"Uber passengers were paying only 41% of the actual cost of their trips"
That's worse than I had imagined, assuming the analysis is correct.
That's worse than I had imagined, assuming the analysis is correct.
The experience of Austin, TX, where Uber and Lyft pulled out rather than fingerprint their drivers is indicative. Within weeks, there were seven companies replacing Uber. It just isn't that hard to replace Uber.[2] When Uber goes under, it will be a speed bump, not a disaster.
Amazon lost money for a long time, but they were building infrastructure - huge warehouses and giant data centers. That's ordinary industrial growth, like building a steel mill. Now that's paying off. What physical assets does Uber have? They don't even own the cars.
[1] http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/why-is-uber-raising-s... [2] http://www.512tech.com/technology/tested-seven-austin-post-u...
Uber is starting to look like the Webvan of transportation.
So a passenger could pay $30 for a $60 ride. It's not practical since you'd be losing the increased rates and still having to drive, netting like $10/hour.
There are GPS hacks that can supposedly spoof your rides though.
At some times, the rate for a ride is less than the driver payout as Uber subsidises rides from time to time.
Another schemes are when people exploit "first ride free" and referral bonuses.
All of this refers to rather casual cheating, done by non-technically literate people to offset the cost of their own driving or supplementing their normal income from Ubering.
People who do Uber frauding professionally are in the different league. These are the guys whom engx is referring.