# A way for drivers to break the chains from Uber and Lyft: (long but worth it



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

What’s the big idea?
Create a new way for owners of vehicles to operate as 'rideshare drivers' and break away from people who profit from their labor and use of their private property. Drivers place your vehicle as collateral in a collective of drivers. You receive shares in a company based on the value of your vehicle. You become a part owner and operators using an app that can be provided by any number of developers. Eliminate the freeloading managers. Hire them to run operations on a salary set by the collectives, answerable to the drivers association. Let the association set the rates, based on the area you operate in. NY would be higher then , say, Charleston SC. Imagine the value of a company if all the cars currently available to Uber or Lyft were used as collateral to fund your own organization? The precedent has been set for ridesharing. Why are you letting someone else use your vehicle for THEIR profit? Get smart, drivers.
How would it work?
Uber raised their revenue based on their ability to show that thousands of drivers would commit to using the app Uber developed to compete with elements of the taxi industry. Others have developed similar applications that a driver could use that match the abilities of Ubers app. A driver would pledge their vehicle to a drivers association and with that demonstration of faith, money can be raised to purchase such an app and hire a management group to oversee the buildup of the organization. A participating driver would receive ownership shares based on the value of their vehicle.
How am I compensated?
1. You earn by charging a fare for transporting passengers from a pickup point to a drop-off point in the fashion you are accustomed to currently with Uber or Lyft. Only the rates are set based on the region you drive in and what the traffic will bear. The rates are set within the ORGANIZATION, not by the management team that is hired by it.
2. TIPs. TIPs are allowed and processed within the application used by the drivers and available to the passenger to give to the driver.
3. Minutes driven. A driver will accumulate additional revenue based on the minutes driven with added value given for driving during certain high value periods within certain designated zones.
4. Value of shares. Annually, value of shares will be calculated and distributed to drivers from the profits of the organization after expenses have been deducted from operations.
How is this value determined? 
Since the value of your vehicle depreciates over time, value is assessed periodically and shares are adjusted based on this assessment. 
What are my obligations? 
You are committed to the Owner/Operator organization. You will promise not to drive for any other rideshare organization or use any other rideshare application in the use of your vehicle as a rideshare operator. This commitment will enable the organization to raise funds to begin the process of building the organization infrastructure.
Who runs the show?
The drivers. They are the owner/operators. However, it is to be determined how this would be accomplished. Obviously its will take elections of representatives, referendums, regional voting etc. 
Will I be insured?
Critical to operation of vehicles is insurance. The amount of coverage necessary will be determined by the drivers and the State requirement in the State they operate in. It would be provided by the Organization.
Who owns the driver app?
Drivers do through ownership in the Organization. The purchase of an application that provides all the same features of the application used in the Rideshare industry. It would be determined by the drivers what additional features would be desired.
How are rates set?
A system of Regions and zones within those regions first must be set up. Once they are determined, then the rates will be determined by the drivers within the zones they operate in. The method of determination will be a vote by the operators and the vote submitted would be based on the value of the shares held by the owner.
Additional details:
As this is a first draft outline, details are highly subject to change. To succeed, drivers will need to provide their input as quickly as possible. The Organization needs to be populated by drivers committed to the Owner/Operator Rideshare concept. We look forward to your input soon.


----------



## RockinEZ (Apr 29, 2015)

Try Decaf....


----------



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

Brilliant. Short and to the point. Coulda done the same thing by filling in a poll response. So, what do you REALLY think of the idea?


----------



## RockinEZ (Apr 29, 2015)

Jimmy Lee Hagerty said:


> Brilliant. Short and to the point. Coulda done the same thing by filling in a poll response. So, what do you REALLY think of the idea?


Not for me. 
Why focus on rideshare? That vertical is limited and currently over populated by businesses that will fail.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

I love it. Just putting it into action is a different story.


----------



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

Only way for it to happen is drivers know about it and spread the word. I gain nothing from it. I can't drive professionally anymore.


