4 ms·

Its funny. When I first started using Uber, every time I took a ride and paid the fair its was almost a joyous experience to pay what seemed like so little. It

Its funny. When I first started using Uber, every time I took a ride and paid the fair its was almost a joyous experience to pay what seemed like so little. It made me want to use Uber for all sorts of trips and tell everyone else to do the same. Now every time I open it, it feels like just a liiittle too much to use for anything but a very occasional trip. They get more from me for each trip I now almost never take. Win the battle, lose the war. There should be a name for this kind of algorithm. How bout "Pyrrhic Optimizers"?

jessriedel 9y ago
They were losing money on you before by subsidizing your ride. Now their price better reflect the actual economic costs, and it's not surprising that this means you don't take a taxi as often.
- noonespecial 9y ago
  Doesn't seem like we can know that for sure without knowing their complete costs per ride. Even at the higher price that might still be true. It might not. What we do know is that the algo isn't based on their cost, its trying to figure out the max it can charge me and "get away with it". I'm suggesting that its time horizon is much too small. It was enough to chase me away. That might be what they wanted. It may not be.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- dahdum 9y ago
  Uber has been profitable in most developed markets* for over a year, this is just meant to squeeze them further so they can subsidize new ones. We are going to live in a bold new world, where getting picked up at Whole Foods costs X% more than a Grocery Outlet across the street. It's really amazing how loose they are with ethics and how willing to court controversy. *Uber points to profits in all developed markets https://www.ft.com/content/afa1d4de-33bc-11e6-bda0-04585c31b153 https://www.ft.com/content/afa1d4de-33bc-11e6-bda0-04585c31b...
  - green_rover 9y ago
    Wouldn't this suggest that they aren't subsidizing rides to compete with Lyft except when Lyft subsidizes rides as well? I always see people saying that Uber subsidizes rides now and that rates will rise later if they win a market, but the evidence doesn't support those claims. If they just want to gouge people as everyone speculates they would already do so in markets where there is no "competition". Instead, it looks like even absent a direct competitor, that they still have competition in the form of car ownership. We should be celebrating their ability to keep driving costs down until it's cheaper to use Uber than to own and operate a car.
darioush 9y ago
To me the variability is too much. I can't tell at 1pm whether I a 3:30pm trip to my doctor office will cost me $8 or will there be rain and will it cost me $30. Since it's not reliable I prefer it much less. I'd rather it just cost $16 both times.
- mayneack 9y ago
  Can't you schedule in advance? Does that not come with a price at the time of scheduling?

jessriedel 9y ago

They were losing money on you before by subsidizing your ride. Now their price better reflect the actual economic costs, and it's not surprising that this means you don't take a taxi as often.

noonespecial 9y ago
Doesn't seem like we can know that for sure without knowing their complete costs per ride. Even at the higher price that might still be true. It might not. What we do know is that the algo isn't based on their cost, its trying to figure out the max it can charge me and "get away with it". I'm suggesting that its time horizon is much too small. It was enough to chase me away. That might be what they wanted. It may not be.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
dahdum 9y ago
Uber has been profitable in most developed markets* for over a year, this is just meant to squeeze them further so they can subsidize new ones. We are going to live in a bold new world, where getting picked up at Whole Foods costs X% more than a Grocery Outlet across the street. It's really amazing how loose they are with ethics and how willing to court controversy. *Uber points to profits in all developed markets https://www.ft.com/content/afa1d4de-33bc-11e6-bda0-04585c31b153 https://www.ft.com/content/afa1d4de-33bc-11e6-bda0-04585c31b...
- green_rover 9y ago
  Wouldn't this suggest that they aren't subsidizing rides to compete with Lyft except when Lyft subsidizes rides as well? I always see people saying that Uber subsidizes rides now and that rates will rise later if they win a market, but the evidence doesn't support those claims. If they just want to gouge people as everyone speculates they would already do so in markets where there is no "competition". Instead, it looks like even absent a direct competitor, that they still have competition in the form of car ownership. We should be celebrating their ability to keep driving costs down until it's cheaper to use Uber than to own and operate a car.

darioush 9y ago

To me the variability is too much. I can't tell at 1pm whether I a 3:30pm trip to my doctor office will cost me $8 or will there be rain and will it cost me $30. Since it's not reliable I prefer it much less. I'd rather it just cost $16 both times.

mayneack 9y ago
Can't you schedule in advance? Does that not come with a price at the time of scheduling?