Uber/Lyft

[Anondson]

Airports have designated pickup/drop off zones, Downtown Minneapolis is going to try designated Uber Lyft pickup zones to tame the chaos of bar close.

http://www.startribune.com/downtown-min ... 501152462/

[Tom H.]

Will Uber and Lyft really leave Minneapolis? Maybe. Here's how it could play out.

I don't use Uber/Lyft and don't know anyone who drives for them, so I have the luxury of being a disinterested third party in this. At minimum, if Uber/Lyft withdrew and no other rideshare service replaced them, I'd be fascinated to see how public transit ridership responds - a true natural experiment to measure the effect of these services on transit.

[DanPatchToget]

Can't say I'd miss them if they completely left the Twin Cities. Haven't used Lyft, and last time I recall using Uber was 2017 (only counting times I was by myself, but even in a group the last time was pre-pandemic).

[J. Mc]

I'm a bit prejudiced in this opinion, but I'd certainly welcome Uber/Lyft pulling out of MN completely. The amount of close calls I've had over the years at MSP from rideshare drivers running stop signs/red lights, not paying attention to the road but their phone, driving erratically, etc. has been frustrating.

Will it have any effect on transit usage, not sure. Uber/Lyft at MSP basically replaced most of the Taxis. Prior to rideshare taking hold there were two taxi holding lots filled to capacity on Post rd. plus about a 1/4-1/2 mile of taxis queued idling on the shoulder waiting to enter those lots during staging for peak demand periods. Now there's one taxi lot with available capacity, and Lot A on Post is typically filled to capacity with rideshare vehicles awaiting their next dispatch on the app. I could see some convenient trips by transit replacing rideshare/taxi in the event of a market shortage. In many cases though I suspect folks will simply opt to drive their own vehicle to off-site or onsite airport parking, call the friends/relatives for a ride, or look at car rental instead.

One of the folks I work with also owns/operates his own taxicab. He told me a month ago he never went for Uber because with driving taxi when he gets a fare, he keeps all of it. He just has to pay a license fee every year. One of his friends drives for Uber. He had a trip to bring someone from MSP to downtown Rochester, MN. Uber charged the passenger $200 or something. He got $50 after their fees and deductions. And he has to cover his fuel, insurance, and vehicle maintenance out of that as well. I can certainly sympathize with the rideshare drivers who are feeling ripped off by these apps.

[UrbanMPLS]

Will Uber and Lyft really leave Minneapolis? Maybe. Here's how it could play out.

I don't use Uber/Lyft and don't know anyone who drives for them, so I have the luxury of being a disinterested third party in this. At minimum, if Uber/Lyft withdrew and no other rideshare service replaced them, I'd be fascinated to see how public transit ridership responds - a true natural experiment to measure the effect of these services on transit.

I’d be interested to see this, too. My hypothesis is it would go up in the short term, but would hurt future ridership growth. In my opinion, ride share enables people to live car free. If your bus doesn’t show or you end up staying out late, you have a backup option and you won’t get stuck on the other side of town.

[DanPatchToget]

Will Uber and Lyft really leave Minneapolis? Maybe. Here's how it could play out.

I don't use Uber/Lyft and don't know anyone who drives for them, so I have the luxury of being a disinterested third party in this. At minimum, if Uber/Lyft withdrew and no other rideshare service replaced them, I'd be fascinated to see how public transit ridership responds - a true natural experiment to measure the effect of these services on transit.

I’d be interested to see this, too. My hypothesis is it would go up in the short term, but would hurt future ridership growth. In my opinion, ride share enables people to live car free. If your bus doesn’t show or you end up staying out late, you have a backup option and you won’t get stuck on the other side of town.

I used to think that when Uber and Lyft were gaining popularity in the Twin Cities, but I don't think that's actually the case. Rideshare has always been a competitor, not a complement, to transit. Take a look at Metro Transit's annual ridership numbers (https://www.metrotransit.org/performance#annual) and you'll see it peaks in 2015 and then keeps declining 2016-2019. Maybe rideshare isn't the complete cause for this decline, but it definitely had a part.

