# Will Lyft raise rates after Uber goes out of business?



## Sal29 (Jul 27, 2014)

Lyft is greedy, but UBER is insanely greedy and stupid. Lyft has been forced to lower rated because Uber keeps lowering rates.
How much do you think Lyft and others would raise rates after Uber goes out of business and Travis is in prison because of angry investors.


----------



## gofry (Oct 20, 2015)

If Uber goes out of business, Lyft will not be far behind. Same business model. For either of these to survive, they would need to charge 3x what they do now or perfect self-driving cars- quickly.


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

If Uber goes out of business, Lyft will not be far behind, unless Lyft learns from Uber's mistakes. High overhead including research into autonomous and flying cars doesn't help. The business of matching riders and drivers can't be too expensive. Insurance may be their biggest cost. History has shown either service can get enough drivers to drive at very low rates. Raise rates to riders and lower rates to drivers may solve Lyft's issues without Uber.


----------



## mrpjfresh (Aug 16, 2016)

If Lyft does somehow survive Uber's demise, I could easily see them raising rates. But, as bsliv says, don't assume that will mean a driver raise. Without any competition, there is no incentive to pay drivers more without an outside factor like extremely bad PR or regulation or something like that.

I don't see Lyft as a "top dog" type of company though. Their whole identity is basically defined as the quirky, "anti-Uber" even though they copy almost everything big brother does. The demise of the 800-lb gorilla called Uber would create a vacuum which Lyft alone, imho, would not be able to fill for a sustained period. Not without a massive change to how they operate anyway. The first more appealing option to drivers with better software, pay, insurance, etc would absolutely cut Lyft off at the knees.


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

mrpjfresh said:


> The first more appealing option to drivers with better software, pay, insurance, etc would absolutely cut Lyft off at the knees.


Will cut Uber down to size as well!

I expect multiple ride share services to emerge in the US in 2018 and try to take a chunk of the pie in multiple markets. Uber and Lyft will figure out pretty dang fast how important it is to create loyalty amongst workers and customers, something they have been avoiding for too long.


----------



## mrpjfresh (Aug 16, 2016)

Mista T said:


> Will cut Uber down to size as well!
> 
> I expect multiple ride share services to emerge in the US in 2018 and try to take a chunk of the pie in multiple markets.


I hope you are right my friend. I think that Uber has set the rates so artificially and unrealistically low that the smart money is just waiting for them to implode from their own hubris and folly. With the costs associated with starting and operating a rideshare company, I'd want to maximize my percentage for success. As long as Uber is still around, that percentage is lower in my opinion. Just look at Juno's struggles and they are focused on only one city. Investors might also be understandable skittish if Uber fails and does so in spectacular fashion.

For all of Uber's faults, you cannot deny they were aggressive and successful about growing their brand. They were not the first; Sidecar and Lyft (before they were rebranded) pre-dated Uber, but Uber still managed to soundly beat them both. Uber and now Lyft have the advantage of being so big (nationwide) that they are ubiquitous. That brand habit can be tough to crack.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

Sal29 said:


> Lyft is greedy, but UBER is insanely greedy and stupid. Lyft has been forced to lower rated because Uber keeps lowering rates.
> How much do you think Lyft and others would raise rates after Uber goes out of business and Travis is in prison because of angry investors.


Every large transportion company I have driven for in the last 40 years has failed. Uber and Lyft are next. It's only a matter of time. Unless, SDCs take them to the promise land, but I have my doubts that they will be able to hold out long enough until they are perfected, and even if they were perfected, will the rides be cheaper? I doubt it, and if not, what's the point?


----------



## Saltyoldman (Oct 18, 2016)

Oscar Levant said:


> Every large transportion company I have driven for in the last 40 years has failed. Uber and Lyft are next. It's only a matter of time. Unless, SDCs take them to the promise land, but I have my doubts that they will be able to hold out long enough until they are perfected, and even if they were perfected, will the rides be cheaper? I doubt it, and if not, what's the point?


Hell no it will cost way more for self driving cars


----------



## Lyftsucks (Oct 27, 2017)

If Uber or Lyft raised their rates 2 to 2.5 times what they are charging now wouldn't that be a huge loss to the one that didn't because they would lose so many drivers and without their drivers they have nothing and they are already failing to begin with?


