
How Lyft screwed me out of a $350 referral bonus - pmx
http://imgur.com/gallery/QZbvw
======
ajford
So Lyft and Uber recently threw a tantrum and fled Austin TX when a vote on
legislature regarding TNCs didn't go their way.

A few new local companies have popped up to fill the hole in the market, and
many have attracted drivers who were formerly with Lyft and Uber.

I've talked to a few of them about the new companies versus Lyft/Uber, and
every single one of them has voiced the same thing; Lyft and Uber treat their
drivers like shit, pull questionable stunts like this (one even mentioned
something similar, except his app kept crashing or signing him out for 48
hours before the deadline for his 100 ride bonus, preventing him from getting
the last few rides), and generally being dicks towards their "independent
drivers".

Every single driver I asked said they wouldn't go back to Uber/Lyft. Most even
indicated they wouldn't go back even if Uber/Lyft returned and drove the new
companies out of business.

I've had great experiences with many drivers, and I hate think that they've
been getting such a rotten deal from these companies.

~~~
bosdev
Not just that, but RideAustin is a non-profit and mimics virtually every
feature of Uber. I seriously wonder if non-profit versions of the business
will expand into other cities and challenge Uber and Lyfts margins.

~~~
chimeracoder
> I seriously wonder if non-profit versions of the business will expand into
> other cities and challenge Uber and Lyfts margins.

Why would non-profits inherently be able to beat Lyft or Uber's margins?

Non-profits, despite the name, are not prohibited from making a profit.
Conversely, the "profit" referred to in "for-profit companies" doesn't come
out of their margins.

And even if you're talking about their bottom line rather than their margins,
it's not like venture-backed companies are required to run at an operating
profit anyway. To my knowledge, Uber has never actually issued GAAP accounting
demonstrating that they're turning a profit[0]. Which makes sense - the whole
point of raising outside capital is to spend money faster than you'd otherwise
have access to it. _Both_ non-profits and for-profit companies do this.

Non-profits are functionally equivalent to for-profit companies. The only
distinction in this case is that a non-profit would have a harder time raising
money, because they _can 't_ provide equity in exchange for the outside
funding they obtain, whereas a for-profit company can.

[0] They've made plenty of _non_ -GAAP claims, but that doesn't mean anything.

~~~
kbenson
> Non-profits, despite the name, are not prohibited from making a profit.

Sure, but I would argue non-profit is still a useful term because while
technically not accurate, it's not accurate in the same way people aren't
being technically accurate in what they mean when they refer to an
organization as non-profit. A non-profit cannot distribute its funds to owners
or shareholders, it can only retain them to further its goal or ensure it's
future survival. At the same time, I would argue more people mean "there isn't
one or more people at the top profiting from ownership" when they say non-
profit. This is an important distinction because it may lead to different
incentives for the organization beyond survival (maximizing shareholder/owner
profits vs maximizing customers served or some other metric).

> Why would non-profits inherently be able to beat Lyft or Uber's margins?

Presumably by doing everything Lyft or Uber do but without the need to ever
pay out to investors. Whether that's likely is another story, but I don't
think it's impossible, it just takes longer to self bootstrap and can be very
hard (for example you might have to fight loss-leading tactics from a for-
profit that's willing to defer profits until you are gone).

~~~
chimeracoder
> At the same time, I would argue more people mean "there isn't one or more
> people at the top profiting from ownership" when they say non-profit.

Yes, and this is a bad usage of the term, because whether or not there are
people "at the top" profiting from ownership has nothing to do with whether
the company is structured as a non-profit or a for-profit company. People "at
the top" can profit from a non-profit, and you can run a for-profit company
without "people at the top profiting".

It's unfortunate that the term we use to refer to companies which cannot
distribute dividends is "non-profit", but it's _really_ bad to project
conceptions of what those companies should act like onto them simply based on
how the term sounds in common vernacular.

And again, whether you are using the term with its precise meaning or with its
colloquial one, non-profit status has _no impact_ on a company's margins:

> Presumably by doing everything Lyft or Uber do but without the need to ever
> pay out to investors.

"Paying out investors" does not impact their margins. They can pay out
investors _from_ their profit margins (if they have any), but the fact that
non-profits don't have any investors to pay out doesn't mean that their
margins magically go up.

