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

Uber rival accuses car service of dirty tactics

money.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 218 posts

Re: Uber rival accuses car service of dirty tactics

#171

Post by Dylan16807 »

hangonhn wrote: post #169
Dylan16807 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not fraud to order a bunch of pizzas and then cancel the order 30 seconds later before they even put anything on the first piece of dough. It's dickish, but no actual harm is done. And if it cost $1 per cancelled pizza they would actually profit off of it.

"It's dickish, but no actual harm is done." In the case of a real restaurant, yes there is harm done. The cost of taking an order is not zero for people: it cost people time and real customers may not be served in time. Maybe not for this particular case with Gett since they're automated.

It's still not fraud to call someone and waste their time for a while. See also: telemarketers

Re: Uber rival accuses car service of dirty tactics

#172

Post by epipsychidion »

samolang wrote: post #102
eridius wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty clear they were doing this to harvest phone numbers of drivers (why does Gett give out their drivers' phone numbers?) rather than any attempt to actually disrupt Gett's business. I would be rather hesitant to call this "fraud", as that's a very serious allegation.

And they paid cancellation fees.

If drivers keep getting requests cancelled, they will be less prompt and enthusiastic about actual ones. The cancellation fee is calculated on the assumption that frequent orders will not be deliberately placed to be subsequently cancelled.

Re: Uber rival accuses car service of dirty tactics

#173

Post by encoderer »

pc86 wrote: post #138
ryguytilidie wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...after what they were doing was exposed.

No, they paid cancellation fees because you get charged when you cancel. This wasn't "Oh, sorry, here's $10."

It's not automatic. I've had to legitimately cancel before and have never been charged a fee.

Re: Uber rival accuses car service of dirty tactics

#174

Post by avalaunch »

eridius wrote: post #159
avalaunch wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were booking rides without the intent of actually taking or paying for those rides. How is that not fraud? The fact that they were doing it to mine for phone numbers doesn't make it less fraudulent. That'd be like saying it's ok to order a bunch of pizzas from Pizza Hut without the intent of paying for them because you were simply trying to figure out who the drivers are.

They're paying cancellation fees. If I order a bunch of pizzas from Pizza Hut in order to find out who the drivers were, and paid for them , then there's no issue. Even though I don't intend on eating the pizzas, I still paid for the service. In this case, Uber is paying the cancellation fees for the privilege of booking, then cancelling, a Gett ride.

If you order pizzas and pay for them, you're completely the transaction as expected. If you order a car from a car service and then cancel it, you're not. The fact that a cancellation fee exists doesn't give you the right to use the system in such an unintended manner.

A better analogy than the pizza analogy might be a "customer" repeatedly buying clothes with the intent to wear and then return them. Despite the fact that there is a return policy in place, the fact that the customer never intended on keeping any of the clothes makes his behavior fraudulent.

Re: Uber rival accuses car service of dirty tactics

#175

Post by jhonovich »

debt wrote: post #156
potatolicious wrote: post #11

Wow. This is low. The statement is absolute bullshit too: "In this instance, the New York City team was a bit too ambitious and we'll make sure they tone down their sales tactics." No, this is unacceptable. This sort of fraudulent behavior deserves consequences larger than "hey, stop that". I live in NYC. The Uber app has now been banished from my phone. It's too bad the Gett app is kind of an unpolished turd.

You hire a sales team to sell your product. They're the least invested in the overall business, they have the highest turnover rate of any other department. Typically, they're young, inexperienced, right out of college. Typically, this isn't their only job. Most care less about the overall viability of the company or the company image then they do about making a sale and a commission. The balance between sales and th…

"Uber maybe needs to reinvent their sales incentive structure the same way they've reinvented ridesharing."

They don't need to reinvent anything here. Lots of companies have salespeople with no experience and a high turnover rate. Yet they rarely directly sabotage their competitors.

Re: Uber rival accuses car service of dirty tactics

#176

Post by samolang »

epipsychidion wrote: post #172
samolang wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they paid cancellation fees.

If drivers keep getting requests cancelled, they will be less prompt and enthusiastic about actual ones. The cancellation fee is calculated on the assumption that frequent orders will not be deliberately placed to be subsequently cancelled.

I agree that they may have violated the spirit of the contract. But the contract specifically handles the case of cancelling an order (including some restitution), so I would hardly consider it fraud.

Re: Uber rival accuses car service of dirty tactics

#177

Post by avalaunch »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #166
avalaunch wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were booking rides without the intent of actually taking or paying for those rides. How is that not fraud? The fact that they were doing it to mine for phone numbers doesn't make it less fraudulent. That'd be like saying it's ok to order a bunch of pizzas from Pizza Hut without the intent of paying for them because you were simply trying to figure out who the drivers are.

It's not fraud to order a bunch of pizzas and then cancel the order 30 seconds later before they even put anything on the first piece of dough. It's dickish, but no actual harm is done. And if it cost $1 per cancelled pizza they would actually profit off of it.

What you describe is a hoax, contrasted to fraud in that there was no intent of gain on the perpetrator's part and that no harm was caused (debatable in your example). What Uber did, and in my example, there was both intent of gain and harm.

You could argue that there was no harm to Gett because of the cancellation fees, but that's only true if the cancellation fees are greater than the cost they incurred which may or may not be true.

Re: Uber rival accuses car service of dirty tactics

#178

Post by Dylan16807 »

avalaunch wrote: post #177
Dylan16807 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not fraud to order a bunch of pizzas and then cancel the order 30 seconds later before they even put anything on the first piece of dough. It's dickish, but no actual harm is done. And if it cost $1 per cancelled pizza they would actually profit off of it.

What you describe is a hoax, contrasted to fraud in that there was no intent of gain on the perpetrator's part and that no harm was caused (debatable in your example). What Uber did, and in my example, there was both intent of gain and harm. You could argue that there was no harm to Gett because of the cancellation fees, but that's only true if the cancellation fees are greater than the cost they incurred which may o…

It hinges on whether there was harm done. I strongly doubt there was harm.

Or at least intentional harm. Such as if they meant to cancel immediately but didn't.

Re: Uber rival accuses car service of dirty tactics

#179

Post by pc86 »

encoderer wrote: post #173
pc86 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they paid cancellation fees because you get charged when you cancel. This wasn't "Oh, sorry, here's $10."

It's not automatic. I've had to legitimately cancel before and have never been charged a fee.

Have you cancelled on the day of or within just a few hours of the scheduled pickup time?

Re: Uber rival accuses car service of dirty tactics

#180

Post by epipsychidion »

samolang wrote: post #176
epipsychidion wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If drivers keep getting requests cancelled, they will be less prompt and enthusiastic about actual ones. The cancellation fee is calculated on the assumption that frequent orders will not be deliberately placed to be subsequently cancelled.

I agree that they may have violated the spirit of the contract. But the contract specifically handles the case of cancelling an order (including some restitution), so I would hardly consider it fraud.

Running into the path of a moving car isn't fraud? End result is the same for when it's an accident.
Post reply on HN