# Uber Survival in doubt



## Momo11 (Dec 1, 2015)

*Uber risks burning through its remaining $7 billion in startup capital within about 3 years*

http://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/543A1B4E-5777-11E7-BF27-E90BE7E240CC


----------



## Jagent (Jan 29, 2017)

Outstanding article.


----------



## DRider85 (Nov 19, 2016)

I'm not sure Uber will be around in 3 to 5 years. Or maybe it will. 

One thing is for sure. There will be headlines non stop as usual. Change will always occur. 

I remember Excel Communications. It was the worlds fastest direct selling company. Went bust in 2004. Uber has a very similar feel.


----------



## Jagent (Jan 29, 2017)

Someone at Uber better wake up and raise rates. They especially need to raise minimum fare to a profitable level for drivers. Expecting someone to pickup a passenger for less than $3.00 is uncalled for and results in 90% of Uber's customer service problems.


----------



## Hoodat (Apr 29, 2016)

Momo11 said:


> http://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/543A1B4E-5777-11E7-BF27-E90BE7E240CC


5 star


----------



## Andre Benjamin 6000 (Nov 11, 2016)

They can start by bringing back the base fare they've taken away in many cities...



Jagent said:


> Someone at Uber better wake up and raise rates. They especially need to raise minimum fare to a profitable level for drivers. Expecting someone to pickup a passenger for less than $3.00 is uncalled for and results in 90% of Uber's customer service problems.


Yep, it's disgraceful.


----------



## Kodyhead (May 26, 2015)

Jagent said:


> Someone at Uber better wake up and raise rates. They especially need to raise minimum fare to a profitable level for drivers. Expecting someone to pickup a passenger for less than $3.00 is uncalled for and results in 90% of Uber's customer service problems.


I disagree i enjoy spending 20 mins for a min fare that pays $2.64 with no tip


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

I would love to take solace in that article, but frankly I don't believe a word of it. If you dig down into the article the author cites as evidence - and then dig down into the numbers that author uses to make to make his case, you can start to see why I am skeptical both of the position of the author of the above article and the agenda of the author this guy cites (he is a 40 year transportation industry insider).

Example: The analyst cited by the author actually says:
" _data from 2013 through the first half of 2015. Drivers retained 83% of passenger payments_"​That would mean that Uber only took 17% of the gross rider fare.
Anyone here believe that?
I don't. But even if you do - that was 2 years ago. We all know today Uber takes 35%-50% of the rider fare - but the author doesn't mention anything about how Uber has managed to reduce the % of the fare the drivers receive - all while increasing the % of the total fare that Uber keeps ... you know, what we've been up in arms about for the last year... but that is exactly why Uber as a corporation is moving towards profitability.

He also says that Uber lost $2bil in 2016.
But the industry insider fails to mention that Uber sold off its money-losing China venture for a billion in cash
AND took a 17%-20% stake in Didi - the company Uber sold it to.
Didi does 20 million rides/day and generates over $20 Bil/yr in revenues.
(Didi is losing money, too - but no one is predicting its demise)
To put that in perspective, the 3 largest unicorns (billion dollar startups) are #1 Uber, #2 Xiomi and #3 Didi.
Uber owns 20% of the third largest unicorn.

And then there's the note in the article that says:
_"Uber has become stuck in a pattern of using its venture capital funding to subsidize at least 50% of every ride "_​Come on - I mean if you're talking about the actual cost of the ride (tech service, insurance, marketing, accounting, driver, vehicle exp) then* we all know that it's the driver who subsidizes the overwhelming % of the cost of the ride - not Uber* - and Uber investors. If what the author really meant to say was that it's investor money that is subsidizing Uber's operational costs of providing a ride, well - do you believe that? Do you really believe that if Uber is grossing (according to the data the article uses) 17% of every fare paid, that it isn't paying for operations out of cash flow?

No - what I believe is that Uber is subsidizing legal fees, lobbying efforts and law suits with investor money. And I also believe (may be wishful thinking, I admit) that with Kalanick gone, those expenses will drop dramatically in the future.

There's just too much in the underlying facts that in reality doesn't support what this author is suggesting for me to believe his premise.

I'll believe it when a more credible sources - or sources says it.
Who knows... with a new CEO coming on-board, maybe we'll actually get a peek at the real numbers and have an idea of what's going on inside those books.

Ok... go ahead and show me the errors in my thinking!


----------



## SEAL Team 5 (Dec 19, 2015)

DRider85 said:


> I'm not sure Uber will be around in 3 to 5 years. Or maybe it will.


It won't make one lick of difference if Uber is around in 3 to 5 years. Uber, Lyft, Rideshare friggin getting compensated for picking up hitchhikers. Call it by whatever name you want. As long as people are willing to drive for pennies the fare for hire industry will only be a supplement to the needy just like food stamps.


----------



## Rollo Tomassi (Aug 29, 2014)

Obviously, the current Uber business model is unsustainable. No company can lose billions year after year and continue to attract investors. Uber's only path toward profitability is raising rates for passengers while keeping drivers' compensation as low as they believe possible. The good news for Uber is that there seems to be an endless supply of gullible dolts who are willing to work for nothing, at least for a while.


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

Jagent said:


> Someone at Uber better wake up and raise rates. They especially need to raise minimum fare to a profitable level for drivers. Expecting someone to pickup a passenger for less than $3.00 is uncalled for and results in 90% of Uber's customer service problems.


All Kalanick had to do was charge the same as taxis from day one. Now they have no choice but to raise fares and anger passengers. Kalanick might be the dumbest smart guy ever.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Momo11 said:


> http://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/543A1B4E-5777-11E7-BF27-E90BE7E240CC


During the crash of 2008 when i was buying stocks nearly daily, Market Watch
( was C.B.S. - Marketwatch then)
WAS SO WRONG ABOUT SO MANY THINGS !
Hertz Car rental failure was even predicted by them.

Common sense will tell you
Well priced goods and services used by people daily do not fail.

No matter how some may wish to manipulate a crowd and start a stampede.

G.M.and Chrystler failed due to not responding to the needs of the People.
( where was market watch on those 2 ???)

G.M. and Chrystler had hundreds of competitors.

Who is Ubers Competition ?
Marketwatch is just doing " Click Bait" to seem important.
I am NOT impressed.



Jagent said:


> Someone at Uber better wake up and raise rates. They especially need to raise minimum fare to a profitable level for drivers. Expecting someone to pickup a passenger for less than $3.00 is uncalled for and results in 90% of Uber's customer service problems.


They NEED TRAVIS !
New Board.
Guess what ? Uber is NOT self driving.
This new board is behind on the learning curve.

So a " sexism scandal" was " Created".
Now new players are at the wheel . . .
NOW WHAT ?



Michael - Cleveland said:


> I would love to take solace in that article, but frankly I don't believe a word of it. If you dig down into the article the author cites as evidence - and then dig down into the numbers that author uses to make to make his case, you can start to see why I am skeptical both of the position of the author of the above article and the agenda of the author this guy cites (he is a 40 year transportation industry insider).
> 
> Example: The analyst cited by the author actually says:
> " _data from 2013 through the first half of 2015. Drivers retained 83% of passenger payments_"​That would mean that Uber only took 17% of the gross rider fare.
> ...


You Sir are 100% Dead On.
And have saved me much research and writing.

I agree completely.


----------



## SEAL Team 5 (Dec 19, 2015)

tomatopaste said:


> All Kalanick had to do was charge the same as taxis from day one. Now they have no choice but to raise fares and anger passengers. Kalanick might be the dumbest smart guy ever.


He actually charged $5/mile at the beginning which is twice a cab rate. Then in Jan '14 his rates dropped to $2.25/mile and in June '14 they again dropped to $1.35/mile. And then hit the rock bottom prices they are today between '15-'16. The funny part is that the lower the rates became the more drivers joined Uber. Drivers might be the dumbest smart people ever.


----------



## Jagent (Jan 29, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Example: The analyst cited by the author actually says:
> " _data from 2013 through the first half of 2015. Drivers retained 83% of passenger payments_"​That would mean that Uber only took 17% of the gross rider fare.
> Anyone here believe that?


Yes, I DO believe that drivers got 83% of Ubers earnings during 2013-2015. Sign up bonuse and incentives were crazy high during those times and all drivers were on a 20% commission anyway. It's not difficult to imagine that Uber spent 3% more on bonuses. Uber didnt start with upfront fares until 2017. The author is using data from 2013-2015.



Michael - Cleveland said:


> He also says that Uber lost $2bil in 2016.
> But the industry insider fails to mention that Uber sold off its money-losing China venture for a billion in cash
> AND took a 17%-20% stake in Didi - the company Uber sold it to.


Its a well known stat that Uber burned through 2b in 2016. Yes, you can sell something for 1b and still lose 2b. Uber sold the China venture for 1b, but it's estimated that they spent much more setting it up.



Michael - Cleveland said:


> And then there's the note in the article that says:
> _"Uber has become stuck in a pattern of using its venture capital funding to subsidize at least 50% of every ride "_​Come on - I mean if you're talking about the actual cost of the ride (tech service, insurance, marketing, accounting, driver, vehicle exp) then* we all know that it's the driver who subsidizes the overwhelming % of the cost of the ride - not Uber* - and Uber investors. If what the author really meant to say was that it's investor money that is subsidizing Uber's operational costs of providing a ride, well - do you believe that? Do you really believe that if Uber is grossing (according to the data the article uses) 17% of every fare paid, that it isn't paying for operations out of cash flow?


