4 ms·

Possibly. But it's good to check assumptions periodically, and I find the assumption that the taxi industry before uber was remotely efficient to be dubious. Ve

Possibly. But it's good to check assumptions periodically, and I find the assumption that the taxi industry before uber was remotely efficient to be dubious. Very few industries merit protection from open competition (in fact, I can't think of one off the top of my head). So far, as a consumer, I prefer uber (or lyft etc, experience is undifferentiated hence why I'm bearish on uber specifically) over literally every other transport-for-hire service I've ever used. The contractor debate should be seen as a first step by the IRS (and soon enough, other countries' taxmen) to take more from an economy that is moving to being self employed at greater numbers (and in growing, valuable fields). Uber and everyone should fight this tooth and nail, both in courts and through lobbying. As it stands, there are strong legal arguments on both sides. As to the ultimate fate of Uber: even if they win this, they will lose. Other competitors will steal their network effect and grow by competing on the spread between pay to company and pay to driver. In 6-10 years, self driving cars will replace human drivers, but margins will keep shrinking and competition will stay fierce. It will remain a huge industry in dollar terms, but not exceptional from a gross margin perspective.

sbov 11y ago
I strongly disagree. Companies have abused contractor status for a long time. This is simply more of the same - another company wishing to have their cake and eat it too. It ultimately lets them pay at least some of their employees under minimum wage. Which puts more money in their pocketbook, and takes more money out of ours (the taxpayer's) through the form of extra government assistance.
- rw2 11y ago
  People can choose where to work. If people thought that Uber didn't offer them a good deal for employment, they can just go work somewhere else. All this does is force Uber to offer benefits which would only make them take a higher cut in the long run. Drivers will suffer in terms of their income. This entire thing is pretty dumb.
  - danielki 11y ago
    Adding to this, "the free market will decide" can sometimes be a cop-out, but in this case it applies perfectly. There are reasonably low barriers to entry in this market, for the most part. If Uber treating its drivers as contractors rather than employees impacts Uber drivers in a negative enough way that they would prefer to work elsewhere, there is likely ample space for a competitor which offers a better deal for its drivers. Drivers have little-to-no incentive to stay with Uber if they can get a better deal elsewhere (based on what I've seen, many already also work for Lyft), and users have little-to-no reason to stick with one on-demand ride app if there's another app that has more availability/drivers. If cost-of-ride is the biggest competitive differentiator, the price of the ride will stay the same and drivers will be able to choose whether they want to work for a company which treats them as an employee but takes a bigger cut, or a company which takes a smaller cut but treats them as a contractor.
toomuchtodo 11y ago
> As to the ultimate fate of Uber: even if they win this, they will lose. Other competitors will steal their network effect and grow by competing on the spread between pay to company and pay to driver. In 6-10 years, self driving cars will replace human drivers, but margins will keep shrinking and competition will stay fierce. It will remain a huge industry in dollar terms, but not exceptional from a gross margin perspective. If this is the case, there is some justice in the world.
- jonnycowboy 11y ago
  Not really, Uber is using their growth and capital to finance R&D of self-driving cars. They are actively hoping that in 6-10 years they won't have any human drivers.
walterbell 11y ago
What about the robotics IP Uber obtained from CMU?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- dave_sullivan 11y ago
  Which gives them what? A monopoly on self driving passenger transport? I find it unlikely (and without that, they will deal with relentless competition).

sbov 11y ago

I strongly disagree. Companies have abused contractor status for a long time. This is simply more of the same - another company wishing to have their cake and eat it too. It ultimately lets them pay at least some of their employees under minimum wage. Which puts more money in their pocketbook, and takes more money out of ours (the taxpayer's) through the form of extra government assistance.

rw2 11y ago
People can choose where to work. If people thought that Uber didn't offer them a good deal for employment, they can just go work somewhere else. All this does is force Uber to offer benefits which would only make them take a higher cut in the long run. Drivers will suffer in terms of their income. This entire thing is pretty dumb.
- danielki 11y ago
  Adding to this, "the free market will decide" can sometimes be a cop-out, but in this case it applies perfectly. There are reasonably low barriers to entry in this market, for the most part. If Uber treating its drivers as contractors rather than employees impacts Uber drivers in a negative enough way that they would prefer to work elsewhere, there is likely ample space for a competitor which offers a better deal for its drivers. Drivers have little-to-no incentive to stay with Uber if they can get a better deal elsewhere (based on what I've seen, many already also work for Lyft), and users have little-to-no reason to stick with one on-demand ride app if there's another app that has more availability/drivers. If cost-of-ride is the biggest competitive differentiator, the price of the ride will stay the same and drivers will be able to choose whether they want to work for a company which treats them as an employee but takes a bigger cut, or a company which takes a smaller cut but treats them as a contractor.

toomuchtodo 11y ago

> As to the ultimate fate of Uber: even if they win this, they will lose. Other competitors will steal their network effect and grow by competing on the spread between pay to company and pay to driver. In 6-10 years, self driving cars will replace human drivers, but margins will keep shrinking and competition will stay fierce. It will remain a huge industry in dollar terms, but not exceptional from a gross margin perspective. If this is the case, there is some justice in the world.

jonnycowboy 11y ago
Not really, Uber is using their growth and capital to finance R&D of self-driving cars. They are actively hoping that in 6-10 years they won't have any human drivers.

walterbell 11y ago

What about the robotics IP Uber obtained from CMU?

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
dave_sullivan 11y ago
Which gives them what? A monopoly on self driving passenger transport? I find it unlikely (and without that, they will deal with relentless competition).