Tuesday, March 3, 2015

The Switch Why drivers are winning the labor war between Uber and Lyft

Why drivers are winning the labor war between Uber and Lyft

 March 3 at 6:30 AM  
Ordinarily I'd have ridden an Uber or taken my bike across town, but it was a chilly February morning and Lyft had just given out a handful of free promotional rides that week. So Lyft it was.
As it turned out, it didn't make much difference which of the two ridesharing services I chose. My driver worked for both companies.
Uber has long been the leading rideshare service for part-time drivers who want to earn a little cash on the side. But motivated by the possibility of more pay and better benefits, some drivers have begun working openly for multiple services. Some drivers I've spoken to acknowledge the practice is common among their peers, though not all do it. Regardless, the result is a new chapter in the quiet war among Uber, Lyft and others over a vital resource for their businesses — labor — with drivers reaping the benefits.
This isn't the first time we've heard about rideshare companies fighting for drivers' loyalty. Last summer there was an epic blowup over reports by the Verge that Uber was resorting to "sabotage" in its attempt to identify and poach drivers away from Lyft.
As the New York Times' Neil Irwin pointed out then, there's nothing inherently abhorrent about this strategy. In fact, it might be the sign of a healthy labor market as the apps each do their utmost to connect the most drivers with the most riders. But the reports about poaching also revealed a flawed assumption: That rideshare drivers would ever work exclusively for one company or another.
In fact, what we're seeing now is a growing refusal by drivers to play by that assumption, particularly amid criticism and even protests over how much Uber will pay. A public debate over wages last year saw Uber initially claiming that its drivers earned, on average, as much as $25 an hour in New York City. After a backlash among drivers pushing back against that figure, a company study showed that across all cities drivers earned, on average, $19 an hour (and $30 an hour in New York). Uber also keeps cutting its prices for riders — the last one came in January, according to Uber — which is good for consumers but puts the squeeze on disgruntled drivers and increases the incentive to look elsewhere for work.
This reddit thread — which is representative of many others — highlights how drivers have begun to divide their time, with one user asking:
Hey guys I'm going to be doing my Lyft mentor ride today. I have been a Uber only driver for 9months. Is it OK to let Mentor know that I am also a Uber Driver with a very good rating or is this a don't ask don't tell kind of thing?
The first reply, from a Denver-based driver who claims to work for both Uber and Lyft, reassures that there's no problem. (Indeed, spokespeople for both Uber and Lyft confirmed that there are no policies at either company prohibiting drivers from signing on with other platforms. Uber now also attempts to retain drivers with perks like discounts on auto maintenance and vehicle financing.)
Lyft is a much more driver-friendly platform. In my city I can be busy with lyft for an entire evening (for the first time ever), earn more per mile, and get about 10% of fares in tips (or more.) People in Denver are making a choice to use lyft over uber right now
Combining apps offers a number of advantages to drivers. It gives them a wider choice of potential fares by adding together Lyft users and Uber users. Choosing the closest fare cuts down on wasted time, money and fuel between trips. And in what could become a problem for riders, drivers have actually taken to driving less in an attempt to earn more.
How does this work? At least one driver has figured out how to game Uber and Lyft's incentive systems to get more drivers on the road.
"I've noticed Uber drivers have started to turn off their apps, wait for surges and turn them back on when the surges are 2X+," wrote the driver, referring to Uber's system of surge pricing that raises rates during periods of peak demand. "Drivers are getting smarter, and driving less miles for more pay. This is what Uber is doing to us with the pay cuts."
This tactic may help drivers earn more at a time whenmany obstacles threaten to eat into their revenue: gas, insurance, repairs, a relatively new car — much of which has to be covered by drivers themselves.
But there are wider implications, too. If drivers are actively removing themselves from the labor supply, that decision directly affects the availability of rides for customers using a given service.
Without drivers, rideshare apps are simply a fancy bit of software. So it's in Uber and Lyft's interest not just to attract drivers to their side, but also to keep them happy while they're there. And even then, the companies have to admit that some mercenary behavior is inevitable, anyway. When drivers are frustrated, drivers will seek to exert power in one of the few ways they can: By leaving. The real trick is to stem the attrition as much as possible.
As we wound our way past Union Station, my driver told me he could've picked a nearby Uber fare instead. But getting there would've taken him a few extra minutes out of his way. That made me — a Lyft fare — the more attractive choice.
Then, as if to show he was owned by no one, my driver fired up a third ridesharing app, Sidecar.
Correction: This post has been updated with more specific driver earnings information.
Brian Fung covers technology for The Washington Post, focusing on telecom, broadband and digital politics. Before joining the Post, he was the technology correspondent for National Journal and an associate editor at the Atlantic.

