Honestly if I was Travis I would probably do the same thing to the drivers.

Raider

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #21
Having a higher rate WILL stop the good drivers from leaving though and if a better rating system were designed the bad drivers would eventually lose business to the better drivers as the pax would be more discerning due to the higher rates. A rating system where the pax can see available cars willing to go to their location and the ratings for things like safe driving, cleanliness of car, knowledge of the city, even things that vary but are not necessarily positive or negative, like talkativeness would allow them to pick what works for them ON THAT DAY (because sometimes you would choose the driver whose city knowledge is the best as you're in a hurry and you don't care if his car is not pristine; another day you may not care about much but you absolutely don't feel like talking to someone--the "quiet" driver would be best then) but a low rating on too many things and that bad driver will not get trips.
An easy way to reward drivers would be to allow them to set up their own clients by having them pay a smaller commission to you for rides where the client specifically requests them. This would allow drivers to build up a client base perhaps in their neighborhood.

Of course a REAL background check would also help to weed out some of those drivers as well.

And God forbid you put a limit on how many drivers you have. Of course if you made the platform available only 40 hours a week and no more than 12 hours a day that would help safety.

Which brings me to not being an @@@@@@@. If I were running this and my not giving a shit caused a driver who was working 100 hours a week to try and pay his crappy Santander lease AND keep a roof over his head to kill someone because he fell asleep at the wheel I would be devastated. But Travis has no conscience. He doesn't care. Yes, accidents happen but a decent person tries to minimize the risk. Travis doesn't give a damn about the drivers, the pax, or anyone else out there who is broke, suicidal, injured or dead as a result of Uber's practices.

IMHO you have to be a psychopath to act the way he does. We all know the research that showed that CEOs have more psychopathic tendencies than the general population. He's a prime example.

To be a CEO you pretty much have to have killer instinct and prey on the weak to make money anyways possible. Think of sweatshops and the owners of Nike, reebok, Adidas etc.

Having a higher rate will not lose drivers but will eventually lose customer base, you want the most riders to sign up and use uber as frequently as possible. That has always been uber's goal, total market domination. How do you do that? You undercut every competitor in town. That $1 SRF fees is really what uber is after at this point. Most rides are taken place in the city don't you agree? Where there are a lot of minimum fares, the SRF fees adds up to shit tons of money at the end of the day.

If you can cut rate, have idiots drive for free, and still make money and dominate the market, then why won't you do it? Yeah it's morally @@@@ed up, but that's what it takes to get to where he is.
 

Oc_DriverX

Well-Known Member
One more time; God gave you free will. What you and every living being does with it, is your and every one else prerogative.

No one put a gun to your head to buy toys with lead paint, or drive 36 hours with out sleep.

So stop looking for a scapegoat.
If an Uber driver drives for too long and gets into an accident, much of that blame is on him. But, if Uber had the ability to limit that driving and did nothing, then they share at least some of that blame as well.
 

Feisal Mo

Well-Known Member
It is a form of slavery. When the drivers must submit to your terms or starve, that's slavery aka economical slavery.
 
Last edited:

KGB7

Well-Known Member
If an Uber driver drives for too long and gets into an accident, much of that blame is on him. But, if Uber had the ability to limit that driving and did nothing, then they share at least some of that blame as well.
If Ifs and Buts were candy and nuts, it would be a Merry Christmas.

Uber has no reason to limit the hours of drivers, since its the only source of income.
 

Fuzzyelvis

Well-Known Member
If an Uber driver drives for too long and gets into an accident, much of that blame is on him. But, if Uber had the ability to limit that driving and did nothing, then they share at least some of that blame as well.
That's my point exactly. And they're doing it on a much larger scale which makes it almost inevitable. Which they know.

I find it very disturbing that there are folks on here saying in essence it's ok to act like Travis and his ilk and that they would do it too if they could. Makes me wonder what else they would do if they thought they could get away with it.
 

