Thanks Garrett for sharing.
One the most fascinating slide to me is the «environmental benefits», decidedly unsexy title but in reality it is where the business model is buried (unconsciously at that moment).
Before and even after Uber, there are generally two approaches to get into the transportation sector: be a cost killer or add more opportunities (revenues). Over 99% of the cases tend to be about cutting costs. In most cases, one end up being a significant portion of those so called costs they suppose to cut, ironically.
Environmental benefits slide points to one of most critical findings of the pitch: Drivers spend over 35% of their time looking for fare (dead time). I can’t stress this finding enough.This is the daily lost opportunity which (if solved) justifies 20% fees.
Being able to direct them to the best nearby places after each drop off (vs randomly driving/scanning the streets or joining an endless queue at obvious places such as airports). Getting this right, means generating 30% more opportunities for fare.
Question to Garrett:
Did this play a role when recruiting the first independent drivers? How did they apprehend this argument?
