28 ms·
New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior
- ecesena 9y agoIn SF a bus ride used to cost 2.25$, and I think it’s now 2.50$. Lyft line most of the time is 4$ + 1$ for an extra passenger. Uber is probably similar and perhaps cheaper, I don’t know. In short, there’s no benefit in using busses anymore.
- nowarninglabel 9y agoIt's actually $2.75 now unless you are using Clipper.
- thatfrenchguy 9y agoOr your mobile phone.
- ProAm 9y ago> In short, there’s no benefit in using busses anymore. Except these rides are still heavily subsidized and are more expensive than the bus at this subsidized rate.
- cdoxsey 9y agoBuses are subsidized too.
- so33 9y agoBuses are indeed subsidized. But which routes? I bet that the most popular bus routes, the ones that are always packed to the gills, make money. What buses are subsidizing are the unpopular bus routes, the ones whose goal is to increase mobility for those who would otherwise not have it, such as night routes or relatively infrequent peak-hour commuter routes. Those cost a lot to run, and ride-hailing has the luxury of not having to run those routes. I think in the discussion about costs we forget that public transit is, first and foremost, a public service.
- criddell 9y ago> Those cost a lot to run, and ride-hailing has the luxury of not having to run those routes. It might make sense for some cities to stop running buses on those routes and instead pay a private company. Imagine being able to book an Uber or Lyft ride and still only paying the $2.50 fare. Maybe it would be cheaper for the city and more convenient for users?
- Doctor_Fegg 9y agoNot everywhere, though. My town (population just 3,000) in the UK has an hourly bus to Oxford and an almost-hourly bus to two medium-sized local towns. (Stagecoach S3 and Pulhams X9, for completeness.) None of these buses are subsidised, and this in an entirely rural area. It's been proved that buses _can_ work without subsidy. It hasn't yet been proved that Uber and Lyft can.
- ProAm 9y agoAre they subsidized to 55-60%???
- harigov 9y agoYeah but they are more convenient and comfortable. Doesn't that say something about current public transit thinking? Some People are willing to pay a little bit more if it is convenient and comfortable.
- ProAm 9y agoWhen the subsidies end, will people be willing to pay $10 +1 for the exact same ride vs public transit?
- harigov 9y agoSubsidies are here to accomplish economies of scale. And when they have that scale, the cost of ride will also decrease dramatically (run buses instead of cars, electric cars/buses?), so my bet is that there will be an increase in price but it won't be order of magnitude more than current price.
- ProAm 9y agoSubsidies here are not for economies of scale, but for market share. Your bet is a risky one vs proven methodology.
- harigov 9y agoIt depends on what you consider as market in which Uber/Lyft operate. If it's entire personal transportation market, then one can think of them as in a zero-sum game with other players. I believe that the ride share market (even if you include taxis) is a growing market. Sure, it is very competitive so there is some struggle to gain market share, but there is also incentive to grow so as to get that economies of scale because whoever has that can price extremely competitively and be the winner.
- jasonbarone 9y agoBut they are for economies of scale. Product like UberPool, LyftLine, and UberEats were born from it. The business gets more efficient, and as the network keeps evolving it’ll open up new business opportunities that’ll drive prices down.
- moduspol 9y agoPeople keep saying this, and I'm sure there are ways to estimate, but drivers are typically getting 80% of the cost to the customer [1], with Uber keeping 20%. Suggesting Uber's only able to price this way to due to investors subsidizing the price is to suggest the corporate side of the business can't make a profit from that 20% alone, which seems difficult to believe. If public transit advocates are expecting this is just a speculation-filled bubble, they might want to re-assess. [1] https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-cut-does-Uber-take-from-the-total-fare-cost-of-a-ride-Do-they-subtract-a-flat-fee-for-each-dispatch-or-a-percentage-Are-there-initiation-monthly-fees-to-be-a-driver https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-cut-does-Uber-take-fro...
- bjacokes 9y agoAs others have pointed out, the rideshares are subsidized in many ways. Monetarily, not just by VCs, but also by drivers who don't get benefits or salary guarantees. Road infrastructure provided by the city that isn't fully supported by gas taxes. Externalities like constantly-blocked bike lanes and congestion that inconvenience others in the city. $4 doesn't get you far in SF, but if you do pay that rate to go across town, just know that you're not paying your fair share to support the driver, maintain the roads, and are probably inconveniencing other drivers and cyclists more than if you were using a bus. Which is fine — but if you then go and argue that this is a reason to never support public transportation, you're just buying into the Lyft/Uber marketing.
