3 ms·

this is not true

• thisisit 9y ago
  Which 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 ago
    It was nice of you to provide sources even when challenged by such a low-effort comment.
  • sprw121 9y ago
    It's been shown many times over that this 59% number is terribly miscalculated.
    • propogandist 9y ago
      sources? my colleague recently took a ~79 mile uber from one airport to a location 1.5hr away, his Uber cost was <$88.
      • Dylan16807 9y ago
        The 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.