Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Businesses Technology

Lyft Says Nearly 250K of Its Passengers Ditched a Personal Car In 2017 (techcrunch.com) 109

Posted by BeauHD from the car-ownership-trends dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Lyft has a new report out detailing its "economic impact" for 2017, and the document includes a lot of stats on its performance throughout the year. The ride-hailing provider claims 375.5 million rides for the year, which is 130 percent growth measured year-over-year. It served 23 million different passengers, itself a 92 percent YoY increase, and had 1.4 million drivers on the platform -- 100 percent growth vs. its total for 2016. Lyft is making some especially strong claims regarding its impact on car ownership trends: In 2017 alone, it said that almost a quarter of a million passengers on its platform dropped owning a personal vehicle, due to the availability of ridesharing specifically. Fifty percent of its users also report driving their own car less because of Lyft's service, and a quarter of those on the platform say they don't feel personal vehicle ownership is that important anymore. The ride-hailing company also found attitudes generally favorable towards self-driving vehicles and their use: 83 percent of Lyft passengers surveyed by the company said they'd be open to hailing and riding in a self-driving vehicle once they're available.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Lyft Says Nearly 250K of Its Passengers Ditched a Personal Car In 2017 More

Lyft Says Nearly 250K of Its Passengers Ditched a Personal Car In 2017

Comments Filter:

  • ride-hailing (Score:5, Funny)

    by 110010001000 ( 697113 ) on Tuesday January 16, 2018 @06:33PM (#55942407) Homepage Journal
    You mean "illegal taxi service" right? I don't care if people use these services, I am on the side of the taxi companies! They provide such great service.
    • No sarcasm intended: I'm on the side of the taxi companies. Not because they offer terribly great service, but because they accept cash. Cash = anonymity. Companies like Uber and Lyft building a map of personal travels to be kept for posterity is an awful idea.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mi ( 197448 )

        No sarcasm intended

        You are not 110010001000 [slashdot.org], are you?

        His objection (sincere or sarcastic) was not the diminishment of anonimity, but simply the alleged illegality.

        they accept cash. Cash = anonymity

        Not quite... Many taxi companies keep record of where each ride originated and ended. And many (most?) take at least a picture of the passenger [taxi-library.org], if not a video [forbes.com] of him. Such video-equipment is a booming business [vehiclevideocameras.com].

        Of course, Uber and others are doing it too [qz.com]. Get used to it — with very few exceptions, whatever c

        • Re:ride-hailing (Score:4, Informative)

          by b0s0z0ku ( 752509 ) on Tuesday January 16, 2018 @09:23PM (#55943339)

          The camera systems are MUCH better than Uber and friends.

          Pictures are a lot harder to tie to an identity than credit card info and an email addy. Also, your link implies that the cameras use local storage, which probably gets cyclically wiped after a day or maybe a week, unless there's evidence of a crime that needs to be preserved.

          I'm a lot more comfortable with a camera in a cab, since the pictures don't hit a large corporate database, and disappear from (local) storage after a short time unless there's evidence of a violent crime. And taxi companies are taxi companies -- they're not into selling your data to marketeering filth.

          • Also, your link implies that the cameras use local storage

            Not for very long. As soon as a smart criminal or two take the recorder along with the driver's money at the end of a ride, the next generation of such cameras will be hailing "instant uploading of videos to the cloud". And the cabbies will upgrade. They are upgrading already [theverge.com] — credit card acceptance by taxis is rising. Though cash still remains an option, that too may be on its way out [nytimes.com].

            BTW, cities like New York have required data-collection fr

            • Thankfully, outside of a few selected markets, cash isn't going anywhere fast in NYC. Why? Thank illegal immigration and the underground economy created by it -- many people have no choice OTHER than to pay cash for services.

              And I mean this with no sarcasm -- I'm actually grateful to the unbanked and undocumented for preserving some level of privacy in the US for everyone else.

              Data collection? Sure. But if cash is paid, all the system knows is that cab #5A4D went from point A to B at such-and-such a ti

              • Re: (Score:1)

                by mi ( 197448 )

                Thank illegal immigration and the underground economy created by it -- many people have no choice OTHER than to pay cash for services.

                More naiveté. An illegal immigrant can get a credit card [npr.org], not a problem [nerdwallet.com]...

                But if cash is paid, all the system knows is that cab #5A4D went from point A to B at such-and-such a time and date.