- bromuro 9y agoit still does have benefits. environmental and social benefits. the problem is when people think about their individual benefits and not those of a whole community.
- smsm42 9y agoBesides prices, there's also time. If I need to get somewhere in the city - especially somewhere I'm not familiar with - I have a choice of getting there in an hour or more with two transfers (one of which may be going underground and no map or site explains that, so not being familiar with the city you just spend time looking for a stop that isn't there) and that assuming everything runs on schedule - or paying the price of a cup of coffee or a glass of beer extra and getting a here-to-the-door half-hour ride comfortably resting on the backseat of the car and not worrying about a thing. I think the choice is not very hard here.
- pdx6 9y agoThe cost is indexed, so the price really hasn’t changed. Don’t forget that there is a flat rate pass, and most 50+ person companies offer the passes pre-tax. In addition, TNC pricing doesn’t have federally mandated discounts for seniors, disabled, youth, and low income.
- z6 9y agoIn SF you also get free transfers for 90 minutes which is a nice benefit. Lyft line / uber pool is closer to $6+ if you're going around the city, unless of course you only go 2 blocks. If you're going somewhere for an appointment and can get back within 90 minutes it's $2.50 vs. over $12. The bus-only lanes are also beneficial if they exist on your route as traffic has gotten a lot worse, in part due to ridesharing. In addition to that, because traffic is horrible, line/pool rides take forever if you're going anywhere downtown during the day and the driver needs to pick up additional riders who aren't exactly along your route (even 1 block away can add 10 minutes). So if you are time-sensitive, you'll likely need a solo-ride which is more like $15+ one-way. The big downside is obviously the poor experience with public transport... lots of homeless / crazy people taking free rides, dirty buses/trains, cramped spaces, too many stops, etc.
- usaar333 9y ago> In short, there’s no benefit in using busses anymore. There's several benefits I find that lead me to favor buses more often than not: 1. Bus is far cheaper than what you listed as you can use pre-tax money. Many companies offer a transit subsidy, making it free. 2. Buses can be faster depending on wait time, going out of the way overhead, and dedicated bus lanes. 3. Legal to transport a toddler on a bus without bringing a car seat.
- orasis 9y agoCongestion pricing for use of city streets would quickly solve any problems due to increased use.
- QAPereo 9y agoDid it in London?
- jahnu 9y agoYeah http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-21451245 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-21451245
- QAPereo 9y agoThat’s from 2013... more recently http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/19/is-this-the-end-of-the-roadfor-the-london-congestion-charge-6390417/ http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/19/is-this-the-end-of-the-roadfor... https://www.ft.com/content/40774fc6-76b5-11e6-bf48-b372cdb1043a https://www.ft.com/content/40774fc6-76b5-11e6-bf48-b372cdb10...
- isostatic 9y agoIn London taxis are classed as public transport - don't have to pay congestion charges, and the legacy expensive cash-only ones can use bus lanes (but not south of the river at this time of night). The upshot of this is its far cheaper to park outside and get a taxi from outside the zone than to drive all the way in, despite not saving on congestion. The reason it didn't used to be as easy was black cabs are an archaic unreliable form of transport. Uber in the other hand is more convienient than driving and parking.
- walshemj 9y agoI have always found black cabs reliable I lost my wallet in one and it was handed into my bank with the £200 intact
- nowarninglabel 9y agoEh, only 6% less using mass transit if you read the ITS report: • Ride-hailing attracts Americans away from bus services (a 6% reduction) and light rail services (a 3% reduction) Given that cities have had populations on the rise, this is actually good because it helps the overloaded transit systems in many places. Of course, perhaps it prevent more investment in them as well. They also noted more people may take commuter rail when they can leverage a Lyft to get from the station to their final destination.
- swampthinker 9y ago"Only" 3% of the MBTA annual ridership is still 5 million + rides.
- true_tuna 9y agoTrains and busses in my area are standing room only for six hours a day. taking some load off those systems so they can preserve what quality of service they have left is beneficial as far as I'm concerned. Using Lyft line when possible helps alleviate congestion too.
- ng12 9y agoGee, it's almost like people only use public transportation when it's reliable, cost-effective, and efficient.
- harigov 9y agoThis is one industry where "build it and they will come" will most probably hold true. Especially in dense areas.
- yjftsjthsd-h 9y ago> efficient Specifically, it should be efficient and preferably fast for me, not just in aggregate
- warent 9y agoNot to mention safe and clean. In bigger cities, public transportation can put you in physical danger and have you walking out smelling worse than Theon Greyjoy
- jdavis703 9y agoMore people die in automobile crashes than from train crashes and crimes in public transit systems.
