4 ms·
For me, the appeal that Uber had (when it was active in Vancouver) was that most people didn't use it, and that I didn't have to pay at the point of delivery (n
by danudey 12y ago
For me, the appeal that Uber had (when it was active in Vancouver) was that most people didn't use it, and that I didn't have to pay at the point of delivery (nor tip). On a Friday night, leaving a venue at midnight with my wife and a friend, we knew from experience that waiting for a cab was going to be an hour at least, and probably more, as taxis were surging into the city with their fares and then rushing back out to get more fares. We were just out of the way enough that no cab was going to want to carry us from A to B, heading from a poorly-travelled area of town to another. On top of that, it was going to be hugely expensive, and splitting the fare is a hassle.
Instead, I summoned an Uber. It got there in fifteen minutes (and would have been sooner except for traffic), took us home, then continued on to drop off our friend. Minimal hassle, a comfortable ride, and impressed the fuck out of our friend. I was sold.
Then in Seattle earlier this year, we used Uber again. Our first trip was perfect (as we'd expected). Our second trip, the driver didn't even show up. We watched him on the app for 20 minutes; mostly not moving, and then driving around, never getting closer than ten blocks. My friend called him (another handy feature!) and he said that he'd already picked us up? Or someone up? He'd already done a fare, anyway, and apparently we weren't part of his plans. My friend got billed though, and had to contest the charge with Uber (which they quickly reversed).
Had we been excessively drunk (as I'm sure a lot of people were that weekend) we might not have even noticed. We would have flagged down a cab (which we eventually did) but forgotten about our uber ride entirely. The driver would have gotten paid, we'd have been out fifteen bucks, and no one would be the wiser.
Uber has gotten shady, for sure, but with their explosive growth it's hard to believe that the drivers aren't getting shady as well. Uber needs to be held to the regulations (which may need updating to support newer models of transportation), but they also need to start behaving like a real company and not an insecure frat boy trying to bully everyone into doing things his way. It's time for their investors to step up and start protecting their investment, and force Uber to stop exposing the company to lawsuits and horrible public image.
And it's time for people to stop using Uber until they straighten out their deal.
- rayiner 12y agoYou know, I don't even think anything is wrong with Uber's public image. Its in their shareholders' best interest to be free from insurance requirements, etc, although I think ultimately they'll have to capitulate to those. And some of the "poaching" of Lyft drivers--well that's great. The drivers should go to whoever pays the most, and agreeing to not poach drivers would be anticompetitive. I think Uber is great. I just see no reason to aggrandize them or to demonize the cab industry.
- Alupis 12y agoare we all forgetting just last week (i think at least) both companies accused each other of the same thing here... only Uber's documentation about it leaked. Seems both are up to no good.
- rayiner 12y agoThe whole premise of this article is that "siphoning drivers away from Lyft" is wrong. Its not. Isn't "not poaching" what everyone is up in arms about when Apple and Google did it?
- jeffdavis 12y agoCanceling rides is the bigger problem.
- giovani 12y agoExactly. That's more than impolite, it's unfair IMO. If the only way they can offer a better service is by screwing with the competition, well, they aren't doing a very good job then. Otherwise they could spend their time looking for ways to improve their services.
- JoachimSchipper 12y agoMaking a better offer is fine. Using your competitor's service to summon their employees so that you can make a better offer is, at least, impolite.