----------



## possibledriver (Dec 16, 2014)

In this plan the workers would own the means of production. I like it


----------



## Lordrlm (Jun 3, 2018)

Great plan with a couple of problems, First and foremost is the shares concept being totally driven by the value of the car you drive. If a guy does this and starts with a $30,000 car and works his ass off for three years. Now he has a $10,000 car and a newbie with a newer Honda civic starts to drive he has more shares than the guy that's been working for the past three years? So why would anyone do this if all there getting out of it is the value of the car they already own?? Second you thinking your going to provide insurance to all the drivers per state requirement is going to cost way more than your co-op is going to have. Uber has way more clout than you will and still has to provide far more than they want to. Than you have the biggest problem who gets all the money you'll earn, as a driver the more I drive and the more rides I give only decreases my stake so if I sign up and never drive a rider my car my car is worth more so I own more shares. More money for me.


----------



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

Lordrlm said:


> Great plan with a couple of problems, First and foremost is the shares concept being totally driven by the value of the car you drive. If a guy does this and starts with a $30,000 car and works his ass off for three years. Now he has a $10,000 car and a newbie with a newer Honda civic starts to drive he has more shares than the guy that's been working for the past three years? So why would anyone do this if all there getting out of it is the value of the car they already own?? Second you thinking your going to provide insurance to all the drivers per state requirement is going to cost way more than your co-op is going to have. Uber has way more clout than you will and still has to provide far more than they want to. Than you have the biggest problem who gets all the money you'll earn, as a driver the more I drive and the more rides I give only decreases my stake so if I sign up and never drive a rider my car my car is worth more so I own more shares. More money for me.


Very well thought out response. I did point out that this was a draft. Uber raised enough money initially that they provided insurance for drivers. It is doable. Using the value of the vehicle is a starting point for distribution of profits. Not a perfect solution, but a point to be resolved in some manner.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

RideAustin tried something similar and was successful, in a vacuum without Uber and Lyft. Upon their return to Austin, RA had to drop their rates to match Uber and Lyft, fired all but a skeleton crew and now are begging for donations to stay open.

They had the benefit of not having to fight Uber and Lyft to get started, a luxury you will not have.

Good luck!


----------



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

You are not quite correct. They set up the org as a non-profit. The drivers had to obtain Chauffeur's licenses. The drivers had no ownership in the organization thus the value of the organization was very much limited and investors are interested in its VALUE. I like much of what they did, however, and if you are REALLY for the drivers, then you would be working as hard as you can to find an alternative to the current state and quit naysaying about how HARD it would be to compete against the status quo. Open you eyes to the potential, not how difficult it may be to reach the goal! I recommend all drivers all research what Ride Austin has done and use much of their model, including their rideshare app and rate structure (found in the FAQ section) as a template for what can be done. Don't give up because it is hard, Do it because you CAN!


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

you will fail,

Any service that sees you getting paid fare wages won't be able to compete with uber in terms of price.

They are hell bent on losing money by operating below cost while also screwing the driver.

So you will fail...

Sorry to burst your bubble.

And the biggest expense to running any competition with Scruber/gryft will be insurance. A 1 car 1 driver commercial insurance policy is $4,000+ per year.

So basically..

A non profit company (X% more than uber or lyft in costs)
Fairly paid drivers (Y% more in costs)
Smaller scale= no economy of scale (Z% more in costs)

It will cost more to operate even if your not trying to turn a profit, those higher costs are higher prices, which the customer won't pay.


