14 ms·

Uber's dirty tricks quantified: Rival counts 5,560 canceled rides

353 points by wfjackson 12y ago

mkal_tsr 12y ago
Is this something that the investors of Uber encourage / don't discourage? If not, what actions are being taken by either Uber or Uber's investors to prevent this from happening again? (cnn reports this is not the first time)
tarminian 12y ago
And now you see why we have taxi regulations.
- thrill 12y ago
  We may get to see why we have unsubstantiated libel regulations.
- seanflyon 12y ago
  Or why fraud is illegal.
- scott_karana 12y ago
  Fraud's fraud. A taxi company could do the same thing to a rival.
- jonknee 12y ago
  Why? You can similarly request a cab and cancel it. Rival cab companies have surely done this for as long as rival cab companies have existed. The difference is cabs don't always show up, they "cancel" on riders all the time. Gotta love taxi regulations!
- tarminian 12y ago
  I see the Uber people have gotten to this post. I guess I don't understand how Uber/Lyft is any different from a standard Taxi company. Me, I'll stick with the bus or Car2Go if this is the way they act.
alrs 12y ago
It feels plainly obvious that Uber is run by assholes, and that anyone who works there has a black mark on their resume forever. But that's how it feels. Is Lyft just better at PR?
- untog 12y ago
  If Lyft are better at PR then Gett must be as well - because Uber did the exact same thing to them a few months ago, allegedly. At a certain point you just have to apply Occam's Razor and realise that Uber is run by a collection of assholes.
  - potatolicious 12y ago
    Not allegedly - Uber owned up to it but refused to punish any of the staff involved, saying only that they were "overzealous". http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/24/technology/social/uber-gett/ http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/24/technology/social/uber-gett/ At this point Uber can't reasonably claim that these were rogue employees. It's pretty obvious to everyone that this is officially sanctioned. [edit] Side note: this is not the first time a YC company has been caught engaging in highly unethical business behavior (see: AirBnb marketing). What is YC, and other investors, doing to curb this kind of behavior? Or is this level of abuse tolerated because money? [edit2] Bah, brain farted, Uber is indeed not a YC company.
    - minimaxir 12y ago
      YC has addressed instances of egregriously bad marketing, such as the InstallMonetizer incident: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5092711 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5092711 Although, many companies that use baity "growth hacking" strategies are indeed YC, but that's a seperate issue.
      - makomk 12y ago
        Oh yeah, they "addressed" that all right. pg argued it was OK that a company they'd supported and helped fund was paying software makers to bundle unwanted software into installers and tricking users into installing it by, amongst other techniques, disguising the prompt to install the crap as a EULA acceptance screen. (But hey, it's no big deal because the screen "has a decline as well as an accept button, and if the user declines, no software is installed" - doesn't matter that the decline button's carefully designed to make users think it'll cancel whatever installation they were actually intending to do.)
fred_durst 12y ago
Free markets make men do amazing things.
jmcnevin 12y ago
I've used Uber dozens of times, but stories like this really make me think I should give Lyft a shot. After all, if this company is operating in such an underhanded manner this early in the game, it's troubling to consider what they'd be capable of down the line.
- devicenull 12y ago
  A PR article by Lyft makes you want to use them. No surprise there!
  - untog 12y ago
    "Our service was compromised and resulted in a worse experience for our customers" sounds like a pretty... interesting PR spin.
- halcyondaze 12y ago
  I have always been unsure why people prefer one over the other - it's essentially the exact same service. I typically go with whatever one is closer / is offering a deal at the time.
  - sopooneo 12y ago
    Has anyone managed to build something on top of both that can find the closest/cheapest ride?
    - samweinberg 12y ago
      An app that does exactly this was just built at YC Hacks: http://ychacks.challengepost.com/submissions/25803-oneride http://ychacks.challengepost.com/submissions/25803-oneride
  - lawnchair_larry 12y ago
    Lyft doesn't have great marketing, and the pink moustache is probably a turn off to many.
cge 12y ago
There were 5,560 canceled rides, but the article suggests that a single Uber recruiter was responsible for almost 30% of those, and another was responsible for a further 10%. It would be interesting to see the data here in more detail: it may well be that 177 Uber recruiters have booked and cancelled rides, but that 160 of them have done so at a rate similar to average users, while 17 have been absurdly abusing the system. I'm actually a bit confused as to how single individuals were able to perpetuate such abuse without Lyft preventing it: after a single phone number has made a hundred cancellations on a bunch of accounts in the course of a few days, why weren't there automated processes in place to prevent those accounts from making another 1,400 of them. For that matter, why was the person even able to sign up for 22 accounts with one phone number?
- praneshp 12y ago
  Or maybe Lyft knew about it, handled it, but let them do whatever they wanted so this article could be written?
  - uptown 12y ago
    Is that based on anything other than complete speculation?
    - praneshp 12y ago
      Nope, except I refuse to believe Uber is 100% evil and Lyft is 100% good. Or that Lyft was stupid enough to let 1 person screw them so much with one phone number.
- CodeWriter23 12y ago
  30%!!! Wonder what his/her conversion rate was at $500/head.
untog 12y ago
In case anyone had forgotten, they did the exact same thing in NYC to another competitor, Gett, a few months ago: http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/24/black-car-competitor-accuses-uber-of-shady-conduct-ddos-style-attack-uber-expresses-regret/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/24/black-car-competitor-accuse... Can't wait to see how Uber rephrase "It was likely too aggressive a sales tactic" this time around!!
- jaxn 12y ago
  That was in the article ;)
  - untog 12y ago
    You think people actually read the article?!
