# Didn't Anyone Notice Lyft Just Increased Commisions on New Drivers?



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

to 25%


----------



## macchiato (Sep 29, 2015)

Sneaky. I just read the email.


----------



## AllenChicago (Nov 19, 2015)

I just read the e-mail myself, and shot right here to the forum to comment and see what others are saying. When I signed up to drive in November 2015, the commission was 80%. Now it's down to 25% for new Chicago drivers? That stinks!

FYI..here's a copy/paste of the wording in today's e-mail from Lyft...

"Chicago Updates

*Commissions update for new drivers:* New drivers applying after midnight on Jan. 1, 2016, will have a 25% commission rate. We have no plans to adjust commissions for current drivers, so this will not affect you - as always, Lyft does not take any commission on tips."

-end

p.s. Note that the effective date of the change is 1.1.2016, but the e-mail was sent on 1.5.2016. Is this indicative of Disorganization....or Willful Deceit?


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Presuming that in most cases drivers applying on or after 1/1/16 would take 5 days to clear Lyft's system anyway to be an "official" driver, so the late notice probably ain't gonna make much difference. New batch of suckers won't know the difference anyway.


----------



## SCdave (Jun 27, 2014)

AllenChicago said:


> I just read the e-mail myself, and shot right here to the forum to comment and see what others are saying. When I signed up to drive in November 2015, the commission was 80%. Now it's down to 25% for new Chicago drivers? That stinks!
> 
> FYI..here's a copy/paste of the wording in today's e-mail from Lyft...
> 
> ...


Raising Commission to 25% is plain stupid. Differentiate yourself from Uber not bring your "App Technology- Not a Transportation Company" closer in-line with Uber.

And Lyft "doesn't take any commission on tips". Really? Like Lyft legally could anyway.

Within two months, Lyft will most likely increase their Safe Rides Fee.


----------



## driving312 (Nov 17, 2015)

Lol, think. Why are you guys complaining? 
This would mean less new drivers = better for you.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

driving312 said:


> Lol, think. Why are you guys complaining?
> This would mean less new drivers = better for you.


Or more and progressively dumber ones. <- My bet.


----------



## driving312 (Nov 17, 2015)

If you feel this bad for new drivers then volunteer to go down to 25% in an act of brotherhood....or better yet, trade your 20% share with them! 

Sorry guys, this is GREAT news out of Lyft for the New Year.

This is terrible news for NEW drivers, I would question even driving for Uber or Lyft at 75% rates when others make 80%. I'd quit if I found out too. ....see good for OLD drivers.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

driving312 said:


> Lol, think. Why are you guys complaining?
> This would mean less new drivers = better for you.


Lol, think. Why are you so happy?
This would mean your Power Driver Bonus is going away soon too = not better for you.


driving312 said:


> Sorry guys, this is GREAT news out of Lyft for the New Year.


Raising commissions on New Drivers is NOT good news for ANY drivers!!


----------



## AllenChicago (Nov 19, 2015)

From my 28 years in commissioned sales, I can guarantee you that if commissions are cut from 80% down to 25%, the company (ANY company) is in serious trouble. Usually its due to product obsolescence, or poor management at the top. 

Perhaps UBER will come to the rescue and buy Lyft. That would solve several problems for drivers contracted with both.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

AllenChicago said:


> if commissions are cut from 80% down to 25%,


Huh?
Who's cutting commission from 80% to 25%? Lyft is raising the commission on New Drivers from 20% to 25%.

*Edit:* I saw your post above. You're really confused about the commissions.


AllenChicago said:


> When I signed up to drive in November 2015, the commission was 80%. Now it's down to 25% for new Chicago drivers?


----------



## glados (May 23, 2015)

Fun fact: Lyft was the first raise SRF to more than a dollar. Now they're the first to raise commission across all of their cities -- many Uber cities are still at 20%.


----------



## AllenChicago (Nov 19, 2015)

chi1cabby said:


> Huh?
> Who's cutting commission from 80% to 25%? Lyft is raising the commission on New Drivers from 20% to 25%.


Perhaps we're comparing apples to oranges... The title of this thread is "Lyft just increased commissions on new drivers". Why is 25% an increase in pay for newly minted drivers, if those of us who started before Jan 1, 2016 are earning 80%??? i.e.: Lyft collects the fare $$$. Lyft then Pays me 80% and keeps 20% of that fare. If I were to change from 80% commission to 25% commission, that would be a substantial decrease in percentage, Chi1Cabby. No?


