Cheaper than uber rn. Long term once they own the market? Too much.

They still have to compete with alternate modes of transportation such as buses, bikes, trains, e-scooter rentals, self-owned cars, Uber with human drivers.

If it would be "too much", then there's no reason why taxis (incl uber/lyft) wouldn't be too much today.

	▲	bix6 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		I don’t really think they have to compete much. Direct competitors are uber and Lyft which they can undercut since they don’t pay drivers. The people who want to take buses and trains will continue to do so although Waymo might sway some with their ease and if pricing is reasonable. Bikes and e-scooters only get you so far. Last time I was in SF I didn’t see too many bikes but I saw a ton of e-scooters. Are you really taking an e-scooter further than a few blocks? And when it rains? Self owned cars make sense for longer trips out of the city but parking is a pain and driving is stressful so this is an easy win for Waymo. It’s cheaper now so they can take market share. And their cost will certainly be lower than Ubers so they can win the pricing battle. But long term monopoly gonna monopoly. Perfect pricing is a given with the wealth in SF and how many rides will be on a business CC.

▲

ElijahLynn 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

from what I heard, the intention is to make it much more affordable than it is now. I don't remember the source right now but I did think it was a blog post or something like that.

I think if it's affordable then people will easily take that. instead of drinking and driving at night or other unsafe activities. if it's affordable then people can just take a waymo home and then back again to get their car when it's safe again.

	▲	bix6 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Certainly they aim to make it affordable now in order to undercut Lyft and uber. Long term they will own the market and jack up prices as monopolies do.