
Uber launches Uber Rush, merchant delivery service, in three cities - zouko
http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-rush-fedex-killer-released-2015-10
======
kingoflosaltos
A few years ago, I was in NY for a conference in Manhattan but had switched to
a hotel in Jersey for a few days to see a friend. Once I switched back to
Times Square, as I was getting dressed for a Broadway show it hit me: I had
left all of my dress shirts in the Jersey hotel. Long story short, I request
an uber in the middle of NY rush hour saying that I was at the Jersey hotel.
After a minute, I called the driver and explained the situation. He was happy
to help and the hotel front desk had the shirts waiting when he arrived. He
took them to the resteraunt that I was eating at on Broadway and much to my
shock, the hour long process had only cost me $21. Needless to say I tipped
the driver with cash. I remember thinking: This is going to be a thing VERY
soon.

~~~
Laaw
Conversely: "Hey Uber driver? I need you to pick up a duffel bag located at
Cicero and X, under the bridge. Do _NOT_ look in the bag. You will be tipped
an extra $500 in cash if you obey these instructions."

~~~
toomuchtodo
Take it further. Is a lock Pelican case suspicious? I've used them constantly
to ship technology equipment worth tens of thousands of dollars. Now what if
I'm moving coke around in them, with Uber drivers doing the deliveries. Who is
going to question locked gear with a bunch of mundane shipping stickers on the
outside?

Interesting times!

~~~
gregpilling
If you ship drugs with UPS or Fedex, law enforcement will dress up as the
driver and personally deliver your package. They arrest you as soon as you
sign for it.

Source - know many people at UPS and Fedex

~~~
craftkiller
What? I doubt that would hold up in court. I sign for packages all the time
without knowing what they are, does signing for a package really mean anything
other than "I've received a package and it doesn't look damaged"? Should I be
making the UPS and FedEx guy wait as I open every package in front of them to
confirm someone isn't maliciously sending me drugs?

~~~
mninm
I remember this happened to a minor league baseball coach for the Red Barrons
back in the '90s. Basically, someone who knew the guy wanted to send the coach
an envelope with cocaine in it. So the genius gave the envelope to his
secretary to mail. The secretary accedently spilled some coffee on the
envelope and decided to open it to check the contents. She found the drugs and
called the police.

The police, now having the drugs and the guy that was going to send them,
hatch a plan. First, they mail the drugs to the coach. Then shortly after the
envelope arrives they search the coach's room. Low and behold they find
cocaine and the coach is arrested.

I'm not sure how it turned out but it looks like the coach is still coaching
to this day:

[http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=199...](http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19960523&slug=2330759)

------
digisth
Very interesting. Assuming that the drivers doing a "Rush" order can gather
delivery items from multiple businesses in one geographical area, it could
mean greater delivery efficiency (and shorter delivery times) overall.
Example: orders come in to 4 businesses within within a few blocks of each
other. Businesses send their Rush request in to Uber. Uber Rush driver
indicates that they are in that area and picks up all items, then delivers
them to target area(s).

Another thing this implies is that that these businesses could switch from a
staffed delivery service to a completely on-demand one. One of the things the
businesses and their customers could see an improvement with is the case where
all their delivery people are out making deliveries, and new orders come in.
With this, they just make a new Rush request and get a new delivery person.

~~~
myhandle
This is something I've always thought about Uber- they're just a courier
service that happens to deliver people. The reason taxi drivers are unhappy
with them has never really made sense to me since the oh-so-expensive taxi
medallion gives them the right to pick up people hailing them from the side of
the street. All of the problems consumers have with taxis are because they're
trying to use them as a car service to schedule rides and go further than just
the downtown area of a city.

------
alrs
My client is a launch partner. Congratulations, ChowNow (and Upfront).

[https://www.chownow.com/lp/UberRUSH](https://www.chownow.com/lp/UberRUSH)

------
holografix
I wonder how hard Uber is working on an autonomous car... Bye bye driving
jobs!

~~~
toomuchtodo
Hello taxing Uber's revenue!

What? You thought getting rid of jobs gets your business off the hook for
helping pay for civilization?

~~~
peatmoss
Well, that line of reasoning assumes that taxes on Uber's revenues would be
commensurate with and used to offset losses in wages for drivers. So, in that
sense, it's still a real concern that cannot simply be waved off.

That said, expecting Uber to continue to pay drivers after the advent of
safer, cheaper autonomous cars is silly. Bring on the autonomous cars, I say.
And, while it's someone's job to ensure an economic system with opportunity
for all, it isn't Uber's job any more than it's yours or mine.

~~~
toomuchtodo
> And, while it's someone's job to ensure an economic system with opportunity
> for all, it isn't Uber's job any more than it's yours or mine.

Agreed! That's why government exists, to create a social safety net, and to
extract taxes from corporate and personal income revenue to support those
services.

~~~
nickff
That might be the reason you accept/support the existence of government, but
it is not clear that is _why_ government exists. Your statement assumes a two
things:

1) People want "to create a social safety net, and to extract taxes from
corporate and personal income revenue to support those services."

2) People are getting what they want, or at least supporting government in the
hope they will achieve the previous point (#1).

I am not sure what level of support either of these two points garners, but I
am certain that it is not 100%, and it may be that less than an outright
majority of people support both.

A more plausible explanation of why government exists (in my view) is that
like any other monopoly, it has used tools including propaganda, suppression
of opposing views, and incentivizes for collaboration to build and maintain
its strength.

