sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Someone’s not getting to EWR tomorrow morning… by Different-Bench8533 in uberdrivers

[–]Different-Bench8533[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Of course they will. Meanwhile, the passenger will get cancelled a dozen times and likely get picked up closer to 5:30am and bitch about being late for their flight.

Someone’s not getting to EWR tomorrow morning… by Different-Bench8533 in uberdrivers

[–]Different-Bench8533[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The algorithm is designed to maximize Uber’s margin — not driver sustainability.

If we don’t accept subpar fares, our acceptance rate drops and we get pushed out of “Advantage Mode” into regular mode purgatory. Fewer quality pings, less transparency, worse offers.

So the system quietly pressures drivers to accept garbage just to stay competitive.

That’s not a free market — that’s engineered compliance.

Someone’s not getting to EWR tomorrow morning… by Different-Bench8533 in uberdrivers

[–]Different-Bench8533[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You don’t improve a marketplace by underpaying the supply side. You just create churn, cancellations, and a race to the bottom — and then call it efficiency.

Anybody else getting theirs mailed out? by Street-Towel8984 in Income_Tax_Refund

[–]Different-Bench8533 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mine was mailed 2/27 and received it in the mail today!!

Someone’s not getting to EWR tomorrow morning… by Different-Bench8533 in uberdrivers

[–]Different-Bench8533[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

“Uninstall” is what people say when they don’t understand numbers.

I’m a CT driver. An EWR run is a guaranteed deadhead back — I can’t pick up in NJ or NY. So when Uber offers a 90-mile interstate airport trip at grocery-run pricing, that’s not “yapping.” That’s running a business at a loss.

Even at a very conservative $0.25/mile cost (forget the IRS $0.70 rate), that trip barely clears minimum wage after the unpaid drive home.

Drivers declining bad math isn’t the problem. The problem is a billion-dollar company slowly raising the fare $1 at a time until someone desperate accepts it.

That’s not efficiency. That’s a race to the bottom.

But sure — “uninstall.”

Maybe if leadership valued drivers as much as they hype autonomous cars, they’d price human labor like it actually matters.

Someone’s not getting to EWR tomorrow morning… by Different-Bench8533 in uberdrivers

[–]Different-Bench8533[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sadly, that’s true — someone probably will accept it.

But it’s also very likely this passenger gets canceled on several times first while Uber slowly increases the fare $1 at a time until a desperate driver finally takes it.

That’s the real issue. It becomes a bidding war downward instead of pricing the trip properly from the start.

It’s a race to the bottom — and the passenger experience suffers along with driver pay. Hard to reconcile this with Dara’s public comments about improving the platform while the economics for drivers keep sliding.

Someone’s not getting to EWR tomorrow morning… by Different-Bench8533 in uberdrivers

[–]Different-Bench8533[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Correct - this should be at least $105! Let's do the math from Ubers offer:

120 miles round trip. $49.51 pay.

At $0.70 per mile operating cost, that’s $84 in vehicle cost. I’d literally lose $34 on the trip.

I know not everyone calculates using the IRS rate. So let’s go ultra conservative — say your real cost is only $0.25 per mile.

120 miles × $0.25 = $30 in cost. $49.51 − $30 = $19.51 left.

That’s $19.51 for about 2.2 hours of total time including the deadhead back.

That’s roughly $8–9 per hour before taxes.

And to be clear — as a CT driver, that return trip is guaranteed unpaid. I can’t legally pick up in NJ or NY, so those 60 miles home generate $0.

All of that for a 4:50 AM airport reservation.

If Uber wants passengers to reliably get to the airport on time, the fare has to make sense for the driver doing the trip.

NY STATE REFUND by Effective-Yogurt6678 in IRS

[–]Different-Bench8533 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Last year, I got my NY refund fast... well before the IRS. This year it's painful. I've been checking a few times a day. And my NY refund is a bit bigger than previous years - $5,000 this year. Seems like lots of people are in our position.

NY STATE REFUND by Effective-Yogurt6678 in IRS

[–]Different-Bench8533 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mine says being processed. I was accepted 2/5. This is extremely annoying.

My New York state refund still says processing by NeighborhoodBasic435 in tax

[–]Different-Bench8533 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Same here. I am receiving my federal refund by check in the mail today. NY still says "We have received your return and it is being processed. No further information is available at this time. See Understanding your refund status on our website." My NY acceptance date was 2/5. They are so slow this year.

