Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Scheduled rides are a neat strategy, but they're tough for consumers to use effectively. For one thing, if you're attempting to schedule a last mile ride after you get off the subway, your arrival at the pickup point could be subject to minor delays. But on the network side, a few minutes on each ride impacts efficiency in a major way.

Personally, my biggest (non ethical) issue with Uber/Lyft et al. is that they're unreliable. There are common rides you can request (e.g. leaving the urban core after work when drivers want to be heading in for bar service) that drivers simply don't want to do. I don't think there's a faster way to create negative user associations than walking an hour home in a heat wave because the pricing model failed.



> is that they're unreliable

The platforms care little about individual customers (as opposed to drivers, which are fewer and have higher onboarding costs) so they are reluctant to set up the right incentives to force drivers to be reliable.

A simple solution (in most gig economy markets - not just ridesharing) is that any accepted task costs you a deposit which gets returned on completion. This instantly makes it unprofitable to offer sub-par service or cancel, and provides stability to both customers and the system in general as any accepted task is more likely to be delivered (and tasks which are unprofitable to accept will not get accepted, so the surge pricing mechanism can do its job and raise prices until acceptance rates go up).

The problem is that this will only happen if there is either a legally-enforceable service-level-agreement (such as compensating passengers for unreliability or missed arrival times) or strong competition, which is not currently the case. Most gig economy markets are dominated by a handful of equally-mediocre players who have no incentive to out-compete each other.


In NYC the volumes are humongous. They could probably build a successful business just going back and forth from airports.


They could have a successful business that way, but I'm not sure it's one that can handle 9,000+ drivers like the article calls out with any sort of equitable scheduling. For context, that's more drivers than the entire city of San Francisco typically has at peak. Maybe I'm just vastly underestimating the size of the NYC airport market though.


The city of San Francisco is ~10% of NYC's population so it's not a good comparison.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: