Printable View
If there's already a thread about this, I apologize. What do you guys think of the people of Austin and their collective decision to drive Uber and Lyft out of town? I know it's those companies choice to leave but they did deliver the ultimatum, so everyone knew it could potentially happen.
I for one am angry as fuck and don't understand why we thought we needed to over regulate such a simple concept. Fuck everyone!
Uber is the bully (We Don't Need No Steenkin' Regulations) while Lyft is content to ride Uber's wake.
Uber and Lyft will be back in Austin, there will be fewer drivers due to the regulatory hassles, which means the drivers who do go through the fingerprinting, whatever will be very happily busy as hell.
Austin was already a vastly superior market for rideshare drivers compared to podunk SA's rideshare market.
The real problem was the puny turnout by Uber and Lyft riders, was just about as ridiculous a turnout as SA muni elections.
Uber Preparing to Leave Houston if City Keeps Existing Rules
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/04...ting-regulati/
The people's choice. Welcome to a democracy where the people decided they wanted qualified drivers. They fingerprint so many public servants now. Ya think teachers need to be fingerprinted? The void will eventually be filled. As a frequent user of both Uber and Lyft due to travel I personally don't care. But I know a lot of women in Austin who do.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsmith
More overreach disguised as concern for the public's safety against an imaginary boogeyman, IMO.
Doctors have to be fingerprinted, but I do worry about over-regulation continuing to stagnant the economy.
bullshit, there aren't enough regulations, and the ones in place aren't enforced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pelicans78
the economy is stagnant, 40M+ on public assistance, because BigCorp/1% have sucked $Ts out of circulation into the BigFinance casino, leaving consumers with much less to spend in the 70% consumer economy.
"over regulation" is one the HUGE PROPAGANDA LIES from the VRWC that wants to be free of all regs so they rape, pillage, loot people and planet "legally"
btw, nearly all the comments in the uber drivers forum, Austin section, are against Uber and for Austin. Uber gets no sympathy and solidarity from the drivers.
Um, I wouldn't peg you for being against government regulation of business quality. Personally, I think it's a great idea to regulate this shit more, especially in a huge (physically) city that has poor public transportation and an active social scene. In fact, I'm surprised they don't have some type of public version of this. Seems like a way to accomplish everyone's goals (except the companies) until they can get something permanent worked out. That's even more true if Uber and Lyft keep to their pledge to stay out of the city. If Austin showed a public option is viable, then they could set a huge precedent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurminator
I just think the business quality aspect is built into the functionality. Drivers are reviewed and rated. I'd welcome a public option as well, if it can compete.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
spent $8-10M and lost. voters didn't want em to write their own rules.Quote:
Originally Posted by pgardn
good riddance to smelly garbage. opportunity for someone else.
hard to believe they'll bail on Austin more than temporarily
See my link above. Uber has beens working under Houston's strict rules, but is now threatening to leave.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
I agree that Uber and Lyft, both bother to have offices in Austin, will not stay out of such an ideal (youngish, techy, educated, relatively high per capita income) and lucrative market, but now that the Austin govt has won, Austin govt ain't gonna back down. Houston didn't.
If will take more than a few TX cities (out of the 100s, or 1000s of other permissive cities) kicking them out for Uber and Lyft to back down.
The challenge for Lyft/Uber from TX cities is to prevent other cities from imposing the same restrictions.
"Only two cities require fingerprint checks for ride-hailing drivers -- Houston and New York City -- but there’s a push to do so in others, including Atlanta, Boston, Los Angeles and San Francisco."
http://www.governing.com/topics/publ...rprinting.html
Assuming cities start imposed fingerprinting, FBI b/g checks, I see that as a big plus for the drivers who pass the b/g checks.
Fewer drivers, and some cities are over-supplied, means less dead time and more rides. For riders, it will probably mean longer wait times, which ruthless Uber may try to compensate for by reducing rates even further, already way way below taxi rates, knocking back drivers' income.
some charts, and how ruthlessly Uber has screwed drivers by reducing fares, forcing Lyft to follow:
"Fernando Chiara, a 26-year-old working full time in the insurance industry in Los Angeles, began driving nights and weekends for Uber to make extra cash in the summer of 2013. At the time, he said, he regularly made $700 to $900 a week, before expenses, working 20 to 30 hours.
“It was great; there were not a lot of fares, but the prices were a lot higher, and that compensated,” said Chiara, who gave rides in his Toyota RAV4. As Uber has done in many cities, it then began to lower fares and the rate drivers earn per mile.
“A fare that used to be 40 bucks started to be 30 bucks, then 28 bucks and 25 bucks,” he said.
“Now you can do the same fare in 15 to 16 dollars. For me, it’s not worth it for that.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...king%E2%80%8B/
Can't find it now, but one analyst figured that Uber was making about $0.19/ride in USA.
I wonder how much the cab drivers spent to win? And those pesky tow truck operators whose bread and butter are the folks Uber/Lyft are separating from their vehicles? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Bingo. Cab companies can't stand Uber/Lyft. The fact is Uber/Lyft serves a niche that cabs don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsmaalox
The turnout was very low. The niche is riders who want to pay 50% or less of what taxis charge. Pretty big niche.Quote:
Originally Posted by tlongII
Price-leader Uber's fares are so low they easily beat taxis, so their screw-the-drivers low-fare pricing strategy is to create and sustain new riders, while keeping Lyft's income down (lyft had to cut their fares by 20% in early April to compete).
I don't care the politics, I don't care about the government, I don't care about Uber's feelings. I just know that the only "winner" in this is the 475 taxi's that currently serve a city of a million fucking people....there's not enough fucking cabs.