----------



## Kodyhead (May 26, 2015)

I would think someone would buy uber


----------



## OCMark (Mar 4, 2018)

driverless cars is a pipedream that the 3 little piggies ULG are trying to sell the public city regs and inve$stirs on....impossible to replace the millions of free cars we donate to the cause daily and keep the same 4-7 min pickup time for rider expect that is called a TAXI


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

I think some underestimate the value of driverless cars. 

1. Uber grossed $11 billion last quarter. $8 billion of that went to drivers. That's a huge chunk.
2. The typical full time driver may drive 40 hours per week. A driverless car could be on the street 168 hours a week. That means fixed costs get reduced by 75% when calculated on a per mile basis.
3. Due to economies of scale, its cheaper to maintain a fleet of vehicles than a single vehicle, on a per vehicle basis. I buy oil 5 quarts at a time. A fleet owner may buy 5 55 gallon barrels at a time. I buy tires 4 at a time. A fleet owner may buy 400 at a time.
4. Repairs on a fleet vehicle will also be cheaper. A near minimum wage employee mechanic who specializes in the type of vehicle being used would be much more efficient than the shade tree mechanic and much cheaper than a general mechanic. Parts for a fleet vehicle would also be cheaper due to economies of scale. And when one vehicle becomes unfit for repair, it becomes a source of cheap parts.
5. The vast majority (>90%) of collisions are due to human error.


----------



## OCMark (Mar 4, 2018)

bsliv said:


> I think some underestimate the value of driverless cars.
> 
> 1. Uber grossed $11 billion last quarter. $8 billion of that went to drivers. That's a huge chunk.
> 2. The typical full time driver may drive 40 hours per week. A driverless car could be on the street 168 hours a week. That means fixed costs get reduced by 75% when calculated on a per mile basis.
> ...


Missing the point on less cars on road longer wait times and slower response from driverlesd cars

Driverless cars will never go over speed limit never do Uber U turn or double park on Wilshire Blvd to pick up passengers...again no driver is a slower product to customer regaurdless of cost to customer

Human driver much faster pickup and drop off than no driver car....notice how the no car people never compare or compete speed test of driver vs no driver point A to B....driver car would win everytime

Please provide $8B went to driver source i have not seen that repirt or discloser

Impossible for uber to replace or exchange car for car current model of FREE driver car vs no driver car and have a better faster product to customer never going to happen


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

OCMark said:


> Please provide $8B went to driver source i have not seen that repirt or discloser


https://uberpeople.net/threads/uber-quarterly-sales-rose-61-to-2-billion-amid-heavy-loss.240325/

Faster is better until the safety aspect is considered. Speed limits are set for a reason. Some u-turns are illegal for a reason. Double parking is outlawed for a reason. Human error is responsible for 94% of crashes. Driverless cars should have a much lower insurance cost. A driver with speeding and unsafe driving tickets will have a much higher insurance cost, not to mention ticket and deductible costs.


----------



## Driver2448 (Mar 8, 2017)

gofry said:


> If Uber goes out of business, Lyft will not be far behind. Same business model. For either of these to survive, they would need to charge 3x what they do now or perfect self-driving cars- quickly.


Same business model but one can learn from the other's mistakes.

It would be the Uber drivers jumping on Lyft that would hurt business.


----------



## Sticks (Mar 6, 2018)

Sal29 said:


> Lyft is greedy, but UBER is insanely greedy and stupid. Lyft has been forced to lower rated because Uber keeps lowering rates.
> How much do you think Lyft and others would raise rates after Uber goes out of business and Travis is in prison because of angry investors.





Driver2448 said:


> Same business model but one can learn from the other's mistakes.
> 
> It would be the Uber drivers jumping on Lyft that would hurt business.


It's not eady for a 70 billion $ company to just go out of buss.


----------



## Sticks (Mar 6, 2018)

Dr


bsliv said:


> https://uberpeople.net/threads/uber-quarterly-sales-rose-61-to-2-billion-amid-heavy-loss.240325/
> 
> Faster is better until the safety aspect is considered. Speed limits are set for a reason. Some u-turns are illegal for a reason. Double parking is outlawed for a reason. Human error is responsible for 94% of crashes. Driverless cars should have a much lower insurance cost. A driver with speeding and unsafe driving tickets will have a much higher insurance cost, not to mention ticket and deductible costs.