                Your naiveté is touching. We already know, how easy it is to uniquely identify you just by your web-browser [slashdot.org]. And that's something you can control somewhat.

                With an active smartpho

                • And, again, if you don't carry the phone at all times? Or pull the battery? (Still an option on some phones.) WiFi and BT can also be turned off, BTW. In the US, you can also buy a prepaid SIM card for cash, without ID -- for all the provider knows, you can be Daffy Duck.

                  BTW - the goal isn't total anonymity. It's FRAGMENTATION of data, so whoever wants a profile on someone's movements needs to work a bit for it. The point is to not make it easy.

                  The link for the credit cards was from 2007. Things have

                  • Re: (Score:1)

                    by mi ( 197448 )

                    And, again, if you don't carry the phone at all times? Or pull the battery?

                    Not something you would do normally. And if you do, you'll be flagged by the system just for that. It will certainly retain your picture and the driver will remember you, etc.

                    BTW - the goal isn't total anonymity. It's FRAGMENTATION of data

                    No disagreement here. Yet the cellphone gives marketeers and police alike a single source...

                    The link for the credit cards was from 2007.

                    The first link was from 2007 and talked about BOFA piloting th [snopes.com]

                    • (1) I'm sure plenty of people take taxis with dead cell phone batteries or even without a phone without being flagged, or remembered by the driver (who is generally yik-yakking on his own phone or just too self-absorbed to care).
                      (2) I'd of course not take out the battery IN the cab, but before I even flag one.
                      (3) FACT is that cash economies are thriving in heavily-immigrant areas of US cities.

    • the only difference between taxis and lyft/uber for me is that the latter requires an app on your smartphone.

      • App is another strike against it: (a) you have to pay for a data plan (b) your phone has to be charged to use it

      • Re:ride-hailing (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Impy the Impiuos Imp ( 442658 ) on Tuesday January 16, 2018 @07:11PM (#55942621) Journal

        The latter is almost instantaneous. On a really cold night a few weeks ago I couldn't get my car started, nor could AAA. How to go pick up my takeout food? He suggest Uber (taxi company had a wait of 10 people ahead of me.)

        A minute to install, a few more to enter my name, address, and CC info, then enter destination and push a button. Wtf, ETA of Uber driver 6 minutes???

        Standard taxies and the politicians who protect them can go drive off a cliff.

        • Don't worry, government suckups! Within 10 years robocars will make all peopled taxies irrelevant!

          Nothing for you to do and protect for donations.

          • Robocars will also destroy privacy, since they'll be paid for via (trackable) electronic means and likely be loaded with cameras. Robocars are a government suckups' wet dream.

            • Robocars will also destroy privacy, since they'll be paid for via (trackable) electronic means and likely be loaded with cameras.

              Cars today all have license plates, and most towns and cities have cameras at every intersection large enough to have a stoplight. And most every vehicle carries at least one cellular telephone. If you're worried about surreptitious government tracking, you should be worried now. Robocars won't significantly change the situation.

              • The thing about cameras at every traffic light is largely untrue outside of very major US cities (can't speak to everywhere in the world). Unless they're red-light cameras, there's simply no money in it. Also, cell phones can be turned off or left at home. I often do either one or both with my phone. If you want to reach me, leave a message. BEEEEEP!

                • The thing about cameras at every traffic light is largely untrue outside of very major US cities (can't speak to everywhere in the world). Unless they're red-light cameras, there's simply no money in it.

                  Not true. Nearly all new traffic light installations use cameras to detect when vehicles are approaching or waiting at the intersection. They're cheaper and more accurate than pressure plates or magnetometers, particularly with respect to small vehicles, especially motor scooters. It's so prevalent that many traffic light vendors are incorporating cameras into the light bodies themselves. If you're in an area with older lights that still haven't upgraded to efficient LEDs, odds are high that when they do up

                  • I forgot to make the concluding point:

                    The conclusion is that if we don't want intrusive government surveillance (and we don't!), the solution is going to have to be through public policy. Technical countermeasures, and especially reliance on the fact that stuff that used to be hard used to be hard, are going to fail as technology continues to get cheaper and better.

                  • You don't need a very clean lens or clear picture to see SOMETHING there vs reading a license plate or recognizing a face.

                    Also, the data would likely be fragmented between local governments and a legal PITA to procure legally. Governments are bound by data-retention and privacy laws.

