# Uber Surge-Pricing Antitrust Suit Green-Lighted by Judge



## arto71

*http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...t-lawsuit-over-pricing-green-lighted-by-judge*

Uber Technologies Inc.'s "genius" just backfired on the company and its co-founder Travis Kalanick.

U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff in Manhattan on Thursday denied Kalanick's bid to dismiss a proposed class-action lawsuit claiming the technology in Uber's popular ride-hailing app is used to illegally coordinate high surge-pricing fares.

Rakoff rejected Kalanick's assertion that a conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of drivers was "wildly implausible" and "physically impossible," an argument the executive made in filings since the suit was filed in December.

"The capacity to orchestrate such an agreement is the 'genius' of Mr. Kalanick and his company, which, through the magic of smartphone technology, can invite hundreds of thousands of drivers in far-flung locations to agree to Uber's terms," the judge said.

The ruling allows Spencer Meyer, a customer in Connecticut, to move forward with his claim that Uber's pricing algorithm violates antitrust laws used to protect consumers from price manipulation.

Meyer's lawsuit seeks damages on behalf of millions of U.S. riders who rely on the world's largest ride-hailing company, and opens a new line of legal attacks on sharing-economy businesses. Uber faces other lawsuits and regulatory challenges over its business model, including demands by its drivers to be classified as employees instead of independent contractors.

*Fundamentally Flawed*
Uber argues the conspiracy described in the New York complaint and ruling would be physically impossible under the antitrust law, and that if Uber lost at trial then thousands of drivers would be forced to pay damages. The company also contends the case is fundamentally flawed because Kalanick would have to personally compete with Uber drivers for rides in order for the type of conspiracy alleged in the case to be true.

"These claims are unwarranted and have no basis in fact. In just five years since its founding, Uber has increased competition, lowered prices, and improved service," Uber said in an e-mailed statement.

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and other regulators have also complained about Uber's pricing algorithm, which ensures standard fares under normal conditions. In certain situations, such as heavy traffic, bad weather or on holidays, the fares rise sometimes to many times the normal rate in a practice known as surge pricing. The company pledged to limit the increases in emergencies under an agreement with Schneiderman in 2014.

*Price Fixer*
Meyer alleged in his complaint that Kalanick designed the company "to be a price fixer" because its drivers "do not compete" but rather charge fares set by the algorithm. Uber takes a cut of the fares. The business plan amounts to an antitrust scheme because the drivers, despite charging the same prices, are supposedly independent service providers, according to Meyer.

"Kalanick has long insisted that Uber is not a transportation company and that it does not employ drivers," Meyer's lawyers said in his complaint. "Instead, Uber is a technology company, whose chief product is a smartphone app."

Rakoff said Meyer has plausibly alleged a conspiracy and the case should go to trial.

*'Disguise Itself'*
"The fact that Uber goes to such lengths to portray itself -- one might even say disguise itself -- as the mere purveyor of an 'app' cannot shield it from the consequences of its operating as much more," the judge said.

At this point in the case, the plaintiff doesn't need to present "direct, 'smoking gun' evidence of a conspiracy," Rakoff said.

Evan Rawley, a professor at Columbia Business School, still sees the risk to Uber as remote.

"One always has to worry about lawsuits, but this one is so far-fetched that I wouldn't lose much sleep over it if I were Uber," Rawley said. "However, if the plaintiff won, it would indeed be potentially costly to Uber since it would interfere with how the core of their business operates."

Andrew Schmidt, Meyer's lawyer, didn't immediately respond to voicemail and e-mail messages seeking comment on the ruling.

*Drivers' Trial*
Uber is set for a trial in June in San Francisco federal court in a case brought by drivers seeking to collect pay and benefits as employees. A victory for the drivers may upend Uber's business model and cut into its more than $60 billion valuation.

The ride-hailing service launched in 2010, has grown rapidly and now has a presence in 65 countries.

Uber and its competitors are able to keep down their costs by using contractors rather than employees. Typically, contractors pay their own expenses and aren't protected by minimum wage and overtime laws. Companies don't pay for their unemployment insurance, workers compensation or Social Security.

The case is Meyer v. Kalanick, 1:15-cv-09796, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).


----------



## SafeT

It isn't much of a stretch to imagine uber management sitting in a plush conference room scheming about screwing riders with surge pricing during holidays and other high demand events. And the fact that they surge an entire city with completely arbitrary multiples of surge pricing and don't bother to properly educate the riders about surge. A reasonable person could call that a conspiracy.

There is a reason why taxi prices are regulated and price gouging for gas and water during natural disasters is illegal.


----------



## D Town

I'm a little confused how Uber is supposed to be colluding with drivers to create surges. I sure as hell never got any notifications on that one.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Next Uber is going to try to say that drivers set the prices.


----------



## Bart McCoy

D Town said:


> I'm a little confused how Uber is supposed to be colluding with drivers to create surges. I sure as hell never got any notifications on that one.


Im thoroughly confused

"conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of drivers"

hahah right. We can't even get more than 20 people in at a protest.

But looks like this lawsuit is NOT for the drivers,but for the riders. And will demand money back from Uber AND the drivers???????


----------



## volksie

Bart McCoy said:


> Im thoroughly confused
> 
> "conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of drivers"
> 
> hahah right. We can't even get more than 20 people in at a protest.
> 
> But looks like this lawsuit is NOT for the drivers,but for the riders. And will demand money back from Uber AND the drivers???????


Slowly but surely, piece by piece, you're starting to get it. The stories about this lawsuit against TRAVIS are very informative. Remember, Uber isn't named in this suit.


----------



## Brooklyn

I don't think they mean Uber directly colluded with drivers by actually having meetings with each but colluded in the sense "hey look you can make 5x the regular price on a trip if you join our app during certain times!" And stuff like that. Like drivers knowingly signed up to catch these "surges"


----------



## USArmy31B30

If Meyer wins Uber will say "Oops!" Here's your money back, drivers pay up!!!


But even with surge fare a pax took once in a while, OVERALL, ridesharing is still cheaper than a cab if we compare the total amount paid by a pax taking a taxi for every trip for 6 months to one year... 

The problem with Uber pax is, they complained about the surge fair because they paid a higher price ONCE in a Blue Moon and almost no one ever complains about the taxi fare even though they charge a higher fair than a rideshare rates. They also had a fare hike almost every year!!! I guess if the Taxi Co adds a few cents here and there and pax doesn't notice, it is a fair game? Correct me if I'm wrong...


----------



## Brooklyn

USArmy31B30 said:


> If Meyer wins Uber will say "Oops!" Here's your money back, drivers pay up!!!
> 
> But even with surge fare a pax took once in a while, OVERALL, ridesharing is still cheaper than a cab if we compare the total amount paid by a pax taking a taxi for every trip for 6 months to one year...
> 
> The problem with Uber pax is, they complained about the surge fair because they paid a higher price ONCE in a Blue Moon and almost no one ever complains about the taxi fare even though they charge a higher fair than a rideshare rates. They also had a fare hike almost every year!!! I guess if the Taxi Co adds a few cents here and there and pax doesn't notice, it is a fair game? Correct me if I'm wrong...


Well Uber is able to artificially keep their prices low because they don't have the same over head as other taxi services.. So yea if you're not gonna follow the rules of course you can afford a cheaper service. Dude I could sell 50 cent beers all day everyday if you come to my bar. My bar as in my house because who cares about having any liquor licenses or any of that?

And no. Do not try to strike fear in Uber drivers hearts by saying some ridiculous statement like "Uber will tell drivers to pay the customers back"... Don't do it. Please.


----------



## UberX_Dave

Violation of anti-trust law and price fixing is a very serious issue in US.
My previous employer was accused of price fixing. 
CEO went to jail for 1 year and company paid 500 million fine to US government.


----------



## ubershiza

I AM A GENIUS!
MY PLAN TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD WILL NOT FAIL!


----------



## volksie

UberX_Dave said:


> Violation of anti-trust law and price fixing is a very serious issue in US.
> My previous employer was accused of price fixing.
> CEO went to jail for 1 year and company paid 500 million fine to US government.


Sweeet...Some jail time, a stool for the corner of his cell and a dunce hat.


----------



## D Town

ubershiza said:


> View attachment 34227
> 
> I AM A GENIUS!
> MY PLAN TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD WILL NOT FAIL!


----------



## volksie

Brooklyn said:


> I don't think they mean Uber directly colluded with drivers by actually having meetings with each but colluded in the sense "hey look you can make 5x the regular price on a trip if you join our app during certain times!" And stuff like that. Like drivers knowingly signed up to catch these "surges"


You described this case perfectly in two sentences. It's one of the most peculiar cases I've ever heard of. I can't wait to see Travis on "The Stand"!


----------



## Buckiemohawk

They could use this forum as evidence of drivers trying to manipulate surge


----------



## arto71

Buckiemohawk said:


> They could use this forum as evidence of drivers trying to manipulate surge


*http://gothamist.com/2016/04/01/ubers_surge_pricing_lawsuit.php

"Spencer Meyer, a Connecticut resident, filed suit in December 2015, claiming that "Uber has a simple but illegal business plan: to fix prices among competitors and take a cut of the profits. Kalanick is the proud architect of that business plan." His lawyers argue that because Uber's drivers are all technically independent contractors and therefore competitors, using the app's pricing algorithm makes them complicit in an antitrust conspiracy organized by Kalanick. They also allege that surge pricing "artificially manipulates supply and demand, guaranteeing sharply higher fares for drivers who would otherwise compete against one another on price."

Referencing reports That Uber drivers manipulate the app to create a false lack of supply and trigger surge pricing, the suit accuses Uber of encouraging drivers to log out of the app to show less supply, and alleges that some drivers stay offline during non-surge times to trigger a surge."*
" reports" is a link to Showa50 's video
*http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2015/05...shows-how-to-manipulate-prices/5871432040834/
*
and reference link
*http://www.whosdrivingyou.org/blog/heres-the-proof-uber-drivers-are-ripping-off-its-customers*


----------



## Bart McCoy

That Uber drivers manipulate the app to create a false lack of supply and trigger surge pricing, the suit accuses Uber of encouraging drivers to log out of the app to show less supply, and alleges that some drivers stay offline during non-surge times to trigger a surge."
*****************************
Well yes drivers do log out during non surge. That's me. However I have no control over making it surge. 

Exactly how/where does Uber encourage drivers to log out of the app??


----------



## Cvi

It is the relentless price cuts that are exasperating the problem of driver demand and surge pricing. Who wants to drive for so little money? The solution, I believe, is to raise the base fares to like $1.35/mile .20 cents/minute minimum. Then cap the surges at 2.0x. There's no reason for them to be any higher. And there wouldn't be one if base fares were more fairly priced.


----------



## D Town

Cvi said:


> It is the relentless price cuts that are exasperating the problem of driver demand and surge pricing. Who wants to drive for so little money? The solution, I believe, is to raise the base fares to like $1.35/mile .20 cents/minute minimum. Then cap the surges at 2.0x. There's no reason for them to be any higher. And there wouldn't be one if base fares were more fairly priced.


If you're capping the surge at 2x then the mileage needs to be closer to $2.00. No less than $1.80 and .40 cents a minute with a minimum fare of $6.00. Also if a driver is more than 5 miles from a ping they get paid at LEAST the .75 cents a mile it cost to get to that pax for the dead miles unless the driver cancels. Do those things and I'll drive again and take just about every ping. I enjoyed driving. I DIDN'T like the feeling of being bent over and told to shut up and take it dry.


----------



## JasonB

Price fixing?

Some of these pax are just unbelievable.

It's not enough that they have a near constant stream of drivers willing to take them anywhere and do
anything for them for .30-.90 cents a mile with just the push of a button.

That one time they have to pay 2.0x (still equating to less than 1/2 the cost of a cab) surge they scream 'price fixing'.

How about this pax?

If you don't want to pay surge pricing, you have 2 simple options that won't force you to lose a few of those precious pennies:

1. Stay home

2. Wait 10 minutes for prices to come down

Sheesh. What a bunch of babies.


----------



## IUberGR

If you don't want to pay the fare as a rider, DON'T. If you don't want to take the fare as a driver DON'T. #freedom



SafeT said:


> It isn't much of a stretch to imagine uber management sitting in a plush conference room scheming about screwing riders with surge pricing during holidays and other high demand events. And the fact that they surge an entire city with completely arbitrary multiples of surge pricing and don't bother to properly educate the riders about surge. A reasonable person could call that a conspiracy.
> 
> There is a reason why taxi prices are regulated and price gouging for gas and water during natural disasters is illegal.


you 


SafeT said:


> It isn't much of a stretch to imagine uber management sitting in a plush conference room scheming about screwing riders with surge pricing during holidays and other high demand events. And the fact that they surge an entire city with completely arbitrary multiples of surge pricing and don't bother to properly educate the riders about surge. A reasonable person could call that a conspiracy.
> 
> There is a reason why taxi prices are regulated and price gouging for gas and water during natural disasters is illegal.


----------



## SEAL Team 5

arto71 said:


> *http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...t-lawsuit-over-pricing-green-lighted-by-judge*
> 
> Uber Technologies Inc.'s "genius" just backfired on the company and its co-founder Travis Kalanick.
> 
> U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff in Manhattan on Thursday denied Kalanick's bid to dismiss a proposed class-action lawsuit claiming the technology in Uber's popular ride-hailing app is used to illegally coordinate high surge-pricing fares.
> 
> Rakoff rejected Kalanick's assertion that a conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of drivers was "wildly implausible" and "physically impossible," an argument the executive made in filings since the suit was filed in December.
> 
> "The capacity to orchestrate such an agreement is the 'genius' of Mr. Kalanick and his company, which, through the magic of smartphone technology, can invite hundreds of thousands of drivers in far-flung locations to agree to Uber's terms," the judge said.
> 
> The ruling allows Spencer Meyer, a customer in Connecticut, to move forward with his claim that Uber's pricing algorithm violates antitrust laws used to protect consumers from price manipulation.
> 
> Meyer's lawsuit seeks damages on behalf of millions of U.S. riders who rely on the world's largest ride-hailing company, and opens a new line of legal attacks on sharing-economy businesses. Uber faces other lawsuits and regulatory challenges over its business model, including demands by its drivers to be classified as employees instead of independent contractors.
> 
> *Fundamentally Flawed*
> Uber argues the conspiracy described in the New York complaint and ruling would be physically impossible under the antitrust law, and that if Uber lost at trial then thousands of drivers would be forced to pay damages. The company also contends the case is fundamentally flawed because Kalanick would have to personally compete with Uber drivers for rides in order for the type of conspiracy alleged in the case to be true.
> 
> "These claims are unwarranted and have no basis in fact. In just five years since its founding, Uber has increased competition, lowered prices, and improved service," Uber said in an e-mailed statement.
> 
> New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and other regulators have also complained about Uber's pricing algorithm, which ensures standard fares under normal conditions. In certain situations, such as heavy traffic, bad weather or on holidays, the fares rise sometimes to many times the normal rate in a practice known as surge pricing. The company pledged to limit the increases in emergencies under an agreement with Schneiderman in 2014.
> 
> *Price Fixer*
> Meyer alleged in his complaint that Kalanick designed the company "to be a price fixer" because its drivers "do not compete" but rather charge fares set by the algorithm. Uber takes a cut of the fares. The business plan amounts to an antitrust scheme because the drivers, despite charging the same prices, are supposedly independent service providers, according to Meyer.
> 
> "Kalanick has long insisted that Uber is not a transportation company and that it does not employ drivers," Meyer's lawyers said in his complaint. "Instead, Uber is a technology company, whose chief product is a smartphone app."
> 
> Rakoff said Meyer has plausibly alleged a conspiracy and the case should go to trial.
> 
> *'Disguise Itself'*
> "The fact that Uber goes to such lengths to portray itself -- one might even say disguise itself -- as the mere purveyor of an 'app' cannot shield it from the consequences of its operating as much more," the judge said.
> 
> At this point in the case, the plaintiff doesn't need to present "direct, 'smoking gun' evidence of a conspiracy," Rakoff said.
> 
> Evan Rawley, a professor at Columbia Business School, still sees the risk to Uber as remote.
> 
> "One always has to worry about lawsuits, but this one is so far-fetched that I wouldn't lose much sleep over it if I were Uber," Rawley said. "However, if the plaintiff won, it would indeed be potentially costly to Uber since it would interfere with how the core of their business operates."
> 
> Andrew Schmidt, Meyer's lawyer, didn't immediately respond to voicemail and e-mail messages seeking comment on the ruling.
> 
> *Drivers' Trial*
> Uber is set for a trial in June in San Francisco federal court in a case brought by drivers seeking to collect pay and benefits as employees. A victory for the drivers may upend Uber's business model and cut into its more than $60 billion valuation.
> 
> The ride-hailing service launched in 2010, has grown rapidly and now has a presence in 65 countries.
> 
> Uber and its competitors are able to keep down their costs by using contractors rather than employees. Typically, contractors pay their own expenses and aren't protected by minimum wage and overtime laws. Companies don't pay for their unemployment insurance, workers compensation or Social Security.
> 
> The case is Meyer v. Kalanick, 1:15-cv-09796, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).


Back on Jan 4th in the Thread " Pax gets $1114 ride" I actually said it won't be long before something like this comes up. And if "price fixing" is the term being used, then I wouldn't be surprised in a couple months to see "Federal Grand Jury files many indictments against Uber" Thread. Stay tuned for the next episode of "So You Think That You're Above The Law".


----------



## s9ramirez33

I think this might be a win for drivers. As it's going to force Uber to raise rate and keep them there where driver are profiting. 

I did always find it a bit weird. Price gouging is illegal. Specially when you put the element of security and safety in it. Example a drunk driver was depending on the Uber drive back. Now at the prices he cannot afford it. Example a women at a club was there and now she stranded in the middle of night, only alternative is paying surge price. 

It be nice for a change to see Travis sweat. 

Tip the driver.


----------



## SEAL Team 5

Bart McCoy said:


> That Uber drivers manipulate the app to create a false lack of supply and trigger surge pricing, the suit accuses Uber of encouraging drivers to log out of the app to show less supply, and alleges that some drivers stay offline during non-surge times to trigger a surge."
> *****************************
> Well yes drivers do log out during non surge. That's me. However I have no control over making it surge.
> 
> Exactly how/where does Uber encourage drivers to log out of the app??


No, but this Forum does mention many many many times about not logging in and using the pax app to see how and where the drivers can get the surge up. Social Media never goes away.


----------



## jonnyplastic

*Hey Travis, raise the damn rates to a reasonable rate for both rider and driver ($2.00 and .40). No more surge games. Everyone is happy. It's not that complicated you numbskull! The end. *


----------



## s9ramirez33

jonnyplastic said:


> *Hey Travis, raise the damn rates to a reasonable rate for both rider and driver ($2.00 and .40). No more surge games. Everyone is happy. It's not that complicated you numbskull! The end. *


That's all to it. The market tries to stabilize it self but they keep trying to manipulated it, just for immediate profits.


----------



## Brooklyn

s9ramirez33 said:


> That's all to it. The market tries to stabilize it self but they keep trying to manipulated it, just for immediate profits.


Well it's inevtiable when you financed $10 billion dollars that you must constantly figure ways to suck as much money out of everyone's pockets as possible.


----------



## IUberGR

s9ramirez33 said:


> That's all to it. The market tries to stabilize it self but they keep trying to manipulated it, just for immediate profits.


I don't know.


Buckiemohawk said:


> They could use this forum as evidence of drivers trying to manipulate surge


Yes. Every single rider that ever typed in the multiplier to accept the surge rate is complicite too I did it in Chicago to get to the museum with my wife and son. Easier and cheaper than a taxi. If I didn't like it, I'd find another way.


----------



## stuber

Cvi said:


> It is the relentless price cuts that are exasperating the problem of driver demand and surge pricing. Who wants to drive for so little money? The solution, I believe, is to raise the base fares to like $1.35/mile .20 cents/minute minimum. Then cap the surges at 2.0x. There's no reason for them to be any higher. And there wouldn't be one if base fares were more fairly priced.


It's a taxicab. Why should it be priced at 1/2 of what the taxis charge? Cabs average about $2.50/mile.

The dirty truth is that X drivers WANT these undercutting prices that Uber sets. Why? Can they not compete without a 50% price advantage?

The Uber system is better, isn't it? Why then price it cheaper?


----------



## uberdriverfornow

What Uber has in place is similar to what many sports teams do. It's called Dynamic Pricing. It's really the same thing. 

However, if they wanted to go after Uber they should be going after how Uber and Lyft have that same bs "booking fee". There is no question in my mind they must be colluding to keep that in place to get around the pay structure in place to pay themselves more and us less. That's what they should be suing over. That's collusion and price fixing at it's finest(or worst).


----------



## BurgerTiime

I remember when I was in the office during Valentines they told us they were deliberately not making drivers live so we could all make some money and that made surge skyrocket due to lack of drivers. Now it's so over saturated surge is a scam to the public. There's always more drivers than demand. One giant SCAM!


----------



## 5 Star Guy

It gets better, there is another federal case on whether they are just a taxi, people pay to go places. Yes the features are different as well as the service. Same goes for an HDTV and a 4K/UHD, they are still both TVs, one is better. I think from the sig lines on here, drivers do drive less when there isn't surge. They're defense is it's a computer that sets it, well who set the computer then?


----------



## James Lee

Surge must be needed in order to have drivers for bar crowds. Nobody wants to pick up drunk people in their car without a reward. 

Yes, they need to raise rates reasonably, at the same time, surge must be capped at 2-3x.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

James Lee said:


> Surge must be needed in order to have drivers for bar crowds. Nobody wants to pick up drunk people in their car without a reward.
> 
> Yes, they need to raise rates reasonably, at the same time, surge must be capped at 2-3x.


That's the issue though, like some had said. First being an independent contractor and working when you want is not the same as a taxi driver, although either way you need to work at some point or you don't have a job. It's supposed to be a free market, walk or take a bus or taxi then. No one is insisting a pax use the technology , what did people do before there was an app for that?  Don't be a driver either if the rates are too low, that's why they have the surge, to match the demand with the driver's online. I don't agree with a cap or legislation, let them go out of business then. What made this innovative was the larger number of drivers available compared to taxis. Travass might be better off agreeing to being a taxi and a delivery service in court now than fighting that along with the price fixing case.  Travass just thinks he's too cool for school, which I think will bite him in the Travass, very soon.


----------



## Trebor

uberdriverfornow said:


> Next Uber is going to try to say that drivers set the prices.


We do set prices. We are allowed to accept and deny any ride we want to as a independent contractors. They are not holding a gun to our head saying take this 10x surge.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

Trebor said:


> We do set prices. We are allowed to accept and deny any ride we want to as a independent contractors. They are not holding a gun to our head saying take this 10x surge.


Independent contractors can't set prices, only employees can and even then only management and leaders of the company. That's the issue. The company sets prices based on the number of independent contractors online and if you don't go online often enough you are no longer working at some point. The court needs to address the loophole and catch-22, that or just accept the fact that this is the new norm, although I hate that term.


