Straight Edge
Member
Personal policies typically don't cover accidents when the vehicle is in use for livery since the risk of exposure is much higher.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Analyst: Uber loses $2 billion/year, customers only pay 41% of ride costs
- Thread starter aeolist
- Start date
- Status
Personal policies typically don't cover accidents when the vehicle is in use for livery since the risk of exposure is much higher.
Not if you are operating in a Business or Commercial capacity. Your basic Geico/Progressive policy is not going to cover you if you decide to run a clandestine taxi service.
StopMakingSense
Member
Regular personal insurance doesn't include coverage for using the vehicle as a taxi.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Nope, Uber covers driver insurance.
I don't see it working for them. For one I don't think self-driving cars are going to be as massively cheaper as they're hoping (who's gonna' clean them and service them? Those are costs they aren't paying now and will have to if they cut out the employee—ahem, I mean "independent contractor" they've got doing it now) and I don't think it's going to happen fast enough. They'll burn through their venture capital before then, but probably they'll have killed off cab companies along the way, so... scorched earth winners?
At least Uber actually has a product and real people using it while it's fleecing investors (hi Just Mayo!) As far as we know there's no actual fraud going on, just unsustainable business practices.
Tom Nook Sawyer
Member
Lyft is actually the one that you should be thanking since they were first to the ridesharing game; Uber copied them, then used really shady tactics to become the market leader
TheAbsolution
Member
If I get an Uber request and go offline for Lyft, why would my Lyft acceptance rate go down? I'm not receiving any rides there.
Lights and Waves
Member
ITT I learned that people actually use Lyft. Where I live, Lyft is like the off brand knock off version of Uber.
Where do you live
Maintenance
Member
Uber, Lyft, to me it doesn't matter. As long as I don't have to use taxis/cabs anymore, I'm fine.
Tom Nook Sawyer
Member
Because cars are expensive and require you have space for them
That's funny, because Lyft was first and Uber's the knockoff. I encourage everyone to use Lyft so that Uber can't monopolize the industry.
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.livescience.com/50841-future-of-driverless-cars.html?client=safari
I don't know, this UC Berkeley dude seems to think that solving the challenges to the point where driverless cars will be safe enough to drive completely autonomously is decades away.
There is a lot of unseen infrastructure involved in google's driverless cars and presumably Ubers. Theres a lot of upkeep to keep the super-detailed 3D maps up to date, and a lot of testing and development needed to get the software reliable enough to be certified for autonomous use using a certification that has yet to be developed. We accept that now because there are two dudes sitting in each car monitoring everything it does.
This is a lot farther away from mainstream than you think.
I just don't think the kind of person that buys a $30,000-$50,000 car is really going to like the idea that more than half the miles put on it are going to be put on it by someone else. Why spend that kind of money if you aren't even going to enjoy it half the time?
Nevermind that at the end of a hard day you're potentially going to be cleaning food/soda/vomit off the upholstery or dealing with stains and scents that may or may not ever come out.
TheAbsolution
Member
Note - only once you're in the car and on route to your destination. In between pings, you're not covered. And if your personal insurance finds out you've been driving for this work, they will cancel.
However, personal insurance companies are starting to add on rideshare optional coverage and it's fairly cheap IIRC, so there you go.
jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
Lyft is more popular in parts of Los Angeles now for sure
Perhaps, but that's what will make them affordable to people who can't afford them - the car can go work while they aren't using it, thus reducing the cost of ownership. And once the car switches into "Uber" mode, Uber will be covering the insurance for what happens. (Though to be fair, there's still some outstanding questions on who is liable for a computer driver's mistake... I think the vehicle owner will end up holding that insurability.... oh and insurance will end up ultimately being cheap as shit for self-driving cars because they won't get in accidents)
Cameras and hard drive space are cheap. They know who you are.
How many ubers / lyfts do you get in that are trashed? Yes there's a human driver in there, but do you trash them? No.
I'm totally down with it. If those miles pay for themselves, and pay for some of my miles, why wouldn't I be? And if Uber is paying for the clean-up fees by charging drivers, I don't need to do that either, the car can take itself to the cleaner.
And why do I need to "enjoy" a car I don't drive? It'll be a fundamental change in the way we approach vehicles. No longer controlling it yourself kind of takes the emotion out of it, at least for me (and I like and drive nice cars!)