Ubers only earned income is from rides. Of course he's going to use rides as the yardstick to measure expenses. We all know that Kalanick wasted billions on self driving cars and lawyers, but we arent talking about where the money went.... we are talking about earnings, and since Uber spent twice that it earned, it's fair to say that rides were subsidized to the tune of 50%.



Michael - Cleveland said:


> There's just too much in the underlying facts that in reality doesn't support what this author is suggesting for me to believe his premise.


I'm not understanding what you do believe. Do you actually think that Uber has been making a profit? Do you think it can continue on the same path without failing?

Personally, I believe everything the author says. We can nitpick over percentages all day, but it doesn't change the fact that Uber is in serious trouble without another round of new money.

Getting rid of Kalanick was just the first step. Now they need to kill his pet projects, raise rates and stop with all the shenanigans that led to lawsuits. Can Uber be profitable? Absolutely. They are a cab company that doesn't own any cabs.

The author lists 5 steps Uber must take to survive..... how can you disagree with any of them? The article is DEAD ON accurate and one of the best articles on Uber that I've ever read.


----------



## Delilah5 (Mar 20, 2017)

Well they are losing tons of money on the dumb Pool rides because they were copying Lyft to gain more market share. Now they are copying Lyfts Tipping option.

YES, the pay sucks. Why do fares have to be one third or half of the Taxi rate, it can be 70-100% because the cars and rider experience is alot better.


----------



## Jagent (Jan 29, 2017)

Delilah5 said:


> Well they are losing tons of money on the dumb Pool rides because they were copying Lyft to gain more market share. Now they are copying Lyfts Tipping option.
> 
> YES, the pay sucks. Why do fares have to be one third or half of the Taxi rate, it can be 70-100% because the cars and rider experience is alot better.


Exactly!.. and the article points out that raising rates is one thing that must happen if Uber is to survive.

Travis was always concerned about market share, but he is so short sighted that he only saw the share controlled by Lyft. He totally ignored the fact that neither Uber nor Lyft is installed on 80% of smart phones. Pay drivers what they deserve and go after that other 80% by advertising .... what should they advertise?

Your words would work - "the cars and rider experience is a lot better."


----------



## Aneed Momoney (Apr 3, 2017)

Ubereater said:


> Eventually Uber will be just a good story about how some smart Ashkenazies tricked $3.5 billions of Saudis money into a Ponzi scheme.


what if I told you the Saudis were Ashkenazis too!


----------



## Side Hustle (Mar 2, 2017)

Momo11 said:


> http://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/543A1B4E-5777-11E7-BF27-E90BE7E240CC


I wish I'd gone to medical school....


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Jagent said:


> Its a well known stat that Uber burned through 2b in 2016. Yes, you can sell something for 1b and still lose 2b. Uber sold the China venture for 1b, but it's estimated that they spent much more setting it up.


They didn't sell it for $1bil - they sold it for *$1bil + 17-20% of Didi*. Didi provides more than 20 million rides/day, generating more than $20 Billion/year in revenue.
To put that in perspective, the 3 largest unicorns (billion dollar startups) are #1 Uber, #2 Xiomi and #3 Didi.
Uber owns 20% of the third largest unicorn.


> Personally, I believe everything the author says.


I wish I had a bridge to sell you! 


> The author lists 5 steps Uber must take to survive..... how can you disagree with any of them?


Let me know when the author steers a start-up from nothing to a $70bil valuation in 8 years.


----------



## touberornottouber (Aug 12, 2016)

Jagent said:


> Someone at Uber better wake up and raise rates. They especially need to raise minimum fare to a profitable level for drivers. Expecting someone to pickup a passenger for less than $3.00 is uncalled for and results in 90% of Uber's customer service problems.


The thing is, at least here, when I get $2.96 Uber is still charging the passenger $6.20!


----------



## westsidebum (Feb 7, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I would love to take solace in that article, but frankly I don't believe a word of it. If you dig down into the article the author cites as evidence - and then dig down into the numbers that author uses to make to make his case, you can start to see why I am skeptical both of the position of the author of the above article and the agenda of the author this guy cites (he is a 40 year transportation industry insider).
> 
> Example: The analyst cited by the author actually says:
> " _data from 2013 through the first half of 2015. Drivers retained 83% of passenger payments_"​That would mean that Uber only took 17% of the gross rider fare.
> ...


You raise some good questions. There are certain premises one must keep in mind when looking at ubers failure to reach profitibility.

Yes drivers subside UBER but cutting driver costs only saved uber a billion a year in aggregate.

The real problem is ubers business model which the author only hints at. Uber knows the taxi cab business is local, which is why there are no national cab companies as there is no cost savings in larger scale...hence the paradox of growth costing uber more. Ubers bet was to destroy cab companies and undermine mass transit and become the transportation grid as a monopoly where they could demand rent. Further, drivers are colonials being exploited to help subsidize ubers growth. In otherwards driver revenue is just used to offset the inefficiency of a cab company scaling internationally which is inherently cost inneffecient. It was a safe bet for billionaires but it is failing. The attempt at reinventing uber were ways to move beyond the initial business plan and that incldes self driving cars. The news that self driving cars are 20 years away should empower drivers to demand their fare share of the pie moving forward. Those on this forum who called Uber a scam were closer to the real truth.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

westsidebum said:


> Those on this forum who called Uber a scam were closer to the real truth.


If uber and taxis are both FORCED to treat their drivers as employees,

Taxis would have an operational advantage in COST Vs Uber.

Uber would have to pay all it's drivers 53.5c a mile for all miles driven and minimum wage.

Taxis could save money by self insuring, doing their own maintenance, and most of the time would come under 53.5c a mile and profit. If the cab company had to treat me as an employee... in my own car, I would need $96.00 in income plus another $106-160 in mileage reimubursement. Plus they would need extra on top of that in order to make some money for themselves. In a taxi would just need to be paid minimum of $96 a night, given that i'm only currently giving the cab company about $90-100 a night... and i KNOW they are making profit on me...

This would be a substantial advantage to the taxi company, wheras for uber it would be tying both hands and a foot behind their back.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> If uber and taxis are both FORCED to treat their drivers as employees,
> 
> Taxis would have an operational advantage in COST Vs Uber.
> 
> ...


You're making two assumptions that aren't true. There is nothing in the law that says that an employer has to pay an employee for expenses paid by the employee - and nothing that says that an employees mileage must be reimbursed at the IRS std mileage deduction rate. An employer could not offer expense reimbursement and leave it to the employee to claim either the actual expense of operating the car or the std deduction on their tax filing.But I do get your point and agree: on a level playing field cab companies are better suited to compete on an operational level than TNCs. However, cab companies are still not even close to competing with TNCs in the arena of service. That would likely change if the cab companies and TNCs operated on a level playing field - but they don't.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Side Hustle said:


> I wish I'd gone to medical school....


Its FREE in Cuba !


----------



## NC252 (Jan 8, 2016)

Jagent said:


> Someone at Uber better wake up and raise rates. They especially need to raise minimum fare to a profitable level for drivers. Expecting someone to pickup a passenger for less than $3.00 is uncalled for and results in 90% of Uber's customer service problems.


They already raised the rates with upfront pricing.....

So basically Uber rather self destruct than pay drivers more money....what's crazy is even if Uber raised their rates as high as taxis, people will still use uber..... Most pax love how convenient it is over how cheap it is.. We see pax are willing to pay nearly 10x the amount on new years and during other special events.....


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Uber will Survive !
Only the Logo will change to protect the innocent . . .

NOW BACK TO WORK ON THE PYRAMID !

Enough of this BLASPHEMY !



Michael - Cleveland said:


> I would love to take solace in that article, but frankly I don't believe a word of it. If you dig down into the article the author cites as evidence - and then dig down into the numbers that author uses to make to make his case, you can start to see why I am skeptical both of the position of the author of the above article and the agenda of the author this guy cites (he is a 40 year transportation industry insider).
> 
> Example: The analyst cited by the author actually says:
> " _data from 2013 through the first half of 2015. Drivers retained 83% of passenger payments_"​That would mean that Uber only took 17% of the gross rider fare.
> ...


----------



## westsidebum (Feb 7, 2015)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> If uber and taxis are both FORCED to treat their drivers as employees,
> 
> Taxis would have an operational advantage in COST Vs Uber.
> 
> ...


Uber can become what it falsely claims to be a technology intermediary...that would mean not providing insurance or setting rates, or having the power to deactivate drivers, and taking a share of the profits similar to a real commission which would be in the six percent range.


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

Has Uber had a driver shortage in any city recently? Unless the economy improves enough to eliminate the under employed, Uber will have enough drivers. Rates are as low as they have ever been (mostly) and there are more drivers than there has ever been (I think). 

Uber doesn't need to pay drivers more. Uber does need more income to survive. Uber needs to charge riders more. And they're doing that. It would make things simpler if they did away with the 25% cut completely. Just charge the rider what they think they can get and pay the driver the contracted rate. There would still be surge rates for the drivers to get them in the areas of demand. But drivers gravitate toward areas of high demand anyway in order to get more riders per hour. I think some riders would pay a lot more than the current rate, some a little more. Our question should be how low will driver pay go before there aren't enough drivers?