                    If we end up with most travel controlled by a few ride-share companies, travel data for anyone would be easier to come by, since we'd end up with a few "one stop shops." No research or subpoenas of every local entity that MIGH

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          So you've got a taxi company which needs to have enough drivers to carry their call volume while not having too many drivers that they can't pay them all during slow periods. Compared with Uber which funnels VC money into each ride to make its price below cost and doesn't need to pay anything while its drivers sit around waiting for your call.

          One is a sustainable business, the other is attempting to drive everyone else out of business so it can massively jack up prices afterwards. In the future, remember

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          It's not that people want to stop them using the app or make the service as annoying as traditional taxi services, it's that they want them to pay the minimum wage, abide by laws on safety and the reporting of crimes, vet drivers properly. They can still use the app.

        • fair enough, if you don't want to use cash i guess that's a valid feature. still, that the taxi company had a line and uber didn't is just an anecdote and doesn't mean that it will work like that all the time (unless you live in a city that lacks taxis, but places like NYC that have 20 taxis per street or something like that would disagree)

    • You mean "illegal taxi service" right? I don't care if people use these services, I am on the side of the taxi companies! They provide such great service.

      The antiquated medallion (licensed taxi) systems should be phased out. They were implemented to ease congestion from taxi's clogging major roadways trying to pick up fares and to ensure that customers were not being cheated/swindled. Apps do the same even more efficiently

      • Re:ride-hailing (Score:4, Insightful)

        by sdinfoserv ( 1793266 ) on Tuesday January 16, 2018 @07:37PM (#55942817)
        complete BS..
        Lyft & Uber are parasite entities that attempt to suck profit off the back of "workers". Calling them "contractors", no benefits, using their own vehicles, competing against each other to drive down cost - by the time you factor in all costs and taxes (of which independent contractors pay ALL), these are sub-minimum wage gigs. Driving someone you don't know to a place you aren't going for money isn't "ride share", it's a taxi. period. The drivers are shorted the most and your municipalities are shorted tax revenue so your roads crumble, first responders go under funded and nobody keeps out the “bad” drivers
        • I could have been more clear. I said replace the medallion licensing system with apps, not with ride-sharing (lyft, uber whatever)

          FYI because medallions are so expensive the taxi drivers can't afford them and "rent" the taxis for exorbitant fees

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Ichijo ( 607641 )

          your municipalities are shorted tax revenue so your roads crumble

          Then should we make the roads pay for themselves 100% from gas taxes and other user fees instead of less than half? [uspirg.org]

          • and what would you suggest to do for that money when most of the vehicles on the road are not using gasoline or diesel?

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Ichijo ( 607641 )

              Mileage fees, tolls, etc. User fees, like I said.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Agripa ( 139780 )

              and what would you suggest to do for that money when most of the vehicles on the road are not using gasoline or diesel?

              Civil assets forfeiture.

        • Yes and no. Each have the power to be huge parasites, but talking to various drivers it doesn't seem like they really view the companies that way.

          You definitely have two different classes of drivers-- full timers, and part timers. The part-timers seem to enjoy doing it when they want and not having to work when they don't feel up to it or when they have conflicts like school or kids soccer matches or whatever. It seems like the part-timers are more opportunistic and help out with peak demand periods. I

        • complete BS.. Lyft & Uber are parasite entities that attempt to suck profit off the back of "workers". Calling them "contractors", no benefits, using their own vehicles, competing against each other to drive down cost - by the time you factor in all costs and taxes (of which independent contractors pay ALL), these are sub-minimum wage gigs. Driving someone you don't know to a place you aren't going for money isn't "ride share", it's a taxi. period. The drivers are shorted the most and your municipalities are shorted tax revenue so your roads crumble, first responders go under funded and nobody keeps out the “bad” drivers

          The only thing under funded about first responders is their pensions - and even that wouldn't be the case if it wasn't for them retiring at nearly full pay at age 50.

      • Phased out in how long?

        So do you think there should be NO LIMIT to the number of on-demand drivers of any type?

        I'm not saying I'm necessarily in favor of the existing medallion system, but it seems to me like it's screwing over the owners of literally million dollar licenses.

        BTW, I have used a taxi literally once ever, and Uber twice (to home and back to car dealership, paid for directly(I realize indirectly by customers) by car dealership when warranty service was happening). I will give up my own person

  • I have a staff partially composed of millenials and Generation Z staff. A few of the younger staff have opted to not purchase a car and instead use either Uber or Lyft to head into work. In speaking with one, she indicated she is saving to purchase a house and not having a vehicle is allowing her to do that. My son indicated originally he didn't want his drivers licence until he realized Lyft doesn't go to the desert.
    • I'd be surprised if paying for (essentially) a taxi every day were cheaper than buying something like a beater Corolla, putting liability-only insurance on it, and driving it to work every day.

