[SafeT]

Uber says surge pricing = more drivers on the road. You remember reading that every time Uber surges (rips off) the drunk riders who are too drunk to do math on Holidays? By Uber's own logic then, lower fares obviously would mean that less cars are going to be available. They can't have it both ways. If they say lowering fares brings more riders, then why would they want less drivers available for more riders? And why keep advertising for more drivers when they are essentially telling existing drivers to park their cars because of low fares?

 

[Greguzzi]

The answer would seem obvious, but maybe that's because I can do basic math? I don't think the average Uber driver can do, or doesn't care to look at, the math.

 

[Michael - Cleveland]

...every time Uber surges (rips off) the drunk riders

side topic: Do you think that fares should be the same at all times in all places, regardless of the demand?
(and side-side topic: is it 'fair' to call out Uber on Surge pricing without also calling out Lyft for 'PrimeTime' pricing?)

 

[SafeT]

side topic: Do you think that fares should be the same at all times in all places, regardless of the demand?
(and side-side topic: is it 'fair' to call out Uber on Surge pricing without also calling out Lyft for 'PrimeTime' pricing?)

The fares at night or Holidays should be a little higher, as there is more risk involved. If the base fare was reasonable for the drivers to cover their costs and make a few bucks there would not need to be more than maybe a 2x or 3x surge maximum ever. But when the rates are this low, there is no way to justify these insanely low normal standard rates or the surge rates either one.

 

[Michael - Cleveland]

The fares at night or Holidays should be a little higher, as there is more risk involved. If the base fare was reasonable for the drivers to cover their costs and make a few bucks there would not need to be more than maybe a 2x or 3x surge maximum ever. But when the rates are this low, there is no way to justify the these insanely low normal standard rates or the surge rates either one.

I agree... but unless the state (any state) has the guts to implement TNC regulations that review and set limits on fare rates - well, it's a free market and. it would take a competitor with a business plan that is more attractive to both riders and drivers to change the way Lyft and Uber do things. Ohio *may* eventually head in the direction of fare oversight as the new state law here will be administered by the Ohio Public Utilities Commission (PUCO).

BTW, just out of curiosity - Do you drive mostly or exclusively late nights? It seems from what your saying that in your experience only 'drunks' are subjectto surge pricing... and that's just not true. Surges occur in the morning and afternoon rush hours, and during events, just as much as the 2AM crowd.

 

[howo3579]

side topic: Do you think that fares should be the same at all times in all places, regardless of the demand?
(and side-side topic: is it 'fair' to call out Uber on Surge pricing without also calling out Lyft for 'PrimeTime' pricing?)

Both surge and prime time are bogus not because the price is higher but it doesn't work when people are not drunk. Hotels and airlines do the same because the supply is limited and the schedule of the service is not flexible. In our city, surge price comes and goes fast because drivers all come out of woodwork when they see surging. Passenger with a brain would just wait for 3 min and request again. And funny thing is when the real supply and demand economy is working, Uber capped the surge during winter storm at 2.9x when no drivers want to drive. yep they said because of integrity and didn't want to take advantage of the weather, but they risked those drivers who need to drive during winter storm with higher chance of accident and car damage. Why not keep your integrity during drunk hours when sometimes surge is at 6x like last Saturday before it went down to non surge in 10 min?

 

[Michael - Cleveland]

Both surge and prime time are bogus not because the price is higher but it doesn't work when people are not drunk.

I don't understand what you mean... can you explain?

Hotels and airlines do the same because the supply is limited and the schedule of the service is not flexible.

Which is exactly the same circumstance for which surge/primetime go into effect: when the supply of drivers is low - and the demand is 'now'.

In our city, surge price comes and goes fast because drivers all come out of woodwork when they see surging.

Same here. (which from the TNCs perspective, is kind of the whole point: get drivers to the pax as quickly as possible, and end the surge as soon as the demand is met. Agree or disagree with tthe methodlogy, thats is how it works.)

Passenger with a brain would just wait for 3 min and request again.

Some do just that. (I do) Others don't want to wait and (thankfully) are willing to pay the additional cost.

And funny thing is when the real supply and demand economy is working, Uber capped the surge during winter storm at 2.9x when no drivers want to drive. yep they said because of integrity and didn't want to take advantage of the weather...

Can't agree with you there. You may not have been following Uber in the ancient days (a year and half ago) when they took enormous criticism form both the public and govenments for allowing the computers to drive surge multipliers through the roof during natural disaters and emergencies.

Why not keep your integrity during drunk hours when sometimes surge is at 6x like last Saturday before it went down to non surge in 10 min?

Well, first, you're comparing being out late (till 'closing time') or just being at a large venue event that dumps thousands of people into the streets at the same time with a natural disaster or general emergency - and that's not a valid comparison. Second, you kind of defeat your own argument when you note that the 6x surge last Saturday only lasted 10 minutes... meaning the rider had a choice to accept it, or wait 10 minutes. And I'm pretty sure that a rider being drunk is something that Uber and Lyft do not have any control over! And it is not just 'drunk' riders who use Uber and Lyft during Surge/PrimeTime. It surges downtown in my market at 5PM nearly every work day... for at least a bit. It surges at the end of every sports event and every concert, every big event in the city - again, for at least a bit. (I rarely drive past midnight anymore, specifically becuase I don't want to drive drunks.)

Everyone hates surge - even the drivers who have no choice but to chase it or now can only afford to accept rides in surge/PrimeTime.

I've said this before so forgive me if you've read it elsewhere:
Surge and PrimeTime pricing were devised by data, financial and accounting nerds.
A marketing professional would have set the X base fares at a much higher level - above cabs in any market.
Then instead of SURGE fares, they would implement DISCOUNTED fares during the slower periods.