Driverless cars really won,t make the seen for another 20 years maybe less. Amd don't say they have them. There are somr auto pilot cars thats something else. I had this conversation with the ex- captain of the uss Ronald Reagan. There is mot a computer big enough to keep track of all the airplanes the military has. To have a driverless car
You would need a computer the size o a house in every car on the road not just ubers. They would all have to comunicate with every other car on the road. Oh yah and the trains trucks busses. If not they would have fatalities by the truck load. They don't evzn work very well in the 12 blocks they have!
Wrecks daily. Hey maybe i'm wrong they said we would never have computers in our homes to!


----------



## RedANT (Aug 9, 2016)

bsliv said:


> I think some underestimate the value of driverless cars.
> 
> The typical full time driver may drive 40 hours per week. A driverless car could be on the street 168 hours a week. That means fixed costs get reduced by 75% when calculated on a per mile basis.


A typical full time driver may drive 1,000 miles a week. A self driving car could, theoretically, drive 2,000 /wk 100,000 /yr, and need to be replaced every 2-3 years MAX. The XC90 that Uber ordered are what, around $50k, and that's without the expensive self driving package. Assuming a $25k self driving package, those cars would cost ~$75k, meaning that Uber will need to turn a profit of at least $25k per car per year just to pay for their cars. Add the cost of insurance and maintenance and that cost skyrockets. Depreciation? Depreciation would be 100% since they won't be able to resell the self driving vehicles.

If MIT is saying that drivers are only making minimum wage, investors will figure out that there's no way to make self driving cars profitable.


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

RedANT said:


> A typical full time driver may drive 1,000 miles a week. A self driving car could, theoretically, drive 2,000 /wk 100,000 /yr, and need to be replaced every 2-3 years MAX. The XC90 that Uber ordered are what, around $50k, and that's without the expensive self driving package. Assuming a $25k self driving package, those cars would cost ~$75k, meaning that Uber will need to turn a profit of at least $25k per car per year just to pay for their cars. Add the cost of insurance and maintenance and that cost skyrockets. Depreciation? Depreciation would be 100% since they won't be able to resell the self driving vehicles.
> 
> If MIT is saying that drivers are only making minimum wage, investors will figure out that there's no way to make self driving cars profitable.


If a full time driver drives 1000 miles in a 40 hour week, they should gross at least $800 or $40,000 a year. A driverless car could, theoretically, drive 160 hours a week and still have 8 hours a week for maintenance and repairs. That means a driverless car could gross $160,000 a year while driving 200,000 miles. $160,000 is enough to pay for a new car every year and still have $85,000 for misc. expenses and profit per car per year.


----------



## RedANT (Aug 9, 2016)

Let's be real. If you truly believe that drivers are barely making $4 /hr, then a self driving car would theoretically make $4 x 24 hrs a day x 365 days /yr = approx $35k /yr before insurance, car payments and operating expenses. I don't see how people still think that self driving cars are a serious threat to any Uber drivers.


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

RedANT said:


> Let's be real. If you truly believe that drivers are barely making $4 /hr, then a self driving car would theoretically make $4 x 24 hrs a day x 365 days /yr = approx $35k /yr before insurance, car payments and operating expenses. I don't see how people still think that self driving cars are a serious threat to any Uber drivers.


It all boils down to what a car makes per hour. The MIT estimate of < $4 of profit per hour has been revised to $8-$10 per hour. And that is profit (pre-tax net), after all costs to drive have been included (depreciation, maintenance, repairs, fuel, insurance, etc).

MIT calculated the median cost of an Uber driver to be $0.30 per mile. Maintenance, repairs and insurance should be cheaper for a driverless car. But depreciation on a $75,000 car will be much higher than the typical Uber car. If the $75,000 car lasts only 200,000 miles before it is worthless, depreciation is $0.375 per mile. Gas would be about $0.10 per mile. Repairs could be $0.027 per mile. Maintenance would be $0.087. Insurance would be $0.005. Total cost per mile for a 2018 Volvo XC90 T8 Inscription Twin Engine Plug-In Hybrid is $0.594 (repair and maintenance numbers from Edmunds True Cost to Own).

$0.594 per mile is not cheap. Its double the typical Uber car's expenses. But it doesn't include the fact that Uber would not be buying 4 tires at a time. They may buy 4000 tires and get a huge discount. Likewise with oil, brakes, etc. Volvo is going to give a customer buying 20,000 cars a better deal than a customer buying 1 car. A mechanic specializing in Volvos would be more efficient than a general mechanic.