Both riders and drivers like rideshare. The core business should not be expensive to operate.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

bsliv said:


> Has Uber had a driver shortage in any city recently? Unless the economy improves enough to eliminate the under employed, Uber will have enough drivers. Rates are as low as they have ever been (mostly) and there are more drivers than there has ever been (I think).
> 
> Uber doesn't need to pay drivers more. Uber does need more income to survive. Uber needs to charge riders more. And they're doing that. It would make things simpler if they did away with the 25% cut completely. Just charge the rider what they think they can get and pay the driver the contracted rate. There would still be surge rates for the drivers to get them in the areas of demand. But drivers gravitate toward areas of high demand anyway in order to get more riders per hour. I think some riders would pay a lot more than the current rate, some a little more. Our question should be how low will driver pay go before there aren't enough drivers?
> 
> Both riders and drivers like rideshare. The core business should not be expensive to operate.


Before Uber raises fares, I just want to see the Uber Fee on rides dropped to 20% for all drivers on the first 20 completed rides they do each week - then 15% on the next 20 rides - then 10% on all rides a driver does over forty rides/wk - plus a bonus reduction in Uber fee of 5% for any driver who receives 5 stars on 80% of their trips. That would put the right incentives in place to keep drivers wanting to drive and provide excellent service.

Then they can slowly raise the fares over the next two years.

That's a path, I think, towards driver retention, rider satisfaction and corporate profitability.


----------



## Side Hustle (Mar 2, 2017)

tohunt4me said:


> Its FREE in Cuba !


Your point is? Oh I get it, you are a free market capitalist who has risen to the top 1% of income earners.....


----------



## westsidebum (Feb 7, 2015)

bsliv said:


> Has Uber had a driver shortage in any city recently? Unless the economy improves enough to eliminate the under employed, Uber will have enough drivers. Rates are as low as they have ever been (mostly) and there are more drivers than there has ever been (I think).
> 
> Uber doesn't need to pay drivers more. Uber does need more income to survive. Uber needs to charge riders more. And they're doing that. It would make things simpler if they did away with the 25% cut completely. Just charge the rider what they think they can get and pay the driver the contracted rate. There would still be surge rates for the drivers to get them in the areas of demand. But drivers gravitate toward areas of high demand anyway in order to get more riders per hour. I think some riders would pay a lot more than the current rate, some a little more. Our question should be how low will driver pay go before there aren't enough drivers?
> 
> Both riders and drivers like rideshare. The core business should not be expensive to operate.


Uber now competes for workers with McDonald's . I'm not making this up. Uber absolutely exploited the great recession and surplus labor pool. However, Uber investors according to NPR are more concerned about driver retention than employee sexual harassment. The reason could be that drivers are the face of the company, and Uber is starting to realize product and service matter for the long haul. A report hudt came out that driver retention is getting even worse since the report of sexual harassment. This means UBER has a rotating pool of new drivers which quickly become fed up which creates doubt about companies long term sustainability


----------



## jonhjax (Jun 24, 2016)

Many taxi companies are now getting their own apps to compete with uber. The only thing that makes uber more convenient than those taxi companies is the sheer amount of uber drivers on the road, sometimes 5 or more times than taxis. The taxi companies limited the amount of drivers who worked for them for two main reasons; it kept vehicle purchase and maintenance expenses down and helped their drivers make a decent living, which in turn created a stable work force. We've seen how much uber values their drivers in the past, now let's see if anything really changes going forward.


----------



## koyotemohn (Mar 15, 2017)

Uber spent billions of investor and labor capital on driverless cars because bro culture says 20-90 years can be compressed into 2 if you finagle it right. Just one issue(among several others) They straight up stole intellectual property from google as a means to accomplish this...all to eventually get rid of drivers.

So they are hemorrhaging at several locations and it never had to be this way.

If they go bankrupt or whatever there will be services that learned from Uber's tactical mistakes.

Regardless of who or what you believe in...if you are a driver we have to focus on sticking together and understanding our situation without judging whatever reason each of us has to push a car around giving 30-60% taxis discounts.


----------



## REX HAVOC (Jul 4, 2016)

I agree they don't charge enough per mile but I think their problem is more of a money management issue rather than a lack of income. I had a ride the other day that was 40 miles. The total cost of the ride was $52.00. Uber paid me $30 and paid themselves the rest. In the bill there was over $6.00 in fees paid to Uber before they even took any commission from me. They are taking over 43% from the ride cost in that scenario on an Uber X ride.


----------



## NC252 (Jan 8, 2016)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Before Uber raises fares, I just want to see the Uber Fee on rides dropped to 20% for all drivers on the first 20 rides they each week - then 15% on the next 20 rides - then 10% on all rides a driver does over forty rides/wk - plus a bonus reduction in Uber fee of 5% for any driver who receives 5 stars on 80% of their trips. That would put the right incentives in place to keep drivers wanting to drive and provide excellent service.
> 
> Then they can slowly raise the fares over the next two years.
> 
> That's a path, I think, towards driver retention, rider satisfaction and corporate profitability.


You are just trying to sound smart...


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

NC252 said:


> You are just trying to sound smart...


try it sometime 



koyotemohn said:


> If they go bankrupt or whatever


Uber has something like $7Bil in cash - and generates $3-4Bil/qtrt in revenue (that's $3-4$Bil after driver distributed driver payments). That's a LOT of cash. If the investors are no longer sitting silent while management and TK run amok, and a new board gets spending and expenses under control... who knows?


> ... there will be services that learned from Uber's tactical mistakes.


I agree - and I think we see it already.


> Regardless of who or what you believe in...if you are a driver we have to focus on sticking together and understanding our situation ...


Ugh... 'we aren't 'stuck together' now - what makes you think drivers will ever be so focused? Most of are way to busy trying to pay our bills, feed our families and keep our cars on the road. As Uber has pointed out (successfully) in court, drivers are not a monolithic group. Every driver is different and has different goals, different ways of working, different amounts of time to drive, etc. A great example is the notion of a 'driver's strike' - repeatedly attempted and repeatedly failing because while 10 drivers might refrain from driving, 100 others will swoop in to try to take advantage of a driver work stoppage. "We" can't even agree on the basics.

A year ago someone made the astute observation that 
"no one hates Uber drivers more than Uber drivers".


----------



## koyotemohn (Mar 15, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> try it sometime
> 
> Uber has something like $7Bil in cash - and generates $3-4Bil/qtrt in revenue (that's $3-4$Bil after driver distributed driver payments). That's a LOT of cash. If the investors are no longer sitting silent while management and TK run amok, and a new board gets spending and expenses under control... who knows?I agree - and I think we see it already.Ugh... 'we aren't 'stuck together' now - what makes you think drivers will ever be so focused? Most of are way to busy trying to pay our bills, feed our families and keep our cars on the road. As Uber has pointed out (successfully) in court, drivers are not a monolithic group. Every driver is different and has different goals, different ways of working, different amounts of time to drive, etc. A great example is the notion of a 'driver's strike' - repeatedly attempted and repeatedly failing because while 10 drivers might refrain from driving, 100 others will swoop in to try to take advantage of a driver work stoppage. "We" can't even agree on the basics.
> 
> ...


I hear you but I have a cluster of local driver friends and we talk and support each other. This was not a call for unionization. It's just time to take the edge off from each other. I would never encourage a drivers strike or boycott. I would encourage diversification of service providers so that everyone can have the option of choosing which provider is the right fit for them.

And as long as driver is not criminal in actions or negligent I tend to empathize with driver. I guess at this point it's do the best you can and stay out of the news.


----------



## NC252 (Jan 8, 2016)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> try it sometime
> 
> Uber has something like $7Bil in cash - and generates $3-4Bil/qtrt in revenue (that's $3-4$Bil after driver distributed driver payments). That's a LOT of cash. If the investors are no longer sitting silent while management and TK run amok, and a new board gets spending and expenses under control... who knows?I agree - and I think we see it already.Ugh... 'we aren't 'stuck together' now - what makes you think drivers will ever be so focused? Most of are way to busy trying to pay our bills, feed our families and keep our cars on the road. As Uber has pointed out (successfully) in court, drivers are not a monolithic group. Every driver is different and has different goals, different ways of working, different amounts of time to drive, etc. A great example is the notion of a 'driver's strike' - repeatedly attempted and repeatedly failing because while 10 drivers might refrain from driving, 100 others will swoop in to try to take advantage of a driver work stoppage. "We" can't even agree on the basics.
> 
> ...


Trust me....other drivers act like the enemy sometimes.... Alot of Uber drivers act as if them and a select few of their buddies should be allowed to be Uber drivers....



koyotemohn said:


> I hear you but I have a cluster of local driver friends and we talk and support each other. This was not a call for unionization. It's just time to take the edge off from each other. I would never encourage a drivers strike or boycott. I would encourage diversification of service providers so that everyone can have the option of choosing which provider is the right fit for them.
> 
> And as long as driver is not criminal in actions or negligent I tend to empathize with driver. I guess at this point it's do the best you can and stay out of the news.


We should go on strike.... And demand $1.50 a mile...


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

NC252 said:


> Trust me....


 how does it make you feel when you read a sentence here, from someone you don't know, that starts with "_Trust me_..." - yeah, I thought so. It makes my skin crawl, too.


> ... other drivers act like the enemy sometimes.... Alot of Uber drivers act as if them and a select few of their buddies should be allowed to be Uber drivers....


yeah - that's what I was saying. It's funny how entitled a lot of drivers act - as if they have some claim to driving that others don't. <smh> Any driver who complains that there are too many drivers should just stop driving so that the the rest of might catch a decent surge! 


