
Uber's dirty tricks quantified: Rival counts 5,560 canceled rides - wfjackson
http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/11/technology/uber-fake-ride-requests-lyft/
======
bedhead
This being a techie-oriented site I'm sure I'll find myself in the minority
here, but here goes.

I think that Uber, as someone else noted, is a company run by assholes.
Rideshare services like UberX and Lyft are going to get more-or-less shut
down, and deservedly so. Remember that period in like 1999 before Napster got
shut down? Yeah, that's rideshare right now. While many consumers cry
"choice!" and "innovation!", the reality is that these services operate in a
loophole which any objective observer will point out is complete bullshit. We
have a system, which is probably unfair to begin with, but an existing and
_functional_ system nonetheless that rideshares effectively hacked. One group
plays by the rules and is taxed and regulated and fee'd, the other magically
escapes it.

If you have a complaint it should be with cities that require medallions -
they are the ones to blame for the current situation. Maybe we should get rid
of medallions completely, I dunno. But be careful what you wish for.

~~~
themartorana
It's rare that bad business regulations and/or government sponsored monopolies
are just, ya know, fixed. Quite often, people need to be shown how bad things
have gotten before anything changes.

It's even worse when the target of those regulations don't want things fixed
either. Taxi companies pay crazy medallion fees, but expect exclusivity
(perhaps rightly so) for that fee. Government doesn't want the fee income to
go away, taxi companies enjoy their monopoly.

Sometimes it takes someone breaking the rules - and more importantly, with the
general full support of the public - to really cause any change in the old,
entrenched ways.

~~~
bedhead
I agree, except the problem is that by-and-large, regulated taxi services work
perfectly fine. How are they even close to dysfunctional currently? So people
can't find a cab in mid-town at 5pm on a rainy day, I mean, come on. I'm
pretty darn laissez faire when it comes to regulation, but honestly I think
taxi service is done pretty well.

Here's what I know. If I paid (heavily) into a system of regulation that
worked, only to have someone hack it and basically blow up my asset/income
stream, you'd better believe I would push back _hard_. Aereo, anyone?

~~~
nickonline
I actually do think cabs are broken. Without a rating system after they get a
medallion they're golden for at least a year.

I get into cabs where: \- The driver can't speak English \- Doesn't know where
they're going \- The cab smells \- Drives dangerously \- Is drunk (literally
had an open bottle of wine under the handbrake) \- Doesn't turn up when I book
it

The list goes on, the moment I started taking uber cabs all of this stopped, I
review every cab I take after a trip and the moment they drop too far they're
removed from the service.

Sure, maybe within the existing system I could write an email to the cab
company (who will probably ignore me on account of trying to avoid a fine),
the medallion issuer (who MIGHT fine the driver if this happens often). But
the reality is that this is hard, and giving someone a rating between 1-5
stars at the end of the trip is easy.

~~~
ycombobreaker
> (literally had an open bottle of wine under the handbrake)

Get out of the cab. Pay or don't pay, it doesn't matter. Note the cab number
and call the taxi company or whatever organization polices the drivers
internally (in Chicago, I think 3-1-1 is sufficient). YOU saw the infraction,
who else do you expect will fix it? Sometimes the taxi driver will not see
anyone else from the company, only the other driver who shares the car.

~~~
pktgen
Or 911, since this is also DUI in progress.

------
cge
There were 5,560 canceled rides, but the article suggests that a single Uber
recruiter was responsible for almost 30% of those, and another was responsible
for a further 10%. It would be interesting to see the data here in more
detail: it may well be that 177 Uber recruiters have booked and cancelled
rides, but that 160 of them have done so at a rate similar to average users,
while 17 have been absurdly abusing the system. I'm actually a bit confused as
to how single individuals were able to perpetuate such abuse without Lyft
preventing it: after a single phone number has made a hundred cancellations on
a bunch of accounts in the course of a few days, why weren't there automated
processes in place to prevent those accounts from making another _1,400 of
them_. For that matter, why was the person even able to sign up for 22
accounts with one phone number?

