4 ms·

The main value prop for Uber hasn’t changed for quite some time, probably not much since UberX, the innovation there is pretty much done. This puts Governments

The main value prop for Uber hasn’t changed for quite some time, probably not much since UberX, the innovation there is pretty much done. This puts Governments in the perfect position to disrupt Uber, if they build their own version, feature for feature (let’s face it, it’s a complex app but not that hard to copy) and mandate it on their already regulated taxis / ban uber, their user acquisition costs and marketing costs will be almost zero. They can run it without making a profit and keep fares lower or close to the current Uber position. Win win for everyone

philwelch 9y ago
For everyone? The only reason Uber and Lyft have been successful have been because the regulated taxis suffer from artificially constrained supply and zero quality control in terms of passenger experience. And we have governments to thank for that. Even on the technology side--sure, Uber isn't groundbreaking, but having used Uber and Lyft and also having used my state portal for buying health insurance through Obamacare, it doesn't seem like governments are capable of producing the same user experience.
zanny 9y ago
LibreTaxi (and several other open source clones) already exist. Governments can easily take those, bake in credit cards (which open source / decentralized apps really can't support) and put in some legalize insurance coverage and they are good to go. The thing is the value in Uber and Lyft come from their mindshare that gives you access to drivers and customers, their ratings systems to filter out good drivers and riders, and their insurance to help mitigate the risk involved in riding in some random strangers car. I don't think it takes state actors running the show to disrupt ridesharing though. Just an endorsement of the concept, some kind of insurance drivers must legally buy to do it, and the only really hard part for anyone involved is a rating system. Which isn't something to underestimate, its not technically hard to do but logistically a nightmare to be able to rate riders and drivers without a central business authority. I'm not sure governments are going to be willing to manage a review board.
ovi256 9y ago
Did you just earnestly advocate for a government mandated ride-sharing app ? And you main argument is that if it's government mandated, "user acquisition costs and marketing costs will be zero", so the users get lower fares ? That's brilliantly lawfully evil. Why stop there ? That argument applies for all services. They would all benefit from having zero acquisition costs. Just nationalise everything. Could anything go wrong ?
- albertgoeswoof 9y ago
  If there’s no innovation, why not? Why give returns to shareholders if their investments provide no value?

philwelch 9y ago

For everyone? The only reason Uber and Lyft have been successful have been because the regulated taxis suffer from artificially constrained supply and zero quality control in terms of passenger experience. And we have governments to thank for that. Even on the technology side--sure, Uber isn't groundbreaking, but having used Uber and Lyft and also having used my state portal for buying health insurance through Obamacare, it doesn't seem like governments are capable of producing the same user experience.

zanny 9y ago

LibreTaxi (and several other open source clones) already exist. Governments can easily take those, bake in credit cards (which open source / decentralized apps really can't support) and put in some legalize insurance coverage and they are good to go. The thing is the value in Uber and Lyft come from their mindshare that gives you access to drivers and customers, their ratings systems to filter out good drivers and riders, and their insurance to help mitigate the risk involved in riding in some random strangers car. I don't think it takes state actors running the show to disrupt ridesharing though. Just an endorsement of the concept, some kind of insurance drivers must legally buy to do it, and the only really hard part for anyone involved is a rating system. Which isn't something to underestimate, its not technically hard to do but logistically a nightmare to be able to rate riders and drivers without a central business authority. I'm not sure governments are going to be willing to manage a review board.

ovi256 9y ago

Did you just earnestly advocate for a government mandated ride-sharing app ? And you main argument is that if it's government mandated, "user acquisition costs and marketing costs will be zero", so the users get lower fares ? That's brilliantly lawfully evil. Why stop there ? That argument applies for all services. They would all benefit from having zero acquisition costs. Just nationalise everything. Could anything go wrong ?

albertgoeswoof 9y ago
If there’s no innovation, why not? Why give returns to shareholders if their investments provide no value?