8 ms·

How Uber Plans to Conquer the Suburbs

36 points by Dowwie 10y ago

noer 10y ago
Didn't see this as I skimmed the article but: What happens when people return? The train lets off a bunch of people at once that need rides, but will there be enough uber drivers to meet the demand?
- bhups 10y ago
  There can be if Uber's systems can proactively position the supply to meet the predicted demand.
- ghaff 10y ago
  I'd really have a general question about how well Uber (or competitors) can deal with very spiky demands. Suburban towns haven't historically had a lot of demand for taxis so one wonders how many drivers will sign up to provide transportation during a fairly narrow timeframe in the morning and the evening. It's not that there isn't a potential pool of drivers who are fine with working a few hours a day but it's not obvious.
  - cowsandmilk 10y ago
    For the commuter rail case, where there is a lot, would you be willing to hop in your car after getting off the commuter rail and turn on uber and be a driver for one ride on your way home? Would uber allow you to be a driver with such low volume?
- bandrami 10y ago
  I work near Dulles Airport and Uber sends pings to drivers throughout northern VA that a bunch of flights are about to come in, in some cases offering a bounty if they go. This town itself may not have a ton of Uber drivers, but they can come from anywhere in the area.
  - noer 10y ago
    Yeah, I guess that was my question. I know they can come from other areas, but when I've taken commuter rail to the suburbs, there are always a few taxis waiting, but never enough to handle the traffic of people who need to get home, it's usually just 1-3 taxis waiting. That said, the town is 6 square miles and they're not getting rid of the existing lot. If you're close enough to the station, why not just walk?
  - chrisseaton 10y ago
    Aren't there a bunch of flights coming in every minute, all day at a major airport like Dulles? If the pinged them when flights were coming it'd be pinging all day.
    - bandrami 10y ago
      There are a few big rushes. The morning east coast shuttles get in at about 8:30, and the evening ones at about 6. The big bunch of intercontinental flights get in around midnight.
- ascagnel_ 10y ago
  At 6 mi^2 and trains arriving once every 30-45 minutes at rush hour, that's enough time for a fare to be picked up at the station, dropped off at home, and the driver to return to the station to repeat.
no_protocol 10y ago
The city is about 6 square miles in area and the general layout appears to be a central hub with major routes as spokes around it to each edge. Anyone living between the spokes can probably get to a spoke by walking 0.75 miles or less. Just two or three continually circling vans/buses could go from the city center, down a spoke, then back via another spoke. Probably could return every 20 minutes, give or take. Can it be done for less than the $167,000 per year this Uber plan will cost the city?
- linkregister 10y ago
  The way you put it, I would say no. 3 vans, operating 16 hours per day, would require a minimum of 7 drivers (to perform two 8-hour shifts per day, with a driver to stand-in for call-outs and vacations). Let's assume we can pay the drivers $10/hr (which is on the low end). At 2080 hours per year per driver, that gives us an annual cost of $145600. And we haven't even paid Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, or worker's comp and unemployment insurance yet! The Uber deal sounds more cost-effective than the van plan.
  - brianwawok 10y ago
    So then how does the math work out? Most people would not Uber for only $10 an hour, knowing that their car needs gas and depreciates. Short term Uber can subsidize the drivers, but long term? I guess a lot of uber drivers come during the busy morning rush, but 0 come at say 1pm or 8pm when it is very slow. How would uber get people to drive on the slow times??
    - zild3d 10y ago
      The difference is we paid our van drivers for an 8 hour shift. Uber isn't, they are only paying when there is a demand
    - the_watcher 10y ago
      > How would uber get people to drive on the slow times?? They won't. You just described the benefits of Uber's system. Their driver pool scales with demand and allows for part time work.
alphaoverlord 10y ago
I see this as Ubers endgame- it doesn't have to beat lyft or other rideshare options, it has to outlast insolvent public transportation options and fickle taxpayers and be the biggest network such that they can get these government contracts. We are seeing more and more of these local deals as it is a superior option in quality and cost to public transportation except in certain mass transport situations.
- ethanbond 10y ago
  And when all the public options disappear just pray that their investors don't start demanding their billions of burned dollars back any time soon. Talk about insolvent...
- hackuser 10y ago
  > it is a superior option in quality and cost to public transportation except in certain mass transport situations. In your humble opinion. It's not better in my town, it's not better environmentally than mass transit, and I don't think it's better for jobs and workers.
- cpprototypes 10y ago
  The plan in the article is complementary, not against public transit. It has the potential to fix the "first and last mile" problem for trains. If successful, it would greatly increase use of rail public transit.
- erispoe 10y ago
  Uber will never outlast urban public transit. Because bigger vehicles and fixed routes are simply more efficient at transporting a lot of people in dense environment. It can easily replace inefficient minibus lines in the suburbs though, and riding your own car to real public transit (in this case, the train). That's potentially a significant market, but I doubt it's as big as the taxi market they're trying to take over.
  - droopyEyelids 10y ago