~~~
praneshp
Or maybe Lyft knew about it, handled it, but let them do whatever they wanted
so this article could be written?

~~~
uptown
Is that based on anything other than complete speculation?

~~~
praneshp
Nope, except I refuse to believe Uber is 100% evil and Lyft is 100% good. Or
that Lyft was stupid enough to let 1 person screw them so much with one phone
number.

------
jonknee
Here is what's going on:

[http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Uber-Lyft-Sidecar-
put-...](http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Uber-Lyft-Sidecar-put-driver-
recruiting-in-high-5190676.php)

> "I was driving for Lyft in November when I picked up two attractive women,"
> said the driver, who declined to give his name because he fears
> repercussions from the apps. "Like anybody, we started chatting, but they
> were sort of awkward. I knew something was up when they didn't tell me
> clearly where they wanted to go."

And this:

[http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhuet/2014/05/30/how-uber-
an...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhuet/2014/05/30/how-uber-and-lyft-are-
trying-to-kill-each-other/)

> Another part of the game is knowing the enemy. Uber employees and loyal Lyft
> drivers regularly try to infiltrate opposing driver ranks for inside
> information, and often call up a rival car for a ride so they can pitch the
> driver on switching.

The cancellations are probably after they see that they got a driver they had
already tried to pitch. A huge portion of them came from just a few
recruiters... Seems like an easy fix if Uber wants to fix it, though they may
not considering Lyft isn't exactly free from devious ploys:

> On Tuesday, the rivals descended upon the humble intersection, where Uber
> usually hosts car inspections. Lyft started recruiting drivers by hosting
> daily luncheons in the parking lot (with a free taco truck, pink mustaches
> ziptied to the chain-link fences and two bouncers in black at the gate).

------
tux1968
Okay, Uber has to face the music on this one. But...

Why is there no rating system for passengers? How can a single phone number be
tied to 21 accounts and cancel over 1500 rides without Lyft ignoring orders
from that phone number? Why weren't the accounts deactivated long before this
level of abuse? It doesn't seem like they're taking good care of their
drivers' time or expenses.

~~~
x0x0
Maybe this was the first time? At companies I've worked at, lots of
limitations where only added after someone abused something...

~~~
mkal_tsr
The article in OP specifically states this is not the first time.

~~~
x0x0
Where? I don't see that. Uber has been previously accused of similar behavior
with Gett, but not on Lyft.

~~~
mkal_tsr
And? Same behavior from Uber, doesn't matter if it's Gett or Lyft targeted
with their antics.

~~~
x0x0
ah, I meant that lyft hadn't added limitations because lyft hadn't been abused
this way before.

------
alrs
It feels plainly obvious that Uber is run by assholes, and that anyone who
works there has a black mark on their resume forever.

But that's how it feels. Is Lyft just better at PR?

~~~
untog
If Lyft are better at PR then Gett must be as well - because Uber did the
exact same thing to them a few months ago, _allegedly_.

At a certain point you just have to apply Occam's Razor and realise that Uber
is run by a collection of assholes.

~~~
potatolicious
Not allegedly - Uber owned up to it but refused to punish any of the staff
involved, saying only that they were "overzealous".

[http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/24/technology/social/uber-
gett/](http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/24/technology/social/uber-gett/)

At this point Uber can't reasonably claim that these were rogue employees.
It's pretty obvious to everyone that this is officially sanctioned.

[edit] Side note: this is not the first time a YC company has been caught
engaging in _highly_ unethical business behavior (see: AirBnb marketing). What
is YC, and other investors, doing to curb this kind of behavior? Or is this
level of abuse tolerated because money?

[edit2] Bah, brain farted, Uber is indeed not a YC company.

