3 ms·

Why would they charge less than a cab? It's clear they are not a ride sharing service, unless your $12 ride was for 50 miles ($.55/mile * 50 miles / 2 people ~

by johnrob 13y ago

Why would they charge less than a cab? It's clear they are not a ride sharing service, unless your $12 ride was for 50 miles ($.55/mile * 50 miles / 2 people ~= 12).

ryanglasgow 13y ago
Taxi drivers are professionals, Lyft drivers are amateurs. I'm not being rude, but that's what they are. Taxi's are under strict regulation and guidelines, and require a medallion to operate. Lyft drivers constantly get lost, take the slowest routes to get around, and have taken me to the wrong place multiple times.
- princess3000 13y ago
  I've taken Lyft twice and both times I had to direct the driver. Which isn't a problem, really, but they are indeed amateurs in the real sense of the word compared to the Uber drivers and most cab drivers. It's kind of neat though since they're just people from the area and even though they don't know where everything is they're interesting to talk to for the most part.
  - mynameishere 13y ago
    How the heck do people get lost with navigation systems? Or, why would an amateur cabbie not have a navigation system?
    - princess3000 13y ago
      They have navigation systems built into the Lyft (and Uber) apps, actually, but it was more of me saying my destination and the guy saying "Should I go left or right to get started?" whereas a cabbie just knows exactly where you're headed.
zipppy 13y ago
I'm unfamiliar with Lyft -- do Lyft drivers only pick people up on their way somewhere? Or do they go out of their way to pick people up? If it's the latter, then it's not really helping the environment much more than cabs, correct? For me, that means taking a cheaper option (and supporting someone's profession, rather than someone who's just making extra money on the side), is better.
- ryanglasgow 13y ago
  1) Lyft drivers operate similar to a taxi and wait around until they are summoned via the app to give someone a ride. 2) It's not helping the environment more than cabs, and probably does more damage than cabs. I've seen a Ford F-350 Superduty with a pink mustache picking someone up. Cab's are usually Toyota Prius'. 3) As of recently, it's not cheaper than a cab. 4) It does allow drivers, who often have full-time jobs during the day, make extra money on the side.
- postnihilism 13y ago
  It's the latter. Lyft and Sidecar started in SF, a city in which it is notoriously difficult to catch a cab. The goal isn't to help the environment but to create a marketplace to allow drivers and passengers to easily connect. When they began they were both cheaper than cabs; from my personal experience they now cost about the same. They do make catching a ride far easier though.
  - socillion 13y ago
    I'm curious, is it a popular service because of a dearth of other options like public transit (buses), or because people prefer cab-style transportation despite the higher cost?
    - potatolicious 13y ago
      A bit of both, but more column A than column B IMO. SF's transit is pretty notoriously bad - dirty buses and trains, never on time, very slow, stops (too) frequently, and there's a (probably well-founded) perception of danger on some routes to boot. Mass transit coverage (see: BART or MUNI light rail) is also non-existent in the vast majority of the city, making sketchy, infrequent buses the only alternative. This is combined with an extremely corrupt taxicab lobby that has successfully prevented the growth of the cab fleet despite an increasing population, making SF a notoriously difficult city to get a cab during busy times (Thurs, Fri, Sat nights). Taxicabs are also poorly regulated, quite often picking up a passenger on the way to another fare and simply abandoning the request, as well as sketchiness with accepting and processing credit cards. SF is really the perfect storm of regulatory and governmental failure that has allowed the rise of Uber, Lyft, Sidecar, etc.

by johnrob 13y ago

Why would they charge less than a cab? It's clear they are not a ride sharing service, unless your $12 ride was for 50 miles ($.55/mile * 50 miles / 2 people ~= 12).

ryanglasgow 13y ago

Taxi drivers are professionals, Lyft drivers are amateurs. I'm not being rude, but that's what they are. Taxi's are under strict regulation and guidelines, and require a medallion to operate. Lyft drivers constantly get lost, take the slowest routes to get around, and have taken me to the wrong place multiple times.

princess3000 13y ago
I've taken Lyft twice and both times I had to direct the driver. Which isn't a problem, really, but they are indeed amateurs in the real sense of the word compared to the Uber drivers and most cab drivers. It's kind of neat though since they're just people from the area and even though they don't know where everything is they're interesting to talk to for the most part.
- mynameishere 13y ago
  How the heck do people get lost with navigation systems? Or, why would an amateur cabbie not have a navigation system?
  - princess3000 13y ago
    They have navigation systems built into the Lyft (and Uber) apps, actually, but it was more of me saying my destination and the guy saying "Should I go left or right to get started?" whereas a cabbie just knows exactly where you're headed.

zipppy 13y ago

I'm unfamiliar with Lyft -- do Lyft drivers only pick people up on their way somewhere? Or do they go out of their way to pick people up? If it's the latter, then it's not really helping the environment much more than cabs, correct? For me, that means taking a cheaper option (and supporting someone's profession, rather than someone who's just making extra money on the side), is better.

ryanglasgow 13y ago
1) Lyft drivers operate similar to a taxi and wait around until they are summoned via the app to give someone a ride. 2) It's not helping the environment more than cabs, and probably does more damage than cabs. I've seen a Ford F-350 Superduty with a pink mustache picking someone up. Cab's are usually Toyota Prius'. 3) As of recently, it's not cheaper than a cab. 4) It does allow drivers, who often have full-time jobs during the day, make extra money on the side.
postnihilism 13y ago
It's the latter. Lyft and Sidecar started in SF, a city in which it is notoriously difficult to catch a cab. The goal isn't to help the environment but to create a marketplace to allow drivers and passengers to easily connect. When they began they were both cheaper than cabs; from my personal experience they now cost about the same. They do make catching a ride far easier though.
- socillion 13y ago
  I'm curious, is it a popular service because of a dearth of other options like public transit (buses), or because people prefer cab-style transportation despite the higher cost?
  - potatolicious 13y ago
    A bit of both, but more column A than column B IMO. SF's transit is pretty notoriously bad - dirty buses and trains, never on time, very slow, stops (too) frequently, and there's a (probably well-founded) perception of danger on some routes to boot. Mass transit coverage (see: BART or MUNI light rail) is also non-existent in the vast majority of the city, making sketchy, infrequent buses the only alternative. This is combined with an extremely corrupt taxicab lobby that has successfully prevented the growth of the cab fleet despite an increasing population, making SF a notoriously difficult city to get a cab during busy times (Thurs, Fri, Sat nights). Taxicabs are also poorly regulated, quite often picking up a passenger on the way to another fare and simply abandoning the request, as well as sketchiness with accepting and processing credit cards. SF is really the perfect storm of regulatory and governmental failure that has allowed the rise of Uber, Lyft, Sidecar, etc.