Uber Testing Massive Merchant Delivery Service 83
An anonymous reader writes: TechCrunch has obtained documents showing that Uber is testing out a delivery service that would allow shoppers to buy something online and have it delivered on the same day. "Sources say that Neiman Marcus, Louis Vuitton, Tiffany's, Cohen's Fashion Optical and Hugo Boss are all in talks with the Uber Merchant Delivery program, and one source in particular said that there are over 400 different merchants currently in talks (or already testing) with Uber for same-day delivery. (Cohen's Fashion Optical and Hugo Boss are both used as examples in the training presentation.) ... From what we can gather from the manual, it seems that Uber drivers and couriers are currently taking merchant orders through a different app (and even a separate phone) than the one they use to receive regular UberRUSH orders. Eventually, however, Uber drivers will be able to take both human passengers and Uber Merchant orders at the same time through an intelligent routing system, all from a single driver-side app."
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I mean, regulations are why nobody speeds, after all!
No, regulations (speed limits) are why people stay within 10-20 mph of the posted limit, and assholes that drive recklessly and exceed it by a rediculous amount don't stay on the road long endangering the rest of us.
Just because some people break laws doesn't make the law pointless. There is still a measurable restraining effect, and recourse when some jerk steps way out of line to the detriment of the rest of us.
Regulations aren't the problem. Bad regu
Stop acting like a putz (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Uber already carries insurance on its passenger service. What on Earth makes you think they wouldn't insure parcels? And why do you think that people who are being electronically tracked would destroy their parcels, thus getting themselves fired/deactivated, and having charges brought against them?
Do you anti-Uber people just not think? Because it seems like you just throw out any kind of garbage that sounds like its an argument against i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Because, depressingly, Uber drivers are more accountable, better trained, and better supervised than TSA agents.
Re: (Score:3)
Because, depressingly, Uber drivers are more accountable, better trained, and better supervised than TSA agents.
They are also slightly better baby sitters than a pack of starving, rabid jackals.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not libel if it's true [northjersey.com]:
Re: (Score:2)
It's not libel if it's true [northjersey.com]
Except that it is NOT true. You pointing out that Uber doesn't insure drivers while they are NOT working for Uber, doesn't negate the fact that they do insure them when they ARE working for Uber.
Re:flashy, but risky too. (Score:5, Insightful)
And you're going to continue to pretend that insurance companies haven't cancelled the policies [policygenius.com] of Uber drivers?
It is true that the insurance situation and legality of operations is most decidedly NOT what comes out of the reality distortion field Uber tells people.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To add to the farce, there hasn't been a single incident (that I am aware of) where these policies have even been exercised.
Re: (Score:2)
Insurance means very little to companies who have a certain service standard to uphold. No one will give a shit if they get their money back if their order of 10k worth of shoes disappears. These people want their service, and they will blame whoever they bought their stuff from if anything goes wrong.
There is a reason why certain trucking operations pay their truckers a shit-ton of money, have armed guards, locked trucks, tracking devices, etc. It's so that shit doesn't get "lost", not that they can pay t
Re: (Score:2)
Similar to how you probably wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) use Uber to transport a VIP, you wouldn't use Uber's product service to transport high-value, hard to replace goods. Instead, this service would be useful for goods which are readily replaceable, and just need to get from A to B. If something happens on the first attempt, you reroute with a 2nd attempt, deliver the good, and get reimbursed for the good that was lost. They'd
Re: (Score:3)
Oddly enough, Massachusetts has just introduced a bill [slashdot.org] to ensure that Uber drivers are not "unregulated, unlicensed, or uninsured".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In Section 11H, (1) (ii) of the bill in question [mass.gov]:
The insurance may be held by the transportation network driver, the transportation network company, or some combination thereof.
Re: (Score:2)
I even doubt there will be suitable insurance or bonding, as one reason Uber can be so cheap is because they externalize most costs to the driver, which means consumer do not have the protection they normally expect. I mean if something happens on the trip, or to a product, who are you going to sue? The driver who doesn't even hold the t
Re: (Score:2)
Even with proper insurance and bonding, it still leaves the consumer open to receiving counterfeit property.
