I guess there is going to be a split on this in terms of what people think. Obviously ride share drivers would love this, and since the only time I’m in Minneapolis is when I’m on business, it’s my company footing the bill, not me.
However - if it was me footing the bill, I’m sure I’d be much less inclined to take a Lyft/Uber. However, ending ops over this is stupid, because there will be people that will pay for it, business or personal. Let the market decide what’s palatable.
Everyone’s wallet is shrinking due to the rampant inflation over the past several years, and if you’re a full time ride share driver, it’s hard to cut even with the rising costs all around. Even before the inflation was hard. Vehicles don’t run on hopes and dreams and need maintenance.
Wouldn’t it be great if our wages were keeping up with inflation.
This is the beauty of self employment. As I said in a previous comment, I'm a driver and one of the apps I work along with my own service give me the ability and freedom to raise my own rates when I feel the need. Truth is though, as it stands, most uber and lyft drivers could make more than enough if the companies were forced to pass on a percentage instead of low balling offers. Very rough math says they could pass on a fixed 80% and charge the rider whatever they feel like at any point in time. This would give them more enough profit along with covering all costs. They won't do this because they are greedy and states/cities won't make them do it because they are stuck in the hourly mindset when most IC work is not hourly. This job is all about miles. Watch dead and wasted time of course but it's not all about the hourly.
But it's a tactic, right? They could still make money, if a bit less, by operating in Minneapolis. But they can put pressure on residents to try and get it repealed by stopping, and try to send a message to other cities.
No, they barely make money as it is
Lyft is losing money, Uber is barely profitable
As a whole, yeah, but top-line losses don't mean each ride makes them less profitable. My understanding was their margins are slim enough they need a lot of rides to subsidize their fixed costs, so fewer rides means less profit, not less loss.
If Uber is actually profitable, stopping operations in Minneapolis really should make them less so. If this isn't them taking a small loss now because they believe they'll avoid a bigger loss later, I can't make sense of it.
Yes, they could make a very tiny profit from a decently sized city, but then it might encourage other cities to follow suit.
The costs are not all fixed, covering another city means paying more support agents, having people signing up local drivers, etc. so after this change it might not even be profitable after all
That's my point though?
If costs like support agents that scale with rides make the rides unprofitable, their business model is upside down. Especially for Uber, I'm counting costs that scale with rides with costs per ride, vs infrastructure and truly fixed costs. Maybe they're so close to breaking even per ride that raising costs depresses demand enough to make them unprofitable, but it seems a lot more likely they're doing this to send a message first and foremost.
Uber is making way more money than they let on. They got caught stashing millions over seas. They and lyft both take over half of the transaction on average and have reduced their support teams to mostly bots and people who can barely read.
Millions? That's almost as much as they make in a day
Tell us you don't understand gross revenue versus net profits without telling us.
Uber increased the cash on hand by 139M in the 4th quarter, so they definitely make more than a million a day net profit
I'm a driver in another state/city but if I lived in Minneapolis I'd be loving this.
Why?
I drive uber, empower (a service launched in my market) and I'm building my own service. Getting uber and lyft kicked out of town will do amazing things for the industry and the drivers and riders. Regional services will pop up and this will help filter out the drivers who know how to run a business and act professionally and those who shouldn't be self employed and customer facing.
I'm on track to pull 6 figures in the next year or two. I'm currently in the process of upgrading to an EV, later this year we will be buying my wife a phev mini van for her to main and I'll use it for business if needed as well as for road trips.
I guess there is going to be a split on this in terms of what people think. Obviously ride share drivers would love this, and since the only time I’m in Minneapolis is when I’m on business, it’s my company footing the bill, not me.
However - if it was me footing the bill, I’m sure I’d be much less inclined to take a Lyft/Uber. However, ending ops over this is stupid, because there will be people that will pay for it, business or personal. Let the market decide what’s palatable.
Everyone’s wallet is shrinking due to the rampant inflation over the past several years, and if you’re a full time ride share driver, it’s hard to cut even with the rising costs all around. Even before the inflation was hard. Vehicles don’t run on hopes and dreams and need maintenance.
Wouldn’t it be great if our wages were keeping up with inflation.
This is the beauty of self employment. As I said in a previous comment, I'm a driver and one of the apps I work along with my own service give me the ability and freedom to raise my own rates when I feel the need. Truth is though, as it stands, most uber and lyft drivers could make more than enough if the companies were forced to pass on a percentage instead of low balling offers. Very rough math says they could pass on a fixed 80% and charge the rider whatever they feel like at any point in time. This would give them more enough profit along with covering all costs. They won't do this because they are greedy and states/cities won't make them do it because they are stuck in the hourly mindset when most IC work is not hourly. This job is all about miles. Watch dead and wasted time of course but it's not all about the hourly.
But it's a tactic, right? They could still make money, if a bit less, by operating in Minneapolis. But they can put pressure on residents to try and get it repealed by stopping, and try to send a message to other cities.
No, they barely make money as it is
Lyft is losing money, Uber is barely profitable
As a whole, yeah, but top-line losses don't mean each ride makes them less profitable. My understanding was their margins are slim enough they need a lot of rides to subsidize their fixed costs, so fewer rides means less profit, not less loss.
If Uber is actually profitable, stopping operations in Minneapolis really should make them less so. If this isn't them taking a small loss now because they believe they'll avoid a bigger loss later, I can't make sense of it.
Yes, they could make a very tiny profit from a decently sized city, but then it might encourage other cities to follow suit.
The costs are not all fixed, covering another city means paying more support agents, having people signing up local drivers, etc. so after this change it might not even be profitable after all
That's my point though?
If costs like support agents that scale with rides make the rides unprofitable, their business model is upside down. Especially for Uber, I'm counting costs that scale with rides with costs per ride, vs infrastructure and truly fixed costs. Maybe they're so close to breaking even per ride that raising costs depresses demand enough to make them unprofitable, but it seems a lot more likely they're doing this to send a message first and foremost.
Uber is making way more money than they let on. They got caught stashing millions over seas. They and lyft both take over half of the transaction on average and have reduced their support teams to mostly bots and people who can barely read.
Millions? That's almost as much as they make in a day
Tell us you don't understand gross revenue versus net profits without telling us.
Uber increased the cash on hand by 139M in the 4th quarter, so they definitely make more than a million a day net profit
I'm a driver in another state/city but if I lived in Minneapolis I'd be loving this.
Why?
I drive uber, empower (a service launched in my market) and I'm building my own service. Getting uber and lyft kicked out of town will do amazing things for the industry and the drivers and riders. Regional services will pop up and this will help filter out the drivers who know how to run a business and act professionally and those who shouldn't be self employed and customer facing.
I'm on track to pull 6 figures in the next year or two. I'm currently in the process of upgrading to an EV, later this year we will be buying my wife a phev mini van for her to main and I'll use it for business if needed as well as for road trips.