> We should go on strike.... And demand $1.50 a mile...


There is no "we". TNC drivers (like the whole body of 'employees in the US) have diverse interests, motivations and ambitions. That is why when congress wrote the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) it was written into the law that an employee could not waive any of their rights under the law. That created a 'level playing field' among workers, and prevented the imbalance of power an employer has over an individual worker from leading to exploitation.


----------



## Kodyhead (May 26, 2015)

jonhjax said:


> Many taxi companies are now getting their own apps to compete with uber. The only thing that makes uber more convenient than those taxi companies is the sheer amount of uber drivers on the road, sometimes 5 or more times than taxis. The taxi companies limited the amount of drivers who worked for them for two main reasons; it kept vehicle purchase and maintenance expenses down and helped their drivers make a decent living, which in turn created a stable work force. We've seen how much uber values their drivers in the past, now let's see if anything really changes going forward.


Its way too late for cab companies now for the most part, asking people to download an app is like asking people to cup your testes, try pushing an app called UZURV and you will see.

Most are traumatized from cab companies in general anyway as it often takes longer for them to show up, and the credit card machine is "broken", which is probably the 2 of the 3 biggest reasons people have switched, the third being the price.


----------



## ABC123DEF (Jun 9, 2015)

bsliv said:


> Has Uber had a driver shortage in any city recently? Unless the economy improves enough to eliminate the under employed, Uber will have enough drivers. Rates are as low as they have ever been (mostly) and there are more drivers than there has ever been (I think).
> 
> Uber doesn't need to pay drivers more. Uber does need more income to survive. Uber needs to charge riders more. And they're doing that. It would make things simpler if they did away with the 25% cut completely. Just charge the rider what they think they can get and pay the driver the contracted rate. There would still be surge rates for the drivers to get them in the areas of demand. But drivers gravitate toward areas of high demand anyway in order to get more riders per hour. I think some riders would pay a lot more than the current rate, some a little more. Our question should be how low will driver pay go before there aren't enough drivers?
> 
> Both riders and drivers like rideshare. The core business should not be expensive to operate.


Drivers like rideshare? I'm one of those under/unemployed drivers that has been at this way longer than I originally planned. All industries just aren't hiring - not matter what your education, experience, or skill level is.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

NC252 said:


> Trust me....other drivers act like the enemy sometimes.... Alot of Uber drivers act as if them and a select few of their buddies should be allowed to be Uber drivers....
> 
> We should go on strike.... And demand $1.50 a mile...


UNION !
Union !
UNION !


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Kodyhead said:


> Its way too late for cab companies now for the most part, asking people to download an app is like asking people to cup your testes, try pushing an app called UZURV and you will see.


Generally true - but when I explain to riders the diff between Uber's 'fake' res system and UZURV's real res system, those who actually need to schedule a ride (early risers going to the airport and those who live in areas where there are few drivers) love it.


----------



## Kodyhead (May 26, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Generally true - but when I explain to riders the diff between Uber's 'fake' res system and UZURV's real res system, those who actually need to schedule a ride (early risers going to the airport and those who live in areas where there are few drivers) love it.


I have had more success with my new business cards with the logo and code, but UZURV still has not sent me any stuff to push it like they promised. Do you have success with airport pick ups? This is the main reason I am pushing it but many people I push it with and are interested don't seem to either have space, or even know how to install an app lol


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Generally true - but when I explain to riders the diff between Uber's 'fake' res system and UZURV's real res system, those who actually need to schedule a ride (early risers going to the airport and those who live in areas where there are few drivers) love it.


I have picked up people for airport runs who have told me absolute Horror stories about cab " reservations".

Reserving the night before.
At an hour past requested tome they called. Cab dispatcher told him maybe a cab might sjow up, maybe not.

You are out of luck if not at one of the big name hotels.
At an Air BNB forget it !


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Kodyhead said:


> I have had more success with my new business cards with the logo and code, but UZURV still has not sent me any stuff to push it like they promised. Do you have success with airport pick ups? This is the main reason I am pushing it but many people I push it with and are interested don't seem to either have space, or even know how to install an app lol


I don't use any of the UZURV marketing materials - though other drivers here do (including logos on their cars). The UZURV folks have come to this market a few times to hold meet & greets with drivers and they hand out their materials at those gatherings. I have not attended any of them.

I've never seen a request from UZURV for an airport pick-up. No one here would need one as there are always cars available at the airport. From the requests I see coming through the UZURV app it appears to be used mostly by people who have to get to the airport, either early in the morning or from an area outside the busy metro area where getting a car might be hit-or-miss.


----------



## jonhjax (Jun 24, 2016)

That's definitely happened with taxis. It's usually because the taxi company made a mistake with the time or the day, sometimes both! On the other hand, I've done at least a dozen airport trips throughout the Jacksonville, Florida metro area this year because the passengers couldn't get an uber or a lyft.


----------



## Kodyhead (May 26, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I don't use any of the UZURV marketing materials - though other drivers here do (including logos on their cars). The UZURV folks have come to this market a few times to hold meet & greets with drivers and they hand out their materials at those gatherings. I have not attended any of them.
> 
> I've never seen a request from UZURV for an airport pick-up. No one here would need one as there are always cars available at the airport. From the requests I see coming through the UZURV app it appears to be used mostly by people who have to get to the airport, either early in the morning or from an area outside the busy metro area where getting a car might be hit-or-miss.


I was talking about the favorite drivers feature specifically being used for airport pick ups so you don't have to wait



jonhjax said:


> That's definitely happened with taxis. It's usually because the taxi company made a mistake with the time or the day, sometimes both! On the other hand, I've done at least a dozen airport trips throughout the Jacksonville, Florida metro area this year because the passengers couldn't get an uber or a lyft.


True, uber and lyft users are victems of cherry pickers so in an attempt to not getting dinged for a cancellation, drivers would accept and never pick them up forcing the riders to cancel. After 45 mins, riders will take a cab


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Kodyhead said:


> I was talking about the favorite drivers feature specifically being used for airport pick ups so you don't have to wait


Ah - got ya. No, I don't know of anyone who has used the FAV driver feature in UZURV. But it would not speed up pick at the airport all - at least not here in Cleveland. No driver can wait at the curb (arrivals or departures) without being shooed away by the police - and if they suspect you are TNC driver, they will ticket - or worse. TNC drivers here must wait in the TNC waiting lot for a 'ping' (or for a client to call/txt). And they must pick-up at the TNC pick-up area - no curbside pickups allowed... that one will get you ticketed, too.


----------



## brianboru (Nov 3, 2016)

Here is another article that questions the Uber business model: https://www.quora.com/How-well-is-Uber-doing-1


----------



## majxl (Jan 6, 2017)

Investors, news media, financial advisors and counselors, towns and cities traffic planer and, yes, even politicians (!) are realizing that Uber is a inefficient business model.

As a matter of fact the city of San Francisco is investigating whether Uber is a public nuisance (Reuter June 5, 2017).

In New York City over 60,000 Uber car don't even come close to book the Yellow cabs amount of fares and they have 5 time less cars ( 13,500 cab)


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

majxl said:


> In New York City over 60,000 Uber car don't even come close to book the Yellow cabs amount of fares and they have 5 time less cars ( 13,500 cab)


apples & oranges: First, that 60,000 number is the number of BLACK CARS - 46,000 of which are on the Uber platform as well as their own dispatch -not the number of Uber cars.

Second, the last number I saw for UberX/XL/SELECT/LUC (ie: non-commercial Ubers) was around 15,000 and none of those are on the road 24/7/365... far from it. NYC taxi cabs (cars) are on the road 24/7/365. 
Only a small % of the 15,000 NYC Uber cars are on the road and available at any given time.

All that means is that if a NYC Uber driver wanted to drive more and earn more, there's plenty of business out there for them. But more importantly - forget NYC (and any of the maybe 10 major metro areas in the US where taxi serve an integral part of the ground transportation system: Uber and Lyft have brought inexpensive, convenient and reliable ground transportation to places it was never before reliable or convenient - and to people who never used a cab before.


----------



## Uberdriver2710 (Jul 15, 2015)

Momo11 said:


> *Uber risks burning through its remaining $7 billion in startup capital within about 3 years*
> 
> http://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/543A1B4E-5777-11E7-BF27-E90BE7E240CC


----------



## Stripzip (Mar 16, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I would love to take solace in that article, but frankly I don't believe a word of it. If you dig down into the article the author cites as evidence - and then dig down into the numbers that author uses to make to make his case, you can start to see why I am skeptical both of the position of the author of the above article and the agenda of the author this guy cites (he is a 40 year transportation industry insider).
> 
> Example: The analyst cited by the author actually says:
> " _data from 2013 through the first half of 2015. Drivers retained 83% of passenger payments_"​That would mean that Uber only took 17% of the gross rider fare.
> ...


Napster thought "terms and conditions" exempted them from the law... Just like Uber. It doesn't. 
https://hbr.org/2017/06/uber-cant-be-fixed-its-time-for-regulators-to-shut-it-down


----------



## Cynergie (Apr 10, 2017)

DRider85 said:


> I'm not sure Uber will be around in 3 to 5 years. Or maybe it will.
> 
> One thing is for sure. There will be headlines non stop as usual. Change will always occur.
> 
> I remember Excel Communications. It was the worlds fastest direct selling company. Went bust in 2004. Uber has a very similar feel.


