Quote:
Originally Posted by TakeFive
You apparently missed my previous response; don't believe everything you read. What would you guess the cost of buying a fleet of self-driving cars would be let alone the insurance and maintenance etc. Besides that's still a couple of decades away except for perhaps designated routes.
My best guess with ride-share is that they're close to being cash-flow positive; Uber Eats also. I wouldn't be surprised if rates drifted higher on some types of rides; we'll see. Uber's latest iteration is a 'comfort' option which merely guarantees the rider a Not small car or a crummy old car. It's especially popular for airport rides for example and is ~$5 more so maybe $23 instead of $18.
The unknown in Uber's case is that they're in various countries and I have no idea how those are performing.
I am still a big believer that in time 'shuttle bus' style on-demand service can make a lot of sense.
In some cities (not in Phx) Uber is offering Uber Pool for those who qualify for the XL platform which means they have three rows of seats, usually a Van for carrying more than 4 pax. I've heard some drivers grumbling about the pay versus hassle but whatever.
In time shuttle buses, preferably operated by the private sector could be great in DTC for transporting riders from light rail and likely subsidized by the DTC. It can and has to a degree made sense already in Lone Tree who does subsidize the effort. These fancy shuttles could work well in downtown Denver IMO especially for nearby neighborhoods.
|
Been thinking about Uber and LYFT and how they are both aggressively developing driverless cars technology. They are both doing this because they have determined this is how they will become profitable long term.
So here is my thought exercise...
1.) If Uber and/or LYFT develop their own driverless cars and then construct and own their own fleet, they will be:
a.) A car manufacturer
b.) Legally considered a traditional taxi company, not ride sharing. Which of course means they will have to comply with municipal ordinances which restricted how many companies can opperaterate in their city. Likely a reduced or limited footprint.
2.) If Uber and/or LYFT manufacture a driverless cars which they developed and then sold or leased them to their drivers, who then provide the ride-sharing service. Then the following apply:
a.) Drivers could designate their car available to drive customers, when the driver has a period of time which they will not require use of their car. Such as while they sleep, or while they are at work.
b.) As a driver perk, if your car is out driving and won't be able to make it back to you in time, you don't have to wait on your own car to return. Just summon an Uber/LYFT. You can just have your car keep driving at all times and then return home at your designated time, or to recharge it's batteries.
c.) Uber and/or LYFT become some kind of quasi-auto leasing/dealer service (possibly including maintenance), car sharing enabling company, economy transforming mobility enabling, source of a universal base-like income generating mechanism. People who own or lease a driverless cars, could earn this income around the clock. This will allow people to work fewer hours a day, to help off-set the impact of job losses due to AI/Automation. Or it could enable upward economic mobility, for anyone who still can manage working 60-70 hours a week and then essentially brings in an entire second income off of their driverless cars. And then own/lease multiple cars and start bringing in more income from each car.
d.) Transit agencies switch to driverless buses and trains and integrate with ride sharing apps including trip cost and payment. Perhaps have designated driverless cars and bus only lanes.
Think about this future.
Prev
Bus ride likely closer to an hour and 25 minutes at best. I hopped on the Loop 101 for 90% of the way and drove (with traffic) at ~75 mph.
Linear Mode