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

glados said:


> Fun fact


Fun fact: Lyft's Minimum Fare is truly what Drivers receive as a minimum fare. 
Uber's Minimum Fare includes the SRF of upto $2.50. So after the SRF & Commission, Drivers receive 40% of a Minimum Fare ride, while Uber gets to pocket 60%!

*Updated List of Markets With Increased Safe Ride Fee*


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

AllenChicago said:


> Why is 25% an increase in pay for newly minted drivers, if those of us who started before Jan 1, 2016 are earning 80%???


Existing Lyft Drivers are charged 20% commission. Lyft gets 20%, Drivers get 80%.
New Lyft Drivers will be charged 25% commission. Lyft gets 25%, Drivers get 75%.


----------



## driving312 (Nov 17, 2015)

This profession attracts some crazies? Who knew.


----------



## MrBear (Mar 14, 2015)

AllenChicago said:


> I just read the e-mail myself, and shot right here to the forum to comment and see what others are saying. When I signed up to drive in November 2015, the commission was 80%. Now it's down to 25% for new Chicago drivers? That stinks!
> 
> FYI..here's a copy/paste of the wording in today's e-mail from Lyft...
> 
> ...


It went from 20% to 25%. Not 80%


----------



## MrPix (Oct 4, 2015)

This makes me happy. It will slow down the influx.


----------



## grams777 (Jun 13, 2014)

Unless the algo gets tweaked to prefer the 25% drivers. Transportation companies love to play favorites by giving good fares to drivers who 'chip in' more. I've seen it first hand at many places I've been. Can it happen here? Why not.


----------



## DieselkW (Jul 21, 2015)

Now you know why you get deactivated if you don't drive once a month - Uber and Lyft can then "re-activate" you at the 25% commission rate.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

DieselkW said:


> Now you know why you get deactivated if you don't drive once a month - Uber and Lyft can then "re-activate" you at the 25% commission rate.


*Uber may Re-activate Waitlisted or Deactivated Accounts at Higher Commission*


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Uber raising their take didn't appear to stop any new drivers coming into the system. There are scads more drivers on the street. People just don't know.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> Fun fact: Lyft's Minimum Fare is truly what Drivers receive as a minimum fare.
> Uber's Minimum Fare includes the SRF of upto $2.50. So after the SRF & Commission, Drivers receive 40% of a Minimum Fare ride, while Uber gets to pocket 60%!
> 
> *Updated List of Markets With Increased Safe Ride Fee*


Not to be critical chi, but if we added the Lyft srf fee to the total that the pax are charged and then ran the same math, it would be a similar outcome.

I've found, generally speaking, that short run Uber fares mount up faster than Lyft i.e. I have to drive much further to get more than the min. fare on Lyft. For Lyft this actually brings my "net" per total mile DOWN lower than Uber in many instances.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> Not to be critical chi, but if we added the Lyft srf fee to the total that the pax are charged and then ran the same math, it would be a similar outcome.


That's an absolutely a wrong assumption. Lyft's Minimum Fare does NOT include the Trust & Safety Fee. Lyft's Minimum Fare is $5 in every market.
UberX Minimum Fare is $4 in many markets AND it includes the SRF.

In Austin, Drivers receive a payout of $0.80 on Minimum Fare rides.


scrurbscrud said:


> I've found, generally speaking, that short run Uber fares mount up faster than Lyft i.e. I have to drive much further to get more than the min. fare on Lyft. For Lyft this actually brings my "net" per total mile DOWN lower than Uber in many instances.


Driving longer for Lyft pickups, or less frequent Lyft ride requests is a valid observation.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> That's an absolutely a wrong assumption. Lyft's Minimum Fare does NOT include the Trust & Safety Fee. Lyft's Minimum Fare is $5 in every market.
> UberX Minimum Fare is $4 in many markets AND it includes the SRF.


My observation was that Lyft charges it, but it doesn't show up on the drivers end as part of the fare. It's still there though on the other end. With Uber we just see it as part of the total.