If Uber and Lyft leave Minneapolis only then I'm not sure an increase in transit ridership can be attributed to that (unless there's detailed data that shows a ridership increase on local routes that go through Minneapolis), but if they left the entire region then I think there could be a noticeable boost in ridership from that. However, one or more other rideshare companies would try to fill the void left by Uber and Lyft, and that could plateau ridership or make it decline slightly.

[thespeedmccool]

I am pretty confident the State Legislature will preempt Minneapolis. They'll set a statewide minimum rideshare wage akin to the current state minimum wage, and change the law to prevent MPLS from setting their own minimum.

The likelihood we see the day when Uber actually leaves the state is like 10%. The political disaster that would result from "the DFL killed Uber" would be insane and something no state lawmaker wants to deal with.

But if it does come to pass and Uber and Lyft leave the state, there are other rideshare companies that say they'll move in. It would be kinda fun if MN was the only state where the majority of riders weren't Uber or Lyft, but some secret third thing (akin to the nation's Starbucks/Dunkin' divide while we're on Caribou.)

[Tcmetro]

Uber and Lyft took off in Chicago because you could get one in minutes compared to a cab which you can only hail in downtown and on the north lakefront and a few other areas. When the costs were lower it was competitive to transit (especially when traveling as a group) and significantly faster.

Of course, all you have to do is look at who they hired in the government relations roles to see how they skirted all the regulatory bodies.

[Nick]

I don't use it very often without a smartphone, but every two or three months with a group we might take a bus somewhere, and then get a car home at 1:30 AM instead of waiting for a bus. If they were to pull out (which seems extremely unlikely--you'd have to think the state will preempt it) probably the short-term impact will be more drunk driving and minimal increase in transit use.

That said, there should for sure be more regulation of the opaque gig economy stuff. One stupid idea I'd like to see is requiring people to come down to the damn door to get their Doordash. Way too many cars double parked with hazards on while some guy who makes $6/hour is getting buzzed into a building and taking an elevator upstairs to drop off delivery Subway sandwiches. (Jesus Christ)

[alexschief]

I'm pretty skeptical that the city level is the correct place for regulation of rideshare companies. But I have no sympathy for the companies themselves. From the start, they've abused information asymmetries with their "employees" to subsidize their anti-competitive pricing. The entire model hides the true costs of taxi service from the consumer by undercutting the driver instead. These types of regulations are overdue (and should be passed at the state level).

[MinneapBliss]

As I type, the CNN main page features an article titled "Lyft and Uber to cease operations in Minneapolis after new minimum wage law." At least there's a decent photo of downtown. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[thespeedmccool]

I'm pretty skeptical that the city level is the correct place for regulation of rideshare companies. But I have no sympathy for the companies themselves. From the start, they've abused information asymmetries with their "employees" to subsidize their anti-competitive pricing. The entire model hides the true costs of taxi service from the consumer by undercutting the driver instead. These types of regulations are overdue (and should be passed at the state level).

Very important point here. City boundaries aren't 'hard' in any sense, and this regulation should come from the state.

Hopefully, the City Council has forced the Legislature's hand, and they'll have to do something now after last year's effort. If that's the final outcome of this, then hats off to the City Council.

The idea percolating at the Legislature that there could be a state-run or -financed Uber replacement seems 1. wildly unworkable but 2. awesome if it could be worked out. Integration with Metro Transit, better pay for drivers, and potentially lower prices for consumers. I doubt it would work, but let's see what Dibble, Fateh, Hoffman, and Marty cook up.

[alexschief]

Metro Transit already runs microtransit service in select areas at a steep subsidy.

There's no aspect of the rideshare/TNC model that public ownership solves to make it profitable. If the state wants to run a transportation company that doesn't run efficient fixed routes and doesn't rule out exploiting workers or replacing them with robots, then the only alternative is to either charge the market price or to massively subsidize the service.

It doesn't make sense to me why we would conclude that would be a good exercise of state power, let alone a good use of state dollars. Let's just make Metro Transit better and let the private sector figure out what the market is for taxi service with a regulated wage floor.