tux1968 12y ago
Okay, Uber has to face the music on this one. But... Why is there no rating system for passengers? How can a single phone number be tied to 21 accounts and cancel over 1500 rides without Lyft ignoring orders from that phone number? Why weren't the accounts deactivated long before this level of abuse? It doesn't seem like they're taking good care of their drivers' time or expenses.
- alanbyrne 12y ago
  Uber has a rating system for passengers so I would have figured Lyft did too.
  - potatolicious 12y ago
    I don't believe you get to rate a passenger unless a successful transaction has occurred. I had an Uber driver in NYC explain this to me in very clear terms (apparently he'd had even more last-minute cancellations than usual that day).
    - prostoalex 12y ago
      But Uber knows about that last-minute cancellation, and probably incorporates it into their rating system.
- allworknoplay 12y ago
  Why the activity wasn't flagged and the account killed is one thing; maybe it wasn't a common enough / known problem. It doesn't say drivers responded, though; it seems like the way it works is if you're recruiting for uber you simply book a lyft ride so you can get the driver's contact info and then call them up.
- x0x0 12y ago
  Maybe this was the first time? At companies I've worked at, lots of limitations where only added after someone abused something...
7Figures2Commas 12y ago
Many states have unfair competition laws under which the type of behavior alleged could very well be actionable. Bringing the alleged behavior into the court of public opinion is appealing but I suspect that if the allegations are true, Lyft's business would be better served by addressing this in a court of law.
bedhead 12y ago
This being a techie-oriented site I'm sure I'll find myself in the minority here, but here goes. I think that Uber, as someone else noted, is a company run by assholes. Rideshare services like UberX and Lyft are going to get more-or-less shut down, and deservedly so. Remember that period in like 1999 before Napster got shut down? Yeah, that's rideshare right now. While many consumers cry "choice!" and "innovation!", the reality is that these services operate in a loophole which any objective observer will point out is complete bullshit. We have a system, which is probably unfair to begin with, but an existing and functional system nonetheless that rideshares effectively hacked. One group plays by the rules and is taxed and regulated and fee'd, the other magically escapes it. If you have a complaint it should be with cities that require medallions - they are the ones to blame for the current situation. Maybe we should get rid of medallions completely, I dunno. But be careful what you wish for.
- dspillett 12y ago
  > I think that Uber, as someone else noted, is a company run by assholes. This is a common theme, that there are a lot of arseholes running growing companies, from which I conclude that being an arsehole brings something to the business. Certainly arseholes tend to be determined in the pursuit of their goals which is useful when those goals overlap with a company's needs, particularly as a newer business grows. Of course it might not bring something to the customers, the workers, or the general public, hence we think they are arseholes but the board of the company see them as useful go-getters.
  - arethuza 12y ago
    You might find this interesting: http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-or-the-office-according-to-the-office/ http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-o...
- temuze 12y ago
  I don't think that's a fair comparison. Napster and all the early music apps were basically a form of stealing. No one got money off downloads. It wasn't a sustainable model for the music industry. Uber has made the market more efficient. If anything, it's making the industry more sustainable.
awwstn 12y ago
Lyft should come up with a way of flagging and hellbanning these accounts. The user could continue to think they have booked a ride, and think they have cancelled it, when really the whole system ignored them.
edibleEnergy 12y ago
Warning, loud auto-playing video.
jonknee 12y ago
Odd that Lyft appears proud to claim that they have a very easily gamed system without anti-fraud filters. Now that the word is out I would watch out for taxi drivers to get in on the fun.
- personZ 12y ago
  Victim blaming is generally reprehensible. Further, I imagine that as a nascent business the notion that competitors would be so unethical didn't seem to be a top priority. Is it obvious now that they should have caught it? Yeah, thanks to the brilliance of hindsight of course it is. Does that justify it? Hardly.
  - jonknee 12y ago
    There's no victim here, this is one extraordinarily rich startup complaining about another extraordinarily rich startup. Meanwhile taxi lobbies complain about them both. To add some perspective, this is 5,560 rides in the last 10 months or ~550 per month or less than 20 per day. There aren't any recent figures, but as of May 2013 they were doing 30,000 rides per week and growing very quickly. A large amount of the cancellations were from a couple people and it also mentioned that when not canceling they took short rides and tried to poach the drivers. It's pretty obvious what a few of the recruiters are doing--asking for rides to be able and pitch the driver, but then canceling when it's a driver who already said no. tl;dr a very small number of sleezy recruiters have gotten under the skin of Lyft.
    - icambron 12y ago
      > There's no victim here, this is one extraordinarily rich startup complaining about another extraordinarily rich startup. That you don't care about the victim does not make them not a victim.
aboodman 12y ago
For pete's sake, it's 5k rides over like 9 months. How many Lyft rides are there per day in SF alone?
mrgordon 12y ago
One more reason to look for a Sidecar or Lyft before an Uber. Usually cheaper too.
edwardhotchkiss 12y ago
In all fairness to my selfish self, that has lived in NYC, SF and finally in LA: Uber (regardless of and possibly because of ) knee-capping other services is now a dominant, helpful service in my life. When I lived in SF and moved to LA I had a problem that only NYC had a solution for: "Many Many Cabs, Everywhere". Two years ago I couldn't go go five miles in traffic without paying $50 and needing cash; and that was if I was somewhere where cabs hung around. Regardless of them being "assholes", it's extremely useless in my life.