So, $0.594 per mile is the upper end of Uber's costs with no additional expense for time. I believe when you add a driver's mileage rate plus a driver's time rate, it exceeds $0.594 per mile in most markets. I believe the Volvo to be a much comfortable and luxurious car than the typical Uber car.

Uber gave drivers $8,000,000,000 last quarter. That's enough to drive 13.5 billion miles, all costs included. And they don't have to deal with driver complaints or rider complaints about the driver. Driverless cars probably won't avoid some neighborhoods. Driverless cars can be made available for a preplanned event. Computers don't complain, much.

The math supports driverless cars. The math would look a lot better with a much cheaper car than the Volvo.

Mixing human driven cars with driverless cars could pose problems. Eliminate human drivers for much more efficient and safer roads. The writing is on the wall. I don't like it. No driving enthusiast will like it. But our nanny overlords will say eliminate human drivers, "for the children." Ugh.


----------



## Transporter_011 (Feb 3, 2018)

gofry said:


> If Uber goes out of business, Lyft will not be far behind. Same business model. For either of these to survive, they would need to charge 3x what they do now or perfect self-driving cars- quickly.


Self driving cars would be even more costly. Suddenly, uber would have to actually own vehicles and maintain them, pay city licensing fees, pay to store them on expensive real estate, have to hire people to carefully review complaints and concerns or else give away free rides galore, and they would actually become a transportation company that has to suffer from many of all the same drawbacks/expenses that cab and limo companies currently do.

I don't think uber wants any part of that, tbh. I think uber is perfectlty happy having ants take all the risks, upkeep, and ripping them off for free rides when complaints come about.

Self driving cars would increase the overhead for uber to such a degree that they would have to raise rates to a level where the market would die out. They would have to charge people $30 bucks for trips they're currently charging $5 dollars for. It wouldn't be sustainable in the long run.

No, uber is a quick cash grab. People at the top are making money but eventually the investors and banks will give up on it and it will die out.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

gofry said:


> If Uber goes out of business, Lyft will not be far behind. Same business model. For either of these to survive, they would need to charge 3x what they do now or perfect self-driving cars- quickly.


I think the only way to make drivers and riders happier is to develop a peer to peer app. This would include requiring signing up as a driver and or a pax with a specialized insurance that covers all parties in the vehicle. The insurance would be paid out of each ride from the Driver and PAX. Almost like a split rideshare insurance between both Driver and PAX. Drivers set their price with the ability to negotiate with PAX via mobile chat. PAX can pick high rated drivers based on profiles close to them. The app creator takes 10-15% and the rest goes to the driver.
Service quality improves cause PAX can choose top rated drivers. And drivers can choose high rated PAX or decline anyone under a certain level. This puts more control in both the Driver and PAX hands.
If an individual or company could roll this out the migration would be almost instant once Drivers and Riders catch on.

Game Over for Lyft and Uber.

Who could accomplish this?

Apple - iRide

or

Amazon - Rideshare


----------



## UberProphet? (Dec 24, 2014)

SurgeMasterMN said:


> I think the only way to make drivers and riders happier is to develop a peer to peer app. This would include requiring signing up as a driver and or a pax with a specialized insurance that covers all parties in the vehicle. The insurance would be paid out of each ride from the Driver and PAX. Almost like a split rideshare insurance between both Driver and PAX. Drivers set their price with the ability to negotiate with PAX via mobile chat. PAX can pick high rated drivers based on profiles close to them. The app creator takes 10-15% and the rest goes to the driver.
> Service quality improves cause PAX can choose top rated drivers. And drivers can choose high rated PAX or decline anyone under a certain level. This puts more control in both the Driver and PAX hands.
> If an individual or company could roll this out the migration would be almost instant once Drivers and Riders catch on.
> 
> ...


Yes, I agree, we should throw away all the good things of uber that passengers like and add back all the bad things that taxis did that passengers hate. There's a great plan for success!
//Sarcasm off


----------



## moJohoJo (Feb 19, 2017)

Sal29 said:


> Lyft is greedy, but UBER is insanely greedy and stupid. Lyft has been forced to lower rated because Uber keeps lowering rates.
> How much do you think Lyft and others would raise rates after Uber goes out of business and Travis is in prison because of angry investors.