Regardless of an impending chapter 11 or not, it's driverless vehicle most certainly will


----------



## circle1 (Sep 17, 2016)

SEAL Team 5 said:


> It won't make one lick of difference if Uber is around in 3 to 5 years. Uber, Lyft, Rideshare friggin getting compensated for picking up hitchhikers. Call it by whatever name you want. As long as people are willing to drive for pennies the fare for hire industry will only be a supplement to the needy just like food stamps.


F'reals. As long as qualifying drivers keep stepping up to the plate and swinging at every pitch, this can keep going. But realistically, the fares _*will have to*_ go up, eventually. Why? Because if it's true these TNCs are subsidizing the co$t$ the money will run out, and then eventually people signing up to drive will taper off.


----------



## BurgerTiime (Jun 22, 2015)

Travis pushed rates too low. Customers will abandon Uber once other independent transport co. Uncut them until they leave the city.


----------



## Uberdriver2710 (Jul 15, 2015)

Stripzip said:


> Napster thought "terms and conditions" exempted them from the law... Just like Uber. It doesn't.
> https://hbr.org/2017/06/uber-cant-be-fixed-its-time-for-regulators-to-shut-it-down


----------



## Tedgey (Jan 29, 2016)

Uber's Survival in Doubt?

Not with me. I'm confident I know exactly what's going to come of those fools.


----------



## ChortlingCrison (Mar 30, 2016)

Tedgey said:


> Uber's Survival in Doubt?
> 
> Not with me. I'm confident I know exactly what's going to come of those fools.


It all comes down to the ducks.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

My take on all of this is as follows

I think the article makes good points but has dialed up the drama a little for a good read. I appreciate that the author doesn't stick to the usual b-school analysis and actually talked about the plight of drivers.
What the heck is their overhead? How much money have they been pissing away at hq on staffing, building, retreats, research on dead ends, ...
Things have changed in the last year, their margins should be better since they started up front fares and pushed harder on them this year. Not a good long term solution because it's anti driver.
A simple shift in strategy would right the boat I think. Raise fares by 20 or 25% and go back to giving drivers their fair percentage. Stop doing quest, promotions, all that other crap. No need to offer incentives if there is money to be made. Insist on standards for drivers, improve and maintain quality of the product.


----------



## NC252 (Jan 8, 2016)

Kodyhead said:


> Its way too late for cab companies now for the most part, asking people to download an app is like asking people to cup your testes, try pushing an app called UZURV and you will see.
> 
> Most are traumatized from cab companies in general anyway as it often takes longer for them to show up, and the credit card machine is "broken", which is probably the 2 of the 3 biggest reasons people have switched, the third being the price.


Uzurv was just a few self absorbed air headed drivers who thought they were so lovable, and pax were so dicrimnative that pax would actually pay more and go threw a bunch of red tape just to book a trip with them.....silly rabbits lol...


----------



## Uberdriver2710 (Jul 15, 2015)

ChortlingCrison said:


> It all comes down to the ducks.


Bout time, they showed up!


----------



## NC252 (Jan 8, 2016)

BurgerTiime said:


> Travis pushed rates too low. Customers will abandon Uber once other independent transport co. Uncut them until they leave the city.


Travis was evil with evil intentions ....evil villians never win....


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

But RamzFanz knows that what this article says is not true. He has links to investor packs full of accounts which say that Uber is profitable and is _not_ subsidizing rides. Right, RamzFanz?  lol



RamzFanz said:


> Yes, just by knowing who and how much was being invested I would know instinctively you are wrong in your false claim that they are subsidizing rides. These companies, unlike you, do their research before they form opinions. If Uber were subsidising rides at this point, they wouldn't get $1 from anyone.
> 
> You are insincere and uninformed.




I guess the takeaway here is, don't always trust your instinct.


----------



## Just Another Uber Drive (Jul 15, 2015)

Jagent said:


> Yes, I DO believe that drivers got 83% of Ubers earnings during 2013-2015. Sign up bonuse and incentives were crazy high during those times and all drivers were on a 20% commission anyway. It's not difficult to imagine that Uber spent 3% more on bonuses. Uber didnt start with upfront fares until 2017. The author is using data from 2013-2015.
> 
> Its a well known stat that Uber burned through 2b in 2016. Yes, you can sell something for 1b and still lose 2b. Uber sold the China venture for 1b, but it's estimated that they spent much more setting it up.
> 
> ...


Look at the big brain on Jagent. Well said.


----------



## SurgeWarrior (Jun 18, 2016)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I would love to take solace in that article, but frankly I don't believe a word of it. If you dig down into the article the author cites as evidence - and then dig down into the numbers that author uses to make to make his case, you can start to see why I am skeptical both of the position of the author of the above article and the agenda of the author this guy cites (he is a 40 year transportation industry insider).
> 
> Example: The analyst cited by the author actually says:
> " _data from 2013 through the first half of 2015. Drivers retained 83% of passenger payments_"​That would mean that Uber only took 17% of the gross rider fare.
> ...


All those bonus zones bullsht, the driver sign on bonuses


----------



## UBERyDUMB (Aug 5, 2015)

Alotta fake news !!!


----------



## Driver100 (Aug 1, 2015)

Anything can happen in three (!) years, so the "news" here is speculation. Is it primarily to stir intrigue, a negative perception and their ratings? $7 billion is a tremendous capitalization to work with.


----------



## MUGATS (Aug 14, 2016)

The question that needs to be asked is if Uber has actually TRIED to make a profit yet.

So far they've been spending money on growth and market penetration at an accelerated rate. They've been pouring money into R&D on driverless cars, foreign markets and labour acquisition. Some of these choices are strong (considering the long term costs to deal with competitors vs taking the opportunity to kill them in the womb). Others are likely overreach. 

This will not continue forever. 

I'd be more interested to know about the direct profitability/liability of the Uber core business in established markets. What is THAT situation. That will tell you what you need to know about sustainability of Uber.


----------



## Chauffeur_James (Dec 12, 2014)

Jagent said:


> Yes, I DO believe that drivers got 83% of Ubers earnings during 2013-2015. Sign up bonuse and incentives were crazy high during those times and all drivers were on a 20% commission anyway. It's not difficult to imagine that Uber spent 3% more on bonuses. Uber didnt start with upfront fares until 2017. The author is using data from 2013-2015.
> 
> Its a well known stat that Uber burned through 2b in 2016. Yes, you can sell something for 1b and still lose 2b. Uber sold the China venture for 1b, but it's estimated that they spent much more setting it up.
> 
> ...


The only problem is, I have a feeling if they raise rates, (which I think essentially they have started doing with UpFront pricing) the driver will only see a portion of those rates. But then again, they have a problem with maintaining drivers, so they may be forced to share a percentage of those higher rates with drivers. I also believe that if they raise rates, they will have to create their own type of medalian system, because so many drivers will be signing up that you'll be lucky to get a fare an hour.


----------



## Kodyhead (May 26, 2015)

MUGATS said:


> The question that needs to be asked is if Uber has actually TRIED to make a profit yet.
> 
> So far they've been spending money on growth and market penetration at an accelerated rate. They've been pouring money into R&D on driverless cars, foreign markets and labour acquisition. Some of these choices are strong (considering the long term costs to deal with competitors vs taking the opportunity to kill them in the womb). Others are likely overreach.
> 
> ...


Looks like they are researching and developing autonomous profitless businesses


----------



## Chauffeur_James (Dec 12, 2014)

Delilah5 said:


> Well they are losing tons of money on the dumb Pool rides because they were copying Lyft to gain more market share. Now they are copying Lyfts Tipping option.
> 
> YES, the pay sucks. Why do fares have to be one third or half of the Taxi rate, it can be 70-100% because the cars and rider experience is alot better.


Pool could have been a huge success too if they didn't screw the driver with it. In some cities they actually pay the driver a lower rate for pool which is absolutely crazy! If they would have compensated the driver at a higher rate, even slightly instead of trying to keep more money for themselves, no driver would have any problem doing pool.


----------



## Kodyhead (May 26, 2015)

Chauffeur_James said:


> The only problem is, I have a feeling if they raise rates, (which I think essentially they have started doing with UpFront pricing) the driver will only see a portion of those rates. But then again, they have a problem with maintaining drivers, so they may be forced to share a percentage of those higher rates with drivers. I also believe that if they raise rates, they will have to create their own type of medalian system, because so many drivers will be signing up that you'll be lucky to get a fare an hour.


Over here in Miami it is so saturated that for Memorial day weekend, they didn't even bother putting out hourly guarantees or any kind of promotion like other long holiday weekends cause they knew drivers would be out anyway.


----------



## Tihstae (Jan 31, 2017)

Kodyhead said:


> I disagree i enjoy spending 20 mins for a min fare that pays $2.64 with no tip


Damn, I wish our minimum fare was that much. Driver side of min fare for me is $2.25 and I'm in a disperse area where 5 minutes to pickup is a better than average.


----------



## Kodyhead (May 26, 2015)

Tihstae said:


> Damn, I wish our minimum fare was that much. Driver side of min fare for me is $2.25 and I'm in a disperse area where 5 minutes to pickup is a better than average.


But i am sure you make more money because you get more rides as uber told me


----------



## Gander36 (Apr 6, 2017)

My plan would change the company's model and offering, but would make it profitable:


Merge with Lyft
Require late model, clean, well-maintained vehicles that seat at least 4.
Ping drivers to random location vehicle inspections and pay them as a cancellation.
Dump poorly rated drivers
Add preferred status for customers that tip regularly (not sure what the reward would be)
Institute a $8 minimum + $2 per passenger base charge.

