Uber Raised Rates During Sydney Hostage Siege

Image: blog.uber.com

The controversial car service Uber gained traction among the hip and wired as the new wave of getting from point A to point B. A mere whiff of an IPO created a valuation frenzy unsettlingly similar to the turn of the century Internet stock bubble. Uber has publicly maintained its mission is the provision of cheaper car service fares, leveraging shared ridership and app-generated demand. However, Uber operates much more like an airline utilizing "yield management" techniques. In simplest terms, transportation firms charge higher fares during peak periods. Uber has asserted this approach, muscularly defending it as a way to attract more drivers to work for Uber.

People on expense accounts (Uber's prime demographic) don't care about rates that double or triple during "peak" times. Meanwhile, Uber's definition of "peak" seems arbitrary, leaving ordinary citizens who've bought into the Uber concept paying more than they would have in a metered cab.

The "peak" concept came into ugly focus during the recent hostage siege in Sydney, Australia. Those who attempted to leave the city's central business district during the incident were dismayed to learn their Uber fares would be anywhere from double to quadruple the regular fare, as a vator.tv report noted. This repellent exploitation became another in a series of very public black eyes for Uber. Recently, an Uber driver in India allegedly raped a passenger. Earlier this fall, an Uber executive publicly suggested hiring detectives to discredit journalists who post pieces that displease Uber.

Uber is another example of privatization's dark side. In this case, arrogant, tech-driven greed masquerades as a public good. My suggestion is a simple one: buyer beware.