# 32/35 5*ratings = 4.79



## marelano (Jun 16, 2016)

what gives?. i dont remember cancelling allot of rides.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

?? Doesn't that just mean that 3 people gave you less than a 5 for a rating?

Cancels don't get to rate you.


----------



## Stygge (Jan 9, 2016)

marelano said:


> what gives?. i dont remember cancelling allot of rides.


One possibility is that you got 2x3* and 1x2*. Another is 1x4*, 1x3*, and 1x1*. Pretty normal; can't be loved by everyone.


----------



## Uber315 (Apr 11, 2016)

Just means you lost 7 stars between the 3 non 5's Max possible is 35x5 = 175 take away 7 stars leaves you with 168 stars , divided by the 35 rated trips gives you your rating


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

So here I am reviving a week old thread because I noticed Stygge and Uber315 came up with two different numbers on the math. This is understandable as

4.79 X 35 = 167.65

And since there is no such thing as awarding .65 stars you have to choose one or the other whole numbers that lay on either side of the line..

168/35 = 4.8000
167/35 = 4.7714

It is impossible to have a 4.79 rating with 35 trips and therefore OP's numbers are incorrect.


----------



## ExpendableAsset (Aug 12, 2015)

I remember a discussion a while back where it was determined that bad ratings from pax are capped at 4 stars (that is, they can rate you less than 4 but it goes on the record as 4). Is that different now?


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Tedgey said:


> It is impossible to have a 4.79 rating with 35 trips and therefore OP's numbers are incorrect


It is not if you employ Uber Arithmetic. You know, the same arithmetic that tells you: "lower rates mean higher earnings for drivers".


----------



## mikejm (Jun 1, 2016)

Another Uber Driver said:


> It is not if you employ Uber Arithmetic. You know, the same arithmetic that tells you: "lower rates mean higher earnings for drivers".


Lower rates mean more market share for Uber if Uber hires enough new drivers to meet capactity. For individual drivers it would only mean higher earnings if they were hardlt ever getting any pings and they finally started getting pings when the rates were lowered but it is more likely drivers will get no difference in the number of pings and Uber will just hire more drivers.


----------



## mikejm (Jun 1, 2016)

Lower rates won't be lower if the lower rates cause surge pricing. If there is more surge pricing due to lower rates then dricers earnings actually will increase. But this only works in places like LA.


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

mikejm said:


> Lower rates won't be lower if the lower rates cause surge pricing. If there is more surge pricing due to lower rates then dricers earnings actually will increase. But this only works in places like LA.


In practice there's a limit to all this theory.


----------



## mikejm (Jun 1, 2016)

Tedgey said:


> In practice there's a limit to all this theory.


Agreed, but since Uber and drivers are each taking a split, then Uber should have the exact same incentive to increase overall earnings that drivers do, But the balance diverges because Uber can hire more drivers to capture the earnings that result from the lower fares while drivers are physically limited to how much of the increased market share they can benefit from. So really all drivers can hope for is that lower fares will create surges and they and Uber can fleece the passengers with the illusion of lower fares.


----------



## mikejm (Jun 1, 2016)

An also there is a limit to how much fare pricing will actually impact a passengers decision to use a rideshare or not. Some portion of the passengers are a captive market and will use rideshare no matter what the fare is. There are different pain thresholds among passengers and they are probably not well understood by Uber.


----------

