Islamic Terrorists Take Hostages in Sydney

[Jacob]

[Valmy]

You make a good point.  Or put differently intolerance to diversity.

Well I look forward to paradise breaking out then.  I mean we are going to have diverse communities in the modern world anyway, so glad to know there will be fewer problems.

[Jacob]

Well I look forward to paradise breaking out then.  I mean we are going to have diverse communities in the modern world anyway, so glad to know there will be fewer problems.

Alright, so we've got you, spicy, and leggy all embracing the strawman at this point. Hope you have a good time with it

[Admiral Yi]

What's your objection to that description?

Because it's based on the premise that supply and price are unrelated.  In a world where consumers feel surge pricing is "predatory," they should be just as happy to wait hours for the regular taxis that are cruising around.  If someone wants a normally priced cab instantly during a very busy time, such as New Year's Eve, and they're upset they can't get one, they're suffering from cognitive dissonance.

Uber's entire business is built around ramping up supply during busy times to meet increased demand, and the mechanism they use is price.

A logically consistent person doesn't expect to have their cake and eat it too.

[crazy canuck]

You make a good point.  Or put differently intolerance to diversity.

Well I look forward to paradise breaking out then.  I mean we are going to have diverse communities in the modern world anyway, so glad to know there will be fewer problems.

I base my comment on my observation of what occurred in this area as diversity increased.  Years ago there was a significant amount of racism toward the Asian communities (both the Indian/Sikh and Chinese/East Asian communities).  But as our diversity increased and we had more immigration from non European countries tolerance increased markedly.  There are still elements of intolerance of course.  A society can never fully rid itself of its idiots.  But we have definitely come a long way.

[Maximus]

You make a good point.  Or put differently intolerance to diversity.

Well I look forward to paradise breaking out then.  I mean we are going to have diverse communities in the modern world anyway, so glad to know there will be fewer problems.

Affirming the consequent?

[Valmy]

Well I look forward to paradise breaking out then.  I mean we are going to have diverse communities in the modern world anyway, so glad to know there will be fewer problems.

Alright, so we've got you, spicy, and leggy all embracing the strawman at this point. Hope you have a good time with it

It is not the first time I have heard this argument thrown around.  I hope it is true.  Whether you made it I have no idea, I just came in and saw Spicey's comment.  I hope I did not offend you in some way.

[Jacob]

Because it's based on the premise that supply and price are unrelated.  In a world where consumers feel surge pricing is "predatory," they should be just as happy to wait hours for the regular taxis that are cruising around.  If someone wants a normally priced cab instantly during a very busy time, such as New Year's Eve, and they're upset they can't get one, they're suffering from cognitive dissonance.

I think the issue comes at the extreme. When people are desperate - and I mean actually desperate, like during natural disasters, terrorist attacks, shortages of basic necessities etc rather than wanting a cab during New Years Eve - then letting the profit rise proportionally is perceived as predatory.

I agree with you that there is no issue about raising prices during New Years Eve or whatever. It's when you let panic increase your profit margins that it looks bad, especially in cases where it appears you're reacting specifically to the panic rather than supply and demand.

Uber's entire business is built around ramping up supply during busy times to meet increased demand, and the mechanism they use is price.

Yeah, it makes total sense from an Econ 101, supply and demand perspective. It's neat and clean and logical. But just because it's neat and clean and logical and makes sense doesn't mean it can't take advantage of people in vulnerable positions.

If you think Uber's business model relies entirely on supply and demand, you're leaving out a significant component - goodwill. They started out strong, with the story of a scrappy start-up, meeting peoples needs and so on. A good sexy story. But they're slowly accumulating a reputation as assholes, and increasing profits when people are desperate feeds into that, no matter how much it makes Econ 101 sense; and that impacts user acquisition rates and possibly regulatory battles in various places and thus has real costs.

A logically consistent person doesn't expect to have their cake and eat it too.

A PR strategy that relies on people being logically consistent is a poor PR strategy.

[Jacob]

It is not the first time I have heard this argument thrown around.  I hope it is true.  Whether you made it I have no idea, I just came in and saw Spicey's comment.  I hope I did not offend you in some way.

