Slashdot Mirror
Not All Uber Drivers Like Surge Pricing, Either
CNET reports that Uber's practice of surge pricing, which sometimes raises the ire of passengers, isn't universally acclaimed by the company's drivers, either. "[M]ost Uber riders," according the the linked article, "despise surge pricing," though it's not clear quite how that "most" is arrived at. From the piece: They've complained about running up bills totaling hundreds of dollars, and have criticized the company for using surge pricing during emergencies, like Hurricane Sandy and the Sydney hostage crisis. The San Francisco Better Business Bureau gave Uber the grade of an F because of complaints related to surge pricing. And New York lawmakers have even proposed legislation to put limits on how high fares can go. Now some drivers, like [San Francisco Uber driver Peter] Ashlock, are also having second thoughts on surge pricing."
On the other hand, what system would you propose to better reward drivers for working at high-demand times?
> having a fucking LOTTERY of who gets the only cab available.
I don't get the hate for this approach. Perhaps some education is in order. When there aren't enough resources to go around, there are different ways to perform allocation. Each method has different moral implications. For example, a lottery implies equality between all people and is best used for resources that are perceived as utilitarian or necessary. Fair market pricing implies that the more money you have, the more important you are and is best used for resources that are perceived as a luxury. Of course this can be argued about all day, but it's not shocking that some people would find fair-market pricing to be inherently unfair.
What if there isn't enough food or medicine to go around? Is a lottery the best approach? Or the fair market? Or perhaps rationing? Should a person with more money be able to redirect resources to themselves, even if it is not as important to their survival as someone who has less money? Transportation can be vital to maintaining a job or caring for kids - it can also be a luxury. I can see an argument either way.
Surge pricing is Good, but there are also valid laws against Price Gouging during and before an emergency.
Uber just needs to pay attention and modify it's surge pricing accordingly, so as not to cross the line between "economic incentive to work instead of fleeing with your family" and "gouging during that emergency".
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
You want to regulate pricing, so that you have a corrupt cartel which keeps competition limited and prices high?
Because that's what we had before Uber came around.
We don't need regulated pricing, we need competition. And that's what we have with Uber and Lyft (who compete against each other). What we need is a few more services like those, and then several apps which do for them what PadMapper does for the rental market, and aggregates them and lets you quickly find out which service will give you the best combination of fare price and convenience (e.g., a cheaper fare probably isn't worth it if you have to wait an hour to get picked up).
All this whining about surge pricing is silly. The pricing is not a surprise: Uber's app tells you before you ride how much it's going to cost. If the price is too high, don't buy it. Most of the time, Uber rides are far cheaper than regular cabs, and you get to ride in a much nicer vehicle. Without surge pricing, drivers wouldn't bother driving during certain times.
If humans with our puny brains can't see that it still saves more money on average as it is, average it out just a little bit.
You expect *way* too much from humans. Way, way, way too much.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
I've only used Uber a few times, but every time I used it, I was given an estimate of the cost beforehand. The pricing isn't a surprise.
Now of course, if you're in a bind and need a ride NOW, and surge pricing is in effect, you may have little alternative, but that's what you get for making yourself dependent on a for-profit company: when they have you locked in, they screw you over. We see this in the software world all the time, where the term "lock-in" is common. I don't think I need to elaborate on it in this forum. The same principle applies with Uber: if you don't want to get screwed, don't make yourself dependent on a for-profit company. It's very simple. Either get your own car, use public transit, or move to someplace where you aren't dependent on them.
People will complain about anything more expensive than the absolute cheapest they've ever seen it. They're spoiled and entitled. Also, some people can't sleep at night thinking that someone, somewhere might be making a profit on something.
The real problem is that so many people take the complaining seriously without asking the complainers to justify it with rational arguments and propose a better alternative.
"Uber just needs to pay attention and modify it's surge pricing accordingly, so as not to cross the line between "economic incentive to work instead of fleeing with your family" and "gouging during that emergency"."
You, and everyone else, would do well to realize that those are the exact same thing.
I, fr one, would rather pay $20/gallon of gas during a power outage to keep my generator, and thus my refrigerator and freezer running, than not have any gas at all. In addition, if I would get thrown in jail for charging too much money, I might actually load up the car with bottled water and other vital supplies and go sell it in disaster areas. But I can't, so the people have to rely on things they shouldn't have to rely on, like governments and charity. As it is, I'm content to sit on my ass and watch such disasters unfold without lifting a finger. ANd before you start bitching at me for being $HUMANCHARACTERISTIC, think about what YOU do during a disaster. What did YOU do during Katrina? Or Rita? Oh right, fucking nothing.
You do understand that mentality comes from the world doing its best to suck out your wealth at every turn, right? What you call spoiled and entitled I call defensive and savvy.
I don't call it reasoned or thoughtful. It an understandable emotional reaction though.
Its a hard check on greed.
It IS greed. To want something for nothing, or to want something for below the cost of providing it is greedy. It may also be a reaction to perceptions of others' greed, but that doesn't make it any less self-serving.
ANd before you start bitching at me for being $HUMANCHARACTERISTIC, think about what YOU do during a disaster. What did YOU do during Katrina? Or Rita? Oh right, fucking nothing.
Actually, at the time I worked in Dallas for a local helicopter flight school. We took our Bell 206 Jetranger and our Robinson R-44 helicopters and loaded up with supplies and flew down there. We spent all day picking up people off rooftops and other locations that were trapped by water and flew them to safety and didn't charge a penny for it, the owner ate the cost.
Why?
Because that is what decent people do in times of need.
This regulation that sets pricing has the effect of normalizing prices across market volatility. Surge pricing indicates what happens when that normalizing is gone and one is literally playing the market to buy one's ride.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
How would you like it if your grocery store had "surge pricing"? Let's double your grocery bill just because you are shopping at the same time as a lot of your peers.
Or how about you doctor doing " surge pricing", so you pay double during flu season because there are a lot of others trying to see a doctor too.
Yeah, "surge pricing" doesn't look so good now does it? Perhaps Uber should do what every other fucking business does when they get a ton of customers: expand, hire more staff, and *shock* lower prices instead of gouge.