----------



## JuanIguana

At the end of the day, noone's coerced a single rider into paying Stooge prices. The app clearly indicates they are agreeing to the Stooge price when they accept the ride.

I just want to take TK for a ride the way uber took so many of us for ride when they implied we could make $1,500/week...indefinitely.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

JuanIguana said:


> At the end of the day, noone's coerced a single rider into paying Stooge prices. The app clearly indicates they are agreeing to the Stooge price when they accept the ride.
> 
> I just want to take TK for a ride the way uber took so many of us for ride when they implied we could make $1,500/week...indefinitely.


Make him drive, you sit in back- like the mafia movies.


----------



## JuanIguana

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Make him drive, you sit in back- like the mafia movies.


Oh yeah....one way trip. Expect Deadhead (wink wink nod nod) miles.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Make him drive, you sit in back- like the mafia movies.


Here I used to hide my trade dress from taxi drivers who I thought hated me, imagine how many people hate Travass. He must have a bulletproof suburban and an employee, not an independent contractor driving. Better have that trade dress on the windshield to blend in undercover.


----------



## JuanIguana

5 Star Guy said:


> Independent contractors can't set prices, only employees can and even then only management and leaders of the company. That's the issue. The company sets prices based on the number of independent contractors online and if you don't go online often enough you are no longer working at some point. The court needs to address the loophole and catch-22, that or just accept the fact that this is the new norm, although I hate that term.


Wtf?

I/C's can't set prices?

Get a clue before you look the fool.

Independent professionals set their terms and rates every day in the normal course of business. The customer either agrees to those rates or they don't and terms are renegotiated....or not.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

JuanIguana said:


> Wtf?
> 
> I/C's can't set prices?
> 
> Get a clue before you look the fool.
> 
> Independent professionals set their terms and rates every day in the normal course of business. The customer either agrees to those rates or they don't and terms are renegotiated....or not.


Exactly, terms are renegotiated.   Turning an app on does not set your price either.


----------



## JuanIguana

5 Star Guy said:


> Exactly, terms are renegotiated.   Turning an app on does not set your price either.


Agreed. I thought you were stating categorically that i/c's don't set prices.

Sorry for my harsh come back.


----------



## stuber

Trebor said:


> We do set prices. We are allowed to accept and deny any ride we want to as a independent contractors. They are not holding a gun to our head saying take this 10x surge.


Not exactly. They impose work rules that dictate acceptance and cancellation thresholds. Drivers are penalized for exceeding the limits. Ultimately the non-compliant drivers are deactivated. Plus, Uber withholds destination information. This prevents drivers from assessing the value of trips prior to accepting.

If I'm an independent contractor building houses, then I may choose to pass on bid requests that don't supply me with adequate information. Uber doesn't work that way.

Uber controls price and terms. Until they relinquish that control, then drivers cannot be properly categorized as independent contractors.

Uber's SURGE algorithm is basically BS. They're pushing the buttons.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

stuber said:


> Not exactly. They impose work rules that dictate acceptance and cancellation thresholds. Drivers are penalized for exceeding the limits. Ultimately the non-compliant drivers are deactivated. Plus, Uber withholds destination information. This prevents drivers from assessing the value of trips prior to accepting.
> 
> If I'm an independent contractor building houses, then I may choose to pass on bid requests that don't supply me with adequate information. Uber doesn't work that way.
> 
> Uber controls price and terms. Until they relinquish that control, then drivers cannot be properly categorized as independent contractors.
> 
> Uber's SURGE algorithm is basically BS. They're pushing the buttons.


The problem is you're not an employee and the only other option at this time is independent contractor. Once again the laws are not up to date with technology, they need to make a new employment category for these kind of jobs, which they didn't think would take off the way they have. If they try to run the case according to existing laws they'll be stuck putting a round peg in a square hole, again. Shared employment or call it by something else and set up regulation around that, oh and add a tip is required.


----------



## stuber

5 Star Guy said:


> The problem is you're not an employee and the only other option at this time is independent contractor. Once again the laws are not up to date with technology, they need to make a new employment category for these kind of jobs, which they didn't think would take off the way they have. If they try to run the case according to existing laws they'll be stuck putting a round peg in a square hole, again. Shared employment or call it by something else and set up regulation around that, oh and add a tip is required.


There's talk of creating a new NLRB category called Independent Worker. I'm not sure why this is necessary. The Independent Contractor definitions could be expanded.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

stuber said:


> There's talk of creating a new NLRB category called Independent Worker. I'm not sure why this is necessary. The Independent Contractor definitions could be expanded.


That's the issue, if you try to expand it, by including this line of work then you could include this and other independent contractors as an employee. I'm not saying that's the way to go. I do think there needs to be a new category and you can't run a a court case or class action until that new employment category is set up. MA and CA are the top states in this area, I haven't heard of anything in MA but I'm not checking my radar for that either.


----------



## s9ramirez33

I have a certain feeling that Travis, will say. "Look there partners they are responsible for making the surge. We cannot force them to work." How he lower the fare for pax to pay less, how he created the bonus to reduce surge. Maybe that's why they create the bonus. It kind of makes sense know he saw the suite coming. Umm?


----------



## 5 Star Guy

s9ramirez33 said:


> I have a certain feeling that Travis, will say. "Look there partners they are responsible for making the surge. We cannot force them to work." How he lower the fare for pax to pay less, how he created the bonus to reduce surge. Maybe that's why they create the bonus. It kind of makes sense know he saw the suite coming. Umm?


He's spent most of the money on lawyers and lobbyists, not advertising or employees. I agree Travass has been good about adopting to the market and regulation while maintaining his vision. These plaintiffs would be better off dropping the cases and waiting for that new employment regulation, although by then these cases might not apply so cash in while you can.


----------



## UberLaLa

uberdriverfornow said:


> Next Uber is going to try to say that drivers set the prices.


We can...and if we were smart, we would more.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> We can...and if we were smart, we would more.


I think on another level you agree to the price, not setting the price. The price changes based on the number of drivers and pax who agree to the price, it doesn't go according to those who are not using the app. What made them so innovative was how the price can change in seconds. The airlines are doing that more now using the same technology that's available. People complain about the price change for an airline ticket, haven't seen any lawsuits or regulation on it.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Brooklyn said:


> I don't think they mean Uber directly colluded with drivers by actually having meetings with each but colluded in the sense "hey look you can make 5x the regular price on a trip if you join our app during certain times!" And stuff like that. Like drivers knowingly signed up to catch these "surges"


hey, I resemble that remark:


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Trebor said:


> We do set prices. We are allowed to accept and deny any ride we want to as a independent contractors. They are not holding a gun to our head saying take this 10x surge.


You're sounding like an Uber apologist.
We do NOT have the ability to set prices (even though our agreement with Uber says we do).
We ARE punished for not accepting all of the requests Uber sends to us.
We ARE punished for canceling rides requests we do not want to complete.
Your post is 100% false.


----------



## Brooklyn

Michael - Cleveland said:


> hey, I resemble that remark:
> 
> View attachment 34386


Don't be mad at me that Uber played your ass. I remember you defending Uber way back. You signed up because you were expecting to hit those nice fat surges without realizing that just as easily as you signed up that anyone else could as well.


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> I think on another level you agree to the price, not setting the price. The price changes based on the number of drivers and pax who agree to the price, it doesn't go according to those who are not using the app. What made them so innovative was how the price can change in seconds. The airlines are doing that more now using the same technology that's available. People complain about the price change for an airline ticket, haven't seen any lawsuits or regulation on it.


Actually, I do set my price...only drive when the Surge is 2.0x or higher. Many in the Los Angeles market will not turn on their Driver Apps until the price _they want_ as a Driver to drive is there. Enough Drivers don't go on line, Surge happens...we prove it here.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> Actually, I do set my price...only drive when the Surge is 2.0x or higher. Many in the Los Angeles market will not turn on their Driver Apps until the price _they want_ as a Driver to drive is there. Enough Drivers don't go on line, Surge happens...we prove it here.


I'm not taking sides, I'm thinking like a judge, which is the point of the thread. You decide at what surge amount you want to work, just like your schedule. Some drivers can't work during a surge or don't want those drunks during that schedule, Friday and Saturday late night to early morning. You don't enter the price for the pax, you just agree to work for them, as an independent contractor.


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> I'm not taking sides, I'm thinking like a judge, which is the point of the thread. You decide at what surge amount you want to work, just like your schedule. Some drivers can't work during a surge or don't want those drunks during that schedule, Friday and Saturday late night to early morning. You don't enter the price for the pax, you just agree to work for them, as an independent contractor.


If there are 10 cars in DTLA (down town los angeles) at 2am this morning (I was there) and 5 of the Drivers, not Uber, the Drivers watch the surge map and choose to NOT go online - the Surge goes from 1.7x to over 3x - That is the Driver setting the price. Not Uber, not the passenger. Yes, the passenger has the choice to wait or accept - that is them rejecting or accepting the price, not Uber. Supply & Demand made EzPz.

P.S. Not sure if you have _heat map_ on your Driver App there in Boston, so this may or may not carry over. Before we had _heat/surge map_ most Drivers used Rider App to determine surge.

P.S.S. So, my point is...the Surge is manipulated...by the Drivers, not Uber.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Brooklyn said:


> Don't be mad at me that Uber played your ass. I remember you defending Uber way back. You signed up because you were expecting to hit those nice fat surges without realizing that just as easily as you signed up that anyone else could as well.


Played my ass? I'm probably one of a small percentage of drivers who uses the Uber system here in my market to actually make a profit. I drive when and where I want (and as importantly, I do not driver when I don't want to because I am fortunate enough to not have a 'need' to drive.

You have no idea what you're talking about - especially about me - someone you don't know. 
I had no expectations when I signed up... took me two months to get motivated to even do my first trip. Since then I've adjusted my driving hours and times and days to meet my needs based on whatever the flavor-of-the-day Uber policy and rates are. I have never 'defended' Uber - but I do state the facts rather than ramble on with absurd mischaracterizations of the company that paint it as if it were some kind of charitable, anthropomorphic entity instead of the for-profit corporation it is. If you've read anything I post here on UP.n then you know I vilify the company over most of its policies. But I also call out the BS posted here that is just so much nonsense.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> If there are 10 cars in DTLA (down town los angeles) at 2am this morning (I was there) and 5 of the Drivers, not Uber, the Drivers watch the surge map and choose to NOT go online - the Surge goes from 1.7x to over 3x - That is the Driver setting the price. Not Uber, not the passenger. Yes, the passenger has the choice to wait or accept - that is them rejecting or accepting the price, not Uber. Supply & Demand made EzPz.
> 
> P.S. Not sure if you have _heat map_ on your Driver App there in Boston, so this may or may not carry over. Before we had _heat/surge map_ most Drivers used Rider App to determine surge.


Right, I'm saying a driver does not decide what the fee per mile is, the time or the surge amount, all a driver does is decide if he wants to drive either at that time or at that rate, take it or leave it. If enough drivers decide not to drive then they raise the surge, again they raise it and choose the amount, not a driver. That's why this is an issue and why it's going to court. Travass found another loophole and catch 22 to weasel out of.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

UberLaLa said:


> If there are 10 cars in DTLA (down town los angeles) at 2am this morning (I was there) and 5 of the Drivers, not Uber, the Drivers watch the surge map and choose to NOT go online - the Surge goes from 1.7x to over 3x - That is the Driver setting the price. Not Uber, not the passenger.


That's (trying very hard not to call that 'dumb') ridiculous.
The drivers do not set the price any more than (in your scenario) riders turning off their app to drive a surge OFF.
UBER'S computers (and the decision makers behind them) determine surge pricing. End of story.


----------



## UberLaLa

This thread started in the Los Angeles, Orange County area. Those outside of this market probably do not understand how it works here...beginning of story...Drivers here do set 'price' of their trips via the Surge.


----------



## UberLaLa

Buckiemohawk said:


> They could use this forum as evidence of drivers trying to manipulate surge


Not _trying...._*DOING*


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> This thread started in the Los Angeles, Orange County area. Those outside of this market probably do not understand how it works here...beginning of story...Drivers here do set 'price' of their trips via the Surge.


I see what you mean the OP was in CA, however the article he quoted was from NY and the court case is in NY. You do not set the price though, you agree to it or you wait until the price they give you fits with your schedule, that could be in 5 minutes or in a week.


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> I see what you mean the OP was in CA, however the article he quoted was from NY and the court case is in NY. You do not set the price though, you agree to it or you wait until the price they give you fits with your schedule, that could be in 5 minutes or in a week.


New York is a large market like L.A. - we have many passengers here, like in NY. It allows us to manipulate the price....trust me.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

5 Star Guy said:


> I see what you mean the OP was in CA, however the article he quoted was from NY and the court case is in NY. You do not set the price though, you agree to it or you wait until the price they give you fits with your schedule, that could be in 5 minutes or in a week.


Ok, let's take your theory, then you are conspiring with other drivers by calling and emailing them to wait on the surge, which is illegal and that is price fixing. Problem with that is you don't run the company, you're not even an employee, allegedly.


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> Ok, let's take your theory, then you are conspiring with other drivers by calling and emailing them to wait on the surge, which is illegal and that is price fixing. Problem with that is you don't run the company, you're not even an employee, allegedly.


Nope and nope... If you do a search for Surge in the Los Angeles/Orange County portion of this site, you will see many many threads that discuss how we (drivers) as independent contractors have the right to choose the price we want. Waiting causes the surge to increase - simple Supply & Demand economics.

P.S. Really it's a design flaw within the Uber system. They lower the per mile....we wait longer to rectify such.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> Nope and nope... If you do a search for Surge in the Los Angeles/Orange County portion of this site, you will see many many threads that discuss how we (drivers) as independent contractors have the right to choose the price we want. Waiting causes the surge to increase - simple Supply & Demand economics.
> 
> P.S. Really it's a design flaw within the Uber system. They lower the per mile....we wait longer to rectify such.


Right, you choose when the price is worth it to drive, you don't manually enter the amount like a cash register, oh today it's $10 per mile I want to drive for, you log on or off as you wish but one driver does not set the price and if there is any collusion with drivers then that is illegal. The case is twisting the relationship between Travass and the driver's as though driver's are responsible. The pax is responsible for sending a ping at the price the company suggests.


----------



## dirtylee

The only thing still decent about uber is surge. Esp 3X or higher. That plaintiff needs to **** off.


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> Right, you choose when the price is worth it to drive, you don't manually enter the amount like a cash register, oh today it's $10 per mile I want to drive for, you log on or off as you wish but one driver does not set the price and if there is any collusion with drivers then that is illegal. The case is twisting the relationship between Travass and the driver's as though driver's are responsible. The pax is responsible for sending a ping at the price the company suggests.


I guess it is similar to when I decided I would be nowhere within the vicinity of Hollywood Blvd after midnight (I drive Fri/Sat nights until 3am). Or avoiding short trip areas like USC - but a bit different in that Drivers here do impact the rise of the Surge by choosing to not turn their app on until their App being off, along with many other Drivers, raises the Surge. I hear what you are saying....but you would maybe need to experience how it works here to get what I am trying to say...


----------



## 5 Star Guy

dirtylee said:


> The only thing still decent about uber is surge. Esp 3X or higher. That plaintiff needs to &%[email protected]!* off.


Right, take a taxi or walk. Don't bring drivers into it or are looking for work, not setting the price.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> I guess it is similar to when I decided I would be nowhere within the vicinity of Hollywood Blvd after midnight (I drive Fri/Sat nights until 3am). Or avoiding short trip areas like USC - but a bit different in that Drivers here do impact the rise of the Surge by choosing to not turn their app on until their App being off, along with many other Drivers, raises the Surge. I hear what you are saying....but you would maybe need to experience how it works here to get what I am trying to say...


Right, it is your choice to work in different neighborhoods, different times and different rates. The issue here is only about who sets the price. You agree to it and take it or you wait for a surge. You can't control where or when the surge occurs, how long it lasts and the amount of the surge. If you conspired with 100 drivers then that would be illegal.


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> Right, it is your choice to work in different neighborhoods, different times and different rates. The issue here is only about who sets the price. You agree to it and take it or you wait for a surge. You can't control where or when the surge occurs, how long it lasts and the amount of the surge. *If you conspired with 100 drivers then that would be illegal.*


Can you prove that statement?


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> Can you prove that statement?


You're not an employee, allegedly, you're not a manager or in a leadership position working at the company. If you were to contact 100 drivers just like you and decided to meet at a fast food restaurant for a meeting,  and said, no one here at the meeting can drive on a Saturday from 12-3am  unless the surge is at 3x that would be independent contractors, I mean drivers colluding or conspiring to get the surge raised by artificial means, thanks to your meeting. They track everything so first you would need to get in contact with 100 partners  have them all meet or via email and of course agree to it and follow it by not logging in until then.  [My understanding is that's the basis of the case.]


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> You're not an employee, allegedly, you're not a manager or in a leadership position working at the company. If you were to contact 100 drivers just like you and decided to meet at a fast food restaurant for a meeting,  and said, no one here at the meeting can drive on a Saturday from 12-3am  unless the surge is at 3x that would be independent contractors, I mean drivers colluding or conspiring to get the surge raised by artificial means, thanks to your meeting. They track everything so first you would need to get in contact with 100 partners  have them all meet or via email and of course agree to it and follow it by not logging in until then.  [My understanding is that's the basis of the case.]


Yeah, we not doing anything like that....but having same impact. Hope things work out for you there in Boston.

Cheers!


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> Yeah, we not doing anything like that....but having same impact. Hope things work out for you there in Boston.
> 
> Cheers!


There would be openings for 100 new drivers if you were able to pull that off.


----------



## s9ramirez33

5 Star Guy said:


> He's spent most of the money on lawyers and lobbyists, not advertising or employees. I agree Travass has been good about adopting to the market and regulation while maintaining his vision. These plaintiffs would be better off dropping the cases and waiting for that new employment regulation, although by then these cases might not apply so cash in while you can.


This suite is brought by customers not drivers.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

s9ramirez33 said:


> This suite is brought by customers not drivers.


Right, they think drivers are in some way responsible for creating the surge and setting the price. Walk if you don't want to pay.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

By the way, the drivers on here who want to believe they set the price, also believe the surge only goes up. It disappears faster than it goes up, especially when you try to conspire and try to get the surge up, it drops or vanishes.


----------



## eyewall

Uber could solve this problem if they stopped with ridiculous fare cuts. If the fares remained reasonable, drivers would more willing to be out there for normal rates as opposed to staying off line until surge kicks in.


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> By the way, the drivers on here who want to believe they set the price, also believe the surge only goes up. It disappears faster than it goes up, especially when you try to conspire and try to get the surge up, it drops or vanishes.


In your area probably...It started at 1.9x around midnight and creeped up to 4.0x over the next 3 hours here in L.A. - never once dropping below 2.0 after midnight.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> In your area probably...It started at 1.9x around midnight and creeped up to 4.0x over the next 3 hours here in L.A. - never once dropping below 2.0 after midnight.


Right, but as you said it went from 1.9 to 4 and down to 2. It wasn't 3x all night or something and that is probably the peak for the week on average. Not everyone wants to drive then.


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> Right, but as you said it went from 1.9 to 4 and down to 2. It wasn't 3x all night or something and that is probably the peak for the week on average. Not everyone wants to drive then.


And what surge do you guys see in Boston on a consistent basis? Let's say even 5pm to 10pm on a weekday night in the business district/s?


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> And what surge do you guys see in Boston on a consistent basis? Let's say even 5pm to 10pm on a weekday night in the business district/s?


It's the same, all over that was my point. You can try to trick the system but that's about it. I don't go out during those hours but someone does.


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> It's the same, all over that was my point. You can try to trick the system but that's about it. I don't go out during those hours but someone does.


110% not accurate for for L.A. market. Orange Country drivers haul over an hour to get to our surges here.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

You're losing money if you think you are making money driving over an hour. There's no magic, a surge is based on the demand. They would manipulate the surge during an event, which is when they get in trouble. When you drive over an hour and make from 1.9 to 4 randomly is not the way to go.


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> You're losing money if you think you are making money driving over an hour. There's no magic, a surge is based on the demand. They would manipulate the surge during an event, which is when they get in trouble. When you drive over an hour and make from 1.9 to 4 randomly is not the way to go.


I see...thank you Sensei all seeing and knowing of everything Uber. Must just be luck that I earn $200-$300 in a 10 hour night (after Uber's take)...so glad you pointed this out to me.


----------



## SECOTIME

When you get valued at 50 something billion or whatever ridiculous valuation they have then you become a target..and all that bullshit you used to get away with comes back around to bite ya....

Just saying


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> I see...thank you Sensei all seeing and knowing of everything Uber. Must just be luck that I earn $200-$300 in a 10 hour night (after Uber's take)...so glad you pointed this out to me.


Great, you made less than $20-$30 an hour after putting that much mileage and wear and tear on your car, driving those drunk pax at that hour of the night. No thanks.


----------



## Trebor

5 Star Guy said:


> I'm not taking sides, I'm thinking like a judge, which is the point of the thread. You decide at what surge amount you want to work, just like your schedule. Some drivers can't work during a surge or don't want those drunks during that schedule, Friday and Saturday late night to early morning. You don't enter the price for the pax, you just agree to work for them, as an independent contractor.


you are also manipulating the surge then right? Isn't that what the ani-trust lawsuit is saying?


----------



## Trebor

JuanIguana said:


> At the end of the day, noone's coerced a single rider into paying Stooge prices. The app clearly indicates they are agreeing to the Stooge price when they accept the ride.
> 
> I just want to take TK for a ride the way uber took so many of us for ride when they implied we could make $1,500/week...indefinitely.


Also, no one is forcing the driver to accept that price.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

Trebor said:


> you are also manipulating the surge then right? Isn't that what the ani-trust lawsuit is saying?


As long as you are active and logged off you are manipulating the surge. There is no schedule of hours to work or shifts, it's work when you want, which is a big part of being an independent contractor, well that part.  As soon as you log on you are manipulating the surge, at least you are working though.


----------



## Guest

The sad part..most drivers want to see Travis get a massive bone in his ass! I agree with the riders, lock the price at 3.00 a mile and everyone should be happy right? Thanks Riders, we applaud you!


----------



## 5 Star Guy

mjuber said:


> The sad part..most drivers want to see Travis get a massive bone in his ass! I agree with the riders, lock the price at 3.00 a mile and everyone should be happy right? Thanks Riders, we applaud you!


Then you are an employee and this is a taxi business and Travass is out of business.


----------



## Guest

5 Star Guy said:


> Then you are an employee and this is a taxi business and Travass is out of business.


Lets call it what it is then....since fuel prices have moved from 1.80 gallon to 2.20 a gallon..uber hasn't changed it pricing..so I guess they aren't interested in helping their "partners" offset..so fk them! Uber was really nice while it lasted. I have never turned on a source of income as fast as I have with Uber. Now I sit and watch a heat map and wait for surges before signing on..so yeah, I help with creating surges I guess..guilty as charged! And when the Surge goes away..so do I and I would encourage everyone else to do likewise...1.05 a mile is nonsense and not what I signed up for. Uber you broke my heart!


