Comment by pedalpete | Hacker News Reader

Comment by pedalpete | Hacker News Reader

The way I see it, pricing for market demand is fine, pricing for individual demand is not, particularly when the pricing is blind to the user.

It's already a bit strange when I'm on a plane and know the person sitting next to me paid 1/2 what I did, and they're aggressively stealing the arm-rest.

It's different when the airline says "we know you were looking for a flight on this day and time because you checked twice before buying a ticket, so each time you checked, we increased the price, because we figured you were more likely to buy.

This example has nothing to do with the market, it's strictly targeting me as an individual.

I had an experience with Uber where I cut myself and had to get stitches, so put my destination as a local hospital. Instant 3x surge pricing, but what am I going to do, bleed out? I got in the car and the driver said "I was about to switch off because it's been completely dead all night." It was immediately obvious to me that Uber would go "oh, you need to go to the hospital, you'll pay more", preying on the need.

> It was immediately obvious to me that Uber would go "oh, you need to go to the hospital, you'll pay more", preying on the need.

That's certainly possible, but does not seem immediately obvious at all. Market prices move upward due to both increases in demand and decreases in supply.

It's entirely possible, especially given the driver's comments, that many Uber drivers who would otherwise be active already had switched off -- in other words, supply had already shrunk in response to low demand -- so you may simply have been facing low availability of drivers at that moment.

>It was immediately obvious to me that Uber would go "oh, you need to go to the hospital, you'll pay more", preying on the need.

I just tried this and can't replicate. While it's possible that uber was preying on the fact you had an emergency, it's equally likely it was a coincidence. Moreover, "this guy is going to a hospital so let's charge him more because he's probably going to bleed out" is a pretty poor strategy. Besides the obvious PR risk, most people going to the hospital probably aren't bleeding out or in any sort of emergency. Think of the last time you were at a hospital. How many cars are in the parking lot vs waiting in the emergency room? It's far more likely that you're there for non-emergency reasons (eg. visiting a someone, going to an appointment, or work there), and charging 3x surge pricing is a good way of losing the fare to a competitor.

“I can’t replicate” does not disprove the behavior. Reddit blocks me from loading almost any post while logged out[0], faking that they’re NSFW. The person next to me does not have this “feature.”

I believe companies use feature flagging in this way (for years!) to avoid scrutiny of these dark patterns. You, of course, may also be right that it was coincidence.

[0] https://imgur.com/a/49dGCnX

I was being sarcastic about "bleeding out" obviously, if it's that bad, you're not taking an Uber.

This was also about 7 years ago, no competitors (in Australia) and Uber has a history of this sort of behavior.

I wonder where the interlocking corporate directorships plays in the pricing market place. I assume the original assessment that these interlocks are to coordinate price fixing for entire markets through out the world is correct. Obviously, computers, AI and Machine Learning makes this more efficient and easier to hide. I think these people that come up with these schemes should be hung.

Interlocking directorates among the major U.S. corporations https://original-ufdc.uflib.ufl.edu/AA00024067/00001

Here in Sweden that hospital example would have been a crime, 'ocker'. The maximum sentence is four years imprisonment.

This is a great formulation and a very easy to apply test.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com