7 ms·

Do you want to beat Uber? Pay the drivers better. Uber has shown that this is plenty of money to be made. Let the drivers get it. Choke off Uber's resources.

by itgoon 11y ago

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
JumpCrisscross 11y ago
> Do you want to beat Uber? Pay the drivers better. In a race towards a self-driving fleet, this does not appear to be the winning strategy.
- spiralpolitik 11y ago
  Uber has to survive until they can get a self-driving fleet. The winning strategy in the short term is to choke off Uber's cash flow, so paying drivers more so they drive for you rather than Uber is the winning strategy at this point of the game.
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    > Uber has to survive until they can get a self-driving fleet. Which is hilarious. Tesla already has a semi-autonomous fleet of tens of thousands of cars, improving daily. Best of luck Uber.
    - untog 11y ago
      There is a long, long distance between what Tesla has today and a car with no driver.
      - toomuchtodo 11y ago
        I bet you $1000 to a charity of your choice they (Tesla Motors, either itself or through a subsidiary) have a fully autonomous (level 4) vehicle in less than 3 years, and actively provides a ridesharing service with its vehicles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car#Definition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car#Definition "Level 4: The vehicle performs all safety-critical functions for the entire trip, with the driver not expected to control the vehicle at any time. As this vehicle would control all functions from start to stop, including all parking functions, it could include unoccupied cars."
        rayiner 11y ago
        I'll take that bet!
        toomuchtodo 11y ago
        Now I'm curious :) Do you see regulatory hurdles as more pressing than technical hurdles? Because technical hurdles for self driving cars appear to be (mostly) solved. I don't even believe laser scanners Google is using are required anymore: http://gizmodo.com/mit-figured-out-how-to-make-cheap-3d-scanners-1-000-tim-1745454853 http://gizmodo.com/mit-figured-out-how-to-make-cheap-3d-scan...
        chipotle_coyote 11y ago
        Do you see regulatory hurdles as more pressing than technical hurdles? Not yet. Based on what I know of Google's efforts, I think your three-year horizon for Tesla is, well, optimistic. As many miles as Google has logged, they're not testing at highway speeds yet -- I don't think their driverless prototypes (as opposed to the modified Lexus SUVs) are even capable of highway speeds. Also, AFAIK, they're only testing cars in Mountain View and Austin, which means there's a lot of weather conditions -- and to some degree terrain -- that they haven't had to accommodate. The most recently-given figures they've supplied that I can find is that they expect to be able to commercialize their technology between 2017 and 2020 -- and they've been working on this project since 2009. Tesla'a engineering is good, to be sure, but I would be really surprised if they beat Google to market in this area. Now, once somebody really does start offering these for sale to the general public (or just to taxi/rideshare companies or etc.), the answer to your question shifts from "not yet" to "yep."
        toomuchtodo 11y ago
        > As many miles as Google has logged, they're not testing at highway speeds yet -- I don't think their driverless prototypes (as opposed to the modified Lexus SUVs) are even capable of highway speeds. Tesla's autopilot functions at up to 90mph. > I think your three-year horizon for Tesla is, well, optimistic. http://www.wired.com/2015/10/obviously-drivers-are-already-abusing-teslas-autopilot/ http://www.wired.com/2015/10/obviously-drivers-are-already-a... "Four days later, Reese, Mastracci, and Roy piled into a Model S and took off. They covered 2,994 miles at an average speed of 51.8 mph, a figure that includes the time spent plugged into Supercharger stations along the way. They had autopilot mode engaged 96 percent of the time, Reese says, using it at speeds around 90 mph. It eased the burden on the team, a big deal when you’re in a car for 57 hours straight." 96 percent of the time, at speeds up to 90mph, across 2,994 miles
    - SilasX 11y ago
      Can someone explain the logic there? That's never made sense to me and yet gets repeated a lot. Ride-hailing services are a saturated market with major network effects (the more drivers on a service, the faster they can get to you) and thus, expensive barriers to entry. It just seems like it makes more business sense for Tesla to sell/license as many self-driving cars as they can to any and all services that want them, and concentrate on their core business, rather than branch out into an entirely new market and write a whole new app from scratch and market it. Can someone make the opposite case?
      - toomuchtodo 11y ago
        > Ride-hailing services are a saturated market with major network effects Not so much. Drivers frequently run Uber and Lyft simultaneously. There is no "stickiness". > It just seems like it makes more business sense for Tesla to sell/license as many self-driving cars as they can to any and all services that want them, and concentrate on their core business, rather than branch out into an entirely new market and write a whole new app from scratch and market it. You'd think so, wouldn't you? But apparently that's the direction Elon is going: http://www.techinsider.io/elon-musk-hints-tesla-may-enter-ride-sharing-space-2015-11 http://www.techinsider.io/elon-musk-hints-tesla-may-enter-ri... > write a whole new app from scratch and market it. I think its humorous this is thought of as expensive. How much does it cost to build an iOS/Android app and run the infrastructure to match riders to drivers? $3-5/million/year? Tesla has hundreds of millions of dollars of credit available to it. And you know, the cars receiving software updates constantly.
        SilasX 11y ago
        >Not so much. Drivers frequently run Uber and Lyft simultaneously. There is no "stickiness". I meant from the perspective of users and providers, not drivers (which are irrelevant in the case of self-driving cars...). You have to get all these users to download another app when their existing one works fine. That's money that Tesla could be further investing in their core specialty rather. >You'd think so, wouldn't you? But apparently that's the direction Elon is going Yes, which is why I'm asking; the fact that someone is in fact doing it doesn't resolve this mystery. >I think its humorous this is thought of as expensive. How much does it cost to build an iOS/Android app and run the infrastructure to match riders to drivers? $3-5/million/year? Tesla has hundreds of millions of dollars of credit available to it. And you know, the cars receiving software updates constantly. Right, but they haven't trodden the path of scaling up a ride-hailing app and made the numerous optimizations that Uber/Lyft have made based on the unique problems of that domain.
  - chrischen 11y ago
    Which is funny, because that's what Uber is probably doing to Lyft.
- schwap 11y ago
  That finish line has a lot of technological and regulatory barriers in front of it. There is a lot of time to choke Uber out before we reach it.
- schandur 11y ago
  Is the self-driving fleet really that close?
Apocryphon 11y ago
Lyft does allow a way for their drivers to keep more of their pay by driving more: https://help.lyft.com/hc/en-us/articles/214586477-Power-Driver-Bonus https://help.lyft.com/hc/en-us/articles/214586477-Power-Driv... They also allow tips, unlike Uber. But I've heard from drivers that they don't get tips often, at least not in the Bay- too many passengers are used to Uber's no-tip system.
- derwiki 11y ago
  That's surprising -- most of my friends in the Bay are either firmly in the Uber camp or the Lyft camp; I'm surprised that Uber's no-tips would make much of an impact. I haven't used Uber in years; I didn't even know they didn't allow tips. I almost always tip $1 for Lyft drivers.
- corford 11y ago
  I used UberX a few weeks back and I'm sure I remember a setting somewhere where you could specify a % of the fare as a tip. I remember because it defaulted to 20% and I reduced it to 10% - yes, I'm a cheap bastard :)
  - n-exploit 11y ago
    This is for markets with UberT (Taxi through Uber). They automatically add your set percentage to that fare, but only for that version of Uber. There are no added tips on UberX.
    - corford 11y ago
      Ah ok that explains it. Must have been an UberT ride.
sopooneo 11y ago
That is certainly the more moral thing to do. But if it is really the most long-term profitable business strategy, then do we suppose that Uber is not only greedy, but imprudent? And that these two mistakes are canceling one another out? I admit that such a situation is possible, but I'm skeptical.
doktrin 11y ago
That's only a viable strategy if Lyft & co. have deeper pockets than Uber - which they don't.
dharma1 11y ago
I've had chats with a lot of Uber drivers. Some of them use several apps. Competition would need to reward both drivers and customers better than Uber. For instance, a loyalty scheme for customers (discount on every nth trip) which Uber doesn't do, and for drivers 10% cut of each journey instead of 20% Uber take from the drivers.
- nostromo 11y ago
  Here in Seattle a driver told me they switched to Lyft just for the tips. It goes 100% to the driver and can really make a big difference in their earnings. It's possible to tip Uber drivers, of course, but cash is a pain, and it's less awkward via the app.
  - dharma1 11y ago
    yep, tipping could work in some places. I doubt these companies need 20% of the fee to fund the infrastructure and make a decent profit too, so there will probably be some downward pressure on that cut as competition intensifies. of course autonomous taxis will change the business model somewhat but we are still some way from that - not just the tech but the legislation.