----------



## D Town

Trebor said:


> We do set prices. We are allowed to accept and deny any ride we want to as a independent contractors. They are not holding a gun to our head saying take this 10x surge.


Allowed to accept or deny any ride? Try that a few times and when Uber kicks you out of the system and eventually deactivates you for it see if that theory holds water.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

D Town said:


> Allowed to accept or deny any ride? Try that a few times and when Uber kicks you out of the system and eventually deactivates you for it see if that theory holds water.


That's the other issue with being an employee. If the lawyer's try to tear that apart with the employee court case like they are trying to here about the surge pricing case, they'll see that by being active and logging in, you are trying to work. I don't believe the employment laws state what the minimum amount of hours or workload you must provide to continue being an independent contractor. Travis has some metric in place that determines that. While they are trying to determine when a large number of pings makes someone an employee, it will be interesting to see when someone is wrongfully terminated as an independent contractor working the minimum.


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> Great, you made less than $20-$30 an hour after putting that much mileage and wear and tear on your car, driving those drunk pax at that hour of the night. No thanks.


My day job pays better that is for certain. And gas isn't cheap in L.A. So, what is your _better angle_ with Uber?


----------



## stuber

dirtylee said:


> The only thing still decent about uber is surge. Esp 3X or higher. That plaintiff needs to &%[email protected]!* off.


That's too many symbols to represent the f word.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> My day job pays better that is for certain. And gas isn't cheap in L.A. So, what is your _better angle_ with Uber?


Work the surge, near you. Drive less until the rates go up or they go out of business. Wait for Google to take them out, make sure you get the TNC Gap insurance in CA or you're really screwed.


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> Work the surge, near you. Drive less until the rates go up or they go out of business. Wait for Google to take them out, make sure you get the TNC Gap insurance in CA or you're really screwed.


We aren't that far off then...I drive way less miles driving the surge.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> We aren't that far off then...I drive way less miles driving the surge.


Just not an hour away, you said over an hour to a surge. After you said that I was thinking drivers should be charging the same for the dead miles, they aren't free. That would be a more accurate way to see not how much drivers make, how much they spent.


----------



## UberLaLa

5 Star Guy said:


> Just not an hour away, you said over an hour to a surge. After you said that I was thinking drivers should be charging the same for the dead miles, they aren't free. That would be a more accurate way to see not how much drivers make, how much they spent.


I live and drive in L.A. - drive out my driveway and it is surging usually. The hour drive was to illustrate how other drivers from the OC haul over to L.A. because our surge is so much better - of course them coming into the L.A. market just lowers the surge usually, but hey, we neighbors.


----------



## Guest

broke my own rule tonight...took a 1.9 surge that was 10 minutes away..got there, sat for 5 minutes..sent a text..called twice..no answer...left..moral of the story..unless they double the cancellation fee, dont drive 10 minutes for any surge amount.

The broken rule: thou shall not drive more than 7 minutes away or pickup city dwellers. Guess I broke two rules!


----------



## DriverX

Bart McCoy said:


> Im thoroughly confused
> 
> "conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of drivers"
> 
> hahah right. We can't even get more than 20 people in at a protest.
> 
> But looks like this lawsuit is NOT for the drivers,but for the riders. And will demand money back from Uber AND the drivers???????


TBF the protest needs to surge over 3x befor I go online.


----------



## Brooklyn

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Played my ass? I'm probably one of a small percentage of drivers who uses the Uber system here in my market to actually make a profit. I drive when and where I want (and as importantly, I do not driver when I don't want to because I am fortunate enough to not have a 'need' to drive.
> 
> You have no idea what you're talking about - especially about me - someone you don't know.
> I had no expectations when I signed up... took me two months to get motivated to even do my first trip. Since then I've adjusted my driving hours and times and days to meet my needs based on whatever the flavor-of-the-day Uber policy and rates are. I have never 'defended' Uber - but I do state the facts rather than ramble on with absurd mischaracterizations of the company that paint it as if it were some kind of charitable, anthropomorphic entity instead of the for-profit corporation it is. If you've read anything I post here on UP.n then you know I vilify the company over most of its policies. But I also call out the BS posted here that is just so much nonsense.


Didn't you block me before? Why so sassy? It seems like you're so defensive about something you don't care about. Dude relax.. I remember you defending them. I'm pretty sure other members here can remember you defending them. Geez. Calm down there pal.


----------



## DriverX

JasonB said:


> Price fixing?
> 
> Some of these pax are just unbelievable.
> 
> It's not enough that they have a near constant stream of drivers willing to take them anywhere and do
> anything for them for .30-.90 cents a mile with just the push of a button.
> 
> That one time they have to pay 2.0x (still equating to less than 1/2 the cost of a cab) surge they scream 'price fixing'.
> 
> How about this pax?
> 
> If you don't want to pay surge pricing, you have 2 simple options that won't force you to lose a few of those precious pennies:
> 
> 1. Stay home
> 
> 2. Wait 10 minutes for prices to come down
> 
> Sheesh. What a bunch of babies.


3. Take a Lyft


----------



## DriverX

Bart McCoy said:


> That Uber drivers manipulate the app to create a false lack of supply and trigger surge pricing, the suit accuses Uber of encouraging drivers to log out of the app to show less supply, and alleges that some drivers stay offline during non-surge times to trigger a surge."
> *****************************
> Well yes drivers do log out during non surge. That's me. However I have no control over making it surge.
> 
> Exactly how/where does Uber encourage drivers to log out of the app??


Seriously, you haven't got the warning messages and time outs? I've definiet;y seen messages from uber telling me to go offline if I'm not accepting trips. Like when they stack them on me and I skip a bunch or whatever.

If it's not price fixing it's definitely manipulation. Sorry but my rides are worth at least 2x the standard rate. That's what I set them at. As far as I know as an IC I can set my price at whatever I want but I just can't collude with the other ICs to do it, but I don't have to worry about that because Uber does that part for me.


----------



## DriverX

UberLaLa said:


> I live and drive in L.A. - drive out my driveway and it is surging usually. The hour drive was to illustrate how other drivers from the OC haul over to L.A. because our surge is so much better - of course them coming into the L.A. market just lowers the surge usually, but hey, we neighbors.


Nothing good has ever come from OC.


----------



## DriverX

s9ramirez33 said:


> I think this might be a win for drivers. As it's going to force Uber to raise rate and keep them there where driver are profiting.
> 
> I did always find it a bit weird. Price gouging is illegal. Specially when you put the element of security and safety in it. Example a drunk driver was depending on the Uber drive back. Now at the prices he cannot afford it. Example a women at a club was there and now she stranded in the middle of night, only alternative is paying surge price.
> 
> It be nice for a change to see Travis sweat.
> 
> Tip the driver.


Yeah but its not really price gouging until its well over what a cab would have cost them, or an ambulance. 2x surge in SD is still less than a cab.


----------



## DriverX

BurgerTiime said:


> I remember when I was in the office during Valentines they told us they were deliberately not making drivers live so we could all make some money and that made surge skyrocket due to lack of drivers. Now it's so over saturated surge is a scam to the public. There's always more drivers than demand. One giant SCAM!


I think you were manipulated.


----------



## DriverX

5 Star Guy said:


> I think on another level you agree to the price, not setting the price. The price changes based on the number of drivers and pax who agree to the price, it doesn't go according to those who are not using the app. What made them so innovative was how the price can change in seconds. The airlines are doing that more now using the same technology that's available. People complain about the price change for an airline ticket, haven't seen any lawsuits or regulation on it.


YES, and if the airlines were colluding/conspiring with each other to set the price then that would be called price fixing and illegal.

I think that's at the heart of this case. THey seem to be saying that Travis is leading a price fixing ring among a bunch of ICs who are SUPPOSED to be in competition with each other and NOT setting their prices in coordination which Travis is facilitating. SO much so is TK the mastermind of this scheme, the ICs don't even know they are involved. Could be big, lawyer up TK!


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

ubershiza said:


> View attachment 34227
> 
> I AM A GENIUS!
> MY PLAN TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD WILL NOT FAIL!


POST # 11/ubershiza : MAJOR CHORTLE !


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

D Town said:


> If you're capping the surge at 2x then the mileage needs to be closer to $2.00. No less than $1.80 and .40 cents a minute with a minimum fare of $6.00. Also if a driver is more than 5 miles from a ping they get paid at LEAST the .75 cents a mile it cost to get to that pax for the dead miles unless the driver cancels. Do those things and I'll drive again and take just about every ping. I enjoyed driving. I DIDN'T like the feeling of being bent over and told to shut up and take it dry.


POST # 19/D Town: Wait...W H A T ? !
N O..." D R Y L U B E "
down dere Deep Inna'heart O'Texas ?


----------



## Oscar Levant

arto71 said:


> *http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...t-lawsuit-over-pricing-green-lighted-by-judge*
> 
> Uber Technologies Inc.'s "genius" just backfired on the company and its co-founder Travis Kalanick.
> 
> U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff in Manhattan on Thursday denied Kalanick's bid to dismiss a proposed class-action lawsuit claiming the technology in Uber's popular ride-hailing app is used to illegally coordinate high surge-pricing fares.
> 
> Rakoff rejected Kalanick's assertion that a conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of drivers was "wildly implausible" and "physically impossible," an argument the executive made in filings since the suit was filed in December.
> 
> "The capacity to orchestrate such an agreement is the 'genius' of Mr. Kalanick and his company, which, through the magic of smartphone technology, can invite hundreds of thousands of drivers in far-flung locations to agree to Uber's terms," the judge said.
> 
> The ruling allows Spencer Meyer, a customer in Connecticut, to move forward with his claim that Uber's pricing algorithm violates antitrust laws used to protect consumers from price manipulation.
> 
> Meyer's lawsuit seeks damages on behalf of millions of U.S. riders who rely on the world's largest ride-hailing company, and opens a new line of legal attacks on sharing-economy businesses. Uber faces other lawsuits and regulatory challenges over its business model, including demands by its drivers to be classified as employees instead of independent contractors.
> 
> *Fundamentally Flawed*
> Uber argues the conspiracy described in the New York complaint and ruling would be physically impossible under the antitrust law, and that if Uber lost at trial then thousands of drivers would be forced to pay damages. The company also contends the case is fundamentally flawed because Kalanick would have to personally compete with Uber drivers for rides in order for the type of conspiracy alleged in the case to be true.
> 
> "These claims are unwarranted and have no basis in fact. In just five years since its founding, Uber has increased competition, lowered prices, and improved service," Uber said in an e-mailed statement.
> 
> New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and other regulators have also complained about Uber's pricing algorithm, which ensures standard fares under normal conditions. In certain situations, such as heavy traffic, bad weather or on holidays, the fares rise sometimes to many times the normal rate in a practice known as surge pricing. The company pledged to limit the increases in emergencies under an agreement with Schneiderman in 2014.
> 
> *Price Fixer*
> Meyer alleged in his complaint that Kalanick designed the company "to be a price fixer" because its drivers "do not compete" but rather charge fares set by the algorithm. Uber takes a cut of the fares. The business plan amounts to an antitrust scheme because the drivers, despite charging the same prices, are supposedly independent service providers, according to Meyer.
> 
> "Kalanick has long insisted that Uber is not a transportation company and that it does not employ drivers," Meyer's lawyers said in his complaint. "Instead, Uber is a technology company, whose chief product is a smartphone app."
> 
> Rakoff said Meyer has plausibly alleged a conspiracy and the case should go to trial.
> 
> *'Disguise Itself'*
> "The fact that Uber goes to such lengths to portray itself -- one might even say disguise itself -- as the mere purveyor of an 'app' cannot shield it from the consequences of its operating as much more," the judge said.
> 
> At this point in the case, the plaintiff doesn't need to present "direct, 'smoking gun' evidence of a conspiracy," Rakoff said.
> 
> Evan Rawley, a professor at Columbia Business School, still sees the risk to Uber as remote.
> 
> "One always has to worry about lawsuits, but this one is so far-fetched that I wouldn't lose much sleep over it if I were Uber," Rawley said. "However, if the plaintiff won, it would indeed be potentially costly to Uber since it would interfere with how the core of their business operates."
> 
> Andrew Schmidt, Meyer's lawyer, didn't immediately respond to voicemail and e-mail messages seeking comment on the ruling.
> 
> *Drivers' Trial*
> Uber is set for a trial in June in San Francisco federal court in a case brought by drivers seeking to collect pay and benefits as employees. A victory for the drivers may upend Uber's business model and cut into its more than $60 billion valuation.
> 
> The ride-hailing service launched in 2010, has grown rapidly and now has a presence in 65 countries.
> 
> Uber and its competitors are able to keep down their costs by using contractors rather than employees. Typically, contractors pay their own expenses and aren't protected by minimum wage and overtime laws. Companies don't pay for their unemployment insurance, workers compensation or Social Security.
> 
> The case is Meyer v. Kalanick, 1:15-cv-09796, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).


I've always wondered about the pricing algorithm. On one hand, it seems like "free market pricing" but it's really not the "free market" that drives up prices, it's a programmers' algorithm that does it, not by natural market forces, based on assumptions in certain areas derived from historical demand in those areas, compared to the number of cars available to serve that historical demand, which, may, or may not be, actually happening at the moment. This is why you might find yourself in a surged zone, expecting a call any second, and wait 20 minutes and nothing happens. It's because that the algorithm isn't responding to demand in real time, but an zone's history. Any area could be dead, though historically it's busy at a given time frame.

In other words, it's not a free market determining pricing, it's programmer's making assumptions. Whether or not this constitutes "price fixing", I don't know. But, I can't see how driver's are complicit in this, and if they are going down that path, it's unjust.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

arto71 said:


> *http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...t-lawsuit-over-pricing-green-lighted-by-judge*
> 
> Uber Technologies Inc.'s "genius" just backfired on the company and its co-founder Travis Kalanick.
> 
> U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff in Manhattan on Thursday denied Kalanick's bid to dismiss a proposed class-action lawsuit claiming the technology in Uber's popular ride-hailing app is used to illegally coordinate high surge-pricing fares.
> 
> Rakoff rejected Kalanick's assertion that a conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of drivers was "wildly implausible" and "physically impossible," an argument the executive made in filings since the suit was filed in December.
> 
> "The capacity to orchestrate such an agreement is the 'genius' of Mr. Kalanick and his company, which, through the magic of smartphone technology, can invite hundreds of thousands of drivers in far-flung locations to agree to Uber's terms," the judge said.
> 
> The ruling allows Spencer Meyer, a customer in Connecticut, to move forward with his claim that Uber's pricing algorithm violates antitrust laws used to protect consumers from price manipulation.
> 
> Meyer's lawsuit seeks damages on behalf of millions of U.S. riders who rely on the world's largest ride-hailing company, and opens a new line of legal attacks on sharing-economy businesses. Uber faces other lawsuits and regulatory challenges over its business model, including demands by its drivers to be classified as employees instead of independent contractors.
> 
> *Fundamentally Flawed*
> Uber argues the conspiracy described in the New York complaint and ruling would be physically impossible under the antitrust law, and that if Uber lost at trial then thousands of drivers would be forced to pay damages. The company also contends the case is fundamentally flawed because Kalanick would have to personally compete with Uber drivers for rides in order for the type of conspiracy alleged in the case to be true.
> 
> "These claims are unwarranted and have no basis in fact. In just five years since its founding, Uber has increased competition, lowered prices, and improved service," Uber said in an e-mailed statement.
> 
> New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and other regulators have also complained about Uber's pricing algorithm, which ensures standard fares under normal conditions. In certain situations, such as heavy traffic, bad weather or on holidays, the fares rise sometimes to many times the normal rate in a practice known as surge pricing. The company pledged to limit the increases in emergencies under an agreement with Schneiderman in 2014.
> 
> *Price Fixer*
> Meyer alleged in his complaint that Kalanick designed the company "to be a price fixer" because its drivers "do not compete" but rather charge fares set by the algorithm. Uber takes a cut of the fares. The business plan amounts to an antitrust scheme because the drivers, despite charging the same prices, are supposedly independent service providers, according to Meyer.
> 
> "Kalanick has long insisted that Uber is not a transportation company and that it does not employ drivers," Meyer's lawyers said in his complaint. "Instead, Uber is a technology company, whose chief product is a smartphone app."
> 
> Rakoff said Meyer has plausibly alleged a conspiracy and the case should go to trial.
> 
> *'Disguise Itself'*
> "The fact that Uber goes to such lengths to portray itself -- one might even say disguise itself -- as the mere purveyor of an 'app' cannot shield it from the consequences of its operating as much more," the judge said.
> 
> At this point in the case, the plaintiff doesn't need to present "direct, 'smoking gun' evidence of a conspiracy," Rakoff said.
> 
> Evan Rawley, a professor at Columbia Business School, still sees the risk to Uber as remote.
> 
> "One always has to worry about lawsuits, but this one is so far-fetched that I wouldn't lose much sleep over it if I were Uber," Rawley said. "However, if the plaintiff won, it would indeed be potentially costly to Uber since it would interfere with how the core of their business operates."
> 
> Andrew Schmidt, Meyer's lawyer, didn't immediately respond to voicemail and e-mail messages seeking comment on the ruling.
> 
> *Drivers' Trial*
> Uber is set for a trial in June in San Francisco federal court in a case brought by drivers seeking to collect pay and benefits as employees. A victory for the drivers may upend Uber's business model and cut into its more than $60 billion valuation.
> 
> The ride-hailing service launched in 2010, has grown rapidly and now has a presence in 65 countries.
> 
> Uber and its competitors are able to keep down their costs by using contractors rather than employees. Typically, contractors pay their own expenses and aren't protected by minimum wage and overtime laws. Companies don't pay for their unemployment insurance, workers compensation or Social Security.
> 
> The case is Meyer v. Kalanick, 1:15-cv-09796, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).


POST # 1/arto71 : Let us be the First
AND Second to 
Congratulate you on a UPNF-Leading
F I F T H...F E A T U R E D...T H R E A D !
Bison and I could NOT be prouder and
YOU could NOT be More Deserving of
this Distinction. Well-done, Sir !

Haberdasher Admires. Bison Inspires!


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

ubershiza said:


> View attachment 34227
> 
> I AM A GENIUS!
> MY PLAN TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD WILL NOT FAIL!


POST # 11/ubershiza: Please alert Maya
Kosoff of Business 
"The Steamy" Insider.com when this
Meme becomes available in the WHOLE
R O O M "FATHEAD" size for her Home
Shrine to Der Kakanicky Fuehrer.

Mentoring Bison: ACHTUNG !


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

This is a touchy subject.
On one hand, the judge is spot on.
Uber drivers colude with the algorithm to wait for surge to log on.

On the other hand, the LAST thing this world needs right now are punative measures to smack the driver.

But hes right, of course- even if it attacks the wrong party.
TK went down to the crossroads.
How else can he be so teflon all the time?


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

5 Star Guy said:


> That's the issue though, like some had said. First being an independent contractor and working when you want is not the same as a taxi driver, although either way you need to work at some point or you don't have a job. It's supposed to be a free market, walk or take a bus or taxi then. No one is insisting a pax use the technology , what did people do before there was an app for that?  Don't be a driver either if the rates are too low, that's why they have the surge, to match the demand with the driver's online. I don't agree with a cap or legislation, let them go out of business then. What made this innovative was the larger number of drivers available compared to taxis. Travass might be better off agreeing to being a taxi and a delivery service in court now than fighting that along with the price fixing case.  Travass just thinks he's too cool for school, which I think will bite him in the Travass, very soon.


POST # 34/5 Star Guy: I saw what you 
did there
with the First Name of Our Beloved [may
$Billions-B-upon him]his August Exigency
Emperor @$$hat the Fi$t ! Woe betide
ANY that mock the.......
☆☆PROPHET ☆ OF ☆ DISRUPTION☆☆

Mentoring Bison: Creepy...but Effective.


----------



## Bart McCoy

DriverX said:


> Seriously, you haven't got the warning messages and time outs? I've definiet;y seen messages from uber telling me to go offline if I'm not accepting trips. Like when they stack them on me and I skip a bunch or whatever.
> 
> .


A couple, but you don't think that means Uber wants you to stay offline until it surges? Uber doesnt like it when it surges constantly. They kick you offline because you not accepting rides or accepting and canceling causes pax linger times to get a ride. I surely wouldn't see that as uber encouraging drivers to wait for surge


----------



## Tequila Jake

Brooklyn said:


> And no. Do not try to strike fear in Uber drivers hearts by saying some ridiculous statement like "Uber will tell drivers to pay the customers back"... Don't do it. Please.


It was Uber who said drivers will have to pay:
*
"Uber argues the conspiracy described in the New York complaint and ruling would be physically impossible under the antitrust law, and that if Uber lost at trial then thousands of drivers would be forced to pay damages. The company also contends the case is fundamentally flawed because Kalanick would have to personally compete with Uber drivers for rides in order for the type of conspiracy alleged in the case to be true."*

Individual drivers are not named in the suit so I don't believe they can be compelled by the court to repay customers. However, Uber could try to recover from the drivers by withholding future pay. I think that would be suicidal since every driver who has ever had a surge fare would stop driving for them.


----------



## Tequila Jake

I'm curious why the suit names Kalanick as the sole defendant and not Uber Technologies Inc or Raiser LLC.

It would seem to make more sense to claim that Uber as the app company conspires with Raiser, the company that contracts drivers.


----------



## Uberdancer

Okay, well, lemme know when y'all go offline so I can pickup and drop off your riders...


----------



## biggplays1

First off, Uber "partners" don't set the prices, it is done by Uber and their so-called algorithm. Partners are only in control of which rides they decide to accept or reject at the rate Uber assigns to those rides. (And if someone actually gets deactivated for not accepting a ride, this is a lawsuit on its own in that an "independent" contractor decides which rides or "contracts" that they want to accept similar to a roofer or plumber deciding what jobs he wants to accept.) If partners were truly "independent" contractors, there would be a customizable feature in the app to set what price you will drive per mile and per minute, while the rider app would display the closest drivers to the pickup location, along with their individual rates, and the riders would choose which driver to hail (i.e. "Joe" is 7 min away and prices at $1.65/mile and .15 cent a minute, "Frank" is 2 min away and prices at $1.90 and .10 a minute. This would truly be an "independent contractor" scenario and Uber would truly be renting the software. This would solve everything as Uber wouldn't need to use surge at all as the independent contractors would set their own rates and could customize them within the app. When Uber sets the rates, controls the surges, and from what some are saying punishes drivers for not accepting contracts (rides), they are no longer independent contractors at this point. As far as their "booking fee" is concerned, they can't charge BOTH a booking fee and take a percentage of their choosing. They either have to negotiate the percentage with the driver or charge a consistent flat rental fee for the software to everyone (i.e. $300 a month, or all rides are $1-$3 to rent the software). They can't legally take both without any negotiation. This is what's ultimately going to cause them to lose their claim that their drivers are independent contractors, especially if they are deactivating contractors for not accepting contracts (rides). In the same way that a hair stylist negotiates their commission and sets their rates OR rents their chair for the month (in Uber's case, it would be a monthly software fee), Uber is not following the very definition of an independent contractor. Uber tacks on a "booking fee", but the drivers have no say or negotiation power to tack on a "maintainence fee" for gas and car upkeep, as an independent contractor should. This case is essentially Uber having to defend and justify its own algorithm that it assigns and FORCES it's drivers to accept or reject with no customizability. However, this will ultimately lead back to the employee vs independent contractor argument. If Uber had contractors set their own rates, there would never be a need for surge!