HawksWinStanley
Member
Not to hijack the thread, but from what I've heard here in Chicago is that Uber is fantastic when it works. But if you ever have an issue with payment or anything that would require even a shred of customer service then Uber falls flat on its face and completely screws you over. I've had a couple friends and co-workers who have said it's completely unorganized and unprofessional when they've had to try to get a hold of anyone.
Pretty much reminded me of this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlYgQgQhvp4
So they pretty much have a 60% off deal 24/7? That's not going to last. I like Uber and I'd pay a little more to continue to use their service. Not double though.
The legislation for autonomous cars, especially for no body behind the wheel, is going to take at least 5 years to come to fruition so that's not even a factor here. Amazon re-invested their profits for about 20 years and made 0 money to achieve dominance. But they weren't losing money like this.
The legislation for autonomous cars, especially for no body behind the wheel, is going to take at least 5 years to come to fruition so that's not even a factor here. Amazon re-invested their profits for about 20 years and made 0 money to achieve dominance. But they weren't losing money like this.
What car dealership accepts "you say I will make up the difference when you give me the car"?
I can see them leasing you the car at a n inflated and probably predatory rate.
StopMakingSense
Member
Yeah there was an option last time I switched my coverage.
Stallion Dan
Member
Why shouldn't use Uber, kill the competition which has far greater quality of service, like Black Cabs, then rocket up the prices because they can.
You'd let random people bang out in your car and put an extra 10k miles or so in mileage on per month for $2K/year?
That wouldn't even cover the fuel costs.
Realistically, unless I have an old ass self driving beater, I'm not in for this for less than $50-75 per night, or $100+ on weekend nights. All of a sudden that looks a lot like hiring a driver.
That's what I meant, you have to get off one service to use the other to get around the restrictions.
Skellig Gra
Member
You are forgetting a lot of things. Say your automated car is out working while you are at work. What if it gets stuck in a traffic jams or gets in an accident on the way back to your office? Well I guess you'll be taking someone else Uber home. Plus why would you want other people to trash your car? Your car is going to be toast in a couple years.
jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
A. people already deal with predatory shit from dealerships, doesn't change anything.
B. it won't be "that you can't afford it" it'll be - you can afford it, but it's more than your budget, but you'll make it back, type of thing, eh?
A. assuming the car is secure (ie, cameras --- you break it / make a mess in it, you get charged, we know who you are, etc)
B. assuming the company using my car (whether that be Tesla, Uber or Lyft) is covering insurance as well as insurance for damage / messes / to the car
C. assuming that the cost of energy/fuel is accounted for in the cost of the ride (it has to be) as well as cost of wear on the car (mileage).
Then yes , of course. The base fare for users riding these things is gonna be mileage (energy/fuel + mileage cost on vehicle [wear and tear]) + insurance + Uber fee + owner profit.
So there will be profit, albeit small, in those drives, and it'll also be covering the cost of the car/fuel it's using.
I'll bite:
-I tell the car be back by 5:30pm so I can leave by 6:00. Car doesn't accept any rides that will take it outside the radius (or accepts rides getting it closer and back) - or just drives itself back at that point.
-Crazy circumstance - say an accident - my insurance covers rental cars, I'm sure it'll cover me using other ubers until my car is available again. Let's say crazy traffic. Fine, I can take an uber home, and my car can either sync up with me later and keep working (working it's way home) or somewhere in between. That'll hit my profits yes, but it's not necessarily gonna be a common thing.
In terms of other people trashing my car - who trashes fucking ubers? Plus I've got them on camera.
And yes, maybe I will go through the car faster than normal, but if the fares are paying for those miles on the car, than that isn't an issue.
A camera in a dimly lit car is not going to catch someone with a leaky ink pen or a drunk chick pissing her pants. Nobody is going to be watching the security camera feed anyhow. It's entirely possible that the car would come back to you soiled and it will be your responsibility to clean it up.....it's also possible that they might not be able to ascertain who caused damage. Is Uber going to re-upholster your car if there's a stain that won't come out, and no way to determine who made it?
jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
why does it only have to be one camera?
It's my car, I can review the footage later. Or perhaps for privacy reasons, only Uber can, but if there's an issue the last dump can go to Uber.
Take it a step further, you get into an automated Uber and there's puke inside. You use a button on the app and report the issue with the car. Now it can head off to get cleaned and dump the footage to Uber for inspection. And chances are, it was the last person in the car.
Uber or whoever has to solve these problems regardless of whether they buy their own cars, or use those procured by individuals.