----------



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

First, it is not me. I am proposing an alternative to Uber for drivers to adopt. Not run by me but the drivers. Second, RideAustin developed an app and put it into operation. But the drivers do not own that organization. That is the weakness. UberLyft business model depends on drivers and their vehicles to operate. No drivers or vehicles, no business. Make it attractive to the drivers and they will come. Your naysaying notwithstanding, it is doable so instead of pointing out what you think is wrong, find ways to make it work. That is all I am saying.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

Jimmy Lee Hagerty said:


> First, it is not me. I am proposing an alternative to Uber for drivers to adopt. Not run by me but the drivers. Second, RideAustin developed an app and put it into operation. But the drivers do not own that organization. That is the weakness. UberLyft business model depends on drivers and their vehicles to operate. No drivers or vehicles, no business. Make it attractive to the drivers and they will come. Your naysaying notwithstanding, it is doable so instead of pointing out what you think is wrong, find ways to make it work. That is all I am saying.


Ride-Austin is the perfect example.

It worked great... until uber/lyft came back, then it went to crap because the customers stopped using it again,
WHY?

Because uber/lyft were charging a heck of a lot less.

Any service paying fair rates is going to fail, Becuase uber/lyft don't pay fair rates, and operate at a loss.


----------



## toyotarola (Apr 7, 2016)

The whole thing would need to be jump-started with (many) millions of dollars in order to build a good app, hire those office workers, put people on the ground in every city (or not), and get insurance.


----------



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> Ride-Austin is the perfect example.
> 
> It worked great... until uber/lyft came back, then it went to crap because the customers stopped using it again,
> WHY?
> ...


Again, If the drivers have signed up for this program they won't be driving for UberLyft. They dry up. Their business model depends on drivers using THEIR app, and not their own. Austin did not have the drivers invested in the program, hence UberLyft still were able to operate there.



toyotarola said:


> The whole thing would need to be jump-started with (many) millions of dollars in order to build a good app, hire those office workers, put people on the ground in every city (or not), and get insurance.


There are already apps out there available to an organization like the one proposed here. Venture capital is available to an organization composed of drivers dedicating themselves to it and leaving Uberlyft. Find ways to make it succeed instead of finding ways for it to fail. Change is hard. Get tough. The money raised will take care of the other issues. How do you think Uber got its start?
The drivers came because the rates were high. Now they aren't. The drivers should be the ones profiting, not UberLyft. Support the idea, work the solution.


----------



## elkscout (Jul 12, 2018)

Jimmy Lee Hagerty said:


> Again, If the drivers have signed up for this program they won't be driving for UberLyft. They dry up. Their business model depends on drivers using THEIR app, and not their own. Austin did not have the drivers invested in the program, hence UberLyft still were able to operate there.
> 
> There are already apps out there available to an organization like the one proposed here. Venture capital is available to an organization composed of drivers dedicating themselves to it and leaving Uberlyft. Find ways to make it succeed instead of finding ways for it to fail. Change is hard. Get tough. The money raised will take care of the other issues. How do you think Uber got its start?
> The drivers came because the rates were high. Now they aren't. The drivers should be the ones profiting, not UberLyft. Support the idea, work the solution.


While I'm not going to say it's not doable, I will remind you that one of the reasons Uber was able to be successful at it is because they were one of the first, if not the first, to implement the idea and make it happen. Just about always, it's the early bird (or first bird) who gets the worm, so remember that everytime you argue that Uber was able to do it.


----------



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

elkscout said:


> While I'm not going to say it's not doable, I will remind you that one of the reasons Uber was able to be successful at it is because they were one of the first, if not the first, to implement the idea and make it happen. Just about always, it's the early bird (or first bird) who gets the worm, so remember that everytime you argue that Uber was able to do it.


File it under making a better mousetrap. Uber did not offer ownership to the drivers. This does. *BIG DIFFERENCE.* I do not claim this would be easy. Herding cats is not easy. Getting Bowling center proprietors to agree on how to fix the industry is not easy. Drivers must be assured that being owners in what it is that they do is not easy. They need to believe in the cause. Someone must take the lead. I am not that person. I am 72. But I have been pushing this idea when I was a driver. I cannot drive professionally any more. But I can help the drivers with this proposal. If parts of it do not work, then fix those parts. But, you have to start. I am in communication with Ride Austin. They already have a basic model in place EXCEPT, the drivers are not part owners. That needs to be changed. Go for it.


