Anecdotally, among my friends I also see Lyft becoming the default, and sometimes price-checking with Uber. If Waymo or whoever came out tomorrow with a cheaper/safer driverless car, I'd just as likely drop Lyft in a heartbeat.
I switched over to only using Lyft, but like the OP states, if Waymo came out tomorrow I'd probably switch to that.
Thus the drivers won't care which app is running, since they will be making (more or less) the same $$$$$. All they need it to do is ensure they are driving people around/keeping busy, and if one company is bleeding customers, they will simple start 'the other app' and continue driving.
I may be oversimplifying the above, but it's the general idea/practice.
As Uber Probes Sexual Harassment At Its Offices, It Overlooks Hundreds Of Thousands Of Female Drivers
This goes for other markets as well, it's just generally hard to get good information.
If you’re in a market where they operate, I can heartily recommend it.
On Lyft in the same cities, I always get a much more oddball mix of vehicles, with much more diverse conversation from the driver. I've had biotech founders looking to recruit and make beer money pick me up on Lyft rides going from the South Bay to the SF in the Bay Area, real estate agents and recruiters drive me in many cities, and many others that are clearly doing Lyft as a side gig rather than a profession. On the downside, this usually means that they're less aggressive drivers in terms of optimizing for speed and route efficiency, but it can make for a more interesting ride and better chitchat along the way.
As a result, I almost always default to Lyft unless there's a huge price spread in Uber's favor.
Uber drivers who do a certain number of hours or rides per day/week often get bonuses, so they'd have to forego these bonuses to split time with Lyft.
On the rider side, they're pulling a play from the airline playbook, with their version of frequent flier miles and status: https://techcrunch.com/2018/11/14/uber-rewards/
- Uber prime
- Uber points
They also don't have a direct competitor/s like Uber. I think the better comparison would be the loyalty programs from United or American.
[1] https://www.cnet.com/how-to/amazon-prime-20-benefits-every-m...
Southwest and Alaska are a different story; they're still trying to compete. But the majors are so terrible I feel the opposite of loyalty toward them.
I started using Uber because it was worth paying more to not deal with taxis. Now Uber is the cheap, bad option. I really wish there was a “middle of market” ridesharing service. Cheaper than a black car from whatever service, but still with good quality control. Uber used to be that but isn’t anymore. Lyft is kind of that but isn’t quite there.
Anyway, it feels like Uber is trading goodwill for volume. I only use it for free rides with Amex platinum or when I need a car ASAP and no taxis are available. Otherwise I use Lyft (and sometimes Lyft is cheaper anyway). It feels like Uber is shorting quality control and trading long-term profitablility for short-term volume with more, cheaper drivers.
Since my impression is a large population of drivers drive for both I don't think you would find different behavior in Uber or Lyft. A dickhead is doing to be a dickhead whether driving for Uber or Lyft right?
At the end of the day they're a layer on top of a taxi business. Sure this is useful in some way but like Airbnb or weworks or all these other companies that just throw one layer of service over the actual business I don't understand why they are treated like high tech companies.
The most extreme example was possibly moviepass which was basically just a subsidy from investors to movie goers.
But driverless cars change that dynamic. Now you need to own a fleet. Well, guess what: there are already businesses like this! They are called car rental companies. Last time I checked, they were shitty, low margin businesses.
Their rides are both VC subsidized and unsustainable. They both punish customer loyalty. My wife and I rotate hiring rideshares. If one of us books too many, one person's fare becomes much costlier than the other. They're both godsends when initially disrupting markets (our Egyptian Uber driver definitely took a lot of personal risks engaging in shouting matches against street touts who were throwing themselves at the car and ready to drag us out so we spend our money at their shops) but once they reach semi-duopoly status in mature markets like the Bay Area, more and more crappy things happen. Things like drivers canceling you after 10 minutes or people using GPS spoofers to pick up rides while not even in the same county. And you clearly see both companies, over the years, trying to hide ways to get problems resolved behind more and more layers of circular forms labyrinths.
I've been taking more traditional taxies to keep the balance of power competitive (and because it's sometimes less frustrating).
Why? I mean, most taxi cab companies have rideshare apps. They were a first mover and showed us the way, but they burned a ton of cash and did some really shitty things. Heck, they've killed more than a few people.
No different than, say, consumer rental companies like Airbnb.
As a rider, there's no "cost" to having both apps, so I'll just check both.
Similarly, as a driver, I'll just sit with both apps open and see which one I get a rider on.
They did (well, it at least has multiple Uber and Lyft services, and I don't know that they get a kickback); the app is called “Google Maps”.
I guess the plan for Uber was always to use low prices to win the market and jack them back up later. Price comparison would interfere with this plan.
Sure, if you never left your country. I certainly didn’t want to register to Italy’s official taxi app - don’t wanna trust them my CC nor my life to horrible service I’ve received (same price as Uber, horrible car)
If, for example, HomeAway got a similar number of rentals to Airbnb (though in this particular case, it hasn't), then both markets could easily co-exist.
Creating C2C marketplaces, however, is not an easy task.
(When it comes to dodgey companies CabCharge is pretty terrible)
[1] http://fortune.com/2017/12/05/lyft-gets-1-5-billion-funding-...
Edit: I stand corrected. Their UI mislead me because for airport rides the price is only shown after you hit a Confirm button, but that does not order the car as I thought, only takes you to the next screen.
Inflammable means flammable??? What a country!
Interestingly, it only uses the “Confirm” label for airports. Other destinations say “Set Destination” which is about eight thousand times more clear.
They should really think about switching it to 'Confirm route' or 'location'.. something that ensures me I'm not ordering it yet. Maybe an arrow where I can swipe and see the next step? Or some visual cue that there are more steps ahead?
There was no confirm button Or anything else hiding prices.
(This was on iOS)
At the end of the day, Pepsi and Coca-Cola sells you sugar water. McDonald's and Burger King get the same meat form the same vendor trucks. You charge a credit card whether Visa or MasterCard.
The point isn't who brings you the convenience, it's that you have convenience at all.
Uber/Lyft has commoditized driving to a product sold at ~$2/mile. That's why this week they both launched loyalty programs, back to back.
And from there they'll just keep trying to add more value bit by bit. Not surprised at all if in 10 yrs Uber doesn't have cab hailing anymore, but you ended up on an Uber flight to Shanghai.
Alexa can't even turn on my living room lights more than 50% percent of the time. I'm not holding my breath for driverless cars coming any time soon (if ever).
No, they don't. They have their own suppliers and logistics for all their raw ingredients and supplies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beef_Products
"BPI was a major supplier to McDonald's and Burger King, as well as restaurants and grocery stores, and its products were reportedly used in 75% of the United States' hamburger patties in 2008. The School Lunch Program, another large buyer of Beef Product's goods, used about 5.5 million pounds in 2009."