[martin_bech]

3 problems.

1. This is at subsidised Uber pricing, where Uber is loosing money at an alarming rate.

2. This means driving for Uber is terrible economicly.

3. This also implies that even getting to driverless cars, Uber will only save 3.37 per hour, not making the business model viable, I would think.

[bitcurious]

3. This also implies that even getting to driverless cars, Uber will only save 3.37 per hour, not making the business model viable, I would think.

Should be higher. Insurance, energy and maintenance will be cheaper at the scale of Uber's fleet. Driving style might be optimized for MPG. Cars will be available 24/7 with no downtime.

[s73v3r_]

But now Uber is responsible for purchasing the vehicles and the maintenance on them.

[dsfyu404ed]

They'll save more than that.

They'll be registering/insuring the vehicles in a state where it's cheap to do so.

Uber's geographic distribution results in the average uber driving paying significantly more baseline cost just to legally field the vehicle. Being able to choose your jurisdiction is probably a ~$1k per year savings over the current Uber driver average.

TBH one of the things I'm looking forward to about self driving cars is that states will be forced to actually compete with each other on registration/insurance/tax.

>Driving style might be optimized for MPG

If (NumSecondsLightHasBeenRed()) > 3 && NobodyInFrontOfMe){keepgoing()}

Not quite what you had in mind, was it? Remember, this is Uber, we're talking about.

[s73v3r_]

Every state in the union requires you to register your vehicles in the state they're in. You're not going to be able to register the cars in Deleware or South Dakota and have them driving in California.

[dsfyu404ed]

Yes you can. What I described is incredibly common in the rental vehicle business.

[s73v3r_]

For vehicles that routinely travel across state lines. Driverless Uber isn't going to be doing that.

[bufferoverflow]

The third point is definitely wrong. Once you have a fleet of driverless cars, you can optimize their routes to perfection, have almost zero down time, so you would need fewer cars in general. And less liability.

[martin_bech]

I dont think thats correct. I dont think you could optimize routes, meaningfully more, that would require, some kind of prediction, of upcomming drives. Its not impossible, but not something that will save heaps of money. And there will be downtime, because rides will follow some kind of pattern during the day. When people are at work, there will be way less demand, when people are going to work, there will be way more demand etc. right now thats kind of offset, by Uber not owning the cars, and not paying for idle drivers.

[davrosthedalek]

While you are right in principle, I'm not sure if the downtime argument holds: Breaks of the driver are not paid currently. The car lifetime is probably not set by age, but total miles driven.

Self-driving cars might be more expensive, too, in maintenance (more things that can break) and initial cost. So I'm not sure how much they can gain.

[bsenftner]

I've felt Uber was a scan from day one. About a year after they expanded out of San Francisco, I had the opportunity to socially meet Travis Kalanick. That ended any speculation I had that Uber was NOT a fraud. All he ever wanted to do was run up a valuation and cash out, any way possible. Then it grew like wild, and he became an Uber Corrupt Asshole. That is the person I met socially.