3 ms·
Let's file this one under "duh" It's not ride-hailing apps themselves. Has nothing to do with the fact that it's someone else's car or that you use an app ins
by ericfrederich 10y ago
Let's file this one under "duh"
It's not ride-hailing apps themselves. Has nothing to do with the fact that it's someone else's car or that you use an app instead of a phone number to order it.
It's the fact that you can get home now for $10 only waiting 5 minutes from the time you decided you want to leave.... compared to paying $60 and waiting an hour.
- domfletcher 10y agoI disagree, Uber for all its obvious faults has a top notch UX, I don't need to find cash, I barely need to break off conversation with my friend let alone speak to a person on the phone who will inevitably be confused about where I am. All that stuff drives adoption and retention.
- hectorr 10y agoI think it has a lot to do with the app. It's more about getting out than getting home. Sure, taxis are usually available if you're out in a town, but anyone who's ever tried to call one to pick them up from home on short notice is often going to be annoyed with the quality of dispatcher service. Even if the dispatcher is great and the taxi arrives quickly, anyone who has had a bad experience before will be anxious given the lack of reliable information. The ETA with a map is a huge factor in improving the experience. I also wouldn't overlook the novelty factor in the idea gaining traction. It took a mundane process (calling a dispatcher) and made it sleek, hip, and fun. Especially in the early days, when you'd meet a lot of diverse drivers, not just professionals. This made a huge difference in making Uber a 'thing', not just a marginally improved commodity service.
- jle 10y agoEven if it's something we already knew, it's nice to see data confirming.