    You're not thinking of 'externalization' Externalization is the key to Uber disrupting mass transit. It doesn't matter how much more efficient busses and trains are if Uber can continue to push the costs of its operations onto the environment, taxpayers, and the less wealthy who drive for the company. (I know this article isn't about that directly, just wanted to chime in)
colmvp 10y ago
Can't read the article at work but I'll just add this anecdote: Uber is so aggressively adding promos in my city that it's actually cheaper for me to to take a 15-20 min ride in an Uber in a suburb than using local transit. And just two days ago, my friend took an Uber from the suburbs to downtown (25-30 min ride), which only cost him an extra two bucks compared to taking public transit (1.5 - 2 hours commute).
aresant 10y ago
TLDR as the facts in the article were hard for me to divine at first glance: - People ride the train in Summit NJ to work in NYC / elsewhere - It's a pain to park at the train station and wastes a lot of time in the AM - It costs $4 to park in the lot currently - Uber will offer $2 each way rides to 100 residents within the city - Summit will reimburse Uber for the difference between the flat fares and the true cost of a ride, which drivers will receive up front - Summit NJ is about 6 square miles
ebola1717 10y ago
Normally, I'm wary of Uber and it's business practices, but I am soooo ready for this. The cabs where I grew up were awful - they took forever to come and the drivers were often rude and unhelpful. I could never count on them. Plus, drop-offs and pickups at the train stations were always a nightmare.
- jameshart 10y ago
  I have bad news for you: those cab drivers are now your local uber drivers.
  - the_watcher 10y ago
    The difference is that there's now a rating system for them, and because Uber's broken the protectionist medallion racket, even if they're rude and unhelpful, at least you can get a ride reasonably quickly, and they can't take kooky routes without being accountable. It's pretty clear that even if the driver pool includes all cab drivers that this is a major net positive for riders.
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    Only until they act like bad cab drivers and their average rating drops below 4.2. Then they are unemployed.
hackuser 10y ago
With Uber's massive political and PR operation, now I always wonder: * Did Uber influence the politicians somehow? * Did Uber place or pay for the article? * How many of the anecdotal cab complaints (EDIT: And anecdotal Uber raves) in every HN Uber story are part of that PR operation (my apologies to all the legit ones)?
- the_watcher 10y ago
  * Did Uber influence the politicians somehow? Yes. They influenced them by convincing them that this was a better option than a major capital expenditure on a parking lot. * Did Uber place or pay for the article? Almost certainly not. This is a newsworthy story. They may have given the writer an exclusive, however. * How many of the anecdotal cab complaints (EDIT: And anecdotal Uber raves) in every HN Uber story are part of that PR operation (my apologies to all the legit ones)? Anecdotal cab complaints are probably real, and for verification, just be a person who has had to deal with cabs.
  - hackuser 10y ago
    Could you back up these claims? In fairness, I don't know Uber did the things I am concerned about in this case, but I do know that they've done them in other cases. > Anecdotal cab complaints are probably real, and for verification, just be a person who has had to deal with cabs I am, in several towns, and am a very satisfied customer. I've almost never had any of the problems described so regularly here. That doesn't make them impossible, of course. Also, I don't think anyone would say Uber was above astroturfing on HN.
FT_intern 10y ago
Is anyone else slightly apprehensive about Uber substituting as public transport? What if their motive is to bankrupt public transport agencies and then raise prices when people have no alternative?
- jgalt212 10y ago
  I think they'd bankrupt themselves first. It's hard to beat the government and their ability to tax at their own game.
- hackuser 10y ago
  I agree. It's also a risk for people living on very limited budgets; what do they do if Uber raises prices? How do they get to work? The grocery? The doctor? Private enterprise relies on business failure and distribution of resources to those who can pay the most for them. Some things can't fail (police, fire, transportation, water, medical, etc.) and are needed by everyone regardless of income. > What if their motive is to bankrupt public transport agencies and then raise prices when people have no alternative? Uber prides itself, IME, on very aggressive business tactics, concerned only for profit and not, for example, its own workers, local laws, etc. I would be surprised if they did otherwise than what you say.
  - mhink 10y ago
    It sounds like the city described in the article (and others mentioned) is subsidizing Uber fares for people in the city. So, if Uber displaces public transport agencies, I suspect it'll end up being the city which gets stuck with the bill. That said, I don't think the situation is as dire as you're describing. Getting around in smaller American cities is _already_ difficult for many people- as you mentioned, those living on very limited budgets, but also the elderly and other people that can't drive themselves around and must rely on family and friends. So, in the end, I think it's less a matter of "replacing public transportation", and more a matter of "creating a realistic model for publicly-funded transportation in suburban and semi-rural America". This is not to say that I'm super chuffed with Uber being the one to do it. But I can see a future where municipal governments become comfortable with the idea, which would open the door to competition, just as we've seen in major cities where there are plenty of alternatives to Uber.

