Or they are looking forward to the introduction of self-driving cars? Rather than waiting for self-driving cars to actually arrive, by which time the horse will have bolted, they are trying to lock the customer base in now at a high cost, banking on the money lasting until self-driving cars arrive. Once self-driving cars arrive, costs fall, competitors are locked out, and they make a big profit.

I just don't think that'll come soon enough for the amount of money and resources they're pumping into it. But obviously this is part of the long play, at least and especially for Uber.

> customers will see value in the better product that keeps them in.

How is Uber a "better product" than a taxi? As far as I can tell, it's competing on price, and that's it. If cabs were the same price as Uber, I would take a taxi every time.

I think it's more convenient, and I've had better experiences with rideshare drivers than any taxi.

You can just call one from your apartment when headed across town instead of waiting for one to drive by on the street. In my experience calling taxis isn't always reliable. Uber etc. show you the driver's location and distance, and they won't stop to bring someone else to the airport.

I think a big part is the quality of the taxis in your area. In San Francisco, they'd do the "card machine is broken" bit (eventually turning it on when you have no cash), or just not pick you up if you were headed out into the Sunset, or drive a longer way hoping you don't notice.

In Dublin, Ireland, calling an Uber will invariably call a taxi. They're usually friendly folks that don't mind that you're only going a few blocks to bring home your groceries because you missed the bus.

But the bar to call Uber a 'better product' is pretty low. There's nothing it does spectacularly better than Lyft or Flywheel or any other app.

A big part of their value is how low the customer experience can go with a traditional taxi. I just want to rent someone's time for point to point transit without any bullshit.

Why would you take a taxi over Uber? In my experience, Uber drivers are more courteous (probably because they know they get rated at the end of the ride) and arrive faster than taxis (in San Francisco). That being said, when I was living in Shenzhen, taking a taxi was more convenient because there are just so many of them and waiting time is really short.

Apaprently you have never taken a taxi in Chicago?

Rusty car. Driver doesnt speak english. Smoking out the window and talking on cell phone in another language. Floors it and slams on the brakes. Seatbelts broken. Credit card machine broken.

Hum why would I take a lyft.

Don't forget, doesn't service large swaths of the city either by population or location.

Most Uber drivers I've had have used their phone... and gasp often in another language.

If you live in one of the few places where you can expect to be able to hail a taxi, you're probably right. If you have to call for a taxi, Uber is infinity times more reliable.

There are a handful of cities in north America where this might be true. If you live in one of those, congratulations. For the rest of us the difference is night and day.

As a really simple example, as applies to my city, I have had to wait 2 hours for a taxi more than once. I've never waited more than 25 minutes for an uber. Average times are ballpark 10 minutes vs. 30 minutes.

I would take uber if it were more expensive than taxis any day.

I'd pay a significant premium over taxis to take Uber. Taxis around here are old and dirty and the drivers are usually crazy. Uber cars are nice and driven by friendly people who aren't usually trying to get me killed.

Are you kidding? Have you ever tried to get a cab outside of Manhattan? It's painful even in the downtown core of major cities. And if you live in the suburbs, you have to call like two hours ahead and there's always a good chance they don't show up. In my experience with Uber, drivers are more courteous, billing is more honest, their cars smell better, and bad drivers are held accountable.

Yes, I've called taxis several times in a tiny (280k) city in Germany - they're there faster than the police would come if you'd call 911, they're reliable, clean, and you can pay via app before the ride.

I really don't get what's so good about uber, they're just like taxis, but worse quality, and bending the law.

Thats the thing, taxi quality varies a lot depending where you go. In Barcelona they are reasonably priced and reliable. Istanbul non seemed to have a clue where they were going and didn't bother when you showed them on the phone map. London are pricey and snobby about what they will let you carry in their cab.

Amusing you mentioned Istanbul. I had forgotten about this, but my cab driver to the airport tried to scam me THREE different ways in one trip. Catching him was almost a game at that point.

Taxis where I live aren't as good as yours are. That's why Uber is nice — it brings taxi service in my unassuming suburb to the quality you take for granted.

You've picked my interest, how would lowering regulation increase customer prices?

I am not saying prices would rise in direct consequence to a reduction in regulation. The premise is that they are pricing below market right now, and probably also for a more open market. This is an expense to them designed to create the open market they want.

Once they have it, they'll have little reason to underprice anymore. You need drivers to run this kind of business (for now), and they will create an upward pressure on cost (to a point) as they move between legitimate services based on who actually pays them a living.

In the abstract, breaking up monopolies is the canonical example.

Breaking up monopolies raises prices? You've lost me :-)

I think the GP is talking about breaking up 'natural' monopolies, rather than government monopolies.

Note: Just to skip a potential semantic argument that always crops up around this: whether or not you believe it's appropriate to call it a monopoly if it's not enforced by government fiat is beside the point.

Less regulation = not breaking up a monopoly = higher prices.

s/picked/piqued/