End result: Uber loses some customers and more drivers, but the company makes money on every ride and retains good drivers longer, reducing its driver recruitment costs.


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

Gander36 said:


> My plan would change the company's model and offering,* but would make it profitable*:
> 
> 
> Merge with Lyft
> ...


While a couple of those aren't terrible ideas, I fail to see where all this profit you speak of would come from.


----------



## I have nuts (Mar 29, 2015)

Two things that stand out to me out the article. 
1. "Uber has become stuck in a pattern of using its venture capital funding to subsidize at least 50% of every ride to cut fares and try to gain a monopoly position that can drive the competition out of business." That alone should have been enough to get Travis whacked. 
2. "In the ultimate irony, the more customers use Uber, the greater into debt it goes." And that pretty much sums up the whole Uber experiment.


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

I have nuts said:


> 2. "In the ultimate irony, the more customers use Uber, the greater into debt it goes." And that pretty much sums up the whole Uber experiment.


Is Uber really in debt if it has billion of investors money to spend? That money doesnt need to be paid back. They weren't loans. They were investments.


----------



## I have nuts (Mar 29, 2015)

I don't see why its so hard for these imbeciles who are running uber to see that at some point you are going to HAVE to significantly raise the prices.


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

I have nuts said:


> I don't see why its so hard for these imbeciles who are running uber to see that at some point you are going to HAVE to significantly raise the prices.


I think they do see it and I think they are all a lot smarter than we give them credit for.
Yes, they're losing money and they know it. But they got billions from investors on "potential", not on showing profits.
So by lowering rates they probably quadrupled their customers, which gave them more "potential" and more investor money came flowing in. Probably more than if they had kept the rates the same or even raised them.
Travis was probably paying himself a good 40-50 million a year as CEO(that's a guess) from investor money, not profits. 
Travis wins. Investors lose.


----------



## I have nuts (Mar 29, 2015)

Gander36 said:


> My plan would change the company's model and offering, but would make it profitable:
> 
> 
> Merge with Lyft
> ...


I would add to your list that Uber rebrand themselves as a 5 star premium service car company, and start charging premium pricing. And the people who don't like it can go back to riding city busses and taxi cabs.



Cableguynoe said:


> I think they do see it and I think they are all a lot smarter than we give them credit for.
> Yes, they're losing money and they know it. *But they got billions from investors on "potential",* not on showing profits.
> So by lowering rates they probably quadrupled their customers, which gave them more "potential" and more investor money came flowing in. Probably more than if they had kept the rates the same or even raised them.
> Travis was probably paying himself a good 40-50 million a year as CEO(that's a guess) from investor money, not profits.
> Travis wins. Investors lose.


If you're using other peoples money, than at some point they are going to want to see you turning a profit or they are going to cut your credit off or stage a coup and replace you.


----------



## Transportador (Sep 15, 2015)

All 6 points of what Uber must do are not in their DNA. The Uber animal will not survive by evolution. It is going extinct now!

A new rideshare company needs to come on the scene with a fresh look at this whole business.

Lyft has a chance though, as long as it raises fares. With Uber going dead, Lyft could do that without having to chase Uber to the bottom.


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

I have nuts said:


> If you're using other peoples money, than at some point they are going to want to see you turning a profit or they are going to cut your credit off or stage a coup and replace you.


I completely agree. But that day hasnt come yet. So I'm just saying if Uber is never able to make a profit and does in fact go under, that doesnt make them stupid. They made it work...for them.


----------



## AuxCordBoston (Dec 3, 2016)

Momo11 said:


> *Uber risks burning through its remaining $7 billion in startup capital within about 3 years*
> 
> http://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/543A1B4E-5777-11E7-BF27-E90BE7E240CC


Yeah... good article


----------



## Karen Stein (Nov 5, 2016)

That's breaking news?

ANY THING might happen in three years. Heck, Trump MIGHT not get the nomination!


----------



## Arb Watson (Apr 6, 2017)

DRider85 said:


> I'm not sure Uber will be around in 3 to 5 years. Or maybe it will.
> 
> One thing is for sure. There will be headlines non stop as usual. Change will always occur.
> 
> I remember Excel Communications. It was the worlds fastest direct selling company. Went bust in 2004. Uber has a very similar feel.


past performance does not predict the future performance...lyft will buy uber



Karen Stein said:


> That's breaking news?
> 
> ANY THING might happen in three years. Heck, Trump MIGHT not get the nomination!


heck Trump will quit before that..


----------



## dirtylee (Sep 2, 2015)

Karen Stein said:


> That's breaking news?
> 
> ANY THING might happen in three years. Heck, Trump MIGHT not get the nomination!


A new rideshare will startup where uber has favorable rideshare laws. 
10% fee to attract drivers.
Same rates for pax.
Gain marketshare via advertising.


----------



## Retired Senior (Sep 12, 2016)

SEAL Team 5 said:


> It won't make one lick of difference if Uber is around in 3 to 5 years. Uber, Lyft, Rideshare friggin getting compensated for picking up hitchhikers. Call it by whatever name you want. As long as people are willing to drive for pennies the fare for hire industry will only be a supplement to the needy just like food stamps.




Fine by me. After the housing market crashed and I burned thru any and all savings, I was on food stamps for 4 years. Now that I am driving for Uber, I am making too much money to keep getting food stamps...

It's all your frame of reference... I've been relatively well off, and I have been dirt poor... now I'm Ubering.... still poor, but without the dirt!


----------



## lowcountry dan (Jun 15, 2017)

I was in sales for a long time. I have a saying, "Don't be afraid of your price." Some may not buy, but most will once they understand the value of your product or service. 

I've seen far too many people cut their price in desperation to get business, only to find they have worked for almost nothing. Profit is the name of the game.


----------



## Gooberlifturwallet (Feb 18, 2017)

Momo11 said:


> *Uber risks burning through its remaining $7 billion in startup capital within about 3 years*
> 
> http://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/543A1B4E-5777-11E7-BF27-E90BE7E240CC


Uber is German for (its) over...


----------



## El Janitor (Feb 22, 2016)

Think Happy thoughts


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

jonhjax said:


> Many taxi companies are now getting their own apps to compete with uber. The only thing that makes uber more convenient than those taxi companies is the sheer amount of uber drivers on the road, sometimes 5 or more times than taxis. The taxi companies limited the amount of drivers who worked for them for two main reasons; it kept vehicle purchase and maintenance expenses down and helped their drivers make a decent living, which in turn created a stable work force. We've seen how much uber values their drivers in the past, now let's see if anything really changes going forward.


I never saw taxi companies limit the number of drivers. Taxi companies make their money leasing the cabs. The more cabs on the road,the more money they make. As far as the cab co is concerned, all the driver needs to make is the lease payment


----------



## Gander36 (Apr 6, 2017)

Uber spends much more


Cableguynoe said:


> While a couple of those aren't terrible ideas, I fail to see where all this profit you speak of would come from.


Well, I haven't done the math and am not privy to Uber's metrics, but obviously they are spending more per ride (advertising, support, incentives, technology, driver's share, driver recruitment, etc) than they take in. So, they are basically subsidizing rides with investor cash. As such, their focus on expansion is just busting the company faster. My points raise per ride revenue/per ride average/reduces rides/slows driver attrition - all things that will make the company leaner and hopefully profitable. Uber is getting paid less for more work - they need to reverse that.


----------



## bostonwolf (Mar 25, 2016)

Jagent said:


> Someone at Uber better wake up and raise rates. They especially need to raise minimum fare to a profitable level for drivers. Expecting someone to pickup a passenger for less than $3.00 is uncalled for and results in 90% of Uber's customer service problems.


Here in Boston they could raise rates considerably and still be much cheaper than taxis. Right now an Uber costs about half the price of a taxi ride. If it was 75% of a taxi ride people would still use the service in droves


----------



## Gander36 (Apr 6, 2017)

bostonwolf said:


> Here in Boston they could raise rates considerably and still be much cheaper than taxis. Right now an Uber costs about half the price of a taxi ride. If it was 75% of a taxi ride people would still use the service in droves


If they just raised their driver and vehicle minimum standards they could charge the same as taxis and be very profitable. They'd basically be the largest taxi service in the world.


----------



## Jagent (Jan 29, 2017)

Gander36 said:


> If they just raised their driver and vehicle minimum standards they could charge the same as taxis and be very profitable. They'd basically be the largest taxi service in the world.


That's why dealing with Uber is so frustrating. Uber makes 20-25% on all rides. They could match taxi rates, drop all the upfront pricing scams, end 95% of the lawsuit issues AND be a profitable company. Uber provides a far better service than most taxis, yet they refuse to realize this.


----------



## Dammit Mazzacane (Dec 31, 2015)

dirtylee said:


> A new rideshare will startup where uber has favorable rideshare laws.
> 10% fee to attract drivers.
> Same rates for pax.
> Gain marketshare via advertising.


That sounds almost exactly like this new rideshare in Seattle called Motor which takes 10%. (Except they seem to have no clue how to market themselves... plus other flailing problems.)


----------



## WaveRunner1 (Jun 11, 2017)

When drivers are treated like contractors and not employees Uber will be forced to increase rates. They are getting away with too much control over drivers yet not providing any benefits of employment. They can't have it both ways and they aren't being challenged enough on this.

