undefined | Better HN

0 pointseli10y ago0 comments

I disagree. The network is the product, not the mobile app. Drivers won't switch to a new app that has no customers and customers won't want an app with no drivers.

0 comments

chasing10y ago

Every driver I talk to has both User and Lyft installed. And I have have both Uber and Lyft installed. If one is surge pricing, I check the other.

baddox10y ago

Sure, you still probably need some capital to bootstrap the process. Guarantee an hourly rate to drivers for a short period of time, and offer really low prices for passengers.

toomuchtodo10y ago

Oh puh-lease! We hear this argument time and again, yet continue to hear anecdotes about drivers who drive for both Lyft and Uber.

There is zero friction to install a new app and accept fares via that app, except perhaps how many ridesharing apps you can run at once on your device for accepting passengers.

simonw10y ago

The challenge is reaching critical mass, where you have enough customers to keep the drivers busy and enough drivers to guarantee a quick pickup.

The linked article says Lyft now have an average pickup time in SF of 2.5 minutes. Good luck bootstrapping to that kind of performance with a brand new ride share company starting from scratch.

TTPrograms10y ago

You're competing on price, and drivers can use all services at the same time. If a driver gets more of the cut from another service they'll use that too - then they'll of course preference requests from the service that pays them more. It just snowballs - there isn't enough friction associated with switching services as a customer or as a driver to prevent competition on price point until the margins are razor, and then you're McDonalds. Which is fine, but you can't assume current margins.

eliOP10y ago

Sure, I also hear anecdotes about companies that try really hard but are unable to compete with Craigslist or eBay or other big companies with a strong two-sided network effect.

Based on what I've seen, Hailo tried to buy their way into this market, albeit with the twist of using licensed cabs. Seems like they had little trouble signing up drivers (who were predisposed to distrust the UberTAXI) but my assumption is that they gave up in North America because they couldn't afford to keep giving away the free rides and discounts needed to build up a customer base.

hkmurakami10y ago

Demand-side network is the most important. Supply side is relatively trivial compared to this. Look at LINE Taxi which launched in Japan using its demand side network via its messaging platform + instantly creating a huge supply side network via a partnership with existing taxi companies. You can buy supply side but can't buy demand side network.

Drivers using both Lyft and Uber is a perfect demonstration that they care most about the size and liquidity of the demand side of the market. They are using both in order to increase demand side liquidity from their perspective.

lazaroclapp10y ago

You can buy demand, though. "All rides free for first month" plus a ton of money in advertising will get you plenty of people switching if there is enough supply as well. It's just perhaps too expensive to buy demand when in the end people can switch back to Lyft or Uber just as easily.

dnautics10y ago

yet for some reason (and even with an app that has arguably superior features), sidecar just can't get it up.

Crito10y ago

Have they considered marketing? Because this is the first time I have ever heard of them.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse