191–200 of 218 posts
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
There is nothing illegal about repeatedly buying clothes, then returning. If I do that enough the store may bar me from the premises for being exceedingly annoying, but they certainly can't charge me with anything.
This is one of the reasons traditional cab services are heavily regulated: to avoid these sorts of battles. It's in the interest of a municipality to have stable, predictable, reliable public transportation. Price wars, selective service, and tactics like these disrupt that stability.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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
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.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
With the intent to disrupt business. They can be easily sued for this practice. This isn't a consumer doing so, this is a company having their employees vehemently attack a competitor.
Legit customers can't book cars because they're busy and when they do the drivers might bail because they think its yet another fake order.
Screw Uber. Theyre not a tech start-up, they're an illegal car service masquerading as a tech company.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
There is nothing illegal about repeatedly buying clothes, then returning. If I do that enough the store may bar me from the premises for being exceedingly annoying, but they certainly can't charge me with anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
There is nothing illegal about repeatedly buying clothes, then returning. If I do that enough the store may bar me from the premises for being exceedingly annoying, but they certainly can't charge me with anything.