great read, as always. One addition to your list might be something to address the network scalability of these services and how that relates to “Pool”/“Line” features. It always felt sad to see two people waiting at the airport pre pandemic for their rides knowing that they may well be headed for a destination a block apart, and yet their rides fail to be matched not because of an algorithmic failure but rather the deliberate walled garden between the person ordering Uber Pool and Lyft Line. And now, in the post-pandemic era, it seems the companies have been really sluggish to launch them again at all, and I hypothesize that the economies of scale and tipping points might be what is holding them back from offering a compelling service at lower price than standard single person rides.
In a more mature state, robotaxi service feels more like something that aught to be consolidated at a regional level akin to a utility or municipal service. By having a regulated monopoly, perhaps competed for every 5 years, you could probably negotiate better policy terms with the operators and also reasonably expect a higher rate of shared passengers per vehicle by ensuring that all robotaxi requests are hailed through the same system. That data on when/where matching is most abundant also seems like an unbelievably good data source with which to plan bus service - if you can put terms for having access to it.
This is regulated monopoly model basically akin to how public transit works in Europe and in some US cities where private operators bid on service contracts for a municipal public transit system. Also true for paratransit services which are more similar. It’s also more similar to taxis - where within a given location there’s often only one operating taxi service but with tight municipal control.
Anyway, I don’t really trust people to get that kind of contract language right to mandate a single robotaxi operator and procure it today, but I hope we can get there.
Thanks for these thoughts, Tim! I think pooled robotaxi rides could be a positive development, but I wouldn't count on them being a particularly effective tool for dealing with the negative externalities of robotaxis. As I recall, data from Uber and Lyft showed that pooled rides weren't all that much more efficient in terms of reducing overall vehicle miles traveled, and crucially, weren't particularly popular compared to solo rides. One of the promises of robotaxis is that rides will be cheap enough that you'd have little incentive to use a pooled ride.
In a dense urban environment, I don't see pooled rides in conventional vehicles working all that well compared to actual mass transit. But there could be a lot more potential in suburbs or as a last mile solution at a regional station.
Oh yes I did not mean in any way to insinuate that pooling would solve the externalities! Only that by moving to robotaxis feels like a chance to take a fresh look at what we want from ridehail services - driven or not. I’m personally keen on the idea of a regulated monopoly approach like a utility for a lot of reasons and that model seems synergistic with pooling, that’s all I meant
There are some key differences. Since robotaxis have no labor costs, they could be a lot cheaper to take longer distances, inducing more travel. And for now, robotaxis are exhibiting a lot of erratic driving behavior and causing trouble on city streets. But generally, I agree with you. My hope is that robotaxi regulations can eventually be rolled out to all ride hailing vehicles, and maybe eventually, all cars.
great read, as always. One addition to your list might be something to address the network scalability of these services and how that relates to “Pool”/“Line” features. It always felt sad to see two people waiting at the airport pre pandemic for their rides knowing that they may well be headed for a destination a block apart, and yet their rides fail to be matched not because of an algorithmic failure but rather the deliberate walled garden between the person ordering Uber Pool and Lyft Line. And now, in the post-pandemic era, it seems the companies have been really sluggish to launch them again at all, and I hypothesize that the economies of scale and tipping points might be what is holding them back from offering a compelling service at lower price than standard single person rides.
In a more mature state, robotaxi service feels more like something that aught to be consolidated at a regional level akin to a utility or municipal service. By having a regulated monopoly, perhaps competed for every 5 years, you could probably negotiate better policy terms with the operators and also reasonably expect a higher rate of shared passengers per vehicle by ensuring that all robotaxi requests are hailed through the same system. That data on when/where matching is most abundant also seems like an unbelievably good data source with which to plan bus service - if you can put terms for having access to it.
This is regulated monopoly model basically akin to how public transit works in Europe and in some US cities where private operators bid on service contracts for a municipal public transit system. Also true for paratransit services which are more similar. It’s also more similar to taxis - where within a given location there’s often only one operating taxi service but with tight municipal control.
Anyway, I don’t really trust people to get that kind of contract language right to mandate a single robotaxi operator and procure it today, but I hope we can get there.
Thanks for these thoughts, Tim! I think pooled robotaxi rides could be a positive development, but I wouldn't count on them being a particularly effective tool for dealing with the negative externalities of robotaxis. As I recall, data from Uber and Lyft showed that pooled rides weren't all that much more efficient in terms of reducing overall vehicle miles traveled, and crucially, weren't particularly popular compared to solo rides. One of the promises of robotaxis is that rides will be cheap enough that you'd have little incentive to use a pooled ride.
In a dense urban environment, I don't see pooled rides in conventional vehicles working all that well compared to actual mass transit. But there could be a lot more potential in suburbs or as a last mile solution at a regional station.
Oh yes I did not mean in any way to insinuate that pooling would solve the externalities! Only that by moving to robotaxis feels like a chance to take a fresh look at what we want from ridehail services - driven or not. I’m personally keen on the idea of a regulated monopoly approach like a utility for a lot of reasons and that model seems synergistic with pooling, that’s all I meant
I don't get the argument for treating these differently from any preexisting taxis or ride hailing. The externalities seem the same
There are some key differences. Since robotaxis have no labor costs, they could be a lot cheaper to take longer distances, inducing more travel. And for now, robotaxis are exhibiting a lot of erratic driving behavior and causing trouble on city streets. But generally, I agree with you. My hope is that robotaxi regulations can eventually be rolled out to all ride hailing vehicles, and maybe eventually, all cars.