Do you want to beat Uber? Pay the drivers better. Uber has shown that this is plenty of money to be made. Let the drivers get it. Choke off Uber's resources.

by itgoon 11y ago

Do you want to beat Uber? Pay the drivers better. Uber has shown that this is plenty of money to be made. Let the drivers get it. Choke off Uber's resources.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

JumpCrisscross 11y ago

> Do you want to beat Uber? Pay the drivers better. In a race towards a self-driving fleet, this does not appear to be the winning strategy.

spiralpolitik 11y ago
Uber has to survive until they can get a self-driving fleet. The winning strategy in the short term is to choke off Uber's cash flow, so paying drivers more so they drive for you rather than Uber is the winning strategy at this point of the game.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  > Uber has to survive until they can get a self-driving fleet. Which is hilarious. Tesla already has a semi-autonomous fleet of tens of thousands of cars, improving daily. Best of luck Uber.
  - untog 11y ago
    There is a long, long distance between what Tesla has today and a car with no driver.
    - toomuchtodo 11y ago
      I bet you $1000 to a charity of your choice they (Tesla Motors, either itself or through a subsidiary) have a fully autonomous (level 4) vehicle in less than 3 years, and actively provides a ridesharing service with its vehicles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car#Definition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car#Definition "Level 4: The vehicle performs all safety-critical functions for the entire trip, with the driver not expected to control the vehicle at any time. As this vehicle would control all functions from start to stop, including all parking functions, it could include unoccupied cars."
      - rayiner 11y ago
        I'll take that bet!
        toomuchtodo 11y ago
        Now I'm curious :) Do you see regulatory hurdles as more pressing than technical hurdles? Because technical hurdles for self driving cars appear to be (mostly) solved. I don't even believe laser scanners Google is using are required anymore: http://gizmodo.com/mit-figured-out-how-to-make-cheap-3d-scanners-1-000-tim-1745454853 http://gizmodo.com/mit-figured-out-how-to-make-cheap-3d-scan...
        chipotle_coyote 11y ago
        Do you see regulatory hurdles as more pressing than technical hurdles? Not yet. Based on what I know of Google's efforts, I think your three-year horizon for Tesla is, well, optimistic. As many miles as Google has logged, they're not testing at highway speeds yet -- I don't think their driverless prototypes (as opposed to the modified Lexus SUVs) are even capable of highway speeds. Also, AFAIK, they're only testing cars in Mountain View and Austin, which means there's a lot of weather conditions -- and to some degree terrain -- that they haven't had to accommodate. The most recently-given figures they've supplied that I can find is that they expect to be able to commercialize their technology between 2017 and 2020 -- and they've been working on this project since 2009. Tesla'a engineering is good, to be sure, but I would be really surprised if they beat Google to market in this area. Now, once somebody really does start offering these for sale to the general public (or just to taxi/rideshare companies or etc.), the answer to your question shifts from "not yet" to "yep."
        toomuchtodo 11y ago
        > As many miles as Google has logged, they're not testing at highway speeds yet -- I don't think their driverless prototypes (as opposed to the modified Lexus SUVs) are even capable of highway speeds. Tesla's autopilot functions at up to 90mph. > I think your three-year horizon for Tesla is, well, optimistic. http://www.wired.com/2015/10/obviously-drivers-are-already-abusing-teslas-autopilot/ http://www.wired.com/2015/10/obviously-drivers-are-already-a... "Four days later, Reese, Mastracci, and Roy piled into a Model S and took off. They covered 2,994 miles at an average speed of 51.8 mph, a figure that includes the time spent plugged into Supercharger stations along the way. They had autopilot mode engaged 96 percent of the time, Reese says, using it at speeds around 90 mph. It eased the burden on the team, a big deal when you’re in a car for 57 hours straight." 96 percent of the time, at speeds up to 90mph, across 2,994 miles
  - SilasX 11y ago
    Can someone explain the logic there? That's never made sense to me and yet gets repeated a lot. Ride-hailing services are a saturated market with major network effects (the more drivers on a service, the faster they can get to you) and thus, expensive barriers to entry. It just seems like it makes more business sense for Tesla to sell/license as many self-driving cars as they can to any and all services that want them, and concentrate on their core business, rather than branch out into an entirely new market and write a whole new app from scratch and market it. Can someone make the opposite case?
    - toomuchtodo 11y ago
      > Ride-hailing services are a saturated market with major network effects Not so much. Drivers frequently run Uber and Lyft simultaneously. There is no "stickiness". > It just seems like it makes more business sense for Tesla to sell/license as many self-driving cars as they can to any and all services that want them, and concentrate on their core business, rather than branch out into an entirely new market and write a whole new app from scratch and market it. You'd think so, wouldn't you? But apparently that's the direction Elon is going: http://www.techinsider.io/elon-musk-hints-tesla-may-enter-ride-sharing-space-2015-11 http://www.techinsider.io/elon-musk-hints-tesla-may-enter-ri... > write a whole new app from scratch and market it. I think its humorous this is thought of as expensive. How much does it cost to build an iOS/Android app and run the infrastructure to match riders to drivers? $3-5/million/year? Tesla has hundreds of millions of dollars of credit available to it. And you know, the cars receiving software updates constantly.
      - SilasX 11y ago
        >Not so much. Drivers frequently run Uber and Lyft simultaneously. There is no "stickiness". I meant from the perspective of users and providers, not drivers (which are irrelevant in the case of self-driving cars...). You have to get all these users to download another app when their existing one works fine. That's money that Tesla could be further investing in their core specialty rather. >You'd think so, wouldn't you? But apparently that's the direction Elon is going Yes, which is why I'm asking; the fact that someone is in fact doing it doesn't resolve this mystery. >I think its humorous this is thought of as expensive. How much does it cost to build an iOS/Android app and run the infrastructure to match riders to drivers? $3-5/million/year? Tesla has hundreds of millions of dollars of credit available to it. And you know, the cars receiving software updates constantly. Right, but they haven't trodden the path of scaling up a ride-hailing app and made the numerous optimizations that Uber/Lyft have made based on the unique problems of that domain.
- chrischen 11y ago
  Which is funny, because that's what Uber is probably doing to Lyft.
schwap 11y ago
That finish line has a lot of technological and regulatory barriers in front of it. There is a lot of time to choke Uber out before we reach it.
schandur 11y ago
Is the self-driving fleet really that close?

