4 ms·

This article makes some interesting assertions, but does very little to back them up with facts. Yes, in sparsely populated areas the availability of Uber ofte

This article makes some interesting assertions, but does very little to back them up with facts. Yes, in sparsely populated areas the availability of Uber often justifies cutting back on bus services -- but Uber is far superior to a once-an-hour bus service anyway. In some cases even allows for an increase in public transit usage, by handling the "last mile" (where individual vehicles are a good solution) and delivering people conveniently to and from train stations (whereupon they can switch to what public transit does efficiently -- moving a large number of people at once).

lefstathiou 10y ago
I didn't think about this until you mentioned it but I definitely take commuter rails more frequently as a result of knowing there will be an Uber in the neighborhood to get me through the last mile. I do this at the expense of renting a car and for whatever reason, using the local taxi service that undoubtedly existed all the while never occurs to me (I've ridden enough sh1tty local cabs to never do it willingly).
- ghaff 10y ago
  I hear this a lot and it seems odd to me. I have literally never taken an Uber (which I admittedly don't use a lot when traveling) when I haven't been fully aware of and prepared to take a taxi as an alternative. When I have taken an Uber I just decided it would be cheaper/easier/etc. but, if an Uber weren't an option, I would certainly just take a taxi.
  - Ensorceled 10y ago
    I take Uber when I can and a cab if I must. But if I must take a cab, I'll often just drive. I've had too many terrible or dangerous cab rides to be so blasé about the difference.
  - ohwello 10y ago
    Taxis suck in a lot of places. It takes then forever to show up when you call, if they show up at all. Very inconvenient for eg. making your way to the commuter rail station in the suburbs.
- ryandrake 10y ago
  I agree. Probably 90% of my Uber usage is from BART to wherever I _actually_ want to go since BART doesn't go there and bus service is infuriating.
- smsm42 10y ago
  Same here - knowing that there's a cheap last-mile service within 5 minutes enables me to use commuter rail more instead of dragging my car all the way over only because I need to visit that one place with bad public service.
ksk 10y ago
> In some cases even allows for an increase in public transit usage, by handling the "last mile" (where individual vehicles are a good solution) and delivering people conveniently to and from train stations (whereupon they can switch to what public transit does efficiently -- moving a large number of people at once). The article's whole point is that because Uber underprices their service, it could be cheaper to avoid public transit entirely.
kimsk112 10y ago
I agree. Knowing that there is Uber service for the 'last mile' encourages me to ride public transit. I hardly have any good experience with Taxi, so I try to avoid it as much as possible.
swehner 10y ago
A service that is not sustainable cannot be said to be superior. As in each and every Uber ride is subsidized to the tune of a few dollars???!!!! http://motherboard.vice.com/read/uber-true-cost-uh-oh http://motherboard.vice.com/read/uber-true-cost-uh-oh https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-25/uber-loses-at-least-1-2-billion-in-first-half-of-2016 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-25/uber-lose...
- cbhl 10y ago
  Public transit isn't sustainable either; it's about public good paid for by tax dollars. It usually costs far more to run buses in suburban areas than they bring in revenue. IIRC, there were Amtrak routes in the Northeast that became very popular, and the gov't was bleeding money increasing the amount of service because every ride was subsidized by something like $10-$20/ride.
  - swehner 10y ago
    Please!
  - makomk 10y ago
    That seems rather unlikely. Generally, the reason public transport loses money is because it doesn't have enough riders, since the cost is relatively independent of the number of people that use it up to some point. You don't tend to get this kind of success problem in public transport, unlike with (say) VC-subsidised services like Uber.
crdoconnor 10y ago
>Uber is far superior to a once-an-hour bus service Hardly surprising that it provides a superior service when Uber subsidizes up to 60% of the passenger fares. Their entire business model does, however, rely upon jacking up prices substantially at some point, to both recoup those losses and to make shareholders happy. The question you should ask yourself isn't "is Uber superior now?" but "is it superior if it's 3x the price it is now?".

lefstathiou 10y ago

I didn't think about this until you mentioned it but I definitely take commuter rails more frequently as a result of knowing there will be an Uber in the neighborhood to get me through the last mile. I do this at the expense of renting a car and for whatever reason, using the local taxi service that undoubtedly existed all the while never occurs to me (I've ridden enough sh1tty local cabs to never do it willingly).

ghaff 10y ago
I hear this a lot and it seems odd to me. I have literally never taken an Uber (which I admittedly don't use a lot when traveling) when I haven't been fully aware of and prepared to take a taxi as an alternative. When I have taken an Uber I just decided it would be cheaper/easier/etc. but, if an Uber weren't an option, I would certainly just take a taxi.
- Ensorceled 10y ago
  I take Uber when I can and a cab if I must. But if I must take a cab, I'll often just drive. I've had too many terrible or dangerous cab rides to be so blasé about the difference.
- ohwello 10y ago
  Taxis suck in a lot of places. It takes then forever to show up when you call, if they show up at all. Very inconvenient for eg. making your way to the commuter rail station in the suburbs.
ryandrake 10y ago
I agree. Probably 90% of my Uber usage is from BART to wherever I _actually_ want to go since BART doesn't go there and bus service is infuriating.
smsm42 10y ago
Same here - knowing that there's a cheap last-mile service within 5 minutes enables me to use commuter rail more instead of dragging my car all the way over only because I need to visit that one place with bad public service.

ksk 10y ago

> In some cases even allows for an increase in public transit usage, by handling the "last mile" (where individual vehicles are a good solution) and delivering people conveniently to and from train stations (whereupon they can switch to what public transit does efficiently -- moving a large number of people at once). The article's whole point is that because Uber underprices their service, it could be cheaper to avoid public transit entirely.

kimsk112 10y ago

I agree. Knowing that there is Uber service for the 'last mile' encourages me to ride public transit. I hardly have any good experience with Taxi, so I try to avoid it as much as possible.

swehner 10y ago

A service that is not sustainable cannot be said to be superior. As in each and every Uber ride is subsidized to the tune of a few dollars???!!!! http://motherboard.vice.com/read/uber-true-cost-uh-oh http://motherboard.vice.com/read/uber-true-cost-uh-oh https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-25/uber-loses-at-least-1-2-billion-in-first-half-of-2016 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-25/uber-lose...

cbhl 10y ago
Public transit isn't sustainable either; it's about public good paid for by tax dollars. It usually costs far more to run buses in suburban areas than they bring in revenue. IIRC, there were Amtrak routes in the Northeast that became very popular, and the gov't was bleeding money increasing the amount of service because every ride was subsidized by something like $10-$20/ride.
- swehner 10y ago
  Please!
- makomk 10y ago
  That seems rather unlikely. Generally, the reason public transport loses money is because it doesn't have enough riders, since the cost is relatively independent of the number of people that use it up to some point. You don't tend to get this kind of success problem in public transport, unlike with (say) VC-subsidised services like Uber.

crdoconnor 10y ago

>Uber is far superior to a once-an-hour bus service Hardly surprising that it provides a superior service when Uber subsidizes up to 60% of the passenger fares. Their entire business model does, however, rely upon jacking up prices substantially at some point, to both recoup those losses and to make shareholders happy. The question you should ask yourself isn't "is Uber superior now?" but "is it superior if it's 3x the price it is now?".