7 ms·

"Now [Uber] employs ex-cab drivers at half their old wages to drive passengers at twice the old fares." At least for where I live (New Jersey) this is complete

"Now [Uber] employs ex-cab drivers at half their old wages to drive passengers at twice the old fares." At least for where I live (New Jersey) this is completely untrue. Uber fares today are still far cheaper then Taxi fares were even in 2009. A 12 min ride home in a taxi from my local train station was $20 in 2008... Today in Uber it's $12.

prepend 3y ago
This seems false to me as well. I’m not sure what city the author lives in, but, while Uber is pretty bad, Uber is still better than taxis. Better service, better fares, and better pay for drivers. Taxis were like the biggest racket around with usually sleazy companies owning the car and paying immigrants and literal slaves from human trafficking poor wages to drive. There’s this mythical owner/operator that I never encountered. So I think that’s why Uber is tolerated because they are still better than the worlds shittiest industry, taxi. Maybe the only more hated industry would be debt collectors or hospital administrators or telemarketers.
- kevviiinn 3y ago
  Why is the company owning the car a bad thing
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    It isn't necessarily, but cab companies often operated on The Medallion system. Medallions going to cost upwards of a million dollars and be required to operate a cab. Cab companies would hold the medallion and charge enormous rent for drivers to use their cabs and medallions.
    - ipaddr 3y ago
      Originally they cost much less but demand / supply has caused the spike. The sensible thing would be to increase Medallions but that reduces the profit from the first group plus increases traffic
      - kevincox 3y ago
        There is also a desirable number of cabs to be driving. Having cabs lined up idling on the side of every street, even if they are profitable, isn't optimal for the city. So there is a legitimate reason to provide a limit. Of course it is clear that the medallion system has other problems like raising barrier to entry. Maybe it would make more sense if the city rented/auctioned the desired number directly on relatively short timeframes.
- stcroixx 3y ago
  Taxis in Chicago used to be pretty great. Always around when you needed one, no wait, knew the city streets well. Nobody I knew complained about them.
  - tptacek 3y ago
    They were great in the loop and more or less useless everywhere else.
    - stcroixx 3y ago
      Nonsense. Near north side, Lincoln park, Gold Coast, all the way up to Rogers park and everywhere in between cabs were all plentiful. I took them regularly. Same on the west side all the way out to oak park. South side I don’t know, never went there on purpose unless you count Chinatown which is at a red line stop. South side has always been an island.
      - giraffe_lady 3y ago
        It sounds like they were fine if you were within a mile of the lake on the north side. I wonder what... else... is notable about that... area... but I just can't quite... put my finger on it.... South side isn't an island, it's half the city's land area and population. To the extent it's cut off from the rest of the city that's an intentional policy choice supported and justified by comments like yours.
        stcroixx 3y ago
        Please continue to tell us what Uptown, Edgewater, and Rogers park are notable for? Dead bodies in dumpsters outside of your condo? Because that's what was in the dumpster outside mine. I worked for years at the Men's shelter in Uptown - I doubt this area is what you think it is.
        tptacek 3y ago
        This is a weirdly aggro response. I lived in Uptown for a couple years. It's not "random dead bodies in dumpsters" territory. My apartment there was expensive.
kj4211cash 3y ago
He's wrong about Uber and, in my humble opinion, has been wrong about Uber for a long time. Albeit while making claims that are very interesting. For the longest time, he claimed Uber could never possibly be profitable. I almost believed him despite the obvious evidence of taxi companies surviving for decades before Uber even existed. To me the worst case for Uber was always really large but marginally profitable taxi company. It's debatable but I think they've exceeded that.
- hakfoo 3y ago
  That's a reasonable argument. From the investor perspective, I wonder if that's good enough-- the people chasing unicorns and 500% IPO paydays would probably be angrier watching it become a low-margin but functionally useful company, than seeing it close up shop. Over time, there's a lot of pressure on Uber's margins. The technology and business idea are obvious enough that the moat is pretty low. There's little reason for drivers to not be on every available platform, and you can do a splashy "Download our app to get $20 in credit" to growth-hack a new competitor. So you're always at the risk of someone launching a price war, and even if you can drive them out of the market, you'll have a hard time resetting customer expectations.
  - dastbe 3y ago
    (disclosure: I work at Uber) > There's little reason for drivers to not be on every available platform So yes and no. Yes in the sense that switching costs for a driver are very low, but no in the sense that not all platforms provide the same value to drivers. A platform that reduces wait times, batches deliveries, plans better routes, etc. can provide drivers better income per-minute/mile compared to competitors.
    - blitzar 3y ago
      Having a second/third/fourth platform that provides you with a positive probability of getting a ride while you have a wait time on your primary platform provides drivers better income per-minute/mile
SOLAR_FIELDS 3y ago
Conversely, circa 2016-2018 it was around $25-30 USD to Uber from far northwest Austin to the airport (excluding, or perhaps including, the weird time where Uber and Lyft left Austin out of spite for their local ordinance which was subsequently preempted by the state legislature). This is around 20-30 minute ride depending on traffic. Now that same ride is minimum $50 USD, usually closer to $70 USD. So those numbers absolutely match up in my city, at least from the rider’s perspective. STILL better than taxis, however. Of course there is inflation, but that doesn’t nearly account for this discrepancy. I can’t provide exact driver numbers but I sometimes have the courage to ask the driver what they are making and on average when I do ask it’s about 1/3 of what I am paying. Never more than half.
- edmundsauto 3y ago
  Uber receipts in Washington will tell you the drivers share. I recently had a $55 fare and the driver received $31 of it. That appears to be representative of my other receipts.
  - SOLAR_FIELDS 3y ago
    Interesting. Does that include any optional tip or was that base fare only? A ride I had back in Corpus Christi last summer was a $36 ride that the driver received $12 for. Similar numbers in San Antonio
    - edmundsauto 3y ago
      Base fare only, drivers keep all of the tips. Interestingly, in other states, I don't see the same reporting - only total amount that I paid, not what the driver received.
hdjdkdbdb 3y ago
Did you account for inflation? Because your 2008 dollars were worth a lot more than what they are now...
- hdjdkdbdb 3y ago
  Also this is because of quantarive easing and low interest rates.....
- kevincox 3y ago
  That makes the current fare even cheaper. Because it would be $30 dollars then to $12 now.
smcleod 3y ago
Yeah absolutely not true here in Australia either. Uber / DiDi fares are about ½ the price taxis were even go back 8 years ago.

