# 2022 year-end (Q4) closeout promotion: All rides just $0.22/minute & 100% to drivers, Uber sees no 4Q mobility revenue



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Hypothetical scenario and follow up questions:

*2022 year-end (Q4) closeout promotion:*

*All rides just $0.22/minute*
*100% to drivers*
*Uber sees no 4Q mobility revenue*
So, let's say starting in October, Uber decides, for PR and driver community goodwill reasons, to outcompete Lyft and bury them once and for all by offering straight $0.22/minute (homage to year 2022) with $0.00 distance fees and they're gonna give 100% of all customer payments to the drivers, but no in app tips are accepted because they want to ensure the customers feel the guilt and charity like Lyft, for the rest of 2022 (all 4th quarter).

Are you down for that? Will you participate?
If so, then how much?
If not, then why not?


----------



## _Tron_ (Feb 9, 2020)

The quest and streak type promotions at their core are to deprive the other TNC from getting rides. Uber wants to eliminate Lyft, and vice versa.

I don't support that. As both a consumer and driver I want choice. I want both Uber and Lyft to survive. Just as I want both Intel and AMD to thrive. That kind of thing.

(btw, I used the microprocessor example because at an Intel seminar one time I stood up and expressed my dissatisfaction at Intel's strategy to kill off AMD. The lightweight PR gal conducting the seminar went to pieces. Later I was the winner of the hand out prize for attending. An array of processor upgrades were available. When asked my choice I said "The most expensive one". PR gal had another meltdown.)


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

_Tron_ said:


> The quest and streak type promotions at their core is to deprive the other TNC from getting rides.


It's all loyalty programs and virtually every consumer facing retailer uses one. Any business who's giving some customers discounts based on their personal volume and repeat visits and repeat purchases/transactions each week or month or year is marketing on loyalty to choke out competition.


----------



## 25rides7daysaweek (Nov 20, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> Hypothetical scenario and follow up questions:
> 
> *2022 year-end (Q4) closeout promotion:*
> 
> ...


.22 per minute and 1 share per I might consider...
Ps I get .21 minute as it is


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

_Tron_ said:


> The quest and streak type promotions at their core is to deprive the other TNC from getting rides. Uber wants to eliminate Lyft, and vice versa.
> 
> I don't support that. As both a consumer and driver I want choice. I want both Uber and Lyft to survive. Just as I want both Intel and AMD to thrive. That kind of thing.
> 
> (btw, I used the microprocessor example because at an Intel seminar one time I stood up and expressed my dissatisfaction at Intel's strategy to kill off AMD. The lightweight PR gal conducting the seminar went to pieces. Later I was the winner of the hand out prize for attending. An array of processor upgrades were available. When asked my choice I said "The most expensive one". PR gal had another meltdown.)


I don't think Intel ever wanted to completely kill of AMD, they wanted a WEAK and IRRELEVANT AMD. 

Intel's well aware that having a virtual monopoly would make them targets for anti-trust lawsuits. Thus they needed a "competitor", albeit a very weak and irrelevant one.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

25rides7daysaweek said:


> .22 per minute and 1 share per I might consider...
> Ps I get .21 minute as it is





Heisenburger said:


> with $0.00 distance fees


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> Hypothetical scenario and follow up questions:
> 
> *2022 year-end (Q4) closeout promotion:*
> 
> ...


It would be disastrous for the drivers.

What good is getting 100% of a tiny pie that isn't large enough to keep you from starving to death?

That was the problem during the 2014-2016 fare cuts. Drivers were getting 75% of an ever-shrinking pie.

The biggest winners would be the pax.

If Uber were to bury Lyft they'd have to deal with FTC anti-trust lawsuits.


----------



## New2This (Dec 27, 2015)

Heisenburger said:


> Hypothetical scenario and follow up questions:
> 
> *2022 year-end (Q4) closeout promotion:*
> 
> ...


I'm bored so I'll play.

1. NOT A ****ING PRAYER!!!!

2. At least double that. No matter what answer I give you'll critique it for being unrealistic. 

3. Because that's $13.20/hour. Sorry my time's worth much more than that.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> What good is getting 100% of a tiny pie that isn't large enough to keep you from starving to death?


Perhaps we could ask these guys that same question. Surely they have the answer!:


pvtandrewmalone said:


> They should put everyone to 80/20 after a certain number of rides.





NJKing said:


> How about 80/20 on DTS rate for qualified drivers with 8 years or newer cars?