----------



## Jace

uberdriverfornow said:


> Next Uber is going to try to say that drivers set the prices.


Uber SHOULD let drivers set rates and allow riders to to pick & choose a car based on those rates as well as proximity, rating, etc. It would be better for all involved. I think a weak point in Uber's business model is that IT determines the rate for services that others provide. This would certainly bolster the "independent contractor" aspect of the business as well as facilitate drivers providing a service at a rate they're comfortable with.


----------



## Tim In Cleveland

We only wish Uber drivers COULD be guilty of price fixing. That would mean we could set our own minimum fares and mileage rates.


----------



## ChortlingCrison

Drivers tagteaming or conspiring with Travis? Now that's a good April fools joke.


----------



## DriverX

Jace said:


> Uber SHOULD let drivers set rates and allow riders to to pick & choose a car based on those rates as well as proximity, rating, etc. It would be better for all involved. I think a weak point in Uber's business model is that IT determines the rate for services that others provide. This would certainly bolster the "independent contractor" aspect of the business as well as facilitate drivers providing a service at a rate they're comfortable with.


This is also the only way Uber can claim they aren't price fixing. It allows drivers to undercut each other or charge a higher rate for a nicer car or whatever they offer. Uber can still use surge tracking to identify where drivers are needed but it should stop there so they aren't leading a price fixing ring. The drivers can determine what the market will bear and customers won't get stuck with no options besides a 5x surge ride to get them home or whatever.

If we do get to set our price I predict that women will be driving in bikinis almost immediately. Picking up drunk horny dudes from strip joints using their nips for tips at a rate of $10 a mile. Male drivers will, as usual, have to rely on their driving/navigating ability and conversational skills to work the pax for tips at a rate of probably $2.50 per, oh sorry I have digressed into misogyny. my bad


----------



## Jace

Exacrlty. Also, drivers could change their rates at any given time for whatever duration they see fit.


----------



## tommyboy

I can't see uber colluding with thousands of drivers on a regular basis that truly is preposterous
The surge is intended to get drivers to high demand areas and it does just that. Is there an easier and Kinder way probably. This system pisses a lot of people off drivers and riders What company in its right mind wants malcontents on both sides of the supply and demand equation. It appears on the surface at least that they are in it for the short haul. Pun definitely intended For example with a system like this in place it will be virtually impossible to maintain loyalty from any body and people will be making any of a number of alternatives to get from point a to point be . Just wait and see there will be hundreds of little ride share companies popping up with a better mouse trap it's inevitable Uber will win the implementation of the ride share business war but lose all the little battles to smaller more personalized competitors. Appearing greedy and cutthroat is no way to create goodwill and develop brand loyalty. I could write a book about this and the star up mistakes they are making For example take a daily customer who is totally reliant on uber then she gets surged her transportation budget goes to he'll in a hand basket She will start looking for alternative arrangements like collecting driver numbers and belive me she will get them This surge pricing model is a design for disaster. Truly I hope that come up with a workable platform before they just turn into another crooked cab company in the publics mind and drivers mind as well .Its still early enough to say hey were young and inexperienced and learning give us a chance to rectify our mistakes


----------



## D Town

Tequila Jake said:


> Individual drivers are not named in the suit so I don't believe they can be compelled by the court to repay customers. However, Uber could try to recover from the drivers by withholding future pay. I think that would be suicidal since every driver who has ever had a surge fare would stop driving for them.


I would not be shocked if they attempted to use the banking info they have on us for payment purposes to try and take money straight from our accounts if drivers did that.


----------



## JMBF831

I wasn't aware that pax were legally forced to use Uber. If you're really this much of a cheap whiny baby then PLEASE feel free to use a Cab. Seriously...Use cab service for a month and get back to us.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

JMBF831 said:


> I wasn't aware that pax were legally forced to use Uber. If you're really this much of a cheap whiny baby then PLEASE feel free to use a Cab. Seriously...Use cab service for a month and get back to us.


Nonono dont send him to us!
Entitled pax like this can walk or take the bus.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

If they went after drivers they would be out of business and there wouldn't be anyone to sue, we aren't independent contractors then. If they lose the case they are out of business since that is their business model, not a feature. If the case makes drivers closer to an employee than a subcontractor then they are out of business. The next case on if they are really just a taxi will be another nail in the coffin, if they lose. If they win Google is closer to putting them out of business, with zero legal fees and lobbyists.


----------



## tommyboy

Uber is the Lewis and Clark of the ride share business.Quite literally trailblazers defining a new industry. It can be compared to the dawn of the railway system with the stakes just as high. All the future players twiddling there thumbs on the sidelines waiting for the systems state County and city to sort out the details at uber s expense.Then when the new playing fields defined here they come. You have to give the uber guys credit for attempting such a monumental task and thus far succeeding beyond many people's expectations.These guys are good and fun to watch. The obstacles they face in every market are formidable my bet is they come out winning.However it's going to take a lot of money and brains to so it


----------



## observer

Casuale Haberdasher said:


> POST # 1/arto71 : Let us be the First
> AND Second to
> Congratulate you on a UPNF-Leading
> F I F T H...F E A T U R E D...T H R E A D !
> Bison and I could NOT be prouder and
> YOU could NOT be More Deserving of
> this Distinction. Well-done, Sir !
> 
> Haberdasher Admires. Bison Inspires!


What is the relationship between Haberdasher and the Bison? For some reason, I always thought they were one and the same.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

observer said:


> What is the relationship between Haberdasher and the Bison? For some reason I always thought they were one and the same.


Much like the relationship between Bruce Wayne and Batman.
Wayne dons the batsuit;
Haberdasher...the Bison suit.


----------



## ABC123DEF

tommyboy said:


> Uber is the Lewis and Clark of the ride share business.Quite literally trailblazers defining a new industry. It can be compared to the dawn of the railway system with the stakes just as high. All the future players twiddling there thumbs on the sidelines waiting for the systems state County and city to sort out the details at uber s expense.Then when the new playing fields defined here they come. You have to give the uber guys credit for attempting such a monumental task and thus far succeeding beyond many people's expectations.These guys are good and fun to watch. The obstacles they face in every market are formidable my bet is they come out winning.However it's going to take a lot of money and brains to so it


They have plenty of brains...but people skills and common sense? The jury is still out on that.


----------



## ChortlingCrison

ABC123DEF said:


> They have plenty of brains...but people skills and common sense? The jury is still out on that.


The verdict just came in. GUILTY on all counts (oh there's too many to name on here) all counts on everything.


----------



## THE MAN!

Before this is all over TK going to be taken away screaming he's seeing things! Hundred of Thousands of driver's? So like almost all the driver's that drive for Uber? We can't even get an association organized? LoL


----------



## DriverX

Bart McCoy said:


> A couple, but you don't think that means Uber wants you to stay offline until it surges? Uber doesnt like it when it surges constantly. They kick you offline because you not accepting rides or accepting and canceling causes pax linger times to get a ride. I surely wouldn't see that as uber encouraging drivers to wait for surge


Interpret it however you want. It's pretty clear to me. Go offline if you don't want requests. It's not my fault that everytime I actually want a trip it is surging over 2x. I guess I'm just lucky or good. LOL


----------



## DriverX

observer said:


> What is the relationship between Haberdasher and the Bison? For some reason, I always thought they were one and the same.


The real question is, which one has committed vehicular homicide?


----------



## Brooklyn

Tequila Jake said:


> It was Uber who said drivers will have to pay:
> *
> "Uber argues the conspiracy described in the New York complaint and ruling would be physically impossible under the antitrust law, and that if Uber lost at trial then thousands of drivers would be forced to pay damages. The company also contends the case is fundamentally flawed because Kalanick would have to personally compete with Uber drivers for rides in order for the type of conspiracy alleged in the case to be true."*
> 
> Individual drivers are not named in the suit so I don't believe they can be compelled by the court to repay customers. However, Uber could try to recover from the drivers by withholding future pay. I think that would be suicidal since every driver who has ever had a surge fare would stop driving for them.


Uber is doing that to scare the drivers into siding with them. They're not gonna tell drivers "hey your next 1,000 miles are not paid because we need to recoup money"... They're just gonna scare the drivers into believing that they're gonna lose money.


----------



## chi1cabby

*Surge Pricing Lawsuit
Uber's Response:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0N1atTXPM8FSXU0QVNEWFdCdDA/view?usp=docslist_api*

*STATEMENT OF FACTS ALLEGED IN THE AMENDED COMPLAINT*
Defendant Travis Kalanick is the Chief Executive Officer and co-founder of Uber. Am. Compl. at 1. He is the sole defendant named in Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. Id.

"Uber is a technology company" that developed and licenses a mobile application (the "Uber App") for use on smartphone devices. Id. ¶ 2. The Uber App allows independent 
transportation providers-Uber "driver-partners"-to receive trip requests from members of the 
public, and provides electronic payment processing for trips booked through the Uber App. Id.
¶¶ 24, 26, 32; see id. ¶ 2 ("Uber is not a transportation company and does not employ drivers" to directly provide transportation services); id. ¶ 5 ("drivers using the App are independent firms that are in competition with one another for riders"). "The Uber App utilizes dispatch software to send the nearest independent drivers to the requesting parties' location." Id. ¶ 24. Following a ride, Uber collects a software licensing fee, which is calculated as a percentage of the fare charged by the driver-partner to the rider, and remits the remainder of the fare to the driver-partner. Id. ¶ 27. 

Uber enters into individual contracts with each driver-partner pursuant to which Uber agrees to provide the driver-partner with lead generation and payment processing services and the driver-partner agrees to pay Uber a licensing fee. Id. ¶ 38; see Declaration of Michael Colman, Ex. 2 ("Driver Terms"). As part of these separate contracts, Uber requires each driver-partner to agree to use Uber's pricing algorithm to arrive at a standard, suggested fare. Id. ¶ 47. 
The pricing algorithm is primarily based on a trip's "time and distance." Id. ¶ 55. The algorithm also uses "surge pricing," which may increase the price "based on demand or limited availability of drivers" "to incentivize its driver-partners to use the Uber App" at times of low supply. Id. ¶ 57. Uber's contracts with driver-partners expressly permit the driver-partners to reject the fare charged by the pricing algorithm and instead charge a lower fare. Driver Terms ¶ 4.1 ("You [the driver-partner] shall always have the right to: (i) charge a fare that is less than the pre-arranged Fare; or (ii) negotiate, at your request, a Fare that is lower than the pre-arranged Fare").2
Even so, Plaintiff alleges that "[a]ll of the independent driver-partners have agreed to charge the fares 
set by Uber's pricing algorithm" and not "to depart downward from the fare set by the Uber algorithm." Am. Compl. ¶¶ 68-69. Uber offers a variety of "different car service experiences," id. ¶ 25, with each "experience" providing a different level of service and price point.

The Amended Complaint asserts that all Uber driver-partners who have accepted so much as a single ride request through the Uber App, by virtue of their agreement to Uber's Driver Terms, are "participa[nts] in a conspiracy, combination, or contract _among themselves_ to adhere to the artificial price setting embodied in the Uber pricing algorithm." Id. ¶ 126 (emphasis added). Mr. Kalanick is the only person or entity identified by name as a party to the purported 
horizontal conspiracy. Id. ¶ 80. Plaintiff bases Mr. Kalanick's membership in the alleged 
horizontal conspiracy on the allegation that he acted as a driver-partner providing the UberX 
service on February 21 and 22, 2014. Id. ¶ 81 (alleging that Mr. Kalanick "tweeted" about his 
experience as a driver-partner).3

The Amended Complaint alleges that this conspiracy spans across the entire United States, id. ¶¶ 113, 122, and includes an estimated 20,000 driver-partners operating in New York City in October 2015, id. ¶ 44. Though the exact size of the alleged conspiracy is not specifically pleaded, the conspiracy must include at least several hundred thousand individual driver-partners in more than a hundred cities and 47 states across the United States. See id. ¶ 41; 
O'Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. C-13-3826, 2015 WL 5138097, *7 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 1, 2015) (certifying a plaintiff class of 160,000 driver-partners operating in California alone). Plaintiff asserts that Mr. Kalanick, in his capacity as Uber's CEO, somehow "orchestrat[ed]" the 
unlawful horizontal agreement among all of these driver-partners. Am. Compl. ¶ 127.

Plaintiff Spencer Meyer, like all users of the Uber App, expressly agreed to Uber's terms and conditions. Id. ¶ 29. Among those conditions was the following: *"You [the user] **acknowledge and agree that you and [Uber] are each waiving the right to a trial by jury or to participate as a plaintiff or class User in any purported class action or representative **proceeding."* Declaration of Michael Colman, Ex. 1 ("User Terms") at 9 (bold in original).


----------



## 5 Star Guy

Brooklyn said:


> Uber is doing that to scare the drivers into siding with them. They're not gonna tell drivers "hey your next 1,000 miles are not paid because we need to recoup money"... They're just gonna scare the drivers into believing that they're gonna lose money.


They have plenty of money to defend these cases and pay the fines. Forget airport regulation, this is about keeping the company going. They will need to increase their take to cover legal.


----------



## Beachbum in a cornfield

5 Star Guy said:


> Right, I'm saying a driver does not decide what the fee per mile is, the time or the surge amount, all a driver does is decide if he wants to drive either at that time or at that rate, take it or leave it. If enough drivers decide not to drive then they raise the surge, again they raise it and choose the amount, not a driver. That's why this is an issue and why it's going to court. Travass found another loophole and catch 22 to weasel out of.


You guys seem to be forgetting the DEMAND side of this equation. If requests go up in proportion to available drivers then the same dynamics apply. I think things will get sticky when some judge says; I want audit all of your surges for the following random dates, in the following random markets.

What I think that judge will find is some madcap hijinx played out in local offices in every market with surge triggers and the amount of the multiples. SURGE is the dumbest idea I have ever seen in a business application. Charging your customers more for doing exactly what you want them to do is a short term fix and a long term disaster.....That judge is also likely to find that surge is an arbitrary thing not some algorithmically triggered process to reposition UBER'S rolling stock.


----------



## Hackenstein

The fact that Uber drivers can go offline and monitor the passenger app for a surge while already being in the physical area, literally equates to price gouging. 

Any other business would never be allowed to do something like that.


----------



## MoneyUber4

Uber will have money to defend themselves until:
1) Investors start requesting their money back and
2) there is order from the court to cease and desist their Illegal operation.


----------



## Beachbum in a cornfield

biggplays1 said:


> First off, Uber "partners" don't set the prices, it is done by Uber and their so-called algorithm. Partners are only in control of which rides they decide to accept or reject at the rate Uber assigns to those rides. (And if someone actually gets deactivated for not accepting a ride, this is a lawsuit on its own in that an "independent" contractor decides which rides or "contracts" that they want to accept similar to a roofer or plumber deciding what jobs he wants to accept.) If partners were truly "independent" contractors, there would be a customizable feature in the app to set what price you will drive per mile and per minute, while the rider app would display the closest drivers to the pickup location, along with their individual rates, and the riders would choose which driver to hail (i.e. "Joe" is 7 min away and prices at $1.65/mile and .15 cent a minute, "Frank" is 2 min away and prices at $1.90 and .10 a minute. This would truly be an "independent contractor" scenario and Uber would truly be renting the software. This would solve everything as Uber wouldn't need to use surge at all as the independent contractors would set their own rates and could customize them within the app. When Uber sets the rates, controls the surges, and from what some are saying punishes drivers for not accepting contracts (rides), they are no longer independent contractors at this point. As far as their "booking fee" is concerned, they can't charge BOTH a booking fee and take a percentage of their choosing. They either have to negotiate the percentage with the driver or charge a consistent flat rental fee for the software to everyone (i.e. $300 a month, or all rides are $1-$3 to rent the software). They can't legally take both without any negotiation. This is what's ultimately going to cause them to lose their claim that their drivers are independent contractors, especially if they are deactivating contractors for not accepting contracts (rides). In the same way that a hair stylist negotiates their commission and sets their rates OR rents their chair for the month (in Uber's case, it would be a monthly software fee), Uber is not following the very definition of an independent contractor. Uber tacks on a "booking fee", but the drivers have no say or negotiation power to tack on a "maintainence fee" for gas and car upkeep, as an independent contractor should. This case is essentially Uber having to defend and justify its own algorithm that it assigns and FORCES it's drivers to accept or reject with no customizability. However, this will ultimately lead back to the employee vs independent contractor argument. If Uber had contractors set their own rates, there would never be a need for surge!


A VERY interesting proposition.....I need to ponder this.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

Beachbum in a cornfield said:


> You guys seem to be forgetting the DEMAND side of this equation. If requests go up in proportion to available drivers then the same dynamics apply. I think things will get sticky when some judge says; I want audit all of your surges for the following random dates, in the following random markets.
> 
> What I think that judge will find is some madcap hijinx played out in local offices in every market with surge triggers and the amount of the multiples. SURGE is the dumbest idea I have ever seen in a business application. Charging your customers more for doing exactly what you want them to do is a short term fix and a long term disaster.....That judge is also likely to find that surge is an arbitrary thing not some algorithmically triggered process to reposition UBER'S rolling stock.


I did consider the demand side, that was my point. I disagree with your take on the surge.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

UberLaLa said:


> Actually, I do set my price...only drive when the Surge is 2.0x or higher. Many in the Los Angeles market will not turn on their Driver Apps until the price _they want_ as a Driver to drive is there. Enough Drivers don't go on line, Surge happens...we prove it here.


That's not you setting the price (FARE) the pax pays...
it's you determining at what rate YOU will accept a ride request.
Uber sets the fare - not you.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

Trebor said:


> We do set prices. We are allowed to accept and deny any ride we want to as a independent contractors. They are not holding a gun to our head saying take this 10x surge.


If we only accept 10X surge we won't have a high enough acceptance rate and we'll be gone. So we are really NOT allowed to accept or deny any ride offered.

Uber, on the other hand, can set the price anywhere they want.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

jonnyplastic said:


> *Hey Travis, raise the damn rates to a reasonable rate for both rider and driver ($2.00 and .40). No more surge games. Everyone is happy. It's not that complicated you numbskull! The end. *


POST # 25/jonnyplastic : Sorry, j.p.,
TCK thrives on
treating "commodity" like Used Toilet
Paper because Ayn Rand has told him
"It's O.K." AND part of his "Genius Vision"
for a BizarroWorld without Private Car
Ownership for the Pesky Proletariat.

"Big Brother" can't let "Winston Smith"
even THINK about a Better Life! You
DID read Orwell's "1984", right ? It's
TCK's "PlayBook" per Sydney Uber...
and This Bison concurs.

☆ ☆ THE TRUTH ABOUT #[F]UBER ☆ ☆
Avarice+Deceit+Hubri$+Schadenfreude


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

s9ramirez33 said:


> This suite is brought by customers not drivers.


POST # 76/s9ramirez33:........................
"SUITE" : A series of connected Rooms
.................used as a Unit.
"SUIT" : Short for Lawsuit....the Uber
..............Lawsuit litigated by Shannon
..............Liss-Reardon, Esq. of Boston, MA.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

Brooklyn said:


> Didn't you block me before? Why so sassy? It seems like you're so defensive about something you don't care about. Dude relax.. I remember you defending them. I'm pretty sure other members here can remember you defending them. Geez. Calm down there pal.


POST # 105/Brooklyn : Call out the #8
Notable...THEN tell
him to Chillax ? No bueno Senor. If you
have Evidence to support your claim
that the Member that chi1cabby him-
self praised as a "Great Great-Laker" WAS
a #[F]UberShill, then PRODUCE IT.

I realize that your Membership predates
his by Six Months, but Unsubstantiated
Aspersions about Michael - Cleveland 
help NONE of Our Readers.

Mentoring Bison: Keeping. It. 100%. REAL!


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

DriverX said:


> Nothing good has ever come from OC.


POST # 108/DriverX : SIR ! You besmirch
the Good[User]Name
of OCBob and ocbob2 . Please issue
a Retraction of your BroadBrushing.


----------



## The_Mouser

Price fixing is an agreement (written, verbal, or inferred from conduct) among competitors that raises, lowers, or stabilizes prices or competitive terms. Generally, the antitrust laws require that each company establish prices and other terms on its own, without agreeing with a competitor. When consumers make choices about what products and services to buy, they expect that the price has been determined freely on the basis of supply and demand, not by an agreement among competitors. When competitors agree to restrict competition, the result is often higher prices. Accordingly, price fixing is a major concern of government antitrust enforcement.

A plain agreement among competitors to fix prices is almost always illegal, whether prices are fixed at a minimum, maximum, or within some range. _*Illegal price fixing occurs whenever two or more competitors agree to take actions that have the effect of raising, lowering or stabilizing the price of any product or service without any legitimate justification.*_ Price-fixing schemes are often worked out in secret and can be hard to uncover, but an agreement can be discovered from "circumstantial" evidence. *For example, if direct competitors have a pattern of unexplained identical contract terms or price behavior together with other factors (such as the lack of legitimate business explanation), unlawful price fixing may be the reason.* Invitations to coordinate prices also can raise concerns, as when one competitor announces publicly that it is willing to end a price war if its rival is willing to do the same, and the terms are so specific that competitors may view this as an offer to set prices jointly.

....

*An agreement to restrict production, sales, or output is just as illegal as direct price fixing, because reducing the supply of a product or service drives up its price.* For example, the FTC challenged an agreement among competing oil importers to restrict the supply of lubricants by refusing to import or sell those products in Puerto Rico. The competitors were seeking to pressure the legislature to repeal an environmental deposit fee on lubricants, and warned of lubricant shortages and higher prices. The FTC alleged that the conspiracy was an unlawful horizontal agreement to restrict output that was inherently likely to harm competition and that had no countervailing efficiencies that would benefit consumers.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

tommyboy said:


> I can't see uber colluding with thousands of drivers on a regular basis that truly is preposterous
> The surge is intended to get drivers to high demand areas and it does just that. Is there an easier and Kinder way probably. This system pisses a lot of people off drivers and riders What company in its right mind wants malcontents on both sides of the supply and demand equation. It appears on the surface at least that they are in it for the short haul. Pun definitely intended For example with a system like this in place it will be virtually impossible to maintain loyalty from any body and people will be making any of a number of alternatives to get from point a to point be . Just wait and see there will be hundreds of little ride share companies popping up with a better mouse trap it's inevitable Uber will win the implementation of the ride share business war but lose all the little battles to smaller more personalized competitors. Appearing greedy and cutthroat is no way to create goodwill and develop brand loyalty. I could write a book about this and the star up mistakes they are making For example take a daily customer who is totally reliant on uber then she gets surged her transportation budget goes to he'll in a hand basket She will start looking for alternative arrangements like collecting driver numbers and belive me she will get them This surge pricing model is a design for disaster. Truly I hope that come up with a workable platform before they just turn into another crooked cab company in the publics mind and drivers mind as well .Its still early enough to say hey were young and inexperienced and learning give us a chance to rectify our mistakes


POST # 129/tommyboy : O Y ..V E Y !
I can offer you
a Discounted Rate on "All You can Eat
Punctuation", if & when you disconnect
your "Stream of Consciousness".

