The last time I had this feeling was when shorting groupon. The emperor has no clothes, I can't see how UBER ends up being materially different from a donut.
Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides
21–30 of 88 posts
Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides
#22In the end you will have a service costing the same as a regular Taxi but without all the benefits of them being licensed. Taxi licensing may be screwed up and unfair in the US but in many parts of the world it works well.
Cost was not the only driver for the push towards Uber. The fact that the licensing scheme was ineffective at providing a safe, positive experience in almost every market I visited was the major driver.
If I'm paying the same as a cab it doesn't matter, as long as the driver is accountable for their behaviour, state of their vehicle and driving it is and always will be a superior experience to traditional cabs.
I also find it doubtful that the Uber experience will ever cost as much, unless they completely kill off all competition (not going to happen). They have no moat - the network effect does not enable them to have a true monopoly, or even duopoly because the concept is simple enough to implement with an app and a team.
Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides
#23In the end you will have a service costing the same as a regular Taxi but without all the benefits of them being licensed. Taxi licensing may be screwed up and unfair in the US but in many parts of the world it works well.
If Uber cost the same as a taxi, I would still use Uber. They're much quicker to show up, have an app (vs. calling a dispatch center and trying to explain where you are), and the quality has been much better than taxis in my experience.
Taxis have the "broken" card machines, the ads playing on the little screen, and the 30 minute wait for a ride if you're not in a high-density urban center.
Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides
#24I won't, since I can already use Bolt, Kapten or Cabify. The idea that Uber will somehow manage to keep people from building an app and competing is silly. There's almost no barrier of entry.
Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides
#25In the end you will have a service costing the same as a regular Taxi but without all the benefits of them being licensed. Taxi licensing may be screwed up and unfair in the US but in many parts of the world it works well.
If Uber cost the same as a taxi, I would still use Uber. They're much quicker to show up, have an app (vs. calling a dispatch center and trying to explain where you are), and the quality has been much better than taxis in my experience. Taxis have the "broken" card machines, the ads playing on the little screen, and the 30 minute wait for a ride if you're not in a high-density urban center.
A 30 minute wait... to find that the taxi decided to take someone else's fare 20 minutes ago.
Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides
#26In the end you will have a service costing the same as a regular Taxi but without all the benefits of them being licensed. Taxi licensing may be screwed up and unfair in the US but in many parts of the world it works well.
I'm fine with Uber costing the same as a regular taxi. Riding in a taxi is a garbage experience compared to uber. Drivers making excuses not to take you after learning your destination, rude drivers, drivers who have no clue how to navigate, drivers who pretend the card machine is broken, or try to take you on winding routes to increase the fare.
Despite all the supposed downsides of ridesharing, it continues to be immensely more popular than the traditional taxi service even as the price gap closes. Because the traditional taxi service is a garbage rent seeking incumbent that needs to die for the good of all.
I catch cabs or ridesharing on a daily basis for work, and cabs are just fucking awful compared to ridesharing.
Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides
#27I won't, since I can already use Bolt, Kapten or Cabify. The idea that Uber will somehow manage to keep people from building an app and competing is silly. There's almost no barrier of entry.
There is a barrier to entry: building a network of drivers.
If there is no drives, nobody will buy a ride over your app, drivers will then not install it because nobody is buying rides.
Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides
#28"Uber's success has been based on two unsustainable tactics: subsidizing fares and exploiting drivers"
Considering Uber loses a billion dollars a quarter, I think the only people that are being 'exploited' are investors. Investor money is going straight to drivers and riders.
Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides
#29In the end you will have a service costing the same as a regular Taxi but without all the benefits of them being licensed. Taxi licensing may be screwed up and unfair in the US but in many parts of the world it works well.
I'm fine with Uber costing the same as a regular taxi. Riding in a taxi is a garbage experience compared to uber. Drivers making excuses not to take you after learning your destination, rude drivers, drivers who have no clue how to navigate, drivers who pretend the card machine is broken, or try to take you on winding routes to increase the fare. Despite all the supposed downsides of ridesharing, it continues to be i…
This. Cabs that are not part of Uber, they just wont agree to take you. I still dont know these drivers rationale behind denying the ride. I understand its their prerogative to refuse a ride, but they do it so often which makes me wonder, how are they making money by refusing rides again and again.
Re: Uber’s IPO means higher fares for rides
#30In the end you will have a service costing the same as a regular Taxi but without all the benefits of them being licensed. Taxi licensing may be screwed up and unfair in the US but in many parts of the world it works well.
I'm fine with Uber costing the same as a regular taxi. Riding in a taxi is a garbage experience compared to uber. Drivers making excuses not to take you after learning your destination, rude drivers, drivers who have no clue how to navigate, drivers who pretend the card machine is broken, or try to take you on winding routes to increase the fare. Despite all the supposed downsides of ridesharing, it continues to be i…
In my country, a taxi driver is legally required to drive you to your destination unless it exceeds reasonable distances (around 50km, which far above what anyone would use a taxi for here). Drivers with broken cashier machines or taxameters aren't allowed to take passengers, especially a broken taxameter might mean that passenger will pay a very much reduced fare. Most of them have GPS, and if they don't they can be liable for excess distance travelled.
Most taxi services here have excellent apps themselves and are cheaper than what Uber offered while they were allowed to operate (they are not just a glorified taxi service since non-taxi drivers aren't allowed on their service).