B - uberlyftdriver said:


> 80/20 fare split
> 
> its what i signed up for, back in the day





Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> And, anyone bringing up "Well, when I started it was 20/80" you are right





Paul Vincent said:


> But the 20/80 split would mean Uber would have to raise rates in order for them to get more money and that would be good for us!


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> What good is getting 100% of a tiny pie that isn't large enough to keep you from starving to death?


Or maybe the people signing onto this petition:

Uber used to take 25% of every ride, now they take anywhere from 50 to 70%


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> Perhaps we could ask these guys that same question. Surely they have the answer!:


First of all, don't misconstrue my pie comment to mean I don't care about capping Uber's cut at 20 or 25%, because I most definitely do care. On many occasions I've advocated that the govt cap Uber's cut at 20 or 25% of EVERY CENT the pax pays including booking/marketplace fees.

While I've been advocating a govt-mandated cap I've also been saying that capping Uber's cut in of itself isn't enough to protect the drivers' earnings from being cut. The drivers also need the govt to mandate MINIMUM PAY RATES similar to what Seattle has. Minimum pay rates protect driver earnings from any attempt by Uber to slash pax fares which in turn slashes driver pay rates.

From 2014-2016 Uber and Lyft continually cut pax fares to gain marketshare and "grow" the rideshare business. The result was that drivers' earnings plummeted despite the fact they were getting 75% of the fares.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Heisenburger said:


> 100% to drivers


Based on poll results thus far, I feel like folks aren't noticing that *they're getting 100% of what the customer pays* in this deal.


----------



## New2This (Dec 27, 2015)

Heisenburger said:


> Based on poll results thus far, I feel like folks aren't noticing that *they're getting 100% of what the customer pays* in this deal.


And? I noticed but 100% of not enough is still not enough.

I've long said Uber could raise rates, at least in my old market of D.C. area. 

People liked the convenience of "I press a button and a car comes get me" aspect.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Heisenburger said:


> 100% to drivers


Based on poll results thus far, I feel like folks aren't noticing that *they're getting 100% of what the customer pays* in this deal. How can this be a bad deal when you would get literally 100%?! Where are all my hardliner 80/20 gospel preachers out there?!


----------



## Daisey77 (Jan 13, 2016)

Heisenburger said:


> Based on poll results thus far, I feel like folks aren't noticing that *they're getting 100% of what the customer pays* in this deal. How can this be a bad deal when you would get literally 100%?! Where are all my hardliner 80/20 gospel preachers out there?!


The 80/20 was based off minute and mile rates. Your hypothetical scenario is based off just minutes. For comparison purposes you'd need equal scenarios. In my market, uberX gets $0.60 a mile and $0.20 a minute. The $0.01 a minute does not offset $0.60 a mile.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Daisey77 said:


> The 80/20 was based off minute and mile rates. Your hypothetical scenario is based off just minutes. For comparison purposes you'd need equal scenarios. In my market, uberX gets $0.60 a mile and $0.20 a minute. The $0.01 a minute does not offset $0.60 a mile.


Oh! So it's not about percentages of what the rider is charged! And it never really has been!


----------



## SpinalCabbage (Feb 5, 2020)

No.


----------



## Daisey77 (Jan 13, 2016)

Heisenburger said:


> Oh! So it's not about percentages of what the rider is charged! And it never really has been!


🙄 dude I seriously think you would argue with a wall. Regardless of how I or anyone else responds to you, it will never suffice


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Daisey77 said:


> 🙄 dude I seriously think you would argue with a wall. Regardless of how I or anyone else responds to you, it will never suffice


It's okay to disagree. Just explain specifically why you agree with the percentage model that so many members on here regurgitate like it's the gospel.


----------



## New2This (Dec 27, 2015)

Heisenburger said:


> Based on poll results thus far, I feel like folks aren't noticing that *they're getting 100% of what the customer pays* in this deal. How can this be a bad deal when you would get literally 100%?! Where are all my hardliner 80/20 gospel preachers out there?!


It's a faulty premise which is why few people responded and you had to resurrect it.


----------



## Diamondraider (Mar 13, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> I don't think Intel ever wanted to completely kill of AMD, they wanted a WEAK and IRRELEVANT AMD.
> 
> Intel's well aware that having a virtual monopoly would make them targets for anti-trust lawsuits. Thus they needed a "competitor", albeit a very weak and irrelevant one.


And that is why Intel is getting schooled by AMD in recent years. The grasshopper is now the teacher.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

New2This said:


> It's a faulty premise


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

One of my favorite attempts:



Boca Ratman said:


> There are several reasons why people express dissatisfaction in the manner of the split.
> 
> 1) many of us have been driving since there was a cut. I myself am an 80% er, meaning I used to get 80% of the fare. Rate cuts happened and they sucked but it was an easier pill to swallow knowing we were still getting 75 or 80% of the fare charged. This included surge, we got 75 or 80% of the total fare
> 
> ...