What I'm also saying is that Uber, for several reasons, my net per mile can and often is higher than Lyft. They notch up the fare faster than Lyft. Since Lyft instituted their last rate cut my "net" on min. fares has been dramatically reduced. I have to drive further with Lyft in most cases to pickup AND the fare won't move higher for a longer period of time compared to Uber. My min. fare nets on Lyft have gotten ugly, where it's dropped lower than 80 cents a mile gross to me before Lyft cutz when I factor longer distance to pickup and longer distance driving. My cutoff point is a buck a mile for overall gross before cutz. When it's lower than that I have to cease driving because I'm paying to do the job.



> In Austin, Drivers receive a payout of $0.80 on Minimum Fare rides.


That is absolutely ridiculous and of course sad. I don't know how anyone can come out doing that.



> Driving longer for Lyft pickups, or less frequent Lyft ride requests is a valid observation.


Indeed. The advantage imho right now on min. fares, at least in my market is in Uber's court. Most of the pickups are shorter to pax and the fare ticks up faster than Lyft. And this offsets the srf charge comparison to Lyft without same. The same distance runs with Uber will often notch above Lyfts min. fare for the same distance, for example $5 compared to an Uber charge of $6.95 over an equal or even less (overall) mileage distance.

The big kicker with Lyft though is always the tip feature.


----------



## Snowtop (Nov 11, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> Uber raising their take didn't appear to stop any new drivers coming into the system. There are scads more drivers on the street. People just don't know.


Since this was effective yesterday I don't see how it could have a noticeable effect on what you are seeing on the app.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Snowtop said:


> Since this was effective yesterday I don't see how it could have a noticeable effect on what you are seeing on the app.


From my general understandings when Uber raises their takes on new drivers it seems to have a minimal effect on reducing driver saturation i.e. it doesn't stop the influx and the problem continues to amplify, at least from the drivers perspectives.

Where there is driver saturation, simple math sez every driver is going to make less and that's all there is to it. The higher take doesn't appear to be helping. It could very well be that drivers under the higher takes are in disfavor. Would be interesting to run a couple drivers in each category side by side just to see what happens. If I were on the other end in either company, I WOULD favor the higher net to company. That might seem to be a business obligation if I were favoring the company, which is the standard way of seeing things from their end, or at least should be.

It may very well be a gradual phase out of the lower commissioned drivers for all we know.


----------



## andaas (May 19, 2015)

I'm sure that in the long term, both companies will force all drivers to the same (higher) commission rates. By limiting only new drivers to the higher commission, the network of drivers working at the higher commission will gradually shift over time. Once there is enough saturation of drivers running at the higher commission, the company can then announce that all drivers will work at the higher commission.

This will result in 25-50% of drivers who worked at the lower commission to quit driving, however, with enough saturation of drivers already operating at the higher rate, it will have a much smaller impact on the driver pool.

However, if they simply pushed all drivers to the higher commission rate today, the impact of drivers quitting would be much more visible.


----------



## ATL2SD (Aug 16, 2015)

glados said:


> Fun fact: Lyft was the first raise SRF to more than a dollar. Now they're the first to raise commission across all of their cities -- many Uber cities are still at 20%.


Go away before I report you to your boss, you work for Uber not Lyft.


----------



## ATL2SD (Aug 16, 2015)

driving312 said:


> Lol, think. Why are you guys complaining?
> This would mean less new drivers = ....


----------



## grams777 (Jun 13, 2014)

andaas said:


> ... Once there is enough saturation of drivers running at the higher commission, the company can then announce that all drivers will work at the higher commission.
> ...
> However, if they simply pushed all drivers to the higher commission rate today, the impact of drivers quitting would be much more visible.


This is another good possibility. It may take a year or two. They can also deactivate you quicker for inactivity or expiring documents or whatever. Then reactivate at higher commission.

And there is the potential to give rides first to the 25 percenters while starving out the 20 percenters. Amazon Flex sort of does this by seeming to give the jobs to the lower paid third party contractors first. Then the leftovers go to the higher paid Flex drivers. Some taxi companies can do it by giving the good fares to people who grease the dispatchers or use higher cost company leased vehicles. Yes, this stuff happens to this day.


----------



## andaas (May 19, 2015)

grams777 said:


> Amazon Flex sort of does this by seeming to give the jobs to the lower paid third party contractors first. Then the leftovers go to the higher paid Flex drivers. Taxi companies can do it by giving the good fares to people who grease the dispatchers or use higher cost company leased vehicles.


Amazon most likely pays *more* for the third party contractors. Consider when you work for a temp agency; the agency may pay you $12.50/hour for a basic office job - the company who hired a temp to fill a position is actually paying between $18/$20 hour for that employee.

