urbanSTL

timersman wrote:Can you grab an uber from the arrivals at lambert? I know here at LAX this was just recently allowed.

Uber Black only.

Was told by a Uber driver out in San Fran that you can just move the pin a little outside the airport then call the driver letting them know you are at arrivals and which airline.

^Ah. If that's the case, then Uber should have an employee on the MTC boad so it can regulate competitor's out of its business.

Then the airport doesn't need to get a "fee" from the cabs anymore either. I've moved the pin too. They tried to stop Uber from picking up at the airport in Charleston South Carolina before, and guess who ended up winning!? Uber now services the airport. I can't wait to see the MTC abolished. I hope the MO Legislature takes this up.

Is pedicab still not operating?

Hamilton has resigned from the taxi commission.

So did Sommers

Ultra-hip and techy Austin, Texas, has passed a law requiring Uber and Lyft drivers to be fingerprinted. Needless to say, its not going over well with the masses:

https://www.yahoo.com/autos/uber-lyft-r ... 54822.html

Actually a pretty interesting (and relate-able) read.

Uber is now 65 cents a mile in Tampa and Orlando. And there are still people driving for them. You'd have to be pretty desperate ore pretty stupid to drive for 48 cents a mile (65 minus Uber's 25%).

eee123 wrote:Uber is now 65 cents a mile in Tampa and Orlando. And there are still people driving for them. You'd have to be pretty desperate ore pretty stupid to drive for 48 cents a mile (65 minus Uber's 25%).

AAA says the average cost to drive a mile is 61 cents.

framer wrote:Ultra-hip and techy Austin, Texas, has passed a law requiring Uber and Lyft drivers to be fingerprinted. Needless to say, its not going over well with the masses:

https://www.yahoo.com/autos/uber-lyft-r ... 54822.html

Update: Uber and Lyft got a proposition on the ballot that would exempt their drivers from the fingerprint requirement. Guess what? the voters turned down the exemption. Uber and Lyft both exited the Austin market on Monday.

Turns out you don't have to have Uber to be a hip city.

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/ ... b362b.html

Still ages to go on this. It is being hashed out in federal antitrust court as far as I know.

The strange thing is the Uber driver I talked to said it takes 30 days to do their background anyway.

framer wrote:

framer wrote:Turns out you don't have to have Uber to be a hip city.

As somehow who has used Uber in both STL and Austin, I have to say I am less likely to visit Austin knowing that Uber and Lyft are not operating there. The city has abhorrently useless public transit as it is (considerably worse than STL), and getting around would be more of a headache without those services available.

Ubers background checks are superior to the dated fingerprint check. I think many people think, hey what's the big deal with fingerprints, but they are inferior to what uber does. I've felt far safer in your average uber ride than in the average taxi ride. I'd rather allow taxis to operate without their fingerprint requirement if it meant keeping uber. I haven't been in a taxi since uber started operating here. How many lives have been saved now with the reliability of uber? Dui's have dropped in every city they operate. No more calling to inquire about your late cab and the BS line "they're on the way..."

How are you supposed to confirm that somebody is who they claim to be without a fingerprint check? Is Uber collecting saliva swabs instead?

jcity wrote:Ubers background checks are superior to the dated fingerprint check. I think many people think, hey what's the big deal with fingerprints, but they are inferior to what uber does.

This is good to hear. How do you know this? Do you have link to a study or story on this?

MarkHaversham wrote:How are you supposed to confirm that somebody is who they claim to be without a fingerprint check? Is Uber collecting saliva swabs instead?

I don't understand Uber's resistance to this. There is a purpose for fingerprints and it doesn't seem like that big of a hassle for potential drivers to get fingerprinted. I know they want lots of people signed up to be Uber drivers to handle peak demand, but I can't imagine fingerprints would really deter that many people.

south compton wrote:

MarkHaversham wrote:How are you supposed to confirm that somebody is who they claim to be without a fingerprint check? Is Uber collecting saliva swabs instead?

I don't understand Uber's resistance to this. There is a purpose for fingerprints and it doesn't seem like that big of a hassle for potential drivers to get fingerprinted. I know they want lots of people signed up to be Uber drivers to handle peak demand, but I can't imagine fingerprints would really deter that many people.

Their whole business model is built around getting drivers in the door, treating them like crap until they quit and replacing them with the next mook. I guess they don't want to slow down the queue?

Oh Mark... My favorite little urbanstl bleeding- heart liberal... So do you prefer taxis over uber? Many uber drivers have told me they are former taxi drivers and that they prefer the flexibility and freedom working for uber. Do you really not like the convenience of uber?

^&^^ I have no doubt in my mind that both taxi companies and share ride services try to maximize their take at the expense of the divers whenever possible. Historically it was done via asset, in the case of the taxi/car itself, and now by leveraging technology to control the rider/revenue source.