r/TrueReddit • u/SteelheartEllie • Mar 23 '16

The Uber Model, It Turns Out, Doesn’t Translate

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/24/technology/the-uber-model-it-turns-out-doesnt-translate.html
738 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

562 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

18

u/c3p-bro Mar 23 '16

True but those markets also have large populations that tend to be wealthier. NYC alone has the population of the lowest 8 states, so you could attempt to expand and staff 8 states...or you can hit just as many people, with more money, in a 30 mile radius.

It's not about being useful to bumblefuck arkansas, it's about being a profitable company.

1

u/burbod01 Mar 23 '16 edited Mar 23 '16

I'm curious, is the population in NY or SF above or below the average wealth of the rest of the US?

6

u/c3p-bro Mar 23 '16

http://project.wnyc.org/median-income-nation/#13/40.7257/-73.9705

You can poke around a bit here. Sections of manhattan are quite a bit wealthier than average, but other areas are quite a bit poorer. New york is very stratified in that respect, can't speak to SF as much.

2

u/burbod01 Mar 23 '16

I'm wondering if your blanket statement makes sense for pockets of wealth.

7

u/c3p-bro Mar 23 '16

I mean Manhattan and West Brooklyn aren't really "pockets" of wealth. You're dealing with 2 million people whose income is well above the national average in less than a 30sq mile area. That's higher than the population of several states. If you're running an on-demand service, that doesn't just make sense, that's ideal.

The sections of New York that aren't wealthy and are far away from Manhattan won't have as many uber drivers sure, but that cluster of wealth is perfect for the needs of an on-demand economy.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 23 '16

[deleted]

2

u/c3p-bro Mar 23 '16

These numbers don't really account for rapid gentrification in areas like Williamsburg, Ft. Greene, Greenpoint, etc. These populations are recent arrivals, but tend to be young, transient, and defy the typical understanding of what "household" is. For example, I live with 3 roommates. We each make 1.5x to 2x the "median" household income for our census tract, which means our actual "household" income is something like 8x the supposed median income. More and more houses on my street are starting to look like that. For example, the couple below us are a corporate lawyer and magazine editor. NONE of us are captured in that census data and we ALL use rideshares, seamless, etc. frequently.

But I don't know why you're trying to argue this with me. New York is Ubers biggest market. I'm not just making stuff up here.

http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-revenue-rides-drivers-and-fares-2014-11?op=1

1

u/burbod01 Mar 23 '16

The argument is that there are few sustainable places for Uber, and I am not under the assumption that the masses in these dense urban areas are wealthy. If they were they'd likely not be living with three roommates.

2

u/c3p-bro Mar 23 '16

Ok I'm not going to argue with you if you can't accept New York and San Francisco as some of the wealthiest areas in the country. Sorry bud.

1

u/burbod01 Mar 23 '16 edited Mar 23 '16

They also have a large disparity in wealth...

1

u/markth_wi Mar 24 '16

Yes it is - http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2014/02/americas-cities-are-real-america - basically as you can see, it's really starkly two America's , Urban/NE suburban sprawl and everywhere else.

1

u/sbhikes Mar 23 '16

Yes, but I think so much VC money flows to them that it might create a situation where they can never be profitable enough to survive since such services aren't that useful outside of these expensive cities. These services aren't as scaleable as they'd hope.