- tradersam 9y agoThis doesn't mean anything. Although many more die from automobile crashes doesn't make using public transportation in some major cities inherently dangerous or unpleasant - even unhealthy.
- lithos 9y agoI imagine traffic caused by Ride Hailing will get worse after you can get rid of the drivers. Since you'll have more corps getting into the space, and an AI won't get impatient driving up and down the same "popular street" to wait.
- otterley 9y agoLink to the actual report: https://itspubs.ucdavis.edu/wp-content/themes/ucdavis/pubs/download_pdf.php?id=2752 https://itspubs.ucdavis.edu/wp-content/themes/ucdavis/pubs/d... What it actually says: "Directionally, based on mode substitution and ride-hailing frequency of use data, we conclude that ride-hailing is currently _likely to_ contribute to growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the major cities represented in this study." (Emphasis mine)
- jessriedel 9y agoAre there realistic situations where a cheaper and more convenient form of driven transport leads to fewer VMT?
- brianwawok 9y agoSure. A faster / better / cheaper train or bus takes cars directly off the road. So you can add more subways / trains / buses / etc. to do this.
- DrScump 9y agoAdding more units, where existing units are underutilized, makes no sense.
- fooker 9y agoIt makes no sense if all units here are equal. It makes a lot of sense to add better unit.
- quickben 9y agoBetter, in terms of congestion, is capacity. Buses>cars.
- TylerE 9y agoImagine a subway that only runs one train per line, such that on average each station only gets visited once an hour. No one would use it. Now add 10 more trains so trains stop every 5 minutes. Many many people use it.
- jwilliams 9y agoI read the link and the report. The added "traffic/congestion" seems to be implied from the usage data - unless I'm missing something? Because that doesn't necessarily follow. One of the main drivers was parking and drinking when going out. The usage patterns could be totally different.
- chisleu 9y agoRight, just like taxis... Oh wait
- Smaug123 9y agoTaxis, as so many have bemoaned on Hacker News, are usually artificially limited in number. For example, by the existence of the medallion system.
- isostatic 9y agoIs there such a system in general use? Aside from NY, and London with its archaic "knowlege", is there any artificial limitations on most cities? The problems with taxis has always been how inconvienent they are - hailing, having to pay, having to beg for a receipt (and then in NY the forced adverts) Uber etc makes taxis easy. It's cheap too, but that's to be expected in the near future with automated driving.
- abiox 9y agomy car was out of commission for a while. i found that to get to work, the only bus route available was a 1.5 hour slog (one way)...and that's if i arrived at the bus stop right on time to minimize waiting. taking lyft was a 15 minute ride, max. losing (at least) 3 hours to transit is brutal.
- revelation 9y agoWell, yes, you always take the personal car, first time you check out the transit schedule is when it's broken.. surprise, you will wake up finding there is no good bus transit! I wonder how that came to be. If Lyft is 15 minutes you could just as well bike.
- yardie 9y agoI’m a big proponent of mass transit and when it’s available I use it if I can. But I can get Lyft door to door for just $1-2 more than a bus or train. If mass transit wants to keep with rideshare and livery they need to: expand routes, increase availability, update their equipment. When I was a kid I knew how to read a bus schedule and train map to plan my trip. Now, there is an entire generation of kids in school and Uber/Lyft is what they know.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- justboxing 9y ago> expand routes, increase availability, update their equipment. ... and be faster. The SFMTA in San Francisco , at an average travel speed of 5 miles / hour. Is only slightly faster than brisk walking. Also, from the downtown FiDi out 2 miles in every direction, the Bus has a bus stop at Every block. Yes, every block.
- yardie 9y agoEven biking works if you have bike racks on the bus and light rail. But most buses can only accommodate 1-3 bikes and light rail has no racks onboard at all.
- capkutay 9y agoIts pretty disappointing that transit advocacy groups spend more time fighting ride-share and jitney transit services than actually working to improve transit in their cities. Instead of looking for solutions to making faster, cleaner, more reliable transit more feasible, they're blaming riders and ride-share companies for a 5% reduction in ridership.