Want to avoid drunks? Don't let your car go out late at night to pick people up - in the automated care future world, people will need rides during the day.
TheAbsolution
Member
Why, exactly would a drunk person admit to puking in your car and subject themselves to a cleaning fee?
And how would they determine who messed up the car?
And who the heck is gonna pay for all of these cameras? That shit ain't cheap.
This is basically analogous to Uber now though. You don't make a ton of cash as a driver.
Based on Uber's calculations, drivers make between $9-13 per hour after expenses.
How cheap realistically will people be willing to rent their car out for? Your still talking $5-10 per hour to make it seem worthwhile. You're filling up every other day, temporarily loaning Uber money in between payments. You have to vacuum your car every night. You're doing oil changes every month. And then once in a blue moon some asshole smokes cigarettes in your car on the way home... or whatever, and you have to deal with that.
It's just not going to be worth it for $10 or $12 per day.
jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
300-360 bucks a month profit won't be worth it? Really?
You're right, if I have to fill the car up, and vacuum it, and take it for oil changes, it will suck.
But I won't. The car will go on it's own and those things will be handled. I don't need to be there. Filling/cleaning/maintenance stations for self-driving cars will be a thing. Car will pull up, wireless communicate what it wants/needs, it'll be done and back on the road.
A. they won't - the NEXT rider will.
Cameras are cheap in comparison to rest of an automobile. Come on.
TheLaughingStock
Member
Companies, especially firms like Uber are more dependent on government than food-stamp recipients. They owe more to the legislative, adjudicative and administrative actions that the government provides than a welfare queen ever will.
Marketshare is king, and as long as Uber has a massive marketshare they'll be fine capital wise.
Also, lawsuits against governments are not going to be a yearly expenditure, so they should be fine the more legal hurdles they clear.
Also, lawsuits against governments are not going to be a yearly expenditure, so they should be fine the more legal hurdles they clear.
Muppet of a Man
Member
This is what happens when you focus solely on the communication paradigm aspect of a new industrial revolution without paying attention to the equally important (if not more important) physical/energy infrastructure paradigm aspect.
You can only do so much with advanced software if the hardware/network you're running it on is the limiting factor. That's where we are at in today's world. And the Silicon Valley companies don't seem to give a shit. They are stuck making better mouse traps to collect your data, advertise to you, and monopolies market ecosystems. This is what happens when greedy investors, business people, and financiers take the reigns away from the true scientists and engineers whose main pursuit is an understanding of nature and how to translate that into ground breaking technological invention and innovation.
You can only do so much with advanced software if the hardware/network you're running it on is the limiting factor. That's where we are at in today's world. And the Silicon Valley companies don't seem to give a shit. They are stuck making better mouse traps to collect your data, advertise to you, and monopolies market ecosystems. This is what happens when greedy investors, business people, and financiers take the reigns away from the true scientists and engineers whose main pursuit is an understanding of nature and how to translate that into ground breaking technological invention and innovation.
Just as planned.
I'm not sure why car ownership is the ideal I woul go for when it comes to automated cars. I would much rather it be integrated into public transport network and help reduce traffic overall. The would happen only happen in rich cities like Singapore or Dubai. Maybe Uber can market themselves as a platform that the city owned fleet of cars can use, but I'm not sure what advantage Uber would have over others in that senerio.
300-360 bucks in PROFIT, means I'm probably getting like 2 or 3 cents per mile. At 0.25/mile that's only 1440 miles. I'd expect my car to be driving at least 5-6x that if it's going all day. Im going to lose half that in maintenance costs and another half that on the fact I'm going to trade in a car with 200k miles in 4 years, and lose out in both trade in value and the taxes saved on the trade in value. Oh and I have to pay taxes on my ride income. It's penny smart but pound foolish.
That automated stuff will happen nowhere near soon enough to save Uber's ass. How did it take Tesla to set up 750 supercharger stations? 4-5 years?
Now imagine it needs to be able to service a couple hundred cars per day, and Uber is going to pay for it all? You're just trading one set of costs for another set.
While I do think Uber is trying to go for a fully automated taxi fleet. That must means they have to own those cars. That seems rather counter to their core philosophy of being a platform of ride sharing, therefore avoiding a plethora of additional costs and responsibilities of ownership. It means they will need an entire supply chain of automated car manufacturing to car maintenance. I wonder if ultimately it might just be cheaper for them to operate with real drivers?