By the way, as of June 29, Lord Travis' Twitter page still lists himself as "CEO of Uber". Poor thing.



Dammit Mazzacane said:


> That sounds almost exactly like this new rideshare in Seattle called Motor which takes 10%. (Except they seem to have no clue how to market themselves... plus other flailing problems.)


Actually, my idea is to have a monthly membership fee for drivers. For example, you'll pay $100 a month plus $1 per ride to the company instead of them taking 25% (or in Uber's case 35%+ with the upfront fares scam).


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Driver100 said:


> Anything can happen in three (!) years, so the "news" here is speculation. Is it primarily to stir intrigue, a negative perception and their ratings? $7 billion is a tremendous capitalization to work with.


I agree ('cept, it's $7bil in _cash_ - their market capitalization is around $68 bil!)


----------



## WaveRunner1 (Jun 11, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I agree ('cept, it's $7bil in _cash_ - their market capitalization is around $68 bil!)


Their $70b value is grossly inflated. Much of it was based on the investments made in Uber of which half has been blown already.


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

Losing money for years before showing a profit is nothing new. FedEx, Amazon, TBS, ESPN, and Tesla all lost money during their first 5 years of existence.


----------



## Roadrage Ranger (Nov 7, 2015)

I remember when, up until less than six months ago, you rarely read an article critical of Uber in the mainstream press. There were a few, but they were rare. It was almost as if Uber was untouchable and invincible. 
Now, damning stories are falling like rain on a near-daily basis.


----------



## youcanbugjason (Jun 29, 2017)

"Data collection is the new oil"


----------



## Chauffeur_James (Dec 12, 2014)

Roadrage Ranger said:


> I remember when, up until less than six months ago, you rarely read an article critical of Uber in the mainstream press. There were a few, but they were rare. It was almost as if Uber was untouchable and invincible.
> Now, damning stories are falling like rain on a near-daily basis.


Or around the time Travis joined the Trump board. Hmmm I wonder if there was a correlation there


----------



## Dammit Mazzacane (Dec 31, 2015)

WaveRunner1 said:


> Actually, my idea is to have a monthly membership fee for drivers. For example, you'll pay $100 a month plus $1 per ride to the company instead of them taking 25% (or in Uber's case 35%+ with the upfront fares scam).


A driver subscription/fee plan sounds like an element used by RydenGo (which is currently in development only).


----------



## Jagent (Jan 29, 2017)

Uber will survive. All they need to do is stop all the trickery and scams, raise rates to taxi levels, keep 25% and call it a day. Profit city.


----------



## BAKAD (Feb 22, 2016)

Finally an article where they realize without the driver there is no Uber.

The new CEO needs to work with drivers, but I noticed the upfront pricing backfiring, so they got some work there too. They are going to have to come up with creative programs, frequent riders discounts etc. as they start raising prices to make the riders happy. Uber dug a whole in the ground with this stupid super low pricing and it is going to be hard increasing prices but it has to be done.

The CEO needs to wake up to the fact that the business model is based on two key elements a rider and a driver without both there is no Uber.

I think they have less than the 3 years of funds at Uber. Since TK had little oversight on spending Uber could spend funds on wild unprofitable projects like the self-driving boats, trucks, helicopters, flying cars etc. I bet the cash is going out so fast they really don't know how much funds they have and how much of these funds are committed to support these projects.


----------



## jonhjax (Jun 24, 2016)

They'll have to raise rates to taxi levels if they keep their commissions at 25 %, that's true, but something tells me uber will raise their commission rates too


----------



## Bolympia (Jan 8, 2015)

Sorry Michael Cleveland, but you are definitely one of Uber's paid internet trolls. Seriously, you are.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

WaveRunner1 said:


> Their $70b value is grossly inflated.


Valuation is determined by what people with skin in the game determine, not from the opinion of people posting on websites.

Uber's market cap (value) may turn out to be zero after an IPO, but as of now, it's value is approx $68 billion (regardless of what you or I think).


----------



## Wedgey (Feb 14, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Valuation is determined by what people with skin in the game determine, not from the opinion of people posting on websites.
> 
> Uber's market cap (value) may turn out to be zero after an IPO, but as of now, it's value is approx $68 billion (regardless of what you or I think).


Hmm, I could have sworn I read somewhere that it dropped to 50billion.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Wedgey said:


> Hmm, I could have sworn I read somewhere that it dropped to 50billion.


hehe... a website maybe? 
(seriously, it wouldn't shock me - but I'd be surprised; a drop in valuation would lower the value of current investors investment)


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Bolympia said:


> Sorry Michael Cleveland, but you are definitely one of Uber's paid internet trolls. Seriously, you are.


Paid by whom? PLEASE let me know where my checks are!

You are seriously misguided - so read through my posts here before you start trolling the board about 'trolls'. <smh>
I'm the guy who a year ago started the completely unsuccessful #UberOffTuesdays campaign. 
What have _you_ done to thwart the evil empire?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

bsliv said:


> Losing money for years before showing a profit is nothing new. FedEx, Amazon, TBS, ESPN, and Tesla all lost money during their first 5 years of existence.




*16 firms worth billions despite losing money*
http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/23/investing/shazam-tech-startups-lose-money/index.html

*Big Companies without Profits - *
*Amazon, Twitter, Uber and Other Big Names that Don't Make Money*
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/...itter-uber-and-other-big-names-that-dont.html


----------



## LA_Native (Apr 17, 2017)

Hopefully my car will be close to being paid off by then.


----------



## SurgeWarrior (Jun 18, 2016)

I have nuts said:


> I don't see why its so hard for these imbeciles who are running uber to see that at some point you are going to HAVE to significantly raise the prices.


They didnt arbitrarily pick these rates..they most likey used focus groups and tons of market analytics to figure where the prices should land. What is the price someone is willing to drive and what is someone willing to pay so they can shake out the weak cash strapped taxi services. Seems to have worked, but now they are scrambling to put the pin back in the grenade before it blows up.

I am certain however they never factored the bad press, videos, sexual harrassment and greyball games into the mix..this is derailing things for them.

Someone was talking about valuation and I cant imagine their brand value and growth is anywhere near last years value..the market will eat ubers lunch if they IPOd. This is no amazon!


----------



## I have nuts (Mar 29, 2015)

SurgeWarrior said:


> They didnt arbitrarily pick these rates..they most likey used focus groups and tons of market analytics to figure where the prices should land. What is the price someone is willing to drive and what is someone willing to pay so they can shake out the weak cash strapped taxi services. Seems to have worked, but now they are scrambling to put the pin back in the grenade before it blows up.
> 
> I am certain however they never factored the bad press, videos, sexual harrassment and greyball games into the mix..this is derailing things for them.
> 
> Someone was talking about valuation and I cant imagine their brand value and growth is anywhere near last years value..the market will eat ubers lunch if they IPOd. This is no amazon!


That's B.S., they lowerd the price that low, because they tried to engage in a price wars with lyft(another company that probably won't be around in five years).


----------



## roadman (Nov 14, 2016)

Momo11 said:


> *Uber risks burning through its remaining $7 billion in startup capital within about 3 years*
> 
> http://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/543A1B4E-5777-11E7-BF27-E90BE7E240CC


 love to see it


----------



## Wardell Curry (Jul 9, 2016)

I just finished clearing my student loans 2 days ago(decided to clear the remaining 4 months worth in one lump sum payment)so if Uber crashes and burns I can simply get rid of my tlc plates and use my car for personal use. We straight.


----------



## Honey Badger (Oct 1, 2016)

Uber sucks and I feel stupid for actually doing it long enough to give 2000 rides. I hope they go down in flames, worst company ever!


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

elelegido said:


> But RamzFanz knows that what this article says is not true. He has links to investor packs full of accounts which say that Uber is profitable and is _not_ subsidizing rides. Right, RamzFanz?  lol
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the takeaway here is, don't always trust your instinct.


You will.


----------



## Wil_Iam_Fuber'd (Aug 17, 2015)

Jagent said:


> Someone at Uber better wake up and raise rates. They especially need to raise minimum fare to a profitable level for drivers. Expecting someone to pickup a passenger for less than $3.00 is uncalled for and results in 90% of Uber's customer service problems.


Uber raised rates about a year ago man when they implemented up front pricing. Unfortunately, they raised their rake the same amount, and left you guys bent over. Lol.


----------



## garyk (Jan 22, 2016)

Delilah5 said:


> Well they are losing tons of money on the dumb Pool rides because they were copying Lyft to gain more market share. Now they are copying Lyfts Tipping option.
> 
> YES, the pay sucks. Why do fares have to be one third or half of the Taxi rate, it can be 70-100% because the cars and rider experience is alot better.


 Uber was not copying Lyft with uberpool they were copying Didi. And the only original thought Lyft has ever had was tipping through the app which Uber has now and if you're looking at your list of rides you're going to find that nobody tips with Uber either. Tipping through the app is a way to shut drivers up temporarily and it's going to make no big difference in your bottom line. Lyft is Uber's little brother in pretty much every mistake Uber has ever made is duplicated by Lyft within 6 months. An example Lyft now is doing upfront fares in Seattle and I don't know about the rest of the world.


----------



## garyk (Jan 22, 2016)

By the way... Uber did raise the rate which is what the customer pays but not the fare the diver is paid (note the terminology which is from newest addendum). The customer pays a rate and we are paid a fare which are not the same thing and are unrelated


----------



## Cynergie (Apr 10, 2017)

tohunt4me said:


> Uber will Survive !
> Only the Logo will change to protect the innocent . . .
> 
> NOW BACK TO WORK ON THE PYRAMID !
> ...