The contractors are likely paid less than Flex drivers, but Amazon probably pays more for them.


----------



## grams777 (Jun 13, 2014)

andaas said:


> Amazon most likely pays *more* for the third party contractors. Consider when you work for a temp agency; the agency may pay you $12.50/hour for a basic office job - the company who hired a temp to fill a position is actually paying between $18/$20 hour for that employee.
> 
> The contractors are likely paid less than Flex drivers, but Amazon probably pays more for them.


Doubtful when fully loaded including their risk. Amazon has to cover the insurance and assumes the risk. The third party doesn't provide the drivers with insurance. The rate difference of a few $ per hour may cover what the third party company gets. They provide nothing at all to the drivers - no insurance. They're driving naked on their personal policy for commercial use.

Temp employees usually get various payroll taxes and other things paid. That does not go on with drivers. They get nothing. I read the contract - and walked away.

The point being however, a company is free to pick and choose whatever makes sense for them without having to treat all drivers similarly.


----------



## ORT (Nov 14, 2015)

MrPix said:


> This makes me happy. It will slow down the influx.


Wishful thinking, lol.


----------



## andaas (May 19, 2015)

grams777 said:


> Doubtful when fully loaded including their risk. Amazon has to cover the insurance and assumes the risk. The third party doesn't provide the divers with insurance. The rate difference of a few $ per hour may cover what the third party company gets. They provide nothing at all to the drivers - no insurance. They're driving naked on their personal policy for commercial use.
> 
> Temp employees usually get various payroll taxes and other things paid. That does not go on with drivers. They get nothing. I read the contract.
> 
> The point being however, a company is free to pick and choose whatever makes sense for them without having to treat all drivers similarly.


Obviously you have more knowledge of the 3rd party contractors (not direct-Flex drivers) than I do. I don't qualify to participate in Flex since I use an iPhone... I assumed they were contracted through a local courier-type service; which would provide base levels of liability, etc.


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

glados said:


> Fun fact: Lyft was the first raise SRF to more than a dollar. Now they're the first to raise commission across all of their cities -- many Uber cities are still at 20%.


Fun fact...Uber raised it's commission to 25% for new drivers on-boarded after Sept 11th, 2015.


----------



## grams777 (Jun 13, 2014)

andaas said:


> Obviously you have more knowledge of the 3rd party contractors than I do. I don't qualify to participate in Flex since I use an iPhone... I assumed they were contracted through a local courier-type service; which would provide base levels of liability, etc.


That's what I though too. I went there and was reading the contract and asked, where's the insurance? Oh, your personal policy covers it they told me. Thanks, but that's a deal breaker. Commercial insurance runs around $350 a month.

I'm sure plenty of people do it anyway without insurance. It was this way at almost every 'use your own car' delivery job. You're basically driving for nothing because what little you do make will get taken away the day you have an accident without insurance coverage.

I figure the risk factor is about $5 an hour. Uber and Lyft are a little less because they cover something at least. But some of the accident costs and personal harm elements are still there.

So if you clear $5 an hour after all expenses, after all is said and done, it's probably zero. Once you pay an accident deductible or your car gets reimbursed at wholesale or you get seriously injured, the piper comes for his pay that was thought to be profit.


----------



## andaas (May 19, 2015)

You read the 3rd party driver's contracts?


----------



## grams777 (Jun 13, 2014)

andaas said:


> You read the 3rd party driver's contracts?


Yes, I was there at the non descript warehouse in Nashville (not the flex one, the third party one). They copied my documents, and I was looking over the contract and gave it back to them unsigned.

It's just your basic courier contract where the driver does what he is told and gets whatever they say. I've seen it a few times before at other companies with some variation. I do not remember seeing Amazon on it anywhere except handwritten word or two on the cover page that it was something for Amazon.


----------



## glados (May 23, 2015)

Txchick said:


> Fun fact...Uber raised it's commission to 25% for new drivers on-boarded after Sept 11th, 2015.


Not in all cities.


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

glados said:


> Not in all cities.


It's completed across the board in all major markets cities now.


----------



## ZLL (Dec 16, 2015)

Txchick said:


> Fun fact...Uber raised it's commission to 25% for new drivers on-boarded after Sept 11th, 2015.


I think you mean Sept 2014, not 2015.