----------



## elkscout (Jul 12, 2018)

Jimmy Lee Hagerty said:


> File it under making a better mousetrap. Uber did not offer ownership to the drivers. This does. *BIG DIFFERENCE.* I do not claim this would be easy. Herding cats is not easy. Getting Bowling center proprietors to agree on how to fix the industry is not easy. Drivers must be assured that being owners in what it is that they do is not easy. They need to believe in the cause. Someone must take the lead. I am not that person. I am 72. But I have been pushing this idea when I was a driver. I cannot drive professionally any more. But I can help the drivers with this proposal. If parts of it do not work, then fix those parts. But, you have to start. I am in communication with Ride Austin. They already have a basic model in place EXCEPT, the drivers are not part owners. That needs to be changed. Go for it.


As part of the process engineers perform in creating new things is first properly identifying and understanding the problem, then doing the necessary research to determine if the problem is solvable. Once it is determined that the problem is solvable, then you start looking for possible solutions.

Right now, you're posting a lot like a cheerleader would to motivate the crowd. I will say again, I am not saying it's not doable. I'm pointing out some of the facts you keep omitting every time you rebut with "Uber was able to do it". Yes they were, and they "herded" up a significant portion of the ride sharing business, at least for now. Even Lyft, who's the second largest player, does not come close to the market share- at least not from my experience driving for both simultaneously.

I like your idea, and I'd be willing to jump on board, but it's going to take some intelligent business folk to lead a bunch of rideshare drivers. In case you haven't noticed, there are a lot of bad experiences with Uber and Lyft that stem from the fact of lousy incompetent drivers- not all, but a significant number. These people are lacking intellectually (and culturally) in so many areas that they might make decent "co-owners", but you really don't want them making business decisions. It's a lot like labor unions. Most members don't really know enough or either don't care enough, to make good decisions, even when they vote for their union representatives. If they were smart enough or cared, then they'd either quit their union/job or they'd be union reps themselves. Disagree? Look at how poorly union members are represented today. Their self-serving leadership is in cahoots with corporate management and seldom do any real negotiation these days. Labor unions are dinosaurs that keep sucking the dues from their membership, while providing very little in return, yet look at all the sheeple who continue to pay their dues.


----------



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

elkscout said:


> As part of the process engineers perform in creating new things is first properly identifying and understanding the problem, then doing the necessary research to determine if the problem is solvable. Once it is determined that the problem is solvable, then you start looking for possible solutions.
> 
> Right now, you're posting a lot like a cheerleader would to motivate the crowd. I will say again, I am not saying it's not doable. I'm pointing out some of the facts you keep omitting every time you rebut with "Uber was able to do it". Yes they were, and they "herded" up a significant portion of the ride sharing business, at least for now. Even Lyft, who's the second largest player, does not come close to the market share- at least not from my experience driving for both simultaneously.
> 
> I like your idea, and I'd be willing to jump on board, but it's going to take some intelligent business folk to lead a bunch of rideshare drivers. In case you haven't noticed, there are a lot of bad experiences with Uber and Lyft that stem from the fact of lousy incompetent drivers- not all, but a significant number. These people are lacking intellectually (and culturally) in so many areas that they might make decent "co-owners", but you really don't want them making business decisions. It's a lot like labor unions. Most members don't really know enough or either don't care enough, to make good decisions, even when they vote for their union representatives. If they were smart enough or cared, then they'd either quit their union/job or they'd be union reps themselves. Disagree? Look at how poorly union members are represented today. Their self-serving leadership is in cahoots with corporate management and seldom do any real negotiation these days. Labor unions are dinosaurs that keep sucking the dues from their membership, while providing very little in return, yet look at all the sheeple who continue to pay their dues.


