Hacker News Reader

Comment by robbyking | Hacker News Reader

I think it's important to remember that Uber users aren't loyal: if a ride isn't immediately available through Uber, they use Lyft; if Lyft isn't available, they go to the next app.

While I agree that the service is here to stay, the individual players are likely to shift.

View on HN

Based on what? I'm pretty loyal to Uber and use it because I know what I'm going to pay when I order the ride and because I'm not pressured to tip in the app. I guess if another app had both those features, the same ride availability, and cost the same I'd download and try it but currently none of them, that I've tried, do.

Yes but Uber will have to raise prices at some point. Will you be loyal then?

What do you base that on?

Here's a link from a comment a bit further down the thread: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/uber-true-cost-uh...

If you really want to go down the rabbit hole I'd recommend reading this series on nakedcapitalism. They're at nine parts now: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/?s=can+uber+ever+deliver

The naked capitalism series is written by a cab dispatch consultant, and reads almost like a paid hatchet job. Makes huge assumptions on data not in hand, and spins iffy conclusions with evident bias. At one point he claims Ubers costs can never be as low as cab dispatch because Uber is spending money expanding! That makes zero sense.

It's pretty clear Uber is in heavy investment mode, in market expansion as well as new businesses (uber-eats, self driving cars, etc), no one can know what their real costs per ride are unless they can break out that detail.

But it's also clear in their core business their cost to dispatch a ride should only be pennies.

Not only are Uber's riders not loyal, their drivers arent either. Lyft pays better, and now has less baggage in terms of existential issues.

If I made my living (or any sizeable chunk of $$) off rides, I'd honestly be looking at positioning Lyft first if it was possible.

Are uber rides ever not available?

Yes, "available" isn't probably the correct term, but what the author of that comment probably meant was stuff like "surging prices", "wait time", etc.

I have Uber in my phone, not Lyft.

And I have Lyft, not Uber. Your point?

That you are a an exception. I've never had a friend suggest Lyft, i'm not sure they even know what it is. They suggest uber all the time, and it's clear Uber has massively more market share.

And when the unsustainable "subsidized growth" period ends, Lyft will be the new word on the street. It's not exactly a high barrier to entry to hear about and install a new app in this day and age.

If your reasoning is entirely anecdata, there's really no point in you engaging in threads about where businesses are going, since you'd only ever have something to contribute after it already happened.

Why would Lyft have any better margins than Uber once the subsidized growth period is over?

If anything Uber will have better margins as they can distribute their fixed costs across more rides due to their global availability.

How many fixed costs are there? It's an app that sends location and messages, and does billing.

Apparently they both have thousands of employees and all in high-cost areas like SF, Seattle, and NYC.

Are you kidding? Having spent less.

Have you not been paying attention to Uber? They've been leaking funds like a sieve. Settlements, advertising, more employees, generally more aggressive and expensive tactics.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com