3 ms·

So you're posting your hypothetical anecdote because you're upset that the LA Times didn't interview you? What unrepresented party to this story do you think y

So you're posting your hypothetical anecdote because you're upset that the LA Times didn't interview you? What unrepresented party to this story do you think you belong to? People who are upset that uber isn't around to serve them? Again, this is entirely dependent on circumstances that you haven't made clear. Maybe Uber and their pro-market pricing think that you're in a region they can't make a profit in, and therefor will never be an option for you anyway. Are you just in the class of people who are upset that taxis aren't available in bad weather in your area? Again, do you live up on the top of a mountain? Are you hard to get to? Again, it's not clear. It just sounds like you're unhappy with your local taxis, and support unrestrained market policies, which frankly, isn't interesting or relevant to stories about Uber, their places in existing market places, and whether they're serving their customers well with surge pricing.

corin_ 13y ago
Guys, you're completely missing the point of his anecdote. Due to the weather, he was unable to get a taxi, he completely lost that option. If fares had been way higher then he most likely could have (either because more drivers would want to work, or because less people would be willing to pay those fares, or for a mixture of these two reasons). Thus, an Uber-pricing system would have been beneficial to him - even if he decided not to use it, it would have at least given him an option to use it (what if he didn't have a car and really needed to make that journey). He's not trying to complain about his local companies, or anything like that, he's merely pointing out that this sort of pricing can be beneficial to some people, not just to Uber. That doesn't mean it's the best system overall, it doesn't even mean this anecdote owner thinks it is, it's merely a discussion point.

corin_ 13y ago

Guys, you're completely missing the point of his anecdote. Due to the weather, he was unable to get a taxi, he completely lost that option. If fares had been way higher then he most likely could have (either because more drivers would want to work, or because less people would be willing to pay those fares, or for a mixture of these two reasons). Thus, an Uber-pricing system would have been beneficial to him - even if he decided not to use it, it would have at least given him an option to use it (what if he didn't have a car and really needed to make that journey). He's not trying to complain about his local companies, or anything like that, he's merely pointing out that this sort of pricing can be beneficial to some people, not just to Uber. That doesn't mean it's the best system overall, it doesn't even mean this anecdote owner thinks it is, it's merely a discussion point.