Mentoring Bison : S E R I O U S L Y !


----------



## The_Mouser

Even the appearance of price fixing can land you in hot water. One of the stories they tell in real estate school is of two sales people sitting at a booth in a restaurant having a conversation when the subject turned to commissions on sales where their rates were discussed. A member of Texas Real Estate Commission happened to be eating at the table behind them and overheard the conversation. Both agents had their licenses revoked as a result.

As an agent you are not allowed to, in any way, infer what a typical commission is for any real estate transaction. You can tell a customer what you charge, but you can't say that you charge the "going rate of" or "industry standard" or anything similar or you could be sanctioned by the commission or lose your license.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

Michael - Cleveland said:


> That's (trying very hard not to call that 'dumb') ridiculous.
> The drivers do not set the price any more than (in your scenario) riders turning off their app to drive a surge OFF.
> UBER'S computers (and the decision makers behind them) determine surge pricing. End of story.


The drivers actually have less control over the overall price of a trip because they don't have a trip estimate option like the pax. The pax know how much the trip is likely to cost them and can decide to take it or not based on that information. If they "lose" money, based on the assumption that they are paying more than the trip is worth (or "should" be worth) that is by choice. If they choose not to take it they may be stranded, but more likely they will simply have to wait a little while for the surge to go down.

They are given a lot more information than the driver.

The driver doesn't even know how long the trip is, may be unable to determine an accurate eta or mileage to pickup in the time given, and certainly is not given a trip estimate. He may (and on many short trips that are not close to him) lose money, but has no way of knowing until he arrives at the pickup point.

If he then decides to not take the trip he has already lost money. In my market if the rider cancels or is not there he has lost money (no cancel fee). And in those cases, even if it was surging he is losing money.

If he refuses too many, unlike the pax his consequence could be job loss or at least, a timeout. This happens even if he is offered ONLY money losing trips which he refuses.

The pax can attempt to control the surge by turning off the app en mass, just as the drivers can attempt the same by going offline.

But Uber can turn on the surge if they want, or turn it off or cap it (as they do now during declared emergencies). Neither pax nor drivers can really know when or if they do that. However, the wording of the reason for surge implies that they do. "FARES HAVE INCREASED TO GET MORE DRIVERS ON THE ROAD."

Drivers don't control the price any more than I do the price of gas at my local gas pump. Sure, it MAY go down if enough people decide it's too expensive, just as surge may go up if the drivers don't take trips. But when the gas price does change, I really won't know for sure why it did, just as the Uber driver doesn't know if anything they did changed the surge.

Saying drivers collude to raise the surge is no different than saying riders are colluding to lower it when they refuse to pay the high surge price.

I think by putting himself at odds with the drivers Travis has only made his position worse. Put 10 drivers on the stand and 9 will say they'd be happy to cap the surge but raise the regular rates to something more reasonable. The 1 who disagrees will come across as an idiot to any judge anyway. The drivers are unwilling participants in any price fixing going on. If they COULD fix the prices they'd be higher overall with less surge.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

5 Star Guy said:


> As long as you are active and logged off you are manipulating the surge. There is no schedule of hours to work or shifts, it's work when you want, which is a big part of being an independent contractor, well that part.  As soon as you log on you are manipulating the surge, at least you are working though.


That means the vast majority of the time I am at home (awake or asleep), at my real job, shopping etc. but not online, I'm manipulating the surge? Even though I may only go online a couple hours a week?


----------



## The_Mouser

A uniform, simultaneous price change could be the result of price fixing, but it could also be the result of independent business responses to the same market conditions. For example, if conditions in the international oil market cause an increase in the price of crude oil, this could lead to an increase in the wholesale price of gasoline. Local gasoline stations may respond to higher wholesale gasoline prices by increasing their prices to cover these higher costs. Other market forces, such as publicly posting current prices (as is common with most gasoline stations), encourages suppliers to adjust their own prices quickly in order not to lose sales. If there is evidence that the gasoline station operators talked to each other about increasing prices and agreed on a common pricing plan, however, that may be an antitrust violation.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

Tequila Jake said:


> It was Uber who said drivers will have to pay:
> *
> "Uber argues the conspiracy described in the New York complaint and ruling would be physically impossible under the antitrust law, and that if Uber lost at trial then thousands of drivers would be forced to pay damages. The company also contends the case is fundamentally flawed because Kalanick would have to personally compete with Uber drivers for rides in order for the type of conspiracy alleged in the case to be true."*
> 
> Individual drivers are not named in the suit so I don't believe they can be compelled by the court to repay customers. However, Uber could try to recover from the drivers by withholding future pay. I think that would be suicidal since every driver who has ever had a surge fare would stop driving for them.


Uber would just add another dollar to every safe rider (sorry "booking") fee to cover it.


----------



## ABC123DEF

Uber...the king of nickel and diming. I think that they'd might as well go ahead and bury themselves if they add another dollar the the booking/SR fee inside of not even 2 years.


----------



## ubershiza

They'll always be someone desperate enough to drive for them.


----------



## JMBF831

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Nonono dont send him to us!
> Entitled pax like this can walk or take the bus.


You have no CLUE about young millenials, bro.

Talk about a 5 minute trip (1 mile or less) and they're asking for a charge cable, aux cord, and bottled water...For a $6 ride ($3 for the driver after Uber's cut, haha)

They don't know how good they have it with Uber. I'd love to force them to use your Cab service for a solid month:

Double the price, much longer wait times, crappy cars, smelly cars, people (drivers) who provide shit service, no aux or charge cord, AND, in most cases, cash only please.

hahaha
Honestly, they would FLOCK back to Uber if they saw what the alternative was. Thanks for making us look good!


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Drivers manipulate surge. Its written in red white and blue all ovwr this website.

Its not the drivers fault- I dont blame drivers, but Ubers legal councel threw Uber partners right the @#$% under the bus.
Your "partner" Travis is one self centered evil #$%@


----------



## Bolympia

JMBF831 said:


> You have no CLUE about young millenials, bro.
> 
> Talk about a 5 minute trip (1 mile or less) and they're asking for a charge cable, aux cord, and bottled water...For a $6 ride ($3 for the driver after Uber's cut, haha)
> 
> They don't know how good they have it with Uber. I'd love to force them to use your Cab service for a solid month:
> 
> Double the price, much longer wait times, crappy cars, smelly cars, people (drivers) who provide shit service, no aux or charge cord, AND, in most cases, cash only please.
> 
> hahaha
> Honestly, they would FLOCK back to Uber if they saw what the alternative was. Thanks for making us look good!


Double the price-Because Taxi companies and the municipalities that regulate them see to it that their drivers get a fair wage.

much longer wait times-Because unlike Uber and Lyft the cities who regulate the taxi industry have enough sense not to over-saturate the market, so their is enough business to go around.

crappy cars-The is because they're being driven into the ground as taxis. In SF our taxis are on the road 22 hours a day 365 days a year. Most of them are scrapped within 3 years after entering the fleet brand new. Soon you and so many other ride-share drivers will be pushing beaters. Was Uber worth it?


Now that I have given you a clue hopefully you'll get one.


----------



## Beachbum in a cornfield

ubershiza said:


> They'll always be someone desperate enough to drive for them.


This sentiment has reached axiomatic status until now. In Indy....Uber is acting desperate using big incentives and flooding the airwaves with ads. Nothing can mitigate driving for 20 minutes for 2 bucks.


----------



## Beachbum in a cornfield

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Drivers manipulate surge. Its written in red white and blue all ovwr this website.
> 
> Its not the drivers fault- I dont blame drivers, but Ubers legal councel threw Uber partners right the @#$% under the bus.
> Your "partner" Travis is one self centered evil #$%@


Agreed on all counts. HOWEVER....Drivers offer nothing to the litigators (most are poor) so the name of the game is show how Uber AND the drivers manipulate the surge....Anyone who has ever logged on to see blitz surges appear only for a few minutes knows the app creates capacity by luring drivers to log on. Why do you think the app now shows surge even when logged off?....That kind of stuff is going to be out in full court. I have written elsewhere in this thread that an audit of algorithm driven surges would be devastating to Uber.


----------



## tommyboy

Here's what happens next. The driver shows up at the pickup location doesn't like the price of the ride tells the customer he wants more money. The pax between a rock and a hard place agrees. Ride complete Pax contacts uber describes scenario. Uber deactivates driver. That will be the beginning of legally defining the true nature of the relationship under the law. However because almost all legal control is under local jurisdiction it will be played out in all markets all over the world and uber will need as many lawyers as it has drivers.Who knows maybe the lawyers can moonlight as driver. At least they'd do a honest days work for a change


----------



## tommyboy

I'm always going east when the surge is going west.Feel like wrong way peachfuzz.Now I just drive let the thinking done by artificial intelligence guide my nomadic existence. In the not to distant future computerized men in black will be the drivers Or even better movie stars of your choice showing up with rates being determined by star popularity. Just don't touch the merchandise.Any thing is possible in the virtual world uber and ourselves will be living in and in the new world reality will be a thing of the past


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

observer said:


> What is the relationship between Haberdasher and the Bison? For some reason, I always thought they were one and the same.


Are you familiar with Jekyl and Hyde?


TwoFiddyMile said:


> Drivers manipulate surge. Its written in red white and blue all ovwr this website.
> 
> Its not the drivers fault- I dont blame drivers, but Ubers legal councel threw Uber partners right the @#$% under the bus.
> Your "partner" Travis is one self centered evil #$%@


That's wishful thinking. Pure fantasy.
Just like the toddler in the race-car-looking shopping cart spinning the steering-wheel.

6 driver's *think* they're manipulating the surge because they log off in city of 500,000 people with 500 drivers available.

Drivers do not manipulate anything but their own mindset.



tommyboy said:


> I'm always going east when the surge is going west.Feel like wrong way peachfuzz.Now I just drive let the thinking done by artificial intelligence guide my nomadic existence. In the not to distant future computerized men in black will be the drivers Or even better movie stars of your choice showing up with rates being determined by star popularity. Just don't touch the merchandise.Any thing is possible in the virtual world uber and ourselves will be living in and in the new world reality will be a thing of the past


The irony is that by the time Uber gets its hands on working, legally acceptable autonomous cars, people will no longer travel to destinations, opting instead to just use virtual reality devices. 
(_"Siri: put me in section FLOOR, ROW 1, SEAT 25 of the NBA finals game - and put Amanda in Seat 26"_)



ABC123DEF said:


> I think that they'd might as well go ahead and bury themselves if they add another dollar the the booking/SR fee inside of not even 2 years.


Why? They'd just lower the fares so it comes out of the driver's end.


----------



## tommyboy

Who wants to be an employee. Freedom is what we have as drives put a rate on that.Do we want set schedules bosses your ass kissing ability determining your success.

Come on guys be careful or you might get what you wish for. If we are declared employees all the control companies exert on traditional basis will follow.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

tommyboy said:


> Who wants to be an employee. Freedom is what we have as drives put a rate on that.Do we want set schedules bosses your ass kissing ability determining your success.
> 
> Come on guys be careful or you might get what you wish for. If we are declared employees all the control companies exert on traditional basis will follow.


It's not black and white or nearly as simple as you make it out.
Read the Fair Labor & Standards Act (FLSA) and get familiar with the Dept of Labor and IRS regulations that support the law and you'll begin to understand what Congress had in mind when setting out to prevent exploitation of workers. *No company should be able to build their business and their brand by promoting a service provided by individuals who bear 100% of the cost of providing the service but have no control over what they are paid for that service.*
The result of practices like that are what you see now with Uber:
People spending more than they can earn for the sole benefit of the corporation that recruited them with implications of earnings.

Uber is going to have to make a choice in the future:

Use independent contractors to provide transportation services as they do now (and live up to their claim that Uber is a Tech company, not a transportation services company) - and allow drivers control over their earnings...

_OR_

Come up with a system by which drivers are protected under the Dept of Labor's Hours and Wages division regulations of minimum wage and over-time - AND the IRS's regulations on expenses and payroll taxes - AND states requirements for Worker's Compensation insurance and Unemployment insurance.​


----------



## tommyboy

Your right I simplified and personalized a very complex situation. As a single man without many financial obligations to meet I could afford to make a statement like the one that i made.Many drivers have life situations that require more stable earnings and security not necessarily for them but there families.Please accept my apologies for those off the cuff remarks. This is not a hobby or a source of amusement for most drivers. In the future I will try not to be so aloof


----------



## 5 Star Guy

I give Travass credit for being putting this together as an entrepreneur, he's a horrible leader though. I think by keeping the driver uninformed is his way of saying it's a free market, drivers are independent contractors and there is no price fixing or collusion. It would probably be very difficult to defend the case if he provided that intel to drivers.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

5 Star Guy said:


> I give Travass credit for being putting this together as an entrepreneur, he's a horrible leader though. I think by keeping the driver uninformed is his way of saying it's a free market, drivers are independent contractors and there is no price fixing or collusion. It would probably be very difficult to defend the case if he provided that intel to drivers.


TKs attitude towards business is the same as the young turk bankers and finance folk who developed derivatives: 
_'because we have the technology to create something that appears to have value, we have the right to do it because the law doesn't prevent it.'_
That same thinking led to the near complete collapse of the US financial system - and cost individuals and institutions (and in some cases, countries!) billions of $ in losses.


----------



## ABC123DEF

Techheads believe that they can do what they want when they want in the name of "disruption" and "innovation" with no regard for consequences or social responsibility. Human beings' lives and emotions be darned.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

ABC123DEF said:


> Techheads believe that they can do what they want when they want in the name of "disruption" and "innovation" with no regard for consequences or social responsibility.


 Or laws and regulations.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

Fuzzyelvis said:


> That means the vast majority of the time I am at home (awake or asleep), at my real job, shopping etc. but not online, I'm manipulating the surge? Even though I may only go online a couple hours a week?


They know how many pax and drivers are active and from there how many are online and from there they match a pax with a driver. That intel sets the price, fees and surge. They claimed to lower rates since they knew there were fewer trips, allegedly.


----------



## Trebor

Fuzzyelvis said:


> If we only accept 10X surge we won't have a high enough acceptance rate and we'll be gone. So we are really NOT allowed to accept or deny any ride offered.
> 
> Uber, on the other hand, can set the price anywhere they want.


I said, "they are not holding a gun saying take this 10x surge". I did not say to "only accept 10x rides". Either way, you can easily log out when the surge turns on before a ride comes in, or you can do as you propose and only log in when the surge is 10x.

It is pretty widespread knowledge that riders can "monitor" the surge while logged out via their driver app, rider app, or even a 3rd party app. Your acceptance rate can stay at 100% should you decide to take surge or non-surge rides.


----------



## Trebor

5 Star Guy said:


> They know how many pax and drivers are active and from there how many are online and from there they match a pax with a driver. That intel sets the price, fees and surge. They claimed to lower rates since they knew there were fewer trips, allegedly.


I am still trying to wrap my head around how Uber thinks they can be more profitable by lowering rates an therefore the commission they receive.


----------



## ChortlingCrison

Trebor said:


> I am still trying to wrap my head around how Uber thinks they can be more profitable by lowering rates an therefore the commission they receive.


Well I don't think they profit from the rate cut/mile, but in a quite a few cities they raised the "booking fees" ranging from $1 to $3 per ride.


----------



## ABC123DEF

Never underestimate the wrath or path of Foober Math!


----------



## Trebor

ChortlingCrison said:


> Well I don't think they profit from the rate cut/mile, but in a quite a few cities they raised the "booking fees" ranging from $1 to $3 per ride.


Yea, but if they doubled the mileage rate, they will make more than the $3 every few miles. They can leave the booking fee at that price.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Trebor said:


> I am still trying to wrap my head around how Uber thinks they can be more profitable by lowering rates an therefore the commission they receive.


Simple.
The goal is and always has been 100% servicing of pings. They are worried about losing service levels to lyft, taxis, buses, cancelations.
More important to seek 100% utilization and never miss a ping than have high rates and lose market share.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Simple.
> The goal is and always has been 100% servicing of pings. They are worried about losing service levels to lyft, taxis, buses, cancelations.
> More important to seek 100% utilization and never miss a ping than have high rates and lose market share.


Precisely. Forget about the driver (Uber does) and picture a car moving 24/7/365 generating fares 90% of the time the wheels are turning. THAT is what Uber is trying to achieve.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Right.
If Uber thought it was feasible to charge .10 per mile as long as jabrones still destroyed their car for it and they approached that 100% service level, they would.
Detroit is the "how low will they go" proving ground. 
Keep your parachute cord at the ready.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Precisely. Forget about the driver (Uber does) and picture a car moving 24/7/365 generating fares 90% of the time the wheels are turning. THAT is what Uber is trying to achieve.


That's why drivers are getting tossed and replaced, the more who are active and taking pings the closer Travass is to that goal. They have a lot of expenses for active pax and drivers who don't ping enough.


----------



## JMBF831

Trebor said:


> I am still trying to wrap my head around how Uber thinks they can be more profitable by lowering rates an therefore the commission they receive.


It's actually quite simple...Profit ratio vs volume...

Company A sells 10 cars per year, but they make $1,000 profit per car.

Company B sells 100 cars per year, but they make $100 profit per car.

Both companies make $10,000 per year. Uber will actually win more customers over will lower rates, and thus will end up making more money in the long run. In a perfect "Uber" world every person in the whole world would use Uber and every person in the world would be an Uber driver.

The part of the idea of "If you lower rates you make more money!" that is flawed is this:

As a driver, you can still only take 3 trips per hour (on average). Sometimes you can squeeze 4 if you're taking short trips, but it's safe to say 3 per hour is about the max per hour. So, even if you have the entire world taking Uber, as a driver, you can still only get 3 rides per hour. And if those 3 riders per hour are at $1.15 per mile versus .65 cents it makes a big difference.


----------



## JMBF831

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Right.
> If Uber thought it was feasible to charge .10 per mile as long as jabrones still destroyed their car for it and they approached that 100% service level, they would.
> Detroit is the "how low will they go" proving ground.
> Keep your parachute cord at the ready.


I don't think it's a bad business idea to test out pricing in different areas (especially low income areas like Detroit where gas is a lot cheaper, too). It makes sense to have different pricing around the nation, but obviously .30/mile is just too low.

We can't compare the San Francisco market to Detroit, though. It's entirely flawed.

SF is literally the most expensive place to live in the United States. And people make 100k income like it's nothing. It's filled with tons of millionaires. Gas prices are incredibly high, here.

Detroit, is...Well...Detroit.


----------



## UberLaLa

Trebor said:


> I am still trying to wrap my head around how Uber thinks they can be more profitable by lowering rates an therefore the commission they receive.


By hurting competition and charging the SRF fee. Uber X is all about quantity not quality, at the moment.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

Fuzzyelvis said:


> The drivers actually have less control over the overall price of a trip because they don't have a trip estimate option like the pax. The pax know how much the trip is likely to cost them and can decide to take it or not based on that information. If they "lose" money, based on the assumption that they are paying more than the trip is worth (or "should" be worth) that is by choice. If they choose not to take it they may be stranded, but more likely they will simply have to wait a little while for the surge to go down.
> 
> They are given a lot more information than the driver.
> 
> The driver doesn't even know how long the trip is, may be unable to determine an accurate eta or mileage to pickup in the time given, and certainly is not given a trip estimate. He may (and on many short trips that are not close to him) lose money, but has no way of knowing until he arrives at the pickup point.
> 
> If he then decides to not take the trip he has already lost money. In my market if the rider cancels or is not there he has lost money (no cancel fee). And in those cases, even if it was surging he is losing money.
> 
> If he refuses too many, unlike the pax his consequence could be job loss or at least, a timeout. This happens even if he is offered ONLY money losing trips which he refuses.
> 
> The pax can attempt to control the surge by turning off the app en mass, just as the drivers can attempt the same by going offline.
> 
> But Uber can turn on the surge if they want, or turn it off or cap it (as they do now during declared emergencies). Neither pax nor drivers can really know when or if they do that. However, the wording of the reason for surge implies that they do. "FARES HAVE INCREASED TO GET MORE DRIVERS ON THE ROAD."
> 
> Drivers don't control the price any more than I do the price of gas at my local gas pump. Sure, it MAY go down if enough people decide it's too expensive, just as surge may go up if the drivers don't take trips. But when the gas price does change, I really won't know for sure why it did, just as the Uber driver doesn't know if anything they did changed the surge.
> 
> Saying drivers collude to raise the surge is no different than saying riders are colluding to lower it when they refuse to pay the high surge price.
> 
> I think by putting himself at odds with the drivers Travis has only made his position worse. Put 10 drivers on the stand and 9 will say they'd be happy to cap the surge but raise the regular rates to something more reasonable. The 1 who disagrees will come across as an idiot to any judge anyway. The drivers are unwilling participants in any price fixing going on. If they COULD fix the prices they'd be higher overall with less surge.


POST # 159/Fuzzyelvis : To my Esteemed
#2 Notable Neighbor
I can only offer a humble "Amen, Sister!"


----------



## JMBF831

UberLaLa said:


> By hurting competition and charging the SRF fee. Uber X is all about quantity not quality, at the moment.


And it isn't a terrible idea so long as they plan to create a monopoly and then jack up their pricing haha


----------



## UberLaLa

JMBF831 said:


> And it isn't a terrible idea so long as they plan to create a monopoly and then jack up their pricing haha


Which they will...


----------



## 5 Star Guy

UberLaLa said:


> Which they will...


Google will have much lower costs, they could raise drivers and lower pax rates significantly for people to switch.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

JMBF831 said:


> And it isn't a terrible idea so long as they plan to create a monopoly and then jack up their pricing haha


POST # 194/JMBF831: Yeah .....too bad
that Emperor @$$hat
is Hellbent on Destroying Lyft and the
Taxi Industry ONLY BY #[F]Uber being
"...as Cheap and Reliable as Running H2O."

"Misanthropy on Parade" is the Article
about #Travis K. Whatapr♤♡k! that THIS
MEMBER would like to see a Journalist
"Tee Off" on.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

5 Star Guy said:


> Google will have much lower costs, they could raise drivers and lower pax rates significantly for people to switch.


