This just sounds like Uber quickly charges you for the worst case since if they charge you for the best case and things go wrong, Uber loses. No one can know what route will even be possible given how chaotic traffic and closures can be. Then the driver gets paid by whatever route is actually taken. I don't really see this as an issue at all.
If it is merely traffic changes, why is the customer not getting a cheaper ride if the route is shorter? If the customer is paying more, why isn't that money going to the driver?
One of the beautiful aspects of Uber over say, taking a taxi, is that you only pay the one price no matter what. You don't have to worry over the route. You don't have to do anything other than get in a car and know you will get where you want to for the price you agreed to.
Also, if there is a fare left over, why should it go to the driver? Uber isn't existing to just get rides for drivers and forward all proceeds to them. They are a giant company that needs to be making money off of every ride. A lot more money than they are making now if they are ever going to be cashflow positive.
So that comment asserts: 1. When using Uber you lock in the price upfront. 2. People like to be certain about prices. 3. Uber is capitalist and likes to keep money. 4. Uber has profitability issues.
All of those look true to me. What part do you think isn't true?
If Uber wanted to protect themselves, they'd authorize for the slower route and settle for the actual route (up to authorization).
It sounds like Uber is using two estimates (or possibly an estimate and a actual; unclear from article) and simply pocketing the difference to increase their margins.
It's an incredibly deceptive practice if Uber is billing you for a route it doesn't intend to send you on. As a customer, I feel it's outright fraudulent -- they're simply lying about their intentions to charge me a higher rate for their service without disclosing they're billing at a higher rate.
I wouldn't tolerate that from any contracting service -- charge more hourly, or bill by the deliverable, but don't lie to me about how you intend to do the work. I don't care, but I do care you're lying to me.
Protect themselves from what? Uber is under no obligation to charge you any amount based off of route, zone, etc. They can charge you whatever they see fit and pay their drivers whatever they see fit. If you don't like the charge, don't take the Uber! If the driver doesn't like the fare, don't accept it!
In case you haven't noticed this is how ALL middle men make money. They charge more to the end user than they pay for a product.
Even your contracting example makes sense. You pay for a deliverable. Does it matter that it costs them less to get it to you and pocket the difference? Nope. That principle is the backbone of all commerce. You charge more than it costs you to deliver.
in this case the middleman is telling a different story between the user and driver. uber is, allegedly, charging the user a higher price while showing the driver a lower price so that they are pocketing extra money that should be going to the driver. say uber takes 10% off each transaction by contract. if they charge the user $10 but show the driver the ride is $8, then by paying the driver $7.20 instead of the deserved and agreed upon via contract $9.00, then they are skimming "hidden" money. this is highly deceptive.
this is how a middleman in a more seedy emplyment scenario gets their fingers chopped off because they're making extra money on the side from the business transactions.
Again, I don't care if a contractor wants to bill by deliverables.
But to transfer domains, if a software contractor gave me a bullshit list of estimated times to justify a project price, I'd let them go for bullshitting me on the estimates even though I'm okay with the final price.
Just be honest and tell me you want to bill by deliverable, not fudge around with high estimates of a low rate to "justify" it.