- zten 9y agoIf you're in a city that mostly moves people by bus, and has incredibly high construction costs, of course this is the solution they're going to chase. The bus service suffers with more competing vehicles on the road. People prefer rail and dedicated right-of-ways, but they also don't want their neighborhood destroyed while it's built. The transit advocacy groups end up hamstrung by these competing desires. Uber and Lyft have given everyone a taste of the self-driving car dream (on-demand comfortable private transit) -- they just need to figure out how to get rid of the drivers. It's already producing political pressure to stall or end hugely expensive transit projects because of uncertainty about what a city might really need in 20-30 years. Hopefully someone's smart enough to show that we'll all still be stuck in the same dumb traffic of our own making, regardless of a human or computer driver, because we really need to be solving for space and land use by minimizing the distance and frequency of vehicle trips instead, public transit included.
- aninhumer 9y agoI think once people are used to getting around by opening a smartphone and putting in a destination, there's a lot of potential for offering transport-as-a-service more efficiently than a private car the whole way. I've already seen Uber appearing in Google Maps directions, and with a bit more work you could combine that to offer Taxi -> Train -> Taxi for the full journey. Indeed, I think there are a lot of benefits once these systems start being integrated. It would likely facilitate ride grouping, since you'll have a lot of people arriving or departing from the same place at the same time. Combined ticketing could also allow stations to have special entrances for taxis that bypass ticket barriers, since they know everyone inside has already paid.
- 9y ago
- jessriedel 9y agoI'm very interested in the convergence of Lyft-Line/Uber-Pool service with bus service. It's easy to imagine Lyft and Uber running dynamically adjustable bus/van routes -- basically jitneys/peseros that take advantage of smart phones -- that are faster, more reliable, and cheaper than city buses. (Vans are super cheap per passenger if they are always full.) Lyft has taken small steps in this direction by asking Line riders to get out a short walk from their destination when it would save the rest of the group a lot of time, but this strikes me as modest and poorly designed. (Instead of relying on altruism, why not offer a variable discount, $1-$5, determined by the amount of time saved so that the rider can easily judge whether it's worth it?) Have there been any news/developments on this recently?
- inglor 9y agoAs the article mentions - this is what Via does https://ridewithvia.com/ https://ridewithvia.com/
- jessriedel 9y agoVia (and Chariot) have to be booked in advance, which is really different than bus/peseros service.
- Eridrus 9y agoI am too, but you need a lot of people going in the same direction. Lyft Line can already be pretty annoying when you need to drop some else off significantly off your path. I think we're going to see an explosion of vehicle miles when self driving cars take off, with the attendant congestion issues. I'm sort of expecting a big change in the sort of cities people want to live in when delivery and transportation gets cheaper and more convenient.
- CraigRood 9y agoThis is not something I've ever thought about but does seem to solve a few concerns. Even in my small town, I can think of many frequently used routes and locations that would benefit from an 'Uber-Bus'.
- 9y ago
- thisisit 9y agoIt's been established that Uber/Lyft cabs actual cost more than what they cost end customer. So when the whole thing pops, prices will go back to the normal level and people back to using mass transits.
- tmh79 9y agothis is not true
- thisisit 9y agoWhich part? The cost of rides being subsidized or people eschewing mass transit in favor of these ride sharing apps or was it the insinuation that people are eschewing mass transit because it is cheaper or more convenient for the price? Cost of ride: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/9a3vye/uber-true-cost-uh-oh https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/9a3vye/uber-true-... 2nd point is the highlight of the linked article. 3rd point has been made repeatedly in this very thread.
- Noumenon72 9y agoIt was nice of you to provide sources even when challenged by such a low-effort comment.
- sprw121 9y agoIt's been shown many times over that this 59% number is terribly miscalculated.
- propogandist 9y agosources? my colleague recently took a ~79 mile uber from one airport to a location 1.5hr away, his Uber cost was <$88.
- Dylan16807 9y agoThe number was based on a misunderstanding of Uber's revenue numbers. The 41% was based on using the number for Uber's cut and thinking it was total fares. When you look at all the money going through Uber, fares make up 79% of expenses for that accounting period. But that's not the right number either. A lot of those expenses are other departments in the company. So fares are paying for more than 80% of combined driver costs, infrastructure, and marketing. Possibly quite a bit more. And that number includes all the cities where they are burning money to expand. I don't know if fares are greater than costs in established cities, but I would not at all be surprised if they were.
- swang 9y agoaren't lyfts/ubers still heavily subsidized? the true cost of a line or pool isn't ~$4, or at least won't be $4 forever.