prepend 3y ago

This seems false to me as well. I’m not sure what city the author lives in, but, while Uber is pretty bad, Uber is still better than taxis. Better service, better fares, and better pay for drivers. Taxis were like the biggest racket around with usually sleazy companies owning the car and paying immigrants and literal slaves from human trafficking poor wages to drive. There’s this mythical owner/operator that I never encountered. So I think that’s why Uber is tolerated because they are still better than the worlds shittiest industry, taxi. Maybe the only more hated industry would be debt collectors or hospital administrators or telemarketers.

kevviiinn 3y ago
Why is the company owning the car a bad thing
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  It isn't necessarily, but cab companies often operated on The Medallion system. Medallions going to cost upwards of a million dollars and be required to operate a cab. Cab companies would hold the medallion and charge enormous rent for drivers to use their cabs and medallions.
  - ipaddr 3y ago
    Originally they cost much less but demand / supply has caused the spike. The sensible thing would be to increase Medallions but that reduces the profit from the first group plus increases traffic
    - kevincox 3y ago
      There is also a desirable number of cabs to be driving. Having cabs lined up idling on the side of every street, even if they are profitable, isn't optimal for the city. So there is a legitimate reason to provide a limit. Of course it is clear that the medallion system has other problems like raising barrier to entry. Maybe it would make more sense if the city rented/auctioned the desired number directly on relatively short timeframes.
stcroixx 3y ago
Taxis in Chicago used to be pretty great. Always around when you needed one, no wait, knew the city streets well. Nobody I knew complained about them.
- tptacek 3y ago
  They were great in the loop and more or less useless everywhere else.
  - stcroixx 3y ago
    Nonsense. Near north side, Lincoln park, Gold Coast, all the way up to Rogers park and everywhere in between cabs were all plentiful. I took them regularly. Same on the west side all the way out to oak park. South side I don’t know, never went there on purpose unless you count Chinatown which is at a red line stop. South side has always been an island.
    - giraffe_lady 3y ago
      It sounds like they were fine if you were within a mile of the lake on the north side. I wonder what... else... is notable about that... area... but I just can't quite... put my finger on it.... South side isn't an island, it's half the city's land area and population. To the extent it's cut off from the rest of the city that's an intentional policy choice supported and justified by comments like yours.
      - stcroixx 3y ago
        Please continue to tell us what Uptown, Edgewater, and Rogers park are notable for? Dead bodies in dumpsters outside of your condo? Because that's what was in the dumpster outside mine. I worked for years at the Men's shelter in Uptown - I doubt this area is what you think it is.
        tptacek 3y ago
        This is a weirdly aggro response. I lived in Uptown for a couple years. It's not "random dead bodies in dumpsters" territory. My apartment there was expensive.