- mamoswined 12y ago
  As someone who is disabled, it truly enables me to have more mobility than I ever have had. I find it truly disturbing when people equate taxis with these services. For those of us who aren't as able to run around hailing cabs or waiting on a dispatch that often never comes, the difference is HUGE. I know they don't accommodate all disabled people yet (wheelchairs for example), but they can serve many disabled people and there is an opportunity to expand the reach.
  - edwardhotchkiss 12y ago
    It's comments like these that people with high karma need to be up-voting. I had no idea that they were disabled accommodating and am glad that some are. Glad that they are having a positive impact in your life.
  - makomk 12y ago
    Unfortunately, in many areas the existing minicab companies they're competing with do actually accomodate wheelchair users. So Uber and its funders are spending billions to try and replace services with ones that are less accessible for many. (With the amount invested and Uber's current market cap, their investors aren't going to be satisfied with mere coexistence - they need to dominate the market.)
    - mamoswined 12y ago
      If Uber or another service worked with these accessible taxis, it would be a true game changer. Yes, some local taxi services allow you to request wheelchair accessible cars, but you are going to often wait a very long time for them (if they ever come). Also some dispatchers are just not polite about it. Imagine if you could request one with the click of a button and track its arrival? That would be so helpful.
mulcher 12y ago
Honestly.. Lyft needs a better spam filter.
chenluis5 12y ago
Number of people defending Uber and their actions are too large. Why not accept the mistake and take responsibility for it ? Also, YC is no hero. If YC speaks highly of such companies and Uber is using such tactics to gain business all you can say is everything is double talk on this site. I used to hang out a lot on this site but just look at number of shills employed commenting , shifting discussion to compare with Taxi industry when actual issue at hand is unethical practice. Uber is no different than FUCK YOU , FUCK SHARING ECONOMY, give us your money we tank it in founders and select-fews pockets and enjoy. Can't wait to all of this blow over and someone files major lawsuit.
- brownbat 12y ago
  I agree in principle, I really want better comments in this thread taking Uber to task. (I want the best arguments on both sides.) You lost me when you started name calling though, accusing everyone of being shills. It's the internet, you don't need to pay people to have strong opinions, it's what they do here.
brownbat 12y ago
Maybe charge a deposit? Not trying to blame the victim, just really curious about how to build a business that can't be DOS'd by competitors. Often wondered how a Netflix or Redbox prevents competitors (once Blockbuster now Amazon?) from renting a bunch of DVDs only to return them with scratches. Maybe track problem accounts then ban them is best you can do?
eurleif 12y ago
Does Lyft's TOS prohibit this? If so, couldn't this theoretically be a criminal offense under the CFAA?
- CodeWriter23 12y ago
  Yes, soliciting or advertising any outside service or product by driver or rider is explicitly forbidden.
- tlrobinson 12y ago
  CFAA, really? No thanks. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/rebooting-computer-crime-law-part-1-no-prison-time-for-violating-terms-of-service https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/rebooting-computer-cri...
ryan-allen 12y ago
A mandatory cancellation fee would be handy, but of course Uber and Lyft would have to opt-in. I think it'd be fair to charge customers $5 for a cancellation.
- CodeWriter23 12y ago
  They both charge $5 for a cancellation, but only after 5 minutes.
jonknee 12y ago
Here is what's going on: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Uber-Lyft-Sidecar-put-driver-recruiting-in-high-5190676.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Uber-Lyft-Sidecar-put-... > "I was driving for Lyft in November when I picked up two attractive women," said the driver, who declined to give his name because he fears repercussions from the apps. "Like anybody, we started chatting, but they were sort of awkward. I knew something was up when they didn't tell me clearly where they wanted to go." And this: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhuet/2014/05/30/how-uber-and-lyft-are-trying-to-kill-each-other/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhuet/2014/05/30/how-uber-an... > Another part of the game is knowing the enemy. Uber employees and loyal Lyft drivers regularly try to infiltrate opposing driver ranks for inside information, and often call up a rival car for a ride so they can pitch the driver on switching. The cancellations are probably after they see that they got a driver they had already tried to pitch. A huge portion of them came from just a few recruiters... Seems like an easy fix if Uber wants to fix it, though they may not considering Lyft isn't exactly free from devious ploys: > On Tuesday, the rivals descended upon the humble intersection, where Uber usually hosts car inspections. Lyft started recruiting drivers by hosting daily luncheons in the parking lot (with a free taco truck, pink mustaches ziptied to the chain-link fences and two bouncers in black at the gate).
CodeWriter23 12y ago
It's pretty simple, Uber understands that to win the game, you need the a supply of drivers that just barely exceeds the demand for rides, to avoid surge pricing. To digress for a moment, surge pricing is brilliant in that it gets riders to volunteer to wait a long time for a ride, instead of getting pissed off like they do at Taxis, or give them the choice to pay up for an expedited ride. Anyway, the recruiting strategy worked for them in SF, they recruited so many Lyft drivers that Lyft was almost constantly in "Prime Time" (their name for surge pricing), that riders got upset and switched to Uber. It's at the intersection Business 101 and Econ 101 if you ask me. The only pushback I've seen from Lyft is mobilizing drivers to hand out free ride cards at slammed venues, like music festivals, when Lyft is at maximum Prime Time of 300% and Uber is at 800-1300%. Not a bad strategy, but basically, Uber is giving Lyft a hyper wedgie by cutting right into their supply. To put the cancellations into context, I met a Lyft driver who was recruited by Uber. He told me the same lady was