# Google Launches Uber Rival RideWith



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

http://americans.org/2015/07/06/goo...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer


----------



## startin trouble (Apr 6, 2015)

Finally!


----------



## Drive777 (Jan 23, 2015)

Looks like Google's getting to the heart of the matter, removing profit motive from the driver in the quest for true rideshare. Another article goes on to say "carpoolers only pay drivers for gas and wear and tear on the car."

http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/248069

If Uber doesn't wise up and come clean with drivers that our cars are expected to be rented to the platform for zero profit (and that riders everywhere need to get used to the idea of riding with multiple strangers), they're not gonna win this race with Google, because Google is setting those expectations from the start.


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

Drive777 said:


> Looks like Google's getting to the heart of the matter, removing profit motive from the driver in the quest for true rideshare. Another article goes on to say "carpoolers only pay drivers for gas and wear and tear on the car."
> 
> http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/248069
> 
> If Uber doesn't wise up and come clean with drivers that our cars are expected to be rented to the platform for zero profit (and that riders everywhere need to get used to the idea of riding with multiple strangers), they're not gonna win this race with Google, because Google is setting those expectations from the start.


i appreciate your comments but disagree... if you go back to 2013 Lyft started it all with their "donation" system.. riders didn't have to pay a dime, they could just donate whatever they wanted to the system, part of which went to the driver .. then uberX shows up .. then meters in iPhones started .. then this idea of people actually going so far as trying to make a living at this thing, that evolved .. so, yes, Google is sounding identical to how Uber and Lyft sounded at the start


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher (Dec 7, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> http://americans.org/2015/07/06/goo...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer


POST # 1/chi1cabby: Bostonian Bison
Thanks You for this
Wicked-Important Article that Witnesses
the Beginning of the End of #[F]Uber by
Documenting Google'sCounter-Disruptive
Strategy. Pack Your bags Emperor A••hat,
the REAL "Big Brother"s on the Move!

Bison reminds Travis: "Time to get Your
Mood Stabilizer refilled."
.


----------



## Seastriper (Jul 1, 2015)

Google can buy uber and lyft if they really want it... Once all the legal challenges are ironed out ---> get ready for a real war!


----------



## Fauxknight (Aug 12, 2014)

Doesn't look too useful. I'd rather Google tried to compete directly with Uber, they're certainly capable of doing a much better job.


----------



## Drive777 (Jan 23, 2015)

riChElwAy said:


> i appreciate your comments but disagree... if you go back to 2013 Lyft started it all with their "donation" system.. riders didn't have to pay a dime, they could just donate whatever they wanted to the system, part of which went to the driver .. then uberX shows up .. then meters in iPhones started .. then this idea of people actually going so far as trying to make a living at this thing, that evolved .. so, yes, Google is sounding identical to how Uber and Lyft sounded at the start


That's because they were providing a new unregulated taxi service in an industry that was highly regulated. Anyone who thinks that Uber (or Google for that matter) is interested in driver profitability is missing the point. Rather it's 5 years or 20 years away doesn't matter, the end game is driverless cars and whatever it takes to get there. I wish it were different and drivers could make a good living at this, but Google isn't motivated in that direction.

Uber tolerates it simply because they have no choice -- livery was their core business and therefore Uber is dead without its drivers. Which is an unfortunate predicament for Travis, and probably why he's been known to run this ship so recklessly to get to Plan B.

Lyft is a different story. It's no secret that Zimmer has experience in the service industry and put driver concerns high on his list of priorities. Problem is he's competing against much bigger money that envisions massive profits on the backs of robots running the entire operation. Robots who probably won't complain about the pay or the hours.


----------



## Kingo9 (May 20, 2015)

Here is another article from USA Today: http://roadwarriorvoices.com/2015/07/07/waze-and-therefore-google-is-venturing-into-ridesharing/



Seastriper said:


> Google can buy uber and lyft if they really want it... Once all the legal challenges are ironed out ---> get ready for a real war!


I think you are right on this. The problem is that drivers will still suffer... There will be yet another competitor and that = lower rates to stay competitive.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Fauxknight said:


> Doesn't look too useful. I'd rather Google tried to compete directly with Uber, they're certainly capable of doing a much better job.