~~~
minimaxir
YC has addressed instances of egregriously bad marketing, such as the
InstallMonetizer incident:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5092711](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5092711)

Although, many companies that use baity "growth hacking" strategies are indeed
YC, but that's a seperate issue.

~~~
makomk
Oh yeah, they "addressed" that all right. pg argued it was OK that a company
they'd supported and helped fund was paying software makers to bundle unwanted
software into installers and tricking users into installing it by, amongst
other techniques, disguising the prompt to install the crap as a EULA
acceptance screen. (But hey, it's no big deal because the screen "has a
decline as well as an accept button, and if the user declines, no software is
installed" \- doesn't matter that the decline button's carefully designed to
make users think it'll cancel whatever installation they were actually
intending to do.)

------
untog
In case anyone had forgotten, they did the exact same thing in NYC to another
competitor, Gett, a few months ago:

[http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/24/black-car-competitor-
accuse...](http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/24/black-car-competitor-accuses-uber-
of-shady-conduct-ddos-style-attack-uber-expresses-regret/)

Can't wait to see how Uber rephrase "It was likely too aggressive a sales
tactic" this time around _!!_

~~~
jaxn
That was in the article ;)

~~~
untog
You think people actually read the article?!

------
jmcnevin
I've used Uber dozens of times, but stories like this really make me think I
should give Lyft a shot. After all, if this company is operating in such an
underhanded manner this early in the game, it's troubling to consider what
they'd be capable of down the line.

~~~
halcyondaze
I have always been unsure why people prefer one over the other - it's
essentially the exact same service. I typically go with whatever one is closer
/ is offering a deal at the time.

~~~
tlrobinson
I don't always want to sit in the front seat, fist bump the driver, and become
their best friend.

~~~
baddox
I haven't encountered a Lyft fist bump attempt (in SF) in at least a year.

------
CodeWriter23
It's pretty simple, Uber understands that to win the game, you need the a
supply of drivers that just barely exceeds the demand for rides, to avoid
surge pricing. To digress for a moment, surge pricing is brilliant in that it
gets riders to volunteer to wait a long time for a ride, instead of getting
pissed off like they do at Taxis, or give them the choice to pay up for an
expedited ride. Anyway, the recruiting strategy worked for them in SF, they
recruited so many Lyft drivers that Lyft was almost constantly in "Prime Time"
(their name for surge pricing), that riders got upset and switched to Uber.
It's at the intersection Business 101 and Econ 101 if you ask me.

The only pushback I've seen from Lyft is mobilizing drivers to hand out free
ride cards at slammed venues, like music festivals, when Lyft is at maximum
Prime Time of 300% and Uber is at 800-1300%. Not a bad strategy, but
basically, Uber is giving Lyft a hyper wedgie by cutting right into their
supply.

To put the cancellations into context, I met a Lyft driver who was recruited
by Uber. He told me the same lady was recruiting in his area on an ongoing
basis, just catching rides to make the pitch (which is a TOS violation on
either platform). He said the recruiter would request a ride, sometimes 4 or 5
times, and keep getting him, then she would cancel shortly afterward when she
recognized his name. So yeah, I'm sure some Lyft drivers spent gas, time and
miles, but I also believe for the most part, the cancellations occurred in a
minute or less.

As far as which company are the biggest assholes, I think you need to look at
it with some historical context. Uber started out as a company that created a
better dispatch system for Black Cars, and got Livery companies and
independent Limo drivers to sign on. That was good, because riders and drivers
could be paired based on proximity. Combine that with Uber's marketing to
increase ridership, and it is an all-around win. The savings/increased
business for your average Livery operator more than made up for the Uber
commission.

