Slashdot Mirror
A New Video Shows Uber CEO Travis Kalanick Arguing With a Driver Over Fares (bloomberg.com)
A new video published by Bloomberg shows Uber CEO Travis Kalanick arguing with an Uber driver over fares. It all started when one of Kalanick's "companions" appears to say that she's heard that Uber is having a hard year. Bloomberg reports: That pleasant conversation between Kalanick and his friends in the back of an Uber Black? It devolved into a heated argument over Uber's fares between the CEO and his driver, Fawzi Kamel, who then turned over a dashboard recording of the conversation to Bloomberg. Kamel, 37, has been driving for Uber since 2011 and wants to draw attention to the plight of Uber drivers. The video shows off Kalanick's pugnacious personality and short temper, which may cause some investors to question whether he has the disposition to lead a $69 billion company with a footprint that spans the globe. Uber declined to comment on the video. Here's part of the conversation:
Travis Kalanick: "So we are reducing the number of black cars in the next few months."
Fawzi Kamel: "It's good."
Kalanick: "You probably saw some email."
Kamel: "I saw the email [says] it starts in May. But you're raising the standards and dropping the prices."
Kalanick: "We're not dropping the prices on black."
Kamel: "But in general."
Kalanick: "In general but we have competitors. Otherwise we'd be out of business."
Kamel: "Competitors? You had the business model in your hands you could have the prices you want but you choose to buy everybody a ride."
You can read the transcript of the conversation here via Recode.
UPDATE 2/28/17: Uber CEO Travis Kalanick has issued "a profound apology."
Travis Kalanick: "So we are reducing the number of black cars in the next few months."
Fawzi Kamel: "It's good."
Kalanick: "You probably saw some email."
Kamel: "I saw the email [says] it starts in May. But you're raising the standards and dropping the prices."
Kalanick: "We're not dropping the prices on black."
Kamel: "But in general."
Kalanick: "In general but we have competitors. Otherwise we'd be out of business."
Kamel: "Competitors? You had the business model in your hands you could have the prices you want but you choose to buy everybody a ride."
You can read the transcript of the conversation here via Recode.
UPDATE 2/28/17: Uber CEO Travis Kalanick has issued "a profound apology."
Hit job?! The media barely has time to cover all the crappy things Uber does because there are so damn many of them!
What?! So this shows the CEO is an A-hole?! Never could have known that before!
Uber’s 10 Worst Actions—Threats, Lies, Sexism & Shady Business Deals
http://observer.com/2016/02/ub... [observer.com]
Anticompetitive and dishonest business practices against rivals.
Using their geolocation data to harassing and personally threaten journalists who didn't cover them favorably.
Exploiting workers, not only as contractors but by enticing them to enter into exploitative financial agreements.
Rampant corporate sexism and misogyn from the CEO on down.
Gees, no, where it the money in that. The goal is to create the illusion of profitability to pump and dump in an IPO and wander off a scamming billionaire. This with the full backing of the psychopathic banskters who control the US government.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
The only thing he's sorry about is the fact he got CAUGHT. If there was no video, he certainly would NOT feel "ashamed", and the need to "grow up", and that driver would probably be finished. But his bitch-ass got caught, now he's sorry. What a douche.
They are indentured. As a UberBlack driver, he has a lease with Uber. That's the $97,000 he's talking about.
Slightly over a month ago they were fined by the FTC for lying about the money drivers earn, lying about vehicle financing rates, lying about lease terms. Seeing a pattern here?
Pretty much every corporation.
So, the old "everybody does it" defense. That is baloney. Every big company has some unethical employees, but many companies have a basic culture of ethical responsibility. Uber is far worse than average, and the problem starts at the top. Travis Kalanick makes even Larry Ellison seem like a nice guy.
Disclaimer: I didn't watch the video.
The driver is 100% right. Uber has set the fares so low, it is very hard to break even, much less make money. Under $3 to carry someone across town is not paying for anything. It's bullshit.
At the same time, they are onboarding hundreds of new drivers every single week in my city. So they have tons of drivers competing with tons of drivers and everybody is losing money on damn pool rides. The worst thing is these new drivers are lured in with Uber fuel cards and Uber car leases they can get, but the fact is, you have to pay Uber for all that shit first before you make a dime. So if you lease a car from them, you are in the hole for $200 or more a week, before you turn the key and burn gas and your time.
