I get that you had a bad experience, but the response to every bad experience should not be regulation. "Surge pricing" is no more a scam than any other market-based pricing mechanism.
To be clear, I'm mixed on Uber overall, and I do think they need some regulation, but not with regard to pricing, coverage, or response time. Those are good fits for self-regulating markets. I'm more concerned with things like knowing that when I get in to an Uber, I'm covered by the proper insurance if I end up in an accident on the way to my destination.
Surge pricing on an unknown fare (metered) is actually quite ridiculous.
For contrast, when I order a Lyft line in Manhattan, it gives me an exact price quote (not an estimate, but the exact quote) before I order the ride, taking all surges into account. This means I have perfect knowledge of what the price is going to be before I decide whether to take the ride[0].
Uber has consistently refused to implement price quotes, to the point where they have literally jeopardized their existence in at least one city because of it: all of the legal problems they have in London would be avoided if they provided price quotes in advance.
Uber has been really clever to frame the controversy as a debate about whether the cabbies should have to take an exam. But the fact that medallion cabs in London have to take the street exam is all moot, because if Uber provided price quotes in advance, they would be classified as a different kind of car service which doesn't have to take the street exam in the first place.
Instead, Uber would rather launch a coordinated PR and legal campaign against the entire medallion cab system in London, just to avoid implementing an incredibly user-friendly feature.
[0] This feature may not be in all locations yet (in fact, I don't know if it even works if the destination is in another borough), but it's clear to me that this is at least where Lyft is headed, whereas it's clear that Uber is committed to not providing price quotes.
The opposite is actually clear to me. Lyft in SF previously had the functionality you describe Uber in Manhattan having. You put your destination in, it gives you an exact price, you decide whether to call it. When Lyft Line (the carpooling variant) was introduced, that feature was actually removed, and now with a standard Lyft ride there is no way to know your fare in advance (though there is now with Lyft Line).
In a similar vain, Uber gives a max fare on Uber Pool (so you know at most what it will cost, guaranteed). Uber also does do fare estimates on UberX and other rides. I've heard from a few drivers that they may have avoided giving exact fares in advance on UberX and others because people tend to want to use them a little bit more flexibly than get from point a to b (Stop and pick up a friend on the way, for instance).
Point of all of this being, it's not clear to me that either company is committed to providing or not providing price quotes. I think we're still in the early stages of experimentation, with features being added and removed and changed between locations all the time, and I don't think we can yet characterize what either company is committed to doing or not.
Point taken. I'm willing to believe that Lyft may not be committed to providing price quotes. But there's at least ambiguity there, whereas it's very clear that Uber does not want to provide exact quotes. If they did, they would have in London and avoided the expensive, multi-year legal and PR battle that they're engaged in there.
How much do you think this protracted battle has cost them over the years, both explicitly (PR firms and lawyers) and implicitly (opportunity cost of lost revenues from additional rides)? Whatever it is, it's a high number, and Uber has decided that not providing price quotes is worth even more[0].
> Uber also does do fare estimates on UberX and other rides.
An estimate is simply lead-generation for them, not a quote. They are not committing to charge me the price they estimate. As the consumer, I still do not know what the ride will actually cost until I am already on the hook to pay for it.
[0] It's not even a tough actuarial problem to solve at Uber's scale, which is why it's such a glaring omission, in addition to the example from London.
Would you rather have a service which charges more to (say) black passengers than white? Or which charges more to go to a poorer part of town a rich part?
The regulation I'm talking about is not being able to discriminate based on the type of passenger or destination.
Race is not equivalent to "type of passenger or destination" though. The latter is a much more vague definition. Like it or not, things like distance, roadway accessibility, and desired route impact the cost of a fare, and regulating that away isn't something I openly accept as the best solution.
Exactly. You're at a bar in SF near closing time (2AM) and need a ride to Hunters Point or Bayview? Suddenly, "surge pricing" is in effect! However, if you need a ride to Pac Heights or the Marina? No problem! This may not seem like discrimination based on economic class/race, but it sure is.
Just as the opposite works, if nobody is going to buy at your price, you have to come down, or you will lose business... ideally you will meet in the middle via market pricing. The rates are centered around competition with other sources for similar services. There is competition and market driven pricing, I don't see the problem.
Too often our knee-jerk reaction is to want the government to get involved.
But based on your experience, you are probably
a) not going to trust Uber again, at least for this sort of ride
b) choose a competitor / traditional cab to get you to OAK
c) tell all of your friends / HN about your crappy experience, leading to reduced reputation for Uber
The end result is that Uber will no longer get your business and perhaps others' business will go elsewhere too. Uber is being punished for its bad behavior by the market. Getting the government involved would likely put Uber out of business (hence the article) or make rates way higher and essentially no different than a traditional cab.
I love it how libertarians believe everything will be fixed by a mythical "market". I'm sorry, but if we had left it to the "market", we'd still have separate "white" and "colored" toilets. We'd have no gay marriage. We'd have no voting rights act.
The regulation I'm talking about is not being able to discriminate based on the type of passenger or destination.
They can refuse based on Destination, but not anything that is forbidden by Law. Such as Race, Sexual Orientation, Religion, Handicap, etc... There was a notice to Uber drivers sent from Uber, stating that any driver that gets complaints about not accepting customers that have a service animal, they will end their partnership with that driver.