"WILL"...
"IF"...
by "THEN"... I'll be long buried.

Good to know our sweatshop labor will make the world a better place in the future.



TwoFiddyMile said:


> Detroit is the "how low will they go" proving ground.


That's actually a myth.
If you compare driver's earnings on a min fare ride and a ride of 3 miles and a ride of 10 miles in Detroit to Cleveland, they are very similar.
Everyone (including me) points only to the CLE $.77/mile vs the DET $.30/mile* and ignores the CLE $.13.minute vs the DET $.30 minute*. 
In city driving it takes more than 2 minutes to drive 1 mile...
that makes Detroit's fares $1.37/mile vs Cleveland's $1.80/mile.
It takes only a small difference in the avg speed in the cities to close that gap -
and it definitely takes longer to drive one mile in the city of Detroit than in the city of Cleveland.

*Detroit, it appears in reality, is not a test of 'how low can Uber go' -
it is a test of how and where to put the emphasis of the fare: on miles or minutes*.

Let's also remember that there is politics in play in Detroit: Uber and Lyft were both courting the major US car manufacturer's for investment $. GM put its $$ in Lyft (and I'm sure Kalanick saw that coming long before it was made public)... so, since everyone only talks about the Fare per Mile': drive down the fare per mile in Detroit to to bury Lyft in GMs frontyard.


----------



## ubershiza

Casuale Haberdasher said:


> POST # 194/JMBF831: Yeah .....too bad
> that Emperor @$$hat
> is Hellbent on Destroying Lyft and the
> Taxi Industry ONLY BY #[F]Uber being
> "...as Cheap and Reliable as Running H2O."
> 
> "Misanthropy on Parade" is the Article
> about #Travis K. Whatapr♤♡k! that THIS
> MEMBER would like to see a Journalist
> "Tee Off" on.


Your esoteric cataloging system continues to amaze, only to be complement by your superlative comments.


----------



## tommyboy

The funny part of the rate increase is they didn't have to do it. It was probably an attempt to expand the market get more people with cars not to use them. In economics they are called elasticity studies. Make percentage adjustments in price to illicit corresponding adjustments in demand
However the blowback from the maneuver apparently was not worth it The customer didn't want it.They from all the comments I've heard think we are not charging enough
Our service beats cabs hands down
From what I've heard it's temporary due to the winter slowdown.We will see personally I will just stop driving if it's not worth the time no hard feelings. I'll be back when it's worth the time. I like 9 out of 10 rides. Right now though it's been good most days especially when I drive early. Of course I wasn't here before the cut.Then again my financial needs are pretty small compared to a lot of people I live a simple life and like that way


----------



## s9ramirez33

Casuale Haberdasher said:


> POST # 76/s9ramirez33:........................
> "SUITE" : A series of connected Rooms
> .................used as a Unit.
> "SUIT" : Short for Lawsuit....the Uber
> ..............Lawsuit litigated by Shannon
> ..............Liss-Reardon, Esq. of Boston, MA.


Thanks professor for editing the word, suite and suit. Omg your so smart you know how to used a dictionary something that I don't know how to used. Maybe that's why I'm an Uber driver and troll in this forum. What's your excuse professor??


----------



## 5 Star Guy

s9ramirez33 said:


> Thanks professor for editing the word, suite and suit. Omg your so smart you know how to used a dictionary something that I don't know how to used. Maybe that's why I'm an Uber driver and troll in this forum. What's your excuse professor??


You're not your, use not used, use not used. No one is judging, troll as much as you want.


----------



## Hackenstein

tommyboy said:


> The funny part of the rate increase is they didn't have to do it. It was probably an attempt to expand the market get more people with cars not to use them. In economics they are called elasticity studies. Make percentage adjustments in price to illicit corresponding adjustments in demand
> However the blowback from the maneuver apparently was not worth it The customer didn't want it.They from all the comments I've heard think we are not charging enough
> Our service beats cabs hands down
> From what I've heard it's temporary due to the winter slowdown.We will see personally I will just stop driving if it's not worth the time no hard feelings. I'll be back when it's worth the time. I like 9 out of 10 rides. Right now though it's been good most days especially when I drive early. Of course I wasn't here before the cut.Then again my financial needs are pretty small compared to a lot of people I live a simple life and like that way


I'm getting more and more customers who've been ripped off by uber, and aren't happy about the condition of the cars.

There are also a surprising number who refuse to use it because they (believe it or not) see that the wildly uneven regulations are simply unfair and shouldn't be legal. Their words, not mine.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

ubershiza said:


> Your esoteric cataloging system continues to amaze, only to be complement by your superlative comments.


POST # 199/ubershiza : Your succint
and Generous 
Compliment serves as a Countervailing Force to diminish the Effects of Off-the-
Wall Diatribes emanating from Iowa via "Montana" or from the Angry Misogynistic Bowels of a Santa Monica Cyberbully.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

s9ramirez33 said:


> Thanks professor for editing the word, suite and suit. Omg your so smart you know how to used a dictionary something that I don't know how to used. Maybe that's why I'm an Uber driver and troll in this forum. What's your excuse professor??


POST # 201/s9ramirez33: A Wise Man
once said :
"Whether you CAN...or you CAN'T
...........Either way....YOU are right !"


----------



## tommyboy

What is a troll. I hear that word all the time. When I was a kid they were little dolls that looked like cave men. Anybody know where I can buy a couple hundred to sell to pax.Just kidding hey you want a troll 3 for a nickel two for a dime


----------



## Beachbum in a cornfield

Lyft just raised its rates today in Indy..... Per mile from .70 to .80.....waiting from .14 to .15. It ain't much and it still sucks but....This tells me something about Lyft's positioning with respect to UBER.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

tommyboy said:


> What is a troll. I hear that word all the time. When I was a kid they were little dolls that looked like cave men. Anybody know where I can buy a couple hundred to sell to pax.Just kidding hey you want a troll 3 for a nickel two for a dime


Forget about a troll, you sound like the new service drivers on here are testing soon. U Deal, pays thousands a day, tax free. We don't need no stinkin' stars.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

Beachbum in a cornfield said:


> Lyft just raised its rates today in Indy..... Per mile from .70 to .80.....waiting from .14 to .15. It ain't much and it still sucks but....This tells me something about Lyft's positioning with respect to UBER.


POST # 207/Beachbum in a cornfield:
HiHo! One of my
First Close Associates here on UPNF
was IndyDriver , who learned 1st-
hand that HIS "Market's" Local Office
and GM kept close tabs on Social Media
AND took such exception to a Tweet that
he got his "Walking Papers". He's been
MUCH Happier as a Lyfter. See if he'll
respond to a "Convo". I will attempt lo-
cating him on The Twitter.

Haberdasher Admires. Bison Inspires!


----------



## NachonCheeze

Hackenstein said:


> I'm getting more and more customers who've been ripped off by uber, and aren't happy about the condition of the cars.
> 
> There are also a surprising number who refuse to use it because they (believe it or not) see that the wildly uneven regulations are simply unfair and shouldn't be legal. Their words, not mine.


Thats odd. I get so many comments about the over priced taxi service, smelly drivers that dont speak english, and how "they prefer Uber" over taxis...their words, not mine


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Simple.
> The goal is and always has been 100% servicing of pings. They are worried about losing service levels to lyft, taxis, buses, cancelations.
> More important to seek 100% utilization and never miss a ping than have high rates and lose market share.


I think you're wrong in that they don't care too much about low density areas. My home is now designated "no uberx available" much of the night. A year ago that was not the case. Folks out here (like me) are simply not driving at these rates, and those who don't live here certainly won't head out here unless a pax makes them.

It's also surging very high sporadically in the suburbs. Because it IS so sporadic and if you are in Houston you won't get there before the surge is gone (15-20 miles from downtown), I don't think it is helping the riders much. They are learning that uber is not dependable, not even available many times, and when it is they may be hit with a big surge.

The places where uber is dependable, almost always, are the areas with high density, well off pax, and short trips. Uber's guarantees here (when they existed) made it a requirement to pick up in these areas, and now if you are trying to get surges they are the only places you can count on surge at all, although it's rarely that high.

The crappy neighborhoods are also ignored for the same reasons. Plus, poor people wait out surges so it really doesn't pay to pick up in those areas. The more it surges in a bad neighborhood, the worse the service will be as drivers learn the surge doesn't result in surge trips, but only pissed off pax who waited for surge to end and now low rate them. Not much incentive for a driver to go back, even if he sees a surge.

The idea that uber will allow underserved and suburban areas to get better and more dependable service is clearly not true. Uber cares only about the number of trips, nothing else. They want to pretend they service every area, but it's simply not happening. I can get a cab more easily at 3am by my house in the suburbs now than an uber.


----------



## Hackenstein

NachonCheeze said:


> Thats odd. I get so many comments about the over priced taxi service, smelly drivers that dont speak english, and how "they prefer Uber" over taxis...their words, not mine


Sure you do. The English part is especially priceless. Where do you think the NYC Uber drivers come from.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Fuzzyelvis said:


> I think you're wrong in that they don't care too much about low density areas. My home is now designated "no uberx available" much of the night. A year ago that was not the case. Folks out here (like me) are simply not driving at these rates, and those who don't live here certainly won't head out here unless a pax makes them.
> 
> It's also surging very high sporadically in the suburbs. Because it IS so sporadic and if you are in Houston you won't get there before the surge is gone (15-20 miles from downtown), I don't think it is helping the riders much. They are learning that uber is not dependable, not even available many times, and when it is they may be hit with a big surge.
> 
> The places where uber is dependable, almost always, are the areas with high density, well off pax, and short trips. Uber's guarantees here (when they existed) made it a requirement to pick up in these areas, and now if you are trying to get surges they are the only places you can count on surge at all, although it's rarely that high.
> 
> The crappy neighborhoods are also ignored for the same reasons. Plus, poor people wait out surges so it really doesn't pay to pick up in those areas. The more it surges in a bad neighborhood, the worse the service will be as drivers learn the surge doesn't result in surge trips, but only pissed off pax who waited for surge to end and now low rate them. Not much incentive for a driver to go back, even if he sees a surge.
> 
> The idea that uber will allow underserved and suburban areas to get better and more dependable service is clearly not true. Uber cares only about the number of trips, nothing else. They want to pretend they service every area, but it's simply not happening. I can get a cab more easily at 3am by my house in the suburbs now than an uber.


At the moment, yes.
I believe Uber Management wants a roster of retired CPAs et al to be on call and logged in 18 hours a day in places like Bumfart, Iowa just in case that ping comes in at the local grange.

That is, of course, before they have Flying Automated Cabs LMFAO.


----------



## Lack9133

NachonCheeze said:


> Thats odd. I get so many comments about the over priced taxi service, smelly drivers that dont speak english, and how "they prefer Uber" over taxis...their words, not mine


That's odd, I drive for both services and I hear people tell me the same about both services. Being on both sides of the coin, I have seen many of those smelly drivers in horrid vehicles that passengers complain so much about switch from taxi to Uber. The funny thing is, passengers won't say a word about that same taxi driver as long as he's driving for Uber and many of those guys have 5 star ratings. I have also seen many very quality Uber drivers switch to taxi and because they are in the front seat of a taxi, people complain about them all the time even though they are a 5 Star driver on Uber's platform.

When I am in my taxi, people are always complaining to me about Uber. When I am in my Uber, people are always complaining to me about taxi.

Moral of the story is, don't take the public's word as gold. People love to complain, perception is everything and people will only say what they think is the PC thing to say when they are stuck in the back seat of your vehicle for 15 minutes.


----------



## tommyboy

I've got several people that want to use me but it's against the law called hailing. I'm going to see if uber will let me establish a schedule to assist these customers in a logical manner. A lot of passengers like the idea of having the same driver and I like the same customers. Kinda like a route driver I bet that's on the drawing board for them probably harder than it sounds


----------



## 5 Star Guy

Lack9133 said:


> That's odd, I drive for both services and I hear people tell me the same about both services. Being on both sides of the coin, I have seen many of those smelly drivers in horrid vehicles that passengers complain so much about switch from taxi to Uber. The funny thing is, passengers won't say a word about that same taxi driver as long as he's driving for Uber and many of those guys have 5 star ratings. I have also seen many very quality Uber drivers switch to taxi and because they are in the front seat of a taxi, people complain about them all the time even though they are a 5 Star driver on Uber's platform.
> 
> When I am in my taxi, people are always complaining to me about Uber. When I am in my Uber, people are always complaining to me about taxi.
> 
> Moral of the story is, don't take the public's word as gold. People love to complain, perception is everything and people will only say what they think is the PC thing to say when they are stuck in the back seat of your vehicle for 15 minutes.


Sounds more like you're not the typical taxi or u driver.


----------



## tommyboy

I ASK EVERY CUSTOMER A FEW COMPLAINT ABOUT SPECIFIC drivers but 100 percent prefer uber to cabs it's definitely here to stay it's becoming a life management tool for many.a lot of people don't have licenses health conditions we are doing meaningful work in many respects for people making there life's more livable in that we can be proud we make a difference


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Lol.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

ubershiza said:


> Your esoteric cataloging system continues to amaze, only to be complement by your superlative comments.


oh puhlease don't encourage him!


----------



## Bart McCoy

Smh


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Bart McCoy said:


> Smh


I worry for your vertebrae.


----------



## Bart McCoy

I 


TwoFiddyMile said:


> I worry for your vertebrae.


If I have the app on and my vertebrae breaks, I can sue Uber for millions?


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Bart McCoy said:


> I
> 
> If I have the app on and my vertebrae breaks, I can sue Uber for millions?


Why not.
All that head shaking is Uber related after all.


----------



## ChortlingCrison

I guess that's Bart's cute way of saying he thinks all the lawsuits against uber are frivilous.


----------



## NachonCheeze

Hackenstein said:


> Sure you do. The English part is especially priceless. Where do you think the NYC Uber drivers come from.


I guess it did not come across...I was being sarcastic ..... "boo hoo, its illegal, whine, whine, whine" nonsense restated over and over and over and over and over by certain members of this forum.

Check this out....so sad... http://www.ocregister.com/articles/taxi-710936-county-uber.html


----------



## Hackenstein

NachonCheeze said:


> I guess it did not come across...I was being sarcastic ..... "boo hoo, its illegal, whine, whine, whine" nonsense restated over and over and over and over and over by certain members of this forum.
> 
> Check this out....so sad... http://www.ocregister.com/articles/taxi-710936-county-uber.html


Seems like it gets under your skin when I point out Uber is not really legal in NYC.

Nice that you cheer when legit taxis go out of business. An MIT spinoff is testing fully autonomous cars as taxis (uber) in Singapore, looking for full functionality by the end of 2016.

Remember to not complain when Uber/Lyft unceremoniously boot you out for a robot much sooner than you expected.


----------



## NachonCheeze

Hackenstein said:


> Seems like it gets under your skin when I point out Uber is not really legal in NYC.
> 
> Nice that you cheer when legit taxis go out of business. An MIT spinoff is testing fully autonomous cars as taxis (uber) in Singapore, looking for full functionality by the end of 2016.
> 
> Remember to not complain that when Uber/Lyft et al unceremoniously boot you out for a robot much sooner than you expected.


I wouldn't say "under my skin", I just find whiners annoying. In regard to fUber not being legal in NYC. Technically it may be true but we all know the system is rigged BS...f'n medallions , what a joke system. If and when fUber dies or drivers get replaced I wont be crying....that's business.......and geez AGAIN with the "Legit Taxis" just cant help yourself I suppose.

Fear not, I shall never respond again to your constant blah blah blah about illegal fUber activities


----------



## Hackenstein

NachonCheeze said:


> Yes, I find whiners annoying. In regard to fUber not being legal in NYC. Technically it may be true but we all know the system is rigged BS...f'n medallions , what a joke system. If and when fUber dies I wont be crying....that's business.


Yeah, so rigged. It's worked well for 100 years. Uber can't keep a driver employed more than a year without screwing them so badly they quit and another sucker takes their place.

I suspect you'll cry louder than anyone when Uber boots you out and you suddenly realize how many sectors of the economy are following the same 'model.' You might even find yourself wishing for stronger regulations. Fool.


----------



## Chef Aarron

James Lee said:


> Surge must be needed in order to have drivers for bar crowds. Nobody wants to pick up drunk people in their car without a reward.
> 
> Yes, they need to raise rates reasonably, at the same time, surge must be capped at 2-3x.


There is already a reward in picking up drunk people. It's the fact that bar closing is a busy time and there is a lot of moneu to be made. Duh.


----------



## Chef Aarron

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You're sounding like an Uber apologist.
> We do NOT have the ability to set prices (even though our agreement with Uber says we do).
> We ARE punished for not accepting all of the requests Uber sends to us.
> We ARE punished for canceling rides requests we do not want to complete.
> Your post is 100% false.


Our agreement with Uber only says that we may negotiate LOWER fares, not any fare we want.


----------



## Chef Aarron

UberLaLa said:


> I see...thank you Sensei all seeing and knowing of everything Uber. Must just be luck that I earn $200-$300 in a 10 hour night (after Uber's take)...so glad you pointed this out to me.


How about after gas and maintenance and other operating expenses? If you're surge chasing and making $20-30 an hour before expenses, I'm really not that impressed.


----------



## UberLaLa

Chef Aarron said:


> How about after gas and maintenance and other operating expenses? If you're surge chasing and making $20-30 an hour before expenses, I'm really not that impressed.


I'm not surge chasing...I'm surge waiting...but, yeah...not that much money. My day job definitely pays more. It's just better than the $150 I used to get in the same time frame.


----------



## ginseng41

I have to wonder if this suit could actually end up saying that uber has been price fixing in the opposite direction. For example, they keep lowering rates to drive off the competition. That is something that definitely could be proven in court with little effort. They even admit that they do it. I was told , when they cut our rates, that people were taking the bus places because our rates were higher. They've publicly stated they're trying to make uber cheaper than all other forms of transportation too


----------



## 5 Star Guy

I think I read the courts just tossed the lawsuits on them and Lyft on drivers being employees.  Sounds like the door is open to refile.


----------



## Dad's Transport

This is my theory; Here in the Seattle district we have the I-405 toll lanes, that have the same settings that Uber has, once rush hour has started and more people begin using the toll lanes, the prices of the toll increases by the number of people using the lane... It is up to the driver to agree or disagree with the price shown before they use the lane and pay the toll.. This is basically the same situation in which Travis has found himself... Why is it not illegal for the Department of Transportation to set 'price surging' but it is apparently illegal for Uber to do this?


----------



## 5 Star Guy

Dad's Transport said:


> This is my theory; Here in the Seattle district we have the I-405 toll lanes, that have the same settings that Uber has, once rush hour has started and more people begin using the toll lanes, the prices of the toll increases by the number of people using the lane... It is up to the driver to agree or disagree with the price shown before they use the lane and pay the toll.. This is basically the same situation in which Travis has found himself... Why is it not illegal for the Department of Transportation to set 'price surging' but it is apparently illegal for Uber to do this?


One is an entrepreneur who could care less, the other is the government and taxes and fees who can care less.


----------



## JSM0713

JasonB said:


> How about this pax?
> 
> If you don't want to pay surge pricing, you have 2 simple options that won't force you to lose a few of those precious pennies:
> 
> 1. Stay home
> 
> 2. Wait 10 minutes for prices to come down
> 
> Sheesh. What a bunch of babies.


Well written post Jason. While i find that my passengers, for the most part, are basically nice people, I also get negative feedback that they hate the concept of surge pricing. I explain tot hem the following: When you get on your Uber riders app, you expect someone is going to come to your door and drive you wherever you want for a rate that is substantially discounted from a taxi, right" I ask them how they can expect Uber to get drivers to you when demand is high and drivers are in short supply? Hence... surging. If there is no incentive to the driver to make to travel the extra distance, you (the pax) will have no car in which to ride in. I further suggest they wait out the surge... I've often commented to myself, the same thing... what a f-ing bunch of crybabies!!! They're already getting steeply discounted rates below cabs for crummy cars and crummy drivers, what the F do they expect?? I politely tell them that this is my car, my gas, my wear and tear and my time and I have the reasonable expectation to maximize my earnings in the best way I know how... surge pricing is a consequence of that...... in short, at times I tell them to MAN-up, shut up and take it.... Uber is the BEST thing that ever happened to them. And, if they don't like, use their own f-ing car to drive to work, pay for parking, buy the gas, risk getting into accidents, put more miles on said auto resulting in higher maintenance, etc, etc. At times I think they believe that Uber is owed to them. SHEESH is sooooo right!


----------



## JSM0713

Dad's Transport said:


> This is my theory; Here in the Seattle district we have the I-405 toll lanes, that have the same settings that Uber has, once rush hour has started and more people begin using the toll lanes, the prices of the toll increases by the number of people using the lane... It is up to the driver to agree or disagree with the price shown before they use the lane and pay the toll.. This is basically the same situation in which Travis has found himself... Why is it not illegal for the Department of Transportation to set 'price surging' but it is apparently illegal for Uber to do this?


WE have exactly the very same system installed in South Florida. The cost of the express lanes fluctuates depending on demand. Surge is no different. I see soooo many cars on the northbound express lanes during evening rush hour willing to pay up to $10.50 to avoid the standstill traffic. To me, surge is EXACTLY same principle. The only thing helping to fix the pricing is the demand riders place on the system. Do they seriously expect me to take a 10-15 minute ride to pick them up and not pay a premium for that? If Uber were to place a "Prime-Time" rate on the whole market at specified times perhaps that would be price fixing.. as things stand now, surge pricing is completely random in only those area where rider demand exceeds supply... This isn't rocket science. Hey, the riders, by and large, are NOT complaining about the rates which benefit them for the most part.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

JSM0713 said:


> WE have exactly the very same system installed in South Florida. The cost of the express lanes fluctuates depending on demand. Surge is no different. I see soooo many cars on the northbound express lanes during evening rush hour willing to pay up to $10.50 to avoid the standstill traffic. To me, surge is EXACTLY same principle. The only thing helping to fix the pricing is the demand riders place on the system. Do they seriously expect me to take a 10-15 minute ride to pick them up and not pay a premium for that? If Uber were to place a "Prime-Time" rate on the whole market at specified times perhaps that would be price fixing.. as things stand now, surge pricing is completely random in only those area where rider demand exceeds supply... This isn't rocket science. Hey, the riders, by and large, are NOT complaining about the rates which benefit them for the most part.


That's a good point, Travass could have made rush hour and night life hours just a flat rate. I do give him credit for putting this system together, however he's a terrible leader and there are a lot of issues for a company that is several years old, has the kind of funding it has and the large number of independent contractors.


----------



## Dutch-Ub

biggplays1 said:


> First off, Uber "partners" don't set the prices, it is done by Uber (....) If Uber had contractors set their own rates, there would never be a need for surge!


Drivers setting their own prices could lead to even lower rates than Ubers price setting. There always be desperate drivers deciding to undercut others by going lower and lower..