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

ZLL said:


> I think you mean Sept 2014, not 2015.


In Texas new drivers in Dallas, Austin, Lubbock etc onboarded after Sept 11th 2015 pay 25% commission for X. Houston is 28% X after that date. Uber started testing the 25% commission rate in 2014 in markets on the west coast.


----------



## Aga Muhlach (Jan 8, 2016)

driving312 said:


> This profession attracts some crazies? Who knew.


I read all about it.


----------



## Ubernomics (Nov 11, 2015)

scrurbscrud said:


> to 25%


You can earn 10 - 20% of your earnings back on the Lyft platform but yea they did raise them for new drivers.


----------



## CLAkid (Oct 23, 2014)

SCdave said:


> Raising Commission to 25% is plain stupid. Differentiate yourself from Uber not bring your "App Technology- Not a Transportation Company" closer in-line with Uber.
> 
> And Lyft "doesn't take any commission on tips". Really? Like Lyft legally could anyway.
> 
> Within two months, Lyft will most likely increase their Safe Rides Fee.


They are virtually neck and neck with Uber on greed.


----------



## KMANDERSON (Jul 19, 2015)

glados said:


> Fun fact: Lyft was the first raise SRF to more than a dollar. Now they're the first to raise commission across all of their cities -- many Uber cities are still at 20%.


How do you explain .30 a mile in detriot 
Travis.


----------



## andaas (May 19, 2015)

glados said:


> Fun fact: Lyft was the first raise SRF to more than a dollar. Now they're the first to raise commission across all of their cities -- many Uber cities are still at 20%.


Fun fact: Lyft has *never* taken the SRF out of the fare, it is charged to the passenger on top of the fare charges. Lyft's SRF has zero impact on driver earnings, and Lyft only takes the commission (20%/25% to new drivers).

Bonus fact: Uber takes nearly 50% of minimum fares in almost EVERY US market for UberX rides. *Lyft only takes 20% (25% for new drivers)*, which drivers can earn back all/most of via the Power Driver bonus.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

andaas said:


> Fun fact: Lyft has *never* taken the SRF out of the fare, it is charged to the passenger on top of the fare charges. Lyft's SRF has zero impact on driver earnings, and Lyft only takes the commission (20%/25% to new drivers).
> 
> Bonus fact: Uber takes nearly 50% of minimum fares in almost EVERY US market for UberX rides. *Lyft only takes 20% (25% for new drivers)*, which drivers can earn back all/most of via the Power Driver bonus.


The only difference is how the fare shows up on the drivers end. Uber shows what the pax is charged for the most part. Lyft doesn't. It deducts that amount from what the driver sees. That's all.

IF Lyft showed the entire fare their cut would be similar if not identical to Uber's when all the dust settles.

There really isn't any difference except Lyft's minimum fare is higher by the amount of their SRF fee, and this is also why more pax use Uber on shorter runs. Because Uber's min. fare includes the SRF and it's lower.


----------



## andaas (May 19, 2015)

scrurbscrud said:


> There really isn't any difference except Lyft's minimum fare is higher by the amount of their SRF fee, and this is also why more pax use Uber on shorter runs. Because Uber's min. fare includes the SRF and it's lower.


That's kind of a big difference, lol. I wouldn't call it a small difference.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

andaas said:


> That's kind of a big difference, lol. I wouldn't call it a small difference.


It's true that Lyft's min. fare from the pax perspective is MUCH higher as is the "perceived" net to driver on Lyft.

BUT, the big but for me is something I tried to point out earlier. And that is that Uber's fare notches up faster/higher to meet Lyft's price. If they are really short runs, let's say less than a mile, Lyft has Uber beat hands down for the drivers. And that's only IF the driver doesn't have to far to go for pickup. I look at "when all is said and done" numbers i.e. miles to pickup and end fare. When I do this there is very little difference in overall "net" for total miles driven and in many cases my Uber numbers are just as good if not better in many instances. And this largely because of Lyft's driver rotation scheme which invariably sends drivers stupid distances to pax, moreso than Uber. Not saying Uber doesn't do this either, but their radius filter for "no UberX available" seems to be tighter than Lyft's. I really question whether Lyft even has such a filter. I question it with Uber sometimes as well.
*
It would be nice if both platforms allowed the drivers to set radius filters and surcharges. That would solve a lot of the B.S. in rideshare for drivers. And they should also allow that surcharge NOT to be charged, let's say on distances of paid travel compared to distance to pickup. *Some drivers will go 10 miles to do 30 mile paid runs for example. I think Sidecar had this kind of setup or similar.


