News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Disrupting Uber by Spooky23 on Monday August 01, 2016 @11:52AM (#12203370)
Overheads absolutely affect marginal decisions. For a Uber driver, their income is revenue - car payment - fuel - other expenses. To remain solvent, that formula needs to be > 0.

For a cab it's similar, except you have labor cost and medallion cost as well. With rates fixed by regulation, the only way to increase profit is to drive more.

Re:Disrupting Uber by rahimnathwani on Monday August 01, 2016 @07:24PM (#12206852)
"With rates fixed by regulation, the only way to increase profit is to drive more."

That's the reason right there. The rates are totally set by regulation. The number of medallions is similarly set. If medallion rental cost were to go up or down by 20% this wouldn't affect whether the marginal ride would be worthwhile for the driver.

Re:Disrupting Uber by Spooky23 on Tuesday August 02, 2016 @12:22PM (#12211046)
Sure it would. The market of people looking for a ride in price sensitive. If the medallion cost goes down, you need to drive less to breakeven and hit your target profit. If it goes up, you need to drive more to attract more rides.

Likewise, there are mental and affordability factors that influence passengers. When I was still going out to downtown clubs, I lived in a close suburb of my mid-sized city. Cabs were regulated by the city, but unregulated outside. That meant that predatory cab companies would charge as much as $50 for a 5 mile ride, and something like $10 for a 4.8 mile ride within the city.

In NYC, historically this has meant that many cabs are kept in motion 24x7, and are concentrated in specific areas in Manhattan to maximize the number of fares.

Re:Disrupting Uber by rahimnathwani on Wednesday August 03, 2016 @03:44AM (#12216331)
You're assuming people have a "target profit", and will keep driving only until they reach it. That's not the way people make decisions.