Wednesday, February 25, 2015

Uber Advises Drivers To Buy Insurance That Leaves Them Uncovered - BuzzFeed News

Uber Advises Drivers To Buy Insurance That Leaves Them Uncovered - BuzzFeed News: "John Han has been a San Francisco taxi driver for 13 years. So when he was approved for a four-year, 23% interest rate loan through Uber partner Exeter Finance at Walnut Creek Toyota, he said, “I wanted to make sure the insurance was squared away. The dealer provided him a list of carriers offering personal auto insurance and “said I needed to register it as a personal car,” said Han.
Han, who wanted commercial coverage, walked away. “Uber just wants to get people on the road fast,” he said. “And then it’s all on the driver. It’s his problem.”
Don Davis, director of Walnut Creek Toyota’s custom finance department, told BuzzFeed News he would call back but never did. Exeter did not reply to a request for comment."



'via Blog this'

Bonnie Wiegal FOOD Share CEO running for supervisor - VC-Star

FOOD Share CEO running for supervisor - VC-Star: Ventura Bennett seat



'via Blog this'

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

TECHNOLOGY Uber and Lyft Force Investors to Play Favorites

Uber and Lyft Force Investors to Play Favorites

Ride-sharing apps won’t open books to potential backers without promise to stay away from rivals

Both Lyft and Uber have asked potential investors to sign agreements stating they won’t invest in competitors for a period of six months to a year.ENLARGE
Both Lyft and Uber have asked potential investors to sign agreements stating they won’t invest in competitors for a period of six months to a year. PHOTO: ASSOCIATED PRESS
Drivers and passengers can freely switch between Uber and Lyft, but investors thinking about backing either car-hailing app must pick a side and stick to it.
In their current fundraising efforts, both Uber Technologies Inc. and Lyft Inc. have asked potential investors to sign agreements stating they won’t invest in competitors for a period of six months to a year, according to people familiar with the policies. Investors are asked to sign the pledge before seeing any internal company data that could help them make a decision, the people said.
The aggressive terms—rare in venture-capital investing—underscore the bitter rivalry between the two top ride-sharing services in the U.S. Uber and Lyft, in their fight to become the car service of choice for millions of commuters across dozens of cities, have undercut each other’s prices, poached drivers and co-opted innovations.
While venture firms typically refrain from investing in competing startups to avoid conflicts of interest, it is unusual for a company to require this level of commitment before an investment decision is made. That suggests Uber and Lyft are confident investor demand for their equity remains strong despite soaring valuations, said Rett Wallace, chief executive of Triton Research LLC, which does research on private companies.
“I’ve never heard of a company doing this,” Mr. Wallace said. “But it’s not like it doesn’t make sense. There have to be some benefits of being private, including not showing your numbers to people you don’t want to. If a company has the leverage to do it, then there’s no reason why they shouldn’t.”
Uber, the larger of the two San Francisco rivals in every major way, likely has more leverage to wield at this point. The company was valued at $41 billion in a funding round first announced last December, and said last week it is in the process of raising an additional $1 billion as part of that round. If successful, the company will have raised a total of $5.6 billion in equity funding, by far the most on record of any private company backed by venture capital, according to Dow Jones VentureSource.
Advertisement
The Journal reported last week that Uber’s net revenue—the amount it keeps after paying out drivers—was more than $400 million last year, according to a person familiar with the numbers. The company is projecting that number to rise to more than $2 billion, this person said.
Uber’s backers include a mix of high-powered investors such as venture firms Benchmark, First Round Capital and Google Ventures, Chinese Internet company BaiduInc., mutual funds BlackRock Inc. and Fidelity Investments and even Qatar’s sovereign-wealth fund. It isn’t clear if any of these investors agreed not to invest in competitors before looking at Uber’s financial data.
Lyft aims to raise about $250 million in a round of funding valuing it at around $2 billion, a personal familiar with the matter said. The company was valued at more than $700 million last April after raising $250 million. Lyft’s investors include venture firms Mayfield Fund and Andreessen Horowitz, Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. and hedge fund Coatue Management LLC, among others.
As both companies move closer to selling shares to the public, a division may also form between the investment banks each one eventually hires to handle their initial public offerings. Uber has already fostered close ties with Goldman Sachs Group Inc., which invested in the company and recently helped it raise $1.6 billion in convertible debt from the bank’s wealthy clients.
Uber CEO Travis Kalanick has publicly admitted to getting involved in Lyft’s fundraising efforts before. In a Vanity Fair profile last year, he said he called investors and told them, “Just so you know, we’re going to be fundraising after this, so before you decide whether you want to invest in them, just make sure you know that we are going to be fundraising immediately after.”
Fred Wilson , a prominent New York venture capitalist and investor in two smaller ride-sharing startups, Sidecar Technologies Inc. and Hailo Network Ltd., wrote on his blog last November that such tactics are unethical and, often, ineffective.
“Don’t waste your time trying to mess with a competitor’s financing,” Mr. Wilson wrote. “It doesn’t look good, it won’t work, and your time and energy is best spent elsewhere, where the real competition happens, product and market.”
Uber has also barred potential investors from backing London-based Hailo, according to that company’s chairman, Ron Zeghibe. In an interview last October, Mr. Zeghibe told BBC, “Any investor who wanted to even look at Uber’s books to decide whether they wanted to make an investment had to sign an agreement which specifically named us, as well as Lyft, and restricting them from having any ability to even talk to us for at least a year.”
—Telis Demos contributed to this article.
Write to Douglas MacMillan at douglas.macmillan@wsj.com and Dana Mattioli atdana.mattioli@wsj.com

Airport trips not as appealing as advertised Uber SFO

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2015

Airport trips not as appealing as advertised

Airport rides are some of the most profitable trips on UberX, Lyft and Sidecar. At pickup, ridesharing drivers are usually excited the moment they see clients/riders/passengers waiting at pickup addresses with luggage. It is not always the case when riders have luggage present, because they elect to use BART as a cheaper alternative. However, most of the early morning rides - involving luggage - are mostly airport trips. Why are airport trips not as appealing?