 

[Greguzzi]

[SNIP]

I've said this before so forgive me if you've read it elsewhere:
Surge and PrimeTime pricing were devised by data, financial and accounting nerds.
A marketing professional would have set the X base fares at a much higher level - above cabs in any market.
Then instead of SURGE fares, they would implement DISCOUNTED fares during the slower periods.

Right on the money (pun intended).

 

[howo3579]

....

Well I get you points. Believe me I love surging and usually weekends were the only time I drove as I have a full time job in weekdays. What I'm saying is if surging is algorithm based on supply and demand at the moment, natural disasters shouldn't matter. If you have to go somewhere and don't want to drive in the storm, pay the market surging price, just like drunk people do when they don't want to wait for surge to do down. It's not about integrity. Now if we are in coffin business and there were earth quake that killed thousands of people, I'd agree integrity applies here.

 

[Michael - Cleveland]

What I'm saying is if surging is algorithm based on supply and demand at the moment, natural disasters shouldn't matter.

Being out late is a choice. Facing life endangering or life threatening situations is not. In our society we do make a distinction between free market capitalism and price gouging. Price gouging is illegal many states - including most of the east coast:

Thirty-four states and the District of Columbia have anti-price gouging laws
​

 

[SafeT]

Being out late is a choice. Facing life endangering or life threatening situations is not. In our society we do make a distinction between free market capitalism and price gouging. Price gouging is illegal many states - including most of the east coast:

Thirty-four states and the District of Columbia have anti-price gouging laws
​

Right, and that is what makes it illegal to charge $20 for a gallon of water or gas after a hurricane.

 

[Michael - Cleveland]

Right, and that is what makes it illegal to charge $20 for a gallon of water or gas after a hurricane.

... or excessive surge pricing for transportation during a blizzard.

 

[howo3579]

Being out late is a choice. Facing life endangering or life threatening situations is not. In our society we do make a distinction between free market capitalism and price gouging. Price gouging is illegal many states - including most of the east coast:

Thirty-four states and the District of Columbia have anti-price gouging laws
​

Not using Uber will result life endangering situation? I thought it's the other way around. It is life endangering activity to drive you around during a winter storm.

 

[Michael - Cleveland]

The answer would seem obvious, but maybe that's because I can do basic math? I don't think the average Uber driver can do, or doesn't care to look at, the math.

I agree with you, but...
the OP was talking about drunk RIDERS who can't do math:
"...every time Uber surges (rips off) the drunk riders who are too drunk to do math on Holidays?"
Thank god he wasn't talking about DRUNK [uber] DRIVERS who can't do math.

 

[SafeT]

Not using Uber will result life endangering situation? I thought it's the other way around. It is life endangering activity to drive you around during a winter storm.

Some people will argue about anything to pass the day it would seem.

 

[Greguzzi]

Not using Uber in a winter storm will result life endangering situation? I thought it's the other way around. It is life endangering activity to drive you around during a winter storm.

This, exactly. Some clown price-gouging a COMMODITY such as milk or water from the safety of his store is a very different thing from a guy out in a storm risking his life and limb and property to provide a SERVICE for people who are unable or afraid to drive themselves.

 

[SafeT]

This, exactly. Some clown price-gouging a COMMODITY such as milk or water from the safety of his store is a very different thing from a guy out in a storm risking his life and limb and property to provide a SERVICE for people who are unable or afraid to drive themselves.

You are not forced to sell the water at an inflated cost and you are not forced to go out in a blizzard to gouge riders. Both gouging is voluntary on the part of the gouger.

 

[Michael - Cleveland]

Not using Uber in a winter storm will result life endangering situation? I thought it's the other way around. It is life endangering activity to drive you around during a winter storm.

Only if as a driver you choose to drive in weather conditions that you are not comfortable with, not skilled enough to handle or don't have a vehicle equipped and capable enough for the conditions. But you're dealing in semantics now (and I'm anti-semantic). The case that brought Uber's surge pricing during times of public need to light was a couple of years ago during a terrorist attack and hostage situation at a shopping mall... people trying to use Uber to get out of the area were hit with massive surge pricing becuase the computer system did not have any limits on it - and no himan oversight intervened. It was a public relations nightmare for Uber (which is a disastor for Uber when it's still raising private capital).
Lawmakers got involved... Uber took notice and changed their surge practices to at least appear to be a better 'corporate citizen'.

 

[Michael - Cleveland]

This, exactly. Some clown price-gouging a COMMODITY such as milk or water from the safety of his store is a very different thing from a guy out in a storm risking his life and limb and property to provide a SERVICE for people who are unable or afraid to drive themselves.

yeah, not exactly... the driver has a choice to drive or not.
The person who has to get someplace to pick up her kids because the school closes early due to a blizzard or bomb threat...
or has to get to their grandmother because she's 'fallen down and can't get up' does not have a choice. In times of an emergency that effects eveyone in an area, and everyone in that area faces the same challenges, it's no longer by choice that they have to get where they are going. That's the purpose of having price gouging laws in place... but it's not a universally accepted position... it's local law.

 

[howo3579]

You are not forced to sell the water at an inflated cost and you are not forced to go out in a blizzard to gouge riders. Both gouging is voluntary on the part of the gouger.

I'm not sure if you understand. Yes you are not forced to qouge riders who by the way are also not forced to go out during a winter storm. Same holds true that no one forces people to get drunk on Saturday night and are too drunk to drive on their own (which i'd say that IS life endangering situation).
Providing a service other than medical or rescue reason should not be compared to selling essential commodity.