recruiting in his area on an ongoing basis, just catching rides to make the pitch (which is a TOS violation on either platform). He said the recruiter would request a ride, sometimes 4 or 5 times, and keep getting him, then she would cancel shortly afterward when she recognized his name. So yeah, I'm sure some Lyft drivers spent gas, time and miles, but I also believe for the most part, the cancellations occurred in a minute or less. As far as which company are the biggest assholes, I think you need to look at it with some historical context. Uber started out as a company that created a better dispatch system for Black Cars, and got Livery companies and independent Limo drivers to sign on. That was good, because riders and drivers could be paired based on proximity. Combine that with Uber's marketing to increase ridership, and it is an all-around win. The savings/increased business for your average Livery operator more than made up for the Uber commission. Then Lyft comes along and says "Hey, let's open this up to your average joe with his car and car payment". Ok, so what they are doing actually is sucking the equity out of people's cars, because by the time you amortize all the expenses, you're making $10-$15 an hour (on Lyft, Uber you can make more), you might as well work for In-N-Out and get benefits too. Not to mention the insurance issues if you get into a wreck and its your fault (cancellation and no payout on your collision policy). Sure, the network will cover your liability, but only because they have been forced to by regulators. I classify this type of business (and AirBNB too) as "Slumlord 2.0". Slumlords buy an asset and drain the equity out of it for profit. Slumlord 2.0s drain the equity out of someone else's asset for profit. Uber had to counter Lyft with UberX, and get into the Slumlord 2.0 game themselves. Bottom line for me, I drive for them both, and I hate them both. I tolerate them because they enable me to continue to work on my startup, or I guess I should say, reboot of the family business. I can't wait to be done driving for them and become a rider.
USAnum1 12y ago
I don't feel this fits in any existing thread here, so I'll just put it at the root level. Doesn't the "look" at ~2:04 in the video sound inserted, perhaps to make Kalanick sound abrasive? I may just be over analyzing it, after having watched a short documentary on shaping opinions with small manipulations of video interviews awhile back. (I sincerely apologize that I can't find a link). I digress. The fact is Uber has been playing fast and loose, and push is starting to come to shove with regulation. Whether Uber or regulators cave is now the question.
- anigbrowl 12y ago
  Audio pro here - I record dialog for film and TV. It doesn't sound edited to me at all. Cutting the audio in slightly ahead or behind the camera image is so usual that such cuts have their own names - J cuts sand L cuts, respectively. Doing so provides a sense of editing momentum (which is quite important in news) and rather than being particularly considered it's just a cookie-cutter technique. Bear in mind that TV segments like this are just product to the people who make them, and are assembled with about as much contemplation as a hamburger. When you're cranking these stories out day after day you're not very invested in any of them, just enough to sketch out the issue in an attention grabbing way.
tlrobinson 12y ago
Certainly sketchy behavior by Uber, but also pretty embarrassing that Lyft wasn't able to detect and ban the Uber employee who cancelled 680 rides.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
pbreit 12y ago
This would certainly be a dick move by Uber, even in the land of hyper competition. But how the heck was Lyft unable to foil it?
supahfly_remix 12y ago
Why can't drivers be part of both Lyft and Uber? Doing so probably violates their respective terms of service, but why can't drivers just "disrupt" the sharing economy themselves by being part of both?
bitJericho 12y ago
I'm not sure why a company that engages in illegal behavior would be afraid of engaging in more illegal or (at the very least) fraudulant behavior.
korzun 12y ago
> One Lyft passenger, identified by seven different Lyft drivers as an Uber recruiter, canceled 300 rides from May 26 to June 10. That user's phone number was tied to 21 other accounts, for a total of 1,524 canceled rides. Sounds like Lyft is a shit show. For a service like this, that number should have been black listed within first 3 'rides'.
habosa 12y ago
I just moved from an Uber-only market (Philadelphia) to an Uber and Lyft market (SF) and it was immediately clear to me that these two companies are at war. UberX offers 25% off this summer, Lyft offers 30% off. Lyft announces Lyft Line, Uber beats them to the punch with Uber Pool. The drivers tell me that either company will give you $$$ to switch and that drivers are coveted. Every feature that one gets, the other will imitate. As a consumer it seems that there is basically no difference between the two services, I take whichever has less surge at the moment and/or whichever my friends want to take. It seems like this price war has served to totally commoditize ride sharing; I don't know anyone who has a serious preference between UberX and Lyft (black car and SUV are another story). Do they really think they can squeeze the life out of each other like this? I feel like VCs will just keep pumping money into them and fueling the price war. It seems to me that instead one should focus on really differentiating the service in some way to reverse the commoditization of private, on-demand rides. They either need to make their service preferable in some way to consumers (like Dropbox has done for file sharing) or make it a no-brainer choice for drivers to exclusively drive with them. Not that I'm complaining, this war basically just serves to make private transportation cheaper for consumers like me.
wcummings 12y ago
Since Taxi rides are basically futures contracts for a car ride, why doesn't someone create an agnostic taxi-ride orderbook. Aside from the fact that taxi companies desperately want to avoid market discovery of rates.
- seanflyon 12y ago
  If you were to ask Uber they would tell you that that is what they did.
  - wcummings 12y ago
    Yeah, but it isn't, really. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think they've claimed it is a "real" market, just that pricing programmatically adjusts to demand. Can Uber drivers set their rates, to undercut other Uber drivers?