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Heisenburger said:


> One of my favorite attempts:












As is typical of your MO of using 
irrelevant citations, the post of mine you quoted is not relevant to this thread. 

Find a more productive way to get attention when you crave it.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Boca Ratman said:


> View attachment 674808
> 
> 
> As is typical of your MO of using
> ...


20% blah blah blah ... 80% blah blah blah ...

Sounds like someone who's just bitter that they're no longer overpaid.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Heisenburger said:


> 20% blah blah blah ... 80% blah blah blah ...


Still irrelevant to this thread.




Heisenburger said:


> Sounds like someone who's just bitter that they're no longer overpaid.


Oh, I'm still over paid. Way over paid, it's quite sweet actually. 

How do you interpret my pointing out that the quoted text of mine you posted is from another thread and irrelevant?


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

I'll play:

Even if I could turn the car off and the passenger pushed, I wouldn't drive for 22 cents a minute. My time is worth more than that (and yet, here I am replying to this).


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Boca Ratman said:


> How do you interpret my pointing out that the quoted text of mine you posted is from another thread and irrelevant?





Boca Ratman said:


> Since my Pay was initially based on a percentage it is ingrained in me to compare the split.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Irrelevant.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Heisenburger said:


> Are you down for that? Will you participate?
> If so, then how much?
> If not, then why not?


Explain the relevance


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Boca Ratman said:


> Irrelevant.


Says you alone.


----------



## Daisey77 (Jan 13, 2016)




----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Boca Ratman said:


> hey @Heisenburger ,
> I heard you beat your wife and kids





Heisenburger said:


> Yes. Yes.





Boca Ratman said:


> if this is true you a pos and deserve to be someone's prison wife





Heisenburger said:


> Agreed.



I can quote out of context, irrelevant text too.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

You'd never survive in front of a judge in a courtroom.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Heisenburger said:


> You'd never survive in front of a judge in a courtroom.


Says the admitted thief, and serial abuser.

Credibility.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Droning on about the good ol days of 80/20 literally all year. Sure sounds like someone strenuously advocating for a percentage split model. Probably an ex-cabbie.



Boca Ratman said:


> In the olden days we got 80% percent of the "fare." The other 20% was paid to Uber as a commission





Boca Ratman said:


> Uber must hate you, they only get get 35-38% of mine 😆 🤣 😂 occasionally a few percent more and often less especially if I long haul.





Boca Ratman said:


> Here's the thing, they've almost taken 50% of short rides every when then they took 20%





Boca Ratman said:


> Here a minimum fare used to pay me 3.20 when I made 80%





Boca Ratman said:


> So while I made 80% of the fare, I only made 47% of what the pax paid.





Boca Ratman said:


> I was mainly just making a joke that they 'ONLY TAKE" almost 40%.





Boca Ratman said:


> It was a 70/30 difference a few months ago.





Boca Ratman said:


> They've been screwing us since I singed up in 2015. When I made 80% they still manged to take 50% plus.





Boca Ratman said:


> I'd argue that the way for them make money is to go back to a simple commission based pay structure and stop trying to reinvent pay formulas. Do away with quests, and assorted bonus, be transparent with the surges pay drivers 75% and they could cut the % as quests. 50 rides get you 80%, 100 rides 90% or whatever.





Boca Ratman said:


> Pax pays $5.00 fee. I got 3.40
> That's a 32/68 split.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Heisenburger said:


> Droning on about the good ol days of 80/20 literally all year. Sure sounds like someone strenuously advocating for a percentage split model. Probably an ex-cabbie.


Hey numb nuts, still isn't relevant to you make beleive scenario. Not even close. Wtf are you even going on about. 

You imported my quote from another unrelated thread. 

I hadn't yet replied to this one, I read the 1st post and thought it was an asinine make beleive scenario. 

Are you trying to steal credibility by pretending I replied? You are an admitted thief but this is just frigen weird, really weird, even by your standards. 

I am not that important, I can't give your fantasy credibility. 

You can hang out in the Neighborhood Of Make Believe all you want. Leave me out of it. 













Heisenburger said:


> Hypothetical scenario and follow up questions:
> 
> *2022 year-end (Q4) closeout promotion:*
> 
> ...





Heisenburger said:


> Droning on about the good ol days of 80/20 literally all year


You used literally wrong, dumb ass.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Heisenburger said:


> Oh! So it's not about percentages of what the rider is charged! And it never really has been!


