All you need to do is find a way of getting people in touch with you for your service. Mainly the reason I hate these companies is because they do provide a valuable service for the drivers in that they have a system to get the people who need a ride connected with the people who give rides; but they demand too much of the profit for what work they actually provide. The ones doing the real work get peanuts and the tool provider is taking in the big bucks.
I mean, I’m sure we could get a non-profit started that offers the exact same service. Just get drivers to take on the responsibility of covering any accidents, etc. It could run on donations like Wikipedia. The drivers get 100% of the profits…I’m sure there’s be unforeseen snags, but I really wish we could start “disrupting” industries by literally taking these tech fucks’ share of the market and redistribute that shit to drivers.
Rides would probably be cheaper, no surge pricing, and a good ol’ stick in the eye of the tech industry.
The insurance is part of why it works. I looked up commercial insurance rates for a taxi and it’s like $2,000 every six months. And while that’s doable if rates are the same or only a little lower it’s still one hell of a gut check. Because you don’t know if you’re going to get customers. Uber and Lyft absorbed that risk.
So what’s likely to happen in the near future is uninsured or under insured open source ride-sharing that will need to crown a winning app or two before it gets predictable enough for people to pay that.
And that means it also needs to survive that stage with Uber and Lyft strongly messaging normal people about safety and quality concerns.
All you need to do is find a way of getting people in touch with you for your service. Mainly the reason I hate these companies is because they do provide a valuable service for the drivers in that they have a system to get the people who need a ride connected with the people who give rides; but they demand too much of the profit for what work they actually provide. The ones doing the real work get peanuts and the tool provider is taking in the big bucks.
I mean, I’m sure we could get a non-profit started that offers the exact same service. Just get drivers to take on the responsibility of covering any accidents, etc. It could run on donations like Wikipedia. The drivers get 100% of the profits…I’m sure there’s be unforeseen snags, but I really wish we could start “disrupting” industries by literally taking these tech fucks’ share of the market and redistribute that shit to drivers.
Rides would probably be cheaper, no surge pricing, and a good ol’ stick in the eye of the tech industry.
The insurance is part of why it works. I looked up commercial insurance rates for a taxi and it’s like $2,000 every six months. And while that’s doable if rates are the same or only a little lower it’s still one hell of a gut check. Because you don’t know if you’re going to get customers. Uber and Lyft absorbed that risk.
So what’s likely to happen in the near future is uninsured or under insured open source ride-sharing that will need to crown a winning app or two before it gets predictable enough for people to pay that.
And that means it also needs to survive that stage with Uber and Lyft strongly messaging normal people about safety and quality concerns.
a lot of people use rented vehicles
fuck it, even add in real ride shares, where you say ‘I’m going to x place, I’m willing to go y amount out of my way and pick up z passengers’
Holy shit, why not just read the article? This is exactly what the interview is about.
Why do people read the comments, but not the articles? I don’t get it.
Because substack.
I don’t get what happens in the backend, but you can’t convince me that these companies should be multi-billion dollar companies.