kj4211cash 3y ago

He's wrong about Uber and, in my humble opinion, has been wrong about Uber for a long time. Albeit while making claims that are very interesting. For the longest time, he claimed Uber could never possibly be profitable. I almost believed him despite the obvious evidence of taxi companies surviving for decades before Uber even existed. To me the worst case for Uber was always really large but marginally profitable taxi company. It's debatable but I think they've exceeded that.

hakfoo 3y ago
That's a reasonable argument. From the investor perspective, I wonder if that's good enough-- the people chasing unicorns and 500% IPO paydays would probably be angrier watching it become a low-margin but functionally useful company, than seeing it close up shop. Over time, there's a lot of pressure on Uber's margins. The technology and business idea are obvious enough that the moat is pretty low. There's little reason for drivers to not be on every available platform, and you can do a splashy "Download our app to get $20 in credit" to growth-hack a new competitor. So you're always at the risk of someone launching a price war, and even if you can drive them out of the market, you'll have a hard time resetting customer expectations.
- dastbe 3y ago
  (disclosure: I work at Uber) > There's little reason for drivers to not be on every available platform So yes and no. Yes in the sense that switching costs for a driver are very low, but no in the sense that not all platforms provide the same value to drivers. A platform that reduces wait times, batches deliveries, plans better routes, etc. can provide drivers better income per-minute/mile compared to competitors.
  - blitzar 3y ago
    Having a second/third/fourth platform that provides you with a positive probability of getting a ride while you have a wait time on your primary platform provides drivers better income per-minute/mile

SOLAR_FIELDS 3y ago

Conversely, circa 2016-2018 it was around $25-30 USD to Uber from far northwest Austin to the airport (excluding, or perhaps including, the weird time where Uber and Lyft left Austin out of spite for their local ordinance which was subsequently preempted by the state legislature). This is around 20-30 minute ride depending on traffic. Now that same ride is minimum $50 USD, usually closer to $70 USD. So those numbers absolutely match up in my city, at least from the rider’s perspective. STILL better than taxis, however. Of course there is inflation, but that doesn’t nearly account for this discrepancy. I can’t provide exact driver numbers but I sometimes have the courage to ask the driver what they are making and on average when I do ask it’s about 1/3 of what I am paying. Never more than half.

edmundsauto 3y ago
Uber receipts in Washington will tell you the drivers share. I recently had a $55 fare and the driver received $31 of it. That appears to be representative of my other receipts.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 3y ago
  Interesting. Does that include any optional tip or was that base fare only? A ride I had back in Corpus Christi last summer was a $36 ride that the driver received $12 for. Similar numbers in San Antonio
  - edmundsauto 3y ago
    Base fare only, drivers keep all of the tips. Interestingly, in other states, I don't see the same reporting - only total amount that I paid, not what the driver received.

hdjdkdbdb 3y ago

Did you account for inflation? Because your 2008 dollars were worth a lot more than what they are now...

hdjdkdbdb 3y ago
Also this is because of quantarive easing and low interest rates.....
kevincox 3y ago
That makes the current fare even cheaper. Because it would be $30 dollars then to $12 now.

smcleod 3y ago

Yeah absolutely not true here in Australia either. Uber / DiDi fares are about ½ the price taxis were even go back 8 years ago.