36 points by Dowwie 10y ago

noer 10y ago

Didn't see this as I skimmed the article but: What happens when people return? The train lets off a bunch of people at once that need rides, but will there be enough uber drivers to meet the demand?

bhups 10y ago
There can be if Uber's systems can proactively position the supply to meet the predicted demand.
ghaff 10y ago
I'd really have a general question about how well Uber (or competitors) can deal with very spiky demands. Suburban towns haven't historically had a lot of demand for taxis so one wonders how many drivers will sign up to provide transportation during a fairly narrow timeframe in the morning and the evening. It's not that there isn't a potential pool of drivers who are fine with working a few hours a day but it's not obvious.
- cowsandmilk 10y ago
  For the commuter rail case, where there is a lot, would you be willing to hop in your car after getting off the commuter rail and turn on uber and be a driver for one ride on your way home? Would uber allow you to be a driver with such low volume?
bandrami 10y ago
I work near Dulles Airport and Uber sends pings to drivers throughout northern VA that a bunch of flights are about to come in, in some cases offering a bounty if they go. This town itself may not have a ton of Uber drivers, but they can come from anywhere in the area.
- noer 10y ago
  Yeah, I guess that was my question. I know they can come from other areas, but when I've taken commuter rail to the suburbs, there are always a few taxis waiting, but never enough to handle the traffic of people who need to get home, it's usually just 1-3 taxis waiting. That said, the town is 6 square miles and they're not getting rid of the existing lot. If you're close enough to the station, why not just walk?
- chrisseaton 10y ago
  Aren't there a bunch of flights coming in every minute, all day at a major airport like Dulles? If the pinged them when flights were coming it'd be pinging all day.
  - bandrami 10y ago
    There are a few big rushes. The morning east coast shuttles get in at about 8:30, and the evening ones at about 6. The big bunch of intercontinental flights get in around midnight.
ascagnel_ 10y ago
At 6 mi^2 and trains arriving once every 30-45 minutes at rush hour, that's enough time for a fare to be picked up at the station, dropped off at home, and the driver to return to the station to repeat.