KGB7

Well-Known Member
That's my point exactly. And they're doing it on a much larger scale which makes it almost inevitable. Which they know.

I find it very disturbing that there are folks on here saying in essence it's ok to act like Travis and his ilk and that they would do it too if they could. Makes me wonder what else they would do if they thought they could get away with it.
Is it a world wide epidemic where drivers are dying left and right? Nope! Then don't waist your energy thinking about it.


And i would eat ice cream with a cucumber, in bed, upsidedown!
 

LA#1x3

Well-Known Member
If you can exploit the dumb and the desperate and prosper, wouldn't you? I'll keep lowering the rates to the brink of zero if there are drivers dumb enough to drive for me, I still collect the SRF and minimum fare commission.

Why not?
I wouldn't first I wouldn't think like that to Lower the rates and stuff. I'd make the rates fare enough so my drivers would be happy and want to work for me. Even if he makes the 20%to 5% he still will be making money. So it just comes from The person u are deep in side. If ur a greedy, don't care about what other think of u,a son is a B then ull get what's coming to u from whatever God u Beleive in.
 

Raider

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #29
I wouldn't first I wouldn't think like that to Lower the rates and stuff. I'd make the rates fare enough so my drivers would be happy and want to work for me. Even if he makes the 20%to 5% he still will be making money. So it just comes from The person u are deep in side. If ur a greedy, don't care about what other think of u,a son is a B then ull get what's coming to u from whatever God u Beleive in.

I have to lower my rates to keep my foot on Lyft's neck. This was the obvious move for Uber, make it cheaper than lyft, taxi, metro, bus etc..if lowering the rates I could still get drivers to drive for me and make me money then why wouldn't I do it? If I kept my rate at a regular level sooner or later everyone will flock to Lyft and then once they're gone it's hard to get them back with drivers flocking there as well.
 

Uber Kraus

Well-Known Member
If Ifs and Buts were candy and nuts, it would be a Merry Christmas.

Uber has no reason to limit the hours of drivers, since its the only source of income.
A bunch of us here in Colorado got an email stating if we drive more than 12 hours a day we face temporary or permanent deactivation.
 

LA#1x3

Well-Known Member
I have to lower my rates to keep my foot on Lyft's neck. This was the obvious move for Uber, make it cheaper than lyft, taxi, metro, bus etc..if lowering the rates I could still get drivers to drive for me and make me money then why wouldn't I do it? If I kept my rate at a regular level sooner or later everyone will flock to Lyft and then once they're gone it's hard to get them back with drivers flocking there as well.
Everyone thinks different . You see how everyone here hates the owner me personally wouldn't want my workers to talk shit behind my back curse t me and think of me as a piece of shit that's just me. U think lyft don't make money they do and look u don't have there drivers @@@@@ing about the owne all day
 

Tim54913

Active Member
Your ignorance is showing. The vast majority of long-haul trucker in the U.S. are not Teamsters, or in any other union.
Kids, here is a prime example why you should not cut class to sniff glue with a homeless.
Taxi driver would be correct. The majority of long haul truckers are not in the Teamsters or in any union. The Majority of Teamsters are in the LTL sector of trucking ie: UPS, The Yellow/Roadway companies, and ABF.
 

Taxi Driver in Arizona

Well-Known Member
Taxi driver would be correct. The majority of long haul truckers are not in the Teamsters or in any union. The Majority of Teamsters are in the LTL sector of trucking ie: UPS, The Yellow/Roadway companies, and ABF.
Thank you.

Now according to KGB7, your factual rebuttal makes you a glue sniffer. LOL.
 

KGB7

Well-Known Member
Taxi driver would be correct. The majority of long haul truckers are not in the Teamsters or in any union. The Majority of Teamsters are in the LTL sector of trucking ie: UPS, The Yellow/Roadway companies, and ABF.
Did I say 100% of all drivers at any given time?
 
Top