Then Lyft comes along and says "Hey, let's open this up to your average joe
with his car and car payment". Ok, so what they are doing actually is sucking
the equity out of people's cars, because by the time you amortize all the
expenses, you're making $10-$15 an hour (on Lyft, Uber you can make more), you
might as well work for In-N-Out and get benefits too. Not to mention the
insurance issues if you get into a wreck and its your fault (cancellation and
no payout on your collision policy). Sure, the network will cover your
liability, but only because they have been forced to by regulators. I classify
this type of business (and AirBNB too) as "Slumlord 2.0". Slumlords buy an
asset and drain the equity out of it for profit. Slumlord 2.0s drain the
equity out of someone else's asset for profit. Uber had to counter Lyft with
UberX, and get into the Slumlord 2.0 game themselves.

Bottom line for me, I drive for them both, and I hate them both. I tolerate
them because they enable me to continue to work on my startup, or I guess I
should say, reboot of the family business. I can't wait to be done driving for
them and become a rider.

~~~
baddox
> Ok, so what they are doing actually is sucking the equity out of people's
> cars, because by the time you amortize all the expenses, you're making
> $10-$15 an hour (on Lyft

Doesn't the depreciation of automobiles slow down considerably after a few
years? The Lyft drivers I have talked to in SF say they make $30 an hour at a
minimum, which I assume is after subtracting fuel costs but not factoring in
automobile depreciation and maintenance costs. However, I'm very skeptical
that depreciation cuts their true earnings in half.

~~~
Spooky23
You need to operate with late-model cars, so depeciation is absolutely a
factor.

In rental car context, depreciation is anything from $15-30/day, depending on
the type of car. With livery vehicles, it may be higher because when you're
done with the car, it has 200k miles and is beat from urban driving. Rental
fleets ditch cars at 40,000 miles

Standard personal vehicle reimbursement is $0.55/mile. Not sure about a livery
scenario, but I think in an urban environment you're easily looking at a
$1.00/mile or more. Livery vehicles burn brakes, tires and other parts. They
spend alot of time idling or in traffic, so gas mileage sucks as well.

~~~
ensignavenger
So, doing some napkin math, assuming the numbers provided by Spooky23 and the
baddox are correct:

30/hr 40 hrs/week = $1200 baddox assumed that accounted for gas, but not
depreciation/maintenance.

Depreciation 30/week (the high end from Spooky24) 1200-30 = 1170.

Now, there may be some maintenance. A full set of break pad for a 2010 Ford
Escape (Random vehicle, yours may vary) cost 100 dollars at Autozone- these
are the expensive ones that appear to have a lifetime warranty- cheaper ones
are half that much. I checked, and the lifetime warranty on the expensive ones
does appear to cover commercial use (the warranty on the cheap ones explicitly
does not, but the expensive ones do not exclude commercial use.)

I don't know how often your breaks wear out, but lets say you put the
expensive ones on every month- and that you don't get free pads because of the
warranty (Thought it appears that you should). A break job should only take an
hour or two once you have done it a few times. Pretty simple stuff. Change the
oil while your at it- another $20. (EDIT: I just realized that some new
vehicles use more expensive synthetic oil- so you may have to double or triple
this number, but you also may not have to change your oil as often, so it may
work out about the same) $120 plus 2 hours of your time each month. 120/4 =
30.

1170 - 30 = 1140.

Your going to need new tires. Lets say you replace them every other month.
Walmart lists them at around $100 a piece for a 60,000 mile tire. Your
probably not going to get that many miles, but it should be at least 40,000.
Again, I don't know how much driving your doing, so lets say you replace them
every 3 months. It would probably be in your interest to do it yourself if
doing it that often. But lets say you pay someone to do it so you don't have
to buy and store the tools and deal with it. $20 per tire- (20 + 100) x 4 =
480, lets just say $500 every 3 months.

500/3/4 = $42. 1170-42= 1128.

Now, there will be other misc maintenance and repairs. Lets say $100 per week-
I think that is high. Your vehicle isn't that old and you are keeping it well
maintained, staying up on the simple things before they become major. We have
already figured depreciation, so your replacing the vehicle when it is worn
out.

1128-100 = $1028 per week after all expenses are accounted for.

1128/40 = $28 per hour. But you will have to pay self employment taxes. That
will cost you a few extra bucks an hour. But you are still making
significantly more than 15/hour.

Unless I am missing something. Please feel free to contribute your own numbers
to my napkin math.

