Uber introducing budget-friendly option for commuters
(NewsNation) — Uber has introduced a new budget-friendly option for commuters.
Earlier this week, the company unveiled 'Route Share,' which allows users to share a ride with up to two other passengers along busy corridors for up to 50% less than the cost of UberX.
Spain will limit access to Madrid's airport to try to prevent homeless camping
'Route Share offers consistent and frequent pickup options along direct routes during morning and evening commute hours (6-10 a.m. and 4-8 p.m. local time Monday through Friday),' the company said in a news release. 'With pickups every 20 minutes along busy corridors during weekday commute hours, you'll get the predictability and comfort of Uber, for even less (up to 50% cheaper than UberX).'
Uber said the program will initially be available in New York City, San Francisco, Chicago, Philadelphia, Dallas, Boston, and Baltimore.
More cities are expected to be added in the future. The company has not announced a start date for the program.Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Waymo is winning in San Francisco
The self-driving car service Waymo has been active in San Francisco for 20 months and has already captured 27% of the city's rideshare market, according to new research compiled by Mary Meeker's Bond venture capital firm. That rapid progress suggests the mainstreaming of self-driving car service could happen faster than once thought. Why you're catching the 'ick' so easily, according to science Waymo is winning in San Francisco Supersonic air travel gets green light in U.S. after 50-year ban lifted 'What we've done in San Francisco is prove to ourselves—and to the world—that not only does autonomy work, but it works at scale in a market and can be a viable commercial product,' Waymo Co-CEO Dmitri Dolgov told Fast Company in March. In my experience as a frequent Waymo user, the service can cost up to a third more than Uber, depending on demand. But in some ways it's worth it. While Uber was originally meant to make ridesharing a friendlier and more social experience than taxi service, being alone can have its perks, too. A Waymo One ride can be a time of quiet contemplation, or even meditation, slotted in between meetings or other tasks. With Uber or a taxi service, you also get a different experience each time. The quality, condition, and odor of the vehicle varies from ride to ride, as does the driver's level of sociability, attitude, behavior, and language. Waymo service, by contrast, is largely the same every time: same Jaguar SUV, same neutral smell, same mellow, ambient music (which you can shut off if you want to). Note that Waymo's Jaguar I-PACE SUVs, after being decked out in computers and sensors, probably cost between $130,000 and $150,000, Motor Trend estimates. So Waymo could adopt less-expensive, and less-posh, vehicles as it scales to drive down costs. Riders may feel more in control in a self-driving car (sounds counterintuitive, I know). In an Uber, 'my car, my rules' governs a number of aspects of the ride. I wouldn't ask an Uber driver to change or turn off the music in his own car, for example. In a Waymo 'you control the music and don't feel judged by being on a call or whatever you do,' Das tells Fast Company. And while Waymo rides may take a little longer than Uber rides to get to their destination, there's evidence that Waymo rides are safer than human-driven cars. Waymo researchers studied more than 56.7 million miles of driving and found that by removing the human driver Waymo achieves a 92% reduction in crashes involving injuries among pedestrians, an 82% reduction in crashes with cyclists, and an 82% reduction in crashes involving motorcyclists. Yes, Waymo might have captured a quarter of the market here because San Francisco is a tech city. 'This may be due to a combination of the region's tech-focused culture, busy workers staying heads-down on work or sensitive calls, or simply a preference for fewer social interactions,' Jeremiah Owyang of Blitzscaling Ventures tells Fast Company. 'Standardized quality in a private setting is outperforming a variable, faster human driver—a physical representation of automation.' And don't get me wrong. I've had my share of problems with Waymo. On at least two occasions, in less-traveled parts of the city, a Waymo car has dropped me off several blocks from my destination. And, at least in San Francisco, you still can't take a Waymo to the airport (the company started servicing its first airport, Phoenix Sky Harbor, in 2022). Still, the differences that matter between the self-driving and human-driven experiences are becoming clearer to more consumers. And some of the ones that really matter seem to favor Waymo. Waymo currently offers rides in the San Francisco Bay Area and down the peninsula and Silicon Valley. The state of California just gave it permission to offer rides in San Jose. The company, which spun off from parent Google 10 years ago, also operates in Los Angeles, Phoenix, and Austin. Across these markets, Waymo says its cars have covered more than 33 million miles. In Austin, Waymo operates through a partnership with Uber. Riders hail a self-driving car through the Uber app. Within its 37-square-mile service area in Austin, Waymo accounts for nearly 20% of Uber rides. Waymo was valued at $45 billion after its most recent funding round of $5.6 billion last October. The company reports its revenue under parent company Alphabet's 'Other Bets' category, which showed $450 million in revenue and an operating loss of $1.2 billion for the first quarter of 2025. This post originally appeared at to get the Fast Company newsletter: Sign in to access your portfolio