I also care that I no longer will be able to use Uber in Austin, which I absolutely loved using.
No when the DUI numbers go up, as well as drinking related vehicle crashes increase, all those that voted for this thing can celebrate that they helped kill someone!
Have DUI incidents declined in Austin since Uber + Lyft arrived? and they were identified as contributing?Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsmith
only 55K voters in Prop 1 vote, in a city of 900K, probably less than a 10% turnout.
Uber/Lyft rates vary with demand. As demand increases, so do their rates. The niche they fill is related to rapid response time.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
Uber surges have been greatly reduced. Surge fares up to 9x non-surge fares REALLY pissed off riders. My friend in Austin rarely see surge zones above 2x.Quote:
Originally Posted by tlongII
The consensus among drivers is that you don't go chasing into a surge zone, because when, or before, you get there
a) the surge zone is gone or
b) you don't get a rider.
The almost constant surge zone in SA in the east side at night, and that's for only a surge rate of 2x or less. Uber tries to lure drivers into a high crime area at night. Drivers mostly refuse.
My Austin rideshare friend just emailed me that his investigation using Uber rider app and Lyft in rider mode to move around his pickup points outside of Austin city limits shows an abundance of uber and lift drivers outside of Austin.
http://therideshareguy.com/wp-conten...troturfing.png
Credit: Austin Monitor
ride your bike
Good point. Is public safety really better served by the reduction of easy options for getting home without driving?Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsmith
is public safety increased by rideshare?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurminator
are drunk people driving themselves home because taxis are too expensive, but rideshare isn't?
The bigger question is why TX and US alcohol limits are so high compared to other countries where BigAlcohol doesn't make the law.
The problem with DWI is not the ,08 limit. Even an idiot like Boutons should be able to function at .08. Its the idiots going way over and driving.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
There's goes fun fellatin TX Macho Man with his "I'm a TX he-man. I can handle my liquor. I can drive 0.08 perfectly, proving I'm a Macho Man!"Quote:
Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy
LOTS of studies show impairment at various levels of BAC, esp the huge diff between 0.05 and 0.08, eg:
http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafet...factsheet.html
People wrecking, killing with 1.0+ doesn't mean 0.08 is safe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_...law_by_country
http://www.drinkdriving.org/worldwid...ing_limits.php
BigAlcohol, like typical BigCorp, blocks any attempts to lower to 0.05 which is the level in other industrial countries. BigAlcohol also blocks mj liberalization (eg, California).
TX has some pretty nasty DUI laws, but are sentences mandatory?
https://www.edgarsnyder.com/drunk-dr...aws/texas.html
0.08 is a joke. Thanks, BigAlcohol!
and I bet TX auto dealers assoc also chip in to keep 0.08 legal and all those car repairs and car sales going.
DUI incidents have declined in Austin since Uber and Lyft came to town. They've mentioned it on the news several times over the past couple days. I'm certain of you google it you can find the information easily.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
Regarding voter turnout, I heard 17%....which really isn't that bad considering it was on a Saturday and the general population is lazy as fuck.
Public Safety is indeed increased becaus of ride sharing.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
It's not that taxi's are too expensive, it's that there are only 475 of them in Austin. And also they stink. Uber is nicer, cheaper, more convenient, and the app kicks ass.
And finally, that may be the bigger question indeed, but it's totally irrelevant to this conversation. And also, .08 isn't that high bruh.
All other industrial countries disagree. But America, owned and operated by BigCorp, knows better, "bruh".Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsmith
do you still wanna fight? and my mother, as you wanted, is still dead
Boutons, I moved to Texas from colorado about 13 years ago. I was a young man when I moved here. I fucking hated rednecks. Absolutely despised them. To this day I'm not a very big fan but a few of them have grown on me. For the most part though, I can't stand them still. Having said that, the quote above, written by you, makes you sound like the largest gaping vagina on the planet. Sac up man and quit being such a pussy. Get off your computer for five minutes and go do something about all the shit you constantly complain about on here. But most importantly, be a fucking man for once in your life. Or at least act like it....fuck!Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
Lol....I was much younger back then Boutons but if you're inviting me, sure, I guess. I also don't think I ever said I wanted to fight but if you say so.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
Also, sorry about your mom bruh.
I'd be interested to see a chart detailing number of roadway accidents caused at each level of intoxication. Couldn't find anything on Google in a quick search.
Theoretically we could lower the BAC limit as far as we want but I'm not sure it would make much difference in road safety.
Boutons just wants to put more minorities in jail on DWI's. Fucking racist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurminator
I know Uber will be missed by my dd. She used it so much - interviews, dental appt, vision appt, pick up glasses - just so convenient. And I'm not worried about her (transportation-wise) in Mountain View this summer.
I suspect Uber is going to have to relent on the issue. The same type of ordinance is getting passed all over the country. It's not really that big a burden to screen the drivers.
Something's going to have to give to keep our cells full when marijuana is legal.Quote:
Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy
Uber outspent the opposition 70 to 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsmaalox
...
in all likelihood, Texas will trump the Uber-initiated referendum:
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/05...voters-have-f/
Republicans going for big-government approaches per par. I'm actually a big fan of bigger government for the sake of consistency, but if the major cities are going to vote one way, it makes little sense to vote against them. And I don't get how people can complain about bathroom safety while also blowing off automobile safety.
I don't agree with the Austin voters but I agree even less with the state's continued disregard for local authority over business in their municipalities. This looks a lot like Abbott squashing fracking bans.
Repugs are autocrats, they love the unConstitutional "unitary executive", the "strong man" machism, are genetically undemocratic, refuse to compromise, refuse to admit even the legitimacy of non-Repugs, Our Way or The Highway. Just total assholes on every count.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurminator