I-Like-To-Bike

Because I, unlike you, do not ignore the fixed costs of ownership (depreciation and financing) as well as the variable costs (fuel, maintenance) that are currently being paid 100% by the drivers.

You prefer to make pretend that that these vehicles will somehow be bought, financed, maintained and operated for next to nothing by Uber et al.

But I am discussing this with a starry eyed fellow that prefers extrapolating his economic and consumer demand "predictions" from his own carefully selected and highly filtered (for highest positive spin value) press releases. Silly me.

Ninety5rpm

Uber and Lyft allow their drivers to retain 70-80% of the fare, plus tips. Yes, the drivers have to pay the fixed costs of ownership out of that, but that's why they're getting the bulk of the fare. Not to mention the fare is largely that high to cover their time.

Say a fare for a 20 mile rides is $50. Driver gets $40; Uber gets $10. Driver allocates 50 cents a mile or $10 for vehicle costs and fuel. He keeps the remaining $30 + tips for himself.

Now with an AV there is no driver, but Uber (or Waymo, more and more likely) gets the entire fare. With no human driver to compensate, they can charge far less than $50 and still have plenty to cover the typical $10 vehicle cost and pay themselves a profit. And the cost of the vehicle, by most accounts I've read, is likely to be far less than 50 cents a mile on these specialized electric vehicles:
https://avt.inl.gov/sites/default/fi...fsev/costs.pdf

Ninety5rpm

I'm sure the AV tech part of the cars will be fairly modular and upgrade-able.

And a $50000 car can be amortized for less than a $1000/month over 5 years. I think that's a reasonable time and insignificant amount for a car that can bring in $1000 or more in revenue per day.

There is a reason so many companies are pouring billions into this.

tyrion

That's $40/hour assuming zero downtime! The transpo-as-service concept isn't going to take over the world at those rates.

Ninety5rpm

LOL! Okay, my math was off on that one.

My main point stands, however. $1000/month for vehicle cost is reasonable given a vehicel that brings $1000 in revenue every few days.

northernlights

Self-driving Cars Use Crazy Amounts of Power, And It's Becoming a Problem

https://www.wired.com/story/self-dri...n-nvidia-chip/




The power needed to operate all those extra sensors seems like it would be pretty significant. How much power is consumed to project radar signals not just in front of the car, but 360 degrees all around it? Must drain a lot of juice to keep those radar/lidar thingys spinning all the time, as well as killing the aerodynamics of the car. Say good-bye to fuel efficiency.

Rollfast

Roll down the windows.

Rollfast

PS Not RADAR, Lidar.

genec

Uber never absorbed the cost of the cars... the owners did, and thus that ownership cost was largely ignored... Sure, the labor costs of the driver were there... but that amortized the cost of the car over not only the driver, but the fare time too.

Uber even has a program where they help drivers buy new cars... Uber doesn’t exactly lose money at that.

Uber may ultimately win out... But they have a lot of sunk costs going in.

Rollfast

I don't see how Phoenix cyclists are lucky, unless they put a huge sign in several places saying, "Pay attention, ain't nobody steering, you are on your own"!

Rollfast

Why do you think we are going to buy stock based on that? That's an iffy statement and what does a share of Alphabet cost?

I-Like-To-Bike

Better yet what will the fare structure be for those lucky Phoenix residents who are being blessed with this limited taxi service, and when, if ever Waymo will be able to make one¢ of profit from this taxi service endeavor? Maybe if Waymo is lucky they won't lose billions of $/year offering cut rate taxi service.

I suspect there are few Phoenix cyclists about to alter their riding (or driving) habits because of anything Uber or Waymo offers in the foreseeable future.

Ninety5rpm

I think Uber is toast, unless GM/Cruise or Aurora Innovations pulls a rabbit out of a hat and teams up with Uber. Otherwise Waymo is going to roast them. We'll know for sure once Waymo rolls out their service in Phoenix later this year. If I'm right, fares will be half of Uber's rates, or less, and Uber will be driven out of business there practically overnight. I mean, who's going to pay $10 for a ride that can be had for $5 or less?

That said, and this is my point, Uber drivers have been around long enough to prove that the fundamental economics of the business are viable (regardless of who owns the vehicle). That is, the 80% of the fares that drivers currently get is sufficient to cover operating/ownership costs of the vehicles PLUS compensating the human driver for his time. If that were not true, no drivers would last more than a few months.

Ninety5rpm

I suspect the rollout will be incremental and will initially focus on an inner region of Phoenix at first, intentionally limiting the market to those needing rides within that circle. But as they work the inevitable bugs out of the system, they will gradually increase the radius of the area they serve, perhaps encompassing the entire Phoenix metro area within a few months of initial rollout.

The rollout is likely to expand faster at subsequent cities.

Ninety5rpm

Smart real estate investors are starting to think about how real estate will be affected by the AV revolution.


Why real estate investors are watching self-driving cars closely

Likewise, smart cycling advocates are starting to think about how cycling will be affected by the AV revolution.

avole

The revolution isn’t self driving cars, it’s breaking the petrol/diesel nexus.

I-Like-To-Bike

What "smart" things are these so-called smart cycling advocates starting to think about? Is their "thinking" similar to yours?

Ninety5rpm

The revolution is the self-driving cars. One of its countless effects will be breaking the petrol/diesel nexus.

Ninety5rpm

Indistinguishable!

Ninety5rpm

More evidence of how close this is.

First, like Urmson points out in the article, it's not an issue for the initial rollouts (slow urban traffic with plenty of recharge opportunities).

Second, more advanced low-power chips are being developed as we speak.

avole

No. It’s rearranging the deckchairs versus avoiding the iceberg.

Ninety5rpm

Huh? Self-driving cars will reduce individual car usage many times more than we could ever hope to accomplish with public transportation.

Maelochs

What's funny is that although the article opens with its click-bait title and tales of disaster, the last few paragraphs are all about how the latest tech cuts the power draw to one-fifth or on eighth (different systems) from the stuff .... that already works.

Bad journalism designed for the cheap emotional reaction (Either, "I knew it I hate AI" or "That can't be right AI cars are already out there and have been for years") and then it turns out is is all a come-on and even though what is out there already works ... there is already stuff way better on the way.

Of course, most people just read the headline ....

Ninety5rpm

In 2018, not in 2028, AV technology is proven worthy in snow conditions, albeit in Moscow. https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/16/1...-winter-russia

squirtdad

actually looks like uber loses on that deal.....

https://www.recode.net/2017/9/27/163...leasing-losses