Gizmodo
6 hours ago
- Gizmodo
Uber's New Shuttle Is Basically a Bus, but Worse
Beyond the jokes about Uber inventing bus lines are serious questions about what its shuttle service will mean for struggling transit systems, air quality, and congestion. Every few years, a Silicon Valley gig-economy company announces a 'disruptive' innovation that looks a whole lot like a bus. Uber rolled out Smart Routes a decade ago, followed a short time later by the Lyft Shuttle of its biggest competitor. Even Elon Musk gave it a try in 2018 with the 'urban loop system' that never quite materialized beyond the Vegas Strip. And does anyone remember Chariot? Now it's Uber's turn again. The ride-hailing company recently announced Route Share, in which shuttles will travel dozens of fixed routes, with fixed stops, picking up passengers and dropping them off at fixed times. Amid the inevitable jokes about Silicon Valley once again discovering buses are serious questions about what this will mean for struggling transit systems, air quality, and congestion. Uber promised the program, which rolled out in seven cities at the end of May, will bring 'more affordable, more predictable' transportation during peak commuting hours. 'Many of our users, they live in generally the same area, they work in generally the same area, and they commute at the same time,' Sachin Kansal, the company's chief product officer, said during the company's May 14 announcement. 'The concept of Route Share is not new,' he admitted — though he never used the word 'bus.' Instead, pictures of horse-drawn buggies, rickshaws, and pedicabs appeared onscreen. CEO Dara Khosrowshahi was a bit more forthcoming when he told The Verge the whole thing is 'to some extent inspired by the bus.' The goal, he said, 'is just to reduce prices to the consumer and then help with congestion and the environment.' But Kevin Shen, who studies this sort of thing at the Union of Concerned Scientists, questions whether Uber's 'next-gen bus' will do much for commuters or the climate. 'Everybody will say, 'Silicon Valley's reinventing the bus again,'' Shen said. 'But it's more like they're reinventing a worse bus.' Five years ago, the Union of Concerned Scientists released a report that found ride-share services emit 69 percent more planet-warming carbon dioxide and other pollutants than the trips they displace — largely because as many as 40 percent of the miles traveled by Uber and Lyft drivers are driven without a passenger, something called 'deadheading.' That climate disadvantage decreases with pooled services like UberX Share — but it's still not much greener than owning and driving a vehicle, the report noted, unless the car is electric. Beyond the iffy climate benefit lie broader concerns about what this means for the transit systems in New York, San Francisco, Chicago, Philadelphia, Dallas, Boston, and Baltimore — and the people who rely on them. 'Transit is a public service, so a transit agency's goal is to serve all of its customers, whether they're rich or poor, whether it's the maximum profit-inducing route or not,' Shen said. The entities that do all of this come with accountability mechanisms — boards, public meetings, vocal riders — to ensure they do what they're supposed to. 'Barely any of that is in place for Uber.' This, he said, is a pivot toward a public-transit model without public accountability. Compounding the threat, Philadelphia and Dallas have struggling transit systems at risk of defunding. The situation is so dire in Philly that it may cut service by nearly 45 percent on July 1 amid a chronic financial crisis. (That, as one Reddit user pointed out, would be good news for Uber.) Meanwhile, the federal government is cutting support for public services, including transit systems — many of which still haven't fully recovered from COVID-era budget crunches. Though ridership nationwide is up to 85 percent of pre-pandemic levels, Bloomberg News recently estimated that transit systems across the country face a $6 billion budget shortfall. So it's easy to see why companies like Uber see a business opportunity in public transit. Khosrowshahi insists Uber is 'in competition with personal car ownership,' not public transportation. 'Public transport is a teammate,' he told The Verge. But a study released last year by the University of California, Davis found that in three California cities, over half of all ride-hailing trips didn't replace personal cars, they replaced more sustainable modes of getting around, like walking, public transportation, and bicycling. And then there's the fact cities like New York grapple with chronic congestion and don't need more vehicles cluttering crowded streets. During Uber's big announcement, Kansal showed a video of one possible Route Share ride in the Big Apple. It covered about 3 miles from Midtown to Lower Manhattan, which would take about 30 minutes and cost $13. But here's the thing: The addresses are served by three different subway lines. It is possible to commute between those two points, avoid congestion, and arrive sooner, for $2.90. So, yes, Uber Route Share is cheaper than Uber's standard car service (which has gotten 7.2 percent pricier in the past year) — but Route Share is far from the most efficient or economical way to get around in the biggest markets it's launching in. 'If anything,' Shen said, 'it's reducing transit efficiency by gumming up those same routes with even more vehicles.' This article originally appeared in Grist at Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Learn more at
