[robswc]

Nobody will want to take public transit if the option of quick and efficient private transport becomes a reality.

You can be taken exactly where you need to go in much more comfortable conditions with much less risk of running into anti-social behavior.

That's why Uber has a market even in cities like NYC or DC.

[anigbrowl]

That's like saying nobody would ride a bus when taxis exist. Most of the time people don't actually need or especially want door-to-door.

[robswc]

Taxis are not quick or efficient enough to make the cost worth it to many people.

>door-to-door

Doesn't have to be door to door.

I use Uber all the time when on vacation to get to places of interest and then back to the hotel. Trying to incorporate public transit would have added 30-40 minutes of walking, no idea how much additional time waiting. Saving ourselves an hour or so per day of vacation makes it worth it for us.

[anigbrowl]

As I said, 'most of the time'. If you're on vacation or time > money for wahtever reason, of course it makes sense.

[robswc]

Time is money. Look at how much time WFH has saved people, no that they don't have to commute. If anything, I would say the ability to summon an AV and have it arrive in ~5 minutes would be more beneficial when you're _not_ on vacation.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhuet/2014/09/08/uber-lyft-...

Dated but it says 66% of riders can find a ride within 5 minutes. I think 5 minutes is a good target.

With how subsidized public transit is, I don't believe these AV taxis could beat it on price... but they don't have to. They just have to make it low enough that the benefits of private travel outweigh the cons of public transit.

People tend to take less public transit when they become wealthier, not more.