no_protocol 10y ago

The city is about 6 square miles in area and the general layout appears to be a central hub with major routes as spokes around it to each edge. Anyone living between the spokes can probably get to a spoke by walking 0.75 miles or less. Just two or three continually circling vans/buses could go from the city center, down a spoke, then back via another spoke. Probably could return every 20 minutes, give or take. Can it be done for less than the $167,000 per year this Uber plan will cost the city?

linkregister 10y ago
The way you put it, I would say no. 3 vans, operating 16 hours per day, would require a minimum of 7 drivers (to perform two 8-hour shifts per day, with a driver to stand-in for call-outs and vacations). Let's assume we can pay the drivers $10/hr (which is on the low end). At 2080 hours per year per driver, that gives us an annual cost of $145600. And we haven't even paid Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, or worker's comp and unemployment insurance yet! The Uber deal sounds more cost-effective than the van plan.
- brianwawok 10y ago
  So then how does the math work out? Most people would not Uber for only $10 an hour, knowing that their car needs gas and depreciates. Short term Uber can subsidize the drivers, but long term? I guess a lot of uber drivers come during the busy morning rush, but 0 come at say 1pm or 8pm when it is very slow. How would uber get people to drive on the slow times??
  - zild3d 10y ago
    The difference is we paid our van drivers for an 8 hour shift. Uber isn't, they are only paying when there is a demand
  - the_watcher 10y ago
    > How would uber get people to drive on the slow times?? They won't. You just described the benefits of Uber's system. Their driver pool scales with demand and allows for part time work.

alphaoverlord 10y ago

I see this as Ubers endgame- it doesn't have to beat lyft or other rideshare options, it has to outlast insolvent public transportation options and fickle taxpayers and be the biggest network such that they can get these government contracts. We are seeing more and more of these local deals as it is a superior option in quality and cost to public transportation except in certain mass transport situations.

ethanbond 10y ago
And when all the public options disappear just pray that their investors don't start demanding their billions of burned dollars back any time soon. Talk about insolvent...
hackuser 10y ago
> it is a superior option in quality and cost to public transportation except in certain mass transport situations. In your humble opinion. It's not better in my town, it's not better environmentally than mass transit, and I don't think it's better for jobs and workers.
cpprototypes 10y ago
The plan in the article is complementary, not against public transit. It has the potential to fix the "first and last mile" problem for trains. If successful, it would greatly increase use of rail public transit.
erispoe 10y ago
Uber will never outlast urban public transit. Because bigger vehicles and fixed routes are simply more efficient at transporting a lot of people in dense environment. It can easily replace inefficient minibus lines in the suburbs though, and riding your own car to real public transit (in this case, the train). That's potentially a significant market, but I doubt it's as big as the taxi market they're trying to take over.
- droopyEyelids 10y ago
  You're not thinking of 'externalization' Externalization is the key to Uber disrupting mass transit. It doesn't matter how much more efficient busses and trains are if Uber can continue to push the costs of its operations onto the environment, taxpayers, and the less wealthy who drive for the company. (I know this article isn't about that directly, just wanted to chime in)

colmvp 10y ago

Can't read the article at work but I'll just add this anecdote: Uber is so aggressively adding promos in my city that it's actually cheaper for me to to take a 15-20 min ride in an Uber in a suburb than using local transit. And just two days ago, my friend took an Uber from the suburbs to downtown (25-30 min ride), which only cost him an extra two bucks compared to taking public transit (1.5 - 2 hours commute).