WIRED
11 hours ago
- WIRED
Uber Just Reinvented the Bus … Again
Jun 7, 2025 7:00 AM Beyond the jokes about its new shuttle service are serious questions about what it will mean for struggling transit systems, air quality, and congestion. Photograph:This story originally appeared on Grist and is part of the Climate Desk collaboration. Every few years, a Silicon Valley gig-economy company announces a 'disruptive' innovation that looks a whole lot like a bus. Uber rolled out Smart Routes a decade ago, followed a short time later by the Lyft Shuttle of its biggest competitor. Even Elon Musk gave it a try in 2018 with the 'urban loop system' that never quite materialized beyond the Vegas Strip. And does anyone remember Chariot? Now it's Uber's turn again. The ride-hailing company recently announced Route Share, in which shuttles will travel dozens of fixed routes, with fixed stops, picking up passengers and dropping them off at fixed times. Amid the inevitable jokes about Silicon Valley once again discovering buses are serious questions about what this will mean for struggling transit systems, air quality, and congestion. Uber promised that the program, which rolled out in seven cities at the end of May, will bring 'more affordable, more predictable' transportation during peak commuting hours. 'Many of our users, they live in generally the same area, they work in generally the same area, and they commute at the same time,' Sachin Kansal, Uber's chief product officer, said during the company's May 14 announcement. 'The concept of Route Share is not new,' he admitted—though he never used the word 'bus.' Instead, pictures of horse-drawn buggies, rickshaws, and pedicabs appeared onscreen. CEO Dara Khosrowshahi was a bit more forthcoming when he told The Verge the whole thing is 'to some extent inspired by the bus.' The goal, he said, 'is just to reduce prices to the consumer and then help with congestion and the environment.' But Kevin Shen, who studies this sort of thing at the Union of Concerned Scientists, questions whether Uber's 'next-gen bus' will do much for commuters or the climate. 'Everybody will say, 'Silicon Valley's reinventing the bus again,'' Shen said. 'But it's more like they're reinventing a worse bus.' Five years ago, the Union of Concerned Scientists released a report that found rideshare services emit 69 percent more planet-warming carbon dioxide and other pollutants than the trips they displace—largely because as many as 40 percent of the miles traveled by Uber and Lyft drivers are driven without a passenger, something called 'deadheading.' That climate disadvantage decreases with pooled services like UberX Share—but it's still not much greener than owning and driving a vehicle, the report noted, unless the car is electric. Beyond the iffy climate benefit lie broader concerns about what this means for the transit systems in New York, San Francisco, Chicago, Philadelphia, Dallas, Boston, and Baltimore—and the people who rely on them. 'Transit is a public service, so a transit agency's goal is to serve all of its customers, whether they're rich or poor, whether it's the maximum profit-inducing route or not,' Shen said. The entities that do all of this come with accountability mechanisms—boards, public meetings, vocal riders — to ensure they do what they're supposed to. 'Barely any of that is in place for Uber.' This, he said, is a pivot toward a public-transit model without public accountability. Compounding the threat, Philadelphia and Dallas have struggling transit systems at risk of defunding. The situation is so dire in Philly that it may cut service by nearly 45 percent on July 1 amid a chronic financial crisis. (That, as one Reddit user pointed out, would be good news for Uber.) Meanwhile, the federal government is cutting support for public services, including transit systems — many of which still haven't fully recovered from Covid-era budget crunches. Though ridership nationwide is up to 85 percent of prepandemic levels, Bloomberg News recently estimated that transit systems across the country face a $6 billion budget shortfall. So it's easy to see why companies like Uber see a business opportunity in public transit. Khosrowshahi insists Uber is 'in competition with personal car ownership,' not public transportation. 'Public transport is a teammate,' he told The Verge. But a study released last year by UC Davis found that in three California cities, over half of all ride-hailing trips didn't replace personal cars, they replaced more sustainable modes of getting around, like walking, public transportation, and bicycling. And then there's the fact that cities like New York grapple with chronic congestion and don't need more vehicles cluttering crowded streets. During Uber's big announcement, Kansal showed a video of one possible Route Share ride in the Big Apple. It covered about 3 miles from Midtown to Lower Manhattan, which would take about 30 minutes and cost $13. But here's the thing: The addresses are served by three different subway lines. It is possible to commute between those two points, avoid congestion, and arrive sooner, for $2.90. So, yes, Uber Route Share is cheaper than Uber's standard car service (which has gotten 7.2 percent pricier in the past year)—but Route Share is far from the most efficient or economical way to get around in the biggest markets it's launching in. 'If anything,' Shen said, 'it's reducing transit efficiency by gumming up those same routes with even more vehicles.'
