Hacker News Reader

Comment by ivancdg | Hacker News Reader

Where I live Uber drivers often use it as a loss leader. They chat people up, and if they strike up a rapport they suggest customers contact them directly, cutting out the middle man. They can even undercut Uber, and still make more money than they do with Uber.

This especially makes sense for people who have a regular commute to the airport etc. I've experienced the same thing with Airbnb: first stay via the platform, and further stays booked directly. With Airbnb you miss out on the platform's protections. But with Uber, as the drivers are getting paid less and less, it seems easier to slide into direct contact.

It can be useful to have a private car driver you know and trust, without the anxiety of the wait, or of drivers calling you to ask where you're going, only to cancel the ride. (This happens to me regularly at the airport).

View on HN

That used to be the common case (side deals with drivers) with Taxis on the Peninsula, but only because taxi dispatch was so horrible. - The value of Uber (at least for me) when you are in a Major metropolitan area is that it requires precisely zero advance preparation. Hit a button, walk out - and your Uber arrives precisely according to it's geo-tracking information.

While I'm sure there are people who strike side deals with drivers, I'd be surprised if that rose to anywhere near 5% of total volume.

Now - if you are having drivers calling you, or cancelling you (in 500+ Uber Rides, I've only had four cancellations after 60 seconds, and no driver has ever called to ask where I'm going) - it sounds like you live in a really crappy Uber dispatch area, so perhaps reverting back to side deals makes sense...

Recently learned that there are Chinese drivers who have been in this business for decades in the peninsula, catering to Chinese families. Especially useful if you have an older relative who's not comfortable with English. It really does make sense for both sides.

This is interesting to me because it suggests that the future of work is in the hands of those who can hustle, rather than in sharing-economy fiefdoms like Airbnb and Uber.

I've been adamant for a long time that the best path to a growing economy is lowering the barriers to entrepreneurship through education, less onerous regulations for small businesses, tax incentives to start a small business, and, probably more important than any piece of legislation, a change in the culture.

Entrepreneurship should be the first choice for everyone, not just folks that read HN.

> the future of work is in the hands of those who can hustle

Instead of the Gig Economy, the Hustle Economy?

Hustling is not a desirable state of employment. I don't want scrambling for money here and there to replace steady, productive jobs. Right now hustlers are glamorized, but it used to be an insult.

EDIT: It's useful to employers who don't want the responsibilities of actual employees.

> Entrepreneurship should be the first choice for everyone

Why? How will this produce better results than full-time jobs? How about people with obligations such as children and mortgages?

> less onerous regulations for small businesses

I keep hearing this, but after cutting regulations for 30 years eventually we must arrive at the right amount. After a certain point, losing weight is bad for your health; you might even need to gain some. What particular regulations in particular is everyone complaining about?

> Entrepreneurship should be the first choice for everyone

That's just a sugar-coated way of saying: "We, the capital owners want to externalize the risk to everyone else"

I briefly lived in Mexico last summer and this was my experience. Drivers would give out their personal number. This was also a more tourist-y area and they would try to pitch me on local spots that I should visit.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com