353 points by wfjackson 12y ago

Is this something that the investors of Uber encourage / don't discourage? If not, what actions are being taken by either Uber or Uber's investors to prevent this from happening again? (cnn reports this is not the first time)

tarminian 12y ago

And now you see why we have taxi regulations.

thrill 12y ago
We may get to see why we have unsubstantiated libel regulations.
seanflyon 12y ago
Or why fraud is illegal.
scott_karana 12y ago
Fraud's fraud. A taxi company could do the same thing to a rival.
jonknee 12y ago
Why? You can similarly request a cab and cancel it. Rival cab companies have surely done this for as long as rival cab companies have existed. The difference is cabs don't always show up, they "cancel" on riders all the time. Gotta love taxi regulations!
tarminian 12y ago
I see the Uber people have gotten to this post. I guess I don't understand how Uber/Lyft is any different from a standard Taxi company. Me, I'll stick with the bus or Car2Go if this is the way they act.

alrs 12y ago

It feels plainly obvious that Uber is run by assholes, and that anyone who works there has a black mark on their resume forever. But that's how it feels. Is Lyft just better at PR?

untog 12y ago
If Lyft are better at PR then Gett must be as well - because Uber did the exact same thing to them a few months ago, allegedly. At a certain point you just have to apply Occam's Razor and realise that Uber is run by a collection of assholes.
- potatolicious 12y ago
  Not allegedly - Uber owned up to it but refused to punish any of the staff involved, saying only that they were "overzealous". http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/24/technology/social/uber-gett/ http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/24/technology/social/uber-gett/ At this point Uber can't reasonably claim that these were rogue employees. It's pretty obvious to everyone that this is officially sanctioned. [edit] Side note: this is not the first time a YC company has been caught engaging in highly unethical business behavior (see: AirBnb marketing). What is YC, and other investors, doing to curb this kind of behavior? Or is this level of abuse tolerated because money? [edit2] Bah, brain farted, Uber is indeed not a YC company.
  - minimaxir 12y ago
    YC has addressed instances of egregriously bad marketing, such as the InstallMonetizer incident: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5092711 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5092711 Although, many companies that use baity "growth hacking" strategies are indeed YC, but that's a seperate issue.
    - makomk 12y ago
      Oh yeah, they "addressed" that all right. pg argued it was OK that a company they'd supported and helped fund was paying software makers to bundle unwanted software into installers and tricking users into installing it by, amongst other techniques, disguising the prompt to install the crap as a EULA acceptance screen. (But hey, it's no big deal because the screen "has a decline as well as an accept button, and if the user declines, no software is installed" - doesn't matter that the decline button's carefully designed to make users think it'll cancel whatever installation they were actually intending to do.)

fred_durst 12y ago

Free markets make men do amazing things.

jmcnevin 12y ago

I've used Uber dozens of times, but stories like this really make me think I should give Lyft a shot. After all, if this company is operating in such an underhanded manner this early in the game, it's troubling to consider what they'd be capable of down the line.

devicenull 12y ago
A PR article by Lyft makes you want to use them. No surprise there!
- untog 12y ago
  "Our service was compromised and resulted in a worse experience for our customers" sounds like a pretty... interesting PR spin.
halcyondaze 12y ago
I have always been unsure why people prefer one over the other - it's essentially the exact same service. I typically go with whatever one is closer / is offering a deal at the time.
- sopooneo 12y ago
  Has anyone managed to build something on top of both that can find the closest/cheapest ride?
  - samweinberg 12y ago
    An app that does exactly this was just built at YC Hacks: http://ychacks.challengepost.com/submissions/25803-oneride http://ychacks.challengepost.com/submissions/25803-oneride
- lawnchair_larry 12y ago
  Lyft doesn't have great marketing, and the pink moustache is probably a turn off to many.

cge 12y ago

There were 5,560 canceled rides, but the article suggests that a single Uber recruiter was responsible for almost 30% of those, and another was responsible for a further 10%. It would be interesting to see the data here in more detail: it may well be that 177 Uber recruiters have booked and cancelled rides, but that 160 of them have done so at a rate similar to average users, while 17 have been absurdly abusing the system. I'm actually a bit confused as to how single individuals were able to perpetuate such abuse without Lyft preventing it: after a single phone number has made a hundred cancellations on a bunch of accounts in the course of a few days, why weren't there automated processes in place to prevent those accounts from making another 1,400 of them. For that matter, why was the person even able to sign up for 22 accounts with one phone number?

praneshp 12y ago
Or maybe Lyft knew about it, handled it, but let them do whatever they wanted so this article could be written?
- uptown 12y ago
  Is that based on anything other than complete speculation?
  - praneshp 12y ago
    Nope, except I refuse to believe Uber is 100% evil and Lyft is 100% good. Or that Lyft was stupid enough to let 1 person screw them so much with one phone number.
CodeWriter23 12y ago
30%!!! Wonder what his/her conversion rate was at $500/head.

untog 12y ago

In case anyone had forgotten, they did the exact same thing in NYC to another competitor, Gett, a few months ago: http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/24/black-car-competitor-accuses-uber-of-shady-conduct-ddos-style-attack-uber-expresses-regret/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/24/black-car-competitor-accuse... Can't wait to see how Uber rephrase "It was likely too aggressive a sales tactic" this time around!!