Still beat your wife? 

Jfc. Come up with something new.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Boca Ratman said:


> Hey numb nuts, still isn't relevant to you make beleive scenario. Not even close. Wtf are you even going on about.
> 
> You imported my quote from another unrelated thread.
> 
> ...


Such a strong reaction leads credence to my conclusions.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Heisenburger said:


> Such a strong reaction leads credence to my conclusions.


Strong reaction? 

You smoking pcp tonight?


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Heisenburger said:


> Looks at least 14 is personally my minimum.


Comments like this... 

Wonder why you're so adamant about giving children rides. 🤔


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Boca Ratman said:


> Comments like this...
> 
> Wonder why you're so adamant about giving children rides. 🤔


I'm not a fan of age discrimination. Maybe you are, no worries for me.



> *Non-discrimination policy*
> 
> In accordance with our community guidelines, Uber does not tolerate discrimination against riders or drivers based on:
> 
> ...





Heisenburger said:


> "Looks at least 14" is personally my minimum.
> 
> IDGAF because I'm not selling them mind altering chemicals and I don't have anything to lose.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Yeah, okay... your derogatory posts on the mentally handicapped and the mentally ill kinda shoot this defense in the foot. 

Really weird that you brought up giving them mind altering substances unprovoked 🤔 


Hard for me to believe an admitted thief, someone who admits they simply ignore rules they don't agree with. Some one who brags about breaking laws. Someone who named themselves after a fictional drug dealer & murderer.

I'm glad my children don't live in Atlanta.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

@Heisenburger did you know, it's a violation of federal law to roll your odometer back, that makes it a felony.















I guess I need to add admitted felon to your list.
Come to think of it, defrauding Uber by giving ghost rides to complete quests for probably 1000s of dollars certainly qualifies as a felony. The felony threshold is $500 for theft. 

I'll never understand why criminals like you brag about your crimes online. Sentences should be double for stupidity. 

I bet a creative prosecutor could get you with possession of a firearm while committing a felony is you get pulled over while carrying, which you've admitted to doing most of the time. In FL that's a mandory 10 years. 

So, let's see. 

● Multiple admitted felonies.

● Admitted armed felon

● Admitted thief. 

● Admits to ignoring rules/laws. you disagree with.

● Openly mocks mentally disabled.
persons

● Openly mocks mentally ill
persons

● Abusive online behavior

● Unanswered spousal abuse allegations

● Unanswered child abuse
allegations

● Questionable behavior with 
children

● Multiple instances of
distinguishing reality from
fantasy

● Online moniker after a well
known fictional drug dealing
murder ( Considering the above
this is no small matter)

● Overly assertive in defying &
denouncing Uber's 
unaccompanied minor rule.

● Unprompted denial of giving a 14
year olds drugs. (This is kind 
of alarming, actually,)

I feel like I'm forgetting something.
Any other crimes you want to brag about? 


Gosh, all this revealed in what, 5-6 weeks? I can only imagine what other heinous things we'll find out in time.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Boca Ratman said:


> Hard for me to believe an admitted thief, someone who admits they simply ignore rules they don't agree with. Some one who brags about breaking laws. Someone who named themselves after a fictional drug dealer & murderer.


You just might be the founding member of my fan club. I'm eternally honored.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Heisenburger said:


> You just might be the founding member of my fan club. I'm eternally honored.


Per my last post:


Boca Ratman said:


> ● Multiple instances of
> distinguishing reality from
> fantasy


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Boca Ratman said:


> @Heisenburger did you know, it's a violation of federal law to roll your odometer back, that makes it a felony.
> View attachment 674928
> View attachment 674929
> 
> ...


I suppose we should add stalker to the list.

















● Obsessive online stalking &
harassment


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

So, let's see.

● Multiple admitted felonies.

● Admitted armed felon

● Admitted thief.

● Admits to ignoring rules/laws. you disagree with.

● Openly mocks mentally disabled.
persons

● Openly mocks mentally ill
persons

● Abusive online behavior

● Unanswered spousal abuse allegations

● Unanswered child abuse
allegations

● Questionable behavior with 
children

● Multiple instances of
distinguishing reality from
fantasy

● Online moniker after a well
known fictional drug dealing
murder ( Considering the above
this is no small matter)

● Overly assertive in defying &
denouncing Uber's 
unaccompanied minor rule.

● Unprompted denial of giving a 14
year olds drugs. (This is kind
of alarming, actually,)

● Obsessive online stalking &
harassment


Updated list of crimes and troubling criminal behavior. 

Wow, it sure didn't take long to add to the list.


----------

