3 ms·
First, I note that you've got from "far less" to "downward pressure." Are you modifying your claim? I think that there is a considerably more colorable argume
by aetherson 10y ago
First, I note that you've got from "far less" to "downward pressure." Are you modifying your claim? I think that there is a considerably more colorable argument that it might shave 5 to 10% off the wages of a driver than that it might shave 50% off the wages of the driver.
While shifting the costs of vehicle purchase and maintenance from the driver to Uber is a factor, it's not enough to make driver wages "far less," and Uber has already been offering various assistances to drivers towards vehicle ownership, so nothing very dramatic is happening there -- and in any case, none of that savings will make it to the passenger, who ultimately is paying for the vehicle.
Making "far less" money than a typical Uber driver means around minimum-wage job or below. Let me suggest that there is no large pool of people who are interested in a roughly minimum-wage job with no security or prospect for advancement, who can plausibly save you from dying in a car crash.
(PS: There is no way that Uber would allow its drivers to dictate a novel while a passenger is in the car).
- technofiend 10y agoSadly there is no RemindMe for ycombinator, but yes I believe "far less" is still my conclusion here. I didn't quantify far less and I'm not sure exactly how much it means? Thirty percent less? Fifty percent less? Not sure but yes I expect it'll be more than a 5 to 10% haircut you cited. And more importantly - profits will be far less if Uber adopts a taxi-like model of supplying the hardware and charging drivers a use fee.