StarDestroyer.Net BBS

multiplied by whatever they want based on current demand because fuck regulations and consumers in the ear

Didn't you mention in another thread about how what Uber does is actually illegal if a licensed taxi service was to do it?

Borgholio wrote:

multiplied by whatever they want based on current demand because fuck regulations and consumers in the ear

Didn't you mention in another thread about how what Uber does is actually illegal if a licensed taxi service was to do it?

Why, yes! Yes, it is. I get $2.60 + $2.25/mile and/or $0.25/minute of waiting no matter what by law, period, end of story. Those fuckers charge whatever they feel like. Somehow the law has not yet stepped in here, baffling and enraging me.

Raw Shark wrote:Why, yes! Yes, it is. I get $2.60 + $2.25/mile and/or $0.25/minute of waiting no matter what by law, period, end of story. Those fuckers charge whatever they feel like. Somehow the law has not yet stepped in here, baffling and enraging me.

From what I understand it's by abusing the hell out of technicalities in contract law to avoid being considered a taxi service.

Serious question here, if taxis aren't allowed to be overpriced and Uber is, why is Uber at all outcompeting conventional taxis?

White Haven wrote:Serious question here, if taxis aren't allowed to be overpriced and Uber is, why is Uber at all outcompeting conventional taxis?

There are several reasons, as I see it:

1] Pricing: They're actually undercutting us during slow times of day, when people are generally-speaking more sober and alert to being ripped off. A lot of people assume that the ride home will cost the same as the ride downtown until they get the bill, or take Uber downtown and catch a real cab home if they're wise to their tactics.

2] They usually respond faster. This is because:
a] Nobody is stopping them from flooding the street with as many drivers as they can hire, because they ignore medallion limits and, for that matter, medallions, and
b] The average cab company has sat on its ass for decades with regard to improving customer service, with a general attitude of, "Fucking walk there if you don't like it." The dispatchers at mine are chronically understaffed (waiting on hold for 15 minutes is normal during busy times), underpaid, and (especially at night) are, nearly to a woman, surly and prone to typing up the order wrong in some way, and we have the best reputation out of the legitimate companies in town.

3] They reliably accept credit cards. This is huge to just about every customer who has ever had a driver be a total douchebag about credit, and even those of us who don't refuse it can't process it when the company network goes down, which happens frequently during peak business hours because, again, company sat on its ass for decades and is trying to serve twice as many vehicles with the same infrastructure.

4] Marketing: Uber did a huge advertising blitz, including billboards, magazines, discounts for first-time customers and a social media presence targeting young people in a largely-successful attempt to convince them that Uber is the edgy underdog and that real taxi companies are anti-competitive corporate fatcats.

5] Racist / Nationalist Prejudice: Uber drivers are (at least perceived to be) vastly more likely to be English-speaking white people, and a lot of passengers who would never say so are more than willing to quietly pay extra for that.

White Haven wrote:Serious question here, if taxis aren't allowed to be overpriced and Uber is, why is Uber at all outcompeting conventional taxis?

I imagine the answer is 'convenience'. All you need is an app, a credit card and a destination. Taxis don't (always) have apps to call up a ride.

That, and 'ooh, new, shiny'. It only started, what, a year or two ago? Give it a few years to shake down.

...damn, ninja'd.

Just having a car available constantly if you're willing to pay the price for it probably goes a long way towards explaining Uber's appeal (that, and the credit card and phone app bits). I've also read some accounts from black folks about why they like Uber - Uber drivers aren't going to refuse to stop for them, or refuse to give them a ride into certain neighborhoods.

Fuck the medallion system.

Guardsman Bass wrote:Just having a car available constantly if you're willing to pay the price for it probably goes a long way towards explaining Uber's appeal (that, and the credit card and phone app bits). [snip]

Credit cards are admittedly still problematic (see above), but we've had an app for three years.

Guardsman Bass wrote:Fuck the medallion system.

If you want to get rid of medallions completely you've got my vote, but as long as I have to pay for one and somebody else doing the exact same thing for a living doesn't I call bullshit.

Oh, I agree. I'd even be in favor of paying off the current medallion holders as part of getting rid of them.

Set the safety and insurance rules you want cab/uber/whatever drivers to have, and then let people go at it. The medallions were supposedly going to help serve as a way to prevent poor performance and law-breaking by cabbies (since the threat to pull it would be there), but in practice that's not what has happened.

Lagmonster wrote:Indeed, including any means of cash payment is a waste of time. Cash at the consumer level is overdue for obsolescence.

Right, because networks never go down...

My current employer takes cash, paper checks, and plastic of various sorts (credit, debit, pre-paid, gift cards, government benefits, etc). There has been more than one occasion when one system or another crashed and we couldn't take government benefits, or debit cards, or something else, but you know what? Cash always works. Cash works even when the power goes out.

Yes, there are hassles like a need for accuracy checks and security, but the same is true for every other form of payment as well.

Without a network your plastic card is just that, so much plastic. Your phone app is meaningless if that network is down. But hand over some actual currency...? Always valid, every time. And that's why people still use it and retailers still accept it. If nothing else it's a great fallback system.

Broomstick wrote:Without a network your plastic card is just that, so much plastic. Your phone app is meaningless if that network is down. But hand over some actual currency...? Always valid, every time. And that's why people still use it and retailers still accept it. If nothing else it's a great fallback system.

Think of the cost of having a cash system in an automatic car, all day, every day. Not just the mechanical and maintenance costs of the system itself, but also in having cash zipping about with minimal protection, and the increased risk of theft. Balanced against the frequency of network outages and lost outcome, the balance could easily be in favour of going cashless and avoiding the cash model.

Yes, for that particular application, but that comment was in response to a post that cash was somehow "obsolete" in today's world. Far from it.

Although, really, how is an automatic cab more vulnerable than, say, a stationary ATM or vending machine coinbox? Most customers probably would use a e-format, but allowing a cash option, even if infrequently used, captures a larger market.

Gandalf wrote:

Broomstick wrote:Without a network your plastic card is just that, so much plastic. Your phone app is meaningless if that network is down. But hand over some actual currency...? Always valid, every time. And that's why people still use it and retailers still accept it. If nothing else it's a great fallback system.

Think of the cost of having a cash system in an automatic car, all day, every day. Not just the mechanical and maintenance costs of the system itself, but also in having cash zipping about with minimal protection, and the increased risk of theft. Balanced against the frequency of network outages and lost outcome, the balance could easily be in favour of going cashless and avoiding the cash model.

Don't forget that the network processing payments is the same network that people use to book rides. If customers can't book a ride, then it doesn't matter if their payment method would work or not.

If your credit card is linked to the app used to book Google cab rides, then that gives Google the ability to record the ride and charge people when the network goes back up. Unless legislation stops them.

Most customers probably would use a e-format, but allowing a cash option, even if infrequently used, captures a larger market.

Just how much of a larger market would they capture ?

Booking these cabs would be done via a smartphone app. Which means payment can be done via the app the same way all those 'free to play' games on Android and IPhone get people to pay for microtransactions. So the only people who would be customers only if Google Cabs took cash are the people who have a device that can run the app, but refuse to allow in-app purchases on it.

Then there is the problem of minors using the app. Refusing trips by people who aren't set up for in-app payments seems like the most reliable way to avoid minors booking rides.

Broomstick wrote:Although, really, how is an automatic cab more vulnerable than, say, a stationary ATM or vending machine coinbox?

ATMs are essentially great big safes placed in secure spots, with more alarms than my whole building. A car lacks that location based security.

Most customers probably would use a e-format, but allowing a cash option, even if infrequently used, captures a larger market.

True, but if the cost:benefit isn't favourable, why bother? It would be easier to set up a prepay system for the cash enthusiasts, where you buy a card worth x from a store and use that.

bilateralrope wrote:

Most customers probably would use a e-format, but allowing a cash option, even if infrequently used, captures a larger market.

Just how much of a larger market would they capture ?

Booking these cabs would be done via a smartphone app. Which means payment can be done via the app the same way all those 'free to play' games on Android and IPhone get people to pay for microtransactions. So the only people who would be customers only if Google Cabs took cash are the people who have a device that can run the app, but refuse to allow in-app purchases on it.

Working in retail, every shift I'm put on the cash register I encounter people with all manner of e-gadgets who, nonetheless, hand over cold, hard cash for their purchases. Not even plastic, they hand me cash. Sometimes hundreds of dollars worth.

There are a sizeable number of people who do not trust e-transactions.