~~~
MoOmer
As someone who ran my fathers trucking company after he passed away, I'd say
you're missing quite a few things.

A good mileage interval guide would show what you can expect (minor) to
repair/replace every once in a while. I set up an example one on edmunds.com
for a Toyota Avalon with 0 miles:

[http://www.edmunds.com/car-
maintenance/results.html?year=201...](http://www.edmunds.com/car-
maintenance/results.html?year=2013&make=&model=&styleId=200442096&engCode=6VNAG3.5&transCode=AUTOMATIC&zip=55402&mileage=0)

There are other general things that you should watch out for [0], and plenty
that aren't listed or may just happen.

[0] [http://www.carsdirect.com/car-maintenance/a-routine-car-
main...](http://www.carsdirect.com/car-maintenance/a-routine-car-maintenance-
schedule-based-on-engine-mileage)

~~~
ensignavenger
Thanks for the pointer to the maintenance cost tool. I increased the mileage
to see what things they had, and most were already accounted for above. Tires,
breaks, and oil changes are already accounted for- of course- I was assuming
that someone putting so many miles on their car would take the time to learn
to do basic maintenance like this themselves. Changing your own oil and
replacing your own break pads and even belts and most hoses are not that
difficult of tasks. If you have the tools, doing the tires is not that
difficult, but I figured on paying someone for the tires in my above numbers.
I also added an extra $100 per week, which is a very generous maintenance
allowance. Some weeks it will be a lot more, like when your AC compressor goes
out, but other weeks you won't spend any of it.

------
habosa
I just moved from an Uber-only market (Philadelphia) to an Uber and Lyft
market (SF) and it was immediately clear to me that these two companies are at
war. UberX offers 25% off this summer, Lyft offers 30% off. Lyft announces
Lyft Line, Uber beats them to the punch with Uber Pool. The drivers tell me
that either company will give you $$$ to switch and that drivers are coveted.
Every feature that one gets, the other will imitate.

As a consumer it seems that there is basically no difference between the two
services, I take whichever has less surge at the moment and/or whichever my
friends want to take. It seems like this price war has served to totally
commoditize ride sharing; I don't know anyone who has a serious preference
between UberX and Lyft (black car and SUV are another story).

Do they really think they can squeeze the life out of each other like this? I
feel like VCs will just keep pumping money into them and fueling the price
war. It seems to me that instead one should focus on really differentiating
the service in some way to reverse the commoditization of private, on-demand
rides. They either need to make their service preferable in some way to
consumers (like Dropbox has done for file sharing) or make it a no-brainer
choice for drivers to exclusively drive with them.

Not that I'm complaining, this war basically just serves to make private
transportation cheaper for consumers like me.

------
7Figures2Commas
Many states have unfair competition laws under which the type of behavior
alleged could very well be actionable. Bringing the alleged behavior into the
court of public opinion is appealing but I suspect that if the allegations are
true, Lyft's business would be better served by addressing this in a court of
law.

------
edwardhotchkiss
In all fairness to my selfish self, that has lived in NYC, SF and finally in
LA: Uber (regardless of and possibly because of ) knee-capping other services
is now a dominant, helpful service in my life. When I lived in SF and moved to
LA I had a problem that only NYC had a solution for: "Many Many Cabs,
Everywhere".

Two years ago I couldn't go go five miles in traffic without paying $50 and
needing cash; and that was if I was somewhere where cabs hung around.

Regardless of them being "assholes", it's extremely useless in my life.