- harigov 9y agoImagine if they achieve economies of scale and started introducing buses instead of cars. Imagine they improve efficiency by driving routes as requested by customers in realtime. Imagine if they were to charge customers based on how much it actually costs them to drive in real time so each customer can decide if its worth it based on their own needs. I can definitely see that such a world will be a lot more efficient in terms of transportation costs and time. If it requires subsidies so that they can achieve that economies of scale, so be it.
- cozzyd 9y agoEspecially if they can get the operator to purchase / maintain the bus!
- eradicatethots 9y agoWhat this shows is that the people of the city are more interested in taking uber and lyft than mass transit - and the people aren’t stupid, it’s better to assume they’re just as aware as environmental issues as anyone else.
- dr_ 9y agoor on the flip side of it, perhaps in a city like NYC, yellow taxi cabs are the cause of major traffic, especially when they are just driving around looking for passengers, slowing down at corners where they may pick someone up, lining up near hotels, carrying only one group of passengers at a time, etc. Or construction vehicles and road blockages have added traffic to major cities - many of which appear to be undergoing a construction boom. And while I'm a proponent of mass transit, id argue that large buses- too large to navigate city streets especially when it comes to making turns - are a cause for major traffic in the city. They should be replaced by services like Via.
- epa 9y agoCorrect me if i'm wrong - but wasn't the medallion system originally created in NYC due to influx of traffic from people trying to make money being a taxi driver after the great depression?
- didip 9y agoFor my everyday commute in SV, Lyft made it possible for me to even use Caltrain. I use Lyft to connect the last mile from/to work, but the bulk of the distance is covered by Caltrain. This combo is the most optimal for me because i get to dodge 101 highway completely. Also, VTA buses are close to useless to me, not only that they are frequently late, but they are too dirty/smelly/full of riff raff, don't take credit card/Apple Pay, etc.
- walshemj 9y agoIs it really such a hard ship to walk a mile?
- erik_seaberg 9y agoOne mile would add 20 minutes in each direction, to a commute that probably already takes two hours per day. Transit planners assume riders will accept walking 1/4-1/2 mile.
- samtho 9y agoIt is when you need to be somewhere at a specific time or not be sweaty when you get there. There are also areas which lack proper pedestrian infrastructure making it very dangerous to walk.
- true_tuna 9y agoPlaces like Mountain View CA
- cbhl 9y agoReally? Loud/disruptive/unpleasant homeless people have reduced mass transit use in SF and LA. Delaying bus rapid transit by six years[0] because environmental impact is measured by car travel times reduces mass transit usage. Blocking the creation of tech shuttle stops to "save" a dozen parking spots reduces mass transit usage. Uber/Lyft are increasing VMT is merely a side-effect of the impossible regulatory environment here. Let's fix that. [0] https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2014/07/transit-projects-are-about-to-get-much-much-easier-in-california/374049/ https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2014/07/transit-proje...
- vrikis 9y agoI'm not surprised to be honest. In the city I currently live in, since moving here a year ago, I've never even gotten the bus because an uber is maybe twice the price but 10x more convenient and 5x as fast to get to the local train station... To get to the next city along, it's a 15min uber or >1hr public transport commute... However, if Uber didn't exist here, I don't think I'd be taking taxis because they are far more expensive.
- Yhippa 9y agoWhere I live it is nearly cost equivalent or even cheaper to use an app to pre-pay for parking and go into the city from the suburbs instead of taking public transit. It's faster too. I will take one or the other depending on how much I feel like I want to zone out or be stressed by the traffic.
- lcfcjs2 9y agoNot in a majority of American cities where mass transit is non-existent. Which is awful.
- holydude 9y agoSorry i get less sick when i commute by car hence i refuse to spend time with other people using buses/trams/subway.
- romanovcode 9y agoMaybe you should stop touching your face often and wash your hands properly.
- jblow 9y agoIt is my pet peeve that people believe this. If this were actually true, why wouldn’t we have evolved an extreme aversion to touching our faces? Also, have you ever seen a baby? What does a baby do if you leave it alone to crawl around?
- upvotinglurker 9y agoWe evolved in small communities where whatever germs existed were likely shared by the whole community, and contact with strangers was rare compared to today.
- holydude 9y agoI do. I exercise a lot and try to live a healthy lifestyle. I make a personal statistics on what affects my health and I firmly believe public transport is a big no no for me.
- wtetzner 9y agoThere are plenty of pathogens that are airborne.
- booleandilemma 9y agoUber and Lyft have saved my butt more than a few times when the NYC subway trains weren’t running. Maybe if the subway trains weren’t regularly delayed, overcrowded, and filled with performers and the homeless I wouldn’t be so quick to use Uber/Lyft.