I agree, the Market can't fix anything, even in a Libertarian world, there is Government. But they should only be there to define the rules of the Game, not control the moves everyone decides to make.
I do agree, just the market would have not made everything all peachy, you do need to set some rules. But its just the limit and overreach of those rules is up for some debate.
KBI background checks, when Uber already does their own. (In a state that is VERY VERY VERY well armed) A State that doesn't support Gay Marriage, that up till 2006 had laws stating black people couldn't live in certain cities. (seriously...)
Just remember... its Governments that ban Gay Marriage, not markets, Governments decide who can and cannot vote, not markets.
That's the most absurd thing I've read today. Literally all of these things are the result of oppressive laws passed by the government in the first place. What does marriage have to do with the markets?
Even when you enter it, it takes a while to transmit that information only after you get into the vehicle, which leads to these awkward stares "where are we going today?" - "oh, I thought I had it entered in the app" - "oh, hold on then, it takes a minute to update".
Arguably, destination disclosure is a boon to consumers in some situation - you might get a discount on a late night ride from SFO if you're heading towards San Jose, where the driver lives (and was going to drive to anyways) as opposed to Walnut Creek, etc.
Next time don't enter your destination address, so the driver doesn't know where you go, and once you are in the car it is much harder for them to refuse you.
if the market was really busy and I wanted to go 3 miles away from the crowds, sorry the cabbie had to end his shift and couldn't take me. If it was a nice and quiet night, I would get the same ride no problem.
I also spoke with the drivers I used here in são paulo and they said the same thing: they only get the destination after the pickup and they only get my first name -- uber now is using a 3rd party service that proxys my phone so the driver won't have my personal number.
i emailed them before regarding problems with drivers and the customer support team is always good (twice i had problems with drivers doing longer routes when smaller ones were better and once i had a problem with a driver that accepted my request but never showed up).
(btw, i'm not an uber employee, i just like the service and use at least twice a month)
This is not an automatic process that can go wrong. And indeed, for anyone who has used Uber any number of times, this is immediately obvious.
Perhaps your driver surmised from your suitcase where you were going?
They wouldn't be as big as it was if the existing system wasn't literally awful, as someone in SF -- if I wanted a '''real''' taxi, it has a chance to not bother coming several hours later more than anything. And then intentionally taking roundabout routes just to fuck me out of even more fare.
And at Santa Ana Metrolink, I had 'taxi' drivers effectively try stealing my bags, throwing them into their vehicles, and trying to drag me along while I was waiting for uber/lyft. Maybe in cities where there is significantly more regulation, enough licences, and no corruption Uber would not be nearly as popular.
I've never once had that with Uber. All cars are fairly new and super shiny. When I sit in an Uber I always feel the car is well maintained and clean etc. There's no grimeyness.
And when I call an Uber, I know when it's coming. After the ride is done, I get a receipt that shows the exact route and so on. It's really neat.
Cabs on the other hand are a black hole. I call a cab and it's theoretically on the way, but I have no way of knowing and there's no indication on how far it is and when it's coming. After I pay for it, the money goes into a black hole and other than a small piece of paper that I lose after two minutes, there is no indication of it happening or how much I paid.
They "cannot" but they have done it to me many times in several cities. I also once had a cabbie try to strongarm me into giving a ridiculously huge tip (~100%) "because I won't be able to get a fare all the way back." Not to defend Uber here, but it's not like the cab regulation totally fixes this.
I am of two minds on surge pricing. I certainly don't like it, but I don't think it is a scam so much as normal economics.
This is one of the unfortunate side effects of a car service pulling out of a city like Lyft did in Houston. Now only Uber remains which, despite its flaws, is light years ahead of the standard yellow cab service.
Wingz is a cheaper replacement for UberX and Blacklane is a cheaper replacement for Uber Black, both have to be arranged though.
You had a spot of bad luck with cancellations—they're in fact extremely rare, and I've taken hundreds of trips. On top of that, drivers cannot see your destination when a request is made. Go ahead and ask them.
If you're going to snark you should at least pick a good example.
I live in SF, and was flying out of OAK. I had used Uber only once before, a long time ago; but this time, I suggested to the wife that we use Uber again. We had to leave SF at 7:15AM - 7:30AM or so.
Around 7:15 I pulled up the app, and saw that there were several cars around (as they usually are). I requested an UberX; punched in the destination. A driver quickly accepted, and Uber said he'd be there in < 5 minutes. A couple of minutes later, I get the notification that the driver cancelled. OK, I tried again. Same thing again: driver accepts, and then a minute or two later, cancels. This went on for 4-5 times. Now, time is getting tighter, and I have a large suitcase; and cabs don't come around in my alley. I tried Uber again, and this time Uber says: "Surge pricing in effect! Rates are 1.5X". I knew what was going on; but I had to accept out of desperation. What do you know? A driver quickly came over and we were on our way. The driver did say that some drivers may not have wanted to go to OAK because traffic back would have been bad.
But here's the thing: a licensed cab cannot refuse to take you to your destination! Uber seems to be set up to take advantage of riders with their "surge pricing" scam.
This experience left a bitter taste in my mouth, and I made sure I installed Lyft for the ride back.