Uber is indeed going under . I used to get 10 Uber rides for every one Lyft ride . Now i get 4 trips for Lyft and five for Uber . Sometimes i get more Lyft requests then Uber . If only they'd get rid of the pink and silly mustache . It's sexists . They would exceed Uber by 50 % in rides requested . I don't think Uber cares that they're going under . They owe investors too much money and are over their head in debts . Travis will indeed end up in prison for bilking investors .


----------



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

moJohoJo said:


> Uber is indeed going under . I used to get 10 Uber rides for every one Lyft ride . Now i get 4 trips for Lyft and five for Uber . Sometimes i get more Lyft requests then Uber . If only they'd get rid of the pink and silly mustache . It's sexists . They would exceed Uber by 50 % in rides requested . I don't think Uber cares that they're going under . They owe investors too much money and are over their head in debts . Travis will indeed end up in prison for bilking investors .


It's not illegal to go out of business.

Uber's finances have been so bad for so long that it would be easy to argue that the investors knew what they were getting into.


----------



## GreatGooglyMoogly (Mar 2, 2018)

OCMark said:


> Missing the point on less cars on road longer wait times and slower response from driverlesd cars
> 
> Driverless cars will never go over speed limit never do Uber U turn or double park on Wilshire Blvd to pick up passengers...again no driver is a slower product to customer regaurdless of cost to customer
> 
> ...


Also, how do you tell a driverless car to key in an apartment or community gate code? You don't, unless Uber installs some kind of prothetic arm on the car. There may be a significant number of driverless cars, but unless things like this, and what is mentioned above, can be worked out they won't be a feasible option.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

GreatGooglyMoogly said:


> Also, how do you tell a driverless car to key in an apartment or community gate code? You don't, unless Uber installs some kind of prothetic arm on the car. There may be a significant number of driverless cars, but unless things like this, and what is mentioned above, can be worked out they won't be a feasible option.


Welcome to The New World Order..


----------



## Jsaxophone (Nov 9, 2017)

moJohoJo said:


> Uber is indeed going under . I used to get 10 Uber rides for every one Lyft ride . Now i get 4 trips for Lyft and five for Uber . Sometimes i get more Lyft requests then Uber . If only they'd get rid of the pink and silly mustache . It's sexists . They would exceed Uber by 50 % in rides requested . I don't think Uber cares that they're going under . They owe investors too much money and are over their head in debts . Travis will indeed end up in prison for bilking investors .


I am indeed getting more Lyft rides than I used to, but it's a mixed bag. Some days, I'm primarily Uber and some days, primarily Lyft.

If I had to take a stab at it, I would say that Lyft is in more trouble than Uber. I'm pretty sure that almost all of my Lyft fares are people claiming their "first free ride" vouchers. Mostly because of the class of people who are using "LYF" and the fact that they're almost always minimum fare. These people are probably registering for a new account every time they use it, too.

Lyft seems to be in more desperate times. They're throwing free ride vouchers, left and right, they're throwing out ridiculous incentives for new drivers, and they're very strict about low acceptance ratings. The 2 biggest indicators I have:
1. Lyft has not modified their app or made any significant improvements for as long as I can remember. They need some desperate improvements and while Uber is tossing out new updates and policies, Lyft programmers seem to be MIA.
2. Uber requests are usually within 5 minutes. Lyft requests go out to about 20-25 minutes on a regular basis. I literally ONLY accept 25min Lyft rides because I know that the pax is going to immediately cancel, once they see how far away I am. This way, my acceptance rating stays reasonable and there's even a small chance of me getting a $5 cancellation fee.


----------



## FartsInCars (Oct 18, 2017)

Where do they get the riders for the self driving cars? 50% of my riders require more than just me pulling into the spot dictated on the map to find me. That means using clues to actually locate their location because not every address is located at the mapped position. Sometimes the drunk client just puts In the numbers wrong and can't be found without me using Google to get an address for the business they are at. 25% require a call because it maps the wrong street entirely or maps me to a street behind where they actually are located. 10% blame me because they use an iPhone indoors which can't get a GPS signal and sends me 2 miles from their location. Sometimes they want me to deviate from the drop off location to a specific point that requires me to enter a code to get in a gate. The self driving car will need a driver to execute more functions that i have to do beyond just driving to make the drive successful.


----------