- chiefalchemist 9y agoEven if you presume it's true the next question is: what are some of the measurable benefits? For example, waiting for the bus, even with a mobile device, likely cuts into productivity. If I have a concern it's the loss of public trans as a social/class equalizer (if you will). That is the better well to-dos will have less direct interaction with the less well to-dos. Awareness is the foundation of empathy. Less socisl "mixing" (if you will) probably isn't a good thing.
- mycodebreaks 9y agoTransit systems in the US need some payment technology upgrade. On a couple of occasions, I haven't been able to board a bus due to not having exact change. Once, I was with kids & family visiting NYC. We were planning to take a public bus from a suburb to the city. The fare turned out to be $16 for all of us, but I had $11 and some $100 bills. Guess what, I couldn't board the bus as they can't return change. The bus driver cannot accept partial fare from me. I couldn't give up 80+ dollars as change. If I had $20, I wouldn't mind not getting back $4. I wondered why they cannot start accepting credit cards, Apple Pay, Android Pay or any reasonable alternative. I then had to find a train station nearby which could accept credit card.
- throwawaybbqed 9y agoI have had the same issue in the past in the Bay area. I finally got a clipper card a few weeks ago (I live in MV typically walk to work). Yesterday, I was in front of a VTA in San Jose trying to get back to MV. The people around were a bit shady, and there was a pretty long wait for the train - of course .. I called an Uber, which cost a few bucks more. Still waiting to use that clipper card.
- mycodebreaks 9y agoYes, clipper card can fix the problem for locals. But, temporary visitors/tourists to the area may not want to get such a card.
- pdx6 9y agoThe Oyster card in London is the only way to pay. Pay stations can vend cards, but they need to be distributed more for this to work with Clipper.
- evadne 9y agoThis would be incorrect as contactless payment cards (e.g. via Apple Pay) are widely supported in London. [1] [1] https://tfl.gov.uk/fares-and-payments/ways-to-pay/whats-the-best-way-for-me-to-pay#on-this-page-0 https://tfl.gov.uk/fares-and-payments/ways-to-pay/whats-the-...
- pinnbert 9y agoffa
- abalone 9y agotl;dr People use ridesharing mostly to go out to eat and drink (62% of trips). Riders are actually more likely to own cars. They don't want to drive when they're going out because they don't want to deal with parking or drive drunk. They don't ride the bus because it's too slow, unreliable or unavailable. If ridesharing didn't exist, two fifths of the time they'd walk, bike or use public transit instead, and a fifth of the trips just wouldn't happen. While ridesharing supports pooling, it also wastes "deadhead" passengerless miles between fares. As a result, ridesharing actually increases total vehicle miles traveled.
- samstave 9y agoIt may increase the "total miles traveled" but doesn't it also increase occupancy density in the cars, thus reducing the fuel/pollution consumption? I'm tired of shitty data coming out of Uber and Lyft: I want to know about fuel consumption and the impact on auto insurance rates/accident frequency. Given the known population of drivers, what is their average insurance rate, fuel consumption etc vs the general pop whom are driving their own cars/fuel/insurance? I recall I had a heavy month on city car share where I spent $800 in one month for that service. Fuck that. I cancelled my account after that. There is extraordinarily valuable data these companies (and insurance companies) have they don't share. The fact that they hoard this data to protect their profits should be criminal as this data should be a Utility...
- abalone 9y ago> It may increase the "total miles traveled" but doesn't it also increase occupancy density in the cars If it did then it wouldn't increase total VMT. Again there are "deadhead" miles in those cars without any passengers at all, a fifth of those trips wouldn't have happened in the first place, and two fifths would have used alternatives that don't contribute to VMT. (According to the study.)
- ibejoeb 9y agoThe fifth of those trips that don't happen sounds bad to me. Does this mean that, for example, people are not going to get groceries because they can't carry all of that on a bicycle or a bus? From the article, "Ride-hailing users have higher personal vehicle ownership rates than those who use “transit only”: 52% versus 46%." This point seems like a non-point. First, that's not a very big gap. Also, Do richer people pollute less or congest less than poorer people? I don't think so, so having the car in the garage is better than having it on the road, and no different than not having it at all.
- madengr 9y agoI thought the whole premise of Uber and Lyft was that you’d use it to catch a ride with someone already going in that direction. It has turned into a taxi service with full time drivers. Was that always the intention?