[DanPatchToget]

I'm pretty skeptical that the city level is the correct place for regulation of rideshare companies. But I have no sympathy for the companies themselves. From the start, they've abused information asymmetries with their "employees" to subsidize their anti-competitive pricing. The entire model hides the true costs of taxi service from the consumer by undercutting the driver instead. These types of regulations are overdue (and should be passed at the state level).

Very important point here. City boundaries aren't 'hard' in any sense, and this regulation should come from the state.

Hopefully, the City Council has forced the Legislature's hand, and they'll have to do something now after last year's effort. If that's the final outcome of this, then hats off to the City Council.

The idea percolating at the Legislature that there could be a state-run or -financed Uber replacement seems 1. wildly unworkable but 2. awesome if it could be worked out. Integration with Metro Transit, better pay for drivers, and potentially lower prices for consumers. I doubt it would work, but let's see what Dibble, Fateh, Hoffman, and Marty cook up.

I don't know about the entire state, but in the metro area we have a taxpayer-funded rideshare service called Transit Link. I haven't used it before, and looking at info about it there's some big differences between Transit Link and Uber/Lyft (limited service hours and only runs on weekdays, only operates within the 7 counties, no service where the trip can be done on a regular route bus [if I'm reading the info right], ride reservations can only be done by calling and the shortest advance notice for a ride is 2 hours, etc.). There's also the suburban opt-outs with their demand-response service, which use apps and ride reservations can be short notice (with MVTA Connect it can at least, speaking from experience), but still some limitations like Transit Link.

I don't know if improving Transit Link so it's at least almost on par with Uber/Lyft levels of service can/should be done, but if a private company or companies try to fill the void it should be companies that aren't trying to skirt around regulations and they pay their drivers fairly. Either way rides are going to cost more.

[MNdible]

Passing this the day before the state study comes out is further evidence that the city council majority is motivated by vibes and not good policy.

[seanrichardryan]

612-333-3333

[tedlanda2571]

Obviously anecdotal, but my Lyft driver last night ranted about the city council decision. He claimed it’s a vocal minority of drivers and that he makes significantly more than $15 hour and presented his pay stubs at a council meeting. He did also complain about some Uber and Lyft policies that made longer rides less profitable, but he thought the proposed increase was so high that it would not only reduce demand but simultaneously increase supply as more drivers try to take advantage, leaving more people fighting over a smaller pie.

[Bakken2016]

Obviously anecdotal, but my Lyft driver last night ranted about the city council decision. He claimed it’s a vocal minority of drivers and that he makes significantly more than $15 hour and presented his pay stubs at a council meeting. He did also complain about some Uber and Lyft policies that made longer rides less profitable, but he thought the proposed increase was so high that it would not only reduce demand but simultaneously increase supply as more drivers try to take advantage, leaving more people fighting over a smaller pie.

Funny enough, my Lyft driver was the complete opposite. Applauded the city council decision and is willing to adapt to new rideshare companies if needed.

[Tiller]

I personally don't like blackmail - so Uber and Lyft's threats and tantrums make me strongly support the ordinance. If they leave, that's a plus at this point. There will be other services/companies that can do what they do without fucking over their workers.

[twincitizen]

I don't think I'm making this up, but don't Uber and/or Lyft have a stated goal of eventually replacing most/all drivers with autonomous vehicles? I swear I remember reading that a while back, and it makes perfect sense. Now, the timeline for a full rollout of autonomous taxis is not what people thought it was going to be 5 years ago (i.e. "about 5 years"), but it's obviously still coming at some point. Waymo is already on the road in a few states, and is expanding to more areas: https://www.latimes.com/california/stor ... os-angeles

Kinda seems like Uber & Lyft's business plan all along was to lose money until they no longer needed to pay drivers, then rake in the profits of their duopoly when the only expenses are robot cars and insurance. Phase one of their takeover was killing the traditional taxi industry through a combination of beating them on technology and undercutting them on price, backed by billions of dollars from silicon valley investors. Phase two is to eliminate the biggest expense, driver labor.