In a way Google is competing with Uber by challenging all of Uber's legal dodging claims, such as the cars are not taxi cabs because it's ridesharing. The last thing Google wants to do is follow down a path created by Travis Kalanik's BS! By showing Uber is NOT ridesharing, it pushes Uber into facing the legal truth of what it is, which will result in solidifying all the laws and regulations that are so unclear now.... Then Google simply extends its ridesharing into the now mature peer to peer ride for hire industry without any of the costs of creating it.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher (Dec 7, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> In a way Google is competing with Uber by challenging all of Uber's legal dodging claims, such as the cars are not taxi cabs because it's ridesharing. The last thing Google wants to do is follow down a path created by Travis Kalanik's BS! By showing Uber is NOT ridesharing, it pushes Uber into facing the legal truth of what it is, which will result in solidifying all the laws and regulations that are so unclear now.... Then Google simply extends its ridesharing into the now mature peer to peer ride for hire industry without any of the costs of creating it.


POST # 10/UberHammer: Please forgive
me for Relishing-in-
Advance either footage of CrownePrince
of Kstan being "frog marched" to justice
in Nearby So. Korea............OR ....absent 
THAT............... a Chinese Political Car-
toon with a Calm SinoParental Figure
spanking Lil' 'Nicky for Disrupting the
Near Monopolist Didi.

T.K. irks The Bison.


----------



## UberXTampa (Nov 20, 2014)

Fauxknight said:


> Doesn't look too useful. I'd rather Google tried to compete directly with Uber, they're certainly capable of doing a much better job.


This is just to scratch the surface, not get into any legal battles and not waste time and money on building the ride-share business, meantime, slowly and steadily build a customer base large enough to launch a direct Uber competition... maybe after Uber goes public and Google divests all its Uber shares at very high prices.. the proceeds from such a sale can easily fund a direct Uber competitor.

At that point, everyone will have the app in their phones, all legal battles will be finalized by Uber/Lyft/Sidecar... Google will be ready to strike anytime...

Google is trying it very smart!

I will definitely RideWith Google when it comes into Tampa Bay area.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> http://americans.org/2015/07/06/goo...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer


This explains why Google bought Waze.


----------



## ReviTULize (Sep 29, 2014)

Uber has put themselves in a bad position by not taking care of its drivers in their quest for world domination. Also, their unwillingness to work with local govt's is about to bite them in the a$$.


----------



## joe flood (Jun 4, 2015)

Didn't Google invest in UBER I am confused or just dumb?


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

joe flood said:


> Didn't Google invest in UBER I am confused or just dumb?


See this post
https://uberpeople.net/threads/upda...or-self-driving-cars.13072/page-3#post-239067


----------



## UberRidiculous (May 19, 2015)

UberHammer said:


> In a way Google is competing with Uber by challenging all of Uber's legal dodging claims, such as the cars are not taxi cabs because it's ridesharing. The last thing Google wants to do is follow down a path created by Travis Kalanik's BS! By showing Uber is NOT ridesharing, it pushes Uber into facing the legal truth of what it is, which will result in solidifying all the laws and regulations that are so unclear now.... Then Google simply extends its ridesharing into the now mature peer to peer ride for hire industry without any of the costs of creating it.


THIS! WHOA UberHammer YOU ARE ONTO SOMETHING! 
Google's Motto: DON'T BE EVIL UBER!


----------



## joe flood (Jun 4, 2015)

OMG Drive-less cars wow , we are looking way into the future ... crazy


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

joe flood said:


> Didn't Google invest in UBER I am confused or just dumb?


Ever hear of the expression,

"Keep your friends close, your enemies still closer".

http://www.quora.com/Who-said-Keep-your-friends-close-and-your-enemies-closer


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

joe flood said:


> OMG Drive-less cars wow , we are looking way into the future ... crazy


 Couple years, maybe less maybe a couple more,

http://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-DGB-42559


----------



## ylneo (Aug 25, 2014)

I think it will be more than 2 years, see what google had report!!

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brookecrothers/2015/06/08/google-now-reporting-driverless-car-accidents/


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

ylneo said:


> I think it will be more than 2 years, see what google had report!!
> 
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/brookecrothers/2015/06/08/google-now-reporting-driverless-car-accidents/


12 accidents, none driverless cars fault. Seems pretty safe.


----------



## ylneo (Aug 25, 2014)

observer said:


> 12 accidents, none driverless cars fault. Seems pretty safe.


That is exactly my point. 1.8 million miles using a new technology and no accident to report... that is a lie!!!


----------



## 20yearsdriving (Dec 14, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> In a way Google is competing with Uber by challenging all of Uber's legal dodging claims, such as the cars are not taxi cabs because it's ridesharing. The last thing Google wants to do is follow down a path created by Travis Kalanik's BS! By showing Uber is NOT ridesharing, it pushes Uber into facing the legal truth of what it is, which will result in solidifying all the laws and regulations that are so unclear now.... Then Google simply extends its ridesharing into the now mature peer to peer ride for hire industry without any of the costs of creating it.


