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

Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 263 posts

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#91

Post by pbreit »

danieltillett wrote: post #88
dotBen wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you under-estimate the power of network effects and also the cost of entry to set up an on-demand transportation company. If it really was as easy and low cost as you assert I would suggest you would have seen many other players enter the market already by now.

Maybe, but if each market is isolated then the network effect is small. To dominate a market you just need enough drivers available to meet the market expectations. If you have two businesses in a market supplying an equal quality service, but where one is 20% cheaper, then the cheaper service will capture the majority of the market. An alternative hypothesis might be that nobody can think of a way to make money by i…

If you have enough liquidity you can implement pools and cut prices in half. It is not easy to compete against.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#92

Post by danieltillett »

pbreit wrote: post #90
danieltillett wrote: post #65

The thing about Uber I don’t understand is how they are going to defend their monopoly once they acquire it. Assuming they eventually win all the legal battles and drive all other taxi and taxi-like services out of business then how are they going to stop anyone else from entering their market? Each transport market is effectively isolated (you don’t hail a driver from SF to get around NYC). This means any new entran…

It's pretty much a natural monopoly and very difficult to compete against once in place.

How is it a natural monopoly? A natural monopoly is something like the electrical poles and wires. I can't see how Uber could even become a normal monopoly even if everything went their way.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#93

Post by Hominem »

arthurcolle wrote: post #70
jrcii wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a seasoned New Yorker I've learned that the best response to "where to?" is to silently get in the cab.

When do you drop the tidbit of information related to the whole reason you got in? /just moved to NYC

As others have said, if the cab has the "on duty" light on, just get in.

If, and the happens a lot late at night, the cab does not have the on duty light on you can negotiate.

I've gotten steep discounts or even free rides for agreeing to do stuff like pick up the drivers wife off the clock on the way home.

Like everything in New York, everything is negotiable.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#94

Post by spacehome »

ghayes wrote: post #12
s73v3r wrote: post #3

Why are we still calling this "ridesharing"? Isn't it pretty clear to everyone that there is no ride sharing going on?

Uber is ride-sharing if and only if taxis are ride-sharing.

Yea, but it's 1000 times easier to organize a ride share with Uber when the app will automatically pair you with someone with similar source and destination locations.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#95

Post by beatpanda »

marssaxman wrote: post #24
beatpanda wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where "winning" is the normalization of precarious labor where the employee assumes all risk and somehow makes even less money than they did in "the machine". Oh, but you got to the club a little faster. Baller, bro.

I make a point of asking Uber and Lyft drivers how they like it. Lyft drivers universally love it. Uber drivers are less enthusiastic on the whole, but they have generally said it's better than working as a cab driver. I've since stopped using Uber since it's hard to feel comfortable about their business practices, but they're still better than the taxi monopolies and I'm happy to see them pursuing the fight and clea…

The individual choices of Uber drivers aren't what I'm concerned about. I'm concerned about the overall normalization of precarious labor that benefits the owners of capital and hurts the people doing the work. It starts to hurt workers everywhere if everyone gets used to accepting all of the risk of employment, not having access to workers comp or unemployment insurance, etc etc. And given the kind of benefits packages tech companies typically offer their workers, Uber's practices are especially hypocritical.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#96

Post by schrodinger »

function_seven wrote: post #76
arthurcolle wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When do you drop the tidbit of information related to the whole reason you got in? /just moved to NYC

After you're seated and have closed the door. At that point the cab driver is much less likely to kick you out.

And at that point it's much easier to report them for breaking the law.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#97

Post by danieltillett »

pbreit wrote: post #91
danieltillett wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but if each market is isolated then the network effect is small. To dominate a market you just need enough drivers available to meet the market expectations. If you have two businesses in a market supplying an equal quality service, but where one is 20% cheaper, then the cheaper service will capture the majority of the market. An alternative hypothesis might be that nobody can think of a way to make money by i…

If you have enough liquidity you can implement pools and cut prices in half. It is not easy to compete against.

My god I hope this is not Uber’s plan. While this would actually work it is very, very illegal [1]. I can’t see the USA government turning a blind eye to such blatant antitrust activities, but after what they have let the banks get away with maybe it would work.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#98

Post by p_monk »

Uber's "we need to meet demand" argument is true, but disingenuous. Uber needs to keep adding more drivers because they have such a high turnover rate.

Many drivers work for a few months, realize that after costs they're making minimum wage, if that, and then quit. Naturally, Uber needs constant access to fresh blood in order to keep the scheme going.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#99

Post by braythwayt »

noir_lord wrote: post #74
danieltillett wrote: post #65

The thing about Uber I don’t understand is how they are going to defend their monopoly once they acquire it. Assuming they eventually win all the legal battles and drive all other taxi and taxi-like services out of business then how are they going to stop anyone else from entering their market? Each transport market is effectively isolated (you don’t hail a driver from SF to get around NYC). This means any new entran…

I think (not an economist) but this is what happens when a market is disrupted, new players enter with a lower cost than incumbents, clean up, this encourages other new players to enter at slightly below, first player then drops to match and eventually you reach a new stable equilibrium, in lots of markets that is by one company winning and buying out the others (commodities like Sugar and Salt seem to go this way, i…

> laptop market

A complete sidebar discussion, but although there are many, many laptop manufacturers, one company is estimated to make only 10% of the revenues but more than 35% of the profits, leaving the manufacturers of the other 90% of the laptops to divide 65% of the profits.

So... It is possible that in some markets, a company can drive operational efficiencies to be grossly profitable even if it ends up with a minority market share.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#100

Post by jasonbarone »

Hominem wrote: post #93
arthurcolle wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When do you drop the tidbit of information related to the whole reason you got in? /just moved to NYC

As others have said, if the cab has the "on duty" light on, just get in. If, and the happens a lot late at night, the cab does not have the on duty light on you can negotiate. I've gotten steep discounts or even free rides for agreeing to do stuff like pick up the drivers wife off the clock on the way home. Like everything in New York, everything is negotiable.

But don't think you're safe there. If you have the slightest hesitation at all in your tonality, the driver will all of the sudden get a case of "I don't know that location, can you give me directions". I experienced that when I first moved here back to back one night because I didn't understand the "process" of getting a cab in New York.

Point is, cabs are completely shady, and nearly all have horrible service.

Since I've been here in NY, I've been using Uber regularly and every single experience has been nothing short of great. 99% have been spotless vehicles that smell good, with A/C in summer, and drivers with an awesome attitude. I've had a few rides where the driver took a non-optimal route and Uber refunded credits each time.

It's unbelievable to me that people dislike Uber and think they're just some "scam" backed by venture capital.

Post reply on HN