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

Uber's New CEO

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 82 posts

Re: Uber's New CEO

#31

Post by te_chris »

malandrew wrote: post #28
bbarn wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the company offers a compelling service for riders, an economically attractive one for drivers (who drive by choice), and makes the cities within which it operates better. Incredibly opinionated. It's a pretty disputed claim that more single passenger traffic improves a city.

Uber at least always shows you both Pool and X trip times and prices at the same time when ordering. This at least gives every X passenger the opportunity to consider a Pool trip first.

Yes but why would you choose it? It's the most awkward experience I've ever had in my life

Re: Uber's New CEO

#32

Post by mseebach »

ssalazar wrote: post #12
erikb wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With "driving demand" you don't mean "creating demand" but "directing demand to my business instead of the competitors", right? Because it sounds a little like you want to say "creating demand", but your demand to go from A to B is already created before you choose between a Taxi and Uber. You don't decide to go to B because Uber exists.

In markets with unreliable, inconvenient, or overpriced taxi service your options before Uber were to drive yourself, have a friend drive you, use public transportation, rough it in a taxi that may or may not show up and do so 30 minutes late, or simply not go. Since low quality was previously a barrier to using any taxi service at all, it absolutely creates demand.

It seems that what you're describing is "simply" meeting existing unfulfilled demand, not creating new demand. Creating new demand would be when you move to a part of town with poor public transport because you can now Uber.

Re: Uber's New CEO

#33

Post by Zach_the_Lizard »

feedjoelpie wrote: post #27
morgante wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't decide to go to B because Uber exists. Actually, I absolutely do. I've gone on many trips that I simply wouldn't have gone on pre-Uber. On a regular basis I'll decide to go somewhere (ex. a party in Brooklyn) which I wouldn't have bothered with if it meant a slow and unreliable taxi (or an even slower subway ride).

Just curious: What makes you call Uber fast and taxis unreliable in NYC? I would agree with you in almost any other market, but I find getting a taxi in NYC using Curb just as fast and reliable, yet cheaper.

In Manhattan below 110 street or so, taxis are reliable if your destination is also in Manhattan below 110 street or so. Also from the airports they're generally reliable.

However, if you go from Manhattan to Queens you'll find they sometimes suddenly "forget" how to get there despite 90% of them living in Queens because they won't reliably get a return fare. Same in the rest of the boroughs.

Also they often have "broken" credit card readers that magically get repaired after fighting with them.

The cars are not always in the best condition. The other day I rode in a cab that had no suspension it seemed. Every bump in the road would send you flying. It was a nauseating experience, let me tell you.

I still take taxis from time to time, especially when there's no real price difference or when I don't want to wait. A late night flight I might take an Uber to the airport and a taxi back if the wait time is too long.

With Uber and Lyft I generally get clean cars with suspensions and don't have to worry about paying them (Already handled!), refusing service, etc.

Although you get bad service from time to time in all transportation providers, Uber and Lyft tend to be much more consistent.

Re: Uber's New CEO

#34

Post by furioussloth »

feedjoelpie wrote: post #27
morgante wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't decide to go to B because Uber exists. Actually, I absolutely do. I've gone on many trips that I simply wouldn't have gone on pre-Uber. On a regular basis I'll decide to go somewhere (ex. a party in Brooklyn) which I wouldn't have bothered with if it meant a slow and unreliable taxi (or an even slower subway ride).

Just curious: What makes you call Uber fast and taxis unreliable in NYC? I would agree with you in almost any other market, but I find getting a taxi in NYC using Curb just as fast and reliable, yet cheaper.

Also being cyclist in NYC these yellow cab drivers are your worst enemies. I have almost got ran over more than once. You can listen to them moan about cyclists if you have been in enough yellow cabs. Having biked around in city for a while I personally go out of my way to avoid them. I only use them if I am in manhattan and have absolutely no patience or sobriety to call uber.

Re: Uber's New CEO

#35

Post by exhilaration »

te_chris wrote: post #31
malandrew wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uber at least always shows you both Pool and X trip times and prices at the same time when ordering. This at least gives every X passenger the opportunity to consider a Pool trip first.

Yes but why would you choose it? It's the most awkward experience I've ever had in my life

Because sometimes it's close to half the price? Some of us like saving $5 or $10 per ride.

Re: Uber's New CEO

#36

Post by icebraining »

bbarn wrote: post #24
dannyw wrote: post #4

This is a thoughtful analysis into the whole Uber CEO opinion, but it is opinionated. Aggregation theory is one way to derive Uber's value, but you can make a compelling argument that supply drives demand. The reason why I don't use taxis in Australia is partly because the experience is far better with Uber and the cost is cheaper, but also because Uber is the most reliable. Without drivers and such reliability, I ca…

> the company offers a compelling service for riders, an economically attractive one for drivers (who drive by choice), and makes the cities within which it operates better. Incredibly opinionated. It's a pretty disputed claim that more single passenger traffic improves a city.

Cheap, reliable on-demand trips make it easier to avoid owning a car at all and use public transport 99% of the time, whereas if you have to buy one anyway, you're more likely to use it even if you could have taken the metro instead, since after sinking the fixed costs, the cost per trip is not that different.

Re: Uber's New CEO

#37

Post by feedjoelpie »

Zach_the_Lizard wrote: post #33
feedjoelpie wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just curious: What makes you call Uber fast and taxis unreliable in NYC? I would agree with you in almost any other market, but I find getting a taxi in NYC using Curb just as fast and reliable, yet cheaper.

In Manhattan below 110 street or so, taxis are reliable if your destination is also in Manhattan below 110 street or so. Also from the airports they're generally reliable. However, if you go from Manhattan to Queens you'll find they sometimes suddenly "forget" how to get there despite 90% of them living in Queens because they won't reliably get a return fare. Same in the rest of the boroughs. Also they often have "br…

I wonder if our experiences aren't wildly different because you seem to hail cabs the traditional way whereas I hail and pay via Curb.

Re: Uber's New CEO

#39

Post by kinkrtyavimoodh »

te_chris wrote: post #31
malandrew wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uber at least always shows you both Pool and X trip times and prices at the same time when ordering. This at least gives every X passenger the opportunity to consider a Pool trip first.

Yes but why would you choose it? It's the most awkward experience I've ever had in my life

In what ways was it awkward?

Re: Uber's New CEO

#40

Post by bpicolo »

cjCamel wrote: post #22
dayaz36 wrote: post #13

why they want a 98 year old running uber is beyond me

Age is just a number and should be meaningless in any discussion to do with employment. Also he's 48. Travis Kalanick is 41. Would you have preferred they got someone in their 20s or 30s? Why?

If anything, age is a positive indicator of work experience
Post reply on HN