Bingo!!!


----------



## 20yearsdriving (Dec 14, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> This explains why Google bought Waze.


More disruption on top of disruption
Sweet !!!!


----------



## jaxbeachrides (May 27, 2015)

Google could reuse their android commercial to advertise for this service. Its exactly what rideshares expect, no uber nonsense.


----------



## Ziggy (Feb 27, 2015)

Drive777 said:


> Anyone who thinks that Uber (or Google for that matter) is interested in driver profitability is missing the point. Rather it's 5 years or 20 years away doesn't matter, the end game is driverless cars and whatever it takes to get there. I wish it were different and drivers could make a good living at this, but Google isn't motivated in that direction.


Yep ... get your Uber or Lyft cash while you can ... as Google & Uber are definitely have Driverless car as their primary goal. This week Google started running driverless cars on the roads here in Austin, TX; haven't seen one yet ... as they are mainly in NW Austin and I am not. But the writing is on the wall ... so scrape up all the rides you can now and save what you can for a "rainy day" 'cause the rain is going to fall soon and neither Google nor Uber/Lyft plan on giving you a life vest, much less a boat.


----------



## Ziggy (Feb 27, 2015)

jaxbeachrides said:


> Its exactly what rideshares expect, no uber nonsense.


You must be a cabbie; Uber nonsense, as you called it ... is the only thing that is giving the people driving Uber or Lyft any income for driving. Speaking of which, you do realize that when Google/Uber roll out their driverless cars ... there's nothing preventing them from taking over the entire cab industry too. As cabbies will be redundant too. The only non-driverless car for hire option left will be Black Cars; because these pax expect a level of service that is unlikely to come from a driverless car


----------



## jaxbeachrides (May 27, 2015)

Theres a difference between automation and undercompensation. If Walmart wants to make a self checkout aisle to replace a cashier, that is within their right. But its not legal to make an existing cashier buy their own equipment and come to work to lose money on expenses. 

It appears Google is offering what uber is without sugarcoating it as something its not. Its a cheap ride for customers that pulls the wool over the drivers eye and takes advantage of the driver's personal resources.


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

This is quite interesting. What a tug at the current definition of rideshare.


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

joe flood said:


> Didn't Google invest in UBER I am confused or just dumb?


These people are venture capitalists, they can drop on a dime....... I have a great article for you. It is a long read but informative.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/05/18/tomorrows-advance-man


----------



## startin trouble (Apr 6, 2015)

Ziggy said:


> Yep ... get your Uber or Lyft cash while you can ... as Google & Uber are definitely have Driverless car as their primary goal. This week Google started running driverless cars on the roads here in Austin, TX; haven't seen one yet ... as they are mainly in NW Austin and I am not. But the writing is on the wall ... so scrape up all the rides you can now and save what you can for a "rainy day" 'cause the rain is going to fall soon and neither Google nor Uber/Lyft plan on giving you a life vest, much less a boat.


Those 1.8 million miles driven by Google's driverless cars all were driven with a human behind the wheel who took control when needed. Yes the cars did great but the cars did not really drive all those miles on their own. On June 3rd Google crossed the 1 million mile mark that the car was truly self driving, so roughly half the time the driverless car was on the road the driver had to take control


----------



## 20yearsdriving (Dec 14, 2014)

LAndreas said:


> No one will have RideWith on their phones because the drivers, and with it the utility for the pax, won't be there.
> 
> There'll be very few actual rideshare offers if they implement as truly just such, and as a customer, I need to have drivers always available to make the app useful, not just "Joe" going down to Long Beach on 7/14 at 2:30pm. If anything, Google will take business off Craigslist. That'll be it.
> 
> I see it more as a technology play. No profit motive off the bat, just developing the tech to see how it can be expanded on later when it's matured. Similar to Google Earth. Not launched as a big money maker...


Maybe it will be more for drivers like
Me

Example today

5:45am Glendora - LAX

10:30 West Covina -LAX
11:55 LAX - Claremont

3:15pm Glendora - LAX
6:05pm LAX to Claremont

Notice the first ride had dead miles on return

If I had anyone going from LAX to my
Area
I would happily take them even at UBERX rates
As in real ride share


----------



## jaxbeachrides (May 27, 2015)

LAndreas said:


> I see it more as a technology play. No profit motive off the bat, just developing the tech to see how it can be expanded on later when it's matured. Similar to Google Earth. Not launched as a big money maker...


Lets see, the 2nd largest company in the world, growing revenues at 20% a year, when only 10 years ago weren't making a dime of profit. You underestimate the googlemonster.

