I take the bus all the time and you're assuming that I care what Uber did, which I don't. I just found your outrage about someone else's outrage that you didn't even take five minutes to understand funny.
You are still assuming they are doing this to undermine the strike. And lyft is technically undermining the strike by providing service instead of halting services.
Take the bus otherwise you are another hypocrite looking for another outrage trophy for the week,
As per Uber, surge pricing is based on pickup location, not destination. Suspending surge pricing at JFK only affects people being picked up at JFK.
https://help.uber.com/h/e9375d5e-917b-4bc5-8142-23b89a440eec
The narrative isn't about them operating at all, the people pushing users to switch to Lyft are abundantly aware that Lyft was operating then too.
I personally don't think it was Uber's intent and frankly even if it was I wouldn't care. I just found it funny that people were getting super angry about other people being angry about a subject they clearly didn't understand. Haha.
Per that link, does that mean surge pricing does not apply to destinations at all if one is picked up in a non-surge area? If so, how can they cancel surge pricing to begin with?
All the news articles and high-volume Tweets show otherwise; people are accusing Uber of profiteering by announcing their cancellation of Surge charges 30 minutes after an official NYC cab service began a boycott.
Yes, surge pricing does not apply to destinations, only pickups. In this case if your pickup location was also affected by surge prices you would pay surge pricing to go to JFK and then if you wanted to get an Uber from JFK back to where you started from you would not be charged surge pricing. I'm not sure I understand the confusion as to how they would cancel it. All they do is return prices to normal in a pickup area.
You're going to have to provide sources as all news articles I have seen show otherwise.
Or it could be that some of us have a legitimate concern about the social media lynch mob mentality, which is as dangerous to our society if not more so than fake news or alt-truthsAs best as I can tell some conservative special snowflakes are outraged that someone else is angry about something.
It's pretty funny how they don't notice the irony, wouldn't you agree?
Then why did you just say "No it couldn't, as Uber only suspended surge pricing FROM the airport, not to it." if there was no surge pricing for going to a high-demand destination?
Please quote an article describing the situation as you see it, I haven't found one.
http://fortune.com/2017/01/29/uber-immigration-protests/
http://www.businessinsider.com/delete-uber-hashtag-jfk-airport-taxi-strikes-2017-1
http://ew.com/news/2017/01/29/delete-uber-lyft-immigration-ban-protests/
Because I was explaining how surge pricing works?
I'm confused, your links back up what I'm saying, which is that the problem came from Uber turning off surge pricing, not for providing service at all.
OK, how was that relevant to my initial point about Uber just getting people to where they want to be? If you're already at an airport and want to leave, it's not like you have a lot of options. A person that wants to get home and doesn't care about the boycott is at the whims of what is available. That makes customers susceptible to price-gouging; if the alternative is sleeping at the airport because the official cabs are not around, I might want to pony up an extra $30 regardless. Uber didn't want to look like they were doing that, therefore they removed surge pricing. Uber charging less undermines no more than if they had followed normal routine. THEN you go on to imply that Uber was being selective in how they choose to cut surge pricing, which is as you now half-admit is not even a thing at play here.
So people are complaining about Uber making money during the strike because they charged less money? The links do not support what you are saying, please quote an excerpt if you feel otherwise.
Uber sent out a tweet after the designated strike time informing customers that surge prices had been temporarily suspended. However, some saw the move as an attempt to capitalize on and undermine the protest, since surges bump the cost of rides when the demand is high.
Fair enough, it wouldn't bring more people to the protests. Doesn't change the fact that demand is wholly up to the number of people at the airport wanting to leave, not something that will make people think "Hey, discount time, I'm gonna get on that".
"Some saw", and how does that capitalize on things when they make less money doing so, and when they have a history of cancelling surge pricing in the past?
Yeah, I remember when you turned down that job offer from Google because it didn't pay enough.tech community likes to use foreign labor to lower wages and outsource work. Anything that threatens their cheap labor has to be stopped.
Uber continued to carry passengers—many of them protesters rallying in support of detainees—to the airport. However, the company announced shortly after 730pm Eastern that it would temporarily suspend surge pricing, in recognition that demand would be unusually high.
Still, users—angered by the fact that the company didn't completely halt service in solidarity—lashed out by vowing to delete their Uber applications. Some pledged to switch to competitor Lyft, even though Uber CEO Travis Kalanick was one of the first Silicon Valley chiefs to come out against the Trump travel ban.
Can someone explain? So why Lyft? It seems Uber was against the Travel ban yet somehow they are banned but why not Lyft if they are still doing rides?
Wow they are going on a blind attack against Uber without a clue its like mob mentality x1000 no thought process at all. Millennials are messed up in the head.
Yes.Uber continued to carry passengers—many of them protesters rallying in support of detainees—to the airport. However, the company announced shortly after 730pm Eastern that it would temporarily suspend surge pricing, in recognition that demand would be unusually high.
Still, users—angered by the fact that the company didn't completely halt service in solidarity—lashed out by vowing to delete their Uber applications. Some pledged to switch to competitor Lyft, even though Uber CEO Travis Kalanick was one of the first Silicon Valley chiefs to come out against the Trump travel ban.
Can someone explain? So why Lyft? It seems Uber was against the Travel ban yet somehow they are banned but why not Lyft if they are still doing rides?
Wow they are going on a blind attack against Uber without a clue its like mob mentality x1000 no thought process at all. Millennials are messed up in the head.
This is also a reaction to comments made by Uber's CEO where he didn't exactly condemn the administration's move. Look around a little bit and you might figure things out a bit on your own.
Good luck!
I remember when you made points without personal attacks.Yeah, I remember when you turned down that job offer from Google because it didn't pay enough.
It's a combination. Uber CEO is on Trump's economic advisory board, has said he'd work with Trump, add in the surge pricing/JFK issue and a somewhat tepid statement on the travel ban versus a direct competitor's unambiguously condemning the EO, coupled with their customer base being predominantly urban (i.e. democratic) and you have what you have.But why should anyone "have to" condemn the administrations move.
Is that a requirement?
Did he support the administrations move?
Or is this just the typical Histrionic Antics about everything they don't agree with?
But why should anyone "have to" condemn the administrations move.
They don't have to. And nobody has to use their service. Next question.
hahaha, the terminally stupid mob strikes again. Snowflakes don't like it when anyone doesn't agree with them.
All you can do is laugh and point at their histrionics.
The very first line of the OP's post is "LOL snowflakes go wild." "LOL" stands for "laughing out loud". Put these two things together and perhaps you'll see that conservatives are laughing at the snowflakes' outrage, not being outraged at the snowflakes' outrage.I'm just going to note the irony of you posting this in a thread made by conservatives ranting and raving about how these 'snowflakes' don't agree with them.
You guys are always good for a laugh!