Re:Beautiful illusions: the economics of uberX
by jyrkesh on Wednesday June 11, 2014 @05:11PM
(#7880462)
I think what he's trying to say is that Uber could raise prices "per-trip", split the cost of those trips with 2+ passengers, and actually decrease the cost "per-user" of each trip. If the decrease in price increased demand enough, overall revenue could go up while the consumer feels like they're getting a price decrease (albeit, they now have to share most of their rides, which may feel like a service decrease).
Re:Beautiful illusions: the economics of uberX
by potatolicious on Wednesday June 11, 2014 @05:22PM
(#7880510)
I get that - I just don't think it'll happen. Instead you'll have 2 people who had a price ceiling of $10 each being transported for $16.
Great for the driver, great for the two passengers, bad for Uber.
Re:Beautiful illusions: the economics of uberX
by hershel on Wednesday June 11, 2014 @07:04PM
(#7880956)
On a $10 fare , UBER gets $2(or $4 for 2 trips) , the driver gets $8
For the $16 trip, let's say UBER gives $10 for the driver(instead of ~$8), and takes $6. UBER still comes ahead. And don't forget the huge lockup it gets - which is valuable in and off itself, esp. in the long term as a basis for self driving cars service.
There's of course the issue of decreased traffic for drivers, but there's probably a strategy to make it work.
It would increase per-driver revenue, certainly, but probably decrease Uber revenue fairly significantly. Taxi services, whether in the old fashioned way our the glitzed-up smartphone way, are pretty commodity.
The success of budget competitors like Lyft and Sidecar is testament to this. The perpetual expansion of UberX too. It seems most people are more concerned about getting from A to B cheaply than any kind of premium lap-of-luxury service.
A ride-splitting service would be pretty great for consumers and maybe for drivers, but from Uber's side it would be a pretty substantial price cut.