Google could certainly quash uber in a hurry if they ever thought it was worth the time or effort. As you can see already, google already has all the technology in place to implement a self driving car system as soon as its legal. Whether they will extend it to vehicles for hire or not is the question, or whether they are simply interested in selling this technology to other companies.

But the initialization of this ride share program is a dead giveaway that they are interested. They are definitely capable, its just a matter of how far they follow through.

I think it can be said for certain though, that the developments that google has made in the tech space makes uber look like summer camp for preschoolers.


----------



## Ziggy (Feb 27, 2015)

jaxbeachrides said:


> But the initialization of this ride share program is a dead giveaway that they are interested


The problem with Google's RideWith program is truly is "ride sharing"; hence the only monies exchanged are for "wear & tear on the vehicle" ... which, in and of itself, means that the driver is not getting paid for his time or expertise ... And if you start picking up pax with RideWith, you'd better have another job you're driving to.


----------



## jaxbeachrides (May 27, 2015)

That's pretty much the same as uber right? The money exchanged is less than wear and tear and the driver is not compensated for time or expertise... Whereas uber presents it as a job opportunity yet you are NOT considered an employee, Google is presenting the job correctly and accurately.


----------



## jaxbeachrides (May 27, 2015)

I figured it out before the rest of you, thanks to all of the posts on here. Therefore I haven't driven a mile for uber, and probably never will.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

joe flood said:


> Didn't Google invest in UBER I am confused or just dumb?


Yes Google paid Uber to do the dirty work, sat back and learnt. Google was probably privy to a lot of forward planning, saw where Uber was going wrong and now will get a good return on that investment for themselves

An education in this whole new industry, ain't cheap. Google hasn't wasted a cent in head-butting all the transport jurisdictions, and pointless lawsuits. They've quietly poured money into cars that will give them 100% of each fare if they own the cars, or a much higher amount than the 25% UBER gets if ownership is not their business model.

Google have visited EVERY state Transport Minister here in Australia and given them a look at their progress, plans and ambitions with Driverless cars. They have shown the Ministers what Driverless cars will give back to Governments once deployed. In return Google have ALREADY gotten positive legislative support - whereas UBER is still getting Governments passing laws working against the UBER business model.

Travis's leadership style and time as CEO is probably coming to an end


----------



## UberRidiculous (May 19, 2015)

jaxbeachrides said:


> I figured it out before the rest of you, thanks to all of the posts on here. Therefore I haven't driven a mile for uber, and probably never will.





LAndreas said:


> Yet you haven't figured out that you're wasting precious time of your limited lifespan away, posting to a forum to which you have nothing of value to contribute?


 I disagree. He's helping the next guy figure it out and I enjoy his posts and probably many others do as well. Now LAndreas I am not picking on you. I learn from you as well. So we don't want jaxbeachrides going anywhere and we don't want you going anywhere. AND although the 'don't go anywhere' list is long, I will only mention one more right here Sydney Uber because his last post in this thread was soooo excellent, I must recommend you read it, maybe twice, so you can report back to travisk that he's going about it all wrong! 



Sydney Uber said:


> Yes Google paid Uber to do the dirty work, sat back and learnt. Google was probably privy to a lot of forward planning, saw where Uber was going wrong and now will get a good return on that investment for themselves
> 
> An education in this whole new industry, ain't cheap. Google hasn't wasted a cent in head-butting all the transport jurisdictions, and pointless lawsuits. They've quietly poured money into cars that will give them 100% of each fare if they own the cars, or a much higher amount than the 25% UBER gets if ownership is not their business model.
> 
> ...


EXCELLENT!


----------



## jaxbeachrides (May 27, 2015)

LAndreas said:


> Yet you haven't figured out that you're wasting precious time of your limited lifespan away, posting to a forum to which you have nothing of value to contribute?


Its called leisure time, looks like you on here too during yours. Value is subjective, to each his own.


----------



## OCBob (Jan 20, 2015)

I love it! This is exactly why I signed up for Uber and then I found out Uber makes it very hard to be actual "rideshare" without knowing where the destination the PAX wants to go. I would normally not mind making less per mile/minute if I knew I am picking someone up North of me and also going North that would be near my office. I would have minimal mileage and time that would be considered "out of my way" and yet make a little money everyday. This is what Uber misses out on and why they will not be considered "rideshare" until they are smart enough to do the same. I guess Sidecar is the closest to this.


----------



## naplestom75 (May 3, 2015)

perhaps the first step toward what I figured would eventually happen. Another company with more internet dollars will "buy" uber and then eventually it will just become an app/software used by cab companies and car services.


----------