Apocryphon 11y ago

Lyft does allow a way for their drivers to keep more of their pay by driving more: https://help.lyft.com/hc/en-us/articles/214586477-Power-Driver-Bonus https://help.lyft.com/hc/en-us/articles/214586477-Power-Driv... They also allow tips, unlike Uber. But I've heard from drivers that they don't get tips often, at least not in the Bay- too many passengers are used to Uber's no-tip system.

derwiki 11y ago
That's surprising -- most of my friends in the Bay are either firmly in the Uber camp or the Lyft camp; I'm surprised that Uber's no-tips would make much of an impact. I haven't used Uber in years; I didn't even know they didn't allow tips. I almost always tip $1 for Lyft drivers.
corford 11y ago
I used UberX a few weeks back and I'm sure I remember a setting somewhere where you could specify a % of the fare as a tip. I remember because it defaulted to 20% and I reduced it to 10% - yes, I'm a cheap bastard :)
- n-exploit 11y ago
  This is for markets with UberT (Taxi through Uber). They automatically add your set percentage to that fare, but only for that version of Uber. There are no added tips on UberX.
  - corford 11y ago
    Ah ok that explains it. Must have been an UberT ride.

sopooneo 11y ago

That is certainly the more moral thing to do. But if it is really the most long-term profitable business strategy, then do we suppose that Uber is not only greedy, but imprudent? And that these two mistakes are canceling one another out? I admit that such a situation is possible, but I'm skeptical.

doktrin 11y ago

That's only a viable strategy if Lyft & co. have deeper pockets than Uber - which they don't.

dharma1 11y ago

I've had chats with a lot of Uber drivers. Some of them use several apps. Competition would need to reward both drivers and customers better than Uber. For instance, a loyalty scheme for customers (discount on every nth trip) which Uber doesn't do, and for drivers 10% cut of each journey instead of 20% Uber take from the drivers.

nostromo 11y ago
Here in Seattle a driver told me they switched to Lyft just for the tips. It goes 100% to the driver and can really make a big difference in their earnings. It's possible to tip Uber drivers, of course, but cash is a pain, and it's less awkward via the app.
- dharma1 11y ago
  yep, tipping could work in some places. I doubt these companies need 20% of the fee to fund the infrastructure and make a decent profit too, so there will probably be some downward pressure on that cut as competition intensifies. of course autonomous taxis will change the business model somewhat but we are still some way from that - not just the tech but the legislation.