I have a Business background. I was the application administrator for the United States Antarctic program. I designed and implemented the Status Management and Retrieval Tool to track system anomalies in the Cruise missile launcher system for all submarines and surface vessels in the U.S. Navy. I documented all the process steps involved in the manufacturing of Power drive belts for Gates Rubber Company for a MRPIII implementation. I was a Business Analyst on the team that designed the Laboratory Work management and analysis system for Ontario Power, Nuclear div. I was part of the team that worked on the combining all the independent site Work Management applications at Tennessee Valley Authority, Nuclear div, into a single unified Application. That is a snippet of my background, but I am too damn old to jump into this thing. If you are willing to get involved I would contact Ride Austin and help them convert to a driver owned organization and then move it outside of Austin TX. They already have the app and a decent rate structure. But they are trying to compete heads up with UberLyft. Aint gonna happen, as so many have stated here. But, if the drivers committed to being part of the ownership, the dynamic will shift. Drivers will dry up for UberLyft as they see the benefits of owning part of the business they work in. Chew on that for a while. See if there is really any interest elsewhere, but always remember who you are doing it for. The Drivers. You can be paid for your work, but your not gonna be Travis. Hope you jump in to this shark infested water. lol.


----------



## elkscout (Jul 12, 2018)

Jimmy Lee Hagerty, it's too bad you feel you're too old to be a part of this.
Another thought I've had re: another player in the ridesharing business is the timeline for autonomous driving coming on the scene. Once this happens, rideshare will change significantly and the needed resources, i.e. autonomous cars, will be a huge factor that the owners will have to bear if they wish to remain in business. Have you thought of this? How will driver/owners be compensated? simply dividing up the fares collected?


----------



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

elkscout said:


> Jimmy Lee Hagerty, it's too bad you feel you're too old to be a part of this.
> Another thought I've had re: another player in the ridesharing business is the timeline for autonomous driving coming on the scene. Once this happens, rideshare will change significantly and the needed resources, i.e. autonomous cars, will be a huge factor that the owners will have to bear if they wish to remain in business. Have you thought of this? How will driver/owners be compensated? simply dividing up the fares collected?


New technology has always been the bane of the old. (Horse carriages, candle makers, whale oil, on and on) You can't let 'what if' defeat the 'now' so cross the bridge when you get to it in maybe 30 or 40 years. The streets are not going to empty overnight to driver less cars. So, get on with it. Give the drivers some hope for the now and let the future take care of itself. There can be several ways of ownership. Introductory ownership with the vehicle, minutes on the clock and so forth. Oh, and just because the bank 'owns' the vehicle, didn't stop Travis claiming the assets as part of his company. Use that against him.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Jimmy Lee Hagerty said:


> Brilliant. Short and to the point. Coulda done the same thing by filling in a poll response. So, what do you REALLY think of the idea?


Good luck. You will need a ton of it.


----------



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

goneubering said:


> Good luck. You will need a ton of it.


It is not me that needs the luck. I no longer drive because of eyesight. It is the drivers who need a tool to come out from under the yoke of Uber and Lyft. How can that be done? Well, I laid out what I think is a pretty logical proposal. Who runs with it, who implements it, how the drivers will profit from it, It is to be determined. If you want for the drivers what I want, then unless you have a better idea (love to see it) then maybe spread the word that there is a proposal on the table that maybe, just MAYBE, benefit the drivers. Let them decide for themselves, but don't poo poo the idea cause it looks hard. Give it a chance. Modify the ride Austin model to allow ownership by the drivers. Figure it out. It will work.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Jimmy Lee Hagerty said:


> It is not me that needs the luck. I no longer drive because of eyesight. It is the drivers who need a tool to come out from under the yoke of Uber and Lyft. How can that be done? Well, I laid out what I think is a pretty logical proposal. Who runs with it, who implements it, how the drivers will profit from it, It is to be determined. If you want for the drivers what I want, then unless you have a better idea (love to see it) then maybe spread the word that there is a proposal on the table that maybe, just MAYBE, benefit the drivers. Let them decide for themselves, but don't poo poo the idea cause it looks hard. Give it a chance. Modify the ride Austin model to allow ownership by the drivers. Figure it out. It will work.


