# Customers want Anti-Surge



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Customers hate paying more than they think they should. Travis can't change this about human nature, even if he understood it, which he doesn't.

Travis however is correct that prices should be higher during periods of higher demand. Instead of doing this with Surge pricing, Uber could accomplish the EXACT SAME RESULT with a different method that would NOT PISS CUSTOMERS OFF LIKE SURGE DOES!

It's simply to do the opposite of what surge does. Instead of raising the cheapest price higher as demand increases, lower the highest price as demand decreases.

For example, set the highest price to something like $5.00 per mile, $1.00 per minute and $5.per base fare. As drivers exceed the number or rider requests, instead of raising the price like surge does, lower the price. Call it anti-surge. Or call it whatever you want. The name doesn't matter. What matters is, as the price drops customers feel like they're getting a deal. And as the price drops, drivers who aren't willing to work for low rates drop off line.

People LOVED Uber even when the prices were high. Because the quality was there. They will pay it, which means more drivers will go online wanting those fares, which naturally drops the price, which just makes passengers even happier.

It eliminates what riders HATE about Uber, and also eliminates the ridiculously poor quality that Travis Kalanick's direction is taking the company towards. 

Will this give Travis his "cheaper than car ownership" goal? Absolutely not... but that's a pipe dream anyway. He'll destroy the company trying to achieve it.

I hope some other TNC comes along and does it the way customers want... cheaper rates as more drivers go online!


----------



## uberguy_in_ct (Dec 29, 2014)

You are talking about a company that doesn't even know how to interact with their customers. They keep themselves well insulated by only giving customers an email address for communication. They've never had anyone puke, scream at them or talk down to them in their car. Their world consists of little cars running around on a computer screen. They are simply too disconnected from their own business to run it effectively.

As far as surge pricing goes, I think what they should do is make it known that even when it surges it will never go above the local tai rates and cap the surge at that point. Maybe then people won't feel as if they are being gouged, and I think most drivers could live with that. The surge seldom works out for the drivers anyway, in Connecticut anyway, people just wait out the surge 90% of the time and the drivers don't get any requests.

Unfortunately, this company seems to thrive on bad PR, or they're just idiots. They remind me of many of the Yale students around here, very bright but with the common sense of a rock.

Cheaper than car ownership is an impossible goal, at that point even the most gullible uber driver won't be able to afford to drive. Unless they can build a $10000 car that NEVER needs any maintenance and runs on water.

I'm hoping google comes out with an app and kicks their ass, they're not a startup looking for an IPO, people trust the brand and they could set rates that make everyone happy.

In reference to my first sentence, the riders aren't even uber's customers they're the drivers customers. Uber is only a referral service. I find it strange that I can't get the full name of "my" customer anymore. If you were a contractor in any other business I think you would want the full of your customer, and the feedback from your customer.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

uberguy_in_ct said:


> Unfortunately, this company seems to thrive on bad PR, or they're just idiots.


Uber succeeds despite itself. That will only last so long. Whenever a company is making mistakes that it refuses to fix for whatever reason, another company eventually comes in and steals their market share away. The hatred customers have for the surge and the low quality c are now getting due to low rates are leaving a huge weakness of Uber that another company can exploit.

Back to anti-surge, people will brag when they got a low rate. They'll go on to Facebook and say "I got an Uber ride for $0.75 per mile today!!!" Why will they brag? Because they got an awesome deal. It's well below the standard rate!

Nobody brags about getting a trip for $0.75 per mile today... because it's the standard rate. But they'll ***** up a storm on facebook when they get charged $5.00 per mile, because they feel exploited.

What I'm suggesting doesn't change the financial flow currently going on today. It's just inverted mechanically. The benefit is it flips the customer perception upside down. They'll expect to pay the standard rate during peak demand, and celebrate when it's gets cheap. As opposed to saying nothing when it's cheap and ***** when it's high during peak demand. And the cheap low quality cars and drivers will get low ratings a lot more because people will expect higher quality, and an english speaking driver, with a higher standard rate.


