6 ms·

No. It isn’t more nuanced than that. SuperShuttle couldn’t make changes because the drivers irrationally refused to work more for the same pay, even though they

No. It isn’t more nuanced than that. SuperShuttle couldn’t make changes because the drivers irrationally refused to work more for the same pay, even though they knew the company was failing. It really is that simple.

nogabebop23 6y ago
>> because the drivers irrationally refused to work more for the same pay How is this irrational? You offer me $X for Y hours of work. If X/Y gets too small I say "no" and do something with higher utility, even if that's playing flappy bird. I don't really care that my actions destroy the source of this opportunity because I've already rejected it. You are right that this is simple, just not in the way you're interpreting it.
- kyle_martin1 6y ago
  Because if you don't take trips then you don't make any money. They felt entitled and refused to adapt when the market demanded it. That's irrational.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 6y ago
    In discussions like these I like to start from a basic premise: people aren't stupid. It's obvious to the drivers that if they don't take trips, then they don't make money. Clearly then, they've decided that below a certain dollar amount, it make more sense to them to play computer games than take a fare. How they arrived at that conclusion, I don't know. But I have faith that it made sense to them. I do very small software projects for people I find online. I have a minimum fee. If I take on projects below that minimum, I'd have more work, but I have determined that it's in my best interest to hold out for that minimum rate. If this means that I don't make money on that side gig a particular day or week, so be it. I have my reasons for doing that and they won't necessarily make sense to anyone looking in from the outside.
    - BoorishBears 6y ago
      It's trivial to find out why looking at driver's posts online: There's a minimum time cost to them for each ride or delivery. There's the time you spend finding out exactly where the person is, there can be a delay between jobs, there's delays when picking up an order. Someone who drives 10 miles for one job will spend much less time than someone who drives 1 mile for 10 jobs. And since they have X units of time to spend in the app, they'll start making less and less per mile driven. They also don't get paid for the time spent going to a pickup unless it exceeds a certain length: https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/24/16533940/uber-long-pickups-late-cancellations-driver-earnings https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/24/16533940/uber-long-picku... It's easy enough to see how, at some point, they start to get paid so little that it's in their best interest to just not drive and spend the gas and their effort __ Here's a severe case showing someone go through that exact experience: > I accepted the pick-up and app informed me that the customer was 13 miles away I drove there[...] pressed my App for the drop-off Destination [...] and saw that drop-off was 1 mile away > Total time of trip, back and forth, 45 to 50 minutes and 29 miles , and I earned $8 dollars > So, after thinking about it, I have decided to ‘decline’ all trips that are more than 10 miles away from me and do not say that it is gonna be a ‘long trip’ https://ride.guru/lounge/p/uber-drivers-how-far-will-you-drive-to-pick-up-a-fare-not-knowing-their-destination https://ride.guru/lounge/p/uber-drivers-how-far-will-you-dri...
    - kyle_martin1 6y ago
      You can be smart and be irrational. You can be dumb and be irrational. So it’s sort of a moot point.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
barry-cotter 6y ago
The drivers were not investors in the company; it failing was not a huge problem for them. Having a strong preference for leisure is totally ok. The drivers didn’t have enough stock and weren’t paid enough to motivate them to work the hours the company needed to be viable. The company failed. The investors lost all their money. The founders and employees got nothing. That’s capitalism. If they’d been right they’d have made massive bank and that too would have been capitalism. Workers get to play capitalism too. Everyone played. Everyone made their choices and the company failed.
- kyle_martin1 6y ago
  The drivers are franchisees so they have huge interest in keeping the company going, otherwise they wouldn't get any trips. It was their problem. They just didn't want to change.
  - ric2b 6y ago
    They can just drive for another company, they don't suffer any significant loss the same way a McDonald's restaurant would if McD's folded and had to overhaul the entire restaurant. The drivers just install another app on their phone.

nogabebop23 6y ago

>> because the drivers irrationally refused to work more for the same pay How is this irrational? You offer me $X for Y hours of work. If X/Y gets too small I say "no" and do something with higher utility, even if that's playing flappy bird. I don't really care that my actions destroy the source of this opportunity because I've already rejected it. You are right that this is simple, just not in the way you're interpreting it.

kyle_martin1 6y ago
Because if you don't take trips then you don't make any money. They felt entitled and refused to adapt when the market demanded it. That's irrational.
- HeyLaughingBoy 6y ago
  In discussions like these I like to start from a basic premise: people aren't stupid. It's obvious to the drivers that if they don't take trips, then they don't make money. Clearly then, they've decided that below a certain dollar amount, it make more sense to them to play computer games than take a fare. How they arrived at that conclusion, I don't know. But I have faith that it made sense to them. I do very small software projects for people I find online. I have a minimum fee. If I take on projects below that minimum, I'd have more work, but I have determined that it's in my best interest to hold out for that minimum rate. If this means that I don't make money on that side gig a particular day or week, so be it. I have my reasons for doing that and they won't necessarily make sense to anyone looking in from the outside.
  - BoorishBears 6y ago
    It's trivial to find out why looking at driver's posts online: There's a minimum time cost to them for each ride or delivery. There's the time you spend finding out exactly where the person is, there can be a delay between jobs, there's delays when picking up an order. Someone who drives 10 miles for one job will spend much less time than someone who drives 1 mile for 10 jobs. And since they have X units of time to spend in the app, they'll start making less and less per mile driven. They also don't get paid for the time spent going to a pickup unless it exceeds a certain length: https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/24/16533940/uber-long-pickups-late-cancellations-driver-earnings https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/24/16533940/uber-long-picku... It's easy enough to see how, at some point, they start to get paid so little that it's in their best interest to just not drive and spend the gas and their effort __ Here's a severe case showing someone go through that exact experience: > I accepted the pick-up and app informed me that the customer was 13 miles away I drove there[...] pressed my App for the drop-off Destination [...] and saw that drop-off was 1 mile away > Total time of trip, back and forth, 45 to 50 minutes and 29 miles , and I earned $8 dollars > So, after thinking about it, I have decided to ‘decline’ all trips that are more than 10 miles away from me and do not say that it is gonna be a ‘long trip’ https://ride.guru/lounge/p/uber-drivers-how-far-will-you-drive-to-pick-up-a-fare-not-knowing-their-destination https://ride.guru/lounge/p/uber-drivers-how-far-will-you-dri...
  - kyle_martin1 6y ago
    You can be smart and be irrational. You can be dumb and be irrational. So it’s sort of a moot point.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

barry-cotter 6y ago

The drivers were not investors in the company; it failing was not a huge problem for them. Having a strong preference for leisure is totally ok. The drivers didn’t have enough stock and weren’t paid enough to motivate them to work the hours the company needed to be viable. The company failed. The investors lost all their money. The founders and employees got nothing. That’s capitalism. If they’d been right they’d have made massive bank and that too would have been capitalism. Workers get to play capitalism too. Everyone played. Everyone made their choices and the company failed.

kyle_martin1 6y ago
The drivers are franchisees so they have huge interest in keeping the company going, otherwise they wouldn't get any trips. It was their problem. They just didn't want to change.
- ric2b 6y ago
  They can just drive for another company, they don't suffer any significant loss the same way a McDonald's restaurant would if McD's folded and had to overhaul the entire restaurant. The drivers just install another app on their phone.