----------



## kideyse

D Town said:


> I'm a little confused how Uber is supposed to be colluding with drivers to create surges. I sure as hell never got any notifications on that one.


You never got a text message from Uber saying "surge is likely"?


----------



## kideyse

Dutch-Ub said:


> Drivers setting their own prices could lead to even lower rates than Ubers price setting. There always be desperate drivers deciding to undercut others by going lower and lower..


It's free market, not fair market


----------



## D Town

kideyse said:


> You never got a text message from Uber saying "surge is likely"?


I got text telling me in vague terms that its going to be busy that evening or to catch the rush hour crowd or about special events coming up. It was NEVER as busy as they claimed and almost NEVER surged at those times. If anything those text KILLED any surge that might have happened by flooding the area with new drivers who didn't know better. I never got a text saying, "All drivers stay off line until 7:45pm and be in this certain area when you do go online."


----------



## kideyse

I don't know about conspiracy but the judge is spot on about price fixing. As "independent contractors" we should be able to make our own pricing. Of course this would make the rider app less reliable since the whole business is based on cheap fares by exploiting drivers.


----------



## D Town

kideyse said:


> I don't know about conspiracy but the judge is spot on about price fixing. As "independent contractors" we should be able to make our own pricing. Of course this would make the rider app less reliable since the whole business is based on cheap fares by exploiting drivers.


Price fixing takes collusion between competing sellers of a good or service. Nothing in this case indicates that or else they'd have Lyft named too.

You can get a balance by giving drivers a SAY in the price changes or allowing them to set their rates from a range of prices.


----------



## kideyse

Hackenstein said:


> Seems like it gets under your skin when I point out Uber is not really legal in NYC.
> 
> Nice that you cheer when legit taxis go out of business. An MIT spinoff is testing fully autonomous cars as taxis (uber) in Singapore, looking for full functionality by the end of 2016.
> 
> Remember to not complain when Uber/Lyft unceremoniously boot you out for a robot much sooner than you expected.


How would insurance work for driverless cars. Although it is technically possible, the practical aspects like getting an insurer to underwrite the liability is unlikely or prohibitively expensive. Exploiting drivers is much cheaper.


----------



## kideyse

D Town said:


> Price fixing takes collusion between competing sellers of a good or service. Nothing in this case indicates that or else they'd have Lyft named too.
> 
> You can get a balance by giving drivers a SAY in the price changes or allowing them to set their rates from a range of prices.


There is no competition between drivers since the price is "fixed" by uber. We are unable to compete.


----------



## DriverX

Bolympia said:


> Double the price-Because Taxi companies and the municipalities that regulate them see to it that their drivers get a fair wage.
> 
> much longer wait times-Because unlike Uber and Lyft the cities who regulate the taxi industry have enough sense not to over-saturate the market, so their is enough business to go around.


Clearly there was plenty of business to go around, but the cab industry failed to see the need to create a larger market and fleet to supply it because they were running on a 20th century model, which is park a lot of cabs at known places of high demand and leave the rest of the county empty. Rideshare revealed the weakness in the Cab industry's inability to service everyone from their homes or wherever they happened to be when they needed a ride. Uber exploited this weakness and crushed them with an instant fleet of driver owned vehicles.

How they managed to insure it is really key here. but with all the money the fed printed to bail out the banks with, the VCs were flush with billions and could basically fund their own insurer. or something a long those lines...


----------



## D Town

kideyse said:


> There is no competition between drivers since the price is "fixed" by uber. We are unable to compete.


If that's the route you want to take there are a LOT more companies you need to sue. For example, many couriers, truck drivers, and freelance writers are IC's that contract to do a certain amount of work for an entities rate. That's not price fixing that's agreeing to provide services at that rate.

Not defending Uber's classification of its drivers as IC's. Lets be clear on THAT one but with your reasoning you're tossing out a LOT of other IC's as well.


----------



## DriverX

Trebor said:


> I am still trying to wrap my head around how Uber thinks they can be more profitable by lowering rates an therefore the commission they receive.


Because their real profit is the fees and the surge. Think about it.

20% comish on a $10 fare is $2. +1.75 = 3.75 or 38% profit margin on that trip
The driver may get one of those an hour plus a short trip if they're lucky

compare that to the profit margin on a minimum ride:
20% $3 fare = .60 + 1.75 fee = 2.35 thats almost 50% of the fare.
and leaves the driver with 2.40 since the base fare was eliminated that means that it takes about 3 miles of driving before more than a $2.40 net
if they can give you 3 of those per hour they make 7.05

Whereas they could only give you one $10 ride before and maybe a short trip if it was busy. so in that same hour uber only made $6.10

Bottom line:

They want to jam up the drivers with as many short trips as possible, where they make almost 50% of the total fare. more short fares the better for uber, and surged short fares are like mana from heaven for uber.


----------



## DriverX

D Town said:


> If that's the route you want to take there are a LOT more companies you need to sue. For example, many couriers, truck drivers, and freelance writers are IC's that contract to do a certain amount of work for an entities rate. That's not price fixing that's agreeing to provide services at that rate.
> 
> Not defending Uber's classification of its drivers as IC's. Lets be clear on THAT one but with your reasoning you're tossing out a LOT of other IC's as well.


The difference being those ICs can set their rate at whatever they want when they want, assuring that the price isn't fixed. If all of them found a way to organize and agree to a price fixing scheme where they would not undercut each other as the price was raised this would be price fixing. You don't have to worry though because they are going after the ringleader, Travis, not individual drivers. Once they saw who was profiteering off the scheme it was pretty obvious that suing a driver would be pointless because none are rumored to be worth $60 billion.

Youre safe, and actually youre even safer if you only drive surge, because that is the only way a driver can set his/her individual price and compete with other drivers. It's a weird way of competing though because we are basically trying to shut down our competitors by attrition. The drivers that just hang around online waiting for a price fixed ride, usually at 1x, will suffer too much loss and have to quit. I'm not competing for more rides I'm competing for more profitable rides.


----------



## DriverX

D Town said:


> Price fixing takes collusion between competing sellers of a good or service. Nothing in this case indicates that or else they'd have Lyft named too.
> 
> You can get a balance by giving drivers a SAY in the price changes or allowing them to set their rates from a range of prices.


These companies have entirely different systems for driving surge pricing so it would be impossible to sue them both for the same thing, because the methods are different. The drivers unwitting collusion was an inevitable outcome of cutting rates to unprofitable levels, leaving surge pricing as the only way for drivers to make any profit. Just because you had to be sent a text by uber or told here to only drive surge, doesn't mean that other drivers weren't able to figure this out on their own without specific direction from the ringleader. Whether or not that means Travis is guilty of being the ringleader of the largest price fixing scheme known to man is why it's going to COURT.

Oh and BTW they did tell me specifically to go offline when I'm not willing to drive for take it in the bum position rate:

" Please press "go offline" when you are not in a position to complete the trips you accept. A high number of canceled trips can lead to deactivation from the Uber platform. "


----------



## RockinEZ

D Town said:


> I'm a little confused how Uber is supposed to be colluding with drivers to create surges. I sure as hell never got any notifications on that one.


I did. 
When I open my app I get a page that explains what the surge is and how to work it. 
I suspect most drivers see this page.


----------



## RockinEZ

kideyse said:


> You never got a text message from Uber saying "surge is likely"?


I get texts all the time saying "It is surging in El Cajon".


----------



## DriverX

Hackenstein said:


> Seems like it gets under your skin when I point out Uber is not really legal in NYC.
> 
> Nice that you cheer when legit taxis go out of business. An MIT spinoff is testing fully autonomous cars as taxis (uber) in Singapore, looking for full functionality by the end of 2016.
> 
> Remember to not complain when Uber/Lyft unceremoniously boot you out for a robot much sooner than you expected.


Owning and maintaining and insuring a fleet of robot cars is a very costly endeavour. It would probably be cheaper just to hire a bunch a people to drive and maintain their own vehicles at their own expense.

Not to mention that fact that the planets roadways are in no condition to handle the needs of these robot cars. Too many unpainted or partially painted lines, or incorrectly painted. Way too many pot holes and road construction events to be avoided.... the tech is so far away from being viable much less approved for saftey standards we won't have to worry about being replaced for decades. I'll be retired by then.


----------



## RockinEZ

DriverX said:


> Owning and maintaining and insuring a fleet of robot cars is a very costly endeavour. It would probably be cheaper just to hire a bunch a people to drive and maintain their own vehicles at their own expense.
> 
> Not to mention that fact that the planets roadways are in no condition to handle the needs of these robot cars. Too many unpainted or partially painted lines, or incorrectly painted. Way too many pot holes and road construction events to be avoided.... the tech is so far away from being viable much less approved for saftey standards we won't have to worry about being replaced for decades. I'll be retired by then.


Hell this country can't even find an honest candidate to run for POTUS. 
Does anyone actually believe that autonomous cars will be legal in the next decade?

Before you answer remember that automotive regulations are both state and federal. The states control operation and the feds control safety.

I am not counting on self driving cars in the near future.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

RockinEZ said:


> Hell this country can't even find an honest candidate to run for POTUS.
> Does anyone actually believe that autonomous cars will be legal in the next decade?
> 
> Before you answer remember that automotive regulations are both state and federal. The states control operation and the feds control safety.
> 
> I am not counting on self driving cars in the near future.


Google just asked the Feds to pump the brakes on the regulations.


----------



## RockinEZ

5 Star Guy said:


> Google just asked the Feds to pump the brakes on the regulations.


Alphabet has a lot of financial clout.

I believe the autonomous car project was removed from the Google subdivision and moved to a separate division.

Alphabet is trying to keep all the web and IT products under the Google name, and separating other business models from Google to keep the subdivision focused on what it does best. Make money.

Who gets paid off, and when will make a lot of difference.


----------



## 5 Star Guy

RockinEZ said:


> Alphabet has a lot of financial clout.
> 
> I believe the autonomous car project was removed from the Google subdivision and moved to a separate division.
> 
> Alphabet is trying to keep all the web and IT products under the Google name, and separating other business models from Google to keep the subdivision focused on what it does best. Make money.
> 
> Who gets paid off, and when will make a lot of difference.


Sorry, Google, Alphabet, I'm just a simple driver on here.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

kideyse said:


> How would insurance work for driverless cars. Although it is technically possible, the practical aspects like getting an insurer to underwrite the liability is unlikely or prohibitively expensive. Exploiting drivers is much cheaper.


I imagine Google and Tesla simply self insure. That would likely be how it will be until there are enough on the road to have reliable data.


----------



## D Town

Fuzzyelvis said:


> I imagine Google and Tesla simply self insure. That would likely be how it will be until there are enough on the road to have reliable data.


I foresee all driverless cars being equipped with 360 degree cameras. There will be certain people who will crash into these cars on purpose and claim it was the driverless cars fault in the hopes of getting a settlement. I would NOT want to be among the first to own a driverless car.


----------



## RockinEZ

D Town said:


> I foresee all driverless cars being equipped with 360 cameras. There will be certain people who will crash into these cars on purpose and claim it was the driverless cars fault in the hopes of getting a settlement. I would NOT want to be among the first to own a driverless car.


It would be like the dash cam photos you see from China.

People faking accidents for money. The dash cam ruined that scam. 
Watch some on youtube. Very funny actually.


----------



## RockinEZ

5 Star Guy said:


> Sorry, Google, Alphabet, I'm just a simple driver on here.


Google found they were starting too many projects that had nothing to do with their core competency. This is a big no-no in the corporate world and generally leads to loss of focus.

Google decided to create an umbrella corporate entity called Alphabet to manage these various divisions and projects.

This way Google is able to focus on what it does best, and separate management teams handle the other divisions and projects.

The name Alphabet is interesting. It has a specific meaning in the stock market, and Google was one of the first to perfect text to speech technology.

Clever folks at Google.

I almost ended up working for their server farm in Pineville Oregon, but didn't want to move from San Diego.
I was an idiot for not taking that job.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

ABC123DEF said:


> They have plenty of brains...but people skills and common sense? The jury is still out on that.


POST # 137/ABC123DEF: With an Entitled
Sociopathic 
Misanthrope as CEO/and "Boober"
BrandMeister, it's a BIG DOUBLE-
GOOSE EGG on "People Skills" and
"Common Sense".

Judge Bison: 100 Years for Economic
☆ ☆ ☆Warfare Waged without Shame !


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

ABC123DEF said:


> Uber...the king of nickel and diming. I think that they'd might as well go ahead and bury themselves if they add another dollar the the booking/SR fee inside of not even 2 years.


POST # 163/ABC123DEF: Other Members
[that HAVE seen it]
will Verify my Coinage of the Term:

*" # PICKPOCKET $BILLIONAIRE "*


----------



## RockinEZ

Casuale Haberdasher said:


> POST # 163/ABC123DEF: Other Members
> [that HAVE seen it]
> will Verify my Coinage of the Term:
> 
> *" # PICKPOCKET $ BILLIONAIRE "*


All of TK's businesses have been based on selling other people's property or services.

He is a true sociopath.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

Trebor said:


> I am still trying to wrap my head around how Uber thinks they can be more profitable by lowering rates an therefore the commission they receive.


POST # 182/Trebor: Y E S S S S ............
BUT...they have
raised the Safe Ri...err...BOOKING FEE
twice now to offset the Lower Total
Software Licensing Fees.


----------



## D Town

Casuale Haberdasher said:


> POST # 182/Trebor: Y E S S S S ............
> BUT...they have
> raised the Safe Ri...err...BOOKING FEE
> twice now to offset the Lower Total
> Software Licensing Fees.


Its a great deal for them. They continually pile costs on drivers and lower their take home while increasing their profits.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

TwoFiddyMile said:


> I worry for your vertebrae.


POST # 221/TwoFiddyMile: Truth be
told.......
he suffers from SMH-Induced TBE.

Bison Chortling !


----------



## Tnasty

I can tell you one thing for sure,in 2030 when the cars hit the road in Mass, watch out for the large elderly guy with the walker holding traffic up throwing roofing nails from his robe pocket in the path of Travis cars.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Tnasty said:


> I can tell you one thing for sure,in 2030 when the cars hit the road in Mass, watch out for the large elderly guy with the walker holding traffic up throwing roofing nails from his robe pocket in the path of Travis cars.


holy crap - there's a chance I may still be alive. 
I'll join you.


----------



## Kruhn

USArmy31B30 said:


> If Meyer wins Uber will say "Oops!" Here's your money back, drivers pay up!!!
> 
> But even with surge fare a pax took once in a while, OVERALL, ridesharing is still cheaper than a cab if we compare the total amount paid by a pax taking a taxi for every trip for 6 months to one year...
> 
> The problem with Uber pax is, they complained about the surge fair because they paid a higher price ONCE in a Blue Moon and almost no one ever complains about the taxi fare even though they charge a higher fair than a rideshare rates. They also had a fare hike almost every year!!! I guess if the Taxi Co adds a few cents here and there and pax doesn't notice, it is a fair game? Correct me if I'm wrong...


It is variation of the 99-cent fallacy. For example, the human mind when it reads the price of something to be $9.99, it thinks it is markedly cheaper than $10.00 because our minds give more weight to the first number in the price. The same thing applies with the surges. The passenger does not understand that even with the surge , they are paying less than the price of a cab ride, because they have been socialized to having a lower price for the transportation provided through Uber. For them, the surge is an affront for the same reason we assume that an item at $9.99 feels much cheaper despite the fact that it is only just one cent less than $10.00, their minds associate that they are paying 1 1/2, double or whatever multiple more than what they're supposed to.

In fact, based on empirical evidence since we changed the surge maps to the new "rash model" for Uber X drivers, whenever there are surges, I've noticed that passengers would try to ride out the surges, especially during times when there are other transportation options in the Washington DC Metro area

You can argue that passengers make a conscious choice when ordering an Uber ride with a surge, but let's be honest, the surge has been the features passengers most object about Uber since its launch.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

DriverX said:


> Clearly there was plenty of business to go around, but the cab industry failed to see the need to create a larger market and fleet to supply it because they were running on a 20th century model, which is park a lot of cabs at known places of high demand and leave the rest of the county empty. Rideshare revealed the weakness in the Cab industry's inability to service everyone from their homes or wherever they happened to be when they needed a ride. Uber exploited this weakness and crushed them with an instant fleet of driver owned vehicles.
> 
> How they managed to insure it is really key here. but with all the money the fed printed to bail out the banks with, the VCs were flush with billions and could basically fund their own insurer. or something a long those lines...


No.
Cab industry didn't flood the market for the following two reasons:
1) Flooding the market with company owned cars would create a loss of profit for the in-house fleet.
2) cab drivers arent as stupid as Uber owner ops, we implicitly refuse to become or stay owner ops in a flooded market.

Why would i put a cab or TNC on the road in a market with no vehicle limits?
Only noob TNCs are that naive (and most of the dumb crowd are too illiterate to be members of UPnet).


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Tnasty said:


> I can tell you one thing for sure,in 2030 when the cars hit the road in Mass, watch out for the large elderly guy with the walker holding traffic up throwing roofing nails from his robe pocket in the path of Travis cars.


Not nails, Tnasty...caltrops!
You know, the Allies used em to puncture the tires of Nazi jeeps- think little girls jacks with sharpened ends.
I should still be alive in 2030, theres a few buildings on Harrison Ave in Chinatown with accessible roofs- but i refuse to come back to Boston before May 15 or after October 15.


----------



## Kruhn

stuber said:


> There's talk of creating a new NLRB category called Independent Worker. I'm not sure why this is necessary. The Independent Contractor definitions could be expanded.


This would be somewhat similar to what Germany and some other European countries have done to classify "gig economy" workers as Dependent Contractors, so they can be covered by some of the benefits regular workers enjoy, but keeping the contractor feature. That would, of course, put the kibosh on the lawsuit in San Francisco demanding that Uber drivers be classified as employees.


----------



## ubershiza

BACK TO WORK ! 
U NEED TO ANSWER MORE PINGS


----------



## Trebor

DriverX said:


> Because their real profit is the fees and the surge. Think about it.
> 
> 20% comish on a $10 fare is $2. +1.75 = 3.75 or 38% profit margin on that trip
> The driver may get one of those an hour plus a short trip if they're lucky
> 
> compare that to the profit margin on a minimum ride:
> 20% $3 fare = .60 + 1.75 fee = 2.35 thats almost 50% of the fare.
> and leaves the driver with 2.40 since the base fare was eliminated that means that it takes about 3 miles of driving before more than a $2.40 net
> if they can give you 3 of those per hour they make 7.05
> 
> Whereas they could only give you one $10 ride before and maybe a short trip if it was busy. so in that same hour uber only made $6.10
> 
> Bottom line:
> 
> They want to jam up the drivers with as many short trips as possible, where they make almost 50% of the total fare. more short fares the better for uber, and surged short fares are like mana from heaven for uber.


They can easily double the mileage rate at this point and not lose any more than a few customers. If they are profitable of surge, then they will double those profits if the base mileage rate was doubled, they would be making double the profit. Those customers that left, are probably the ones to e-mail Uber support about every little thing anyways, trying to get a free ride. So they will save money on support as well.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Kruhn said:


> It is variation of the 99-cent fallacy. For example, the human mind when it reads the price of something to be $9.99, it thinks it is markedly cheaper than $10.00 because our minds give more weight to the first number in the price. The same thing applies with the surges. The passenger does not understand that even with the surge , they are paying less than the price of a cab ride, because they have been socialized to having a lower price for the transportation provided through Uber. For them, the surge is an affront for the same reason we assume that an item at $9.99 feels much cheaper despite the fact that it is only just one cent less than $10.00, their minds associate that they are paying 1 1/2, double or whatever multiple more than what they're supposed to.
> 
> In fact, based on empirical evidence since we changed the surge maps to the new "rash model" for Uber X drivers, whenever there are surges, I've noticed that passengers would try to ride out the surges, especially during times when there are other transportation options in the Washington DC Metro area
> 
> You can argue that passengers make a conscious choice when ordering an Uber ride with a surge, but let's be honest, the surge has been the features passengers most object about Uber since its launch.


I've said this repeatedly here in UP.n:
If the pricing model had been designed by professional marketers rather than millennial data nerds and bean-counters, it would have set the standard rate at $x and then discounted it for slow times instead of surging it at times of high demand:

Regular fare rate at bar closing time? $5/mi & $0.25/min.
Mid afternoon trip to the doctor's office or Thursday evening trip to the movies? 75% discount from the std rate.
Inclement weather trip? 35% discount from the std rate.
Tip your driver.​Everyone would be be happy.
People hate price gouging - but they love discounts.


----------



## Kruhn

chi1cabby said:


> *Surge Pricing Lawsuit
> Uber's Response:
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0N1atTXPM8FSXU0QVNEWFdCdDA/view?usp=docslist_api*
> 
> *STATEMENT OF FACTS ALLEGED IN THE AMENDED COMPLAINT*
> Defendant Travis Kalanick is the Chief Executive Officer and co-founder of Uber. Am. Compl. at 1. He is the sole defendant named in Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. Id.
> 
> Uber enters into individual contracts with each driver-partner pursuant to which Uber agrees to provide the driver-partner with lead generation and payment processing services and the driver-partner agrees to pay Uber a licensing fee. Id. ¶ 38; see Declaration of Michael Colman, Ex. 2 ("Driver Terms"). As part of these separate contracts, Uber requires each driver-partner to agree to use Uber's pricing algorithm to arrive at a standard, suggested fare. Id. ¶ 47.
> 
> The pricing algorithm is primarily based on a trip's "time and distance." Id. ¶ 55. The algorithm also uses "surge pricing," which may increase the price "based on demand or limited availability of drivers" "to incentivize its driver-partners to use the Uber App" at times of low supply. Id. ¶ 57. Uber's contracts with driver-partners expressly permit the driver-partners to reject the fare charged by the pricing algorithm and instead charge a lower fare. Driver Terms ¶ 4.1 ("You [the driver-partner] shall always have the right to: (i) charge a fare that is less than the pre-arranged Fare; or (ii) negotiate, at your request, a Fare that is lower than the pre-arranged Fare").2
> Even so, Plaintiff alleges that "[a]ll of the independent driver-partners have agreed to charge the fares
> set by Uber's pricing algorithm" and not "to depart downward from the fare set by the Uber algorithm." Am. Compl. ¶¶ 68-69. Uber offers a variety of "different car service experiences," id. ¶ 25, with each "experience" providing a different level of service and price point.
> 
> Plaintiff Spencer Meyer, like all users of the Uber App, expressly agreed to Uber's terms and conditions. Id. ¶ 29. Among those conditions was the following: *"You [the user] **acknowledge and agree that you and [Uber] are each waiving the right to a trial by jury or to participate as a plaintiff or class User in any purported class action or representative **proceeding."* Declaration of Michael Colman, Ex. 1 ("User Terms") at 9 (bold in original).


I haven't seen so much cow manure spewed with such a straight face in my life, and I WORK IN WASHINGTON DC! So the fare you pay as an Uber passenger, is a _*suggested price?!?!?!?!?!