When I drove for Uber, it was very rare that I made $200 a week working 8 hours a day. The money wasn't there, once pool went live. So if I leased a car from Uber, I would owe my soul to the company store into infinity and not make a dime. My lawyer does bankruptcies and she says she sees tons of clueless Uber drivers who got into these leases promised a way to make them pay and then they find out there is NO way to make the lease payment and keep the car fueled, much less make any take home money.
As long as clueless new drivers show up with dollar signs in their eyes, Uber will be happy to put them on the roads and ensure neither the existing drivers nor the new ones make anything.
This will eventually fix the low fare issues as drivers just quit and new ones stop signing up. But then Uber will probably be entirely irrelevant anyway.
Right now, Uber still sends me messages begging me to hit the road and drive. Guarantees of $20-40 an hour for making ONE trip per given hour. All sorts of promotions promising to double my earnings if I recruit someone else to drive. Who pays for this? Investor cash. Watch it burnnnnn.
I would be tempted to drive for $20 to $40 an hour and make that one required trip, but I hate Uber so much at this point I don't give a shit. I am DONE driving for them. They can ripoff somebody else.
Sig for hire.
Isn't Uber "Over" in German anyway? Kinda prophetic.
In English, "Over" can mean "above" or it can mean "finished". The German word "Uber" shares only the first meaning, but it can also mean "superior".
These sorts of unshared dual meanings are one of the things that makes machine translation difficult. For instance, in Chinese the word "kai" can mean "open" and it can also mean "turn on". So when a native Chinese speaker is learning English, they will sometimes ask someone to "open the light". This can be especially confusing since the English phrase "close the switch" when properly translated to Chinese is "open the switch".
This email sounds sincere, which is, indeed, a good sign.
Yes, it does indeed sound sincere. The PR consultant that wrote it deserves every dollar he was paid.
....well, yeah?
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Yeah this is starting to look like a hit job. An 'uber did X' story every 2-3 days. Anyone willing to dig and see the connections? Too lazy myself to do it. But it smells 'odd' and put on.
Until recently almost all the Uber stories were presented as "cool disruptive Uber blocked by boring old laws yet again". This is just part of a correction to the overwhelmingly gushing treatment Uber have had here up to now.
And, of course, I must be a shill for the legendary and all-powerful Taxi Cartel for daring to criticise Uber.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Averted WWIII? Now that is a stupid and wholly incorrect way to put it, let me put the main points down and if you are interested to some reading:
. The US placed nuclear missiles close to the USSR border on the territory of an ally.
. The soviets didn't like that. not. one. bit.
. So they arranged to place their missiles on the territory of one of their allies, close to the USA border.
. They built missile bases on Cuba.
. They began transporting missiles to those bases.
. The US freaks out and want to sink ships legally sailing on international waters, bomb Cuba and a lot of other shit.
. This is reported in media as if the USSR want to start a war (they didn't) and it is an incredible provocation (doing something that the US already had in place).
. After a while the US secretly agrees to withdraw their missiles from the USSR border and the USSR says "okay, that's what we wanted in the first place" and turns their ships around.
. This is painted as a win for the WESTERN WORLD against the eeeevil COMMUNIST CONSPIRACY and that the USSR weakened when shown the STRENGTH of the FREE WORLD. In reality the US fucked up and then tried to either start a war or do serious international crimes against other states.
The ones that could have caused WWIII was the USA leadership and military. Anybody sane would realize that trying to make decapitation strikes possible against the enemy in a MAD world is... well, mad. That the USSR wouldn't try to change that state by doing something similar is beyond stupid.
> The US freaks out and want to sink ships legally sailing on international waters, bomb Cuba and a lot of other shit. ...
> The ones that could have caused WWIII was the USA leadership and military.
Absolutely, there were high-ranking leaders, military, intelligence, and civilian leaders, who very much wanted to escalate the situation. Air strikes on Cuba were favored by many of Kennedy's advisors. My understanding, both from open sources and personal conversations with my uncle, an air force colonel who was involved, is that the people who wanted to escalate the situation were stopped by President Kennedy, with the advice of his brother. Another president may well have allowed the Pentagon to escalate the situation. A particularly timid president might have allowed the missiles to stay. According to my uncle, and many people who have studied the situation, President Kennedy went against the advice of almost everyone (other than his brother) by ordering them (in no uncertain terms) not to bomb or otherwise escalate the situation. Kruschev's foreign minister, Andrei Gromyko, agrees with the general consensus that Kennedy amd his ambassador also expertly manipulated Kruschev into a situation where he had to remove the missiles and couldn't demand much in return. That's agreed by both Soviet and American leaders involved (though Kruschev himself didn't admit he was outfoxed).