7 ms·

I dont see how Lyft gets off calling this fraudulent. Seems to me it's the system working as intended, and as it should. Drivers dont want to drive for under a

by gdhbcc 7y ago

I dont see how Lyft gets off calling this fraudulent. Seems to me it's the system working as intended, and as it should. Drivers dont want to drive for under a certain value, so they simply inform the app who adjusts the value to fulfill demand. Seems like its what you want to happen.

mikeash 7y ago
And it’s not like Uber and Lyft are a monopoly. Taxis are available, and there are roughly eighteen million private car services in the area.
i_am_proteus 7y ago
And it only works as long as all of the drivers in an area agree: one or two drivers who don't join the scheme, and it doesn't work.
- metalliqaz 7y ago
  Not all. The large majority, but not all. There are very likely one or two drivers in the area that don't participate, simply because they aren't in the parking lot at the moment they orchestrate the mass logout. Surge pricing is about supply and demand, so if expected demand is high (like at an airport) they need a lot more than one or two drivers.
  - mikeash 7y ago
    I don’t think it even necessarily needs to be a large majority. It just needs to be enough such that the remaining drivers aren’t sufficient to meet demand. Depending on circumstances, that could require anywhere from one driver to all of them. It’s a great illustration of how supply and demand work to determine prices.
    - metalliqaz 7y ago
      Yeah, agreed, but these guys are going for maximum rate, so they have to get as many as possible.
      - mikeash 7y ago
        Indeed. And as the rate grows higher, there’s ever more incentive to defect from the scheme. This should be a case study taught in Economics 101, it’s so pure and clear!
        kevin_b_er 7y ago
        Well, yes. It will settle at the rate they're actually willing to be paid, not the one their "employer" is setting for them.
  - duxup 7y ago
    Maybe not all, but I wouldn't be surpised to see someone "not participating" txting a buddy "prices up". Someone has to check it to make sure it is working.
    - netsharc 7y ago
      Couldn't they check using the passenger app?
      - duxup 7y ago
        I the rate that the passenger sees always the rate that the driver is paid? If so then yeah, but I'm not sure they're always 1:1.
        eropple 7y ago
        It used to be almost exactly proportional. Lyft and Uber have been progressively trying to disconnect the two values, though; these days it's probably not possible to tell.
- ardy42 7y ago
  > And it only works as long as all of the drivers in an area agree: one or two drivers who don't join the scheme, and it doesn't work. That's much easier to organize at an airport than elsewhere, since all the drivers are required to gather together in an airport waiting area.
- asdff 7y ago
  If one or two drivers pick up the fair before the surge they are good for 15+ minutes of being not at the airport driving someone someplace, then the surge can just happen then after they leave.
ardy42 7y ago
> I dont see how Lyft gets off calling this fraudulent. The workers are "defrauding" Capital out of greater-than-substance wages. It's bullshit, and they'll try to re-frame in in terms of customers, but that's essentially their view.
- richardknop 7y ago
  Well, Lyft drivers are supposed to be contractors, it's normal for contractors to set their rate so I don't see how this is fraudulent.
  - eropple 7y ago
    'ardy42 is presenting the part of the argument that Lyft and Uber can't say aloud but almost certainly believe. Lyft and Uber have a vested interest in making their objection seem "pro-consumer," when they're primarily anti-worker; lower prices to the consumer pumps up the demand curve and Lyft makes more money.
    - rayiner 7y ago
      > Lyft and Uber have a vested interest in making their objection seem "pro-consumer," when they're primarily anti-worker; Given that Lyft and Uber are losing money, there is no difference between the two. Uber and Lyft are just vehicles (hah) for consumers to make taxi drivers work for less than what taxi drivers used to make. People use Lyft and Uber because it’s cheaper than taxis. Since Uber and Lyft don’t make any money, those savings are coming out of the pockets of drivers.
      - eropple 7y ago
        I mean, fair cop. Though a lot of my Uber and Lyft use is with the endless discounted ride offers I get, which seems to just be a transfer from investors to...well...me.
  - matz1 7y ago
    From the perspective of Lyft it is fraudulent.
NotPaidToPost 7y ago
This seems the very definition of fraud, though. Edit: Fraudulent: "intended to deceive someone in order to get money or property". The collusion is intended to deceive Lyft (and in the end customers) for financial gains.
- eropple 7y ago
  By leveraging the supply controls, which are explicitly theirs to use to communicate willingness to take on work, in a two-sided market where you're not allowed to directly set prices? Please substantiate how that is fraudulent. If Lyft and Uber allowed direct pricing, this wouldn't happen. Drivers would set the price they're willing to work for. Instead, drivers--who, once more for emphasis, are supposed to use price fluctuations as incentive or disincentive for working, that's what "surge pricing" was in the first place--only have one message that they can send: "nope, not at that price". Or they can be obligated to work cheap because rich people demand their labor. Hrm. I think I now understand where the claim of "fraud" comes from.
  - chrismeller 7y ago
    So go drive a cab instead. I hear that’s a great life. They agreed to drive for a service for x. They can’t then complain that they are making x or manipulate the system to earn more than x.
    - eropple 7y ago
      No, they did not agree to "drive for a service for X". They entertain offers to drive at a given rate. They can choose to take those offers or not. That's the whole point of the on-demand, contractor-but-not-really relationship (see also the way that Lyft and Uber punish drivers to don't take absolutely every ride that pops up on the app) that underpins Lyft and Uber's business model. They're refusing to entertain offers below a certain rate. That drops supply, which requires price increases to satisfy demand on the other side. The market, literally, is working as intended.
      - 7y ago
ma2rten 7y ago
I don't know if I would call it fraud, but I can see where they are coming form. Drivers aren't individually deciding to turn off the app, but they are doing it collectively to manipulate the app into surge pricing.
dnautics 7y ago
Its not clear to me that Lyft is calling the behavior fraudulent. That's a sketchy AF quote-out-of-context by wjla.