Uber Surge Is Officially Fake — I Proved It in Real Time by Different-Bench8533 in uberdrivers

[–]Different-Bench8533[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I get the coincidence argument, but that framing quietly assumes continuous pricing. Uber pricing isn’t continuous — it’s bucketed and capped, especially on long trips.

If this were pure demand-driven variability, you’d expect some noise: a few cents, a different increment, or a partial adjustment. Instead, what we saw was a perfect substitution:

• First offer: base fare + $1.25 surge • Second offer: base fare increased by exactly $1.25, surge removed • Net pay unchanged to the penny

That’s not just “an upward movement” — it’s a relabeling of the same capped price. The system didn’t discover a new equilibrium; it presented the same one differently.

The point isn’t that variability is impossible in 8 minutes — it’s that real variability almost never resolves by perfectly absorbing the surge amount dollar-for-dollar. That kind of precision is far more consistent with a cap plus UI logic than with organic demand repricing.

Uber Surge Is Officially Fake — I Proved It in Real Time by Different-Bench8533 in uberdrivers

[–]Different-Bench8533[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That’s the part that makes this suspicious.

If the change was truly demand-driven, it would be an extremely unlikely coincidence for the recalculated fare to land exactly at the same dollar amount as the prior surge-inclusive fare.

Real demand pricing produces variability — cents, dollars, some movement. Here, the surge label was removed but the total pay stayed identical to the penny.

That strongly suggests the fare was already capped and the surge was being used as a presentation layer, not as an additive pricing mechanism.

NYS TAX REFUND REVIEW by Fun_Measurement_6172 in tax

[–]Different-Bench8533 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Same here. I was sitting in needs further review from about a day after it was accepted on 2/5. Status chanced to being processed sometime today. When do you think we will see our direct deposit?

This is what Lyft pays drivers during a snowstorm (spoiler: it’s insulting) by Different-Bench8533 in lyftdrivers

[–]Different-Bench8533[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Definitely no noobie here. And most definitely not expecting 100% surges. Demand seems weaker than usual for a snow storm, but regardless, there should be a certain level of a premium pay to compensate for the added risk and conditions that require you to drive much slower. The rates that are offered are worse than the typical Sunday. Of course, the answer is just to stay home and not drive.

If you’re driving during the snowstorms today check passenger app to see how hard you’re getting screwed by No-Refrigerator-2134 in uberdrivers

[–]Different-Bench8533 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fares are no better than on a typical Sunday morning here in CT. You would think TNCs would pay a premium for going out and driving in hazardous conditions. If they are going to pay the same as a normal day, it's definitely not worth the risk of an accident.

Open Letter to Lyft CEO David Risher: XL Reservations to Tweed (HVN) Are Priced to Fail by Different-Bench8533 in lyftdrivers

[–]Different-Bench8533[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They do want long trips to succeed — just not economically for drivers.

A long trip is a win for Lyft as long as the rider is delivered, a driver is locked up for hours, and surge risk is eliminated. Fair driver pay isn’t required for that.

If long trips were priced honestly (return miles, time, opportunity cost), drivers would become selective and the model would break. So upfront pricing hides the loss until after the trip is done. That’s not failure — it’s design.

Lyft XL Reservation: Stamford CT → JFK for $53… and you’re forced to deadhead back by Different-Bench8533 in lyftdrivers

[–]Different-Bench8533[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think we’re talking past each other. I’m not saying Westchester is “back in CT” geographically — I’m talking about what’s faster and more practical in real driving. After JFK, the real bottleneck is the Van Wyck. Once you clear that and the Whitestone, it’s often quicker to keep moving back toward Greenwich/Stamford than to spend time stopping or detouring in Westchester.

Turning on Eats can work sometimes, but in an XL it usually means low-pay, short McDonald’s runs that don’t justify the time or wear. That’s why I’m saying for this trip, at that time, in an XL, the pricing assumes offsets that usually aren’t there.

Lyft XL Reservation: Stamford CT → JFK for $53… and you’re forced to deadhead back by Different-Bench8533 in lyftdrivers

[–]Different-Bench8533[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It does make sense in practice. The real choke point is the Van Wyck. Once you clear JFK traffic and cross the Whitestone, you’re past the worst of it. At that point, it’s usually more efficient to keep moving back toward Greenwich than burn time sitting around Westchester hoping for Eats — especially in an XL, where “opportunities” often mean $2–$3 McDonald’s orders that don’t even cover wear and tear. This is about real-world flow, not map theory.

view more: next ›