  • Most people that benefit from Lyft or Uber live in denser areas that had taxi service or public transit anyway. Did the people being interviewed move in the last few years and maybe not buy another car?

    In the same time frame, how many people moved to more suburban areas where a (non-shared) car is generally needed to get around?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AvitarX ( 172628 )

      Taxi service was worthless where I live (Wilmington, DE).

      45+ minute waits (after telling you 30), sometimes no show. I saw someone wait in the shopping center where I work for 2 hours being told 30 minutes and then constantly 15 minutes away.

      Uber/Lyft have the greatest benefit in medium cities, the type where things aren't too far apart, but there isn't enough people to support cabs.in these areas they are not particularly cheaper than a cab, but do show up, and are happy (at least in the face) to do short

  • Once people don't have cars and all the taxi companies have been killed off Lyft can put the prices up.

    It'll be the same with Amazon. Once their brick and mortar competitors have been killed off, Amazon will get a lot less cheap.

    • Certainly there will never be another Wal-Mart / Amazon / Big Box Store / et al, to come along that will be able to do it better and cheaper. 'Cause that's never happened. Ever.

  • There's a pretty big stigma to admitting to hard financial times, but I'd bet money these folks just couldn't afford to keep their own car anymore. For those of you playing at home this is a Bad Thing.

  • I ditched my car, well... wife took it, anyway I would say this can be very different depending on your case but I spend an average of 300€ on Uber per month, when in the past I used to spend around 500€ with my car, loan+taxes+tolls+insurance+fuel+parking.

  • True ridesharers take the train.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sconeu ( 64226 )

      Ah, but... How do you GET to the train?

      • Bicycle...

        Got to hand it to the Dutch, they do it with flair:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

        • And if the train is close by, you can use your feet. Then you don't have the inconvenience of packing your bicycle in and out of trains and buildings.

          Dutch and New Yorkers both ride bicycles in the winter. It's a challenge but possible in a big city with well plowed streets or in a city that doesn't get excessive snow fall. Where some pull over pants that will keep you dry and you can take off when indoors. If your cool hipster job is in a big drafty reclaimed warehouse you might be wearing some flannel-lin

  • That's awesome. Everyone should just stop spending money on everything. Nothing but good times ahead.

  • Average trip is $14. If you need to take 2 trips a day, that's $28 a day. Typically about 6 miles per trip, so let's say 12 miles a day.
    Car insurance would be about $2.25/day for an under 25 year old millennial ($820/year). Fuel cost for 12 miles a day using a relatively cheap 24 mpg car is around $1.25 assuming a price of $2.50/gal. So now we're up to $3.50/day and haven't added in car payments. I'm not sure what kind of care you want to get for $24.50/day but a lease on a new car of $23,000 should be arou

    • Few things:
      - Lease is the most expensive way to own a car.
      - A under 25 shouldn't ever buy a new car.
      - A used Honda Fit is 9k.

      I'd redo the math after that, and be sure to recalculate how much it costs once the car is paid off and is only maintenance.

  • Uber/Lyft is roughly $15 for a 5 mile ride [engadget.com]. Figure you live 5 miles from work. That's $30/day, 250 workdays/year, or $7500/yr.

    That's squarely in-line with the cost to own a new car [aaa.com]. $6354/yr for a small car, $8171/yr for a medium sedan. Except that ownership cost assumes 15k miles/yr driven. The Uber/Lyft cost above is for only 2.5k miles/yr. So if you own, you're paying the same as two 5 mile rides per workday, plus you get to drive 12,500 miles anywhere you want each year for free.

    Basically, w

    • >Basically, when you use Uber/Lyft, you're paying for use of a car plus the time and services of a driver.

      You cannot get the cost of a driving service low enough to compete, since my travel time is already lost regardless of whether I'm a driver or a passenger.

      I keep my costs for a car to ~CAD 1K/year by buying used and driving them until they're not safe. Add gas and a few more percentage points for insurance.

      I live more than five miles from work, I like visiting my parents from time to time - and they

  • Bad business case. If everyone is getting rid of their cars and taking Lyft, where are they going to get cheap drivers to work for Lyft?

Slashdot Top Deals

Sentient plasmoids are a gas.

Close