4 ms·
> Uber/Lyft did outcompete taxis on merit, and to suggest otherwise is revisionist history > People talk about how Uber/Lyft dodged taxi regulation, which is t
by musicale 3y ago
> Uber/Lyft did outcompete taxis on merit, and to suggest otherwise is revisionist history
> People talk about how Uber/Lyft dodged taxi regulation, which is true
Taxis sucked (and still do), but Uber/Lyft's not-so-secret sauce was regulatory evasion, claiming that their taxi service wasn't a taxi service and that their employees weren't employees.
- droopyEyelids 3y agoAlso Uber/Lyft were "dumping" their product, selling rides below cost by partially funding every ride with VC investment money. This made their product artificially competitive.
- tanjtanjtanj 3y agoI always see people say this but I don't know how they were subsidizing rides. I was an early Uber driver when I was in grad school and I received roughly 2/3rds of what riders paid. Was Uber's third take too low? I would also receive a lower fare when the rider used a coupon or had a promotion. It always seemed more like I was subsidizing the rides rather than Uber.
- mrguyorama 3y agoMaybe, just maybe, your singular experience is not accurately representative of Uber's business? You can go look up how they were clearly subsidizing fares.
- bamfly 3y agoRight—I'm sure they won some business because they were actually a better experience in some ways, but I've ridden in like three taxis ever in my nearly 40 years on this planet, and never in the place where I live, but have taken probably thirty or forty ubers/lyfts, most of them near home. Why? Taxis were too expensive, so I never even considered them an option. Ubers and Lyfts were stupid-cheap for a long time.