I assumed that their end goal with automated cards wasn't to own the car themselves, but to have "drivers" who use their vehicle to get to work or aren't using it at home, and pay them a tiny fee.#
e.g. I drive my car to work, get out, my car then spends the day as an uber taxi, then I drive it home from work. Maybe overnight it can be doing the same thing. Uber pays me a small amount based on how much it is used, but no-where near what a driver makes, and everyone profits.
After all, most cars spend most of the day doing nothing. If you don't need a driver, there's no reason they shouldn't e on the road a lot of the time if the automation works.
e.g. I drive my car to work, get out, my car then spends the day as an uber taxi, then I drive it home from work. Maybe overnight it can be doing the same thing. Uber pays me a small amount based on how much it is used, but no-where near what a driver makes, and everyone profits.
After all, most cars spend most of the day doing nothing. If you don't need a driver, there's no reason they shouldn't e on the road a lot of the time if the automation works.
Extra Sauce
Member
What if instead of lending their time to Uber, people who own a self-driving car lease their car to Uber for a cut of the profit.
Fuck did I just make someone else billions of dollars.
Uber Cleaning Fees max out at $150. Are cool with someone permanently staining your seats, carpets, and/or ceiling when the most you will get out of it is a hundred fifty bucks?
Maybe so, but I don't think that the people buying early model automated cars really want to deal with that kind of nonsense.
Beer Monkey
Member
If Uber doubled their (current) price here in Cincinnati I'd pay it. It would still be (slightly) cheaper than a taxi, but at least Uber reliably shows up here. It's damned hard to get a cab in this town.
jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
no. 300-360 in profit is after mileage costs. Chances are that you - the owner will pay your service costs, but again, mileage and gas is factored into what you're getting on the car, that's the fixed cost. Uber is taking a percentage fee for linking you up to the their network
again, it'll have to be worth it - people already think it's worth it to be a driver for Uber and put that wear and tear on their car, while also staffing the car.
Eliminating the staffing of the car will make it even cheaper to do it, and require little energy from the person involved.
And super charger stations are NEW infrastructure. A gas station getting an ipad and having someone filling up the self driving cars and clean them according to the app and what it says isn't that infrastructure beyond that person's time and a tablet.
Not all of them, but some. And 150 pays for a pretty solid interior detailing.
They aren't trying to stay on top until automated cars come along they are trying to price everyone else out of the market with their deep pockets, once they've got the critical mass of customers and drivers it will be impossible for anyone else to break in at any price.
That's when the discounts will end and we'll be back to paying regular taxi fares.
That's when the discounts will end and we'll be back to paying regular taxi fares.
Nikodemos
Member
Why do you guys discuss self-driving regular cars? Self-driving cars only 'really' work if they're electric. Otherwise they're just a crappier, higher maintenance version of driven cars.
Uber evidently want to rent self-driving electric cars from owners and pay them whatever for the time.
How to pay for interior destruction? Spillage insurance.
Uber evidently want to rent self-driving electric cars from owners and pay them whatever for the time.
How to pay for interior destruction? Spillage insurance.
original idea pls don't steal
Palette Swap
Member
I'd argue there's a time scale somewhere in your proposition. Dominating a market through a business model where you sink money can be pretty effective, as long as you're getting a cash influx from outside sources. But this is all done with the perception that at some point in the future, you'll start making a buck on your own. Meanwhile, you're educating your market to prices that don't reflect your current costs.
If the disruption you're betting on arrives too late, or if someone else is first to market with their own disruption and efficiently leverage it, you can be in trouble. There's a thin line between a daring model and a Ponzi scheme.
You're getting paid for the ride, why would you need a tip on top of it?
The people currently driving for Uber are eating depreciation costs on like, a $15,000 Toyota. A self-driving car will cost 2-3 times as much so the price of wear and tear on the car is inflated.
Do the math on it. If you assume that the IRS is basically right and the cost of driving for a mile is similar to what you can deduct on taxes, I.e. $0.57 per mile, and then assume the car drives about 20 miles per hour, and you're renting it out for about 8 hours a day.
If you assume it costs Uber $5/day to have some dude clean it for your at the end of the shift, and then the driver actually needs to incrementally make a profit of $350/month, then the cost they would pay you is $13.48 per hour to use your car.
The back of the envelope economics just don't really make it look like there's a huge cost savings there, since Uber drivers already make like $15/HR before expenses.
- Status