by gdhbcc 7y ago

mikeash 7y ago

And it’s not like Uber and Lyft are a monopoly. Taxis are available, and there are roughly eighteen million private car services in the area.

i_am_proteus 7y ago

And it only works as long as all of the drivers in an area agree: one or two drivers who don't join the scheme, and it doesn't work.

metalliqaz 7y ago
Not all. The large majority, but not all. There are very likely one or two drivers in the area that don't participate, simply because they aren't in the parking lot at the moment they orchestrate the mass logout. Surge pricing is about supply and demand, so if expected demand is high (like at an airport) they need a lot more than one or two drivers.
- mikeash 7y ago
  I don’t think it even necessarily needs to be a large majority. It just needs to be enough such that the remaining drivers aren’t sufficient to meet demand. Depending on circumstances, that could require anywhere from one driver to all of them. It’s a great illustration of how supply and demand work to determine prices.
  - metalliqaz 7y ago
    Yeah, agreed, but these guys are going for maximum rate, so they have to get as many as possible.
    - mikeash 7y ago
      Indeed. And as the rate grows higher, there’s ever more incentive to defect from the scheme. This should be a case study taught in Economics 101, it’s so pure and clear!
      - kevin_b_er 7y ago
        Well, yes. It will settle at the rate they're actually willing to be paid, not the one their "employer" is setting for them.
- duxup 7y ago
  Maybe not all, but I wouldn't be surpised to see someone "not participating" txting a buddy "prices up". Someone has to check it to make sure it is working.
  - netsharc 7y ago
    Couldn't they check using the passenger app?
    - duxup 7y ago
      I the rate that the passenger sees always the rate that the driver is paid? If so then yeah, but I'm not sure they're always 1:1.
      - eropple 7y ago
        It used to be almost exactly proportional. Lyft and Uber have been progressively trying to disconnect the two values, though; these days it's probably not possible to tell.
ardy42 7y ago
> And it only works as long as all of the drivers in an area agree: one or two drivers who don't join the scheme, and it doesn't work. That's much easier to organize at an airport than elsewhere, since all the drivers are required to gather together in an airport waiting area.
asdff 7y ago
If one or two drivers pick up the fair before the surge they are good for 15+ minutes of being not at the airport driving someone someplace, then the surge can just happen then after they leave.

ardy42 7y ago

> I dont see how Lyft gets off calling this fraudulent. The workers are "defrauding" Capital out of greater-than-substance wages. It's bullshit, and they'll try to re-frame in in terms of customers, but that's essentially their view.

richardknop 7y ago
Well, Lyft drivers are supposed to be contractors, it's normal for contractors to set their rate so I don't see how this is fraudulent.
- eropple 7y ago
  'ardy42 is presenting the part of the argument that Lyft and Uber can't say aloud but almost certainly believe. Lyft and Uber have a vested interest in making their objection seem "pro-consumer," when they're primarily anti-worker; lower prices to the consumer pumps up the demand curve and Lyft makes more money.
  - rayiner 7y ago
    > Lyft and Uber have a vested interest in making their objection seem "pro-consumer," when they're primarily anti-worker; Given that Lyft and Uber are losing money, there is no difference between the two. Uber and Lyft are just vehicles (hah) for consumers to make taxi drivers work for less than what taxi drivers used to make. People use Lyft and Uber because it’s cheaper than taxis. Since Uber and Lyft don’t make any money, those savings are coming out of the pockets of drivers.
    - eropple 7y ago
      I mean, fair cop. Though a lot of my Uber and Lyft use is with the endless discounted ride offers I get, which seems to just be a transfer from investors to...well...me.
- matz1 7y ago
  From the perspective of Lyft it is fraudulent.

NotPaidToPost 7y ago

This seems the very definition of fraud, though. Edit: Fraudulent: "intended to deceive someone in order to get money or property". The collusion is intended to deceive Lyft (and in the end customers) for financial gains.

eropple 7y ago
By leveraging the supply controls, which are explicitly theirs to use to communicate willingness to take on work, in a two-sided market where you're not allowed to directly set prices? Please substantiate how that is fraudulent. If Lyft and Uber allowed direct pricing, this wouldn't happen. Drivers would set the price they're willing to work for. Instead, drivers--who, once more for emphasis, are supposed to use price fluctuations as incentive or disincentive for working, that's what "surge pricing" was in the first place--only have one message that they can send: "nope, not at that price". Or they can be obligated to work cheap because rich people demand their labor. Hrm. I think I now understand where the claim of "fraud" comes from.
- chrismeller 7y ago
  So go drive a cab instead. I hear that’s a great life. They agreed to drive for a service for x. They can’t then complain that they are making x or manipulate the system to earn more than x.
  - eropple 7y ago
    No, they did not agree to "drive for a service for X". They entertain offers to drive at a given rate. They can choose to take those offers or not. That's the whole point of the on-demand, contractor-but-not-really relationship (see also the way that Lyft and Uber punish drivers to don't take absolutely every ride that pops up on the app) that underpins Lyft and Uber's business model. They're refusing to entertain offers below a certain rate. That drops supply, which requires price increases to satisfy demand on the other side. The market, literally, is working as intended.
    - 7y ago

ma2rten 7y ago

I don't know if I would call it fraud, but I can see where they are coming form. Drivers aren't individually deciding to turn off the app, but they are doing it collectively to manipulate the app into surge pricing.

dnautics 7y ago

Its not clear to me that Lyft is calling the behavior fraudulent. That's a sketchy AF quote-out-of-context by wjla.