This problem can be solved with a 5 cent seal applied to the box, which is already commonly done for valuable items, since a UPS or FedEx driver can pilfer a shipment just as easily as an Uber driver can. Most valuable items are also serialized, so the consumer can go online and verify that it is genuine. This is not a new problem, and is not unique to Uber.
Re: (Score:2)
Although I see problems with this I kind of doubt counterfeiting is going to be one. To successfully do this the driver/Uber would have to have access to a huge warehouse of counterfeit goods so they could exchange the real item (chosen by the customer, not the Uber driver) for a matching fake one. I just don't see that as a practical scheme for stealing goods.
Re: (Score:2)
Im sure most of these companies feel like its worth the PR, until they realize shipping through an unregulated, unlicensed, un-insured third party is a great way to watch $12,000 worth of shoes and purses go from the back of a prius to a roaring bonfire on youtube.
You do realize that big companies monitor their vendor's performance, and only work with vendors that do a good job.
At my workplace we really don't care how the outside vendor gets the job done for stuff like this as long as they get it done. We care about performance, not process (except at the interfaces with us).
If Uber starts losing items, they'll go out of business. Heck, if they can't give their customers (the big vendors) visibility into where their stuff is at all times, they'll never get the busi
Re: (Score:2)
I'll just leave this here... DHL in practice. [youtube.com]
We already know how the current companies perform. And its generally not great.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll just leave this here... DHL in practice. [youtube.com]
We already know how the current companies perform. And its generally not great.
Meh. At my workplace we use monitors/etc when we ship stuff where handling matters. If handling goes out of spec, then we'll have some words with the courier, and have procurement bring up that nice exclusive agreement we made that sends millions per year in business their way.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, and those Uber drivers are going to rape the packages, too! Won't someone think of the packages!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Why not become a driver, get a big load of packages, then never return?
If that's actually a problem in reality then we'll see it happen pretty soon, won't we? If we don't see it, then it's probably not actually a problem, is it?
Hmm (Score:1)
Possibly this could help sagging local retailers, the matching of routes with people needing a ride means 2 things done at once reducing emissions.
There's some good potential here, I wonder if Uber can implement this correctly.
Re: (Score:2)
There's some good potential here, I wonder if Uber can implement this correctly.
Since the social benefits are closely aligned with the greedy self-interest of both the drivers and the shareholders, it is likely that it will be implemented correctly. Profit is a powerful motivator.
Re: (Score:1)
Funny, I can recall arguing to make politicians jobs revolve around self interest, their self interest, as that is possibly the only way to get them to do anything (in our interest).
Implementation is another thing entirely.
Economy of Scale (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, right.
FedEx/UPS are bonded, insured, and reliable, and have global logistics chains.
Uber is some guy with his mom's car, no commercial license, possibly improper insurance, and quite likely operating as an illegal commercial vehicle in many places.
I just don't see that happening.
Uber's magical thinking that laws don't apply to them tell me they're not what I'd call trustworthy.
Re: (Score:1)
That would be because you are a short-sighted rube. You didn't see Uber itself coming either, did you? But don't let that stop you from making asinine assertions from the peanut gallery.
Re: (Score:2)
Not quite pennies, especially in today's limited job market. The most dedicated drivers I know, after the first couple of months using their own car, use their profits to buy a just-young-enough semi-beater to take all the depreciation and save their own car for strictly personal mileage
*full disclosure* Not a rideshare driver, but I sure have been consi
Re: (Score:2)
have global logistics chains.
You don't need a global logistics chain to deliver a parcel in a store in Wichita to a person in Wichita. Which is what it sounds like they're doing.
some guy with his mom's car
The owner of the car seems largely irrelevant.
no commercial license
Which is unnecessary to drive said mother's car.
possibly improper insurance
Boy, that doesn't sound solvable at all. Like, by making drivers have and prove they have the right insurance?
quite likely operating as an illegal commercial vehicle in many places.
TBD, lawsuits aren't over, laws may change.
I just don't see that happening.
If you stopped your irrational hate for a second and used your imagination, maybe you could.
Re:Economy of Scale (Score:5, Informative)
I don't have an irrational hate for Uber ... I have a well reasoned dislike for a company who says "la la la, we're not listening, your laws don't apply because we're awesome".
I heard one of the founders/mouthpieces defending their position once ... he sounded like a self entitled ass who deemed himself special and covered under a different set of rules.
Uber can't simultaneously say "we're not a transport company, we're a tech company" and also pretend to be a transport company.
Having an app doesn't exempt you from laws. Only in their delusional, self important heads.
They're a greedy tech company, they're not some fucking saviors of the world.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have an irrational hate for Uber ... I have a well reasoned dislike for a company who says "la la la, we're not listening, your laws don't apply because we're awesome".
The thing is, most people likely to consume their services would rather have them operating just as they are than otherwise. It is a bit of an irony given that we're a democracy, but stuff like this happens all the time. We have speed limits that almost nobody follows, and yet they aren't changed. The issue is that laws often do not reflect the political will of the population.
So, just about everybody is starting to just ignore laws in these cases and dare anybody to do anything about it. People just sp
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is when something inevitably happens, and the user gets screwed. E.g., an Uber driver getting in an accident without a f
Re: (Score:2)
Uber's small enough now it doesn't matter because they're only going after the folks with money...
This has happened in other areas of the economy as well. Previously there was a monopoly that charged inflated prices to most of the population, and subsidized prices to a small part of the population. Then somebody comes along and competes for the profitable majority and ignores the profitless minority, which then causes a loss for the former monopoly.
I think the real problem is that this is a lousy way to provide services to the poor/etc. Just make the service provider free-market and run things super-
Re: (Score:2)
Until their Uber driver hits someone litigous on the street. Then all of a sudden the driver and the rider (as the "employer of an independent contractor" ) are getting sued.
There's a reason the laws built up the way they did. You want to fix them, you have my blessing. But, for the love of many things, demonstrate that your fixes also solve the problem that the law was designed to solve, or tell
Re: (Score:2)
There's a reason the laws built up the way they did. You want to fix them, you have my blessing.
Nah, I'll leave that to you.
That was my whole point. If you want the law to be right, go ahead and fix it. Everybody else is just going to ignore it. They don't care if the law is right or not, because it doesn't really matter if nobody enforces it.
It is just too painful to fix the law. Too many entrenched interests are going to block you when you try. People realize they don't actually have to play that game, and so they don't. We end up with a society where EVERYBODY breaks the law daily as a result
Re: (Score:2)
They totally enforce the laws to some degree. Hundreds of people get ticketed for violating the laws.
But you're talking about the process. I'm talking about the desirability. I think the laws are, in general, good for America. There's a reason they were put in place. And while they may have been captured by industry, the harms they were put in place to avoid are still out there. So my question is: Why would we want to change the law. Or, the question I was asking and you ducked was: In what way can yo
Re: (Score:2)
Or, the question I was asking and you ducked was: In what way can you change the law and still avoid those harms?
I'm actually not convinced that it is possible to do so in a democratic society purely governed by the rule of law. Many of the most harmful issues in society are the result of people completely complying with the law, and always staying one step ahead of it.
I can look at a big company paying zero taxes and say that they're doing something wrong. I can't come up with a robust law that would result in them paying taxes. I don't think anybody else can, unless you allow the law to be changed about 47 times
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have an irrational hate for Uber ... I have a well reasoned dislike for a company who says "la la la, we're not listening, your laws don't apply because we're awesome".
I have a rational dislike for Uber because I've lived in a place with unregulated taxi services where anyone can become a driver.
In other words, I've seen the end game for Uber.
The best case scenario is to compensate for too many drivers and not enough fares they form gangs and territories of their own. Drivers will not be able to pick up fares outside their territory. Drivers who are not members of a gang will be threatened and intimidated... Thats the best case scenario.
Beyond the best case you h
Re: (Score:2)
I have a well reasoned dislike for a company
I'm not seeing the "well-reasoned" part. You don't like what they say and you spewed a poorly reasoned explanation for why you don't see local delivery happening. I'm not in love with Uber either, and I don't approve of all their actions. But my dislike for them doesn't preclude me from seeing the possibility of package delivery.
Re: (Score:2)
FedEx/UPS are bonded, insured, and reliable, and have global logistics chains
Uber is some guy with his mom's car, no commercial license, possibly improper insurance, and quite likely operating as an illegal commercial vehicle in many places.
I just don't see that happening.
Uber's magical thinking that laws don't apply to them tell me they're not what I'd call trustworthy.