jaxn 12y ago
That was in the article ;)
- untog 12y ago
  You think people actually read the article?!

tux1968 12y ago

Okay, Uber has to face the music on this one. But... Why is there no rating system for passengers? How can a single phone number be tied to 21 accounts and cancel over 1500 rides without Lyft ignoring orders from that phone number? Why weren't the accounts deactivated long before this level of abuse? It doesn't seem like they're taking good care of their drivers' time or expenses.

alanbyrne 12y ago
Uber has a rating system for passengers so I would have figured Lyft did too.
- potatolicious 12y ago
  I don't believe you get to rate a passenger unless a successful transaction has occurred. I had an Uber driver in NYC explain this to me in very clear terms (apparently he'd had even more last-minute cancellations than usual that day).
  - prostoalex 12y ago
    But Uber knows about that last-minute cancellation, and probably incorporates it into their rating system.
allworknoplay 12y ago
Why the activity wasn't flagged and the account killed is one thing; maybe it wasn't a common enough / known problem. It doesn't say drivers responded, though; it seems like the way it works is if you're recruiting for uber you simply book a lyft ride so you can get the driver's contact info and then call them up.
x0x0 12y ago
Maybe this was the first time? At companies I've worked at, lots of limitations where only added after someone abused something...

7Figures2Commas 12y ago

Many states have unfair competition laws under which the type of behavior alleged could very well be actionable. Bringing the alleged behavior into the court of public opinion is appealing but I suspect that if the allegations are true, Lyft's business would be better served by addressing this in a court of law.

bedhead 12y ago

This being a techie-oriented site I'm sure I'll find myself in the minority here, but here goes. I think that Uber, as someone else noted, is a company run by assholes. Rideshare services like UberX and Lyft are going to get more-or-less shut down, and deservedly so. Remember that period in like 1999 before Napster got shut down? Yeah, that's rideshare right now. While many consumers cry "choice!" and "innovation!", the reality is that these services operate in a loophole which any objective observer will point out is complete bullshit. We have a system, which is probably unfair to begin with, but an existing and functional system nonetheless that rideshares effectively hacked. One group plays by the rules and is taxed and regulated and fee'd, the other magically escapes it. If you have a complaint it should be with cities that require medallions - they are the ones to blame for the current situation. Maybe we should get rid of medallions completely, I dunno. But be careful what you wish for.

dspillett 12y ago
> I think that Uber, as someone else noted, is a company run by assholes. This is a common theme, that there are a lot of arseholes running growing companies, from which I conclude that being an arsehole brings something to the business. Certainly arseholes tend to be determined in the pursuit of their goals which is useful when those goals overlap with a company's needs, particularly as a newer business grows. Of course it might not bring something to the customers, the workers, or the general public, hence we think they are arseholes but the board of the company see them as useful go-getters.
- arethuza 12y ago
  You might find this interesting: http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-or-the-office-according-to-the-office/ http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-o...
temuze 12y ago
I don't think that's a fair comparison. Napster and all the early music apps were basically a form of stealing. No one got money off downloads. It wasn't a sustainable model for the music industry. Uber has made the market more efficient. If anything, it's making the industry more sustainable.

awwstn 12y ago

Lyft should come up with a way of flagging and hellbanning these accounts. The user could continue to think they have booked a ride, and think they have cancelled it, when really the whole system ignored them.

edibleEnergy 12y ago

Warning, loud auto-playing video.

jonknee 12y ago

Odd that Lyft appears proud to claim that they have a very easily gamed system without anti-fraud filters. Now that the word is out I would watch out for taxi drivers to get in on the fun.

personZ 12y ago
Victim blaming is generally reprehensible. Further, I imagine that as a nascent business the notion that competitors would be so unethical didn't seem to be a top priority. Is it obvious now that they should have caught it? Yeah, thanks to the brilliance of hindsight of course it is. Does that justify it? Hardly.
- jonknee 12y ago
  There's no victim here, this is one extraordinarily rich startup complaining about another extraordinarily rich startup. Meanwhile taxi lobbies complain about them both. To add some perspective, this is 5,560 rides in the last 10 months or ~550 per month or less than 20 per day. There aren't any recent figures, but as of May 2013 they were doing 30,000 rides per week and growing very quickly. A large amount of the cancellations were from a couple people and it also mentioned that when not canceling they took short rides and tried to poach the drivers. It's pretty obvious what a few of the recruiters are doing--asking for rides to be able and pitch the driver, but then canceling when it's a driver who already said no. tl;dr a very small number of sleezy recruiters have gotten under the skin of Lyft.
  - icambron 12y ago
    > There's no victim here, this is one extraordinarily rich startup complaining about another extraordinarily rich startup. That you don't care about the victim does not make them not a victim.

aboodman 12y ago

For pete's sake, it's 5k rides over like 9 months. How many Lyft rides are there per day in SF alone?

mrgordon 12y ago

One more reason to look for a Sidecar or Lyft before an Uber. Usually cheaper too.

edwardhotchkiss 12y ago

In all fairness to my selfish self, that has lived in NYC, SF and finally in LA: Uber (regardless of and possibly because of ) knee-capping other services is now a dominant, helpful service in my life. When I lived in SF and moved to LA I had a problem that only NYC had a solution for: "Many Many Cabs, Everywhere". Two years ago I couldn't go go five miles in traffic without paying $50 and needing cash; and that was if I was somewhere where cabs hung around. Regardless of them being "assholes", it's extremely useless in my life.