- tmh79 9y agoThere are a lot of ways to slice the impact of uber and lyft on urban mobility. As the study shows, VMT have likely increased. But what does this really mean? Here are some of my postulations: 1) People who did not have physical/temporal access to transit (ex: works at restaurant but transit doesn't run after closing), and thus did not make many trips have increased mobility through uber and lyft. This is important in urban areas because housing that is transit adjacent has become too expensive for many to afford. This increased physical mobility is unambiguously good for society and social mobility. 2) People who do have physical/temporal access to transit are using uber/lyft because, as transit as it is currently implemented in many cities is a terrible experience. There are untimed transfers, possibly anti-social behavior, and the busses are stuck in the same traffic as cars. The best way to improve this would be to add more bus-only lanes and congestion pricing to every city concerned about congestion. Also, higher density transit with timed transfers and more consumer oriented policies will help. IMO, transit should be faster than cars. 3) Much of the US is too low density for effective transit use. Expanding transit coverage in both routes and frequency to match peoples needs would be prohibitively expensive and inefficient in many areas. IMO, there are many places where uber and lyft are a better solution than busses for many folks, and there are a few low density rural cities that have replaced bus services with subsidized ride share service successfully. 4) VMT is a good measure of what we're trying to optimize in cities WRT mobility, but it doesn't account for the cost of parking to society in terms of high value land being occupied by abandoned vehicles. Measured purely in VMT terms, driving your own car to a restaurant, parking, and driving home is better than taking an uber, and having the few minutes of dead head space between fares.
- sixQuarks 9y agoI love technology, but I have a bad gut feeling about self-driving cars and the likelihood of unforeseen emergent outcomes. Some people think it will free up the streets, I think it's more likely to cause more congestion, with people sending the vehicles out for errands.
- davidmr 9y agoThe cities included in the study are Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco/Bay Area, Seattle, and Washington, D.C. I haven't really spent huge amounts of time in a couple of these cities, but I wonder how uniformly over the cities the data factored into the decision. My impression is that NYC, Chicago, and DC have much more comprehensive public transit systems than do the others in the list (except Boston, about which I know next to nothing.) Is my impression just wrong? Public Transit just didn't seem to be nearly as big a thing in LA, SF, or Seattle in the time I spent there.
- sebleon 9y agoI hope urban planning committees use this as a wake up call to step it up and improve non-car transportation options. Rather than banning Uber/Lyft because consumers prefer them, cities should beat the competition by making public transit really good.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- cozzyd 9y agoOne problem I've noticed is that Uber/Lyft drivers like to use bus stops to pick off or drop off passengers, which obviously slows down buses quite a bit. I wish buses had cameras that could be used to automatically fine those drivers...
- ctoth 9y agoI cannot drive. I take Uber to and from work every day using a Uber pass. If my alternative were public transit, a bus to a train to another bus or train depending, it would take me 1.5 hours per trip, for a total of 3 hours a day. I would not work in the corporate world if this were the case. Does this study capture these positive externalities? For blind people, these often-derided services are the difference between a full life where we can participate, and being marginalized outcasts who are constantly late, smelling like the bus, and totally inconvenienced when compared with the guy who can just hop in his car.
- ibejoeb 9y agoDo you regularly get offered the Uber Pass? I've gotten it once, and I used the hell out of it, so now I'm pretty convinced that I'll never be offered again.
- sueders101 9y agoI'm not the parent comment, but I used to get offered Uber pass immediately after the previous one expired. Recently they switched over to option to auto-renew rather than having to manually buy a new pass each time. I'm in Portland, OR so it may be location specific.
- k_sh 9y agoI have a friend who has one, she uses it quite heavily - routinely cutting around $250 out of her Uber costs. She gets a new one every week.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- beager 9y agoI’m sure the positive anecdotes and trends are accounted for in the data, but nevertheless the data still says what it says. Uber and Lyft aren’t here to solve for transit access and commute optimization, they’re here to serve as many rides as possible.
- 9y ago
- ilamont 9y agoThe research (and ride-hailing firms themselves) suggest that ride-hailing can be complementary to public transit. I'm a former PT taxi driver (suburban city next to large urban area) and a lot of our business was from or to mass transit stations and the airport. These services (car and mass transit) complemented each other, but I don't recall anyone criticizing them for taking riders away from buses or the subway. The main complaint was cab rides were too expensive and the medallion system was unfair. One thing that was different then compared to the use of ride-sharing services now: Rarely did we have a pickup from a private home or random street address to another home, random street address, restaurant, or movie theater. However, this was before the smart phone era, so random street pickups were either flag-downs or via public phones. I also used to live in London where private car services used to be very common before the rise of the smart phone or ride-sharing services. They were necessary, particularly in neighborhoods where it was hard to get black cabs or there were no tube stations nearby. The main complaints against the private car services came from the black cab industry.
