To Uber or not to Uber?
After I met up with an out-of-town visitor, I
wondered how she was getting back to the airport.
"Oh, I'm using Uber," she said.
"A what?" I replied.
"Uber is this service where you can book
a driver through this app and the driver shows up to where you are at," my
Uber-using visitor said.
Suddenly she pulled out her smartphone,
called up an app and scheduled a pick-up driver.
OK, this is a great proactive revolutionary
app, but is the use of it safe? Customers register with Uber ahead of
time, use the customer's phone's GPS to locate the user and sends a picture
text of the driver as he/she gets closer to the user. Still, does
registration and texts of the driver make it all a safer experience? You
decide.
Users also have the convenience of inputting
their credit card information when signing up, so no money changes hands when
making a request/transaction. When it comes to cost, Uber can be quite pricey
depending on the level of service users choose. My budget-conscious
visitor used UberX, a cheaper choice.
Every day there seems to be a new app out
there just waiting for smartphone users to download and eat up memory
space on our devices.
I'm torn with the amount of apps I download
on my phone. On the one hand, I like to keep up with the latest technology when
getting a new app. On the other, I don't want to slow down my device. The Uber
app seems to be another one of those breakthrough apps that can change our
lives by providing a convenience that did not previously exist.
After every time I learn about a new app like
Uber, I typically say, "Why didn't I think of that?" Well, a group of
San Francisco visionaries came up with this "taxi-on-demand" service
that has been operating in about 20 markets. The idea has been a success with
its users raving about how they can basically push a button and suddenly,
a car appears.
Lately, a handful of folks have been
wondering if Uber is becoming the modern-day equivalent of Napster. If anyone
is able to recall, Napster was that convenient music-file-sharing service from
years ago. Traditional musicians, producers, distributors and record companies
felt that Napster cut into their profits. Napster ultimately met its untimely
end. Yes, Napster became a wing of Rhapsody, but its original setup came to an end. So, how could Uber face such an uncertain future? In this case, traditional
taxicab companies see Uber as a threat to their profits. Typically, cities have
been protecting taxicab companies' interests. So, taxicab interests could lobby
cities to effectively find ways to either reduce or eliminate Uber.
Former Obama administration official and
campaign strategist David Plouffe most likely hopes to prevent that
"Napster-type-demise." Mr. Plouffe joined Uber as a policy and
strategy adviser. If Plouffe puts his government experience to
use, he could convince cities to allow Uber to "stay and play."
Uber's CEO Travis Kalanick is a bit more blunt on this "city governments
versus fledgling business struggle" when he stated that, "... the Big Taxi cartel -- has used decades of
political contributions and influence to restrict competition, reduce choice
for consumers, and put a stranglehold on economic opportunity for its
drivers."
Whether Mr. Plouffe is
successful in saving and expanding Uber, one must admit that the electronic
taxi-hailing service is an awesome idea. My question in this dilemma is: can
existing services develop their own apps and compete with Uber? What do you
think? Is Uber going to kill traditional taxicab companies and the scores of
jobs that they provide or is this truly a service that provides consumers more
choice?
Comments