aresant 10y ago

TLDR as the facts in the article were hard for me to divine at first glance: - People ride the train in Summit NJ to work in NYC / elsewhere - It's a pain to park at the train station and wastes a lot of time in the AM - It costs $4 to park in the lot currently - Uber will offer $2 each way rides to 100 residents within the city - Summit will reimburse Uber for the difference between the flat fares and the true cost of a ride, which drivers will receive up front - Summit NJ is about 6 square miles

ebola1717 10y ago

Normally, I'm wary of Uber and it's business practices, but I am soooo ready for this. The cabs where I grew up were awful - they took forever to come and the drivers were often rude and unhelpful. I could never count on them. Plus, drop-offs and pickups at the train stations were always a nightmare.

jameshart 10y ago
I have bad news for you: those cab drivers are now your local uber drivers.
- the_watcher 10y ago
  The difference is that there's now a rating system for them, and because Uber's broken the protectionist medallion racket, even if they're rude and unhelpful, at least you can get a ride reasonably quickly, and they can't take kooky routes without being accountable. It's pretty clear that even if the driver pool includes all cab drivers that this is a major net positive for riders.
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  Only until they act like bad cab drivers and their average rating drops below 4.2. Then they are unemployed.

hackuser 10y ago

With Uber's massive political and PR operation, now I always wonder: * Did Uber influence the politicians somehow? * Did Uber place or pay for the article? * How many of the anecdotal cab complaints (EDIT: And anecdotal Uber raves) in every HN Uber story are part of that PR operation (my apologies to all the legit ones)?

the_watcher 10y ago
* Did Uber influence the politicians somehow? Yes. They influenced them by convincing them that this was a better option than a major capital expenditure on a parking lot. * Did Uber place or pay for the article? Almost certainly not. This is a newsworthy story. They may have given the writer an exclusive, however. * How many of the anecdotal cab complaints (EDIT: And anecdotal Uber raves) in every HN Uber story are part of that PR operation (my apologies to all the legit ones)? Anecdotal cab complaints are probably real, and for verification, just be a person who has had to deal with cabs.
- hackuser 10y ago
  Could you back up these claims? In fairness, I don't know Uber did the things I am concerned about in this case, but I do know that they've done them in other cases. > Anecdotal cab complaints are probably real, and for verification, just be a person who has had to deal with cabs I am, in several towns, and am a very satisfied customer. I've almost never had any of the problems described so regularly here. That doesn't make them impossible, of course. Also, I don't think anyone would say Uber was above astroturfing on HN.

FT_intern 10y ago

Is anyone else slightly apprehensive about Uber substituting as public transport? What if their motive is to bankrupt public transport agencies and then raise prices when people have no alternative?

jgalt212 10y ago
I think they'd bankrupt themselves first. It's hard to beat the government and their ability to tax at their own game.
hackuser 10y ago
I agree. It's also a risk for people living on very limited budgets; what do they do if Uber raises prices? How do they get to work? The grocery? The doctor? Private enterprise relies on business failure and distribution of resources to those who can pay the most for them. Some things can't fail (police, fire, transportation, water, medical, etc.) and are needed by everyone regardless of income. > What if their motive is to bankrupt public transport agencies and then raise prices when people have no alternative? Uber prides itself, IME, on very aggressive business tactics, concerned only for profit and not, for example, its own workers, local laws, etc. I would be surprised if they did otherwise than what you say.
- mhink 10y ago
  It sounds like the city described in the article (and others mentioned) is subsidizing Uber fares for people in the city. So, if Uber displaces public transport agencies, I suspect it'll end up being the city which gets stuck with the bill. That said, I don't think the situation is as dire as you're describing. Getting around in smaller American cities is _already_ difficult for many people- as you mentioned, those living on very limited budgets, but also the elderly and other people that can't drive themselves around and must rely on family and friends. So, in the end, I think it's less a matter of "replacing public transportation", and more a matter of "creating a realistic model for publicly-funded transportation in suburban and semi-rural America". This is not to say that I'm super chuffed with Uber being the one to do it. But I can see a future where municipal governments become comfortable with the idea, which would open the door to competition, just as we've seen in major cities where there are plenty of alternatives to Uber.