a large amoral corporation whose business is built around loopholes in regulati…

> I have a lot more trust that taxi laws can be reformed than that a large amoral corporation [...]

Taxi companies are large amoral corporations too. And if we were going to reform Taxi law (not to build higher walls, but to help drivers) we'd have done it a century ago, so I question that trust.

> the fact is that your views on which is better for drivers are not shared by drivers.

> Even if you think Uber is better for drivers

Which drivers? The Uber drivers I've talked to have liked the easy hours and no-hassle shift selection - including the ability to wait for surge pricing. They love the risk-free factor in that they get a percentage of every dollar earned, without having to hit a minimum like a cabbie. (Not to mention the concept of going in the hole.) None of them considered themselves a career driver, they all have a reason for being between other jobs.

I've spoken to two groups of cabbies, those who rent a medallion, and those who own (a share of) a medallion. The owners dislike Uber in the same way they'd dislike a new competitor coming in and doubling the number of cabs in the city. The renters see Uber/Lyft/etc as just another boss.

I've never talked to an employee driver who was upset by ridesharing companies.

Post reply on HN