mamoswined 12y ago
As someone who is disabled, it truly enables me to have more mobility than I ever have had. I find it truly disturbing when people equate taxis with these services. For those of us who aren't as able to run around hailing cabs or waiting on a dispatch that often never comes, the difference is HUGE. I know they don't accommodate all disabled people yet (wheelchairs for example), but they can serve many disabled people and there is an opportunity to expand the reach.
- edwardhotchkiss 12y ago
  It's comments like these that people with high karma need to be up-voting. I had no idea that they were disabled accommodating and am glad that some are. Glad that they are having a positive impact in your life.
- makomk 12y ago
  Unfortunately, in many areas the existing minicab companies they're competing with do actually accomodate wheelchair users. So Uber and its funders are spending billions to try and replace services with ones that are less accessible for many. (With the amount invested and Uber's current market cap, their investors aren't going to be satisfied with mere coexistence - they need to dominate the market.)
  - mamoswined 12y ago
    If Uber or another service worked with these accessible taxis, it would be a true game changer. Yes, some local taxi services allow you to request wheelchair accessible cars, but you are going to often wait a very long time for them (if they ever come). Also some dispatchers are just not polite about it. Imagine if you could request one with the click of a button and track its arrival? That would be so helpful.

mulcher 12y ago

Honestly.. Lyft needs a better spam filter.

chenluis5 12y ago

Number of people defending Uber and their actions are too large. Why not accept the mistake and take responsibility for it ? Also, YC is no hero. If YC speaks highly of such companies and Uber is using such tactics to gain business all you can say is everything is double talk on this site. I used to hang out a lot on this site but just look at number of shills employed commenting , shifting discussion to compare with Taxi industry when actual issue at hand is unethical practice. Uber is no different than FUCK YOU , FUCK SHARING ECONOMY, give us your money we tank it in founders and select-fews pockets and enjoy. Can't wait to all of this blow over and someone files major lawsuit.

brownbat 12y ago
I agree in principle, I really want better comments in this thread taking Uber to task. (I want the best arguments on both sides.) You lost me when you started name calling though, accusing everyone of being shills. It's the internet, you don't need to pay people to have strong opinions, it's what they do here.

brownbat 12y ago

Maybe charge a deposit? Not trying to blame the victim, just really curious about how to build a business that can't be DOS'd by competitors. Often wondered how a Netflix or Redbox prevents competitors (once Blockbuster now Amazon?) from renting a bunch of DVDs only to return them with scratches. Maybe track problem accounts then ban them is best you can do?

eurleif 12y ago

Does Lyft's TOS prohibit this? If so, couldn't this theoretically be a criminal offense under the CFAA?

CodeWriter23 12y ago
Yes, soliciting or advertising any outside service or product by driver or rider is explicitly forbidden.
tlrobinson 12y ago
CFAA, really? No thanks. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/rebooting-computer-crime-law-part-1-no-prison-time-for-violating-terms-of-service https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/rebooting-computer-cri...

ryan-allen 12y ago

A mandatory cancellation fee would be handy, but of course Uber and Lyft would have to opt-in. I think it'd be fair to charge customers $5 for a cancellation.

CodeWriter23 12y ago
They both charge $5 for a cancellation, but only after 5 minutes.

jonknee 12y ago

Here is what's going on: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Uber-Lyft-Sidecar-put-driver-recruiting-in-high-5190676.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Uber-Lyft-Sidecar-put-... > "I was driving for Lyft in November when I picked up two attractive women," said the driver, who declined to give his name because he fears repercussions from the apps. "Like anybody, we started chatting, but they were sort of awkward. I knew something was up when they didn't tell me clearly where they wanted to go." And this: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhuet/2014/05/30/how-uber-and-lyft-are-trying-to-kill-each-other/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhuet/2014/05/30/how-uber-an... > Another part of the game is knowing the enemy. Uber employees and loyal Lyft drivers regularly try to infiltrate opposing driver ranks for inside information, and often call up a rival car for a ride so they can pitch the driver on switching. The cancellations are probably after they see that they got a driver they had already tried to pitch. A huge portion of them came from just a few recruiters... Seems like an easy fix if Uber wants to fix it, though they may not considering Lyft isn't exactly free from devious ploys: > On Tuesday, the rivals descended upon the humble intersection, where Uber usually hosts car inspections. Lyft started recruiting drivers by hosting daily luncheons in the parking lot (with a free taco truck, pink mustaches ziptied to the chain-link fences and two bouncers in black at the gate).