Ah, I see. I thought you were taking Spicy's reply to my post as being on point when it was not. If you're just engaging with him with no reference to what I posted, then it's all good from my POV. Have at it

[frunk]

There's a lot of ways Uber can use price to their advantage during a crisis without looking like an asshole.  They could forgo their own cut.  They can let the price for the taxi go up but not as much for the rider, subsidizing the fare in effect.  It might not be great business in the short run but in the long run it makes them look a lot nicer.

[The Minsky Moment]

Yeah, it makes total sense from an Econ 101, supply and demand perspective. It's neat and clean and logical. But just because it's neat and clean and logical and makes sense doesn't mean it can't take advantage of people in vulnerable positions.

'

Uber has a decentralized structure - the drivers are free agents.
So increases in price aren't just a reflection of high demand, they are as Yi says a powerful mechanism to increase supply.

In a regime where there is price control, the response to situation like this is that supply dries up (why risk going to a trouble area?) or at best is much less than required.  So for the people in "vulnerable positions" - are they better off getting cars for high prices or being completely stranded in the danger zone?  That is the real choice here. 

If Uber backs down here (as they did in the US on a similar issue) then the next time something like this happens people will just be out of luck.

[Jacob]

There's a lot of ways Uber can use price to their advantage during a crisis without looking like an asshole.  They could forgo their own cut.  They can let the price for the taxi go up but not as much for the rider, subsidizing the fare in effect.  It might not be great business in the short run but in the long run it makes them look a lot nicer.

Yeah, using disasters of various kinds as an opportunity for good (and cheap) PR is classic. I mean, various Yakuza groups in Japan have been credited with better and quicker disaster responses than the government and there are few groups more predatory in practice than the Yakuza.

It'd be simple enough for Uber to do that too - have a protocol for recognizing a disaster. When a disaster is identified activate surge pricing so drivers are attracted, but make the prices for the consumers free or simply very low.

I don't think it would take much in the way of coding to implement. You'd get an increase in drivers, and an increase in users, and you'd get a story about how Uber rides in to save the day and help people get out of trouble. Sure, it'll cost $10K or maybe $50K, but that's peanuts when it comes to marketing - and being the guys who help people flee for their lives is pretty much the best reputation you can have. Being the guys who try to turn a few extra bucks when people are afraid of dying, on the other hand, is not a good rep (especially when the PR repercussions cause you to refund the money afterwards anyways).

[Admiral Yi]

Flee for their lives?  That's overegging the pudding.  Surely Uber drivers weren't whisking passengers away from a hail of gunfire.

[Jacob]

Uber has a decentralized structure - the drivers are free agents.
So increases in price aren't just a reflection of high demand, they are as Yi says a powerful mechanism to increase supply.

In a regime where there is price control, the response to situation like this is that supply dries up (why risk going to a trouble area?) or at best is much less than required.  So for the people in "vulnerable positions" - are they better off getting cars for high prices or being completely stranded in the danger zone?  That is the real choice here. 

If Uber backs down here (as they did in the US on a similar issue) then the next time something like this happens people will just be out of luck.

That's obviously for Uber to decide. Do they want to continue to develop a reputation as the guys trying to turn a few extra bucks off of people being desperate and in fear of their lives? While econ 101 makes that reasonable, there's a PR cost associated nonetheless because many if not most people do not think along econ 101 lines.

Or do they just disappear, keeping their heads down? It does decrease the options available to people, yes.

Alternately, they could attempt to turn it into a PR positive by increasing the pricing from the drivers POV, but covering the cost. That comes at a cost to the company, and it's up to them to decide if it's worth it, but it'd be some of the best PR money can buy IMO.

In any case, it's going to be really hard to spin "we heard you're in trouble, and good news: we're going to help you by charging you more money" as a positive, though.

[Viking]

I find it a sad testimony to Languish that this has been derailed into a thread about Uber. But then it is Jacob and garbon so to them uber is clearly more evil than fundamentalist Islam.

What is there to say about fundamentalist Islam that hasn't been said many times over since 2003?

Dunno, have you started listening yet?