- korzun 9y agoDon't forget the parking. The TLC vehicles are taking over all of the public spots in NYC. There should be a law requiring them to be parked in a commercial lot.
- davidf18 9y ago> "Uber and Lyft have reduced mass transit use and added traffic in major cities" Could also be: "Private automobiles have reduced mass transit use and added traffic in major cities" I live in NYC and Uber/Lyft are a godsend. The mass transit is generally good, but not always, and the taxis way, way overcharge. NYC has spoken about using congestion pricing, but the real problem is the private automobiles and limousines, not Uber/Lyft.
- GigabyteCoin 9y agoThe class of people that can pay $40 for an uber ride home right to their door is entirely different from the class of people who would wait 15 minutes out in the elements to pay $2 for a ride that would take them within a 10 minute walk of their home. I don't really consider myself an uber or a bus person... I drive myself around most of the time and just choose not to drink too much when I am out. But I have never shared an uber with anybody who I regularly take public transit with. And i have never shared a public transit ride with anybody who I regularly share an uber ride home with. All I am getting at is I do not believe that Uber is stealing away too many people from the bus system at least where I reside.
- Feniks 9y agoDoes the US even have mass transit? Seems to me most cities rely on shitty unreliable bus services.
- Sam_Harris 9y agoBuses aren't reliable.
- scott00 9y agoDoes anyone find the results of how users would travel absent Uber/Lyft strange to the point of disbelief? Only 1% of users would replace Uber/Lyft by a taxi?
- noddy1 9y agoI really think that an 8 seater vehicle running uberpool will be the sweet spot here. Buses are slow and annoying and crap. I think algorithmically directed minibuses will be the gamechanger.
- blueline 9y agobuses are largely slow and annoying because they rarely if ever have designated space to operate effectively. In correct conditions they're an incredibly effective and space efficient (especially relative to cars) way to move people around, but 'correct conditions' can't happen if every square inch of street space is reserved for use of private cars. Don't let your experiences with presumably crappy underfunded bus systems cloud your perception of a good means of mass transit.
- webosdude 9y agoThe study claims that "After using ride-hailing, the average net change in transit use is a 6% reduction among Americans in major cities." Where is the supporting data or facts to back those claims? Being located in Bay Area I know for a fact that BART ridership is down this year due to variety of reasons. May be Ride-sharing companies is one of the reason. But I don't see specific data from different cities mentioned in the study. http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/02/23/bart-ridership-continues-to-decline-board-mulls-service-cuts-fare-increases/ http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/02/23/bart-ridership-contin...
- LeicaLatte 9y agoAm I the only one that finds mass transit so much more expensive compared to a Lyft? Public transit is also definitely unsafer. Mass transit simply hasn't kept up. It can easily go the way of the open web, headphone jack.
- raiyu 9y agoThis study is definitely flawed and should differentiate between hyper dense cities like NYC and other major metro areas. In the first graph they ask people what they would do if Uber/Lyft wasn't available and only 1% responded they would use a taxi. This is completely untrue. Being a New Yorker for 25+ years, and completely switching my commute preferences for Lyft/Uber I would certainly use Taxi's much more frequently if there were no ride-hailing services available. Can't believe that 99% of occurrences would do something other than use a taxi.
- diogenescynic 9y agoBecause most mass transit in the US is awful. For $3 more, I don't have to deal with people using drugs or defecating on the bus in my vicinity. Honestly, this is a failure on the the public transit cops and administrators for failing to keep stations, trains, and buses clean.
- andrewdon 9y agoUberPool is the future
- alpb 9y ago> As of 2016, transportation surpassed the power sector as the largest contributor to the U.S. climate problem. Straight out wrong. Largest contributor to climate problems such as global heating and Co2 emissions is animal agriculture.
- frandroid 9y ago> U.S. > Global Maybe you're not comparing the same thing... (And I'm with you on the seriousness of animal agriculture pollution!)
- dmritard96 9y agouber and lyft are the next mass transit (at least in concept). think of trains and busses as circuit switched networks and cars (in a rideshare context) as packet switched networks. packet switched flexibility wins over the efficiency gains of metal wheels (lower friction) and the economies of scale of busses or trains. my 2c
- d1ffuz0r 9y agoMicrotransit is called Marshrutka, it's been forever in Russia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshrutka https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshrutka