Calling it "rideshare" is unhelpful. These are taxi services, where the relationship between driver and passenger is the same as when you hail a cab. One of the moves Uber made, which seemed smart but produced backlash, was to pretend it was the kind of car-pooling co-op discussed by Yochai Benkler in Sharing Nicely.
Uber's success was due partly to new apps, but mostly to the fact that taxi regulation was a monopolistic disaster - most notably in NY, where Uber arrived just as a speculative bubble in taxi medallions was inflated to the maximum.
In the end, policy needs to end the arbitrary distinction between special purpose taxis (yellow cabs) and private vehicle taxis ("rideshare"). I don;t have a good anwer on how.
I agree they’re the same. I am thinking of amending the title to $7 taxi but I can’t tell if people will think of only the yellow cabs. It is weird to have a distinction.
I guess the distinction was created because Uber/Lyft had to go against the incumbent taxi industry?
Minor quibble maybe, but I disagree that they're the same, should cost the same, or have the same regulations. Yellow cabs/taxis are professionals and rideshares are amateurs. I think the distinction is helpful. I think amateurs should be able to get into the gig business at lower cost and charge less, and the distinct names means I know what I'm paying for.
If I want a full-time professional who knows the backroads and will never miss an exit, I pay more to hire a taxi. When I have time to spare, it's ~fine to have a part-time amateur driver who does their best to follow whatever route an app provides but misses a turn here and there.
While not *all* taxi drivers are experts and *some* rideshare drivers do it full-time, they're not really the same service. Rideshares are still more like hiring my neighbor to take me to work than they are like hiring a commercial chauffer, and keeping them distinct seems preferable to me.
True, they're different categories of service. I think the question is more about how different the government should treat them. Right now, rideshares are meeting the standards for interstate shuttles, so a higher bar than taxis, which means that, even though they're the less professional option, they're more expensive. :) You're 100% right. I don't think these are mutual exclusive views.
Thanks Rick! I’m not familiar with Seattle at all but just from this site, I can’t tell how difficult it is for someone to become “for hire”.
At first glance, it seems hard on drivers to have the rule the “drivers can’t decline to give you a ride based on your location”. That seems great but the location might be way further away than where the driver wants to be. I might soon rideshare to Richmond two hours away from me and I hate to think that I take the driver two hours away from home. TNC apps tend to not tell drivers the drop off location until they accept, which apps like Empower do.
Thank you!!! I'm on the lookout for more! It's definitely an addicting niche. I'm also looking into residential spaces within industrial zones, Canada banking system, etc. I'd love any tips!!
In China, those cheap "false rideshare" apps are taking market over legacy ride-hailing apps. The Empower as you described looks similar to those false rideshares in China. We call it involution - eventually making all drivers earn less than before.
Drivers earn more on Empower though than with our legacy apps. From talking to drivers and seeing Uber and Lyft reddit, drivers strongly prefer Empower because the laws that prevent competition make it so there’s less price competition, but it’s just Uber/Lyft taking a bigger cut.
Hi Simone! Great question. :) I don’t think it was intentional. It served a purpose (granting rideshare legitimacy). It wasn’t poor at the time, since the taxis had incumbent political power. That was probably the downstream cause of needing to prove legitimacy.
Calling it "rideshare" is unhelpful. These are taxi services, where the relationship between driver and passenger is the same as when you hail a cab. One of the moves Uber made, which seemed smart but produced backlash, was to pretend it was the kind of car-pooling co-op discussed by Yochai Benkler in Sharing Nicely.
Uber's success was due partly to new apps, but mostly to the fact that taxi regulation was a monopolistic disaster - most notably in NY, where Uber arrived just as a speculative bubble in taxi medallions was inflated to the maximum.
In the end, policy needs to end the arbitrary distinction between special purpose taxis (yellow cabs) and private vehicle taxis ("rideshare"). I don;t have a good anwer on how.
I agree they’re the same. I am thinking of amending the title to $7 taxi but I can’t tell if people will think of only the yellow cabs. It is weird to have a distinction.
I guess the distinction was created because Uber/Lyft had to go against the incumbent taxi industry?
Minor quibble maybe, but I disagree that they're the same, should cost the same, or have the same regulations. Yellow cabs/taxis are professionals and rideshares are amateurs. I think the distinction is helpful. I think amateurs should be able to get into the gig business at lower cost and charge less, and the distinct names means I know what I'm paying for.
If I want a full-time professional who knows the backroads and will never miss an exit, I pay more to hire a taxi. When I have time to spare, it's ~fine to have a part-time amateur driver who does their best to follow whatever route an app provides but misses a turn here and there.
While not *all* taxi drivers are experts and *some* rideshare drivers do it full-time, they're not really the same service. Rideshares are still more like hiring my neighbor to take me to work than they are like hiring a commercial chauffer, and keeping them distinct seems preferable to me.
True, they're different categories of service. I think the question is more about how different the government should treat them. Right now, rideshares are meeting the standards for interstate shuttles, so a higher bar than taxis, which means that, even though they're the less professional option, they're more expensive. :) You're 100% right. I don't think these are mutual exclusive views.
What do you think of Seattle/King County's regulations? https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/executive-services/certificates-permits-licenses/records-licensing/taxi-for-hire-tnc-licensing/rider-resources
Thanks Rick! I’m not familiar with Seattle at all but just from this site, I can’t tell how difficult it is for someone to become “for hire”.
At first glance, it seems hard on drivers to have the rule the “drivers can’t decline to give you a ride based on your location”. That seems great but the location might be way further away than where the driver wants to be. I might soon rideshare to Richmond two hours away from me and I hate to think that I take the driver two hours away from home. TNC apps tend to not tell drivers the drop off location until they accept, which apps like Empower do.
Great work! The market in action.
I like articles like this because it makes you wonder what other domains we see the same effect
Thank you!!! I'm on the lookout for more! It's definitely an addicting niche. I'm also looking into residential spaces within industrial zones, Canada banking system, etc. I'd love any tips!!
In China, those cheap "false rideshare" apps are taking market over legacy ride-hailing apps. The Empower as you described looks similar to those false rideshares in China. We call it involution - eventually making all drivers earn less than before.
Drivers earn more on Empower though than with our legacy apps. From talking to drivers and seeing Uber and Lyft reddit, drivers strongly prefer Empower because the laws that prevent competition make it so there’s less price competition, but it’s just Uber/Lyft taking a bigger cut.
Hi Simone! Great question. :) I don’t think it was intentional. It served a purpose (granting rideshare legitimacy). It wasn’t poor at the time, since the taxis had incumbent political power. That was probably the downstream cause of needing to prove legitimacy.