This sounds like just an EBay style market for last mile delivery... I think if structured properly it could work with feedback, policing and policy structures in place to reinforce good behavior and quickly weed out bad actors. You can use tamper evident seals/photograph/signoff procedures to keep drivers on the hook legally.
EBay has buyer protection schemes which work for all buyers regardless of seller. Uber could do the same and essentially offer insurance itself for the service as well as requiring t
Re: (Score:2)
FedEx/UPS are bonded, insured, and reliable, and have global logistics chains. Uber is some guy with his mom's car, no commercial license, possibly improper insurance, and quite likely operating as an illegal commercial vehicle in many places.
FedEx is a lot more like Uber than you think. FedEx drivers are independent contractors. They get no benefits, no overtime, no sick leave, and no insurance. They pay for and maintain their own vehicles.
And yes, there was even a time when the US Post Office was trying to outlaw FedEx, because FedEx drivers had the gall to sometimes use door mail slots (instead of just leaving the envelopes on the ground in front of people's doorways when they were not home).
In any case, FedEx had some rough patches when it
Re: (Score:2)
Having had UPS destroy properly packaged shipments and then disclaim all liability, any insurance they provide is useless.
I can just see it now ... (Score:2)
Yeah. No thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
I wish we could find a way to make the honeymoon last forever. Maybe a way to identify and blacklist bad actors before they can create damage.
That sounds like a perfect plan. And I'm sure that the identifying and blacklisting of bad actors would be awesome during the "honeymoon" period when it is introduced. Enthusiastic participants will make it a great alternative.
And then, once it gets popular, the assholes will show up...
Queue the special interest groups (Score:2)
Queue the special interest groups to start trying to shut this down.
Re: (Score:2)
Might be better to get one of those numbered ticket dispensers.
Home or Phone? (Score:4, Interesting)
The article is kind of vague on the dropoff but it seems to be the real benefit isn't in the speed, it's the dropoff location.
As someone who lives in an apartment getting a parcel looks like me checking the main entrance (which I don't use) for delivery notices of parcels they tried to deliver while I was at work then heading to the parcel depot during the 6 hours window on Saturday when I'm not at work and they're open.
But Uber can get the current GPS location of its customers, so could do the dropoff directly to the person and skip the game of depot tag.
The traditional delivery companies might have a real hard time responding to that.
Re: (Score:2)
My complex straight up stopped signing for packages. You have a job to pay your rent? Tough tits, pay up for FedEx Saturday (or buy from amazon and time it for USPS Sunday delivery) .
Re: (Score:2)
My complex has never signed for packages; there wouldn't even have ever been that ability, nobody would be there to sign for it. If a package can be dropped off without signature, they'll just leave it in the lobby sometimes (occasionally they don't feel like it, which is annoying).
However, given that I have a job and am thus not there during the week during the day, if I know a package will require a signature, I have it *sent* to my work. My work receives packages all the time, so it doesn't mind occasion
a new dystopia (Score:5, Insightful)
We all know the dystopia of 1984 in which humans were dehumanized by their own actions; and the Terminator movies where smart machines set out to kill us like cockroaches. The Matrix reduced humans into sleeping energy generators. Uber has advanced a new method of dehumanizing us by sending us on chores to serve a superintelligence (OK, just a central computer now, more or less managed by humans- but are those humans necessary?).
We do have a similar concept in Taskrabbit and the Amazon Mechanical Turk in which humans do tiny chores in response to requests delivered by their devices. Uber seems ready to take this concept worldwide at a grand scale. People will be scurrying about like ants, rushing from one chore to another in a frenzy of blind busy-ness.
And you, mister smarty pants programmer, you think you're off the hook? You'll be lucky to find work writing snippets of code that will be inserted into some diabolical software that doesn't even have a name.
Is this the beginning of a world where nobody has a job, a health insurance plan, a steady income; but instead performs chores when they can be found? Will we compete against each other to do menial tasks? Will we be graded like schoolchildren for our skills, timeliness, reliability? Will future humans be the cooperative slaves of a central computer?
Wonder what UPS etc will say (Score:1)
Unlicensed drivers delivering packages.
Under TPP this would be illegal.
Under many state laws this would result in the execs serving jail terms.
I'm sure nobody would call the cops on them ...
In related news ... (Score:2)