~~~
mamoswined
As someone who is disabled, it truly enables me to have more mobility than I
ever have had. I find it truly disturbing when people equate taxis with these
services. For those of us who aren't as able to run around hailing cabs or
waiting on a dispatch that often never comes, the difference is HUGE. I know
they don't accommodate all disabled people yet (wheelchairs for example), but
they can serve many disabled people and there is an opportunity to expand the
reach.

~~~
makomk
Unfortunately, in many areas the existing minicab companies they're competing
with _do_ actually accomodate wheelchair users. So Uber and its funders are
spending billions to try and replace services with ones that are less
accessible for many. (With the amount invested and Uber's current market cap,
their investors aren't going to be satisfied with mere coexistence - they need
to _dominate_ the market.)

~~~
mamoswined
If Uber or another service worked with these accessible taxis, it would be a
true game changer. Yes, some local taxi services allow you to request
wheelchair accessible cars, but you are going to often wait a very long time
for them (if they ever come). Also some dispatchers are just not polite about
it.

Imagine if you could request one with the click of a button and track its
arrival? That would be so helpful.

------
awwstn
Lyft should come up with a way of flagging and hellbanning these accounts. The
user could continue to think they have booked a ride, and think they have
cancelled it, when really the whole system ignored them.

------
mkal_tsr
Is this something that the investors of Uber encourage / don't discourage? If
not, what actions are being taken by either Uber or Uber's investors to
prevent this from happening again? (cnn reports this is not the first time)

------
edibleEnergy
Warning, loud auto-playing video.

------
supahfly_remix
Why can't drivers be part of both Lyft and Uber?

Doing so probably violates their respective terms of service, but why can't
drivers just "disrupt" the sharing economy themselves by being part of both?

------
USAnum1
I don't feel this fits in any existing thread here, so I'll just put it at the
root level.

Doesn't the "look" at ~2:04 in the video sound inserted, perhaps to make
Kalanick sound abrasive? I may just be over analyzing it, after having watched
a short documentary on shaping opinions with small manipulations of video
interviews awhile back.

(I sincerely apologize that I can't find a link).

I digress. The fact is Uber has been playing fast and loose, and push is
starting to come to shove with regulation. Whether Uber or regulators cave is
now the question.

~~~
anigbrowl
Audio pro here - I record dialog for film and TV. It doesn't sound edited to
me at all. Cutting the audio in slightly ahead or behind the camera image is
so usual that such cuts have their own names - J cuts sand L cuts,
respectively. Doing so provides a sense of editing momentum (which is quite
important in news) and rather than being particularly considered it's just a
cookie-cutter technique. Bear in mind that TV segments like this are just
product to the people who make them, and are assembled with about as much
contemplation as a hamburger. When you're cranking these stories out day after
day you're not very invested in any of them, just enough to sketch out the
issue in an attention grabbing way.

------
korzun
> One Lyft passenger, identified by seven different Lyft drivers as an Uber
> recruiter, canceled 300 rides from May 26 to June 10. That user's phone
> number was tied to 21 other accounts, for a total of 1,524 canceled rides.

Sounds like Lyft is a shit show. For a service like this, that number should
have been black listed within first 3 'rides'.

------
brownbat
Maybe charge a deposit?

Not trying to blame the victim, just really curious about how to build a
business that can't be DOS'd by competitors.

Often wondered how a Netflix or Redbox prevents competitors (once Blockbuster
now Amazon?) from renting a bunch of DVDs only to return them with scratches.

Maybe track problem accounts then ban them is best you can do?

------
wcummings
Since Taxi rides are basically futures contracts for a car ride, why doesn't
someone create an agnostic taxi-ride orderbook. Aside from the fact that taxi
companies desperately want to avoid market discovery of rates.