And, yes, it's true that you never need to pay out investors if you never have
any. Of course, if you never have any investors and your competitors all do,
you're starting off at a huge disadvantage.

~~~
kbenson
> And again, either way you use the term, non-profit status has no impact on a
> company's margins

I think your interpretation of the original comment and statement may be
different than some of those you are in discussion with. I interpreted
"challenge Uber and Lyfts margins" as "compete at a similar level" (with the
margins of competitors being affected by the competition), and it appears you
might be interpreting it as "getting better margins than the competitors".
It's also possible to read the original statement as raising the question of
whether it's even possible, and so fully in line with your position.

It _is_ poor wording though. Margins have a complex relationship with, and are
only one of the variables that goes into, profit.

> "Paying out investors" does not impact their margins.

Insofar as investors are willing (or forced) to defer payment it doesn't, but
pressure can change strategy, and strategy can change margins. But as I
outlined above, I'm not really making any argument for better/worse margins
from a non-profit. Actually, I'm not making an argument that non-profits are
any better at providing a service or surviving either. I was just adding a bit
of information to the discussion.

------
jessaustin
IANAL, but the app prominently displaying "you're this much closer to the
bonus" every time the driver uses it would seem to overrule some never-
communicated retroactive contract term? If the app can't be relied on for
commerce, why should any customer trust it?

~~~
0xmohit
A common shady practice these days:

    
    
      By signing up ... you agree to the terms and conditions.
      ...
      The terms and conditions are subject to change without notice.
    

\--

Consider WhatsApp, for example. It probably said that personal information
would not be shared with anyone. And then later changed the terms, it would be
shared (with Facebook or whatever).

~~~
notyourwork
I struggle to see how this holds legality. It basically says here is what you
are agreeing to but also we can change that and you still agree.

~~~
CamelCaseName
I hope someone with more knowledge can come in and clarify, but I have always
interpreted this as, "You agreed to X, if in the future we change our
agreement to Y and you continue using our service, we will have assumed you
agreed to Y".

I think that's pretty fair, it would be nice if services let you know when
they updated their T&C, and sometimes they do (I recall Google doing this) but
honestly, if you didn't read it the first time, will you read the updated
version?

It would be nice if they could also provide a document with the differences,
but I guess that would be a lot of work with no real benefit and still, no one
would read it.

~~~
0xmohit

      It would be nice if they could also provide a document with the
      differences, but I guess that would be a lot of work
    

I doubt that. Legalese such as TOS are, I'm sure, prepared carefully and a
diff should be readily available.

    
    
      and still, no one would read it.
    

A few might want to read it and may actually do so (if they were to receive
one).

\--

As an example, Apple prompts one to send the terms upon upgrading the OS. This
is a good step. Although it'd be better if they could highlight the changed
text in the terms.

------
mararee
I've never liked Lyft. The first time I used them I was supposed to get a free
ride, but I didn't know where to input the coupon. I thought it was at payment
time. So I didn't get my free ride. Also the driver knowing it was my first
took a long time so he could get $25 for the ride. He took the long route and
going three miles took half an hour. When we arrived at the destination he
told me he didn't have cell phone service and asked if he could turn it off at
the corner. He didn't turn off his app until several blocks away. I wrote to
Lyft to complain about it and they wouldn't refund my money or let me change
my driver rating. The driver was also unprofessional and told me he would call
me. I emailed Lyft to see if the drivers have our phone numbers because I was
worried he would bother me afterward. They never responded to that email.

------
nwellinghoff
Lets just call out the big elephant in the room here. Uber, Lyft or any other
middle man service can be easily replaced by...you guessed it; Another middle
man! Pulling out was so stupid for them as they basically did all the market
creation and then just let others eat it all up. Thus setting a precedent that
the same thing can be done in any other city and everyone will be "just fine".
:?/

------
caseysoftware
It's dirty saying "here's what you're working towards!" if they've already
decided the driver doesn't qualify.

------
roflchoppa
I thought lyfts thing was that they don't screw the driver over?

Don't hide behind political speak.....

~~~
ajford
I've talked to a fair number of former drivers for Lyft/Uber in the Austin TX
area. General feeling I've gotten from them is that Lyft was less shitty than
Uber, but still not great.

------
circa
A friend of mine sent me a $50 credit but it only ended up being $10 when I
went to use it. I didn't really investigate but I feel like they do this a
lot. I know this is for a driver but still.

------
anon946
If I understand this correctly, they are saying that you didn't complete the
application within 30 days because it wasn't approved within 30 days. However,
I believe that most people would consider the completion of an application and
its approval as distinct events. What does the fine print state? Can this be
pursued in small claims court?

------
baybal2
register from a voip phone number and continue getting bonus rides, some
people here in Russia are riding like that for months

------
beastman82
Gosh a company that calls their ride fees "donations" didn't pay up? Shocking.

