5 ms·

I think the play is more or less to strangle the higher priced and over-regulated patchwork taxi industries and build a more uniform national/international regu

I think the play is more or less to strangle the higher priced and over-regulated patchwork taxi industries and build a more uniform national/international regulatory framework that's more amenable to these kinds of businesses. At that point prices will probably rise, and (they hope, and I think they're right) customers will see value in the better product that keeps them in.

_Codemonkeyism 10y ago
You've picked my interest, how would lowering regulation increase customer prices?
- stormbrew 10y ago
  I am not saying prices would rise in direct consequence to a reduction in regulation. The premise is that they are pricing below market right now, and probably also for a more open market. This is an expense to them designed to create the open market they want. Once they have it, they'll have little reason to underprice anymore. You need drivers to run this kind of business (for now), and they will create an upward pressure on cost (to a point) as they move between legitimate services based on who actually pays them a living.
- argonaut 10y ago
  In the abstract, breaking up monopolies is the canonical example.
  - _Codemonkeyism 10y ago
    Breaking up monopolies raises prices? You've lost me :-)
    - argonaut 10y ago
      Less regulation = not breaking up a monopoly = higher prices.
    - stormbrew 10y ago
      I think the GP is talking about breaking up 'natural' monopolies, rather than government monopolies. Note: Just to skip a potential semantic argument that always crops up around this: whether or not you believe it's appropriate to call it a monopoly if it's not enforced by government fiat is beside the point.
- dredmorbius 10y ago
  s/picked/piqued/
femto 10y ago
Or they are looking forward to the introduction of self-driving cars? Rather than waiting for self-driving cars to actually arrive, by which time the horse will have bolted, they are trying to lock the customer base in now at a high cost, banking on the money lasting until self-driving cars arrive. Once self-driving cars arrive, costs fall, competitors are locked out, and they make a big profit.
- stormbrew 10y ago
  I just don't think that'll come soon enough for the amount of money and resources they're pumping into it. But obviously this is part of the long play, at least and especially for Uber.
ForHackernews 10y ago
> customers will see value in the better product that keeps them in. How is Uber a "better product" than a taxi? As far as I can tell, it's competing on price, and that's it. If cabs were the same price as Uber, I would take a taxi every time.
- nordsieck 10y ago
  If you live in one of the few places where you can expect to be able to hail a taxi, you're probably right. If you have to call for a taxi, Uber is infinity times more reliable.
- marcoperaza 10y ago
  Are you kidding? Have you ever tried to get a cab outside of Manhattan? It's painful even in the downtown core of major cities. And if you live in the suburbs, you have to call like two hours ahead and there's always a good chance they don't show up. In my experience with Uber, drivers are more courteous, billing is more honest, their cars smell better, and bad drivers are held accountable.
  - kuschku 10y ago
    Yes, I've called taxis several times in a tiny (280k) city in Germany - they're there faster than the police would come if you'd call 911, they're reliable, clean, and you can pay via app before the ride. I really don't get what's so good about uber, they're just like taxis, but worse quality, and bending the law.
    - collyw 10y ago
      Thats the thing, taxi quality varies a lot depending where you go. In Barcelona they are reasonably priced and reliable. Istanbul non seemed to have a clue where they were going and didn't bother when you showed them on the phone map. London are pricey and snobby about what they will let you carry in their cab.
      - 10y ago

_Codemonkeyism 10y ago

You've picked my interest, how would lowering regulation increase customer prices?

stormbrew 10y ago
I am not saying prices would rise in direct consequence to a reduction in regulation. The premise is that they are pricing below market right now, and probably also for a more open market. This is an expense to them designed to create the open market they want. Once they have it, they'll have little reason to underprice anymore. You need drivers to run this kind of business (for now), and they will create an upward pressure on cost (to a point) as they move between legitimate services based on who actually pays them a living.
argonaut 10y ago
In the abstract, breaking up monopolies is the canonical example.
- _Codemonkeyism 10y ago
  Breaking up monopolies raises prices? You've lost me :-)
  - argonaut 10y ago
    Less regulation = not breaking up a monopoly = higher prices.
  - stormbrew 10y ago
    I think the GP is talking about breaking up 'natural' monopolies, rather than government monopolies. Note: Just to skip a potential semantic argument that always crops up around this: whether or not you believe it's appropriate to call it a monopoly if it's not enforced by government fiat is beside the point.
dredmorbius 10y ago
s/picked/piqued/

femto 10y ago

Or they are looking forward to the introduction of self-driving cars? Rather than waiting for self-driving cars to actually arrive, by which time the horse will have bolted, they are trying to lock the customer base in now at a high cost, banking on the money lasting until self-driving cars arrive. Once self-driving cars arrive, costs fall, competitors are locked out, and they make a big profit.

stormbrew 10y ago
I just don't think that'll come soon enough for the amount of money and resources they're pumping into it. But obviously this is part of the long play, at least and especially for Uber.

ForHackernews 10y ago

> customers will see value in the better product that keeps them in. How is Uber a "better product" than a taxi? As far as I can tell, it's competing on price, and that's it. If cabs were the same price as Uber, I would take a taxi every time.

nordsieck 10y ago
If you live in one of the few places where you can expect to be able to hail a taxi, you're probably right. If you have to call for a taxi, Uber is infinity times more reliable.
marcoperaza 10y ago
Are you kidding? Have you ever tried to get a cab outside of Manhattan? It's painful even in the downtown core of major cities. And if you live in the suburbs, you have to call like two hours ahead and there's always a good chance they don't show up. In my experience with Uber, drivers are more courteous, billing is more honest, their cars smell better, and bad drivers are held accountable.
- kuschku 10y ago
  Yes, I've called taxis several times in a tiny (280k) city in Germany - they're there faster than the police would come if you'd call 911, they're reliable, clean, and you can pay via app before the ride. I really don't get what's so good about uber, they're just like taxis, but worse quality, and bending the law.
  - collyw 10y ago
    Thats the thing, taxi quality varies a lot depending where you go. In Barcelona they are reasonably priced and reliable. Istanbul non seemed to have a clue where they were going and didn't bother when you showed them on the phone map. London are pricey and snobby about what they will let you carry in their cab.
    - 10y ago