Good airport trips are those which originate from the Marina, Sunset, Richmond, North Beach, and Presidio districts. Short trips from the Mission District net drivers less than $20. Nonetheless, ride requests accepted on return routes back to San Francisco are not so good. One UberX driver shared accepting three ride requests in a row, two from South San Francisco and another from Candlestick Park. These rides minus commission and airport toll charges paid out between $7-$9.

Imagine accepting airport ride requests from San Bruno, South San Francisco and Visitacion Valley in San Francisco, and only clearing $7-$8 on these rides. Basically on these short airport trips, ridesharing drivers enter SFO, unload client luggage and leave with only peanuts in their pockets.

Why are these airport trips unappealing? They are too close to SFO, so minimal per mile and per minute charges are accumulated during these trips. This is a problem because drivers must also pay commission and toll charges - $4. A $11-$15 SFO trip will net drivers $6-$9.

How can drivers reduce close airport trips? They can wait in the TNC que for at least 30 minutes to possibly score a ride from the SFO to an outside destination. There is a good chance these SFO rides will take drivers out to distant cities and make them money. Drivers don't pay bridge toll charges in any direction on these trips originating from SFO out to any destinations. However, riders are charged bridge tolls in free directions because drivers may return back into San Francisco to continue working. Longer trips accumulate additional mileage per minute and time per minute earnings.

Another alternative to reduce short, low-paying airport runs is to go offline once leaving the airport. Travel back to San Francisco and enter busy surged regions to secure work/commute trips and maybe another SFO ride. It really depends on drivers; whether they are out to make money or choose to provide a moral service. There are money-driven drivers, then there are ethical drivers. Essentially, the primary goal is to make money performing ridesharing services. Nevertheless, ridesharing drivers may accomplish this moneymaking goal by accepting all rides and focus primarily on increasing volume of trips rather than concentrate on good paying rides.

In retrospect, not all airport trips pay well. Ridesharing drivers may get hooked on multiple SFO runs at extremely cheap fares since ridesharing companies agreed to airport toll charges and commission is also deducted from drivers. These close airport runs may net drivers only $6-9 per trip. We have proof of these short airport trips, which take up valuable time (pickup, loading, driving to airport, unloading and leaving airport) and don't make drivers money ($6-9). It up to drivers to make adjustments to increase their earnings, or they risk losing money (fuel cost).

Fuel is on the rise again. This increase in fuel cost will definitely influence driving behavior. Lyft is holding a Spring promotion to waive commission on all trips to help drives. What will Uber do? Sidecar? Once gas prices reach $4+, many drivers will reduce their hours and there will likely be more surge pricing activated. As a result of this, clients will pay more and face longer pickup times. Springtime is the biggest challenge for ridesharing companies. High gas prices, above $4, will dictate the number of drivers who take the road.

It is not easy for drivers to earn decent money with high commission, steep gas prices, wear and tear, maintenance cost, repairs, possible parking tickets due to clients, traffic citations, snacks, water, tolls, and other expenses. The first year of ridesharing is like operating a new business. Drivers may lose money because they are spending a fortune on gas, repairs, oil changes, repairs from damage inflicted by poor road conditions, brakes, car washes, and additional expenses.

Drive smart. Know when repetitive short airport runs are impacting driver earning potential. Completing three short airport trips within an hour may net drivers only $20. This is not much money, considering an airport trip form North Beach and/or the Marina District can net drivers $38 on a 1.5X surge. There is not much surging around San Bruno, South San Francisco and near Candlestick Park. Not even Daly City is surging during the early morning. However, there are surges in Palo Alto, Redwood City, and other cities located along the 101.

Good luck taking airport trips. Rideshare on!

Monday, February 23, 2015

War on Whistleblowers (ft. Edward Snowden & David Carr) 2015 • FULL DOCUMENTARY • BRAVE NEW FILMS - YouTube

War on Whistleblowers (ft. Edward Snowden & David Carr) 2015 • FULL DOCUMENTARY • BRAVE NEW FILMS - YouTube:



'via Blog this'

Samsung DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY

Samsung: "
An Innovative Digital Radiography System
Discover a spectrum of diagnostic tools specifically designed for the needs of both care providers and patients.

WATCH VIDEO

Advanced Digital X-Ray Technology
The XGEO GC80 offers a modern alternative for the 21st century radiology department.

DOWNLOAD BROCHURE"



'via Blog this'