~~~
seanflyon
If you were to ask Uber they would tell you that that is what they did.

~~~
wcummings
Yeah, but it isn't, really.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think they've claimed it is a "real"
market, just that pricing programmatically adjusts to demand.

Can Uber drivers set their rates, to undercut other Uber drivers?

------
ryan-allen
A mandatory cancellation fee would be handy, but of course Uber and Lyft would
have to opt-in. I think it'd be fair to charge customers $5 for a
cancellation.

~~~
CodeWriter23
They both charge $5 for a cancellation, but only after 5 minutes.

------
tlrobinson
Certainly sketchy behavior by Uber, but also pretty embarrassing that Lyft
wasn't able to detect and ban the Uber employee who cancelled _680_ rides.

------
pbreit
This would certainly be a dick move by Uber, even in the land of hyper
competition. But how the heck was Lyft unable to foil it?

------
mrgordon
One more reason to look for a Sidecar or Lyft before an Uber. Usually cheaper
too.

------
bitJericho
I'm not sure why a company that engages in illegal behavior would be afraid of
engaging in more illegal or (at the very least) fraudulant behavior.

------
eurleif
Does Lyft's TOS prohibit this? If so, couldn't this theoretically be a
criminal offense under the CFAA?

~~~
tlrobinson
CFAA, really? No thanks. [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/rebooting-
computer-cri...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/rebooting-computer-
crime-law-part-1-no-prison-time-for-violating-terms-of-service)

------
mulcher
Honestly.. Lyft needs a better spam filter.

------
fred_durst
Free markets make men do amazing things.

------
tarminian
And now you see why we have taxi regulations.

~~~
scott_karana
Fraud's fraud. A taxi company could do the same thing to a rival.

------
chenluis5
Number of people defending Uber and their actions are too large. Why not
accept the mistake and take responsibility for it ? Also, YC is no hero. If YC
speaks highly of such companies and Uber is using such tactics to gain
business all you can say is everything is double talk on this site. I used to
hang out a lot on this site but just look at number of shills employed
commenting , shifting discussion to compare with Taxi industry when actual
issue at hand is unethical practice. Uber is no different than FUCK YOU , FUCK
SHARING ECONOMY, give us your money we tank it in founders and select-fews
pockets and enjoy. Can't wait to all of this blow over and someone files major
lawsuit.

~~~
brownbat
I agree in principle, I really want better comments in this thread taking Uber
to task. (I want the best arguments on both sides.)

You lost me when you started name calling though, accusing everyone of being
shills.

It's the internet, you don't need to pay people to have strong opinions, it's
what they do here.

------
aboodman
For pete's sake, it's 5k rides over like 9 months. How many Lyft rides are
there per day in SF alone?

------
jonknee
Odd that Lyft appears proud to claim that they have a very easily gamed system
without anti-fraud filters. Now that the word is out I would watch out for
taxi drivers to get in on the fun.

~~~
personZ
Victim blaming is generally reprehensible. Further, I imagine that as a
nascent business the notion that competitors would be so unethical didn't seem
to be a top priority.

Is it obvious now that they should have caught it? Yeah, thanks to the
brilliance of hindsight of course it is. Does that justify it? Hardly.

~~~
jonknee
There's no victim here, this is one extraordinarily rich startup complaining
about another extraordinarily rich startup. Meanwhile taxi lobbies complain
about them both.

To add some perspective, this is 5,560 rides in the last 10 months or ~550 per
month or less than 20 per day. There aren't any recent figures, but as of May
2013 they were doing 30,000 rides per week and growing _very_ quickly.

A large amount of the cancellations were from a couple people and it also
mentioned that when not canceling they took short rides and tried to poach the
drivers. It's pretty obvious what a few of the recruiters are doing--asking
for rides to be able and pitch the driver, but then canceling when it's a
driver who already said no.

tl;dr a very small number of sleezy recruiters have gotten under the skin of
Lyft.

~~~
icambron
> There's no victim here, this is one extraordinarily rich startup complaining
> about another extraordinarily rich startup.

That you don't care about the victim does not make them not a victim.