No. Article proves my speculation Uber was always a reverse pyramid scheme. Lol



tohunt4me said:


> UNION !
> Union !
> UNION !


Unfortunately this would be impossible because
1.ICs are not defined as Uber employees and
2. Unionization is 100% impossible by default of the definition of automation. Automation gives a Corporation a chèque en blanc to dismiss it's organic personnel ie legally layoff it's workers -- be they emoyees or ICs


----------



## Agent99 (Nov 4, 2015)

Jagent said:


> Someone at Uber better wake up and raise rates. They especially need to raise minimum fare to a profitable level for drivers. Expecting someone to pickup a passenger for less than $3.00 is uncalled for and results in 90% of Uber's customer service problems.


I've heard it said that Uber is likely to raise rates as they approach an IPO. However, they will be tempted to give themselves the lion's share of the increases, if they continue to operate with the Travis Kalanick type ethics we have seen in the past.

Higher rates would support a higher valuation in the event of an IPO.


----------



## Elmo Burrito (Feb 3, 2017)

bsliv said:


> Has Uber had a driver shortage in any city recently? Unless the economy improves enough to eliminate the under employed, Uber will have enough drivers. Rates are as low as they have ever been (mostly) and there are more drivers than there has ever been (I think).
> 
> Uber doesn't need to pay drivers more. Uber does need more income to survive. Uber needs to charge riders more. And they're doing that. It would make things simpler if they did away with the 25% cut completely. Just charge the rider what they think they can get and pay the driver the contracted rate. There would still be surge rates for the drivers to get them in the areas of demand. But drivers gravitate toward areas of high demand anyway in order to get more riders per hour. I think some riders would pay a lot more than the current rate, some a little more. Our question should be how low will driver pay go before there aren't enough drivers?
> 
> Both riders and drivers like rideshare. The core business should not be expensive to operate.


Minimum wage or 1$ below in any city.



ABC123DEF said:


> Drivers like rideshare? I'm one of those under/unemployed drivers that has been at this way longer than I originally planned. All industries just aren't hiring - not matter what your education, experience, or skill level is.


Come to Portland you just need a pulse.


----------



## I_Like_Spam (May 10, 2015)

Jagent said:


> Someone at Uber better wake up and raise rates. They especially need to raise minimum fare to a profitable level for drivers. Expecting someone to pickup a passenger for less than $3.00 is uncalled for and results in 90% of Uber's customer service problems.


increasing the rates will reduce ridership significantly, resulting in idle drivers and a loss of company revenues


----------



## Jagent (Jan 29, 2017)

I_Like_Spam said:


> increasing the rates will reduce ridership significantly, resulting in idle drivers and a loss of company revenues


No it won't.


----------



## I_Like_Spam (May 10, 2015)

Jagent said:


> No it won't.


maybe you're right,but I base my prognosis on past history- which isn't of course necessarily predictive.

20 years ago, in the cab business, we didn't get many pukahontas cheap skate college students. the took the bus, walked to closer bars,drove themseves or caught a ride from a friend.

now, they are a major uber demographic, i think a lot will abandon uber for these kinds of trips


----------



## ABC123DEF (Jun 9, 2015)

Pukahontas???? Good one!


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

I_Like_Spam said:


> maybe you're right,but I base my prognosis on past history- which isn't of course necessarily predictive.
> 
> 20 years ago, in the cab business, we didn't get many pukahontas cheap skate college students. the took the bus, walked to closer bars,drove themseves or caught a ride from a friend.
> 
> now, they are a major uber demographic, i think a lot will abandon uber for these kinds of trips


Let them keep walking. Uber can have higher rates and be successful without them.

When I first discovered Uber a few years ago my wife and I started using it when we go out. We usually always go to same area. Used to cost me $60-70 to get home. But I though it was well worth it to not risk driving drunk.

This is what I paid this past Saturday








I would still use Uber if they charged double.


----------



## Jagent (Jan 29, 2017)

I_Like_Spam said:


> maybe you're right,but I base my prognosis on past history- which isn't of course necessarily predictive.
> 
> 20 years ago, in the cab business, we didn't get many pukahontas cheap skate college students. the took the bus, walked to closer bars,drove themseves or caught a ride from a friend.
> 
> now, they are a major uber demographic, i think a lot will abandon uber for these kinds of trips


They have to get around somehow. Even if Uber matched taxi pricing, most Uber users would keep using Uber. The only rides they might lose would be the people taking a $3.00 ride instead of walking. If every single one of them abandoned Uber, who cares?

Dirt cheap pricing is only causing horrible customer service. If they'd raise rates, they could stop advertising for drivers and cherry picking would no longer happen.


----------



## jonhjax (Jun 24, 2016)

If uber doubles their present rates, charges a 40%commission and stops surge pricing and the upfront pricing and increases in the booking fees they should still make a profit and drivers will be paid about 50% more. Uber would still be cheaper than taxis.


----------



## Cynergie (Apr 10, 2017)

Cableguynoe said:


> Let them keep walking. Uber can have higher rates and be successful without them.
> 
> When I first discovered Uber a few years ago my wife and I started using it when we go out. We usually always go to same area. Used to cost me $60-70 to get home. But I though it was well worth it to not risk driving drunk.
> 
> ...


This is why I avoid the Oakland area like the plague as an Uber driver. But ironically (and understandably) Lyft drivers have fared better in this area given the Berkely/College crowd demographic. That being said, drunk pax (and especially pax who want to goto concerts, MLB/NFL/NBA events etc) will ALWAYS pay $$$$ to for the commute. Regardless of how long it takes them. You can make $100+ for driving pax to and from events like the past Warriors championship parade in Oakland. I had a short trip to drive a Uber pax from his house to his gf house about 3 blocks away. He was heading out to the Warrior event a couple hours later with family. Pax gave me a $20 tip for a $5 fare. And I was light years from the actual venue location in Oakland. lol.

Anyhow, Uni kids love LyfUber but are some of the cheapest pax (next to hood pax). Because they're actually quite broke and haven't begun to work for a real living yet. lol. IMO, the college demographic is only good for raising your driver ratings IMO. Not for making profit. lmao



jonhjax said:


> If uber doubles their present rates, charges a 40%commission and stops surge pricing and the upfront pricing and increases in the booking fees they should still make a profit and drivers will be paid about 50% more. Uber would still be cheaper than taxis.


Uber/Lyft will ALWAYS be cheaper than taxis. Simply by the default nature what a rideshare is i.e. the sheer volume of IC drivers alone will always meet (and typically exceed) pax demand. Regardless of what city they operate in. No cabbie company -- even with the most efficient electronic dispatcher -- can cover the vast footprint which Uber and Lyft have monopolized in major cities like NYC, SF and Chicago.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Cynergie said:


> Uber/Lyft will ALWAYS be cheaper than taxis. Simply by the default nature what a rideshare is i.e. the sheer volume of IC drivers alone will always meet (and typically exceed) pax demand. Regardless of what city they operate in. No cabbie company -- even with the most efficient electronic dispatcher -- can cover the vast footprint which Uber and Lyft have monopolized in major cities like NYC, SF and Chicago.


And that's not to mention all of the SUBURBS that were never served well - or at all - by taxis. Uber has brought unbelievably consistent, reliable service to areas that never had any service before. People will pay for that.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> And that's not to mention all of the SUBURBS that were never served well - or at all - by taxis. Uber has brought unbelievably consistent, reliable service to areas that never had any service before. People will pay for that.


I'll give you an example. Last week I drove someone whose cell phone was currently taking a rice bath and couldn't use Luber.

He normally would have taken lyft instead of paying a lot more for a taxi. ( he told me this) He said he normally used lyft 2-3 times a week when he couldn't get rides.

11.5 miles 25-30 minutes, right down the highway downtown. Right in the middle of the morning commute to downtown Orlando.

Luber/ ulyft $12-17

Taxi- $31-35

Sure I acknowledge that uber is a lot cheaper,

But no one living in an apartment building across the street from the mall is going to pay $30-35 to get to work 2-3 times a week.

That half hour drive cost him $37 with tip in a taxi, I kept 50% of the meter plus i got $5 in tip.

The uber/lyft rate for the ride would have been $12-17

I'm under no delusions that..

A.. before the days of uber he would take the bus
B. he never could have afforded to take that ride in a taxi 2-3 times a week.
C. I'm making a LOT more per trip in a taxi, that i don't own.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> I'll give you an example. Last week I drove someone whose cell phone was currently taking a rice bath and couldn't use Luber.
> 
> He normally would have taken lyft instead of paying a lot more for a taxi. ( he told me this) He said he normally used lyft 2-3 times a week when he couldn't get rides.
> 
> ...


Seriously good post,
But keep in mind that right now the overwhelming majority of TNC drivers do this for 'extra' money - not to make a living. We don't NEED to make what a taxi driver makes per ride. You have to understand that when 'most' TNC drivers set out to drive for a few hours, they have a $ goal. We hit that goal (+/-) and we go home or off to the rest of our lives. I know TNC drivers who only drive to 'fund' something - like an anniversary party, or a DisneyWorld/Land trip for the family. For most drivers, it's 'found' money'. When the wear & tear on our cars get to be too much, or the goal is met - we stop driving (thus the high attrition rate). This gig is a totally different game than going to the trouble and expense of becoming a taxi-driver.


----------