----------



## andaas (May 19, 2015)

There's likely some market differentiation between our views. Here in Dallas, Lyft's rates are slightly higher than Uber's, and have been for several months here (5 cents per mile & minute difference). So I tend to view Lyft fares as racking up faster, whether that be minimum or longer range fares.

Yes, we also suffer from the long distance pickup problems here with Lyft, but for me that tends to occur more when I'm outside of the busy areas anyway and I just decline those requests or have the passenger cancel if I need the acceptance score.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

When Lyft didn't have nearly as many drivers onboard I liked the min. fare arrangement better with Lyft, obviously. If it was busy I could score fares an hour, hit the net $16 mark, and usually tag in another $2-4 in tips. Life was good. And here and there were bigger scores to up the overall take.

Now, with Lyft, it's just sit and wait your turn, and hope you get 1 or 2 fares an hour. It just doesn't work for me anymore. And Uber isn't much better at this point. 

Driver saturation has again ruined the game. 

I think both platforms could remedy this problem, but they won't.


----------



## SCdave (Jun 27, 2014)

andaas said:


> Fun fact: Lyft has *never* taken the SRF out of the fare, it is charged to the passenger on top of the fare charges. Lyft's SRF has zero impact on driver earnings, and Lyft only takes the commission (20%/25% to new drivers).
> 
> Bonus fact: Uber takes nearly 50% of minimum fares in almost EVERY US market for UberX rides. *Lyft only takes 20% (25% for new drivers)*, which drivers can earn back all/most of via the Power Driver bonus.


SRF fees have a huge impact on Driver's earnings. Obviously, Lyft and Uber believe that the 100% they profit from their SRF fees is vital income. Or they do it "just because they currently can".

So, if their was no SRF fee, which Lyft/Uber keeps 10o% of, how much would Lyft/Uber have to increase Fares so they could charge their 20/25%+ commission and still profit like they were charging the SRF fee?

The SRF is money out of each and every Driver's pocket.


----------



## andaas (May 19, 2015)

True, but at least with Lyft I can put my head in the sand and not have to worry about it on minimum fares. Whereas with Uber, until the fare exceeds ($1.70 here in Dallas) beyond the minimum fare, then I am paying all or some of the service fee - not the passenger.


----------



## SCdave (Jun 27, 2014)

andaas said:


> True, but at least with Lyft I can put my head in the sand and not have to worry about it on minimum fares. Whereas with Uber, until the fare exceeds ($1.70 here in Dallas) beyond the minimum fare, then I am paying all or some of the service fee - not the passenger.


No problem. I'm not arguing Lyft vs Uber. I just think the SRF fees are absolutely total freaking BS.

SRF is a Flag Drop for the TNC. SRF is a Base Fee for the TNC. SRF is a Surcharge for the TNC. The premise for charging the SRF started out as a lie and continues as a lie..." it is charged, on behalf of drivers...." Blah, Blah Blah.

End of mini-rant. I'll save it for another thread.


----------



## AllenChicago (Nov 19, 2015)

chi1cabby said:


> Existing Lyft *Drivers are charged 20% commission*. Lyft gets 20%, Drivers get 80%.
> New Lyft Drivers will be charged 25% commission. Lyft gets 25%, Drivers get 75%.


The person who receives IRS Form 1099 from the corporation is the commission recipient. Our commission is 80% or 75%, depending on when contracted. This is how U.S. business and tax laws designate the compensation relationship between Lyft and Driver. It's like that across all industries. The proper legal wording is, "Lyft pays drivers a monetary commission that is (80%) (75%) of the gross fare".


----------



## Chui LoPan (Oct 9, 2015)

AllenChicago said:


> From my 28 years in commissioned sales, I can guarantee you that if commissions are cut from 80% down to 25%, the company (ANY company) is in serious trouble. Usually its due to product obsolescence, or poor management at the top.
> 
> Perhaps UBER will come to the rescue and buy Lyft. That would solve several problems for drivers contracted with both.


Like many companies that buy out their competition, they(uber) can keep the lyft name, keep the core dedicated riders and have them reassured that the quality of service won't change in the transition (bull$$!#), lol


----------

