3 ms·

>You can split an Uber 4 ways but you can't split a bus fare. Like a taxi? Uber will never come close to moving the sheer numbers that public transit does. Yo

>You can split an Uber 4 ways but you can't split a bus fare. Like a taxi? Uber will never come close to moving the sheer numbers that public transit does. You can't do it, not enough road to fit all those cars. Especially in downtown cores. So Uber competes with public transit as much as taxis compete with public transit.

cmurf 10y ago
Taxis are a kind of public transit. So call me skeptical if Uber manages to sink taxis and this is part of their long term strategy, because unless they have enough money to become the sovereign in their dominant markets, they're going to end up being regulated by the local government should they supplant taxis.
- CydeWeys 10y ago
  I know what point you're trying to make, but taxis are explicitly not public transit. Busses, trains, planes, ferries, etc., are all public transit, regardless of whether they are publicly or privately owned. For-hire taxis, coaches, limousines, private jets, etc., are all private transport.
- codecamper 10y ago
  Interesting. I think this is a very valid point. Eventually governments will get wise to the fact that this is not magic. Just a new way to dial up a ride. Governments didn't allow individuals to install a radio into their private car & drive around making rides. Why should they allow the same just because you have a smartphone?
scythe 10y ago
That only holds true at peak hours. For off-peak uses, ride-sharing can compete with buses; in an electric car world, cost-effectively as well.
loeg 10y ago
Yes, like a taxi. The primary benefits Uber has over traditional Taxis are 1. price; 2. they have an app, and it works well; 3. drivers arrive in vaguely predictable times that are less than 45 minutes; and 4. it doesn't discriminate as badly as cabbies. > Uber will never come close to moving the sheer numbers that public transit does. You can't do it, not enough road to fit all those cars. Especially in downtown cores. I never suggested anything of the sort. Especially not at commute hours. > So Uber competes with public transit as much as taxis compete with public transit. I think we agree. I just noted that if Uber prices rose, some Uber users would prefer to use public transit rather than pay higher Uber prices or Taxi prices.
- gaius 10y ago
  2-4 apply to every taxi firm these days too
  - driverdan 10y ago
    Not in the US. Taxi companies in US cities are terrible.
    - TeMPOraL 10y ago
      A great marketing win for Uber here. It became known worldwide as an "innovative technology company" even though outside US, it's only innovation is funneling SV money to lawyers so that they can maintain their illegal business practices while they conquer the local markets. E.g. in Europe we've already had all the other "innovative" stuff. But people don't notice it, instead naively buying the "Uber = innovation" marketing.
      - scarmig 10y ago
        The funny thing here is that a couple cab companies have done seemingly irreparable damage to the worldwide taxi industry, merely by virtue of being based in San Francisco and allowing drivers to regularly flake or refuse service to slightly less profitable areas.

cmurf 10y ago

Taxis are a kind of public transit. So call me skeptical if Uber manages to sink taxis and this is part of their long term strategy, because unless they have enough money to become the sovereign in their dominant markets, they're going to end up being regulated by the local government should they supplant taxis.

CydeWeys 10y ago
I know what point you're trying to make, but taxis are explicitly not public transit. Busses, trains, planes, ferries, etc., are all public transit, regardless of whether they are publicly or privately owned. For-hire taxis, coaches, limousines, private jets, etc., are all private transport.
codecamper 10y ago
Interesting. I think this is a very valid point. Eventually governments will get wise to the fact that this is not magic. Just a new way to dial up a ride. Governments didn't allow individuals to install a radio into their private car & drive around making rides. Why should they allow the same just because you have a smartphone?

scythe 10y ago

That only holds true at peak hours. For off-peak uses, ride-sharing can compete with buses; in an electric car world, cost-effectively as well.

loeg 10y ago

Yes, like a taxi. The primary benefits Uber has over traditional Taxis are 1. price; 2. they have an app, and it works well; 3. drivers arrive in vaguely predictable times that are less than 45 minutes; and 4. it doesn't discriminate as badly as cabbies. > Uber will never come close to moving the sheer numbers that public transit does. You can't do it, not enough road to fit all those cars. Especially in downtown cores. I never suggested anything of the sort. Especially not at commute hours. > So Uber competes with public transit as much as taxis compete with public transit. I think we agree. I just noted that if Uber prices rose, some Uber users would prefer to use public transit rather than pay higher Uber prices or Taxi prices.

gaius 10y ago
2-4 apply to every taxi firm these days too
- driverdan 10y ago
  Not in the US. Taxi companies in US cities are terrible.
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    A great marketing win for Uber here. It became known worldwide as an "innovative technology company" even though outside US, it's only innovation is funneling SV money to lawyers so that they can maintain their illegal business practices while they conquer the local markets. E.g. in Europe we've already had all the other "innovative" stuff. But people don't notice it, instead naively buying the "Uber = innovation" marketing.
    - scarmig 10y ago
      The funny thing here is that a couple cab companies have done seemingly irreparable damage to the worldwide taxi industry, merely by virtue of being based in San Francisco and allowing drivers to regularly flake or refuse service to slightly less profitable areas.