Then there is the problem of minors using the app. Refusing trips by people who aren't set up for in-app payments seems like the most reliable way to avoid minors booking rides.

Why shouldn't minors be allowed to use a cab? Next you'll tell me they shouldn't use a city bus or a subway.

Not that I'm advocating 6 year olds be allowed to range freely without supervision, but fucking hell, I went to Belgium and France before I was legally adult (I was 17). I can think of a lot of situations where a legal minor could have a good and valid reason to get a ride. Is the average cab driver going to be able to distinguish between a 16 year old and an 18 year old when he or she gets in the car? Is the average cab driver going to give a damn as long as said driver gets paid (and, hopefully, also tipped appropriately)?

Gandalf wrote:

Broomstick wrote:Although, really, how is an automatic cab more vulnerable than, say, a stationary ATM or vending machine coinbox?

ATMs are essentially great big safes placed in secure spots, with more alarms than my whole building. A car lacks that location based security.

Cigarette vending machines are placed on every corner of even the darkest alley. It appears that they are not robbed frequently enough to make them unprofitable. And while they are obviously not filled with as much money as an ATM a taxi wouldn´t contain tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars like an ATM does either.

On the subject of cash: There's really not much safeguarding it in my pocket, either: If somebody sticks a gun up my nose, they get my cash. I go home and drop it off as often as is convenient to minimize my potential losses. On the legitimate customer side, the service industry does and always will favor cash, for reasons that I probably don't need to explain. Uber and Lyft have already written them off, along with all other cash customers, and seem to be doing okay.

Broomstick wrote:

bilateralrope wrote:

Most customers probably would use a e-format, but allowing a cash option, even if infrequently used, captures a larger market.

Just how much of a larger market would they capture ?

Booking these cabs would be done via a smartphone app. Which means payment can be done via the app the same way all those 'free to play' games on Android and IPhone get people to pay for microtransactions. So the only people who would be customers only if Google Cabs took cash are the people who have a device that can run the app, but refuse to allow in-app purchases on it.

Working in retail, every shift I'm put on the cash register I encounter people with all manner of e-gadgets who, nonetheless, hand over cold, hard cash for their purchases. Not even plastic, they hand me cash. Sometimes hundreds of dollars worth.

There are a sizeable number of people who do not trust e-transactions.

Yes, there are a large number of people who prefer cash when they have a choice. But how many of them will be willing to use electronic transactions when the choice is pay electronically or don't use a Google Cab ?

I don't have the data to make that judgement. Google probably does, because anyone willing to buy anything on the Android store is probably willing to use electronic payment for other things where they have no choice.

Then there is the problem of minors using the app. Refusing trips by people who aren't set up for in-app payments seems like the most reliable way to avoid minors booking rides.

Why shouldn't minors be allowed to use a cab? Next you'll tell me they shouldn't use a city bus or a subway.

I'm not saying they shouldn't. Just that there may be problems in letting minors ride in the cabs that Google wants to avoid.

Though I'm probably overestimating those problems, so I'll shut up about minors now.

salm wrote:

Gandalf wrote:

Broomstick wrote:Although, really, how is an automatic cab more vulnerable than, say, a stationary ATM or vending machine coinbox?

ATMs are essentially great big safes placed in secure spots, with more alarms than my whole building. A car lacks that location based security.

Cigarette vending machines are placed on every corner of even the darkest alley. It appears that they are not robbed frequently enough to make them unprofitable. And while they are obviously not filled with as much money as an ATM a taxi wouldn´t contain tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars like an ATM does either.

Besides, they have to fill up their gas tanks or charge their batteries at some point, and since I don't know of any automated gas stations out there it'll require human input to do so. So like Raw Shark and his running back to the depot, so too will these Google Cabs, at which point they can have someone on hand to empty/reset their cash boxes back to the minimum required (for dispensing change or whatever).

That's assuming they want to bother of course, but it's not like they're going to have fat stacks of cash at all times. They do need to 'go home' every so often, more so arguably than a regular cab which has a driver who can work a gas station pump to stay out in the field, whereas the automated cabs don't.

RogueIce wrote: Besides, they have to fill up their gas tanks or charge their batteries at some point, and since I don't know of any automated gas stations out there it'll require human input to do so. So like Raw Shark and his running back to the depot, so too will these Google Cabs, at which point they can have someone on hand to empty/reset their cash boxes back to the minimum required (for dispensing change or whatever).