Not a chance.


----------



## elkscout (Jul 12, 2018)

Jimmy Lee Hagerty said:


> New technology has always been the bane of the old. (Horse carriages, candle makers, whale oil, on and on) You can't let 'what if' defeat the 'now' so cross the bridge when you get to it in maybe 30 or 40 years. The streets are not going to empty overnight to driver less cars. So, get on with it. Give the drivers some hope for the now and let the future take care of itself. There can be several ways of ownership. Introductory ownership with the vehicle, minutes on the clock and so forth. Oh, and just because the bank 'owns' the vehicle, didn't stop Travis claiming the assets as part of his company. Use that against him.


By the looks of things, autonomous driving will not take another 30 years. Also, in the spirit of safety, I imagine once the government sees how much safer autonomous driving is, then they will mandate the phase-out of non-autonomous vehicles being on the roads alongside of autonomous ones. The maximum benefit will be when every vehicle on the roadways will be not only driving themselves, but also communicating with each other in order to avoid traffic congestion, the occasional accident, and other potentially dangerous obstacles/routes. I imagine the day came when people realized cars and horse drawn buggies couldn't co-exist, and so govt. "outlawed" horse drawn buggies on public roadways (for the most part) in the interest of safety and progress.

the other point is uber is already working on capitalizing with this technology. I'm just saying any new kids on the block will be playing catch-up and maybe in business only briefly.


----------



## Jimmy Lee Hagerty (Nov 2, 2014)

goneubering said:


> Not a chance.


For you, there has never been a chance.



elkscout said:


> By the looks of things, autonomous driving will not take another 30 years. Also, in the spirit of safety, I imagine once the government sees how much safer autonomous driving is, then they will mandate the phase-out of non-autonomous vehicles being on the roads alongside of autonomous ones. The maximum benefit will be when every vehicle on the roadways will be not only driving themselves, but also communicating with each other in order to avoid traffic congestion, the occasional accident, and other potentially dangerous obstacles/routes. I imagine the day came when people realized cars and horse drawn buggies couldn't co-exist, and so govt. "outlawed" horse drawn buggies on public roadways (for the most part) in the interest of safety and progress.
> 
> the other point is uber is already working on capitalizing with this technology. I'm just saying any new kids on the block will be playing catch-up and maybe in business only briefly.


And you can predict that what they are doing will be successful? When? How will society react to this new technology? Resist or welcome? You dont know and neither do I. So give up. Don't do anything. Watch the story unfurl, with or without you.


----------



## I_Like_Spam (May 10, 2015)

possibledriver said:


> In this plan the workers would own the means of production. I like it


In Uber , you already own the means of production- your vehicle.

Uber is merely a matchmaker and a middleman.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

I_Like_Spam said:


> In Uber , you already own the means of production- your vehicle.
> 
> Uber is merely a matchmaker and a middleman.


Matchmaker is the most important and irreplaceable thing they offer,

As an owner operator cab driver, I was limited to a few small areas around Orlandoish. Namely places with extremely heavy concentrations of hotels/tourist heavy restaurants.

With a cab company my operating range expands to the entire county.

The difference is having that match maker. It's almost invaluable.

(if only uber paid fair rates)

Without uber, you are nothing, One man car services are borderline impossible to operate in most cities of the US. 1 man taxi companies are 100% IMPOSSIBLE in many places, and very difficult in others.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Jimmy Lee Hagerty said:


> For you, there has never been a chance.
> 
> And you can predict that what they are doing will be successful? When? How will society react to this new technology? Resist or welcome? You dont know and neither do I. So give up. Don't do anything. Watch the story unfurl, with or without you.


If you think your idea is workable then you should run with it and become richer than TK. I wish you well.


----------

