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

Uber and Lyft Suggest the Days of Cheap Rides Could Be Over

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 321 posts

Re: Uber and Lyft Suggest the Days of Cheap Rides Could Be Over

#291

Post by pentae »

6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #31

> ...the company’s upcoming pricing algorithms, which they hinted might be able to more precisely predict what riders might be willing to pay for a ride. I hate the whole idea of this. If they track you around, maybe realize you order from fancy places on uber eats, then they will raise prices on something that costs them the same. There's something that strikes me as especially awful about automating the "how much i…

Exactly. How is this not a tech version of the scam taxi drivers you encounter when traveling overseas who refuse to use the meter and try to charge you a fixed fee thats 5-10x more than a local would pay.

Charging different customers different prices for the same fare should be illegal.

Re: Uber and Lyft Suggest the Days of Cheap Rides Could Be Over

#292

Post by thundergolfer »

Jedi72 wrote: post #200

Hopefully this bullshit opens up a new market for digital obfustication services. Pay me $100, I will show you how to save $300/yr in Uber fees by changing your digital appearance.

Or we could just regulate these practices away and save the trouble. Man I would hate having to shop around for a service like that just so I can avoid being vulnerable to price gouging.

Re: Uber and Lyft Suggest the Days of Cheap Rides Could Be Over

#293

Post by mark_l_watson »

6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #31

> ...the company’s upcoming pricing algorithms, which they hinted might be able to more precisely predict what riders might be willing to pay for a ride. I hate the whole idea of this. If they track you around, maybe realize you order from fancy places on uber eats, then they will raise prices on something that costs them the same. There's something that strikes me as especially awful about automating the "how much i…

I don’t like differential pricing based on personal data either. It may not be true, but I have read references to Amazon doing this: different prices based on your history. I prefer now to enter Amazon on a private browser tab and then login when I see a price. There is no way to do this with an Uber or Lift app.

Re: Uber and Lyft Suggest the Days of Cheap Rides Could Be Over

#294

Post by listenallyall »

Barrin92 wrote: post #89
admn2 wrote: post #19

Pretty crazy with Juul, WeWork, DoorDash, and Uber / Lyft all struggling (or showing their true colors) that all the things they sought to kill are coming back. Taxis, cigarettes, picking up your own food! It's amazing to me that people were having food delivered from a half mile away.

>Pretty crazy with Juul, WeWork, DoorDash, and Uber / Lyft all struggling Given that the entire value-added of a company like Uber is getting a taxi to you slightly faster it's not surprising at all. Uber didn't make cars cheaper, drivers faster or added productivity in any other way plus they have a gigantic and expensive tech overhead, so it was never at all clear to me how they're supposed to be both competitive a…

Of course Uber added productivity -- it enabled a bunch of people who previously were sitting on their couch doing nothing, to become paid drivers. And while Uber didn't make cars faster, they made a car TO YOU faster. Usually within 5 minutes, whereas most taxi pickups (outside NYC, etc) could easily be 15-60 minutes, if they came at all.

Re: Uber and Lyft Suggest the Days of Cheap Rides Could Be Over

#295

Post by FabHK »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #242
ldoughty wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except corporations have already agreed to not seriously undercut each other... Geographic monopoly, understood collaborative price hikes... Forced plan changes post-capture that eliminate the most common plan and squeeze out an extra $5 per customer.... Simply having another player in the field is not competition, despite the federal government's claims.

That effectively requires a cartel with high barriers to entry, otherwise not doing that is an immediate competitive advantage to any new challengers. It's pretty hard to build your own last mile telecommunications network, how hard is it to build a ride sharing app?

Price is not the only factor for me as a consumer. The other is availability, or time to wait for pick-up. That is determined by how many drivers are around. Similarly, drivers like to have their next ride soon after their current one ends.

Thus, you have economies of scale for multiple reasons (big upfront investments for app and marketing, network effects).

As such, there are high barriers to entry.

Re: Uber and Lyft Suggest the Days of Cheap Rides Could Be Over

#296

Post by FabHK »

suyash wrote: post #77
blululu wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Discriminatory pricing feels nasty when you're get the short end of the stick but any pricing scheme will have bias. Having a high wage earner pay the same fare for a service as a low wage earner gives a much better deal to the wealthier person. (In Finland traffic tickets are calculated as a percentage of your income) In many countries you will pay a surcharge if merchants think that you are wealthier since it impli…

Finland traffic tickets sounds like a horrible idea.

Many European jurisdictions have this, a so-called day-fine. It’s a just fine, and just fine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-fine

Re: Uber and Lyft Suggest the Days of Cheap Rides Could Be Over

#297

Post by mamon »

larnmar wrote: post #204
Baltasaur wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a colossally bad take. Tickets have the distinct purpose of disincentivizing dangerous driving. They don't do that if it's a flat fare and the person breaking the speed limit is sufficiently wealthy. Thus, if you want speeding tickets to affect everyone equally, you make them proportional.

Despite this, it’s (judging by cars) lower income people who tend to be the idiots driving recklessly on the streets. Being passed by a shitty Honda doing 120mph is common, being passed by a new luxury car doing the same is much rarer. Why? Probably because rich people statistically tend to have better long term thinking and lower impulsivity, which is why they’re rich in the first place.

That may be true, but only for people who made their fortunes themselves - and even then you have some amount of luck involved. It doesn't work for those who inherited their fortunes, or simply won $100M in a lottery.

Re: Uber and Lyft Suggest the Days of Cheap Rides Could Be Over

#298

Post by pixl97 »

Spooky23 wrote: post #284
denimnerd42 wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that's pretty crazy. thats like a high end metal roof with all the extras on the high end you were quoted for.

Totally. Some of these guys just throw out crazy stuff if they’re booked up. I’ve done a lot of procurement at work and I’ve seen it all. My dad got a siding company that quoted $120k to do the job in the middle of winter for $30k.

Yep, if someone actually hits on one of those high profit bids, it gets scheduled first, and a low profit job gets pushed.

When you have no jobs, you'll take almost break even to prevent employee loss.

Re: Uber and Lyft Suggest the Days of Cheap Rides Could Be Over

#299

Post by ikeboy »

mpweiher wrote: post #290
ikeboy wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Speeding is either a misdemeanour or crime, that means it is simply prohibited. Period. Why not set the fine to a million dollars for everyone, then, or at least significantly boost the fine? Under my framework it's easy to answer, since it's inefficient to disincentivize speeding that much. >The state of affairs you refer to, where the speeding ticket is considered just a cost of doing said activity is exactly what…

> Why not set the fine to a million dollars for everyone Because that is a disproportionate punishment for speeding for most people. We don't do disproportionate punishment. It's also why we don't hang people for stealing. Any more. > [it's not a tax] Why? Because allowing speeding and taxing it is not the goal. We don't want people to speed. Even rich people. > same amount of deterrence for everyone Exactly. > which…

You haven't answered the central question, which is why you want a punishment outside of the deterrence effect.

And I've addressed the deterrence issue at length, just asserting that my model is wrong without explaining why won't cut it.

Post reply on HN