That's assuming they want to bother of course, but it's not like they're going to have fat stacks of cash at all times. They do need to 'go home' every so often, more so arguably than a regular cab which has a driver who can work a gas station pump to stay out in the field, whereas the automated cabs don't.

I assume that the cash safe would be built deep into a difficult to reach part of the car. You could probably design it to make it only possible to reach if you actually stole the car, lifted it on a hoist and went at it with tools or brute force for a while (unless you have the key of course). At this point it becomes meaningless because there would need to be some sort of built in security device to prevent theft anyway.

In the end you just have to balance out the loss you suffer from theft with the additional costs of securitiy measures, which is a bog standard issue when designing things like this.

Broomstick wrote:Why shouldn't minors be allowed to use a cab? Next you'll tell me they shouldn't use a city bus or a subway.

Not that I'm advocating 6 year olds be allowed to range freely without supervision, but fucking hell, I went to Belgium and France before I was legally adult (I was 17). I can think of a lot of situations where a legal minor could have a good and valid reason to get a ride. Is the average cab driver going to be able to distinguish between a 16 year old and an 18 year old when he or she gets in the car? Is the average cab driver going to give a damn as long as said driver gets paid (and, hopefully, also tipped appropriately)?

For that matter, should they? I mean, generally when someone hires a cab they need that cab ride. What is our hypothetical legal minor supposed to do if they urgently need to get somewhere. They're too young to own a car and maybe too young to drive at all. What are they supposed to do, hitchhike?

Simon_Jester wrote:

Broomstick wrote:Why shouldn't minors be allowed to use a cab? Next you'll tell me they shouldn't use a city bus or a subway.

Not that I'm advocating 6 year olds be allowed to range freely without supervision, but fucking hell, I went to Belgium and France before I was legally adult (I was 17). I can think of a lot of situations where a legal minor could have a good and valid reason to get a ride. Is the average cab driver going to be able to distinguish between a 16 year old and an 18 year old when he or she gets in the car? Is the average cab driver going to give a damn as long as said driver gets paid (and, hopefully, also tipped appropriately)?

For that matter, should they? I mean, generally when someone hires a cab they need that cab ride. What is our hypothetical legal minor supposed to do if they urgently need to get somewhere. They're too young to own a car and maybe too young to drive at all. What are they supposed to do, hitchhike?

"Please, won't somebody think of the children?" That's a pretty poor defense of cash money cabs.

When I was too young to drive, I didn't have any money either, so getting a cab was out of the question anyway. I usually walked, or rode my bike anywhere I needed to go.

On the other hand kids these days routinely have smartphones. So how difficult would it be to make it so that you can charge the ride of someones phone bill? I do not think it would be too difficult to make a system that works like that if you get the telephone company on board. And if anyone can do it google can with their monopolistic policies.

Darmalus wrote:"Please, won't somebody think of the children?" That's a pretty poor defense of cash money cabs.

It's not just a defense of cabs that use cash - minors can have a need to travel, too. Hell, kids are sent cross country in the US on their own on airplanes, so why shouldn't a minor be able to use a cab? In fact, getting from an airport to a final destination might well be a situation where a minor would hire a cab.

Now, typically airlines want to know about unescorted minors using their services, and I can see a cab driver might want some assurance that a kid can pay for a ride, so I can see having some controls on the use of cabs by minors, but really, I thought it was a kneejerk reaction to say "no minors".

When I was too young to drive, I didn't have any money either, so getting a cab was out of the question anyway. I usually walked, or rode my bike anywhere I needed to go.

How nice for you. Walking and/or biking is not always safe.

When I was too young to drive my parents routinely gave me money for a phone call (because back in the late paleolithic we didn't have mobile phones or debit cards) in case an emergency came up. You really ran around with absolutely no money in your pockets?

Minors take cabs on a regular basis, during the day. A lot of kids have working-class parents with little control over their lives that normally get off work in time to pick them up from school but sometimes get delayed or called in early and just order them a ride home on a credit card over the phone (especially if they live in a shitty neighborhood where you shouldn't walk without a gun even at high noon; just one more way poor people get fucked out of money). Also, if I see an obvious minor trying to get a ride after dark in a dangerous area, I'm a little more flexible than usual on payment.