All the factors you cite impact driver earnings, but do they impact the analysis? At the end of the day the argument boils down to "drivers make more money when they can drive faster", which seems pretty indisputable. So if overall traffic speeds are slowing down, then in aggregate all drivers will suffer as well, although the daytime driver suffering through rush hour gridlock will be comparatively worse off than a driver who focuses on long airport rides in the middle of the night.
As for the taxi meter fee structure, Uber/Lyft can work around this with surge fees during those congested peak hours, while taxis cannot. This too is quite clearly in the Uber drivers' favor: if you're going to be sitting around in traffic, better to be paid more for it. (Unless Uber takes all the extra revenue for themselves, but that's another story.)
>All the factors you cite impact driver earnings, but do they impact the analysis?
Probably not. However, if the analysis doesn't provide enough nuance WRT revenue generation, how useful is that analysis, except as a primer on using those particular techniques in a novel fashion?
>At the end of the day the argument boils down to "drivers make more money when they can drive faster", which seems pretty indisputable.
Absolutely a fair point, although ignoring the time-based variations in the demand curve likely has a measurable effect on revenue generation.
To illustrate that point, during the pandemic, overall traffic volumes are down at least 50%, presumably allowing even day time drivers to drive faster. However, some estimates of taxi driver revenue have it down 80+%.
Even more, traffic lights on one-way avenues (at least in Manhattan, where the bulk of medallion taxis operate) are generally set at slightly less than 25 miles/hour (the citywide default speed limit), so "driving faster = making more money" isn't really correct. "Driving faster than 12 miles per hour usually results in higher revenue" is probably more accurate.
>So if overall traffic speeds are slowing down, then in aggregate all drivers will suffer as well, although the daytime driver suffering through rush hour gridlock will be comparatively worse off than a driver who focuses on long airport rides in the middle of the night.
That absolutely applies to day time drivers, and night-time drivers can (and usually do) generate more revenue. However, some of that difference is unrelated to speed. Rather it's related to demand. Because people know that traffic is bad during the day makes them less likely to use a taxi during the day and more likely to do so at night.
However, your example of airport rides is flawed, as rides between airports/Manhattan are a flat fare and not based on time and distance.
I don't use Uber or other FHV services, mainly because I find their business model offensive, given the huge fees they charge are way out of proportion to the services they provide -- and that's fundamentally unfair to the drivers.
Which is also why I always pay cash when using a taxi, as there's usually a fee of at least 5% on credit card transactions in the taxi, and drivers often don't receive their money for days -- yet the fleet owners require up-front payment for leases, and the drivers must fill the gas tank before returning the car.
As for the taxi meter fee structure, Uber/Lyft can work around this with surge fees during those congested peak hours, while taxis cannot. This too is quite clearly in the Uber drivers' favor: if you're going to be sitting around in traffic, better to be paid more for it. (Unless Uber takes all the extra revenue for themselves, but that's another story.)