Uber drops fares for SF Taxi strike (opens in new tab)

Their drivers aren't taxi drivers in the sense that they don't drive medallion cabs. Medallions in major cities are a scarce, and outrageously expensive on secondary markets. Uber's interests here are aligned with their drivers, not traditional hackney carriage drivers.

Edit: I'm a dope. See child.

I'm not sure I understand what is cynical about it. The union represents a small number of taxi drivers and tries to improve their economic position at the expense of that of everybody else in the city. Moreover, basic price theory shows that the union is likely to hurt "the people" (i.e. everybody else) more than it helps the drivers, because they don't just increase the fare (which would be a pure transfer from customers to providers -- fair or not, it's not a net loss) but they also decrease the number of rides. If it weren't for people imagining that their own economic well-being was somehow wound up with the taxicab union, they'd be better off, and thus eroding public support for the taxicab union is a public service.

Sincerely, your friendly neighborhood economist.

Agreed. It's a great play either way in my opinion. I have a feeling Uber is going to get a lot of new customers tomorrow.

I left this comment at Uber:

What drives people crazy is insincerity . Why not to call spades, spades? Uber is in the business, an innovative and disrupting and customer-centric business. Your business is good, as it was carved by hard work of Uber team, and your livelihood and success depends on it.

So, why not to tell your customers that you are there for them, when they need you. You don't have to mention "we love taxi, unions, taxes and strikes" BS, or you can stand for your business, and say "f%$# taxi drivers, look at us, we are better, and here's our discount!"

Good luck with Uber, and, please, be sincere.

They're cynically acting as vultures, taking taxi business and eroding the leverage the taxi drivers get by striking. They know what they're doing. Hopefully it backfires on them.

Gouging may be good for a day (assuming there weren't other good transport options, which is simply untrue in SF), but it sucks as an acquisition method.

My experience with Uber was essentially: (1) "Hey, it sounds great, but that's a bit pricey. It can't really be worth it, can it?" (2) Decided to take someone to dinner via Uber because it was more impressive than a cab. (3) "Hey, this is actually pretty cool and totally worth it." (4) I'm now a repeat customer, even when traveling alone.

In my eyes, the key is that they need to find a step (2) for a more general case. Having a day where there are no cabs might be a small push, but having a day where there are no cabs and Uber is the price you would have paid anyway is absolutely killer.

Short answer: Long-term thinking is better for them than short-term thinking.

There is competition. People might take buses, or trollies, or BART. They could also walk, carpool or hitchhike.

Customer acquisition and advertisement.

It's not a long term market pricing strategy. It's a PR maneuver, and it's a damn smart one. There will be a ton of interest in this story, especially for the 'victims' of the strike - the actual customers. Uber is using this situation to gain awareness in the minds of their target market.

I hadn't heard of this business until now (admittedly I am not in the correct location). Now I have.

I hope they're advertising it enough that people who have never heard of Uber actually use them.

I know I'll never use their services now.

There have been several times recently where I was unable to use Uber because there were no Ubercabs available. I wonder if the demand will be too much for the system to handle... though presumably they've got all hands on deck tomorrow.

Fuck the unions. They've half bankrupted the city already and are well on their way to completing the job. Uber does not owe the medallion owners a damn thing, and neither do the people of SF. They've made out like bandits for years by keeping the market deliberately undersupplied and inflating prices. Now we have the most expensive cabs in the US and you can't hail one outside of downtown for love or money. It's hard to get cab in the downtown area. I have no sympathy.

So - are people just supposed to not leave their house because taxi drivers decide to not work on a given day?

This is San Francisco. Public transit sucks, and owning a car sucks(though less than public transit). Many people rely on taxis for their livelihood and they will be screwed over if they can't go places tomorrow, regardless of the reason why.

Weren't these the same taxicab drivers that were complaining that, even though Uber is a limousine service, they were encroaching on the taxicab market? Wasn't there a threat of jail time and fines from the city of San Francisco for every customer Uber picks up?

A few reasons.

Convenience:

* There's a very easy-to-use app to request a driver that shows the locations of nearby cars and an estimate on how long it'll take for a car to arrive. No need to try and flag down a cab or call a company.

* Payment is done via stored credit card info, so no need to worry about paying at the end of the ride. No need to worry about tip, either.

Comfort:

* The town car is far more comfortable than a normal taxi. Nice seats, ample leg room (and I'm a large guy), no ads, actually useful air conditioning.

* There are magazines to read, if that's your thing. Some of the cars seem to be wifi equipped (one of my drivers has told me that that car had wifi, at least).

Experience

* They definitely ride the line between limo and taxi, to the point where I can't help but laugh. The driver even hops out of the car to open the door for you!

Really, if you're in SF, it's worth checking out Uber at least once.

They get limo drivers to pick you up in a lincoln town car.

They are pretty open about the fact most fares are around 2x that of a normal taxi.

no offense, but how is it that you both did not realize that and care? didn't you first check the price?

That was my thought as well. Bay Area cabs are disgustingly overpriced already, especially with that slimy 50% surcharge they include if you go to, e.g. Palo Alto.

Anything that destroys the medallion mafia I support, however. Cabs aren't expensive because cabbies are living it up, but because of a class of parasitic rent-seekers who really need to be washed into the ocean.

Yeah, if they're going to be scabs, and undermine the leverage that striking creates, they should at least be up front about it.

Heh, they're opposing more cabs on the street? Well there's a surefire way to endear your cause to the people of the city...