CodeWriter23 12y ago

It's pretty simple, Uber understands that to win the game, you need the a supply of drivers that just barely exceeds the demand for rides, to avoid surge pricing. To digress for a moment, surge pricing is brilliant in that it gets riders to volunteer to wait a long time for a ride, instead of getting pissed off like they do at Taxis, or give them the choice to pay up for an expedited ride. Anyway, the recruiting strategy worked for them in SF, they recruited so many Lyft drivers that Lyft was almost constantly in "Prime Time" (their name for surge pricing), that riders got upset and switched to Uber. It's at the intersection Business 101 and Econ 101 if you ask me. The only pushback I've seen from Lyft is mobilizing drivers to hand out free ride cards at slammed venues, like music festivals, when Lyft is at maximum Prime Time of 300% and Uber is at 800-1300%. Not a bad strategy, but basically, Uber is giving Lyft a hyper wedgie by cutting right into their supply. To put the cancellations into context, I met a Lyft driver who was recruited by Uber. He told me the same lady was recruiting in his area on an ongoing basis, just catching rides to make the pitch (which is a TOS violation on either platform). He said the recruiter would request a ride, sometimes 4 or 5 times, and keep getting him, then she would cancel shortly afterward when she recognized his name. So yeah, I'm sure some Lyft drivers spent gas, time and miles, but I also believe for the most part, the cancellations occurred in a minute or less. As far as which company are the biggest assholes, I think you need to look at it with some historical context. Uber started out as a company that created a better dispatch system for Black Cars, and got Livery companies and independent Limo drivers to sign on. That was good, because riders and drivers could be paired based on proximity. Combine that with Uber's marketing to increase ridership, and it is an all-around win. The savings/increased business for your average Livery operator more than made up for the Uber commission. Then Lyft comes along and says "Hey, let's open this up to your average joe with his car and car payment". Ok, so what they are doing actually is sucking the equity out of people's cars, because by the time you amortize all the expenses, you're making $10-$15 an hour (on Lyft, Uber you can make more), you might as well work for In-N-Out and get benefits too. Not to mention the insurance issues if you get into a wreck and its your fault (cancellation and no payout on your collision policy). Sure, the network will cover your liability, but only because they have been forced to by regulators. I classify this type of business (and AirBNB too) as "Slumlord 2.0". Slumlords buy an asset and drain the equity out of it for profit. Slumlord 2.0s drain the equity out of someone else's asset for profit. Uber had to counter Lyft with UberX, and get into the Slumlord 2.0 game themselves. Bottom line for me, I drive for them both, and I hate them both. I tolerate them because they enable me to continue to work on my startup, or I guess I should say, reboot of the family business. I can't wait to be done driving for them and become a rider.

USAnum1 12y ago

I don't feel this fits in any existing thread here, so I'll just put it at the root level. Doesn't the "look" at ~2:04 in the video sound inserted, perhaps to make Kalanick sound abrasive? I may just be over analyzing it, after having watched a short documentary on shaping opinions with small manipulations of video interviews awhile back. (I sincerely apologize that I can't find a link). I digress. The fact is Uber has been playing fast and loose, and push is starting to come to shove with regulation. Whether Uber or regulators cave is now the question.

anigbrowl 12y ago
Audio pro here - I record dialog for film and TV. It doesn't sound edited to me at all. Cutting the audio in slightly ahead or behind the camera image is so usual that such cuts have their own names - J cuts sand L cuts, respectively. Doing so provides a sense of editing momentum (which is quite important in news) and rather than being particularly considered it's just a cookie-cutter technique. Bear in mind that TV segments like this are just product to the people who make them, and are assembled with about as much contemplation as a hamburger. When you're cranking these stories out day after day you're not very invested in any of them, just enough to sketch out the issue in an attention grabbing way.

tlrobinson 12y ago

Certainly sketchy behavior by Uber, but also pretty embarrassing that Lyft wasn't able to detect and ban the Uber employee who cancelled 680 rides.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

pbreit 12y ago

This would certainly be a dick move by Uber, even in the land of hyper competition. But how the heck was Lyft unable to foil it?

supahfly_remix 12y ago

Why can't drivers be part of both Lyft and Uber? Doing so probably violates their respective terms of service, but why can't drivers just "disrupt" the sharing economy themselves by being part of both?

bitJericho 12y ago

I'm not sure why a company that engages in illegal behavior would be afraid of engaging in more illegal or (at the very least) fraudulant behavior.

korzun 12y ago

> One Lyft passenger, identified by seven different Lyft drivers as an Uber recruiter, canceled 300 rides from May 26 to June 10. That user's phone number was tied to 21 other accounts, for a total of 1,524 canceled rides. Sounds like Lyft is a shit show. For a service like this, that number should have been black listed within first 3 'rides'.

habosa 12y ago

I just moved from an Uber-only market (Philadelphia) to an Uber and Lyft market (SF) and it was immediately clear to me that these two companies are at war. UberX offers 25% off this summer, Lyft offers 30% off. Lyft announces Lyft Line, Uber beats them to the punch with Uber Pool. The drivers tell me that either company will give you $$$ to switch and that drivers are coveted. Every feature that one gets, the other will imitate. As a consumer it seems that there is basically no difference between the two services, I take whichever has less surge at the moment and/or whichever my friends want to take. It seems like this price war has served to totally commoditize ride sharing; I don't know anyone who has a serious preference between UberX and Lyft (black car and SUV are another story). Do they really think they can squeeze the life out of each other like this? I feel like VCs will just keep pumping money into them and fueling the price war. It seems to me that instead one should focus on really differentiating the service in some way to reverse the commoditization of private, on-demand rides. They either need to make their service preferable in some way to consumers (like Dropbox has done for file sharing) or make it a no-brainer choice for drivers to exclusively drive with them. Not that I'm complaining, this war basically just serves to make private transportation cheaper for consumers like me.

wcummings 12y ago

Since Taxi rides are basically futures contracts for a car ride, why doesn't someone create an agnostic taxi-ride orderbook. Aside from the fact that taxi companies desperately want to avoid market discovery of rates.

seanflyon 12y ago
If you were to ask Uber they would tell you that that is what they did.
- wcummings 12y ago
  Yeah, but it isn't, really. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think they've claimed it is a "real" market, just that pricing programmatically adjusts to demand. Can Uber drivers set their rates, to undercut other Uber drivers?