----------



## JaxBeachDriver (Nov 27, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> Uber succeeds despite itself. That will only last so long. Whenever a company is making mistakes that it refuses to fix for whatever reason, another company eventually comes in and steals their market share away. The hatred customers have for the surge and the low quality c are now getting due to low rates are leaving a huge weakness of Uber that another company can exploit.
> 
> Back to anti-surge, people will brag when they got a low rate. They'll go on to Facebook and say "I got an Uber ride for $0.75 per mile today!!!" Why will they brag? Because they got an awesome deal. It's well below the standard rate!
> 
> ...


Don't worry. Another company will come along with a better way to do business. More competition is better for all of us.


----------



## cybertec69 (Jul 23, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> Customers hate paying more than they think they should. Travis can't change this about human nature, even if he understood it, which he doesn't.
> 
> Travis however is correct that prices should be higher during periods of higher demand. Instead of doing this with Surge pricing, Uber could accomplish the EXACT SAME RESULT with a different method that would NOT PISS CUSTOMERS OFF LIKE SURGE DOES!
> 
> ...


And I want a bow job with each fare.


----------



## Tim In Cleveland (Jul 28, 2014)

Uber keeps themselves insulated by banning CSR's and all internal employees from driving. I have an Uber employee who hires CSRs nearby and give him rides sometimes. I was going to apply to be a CSR until he told me I wouldn't also be able to drive. They feel employees who drive may not make the customer's viewpoint the top priority.


----------



## cybertec69 (Jul 23, 2014)

Tim In Cleveland said:


> Uber keeps themselves insulated by banning CSR's and all internal employees from driving. I have an Uber employee who hires CSRs nearby and give him rides sometimes. I was going to apply to be a CSR until he told me I wouldn't also be able to drive. They feel employees who drive may not make the customer's viewpoint the top priority.


And actually see that driving for Uber is a losing proposition.


----------



## doyousensehumor (Apr 13, 2015)

Great idea. Presentation is everything when dealing with any business. They do this to get so many drivers in the first place 

Matter of fact, that sums up most of the difference between taxis and uber. Same product in nicer packaging.

I though the whole idea of uber was a fast ride when you request it, As well as fixing alot of problems compared to cabs. In order to eliminate that wait, have that surge and noshow fees to reduce downtime when there are actual passengers waiting.

There is a button on customer app "notify me if surge ends". Fair enough. No need to pay surge. Pax waits for a little bit. Comparable to waiting for taxicab.

Without surge= waiting
Surge = fast arrival times.
Cap on surge = long wait times and expencive rides. See if the pax like that.

Uber didnt get this big because surge was a problem..


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

JaxBeachDriver said:


> Don't worry. Another company will come along with a better way to do business. More competition is better for all of us.


How is it competition if their are no commonly respected rules? What is going on between Uber and Lyft is more like a war. No one asked to go to war. They asked to go to work. First, before people suggest Uber needs competition, it moight be fair to say, Uber drivers need more reasonable choices in terms of platform options.

The typical Uber driver, when given the option also drives for Lyft. That might hint that there is more to it than simply needing more competition. Drivers need for more stability. Much of the talk seems to suggest that there needs to be more competition, yet somehow at the end of the day, there is the idea that only one platform could be left standing if a free market is to prevail. I believe that is false. That would only be true if only the Travis Kalanicks of the world have their say.

Competition is one thing. It may be best for drivers to reconsider their language a little. Choice and stability are in order. Look at how the despised leader competes, those methods are completely analogous to the way he sets driving policy at Uber.

The idea is that somehow more competition would bring better driving conditions. There is a high probability that any company that can out compete Uber on their playing field aren't going to be a lot of fun to work for.


----------



## stuber (Jun 30, 2014)

Tim In Cleveland said:


> They feel employees who drive may not make the customer's viewpoint the top priority.


Did you get the impression that this was actual stated policy? Incredible.

They make their money from drivers, yet the drivers are not the top priority.


----------



## Sweet Ping (Jan 20, 2015)

It's called happy hour


----------

