http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/throw... Edit: thanks for downvoting a valid point. It's weird that HN doesn't see it for what it is.
HN downvotes low effort posts like reaction gifs, it has nothing to do with your point.
$2.25 Lyft line rides in SF
41–50 of 84 posts
Re: $2.25 Lyft line rides in SF
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree, until Lyft runs out of money, Uber wins, and the price skyrockets. Plus there's Sidecar, which will surely die soon because nobody even knows it exists.
...and the price skyrockets. Maybe. But maybe instead: Routing and capital intensity (lack of car idle-times) continues to improve. Shared-rides in larger-vehicles (vans) grow in proportion and convenience. Cities expand pick-up/drop-off zones for car services. Attempts at monopoly price hikes spur freelance/coop/upstart competitors along the most profitable corridors, able to snipe Uber rides via overlay apps/servic…
Who owns the cars? Who is liable for problems which arise? If I'm anywhere near home, I'm using my own self-driving car, not something used by tens of thousands of unknown people. If I'm somewhere else, I'd like to use a restricted set of cars of people that I know and trust and vice versa. Probably just trade favors and pay for gas/charging rather than a straight up fee. Would be nice to coordinate with a place to stay, so I don't have to do two separate tasks (esp if I'm visiting somewhere I have friends or family nearby).
Also, it seems like regulated utilities have been more effective at providing essential services widely at low cost than large private oligopolies such as cable and wireless, so I have no particular desire for an Uber/Lyft duopoly.
Re: $2.25 Lyft line rides in SF
#43The company I work for recently won a contest put on by Lyft offering free Lyft Line rides to and from work for an entire week. I live in Lower Pac Heights and work in the Financial District and take a couple different Muni routes to and from work. I'll take either the 2 or the 3 heading in and the 38L heading back; the 38L is way too crowded in the morning by the time it gets to my closest stop. Morning commute usually takes around 15 minutes and afternoon takes around 10.
So, my commute isn't bad by any means but I decided to give Lyft Line a shot to see if I could do any better. The first day I tried hailing one in the morning, the app hung up looking for drivers; it said 1 minute to match with a driver but I waited 3 before quitting the app and deciding to take Muni. That afternoon, I tried again but ran into the same issue. The next afternoon, I was finally able to line up a ride but had to wait 10 minutes for the driver to get to me. Once he did and we were on our way, I had the joyful experience of sitting in traffic for blocks on end while watching Munis zip by in the designated lanes beside us. Not including wait time, the ride took around 20 minutes (double my normal commute time).
I'm sure there are some routes for which Line is a better option than public transportation, but I personally have a much better experience on Muni than I did with Line. I get why they're focused on rush hour; a service like Line requires a critical mass of people to use the app concurrently in order to make it work. But, the downside of this is that the times when it reaches this point are the times when traffic is the worst and public transportation offers a superior alternative in many cases. We'll see if this ends up taking off, but I know I won't be using it for my commute. Maybe this would be better suited for one-off events like Outside Lands, Giants games etc. but I'd imagine they'd run into the same problems.
Re: $2.25 Lyft line rides in SF
#44The actual lyft line code is more simple than you would expect. It's written in Flask and uses lots of heuristics. Lack of real-time traffic data causes most of their issues. We're hosting the engineering lead for Lyft Line at our meetup in SF next month if you are interested in learning about it: http://www.meetup.com/OpenLate/events/217476372/
Re: $2.25 Lyft line rides in SF
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, I've been talking to a lot of Uber/Lyft drivers, and while I have no carefully tabulated data to quantify my point, I must say Lyft drivers complain less than Uber drivers (at least not explicitly) about their respective employers. This attitudinal difference is most acute when the driver drives for both: they generally like Lyft better for how the company treats them but are also on Uber to ensure steadier busin…
I thought dogma was that drivers are not employees, but Independent Contractors? Meaning Uber/Lyft are not employers (of drivers), but more akin to a fancy home improvement parking lot?
They're still employers, even if the drivers are independent contractors. The name doesn't change.
Re: $2.25 Lyft line rides in SF
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
You shouldn't, the end result is that drivers will end up with shitty salaries (and no, most drivers aren't going to be retrained as computer programmers when they realise Uber can't help them pay for their SF rent). Not to mention that these people are contractors (illegal) so have more personal taxes to pay. In my eyes Uber and Lyft have lost all moral high ground. These companies are just not following regulations…
It's not clear to me that the contracting model for drivers is illegal. Drivers choose their own hours, own their own cars, and don't have to be exclusive to either Uber or Lyft--many drivers drive for both more or less simultaneously. That's the most clear cut example of a valid, legal contractor model I've seen.
If working your own hours, with your own equipment, for one or two companies is illegal then myself and a lot of Hacker News are working illegally.
Re: $2.25 Lyft line rides in SF
#47This would seem to undermine companies like Chariot, who are offering more MUNI-plus like services:
Re: $2.25 Lyft line rides in SF
#48This price war between uber and lyft seems foolish and unsustainable, but as a consumer, I'm down.
There's a logic to unsustainable price wars - your competitors might not sustain them as well as you can.
Price wars can be horrible for consumers, that's why some forms of them are illegal[0]. If Lyft and Uber talk to each other about gutting prices to put cabs out of business it's illegal. If they read the same econ books and independently come to the conclusion that it's the best thing to do, it's legal.
We regulate the cab industry to insulate it from this type of thing, because once the high prices and bad service that come with market concentration happen it may be months or longer before better options become available.
Re: $2.25 Lyft line rides in SF
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought dogma was that drivers are not employees, but Independent Contractors? Meaning Uber/Lyft are not employers (of drivers), but more akin to a fancy home improvement parking lot?
They're still employers, even if the drivers are independent contractors. The name doesn't change.
They do employee people (office staff), but they are not employers of the drivers. It would be more accurate to call them the contractee.
At least, this is the argument that Uber/Lyft will/does make to shield them from general liability for their contractors' actions as well as tax liability[1].
[1] http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Small-Businesses-&-Self-Employ...
Re: $2.25 Lyft line rides in SF
#50For its shortcomings, at least Muni has a level of accountability to the public that Lyft and Uber inherently lack. I can't see Lyft or Uber providing discounts to seniors or people with disabilities.
Muni is theoretically accountable to city hall, not the people who ride it. It has no incentive to provide a useful service- only to keep its budget (which is a slush fund anyway).