And that passengers can negotiate a lower price?!?!?!? *_Guess what's going to happen if this information goes out into the general public? Passengers will start demanding that we charge them a rate other than the one they see on their screen!!

Travis, you should try your hand in comedy!


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I've said this repeatedly here in UP.n:
> If the pricing model had been designed by professional marketers rather than millennial data nerds and bean-counters, it would have set the standard rate at $x and then discounted it for slow times instead of surging it at times of high demand:
> 
> Regular fare rate at bar closing time? $5/mi & $0.25/min.
> Mid afternoon trip to the doctor's office or Thursday evening trip to the movies? 75% discount from the std rate.
> Inclement weather trip? 35% discount from the std rate.
> Tip your driver.​Everyone would be be happy.
> People hate price gouging - but they love discounts.


Right out of The Prince;
Begin as a heavy handed ruler, then lighten slowly as time passes.
People love a tough ruler who lightens.
People hate a lax ruler who becomes a tyrant.


----------



## kideyse

D Town said:


> I foresee all driverless cars being equipped with 360 degree cameras. There will be certain people who will crash into these cars on purpose and claim it was the driverless cars fault in the hopes of getting a settlement. I would NOT want to be among the first to own a driverless car.


Uber, Lyft, Google, and Tesla will be the first owners. If they are self-insured by same, I would invest in the stock or partner with trial lawyer firms. One satellite glitch or solar storm and you would have thousands of accidents running into billions of liability.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

RockinEZ said:


> All of TK's businesses have been based on selling other people's property or services.


Unless you're a farmer or fiddle-maker, that's pretty much what everyone does - and there's nothing wrong with that.


> He is a true sociopath.


That's not because he sells other people's stuff, it's because he won't encourage tipping!


----------



## D Town

kideyse said:


> Uber, Lyft, Google, and Tesla will be the first owners. If they are self-insured by same, I would invest in the stock or partner with trial lawyer firms. One satellite glitch or solar storm and you would have thousands of accidents running into billions of liability.


Driverless cars I've seen use lasers to detect objects and avoid them. In theory at least the worst that would happen is the cars losing info on where exactly they are on their maps and pulling over en mass. That would piss off millions and be crap PR.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

D Town said:


> Driverless cars I've seen use lasers to detect objects and avoid them.


And mapping and route info is downloaded and stored ON BOARD - with online monitoring systems. A loss of satellite or data connection to the outside world for periods of time (tunnels, mountains, etc), theoretically, would not effect them.


----------



## chi1cabby

*Federal Judge Compared Uber to Silk Road in Surge Price-Fixing Anti Trust Case
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/a-federal-judge-compared-uber-to-silk-road*
By 
*SARAH JEONG **April 12, 2016*

It seems like every week Uber is taking yet another beating in the news, but the worst burn it's received (This quarter? This year? Ever?) has been buried deep inside a recent legal opinion in an antitrust case in New York, in which a judge compared Uber to the shuttered online black marketplace Silk Road while reasoning through one of the legal issues in the case.

So what's going on with this case? Well, you know that annoying thing that happens when you're trying to leave a concert in the middle of the night with thousands of other people and an Uber ride out of there costs like $200? Yeah, so, Uber is getting sued for it.

Price-surging is infuriating for consumers, but the actual theory of the case is&#8230; interesting. The class action lawsuit, brought on behalf of Uber customers, alleges that Uber CEO Travis Kalanick and Uber drivers are in an "illegal price-fixing conspiracy in violation of Section 1 of the federal Sherman Antitrust Act."

That might be a little wacky, but Judge Jed Rakoff bought just enough of the argument to let the lawsuit survive a motion to dismiss. For example, Uber sometimes organizes "partner appreciation" meet-ups (maybe more accurately described as a "have some pizza and please don't strike" meet-up). Clearly, this is just an opportunity to "meet and enforce their commitment to the unlawful agreement"-an actual quote from the complaint.

More logic from the plaintiffs: The drivers all signed onto the a "terms of service" _agreement_-which is clearly an agreement with each other to fix prices. Catch my drift?

"Uh, but wait," you might say. "So basically the argument is that a bunch of drivers use the Uber app and now they're conspiring with Travis Kalanick? How does that even make any sense?" Well, you've hit upon the gist of one of Uber's counter-arguments, which is where the Silk Road comparison comes in. The judge dismissed Uber's arguments by citing a series of other cases-including the criminal case against Ross Ulbricht, who was convicted of running the darknet black market Silk Road.

In the Silk Road case, "the Government charged the defendant with sitting 'atop an overarching single conspiracy, which included all vendors who sold any type of narcotics on Silk Road at any time.'" Similarly, Judge Rakoff reasoned, "Uber's digitally decentralized nature does not prevent the App from constituting a 'marketplace' through which Mr. Kalanick organized a horizontal conspiracy among drivers."

So, Silk Road wasn't just a platform for selling drugs, it was also a conspiracy to sell drugs. Similarly, Uber isn't just a platform for ride-sharing that happens to involve price-surging, it might also be a conspiracy to price-surge. In other words, Silk Road but for ride-sharing.

This probably isn't what Ross Ulbricht's supporters mean when they say his conviction needs to be overturned in order to get rid of "bad precedent," and to be fair, the judge did cite a lot of other cases that didn't involve any Tor-hidden marketplaces for illegal drugs. But still, it's not a pleasant turn of events for the Dread Pirate Travis Kalanick. The litigation is now rolling forwards, with attorneys ordered to have the "case ready for trial by November 1, 2016."

*SDNY Surge Price-Fixing Anti-Trust Lawsuit Against Uber
https://www.scribd.com/book/307973514/SDNY-Class-action-suit-against-Uber*


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

some atty somewhere (hello, Shannon Liss-Riordin?) needs to bring a driver's class to join the PLAINTIFF in this suit and get it amended to charge that Uber does not conspire with drivers to implement Surge Pricing, but rather EXPLOITS drivers to implement Surge Pricing. Or at least an amicus brief.

There are a thousand moving parts in the puzzle that is Uber Operations and Marketing -
and NO ONE in authority or leadership seems to have a handle on them the way that drivers do.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

Michael - Cleveland said:


> oh puhlease don't encourage him!


POST # 219/Michael - Cleveland: Esteemed
#8 Notable : I happen to
be "in demand" in Many UPNF "Markets"
throughout the United Snakes, with the
OBVIOUS exception of Santa Bloviatusvilla,
and surrounding Narcissistus County, CA.

I read ubershiza 's Honest Comment
as an Endorsement of Additional Content
to be provided to the "Miam-uh" Forum.

Even "Second City" Helmet-Endorsing Ro-
dent, Wil_Iam_Fuber'd has NOT ONLY
shepherded my Return to ChiTown, but has Selflessly [for a KindaSorta Mode$t Price]
added a Signature Line of :
"Free Casuale Haberdasher: Bison Lives
Matter!" to bring ATTENTION to my Unusu-
ally Unfair Situation and Prompt Popular
Sentiment to be Expressed.

Examples: "Whatever."/ "Is that the Band
that plays That Song on the Awards Thing
on Cable?" /peter Griffin's C L A S S I C
"W H O the HELL, KAAAYEZZ ?!"


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

Tnasty said:


> I can tell you one thing for sure,in 2030 when the cars hit the road in Mass, watch out for the large elderly guy with the walker holding traffic up throwing roofing nails from his robe pocket in the path of Travis cars.


POST # 270/Tnasty: Truth be told a
Former Work Colleague's
Hellderly Dad would add a VERY
SPORTY Euro-Rallyeing feature to HIS Neighborhood of the Irish Riviera
with timed TrashcanTossing into
the paths of Speeding Scofflaws!

BusyBeeBison: Need a "Sidekick"
☆ ☆ with that "Roofing Nail Toss"?
☆ Will it be "Bring Your Own Robe"?


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

chi1cabby said:


> *Federal Judge Compared Uber to Silk Road in Surge Price-Fixing Anti Trust Case
> http://motherboard.vice.com/read/a-federal-judge-compared-uber-to-silk-road*
> By
> *SARAH JEONG **April 12, 2016*
> 
> It seems like every week Uber is taking yet another beating in the news, but the worst burn it's received (This quarter? This year? Ever?) has been buried deep inside a recent legal opinion in an antitrust case in New York, in which a judge compared Uber to the shuttered online black marketplace Silk Road while reasoning through one of the legal issues in the case.
> 
> So what's going on with this case? Well, you know that annoying thing that happens when you're trying to leave a concert in the middle of the night with thousands of other people and an Uber ride out of there costs like $200? Yeah, so, Uber is getting sued for it.
> 
> Price-surging is infuriating for consumers, but the actual theory of the case is&#8230; interesting. The class action lawsuit, brought on behalf of Uber customers, alleges that Uber CEO Travis Kalanick and Uber drivers are in an "illegal price-fixing conspiracy in violation of Section 1 of the federal Sherman Antitrust Act."
> 
> That might be a little wacky, but Judge Jed Rakoff bought just enough of the argument to let the lawsuit survive a motion to dismiss. For example, Uber sometimes organizes "partner appreciation" meet-ups (maybe more accurately described as a "have some pizza and please don't strike" meet-up). Clearly, this is just an opportunity to "meet and enforce their commitment to the unlawful agreement"-an actual quote from the complaint.
> 
> More logic from the plaintiffs: The drivers all signed onto the a "terms of service" _agreement_-which is clearly an agreement with each other to fix prices. Catch my drift?
> 
> "Uh, but wait," you might say. "So basically the argument is that a bunch of drivers use the Uber app and now they're conspiring with Travis Kalanick? How does that even make any sense?" Well, you've hit upon the gist of one of Uber's counter-arguments, which is where the Silk Road comparison comes in. The judge dismissed Uber's arguments by citing a series of other cases-including the criminal case against Ross Ulbricht, who was convicted of running the darknet black market Silk Road.
> 
> In the Silk Road case, "the Government charged the defendant with sitting 'atop an overarching single conspiracy, which included all vendors who sold any type of narcotics on Silk Road at any time.'" Similarly, Judge Rakoff reasoned, "Uber's digitally decentralized nature does not prevent the App from constituting a 'marketplace' through which Mr. Kalanick organized a horizontal conspiracy among drivers."
> 
> So, Silk Road wasn't just a platform for selling drugs, it was also a conspiracy to sell drugs. Similarly, Uber isn't just a platform for ride-sharing that happens to involve price-surging, it might also be a conspiracy to price-surge. In other words, Silk Road but for ride-sharing.
> 
> This probably isn't what Ross Ulbricht's supporters mean when they say his conviction needs to be overturned in order to get rid of "bad precedent," and to be fair, the judge did cite a lot of other cases that didn't involve any Tor-hidden marketplaces for illegal drugs. But still, it's not a pleasant turn of events for the Dread Pirate Travis Kalanick. The litigation is now rolling forwards, with attorneys ordered to have the "case ready for trial by November 1, 2016."
> 
> *SDNY Surge Price-Fixing Anti-Trust Lawsuit Against Uber
> https://www.scribd.com/book/307973514/SDNY-Class-action-suit-against-Uber*


POST # 285/chi1cabby: Bostonian Bison
Thanks You for this
COMPLETELY PRINTED-OUT
Hyperlinked Scribd.com Article of
Interest to E A R T H L I N G S that
like to "Turn Tables on Travi$" and
savor Sweet SCHADENFREUDE them-
selves as Yet Another Jurist urinates
ALL OVER The Kakanicky while Belt-
ing Out, a la Gene Kelly, "Singing in
the Rain"and doing his best Courtroom
Version of the Original Footwork" !

ChortlingBison: #[F]UberGoldenShower?


----------



## JMBF831

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Nonono dont send him to us!
> Entitled pax like this can walk or take the bus.


This was not meant to be a shot at you in anyway.

Believe me, after they're forced to use your services (if you can call it that) they will happily come flocking back to Uber.


----------



## Tnasty

Its fuber were talking about, so ya bring your own robe and make sure its not tied up all the way


----------



## Lnsky

I don't see how this would be an Antitrust suit. It's certainly not a Monopoly and private drivers and vehicles have no obligation to pick people up during a storm. 

If I'm fleeing for my life I may pick someone up on my way out of charity but I'm not risking my life to go 3 miles out of my way taking 2 hours to do so for free. 

It hailed today in Austin. Golf ball sized hail. I parked my car at a closed bank and left it until the bank opens and had a nice dinner. 

Uber asshole riders will give you a 4 star rating whilst you are picking them up for no surge prices in golf ball sized hail because it is hailing. Seriously. They are pissed the weather is bad, you car is literally being TOTALLED during the ride you are giving them for $3 and they will give you 4 stars or less because the weather is bad. You just gave them a ride in your 1 year old $55,000 vehicle (trade in value not new) and they 4 star you. You drove them 20 minutes for $3 and they hate you. Your car is clean, you smell nice and you pulled up over a curb so they didn't get wet but they 4 star you because it was hailing and the ride took too long. Seriously this happens. 

Uber and Lyft either are taxis or they aren't. If they are then pay them like one. If they aren't then **** off. I as a driver have no obligation to risk my livelihood on an asshole pervert who makes a third of my income from my real job and wants to treat me and my car like a POS. I had a lady ask me if she could just leave her giant fast food drink in my car because she didn't want to throw it away in the trash can 15 feet away. Props to her because most people purposely leave trash in my luxury vehicle they just got a ride in for 20 minutes for less than $10. But she was verbally confirming that every rider sees a driver as less than a cockroach. 

Why wouldn't they? I take a loss on 20% of rides. I pay 1 in 5 riders money to drive them around in the hope that my next ride will be profitable for bad treatment and no tip. 

I had a professor of Psychology at the University of Texas at Austin pretend to leave me a tip on her app with Lyft yesterday because I told her I did my BS and MS in that same program. She asked me which professors I had because she wasn't there when I was a student. After she knew without a doubt that I did grad school there she made this big scene with her phone pretending to tip me when I just wanted her to get out of my car. 

The nice thing with Lyft is tjAt if someone does tip you, you don't have to surrender your dignity to receive a tip. I have a luxury vehicle and am a good driver as well as a good host for tourists. To have someone who would have been my teacher make a big show pretending to tip me before getting out of my car was insulting. I honestly don't need her money that bad. Even when I waited tables in college if someone made a big deal out of the fact they wee tipping me I refused to take it. 

This isn't charity and it isn't a big deal. Your paying me for devices rendered. Honestly homeless people get treated better. I've had a rider give a homeless person money at a light whole in my car and not tip me. Riders absolutely hate drivers.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

JMBF831 said:


> This was not meant to be a shot at you in anyway.
> 
> Believe me, after they're forced to use your services (if you can call it that) they will happily come flocking back to Uber.


Nope.
After they are served by ME, they will beg for my business card and dream about me for months.
Service is my middle name.


----------



## D Town

Lnsky said:


> I don't see how this would be an Antitrust suit. It's certainly not a Monopoly and private drivers and vehicles have no obligation to pick people up during a storm.
> 
> If I'm fleeing for my life I may pick someone up on my way out of charity but I'm not risking my life to go 3 miles out of my way taking 2 hours to do so for free.
> 
> It hailed today in Austin. Golf ball sized hail. I parked my car at a closed bank and left it until the bank opens and had a nice dinner.
> 
> Uber asshole riders will give you a 4 star rating whilst you are picking them up for no surge prices in golf ball sized hail because it is hailing. Seriously. They are pissed the weather is bad, you car is literally being TOTALLED during the ride you are giving them for $3 and they will give you 4 stars or less because the weather is bad. You just gave them a ride in your 1 year old $55,000 vehicle (trade in value not new) and they 4 star you. You drove them 20 minutes for $3 and they hate you. Your car is clean, you smell nice and you pulled up over a curb so they didn't get wet but they 4 star you because it was hailing and the ride took too long. Seriously this happens.
> 
> Uber and Lyft either are taxis or they aren't. If they are then pay them like one. If they aren't then &%[email protected]!* off. I as a driver have no obligation to risk my livelihood on an asshole pervert who makes a third of my income from my real job and wants to treat me and my car like a POS. I had a lady ask me if she could just leave her giant fast food drink in my car because she didn't want to throw it away in the trash can 15 feet away. Props to her because most people purposely leave trash in my luxury vehicle they just got a ride in for 20 minutes for less than $10. But she was verbally confirming that every rider sees a driver as less than a cockroach.
> 
> Why wouldn't they? I take a loss on 20% of rides. I pay 1 in 5 riders money to drive them around in the hope that my next ride will be profitable for bad treatment and no tip.
> 
> I had a professor of Psychology at the University of Texas at Austin pretend to leave me a tip on her app with Lyft yesterday because I told her I did my BS and MS in that same program. She asked me which professors I had because she wasn't there when I was a student. After she knew without a doubt that I did grad school there she made this big scene with her phone pretending to tip me when I just wanted her to get out of my car.
> 
> The nice thing with Lyft is tjAt if someone does tip you, you don't have to surrender your dignity to receive a tip. I have a luxury vehicle and am a good driver as well as a good host for tourists. To have someone who would have been my teacher make a big show pretending to tip me before getting out of my car was insulting. I honestly don't need her money that bad. Even when I waited tables in college if someone made a big deal out of the fact they wee tipping me I refused to take it.
> 
> This isn't charity and it isn't a big deal. Your paying me for devices rendered. Honestly homeless people get treated better. I've had a rider give a homeless person money at a light whole in my car and not tip me. Riders absolutely hate drivers.


Gospel truth here.

Any job that puts you into contact with the public on a regular basis is going to degrade your view of humanity...and this is why. These jobs generally pay crap wages and you have to bust your a$$ for many ungrateful bastards.


----------



## JMBF831

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Nope.
> After they are served by ME, they will beg for my business card and dream about me for months.
> Service is my middle name.


That is fair, but you have to understand that you're the exception. Most cabbies are horrible at their job. It's no wonder people are choosing Uber over Cabs.


----------



## William1964

I cannot produce a text or email or Uber has suggested I log out of the app. I have a hundred and seventy-five emails a and notifications Uber tries to convince me to stay online.

If you ever came to me or the judge came to me or whatever happens and they come to me asking for money I didn't participate in AIDS strike he was the one on here hurting people to ignore and cancel.

I can reference so many posts here where I was like why are you trying to manipulate that's wrong or something like that I'm paraphrasing.

I'm not saying Uber is right. They were illegal and many cities had to create their own ordinance for ride sharing.

I would have to complain about the plaintiff he's accusing me of being part of a conspiracy I didn't even know existed

Okay fine. And 9 months I have 7 surge trips here's your effing nickel


----------



## Uber-Doober

arto71 said:


> *http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...t-lawsuit-over-pricing-green-lighted-by-judge*
> 
> Uber Technologies Inc.'s "genius" just backfired on the company and its co-founder Travis Kalanick.
> 
> U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff in Manhattan on Thursday denied Kalanick's bid to dismiss a proposed class-action lawsuit claiming the technology in Uber's popular ride-hailing app is used to illegally coordinate high surge-pricing fares.
> 
> Rakoff rejected Kalanick's assertion that a conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of drivers was "wildly implausible" and "physically impossible," an argument the executive made in filings since the suit was filed in December.
> 
> "The capacity to orchestrate such an agreement is the 'genius' of Mr. Kalanick and his company, which, through the magic of smartphone technology, can invite hundreds of thousands of drivers in far-flung locations to agree to Uber's terms," the judge said.
> 
> The ruling allows Spencer Meyer, a customer in Connecticut, to move forward with his claim that Uber's pricing algorithm violates antitrust laws used to protect consumers from price manipulation.
> 
> Meyer's lawsuit seeks damages on behalf of millions of U.S. riders who rely on the world's largest ride-hailing company, and opens a new line of legal attacks on sharing-economy businesses. Uber faces other lawsuits and regulatory challenges over its business model, including demands by its drivers to be classified as employees instead of independent contractors.
> 
> *Fundamentally Flawed*
> Uber argues the conspiracy described in the New York complaint and ruling would be physically impossible under the antitrust law, and that if Uber lost at trial then thousands of drivers would be forced to pay damages. The company also contends the case is fundamentally flawed because Kalanick would have to personally compete with Uber drivers for rides in order for the type of conspiracy alleged in the case to be true.
> 
> "These claims are unwarranted and have no basis in fact. In just five years since its founding, Uber has increased competition, lowered prices, and improved service," Uber said in an e-mailed statement.
> 
> New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and other regulators have also complained about Uber's pricing algorithm, which ensures standard fares under normal conditions. In certain situations, such as heavy traffic, bad weather or on holidays, the fares rise sometimes to many times the normal rate in a practice known as surge pricing. The company pledged to limit the increases in emergencies under an agreement with Schneiderman in 2014.
> 
> *Price Fixer*
> Meyer alleged in his complaint that Kalanick designed the company "to be a price fixer" because its drivers "do not compete" but rather charge fares set by the algorithm. Uber takes a cut of the fares. The business plan amounts to an antitrust scheme because the drivers, despite charging the same prices, are supposedly independent service providers, according to Meyer.
> 
> "Kalanick has long insisted that Uber is not a transportation company and that it does not employ drivers," Meyer's lawyers said in his complaint. "Instead, Uber is a technology company, whose chief product is a smartphone app."
> 
> Rakoff said Meyer has plausibly alleged a conspiracy and the case should go to trial.
> 
> *'Disguise Itself'*
> "The fact that Uber goes to such lengths to portray itself -- one might even say disguise itself -- as the mere purveyor of an 'app' cannot shield it from the consequences of its operating as much more," the judge said.
> 
> At this point in the case, the plaintiff doesn't need to present "direct, 'smoking gun' evidence of a conspiracy," Rakoff said.
> 
> Evan Rawley, a professor at Columbia Business School, still sees the risk to Uber as remote.
> 
> "One always has to worry about lawsuits, but this one is so far-fetched that I wouldn't lose much sleep over it if I were Uber," Rawley said. "However, if the plaintiff won, it would indeed be potentially costly to Uber since it would interfere with how the core of their business operates."
> 
> Andrew Schmidt, Meyer's lawyer, didn't immediately respond to voicemail and e-mail messages seeking comment on the ruling.
> 
> *Drivers' Trial*
> Uber is set for a trial in June in San Francisco federal court in a case brought by drivers seeking to collect pay and benefits as employees. A victory for the drivers may upend Uber's business model and cut into its more than $60 billion valuation.
> 
> The ride-hailing service launched in 2010, has grown rapidly and now has a presence in 65 countries.
> 
> Uber and its competitors are able to keep down their costs by using contractors rather than employees. Typically, contractors pay their own expenses and aren't protected by minimum wage and overtime laws. Companies don't pay for their unemployment insurance, workers compensation or Social Security.
> 
> The case is Meyer v. Kalanick, 1:15-cv-09796, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).


^^^
If you switch the first letters of the first and last name of the judge....


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> If you switch the first letters of the first and last name of the judge....


The male sense of humor is firmly rooted in place by 12 years old.

Its great.


----------

