61–70 of 80 posts
I would argue that with perfect unregulated competition, having more than one firm with a stable market share is a sign of INefficiency. Small differences will get magnified, and whoever has the small edge will completely dominate, assuming rational behavior.
A decentralized ride solicitation tool with a reputation system, maybe blockchain-based, could kill off Uber and Lyft almost overnight. Especially if existing taxi companies embraced it. I want to know if a driver is licensed, insured, etc. Uber doesn't provide that, and I don't like the rent-seeking aspect of their service. If it's winner-takes-all, it's only a matter of time until another winner takes all. I don't…
Lyft has already lost the battle. The one to watch is Uber vs Didi Kuaidi, which owns China's market (80%+, vs <15% for Uber) and is tightly integrated into Wechat/Weixin, which is rapidly expanding outside China.
Didi Kuaidi is only competitive in china because of homefield advantage. They have used bribes and other tactics to hinder uber. Uber has had to fight with the government to even allow them to operate while didi kuaidi was granted a license to operate from day one because they are invested with big names who have government connections. Outside of china didi kuaidi can not compete with uber. It is the same reason why…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The threat of possible disruption from an uncertain direction 10 years down the line is of a very different nature than the threat posed by direct, immediate competition. Why do you think it's "lazy" to find one type of competition less desirable and then notice and complain when certain markets seem to consistently gravitate towards it?
I don’t think what you’re describing is wrong. But a belief that something is a natural monopoly causes us to make policy choices based on a flawed assumption. Flawed choices about the inevitability of a monopoly tend to entrench same. E.g. our municipal broadband monopolies trace back to a belief that wireline phone and TV can only be monopolies. And maybe it’s true! But we might have chosen differently, had we not…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An interesting problem of working with "real" cabs is that you have to compete with street hails (that is, people doing the traditional stand-on-the-curb-and-wave-their-arms deal). This is a surprisingly big issue. During slow times, it's not a big deal. But during slow times, you also aren't providing very many rides to the cabbies. And also pricing, which I'll come back to. During peak times, it's very likely in a…
I'm curious how this is any different than Uber other than presentation? During peak hours there's peak pricing and not enough cars to go around so I have to wait. Also, if it was legal for drivers to pick up hails I'm sure many drivers would just turn off Uber during peak and then turn it back on after, no "flakiness". Besides, their rep will go down if they bail on pickups so it seems like they'd just turn if off d…
Turning off during peak is bad. Again, your service will only be used if you can remotely get people rides during peak times. They're peak times because that's when passengers want rides.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well... I mean, it depends on how you do reputation. Passengers do not by-and-large want to page through a list of cabbies and try to trade off the reputation of the person versus how far away they are or whatever. Uber gives its reputation system some bite by just delisting drivers who fall below some rating system (and probably by threatening to do so considerably before they actually do so), and that's more-or-les…
The software agent that consumers interact with would have to be responsible for determining the accuracy of ratings. I suspect that the most important aspect of such a system would be trusted participants: eg, insurance companies, city licensing agencies, etc. If you get one hundred great, but fake, reviews from shell accounts, it would be rather meaningless if your city didn't issue you a license on the blockchain,…
If the city is "issuing" licenses on a blockchain, how is this different than the medallion system already in use?
As an example: Amazon is everything in retail. Well, there is a thriving company in Belgium called coolblue.be There is also a Dutch company called bol.com. For every of those great news stories there are profitable small businesses making money. You just don't see them. To be honest that's ok.
Most of those companies didn't need to shut down if they used money sensibly and were not only dedicated to growth. But off course that's what VC money makes you do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The threat of possible disruption from an uncertain direction 10 years down the line is of a very different nature than the threat posed by direct, immediate competition. Why do you think it's "lazy" to find one type of competition less desirable and then notice and complain when certain markets seem to consistently gravitate towards it?
I don’t think what you’re describing is wrong. But a belief that something is a natural monopoly causes us to make policy choices based on a flawed assumption. Flawed choices about the inevitability of a monopoly tend to entrench same. E.g. our municipal broadband monopolies trace back to a belief that wireline phone and TV can only be monopolies. And maybe it’s true! But we might have chosen differently, had we not…
Please elaborate on what you mean by "chosen."
A decentralized ride solicitation tool with a reputation system, maybe blockchain-based, could kill off Uber and Lyft almost overnight. Especially if existing taxi companies embraced it. I want to know if a driver is licensed, insured, etc. Uber doesn't provide that, and I don't like the rent-seeking aspect of their service. If it's winner-takes-all, it's only a matter of time until another winner takes all. I don't…
I'm not the one who downvoted, but I would imagine this is why. * Overnight is a bit too quick. Uber's service has grown so quickly partly because they have an organization behind it to fight against regulations which is part of what made their rapid growth possible. * Implementing a standardized "blockchain" protocol to guarantee all of those things is a non trivial task * Go outside of SF Bay, whip out your phone w…
I see it looking much like air travel today. Some will opt for fractional/full ownership like netjets and the like, but most commoners will simply pay-as-you go. I hope it evolves like travel by horse with the endpoint being only the very rich will be able to own their own car and there will be restrictions keeping them off important travel arteries because they would be relatively slow, stupid, and dangerous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uber Pool and Lyft Line are now the majority of rides in SF, not sure about other cities - but there is definitely a network affect there
SF is not the rest of the world.