Poll : 17 December - 31 December 2014

Analysis

This was an interesting result to our survey on what we knew was a contentious subject. As you can see, it stimulated some impassioned responses from right across the spectrum. Here are some of your thoughts:

• "Yes to Uber for areas other than the Strip. It would best serve the community not tourist areas.
  
  
• "I have used Uber in Baltimore, Washington, Pittsburgh, and other cities. Clean cars, cashless transaction, and usually friendly drivers, in addition to competitive prices. I always prefer Uber!!!"
  
  
• "The choice with 'all LV drivers appear intoxicated' made me laugh."
  
  
• "I don't have a smartphone so I don't have access to Uber."
  
  
• "I have no clue what you are talking about!! What is Uber?!? Never heard of it. Guess that 'dates' me!!" [Ed: You were not alone in this response...]
  
  
• "OK, I did a Google search. [Ed: You did? So, we don't have to send you the magic link, eh? Bravo!] Interesting concept but I can see where it would have its pitfalls, especially in a place like Las Vegas.

For the benefit of everyone who's been shipwrecked/in a coma/lost in space for the past several months or more, here is a link, courtesy of this previous reader, which will give you a great introduction into what Uber is and some of its possible pitfalls. Take it away, Daily Beast

• "I support Uber, but not universally; I also support the city's right to restrict access to McCarran Airport. Of course, nothing stops somebody from getting on a shuttle to the airport rental car building, walking 1/2 block or so, and if there just happen to be Uber cars waiting at that area..."
  
  
• "I always rent a car so have no need for Uber, cab, or bus. We are always all over the place playing on the strip, off strip, downtown and at local casinos. Also there is so much to do in Vegas besides be in the casino all the time. Wife likes to shop all over town."
  
  
• "I welcome an alternative option like Uber, but not this particular company. They have revealed themselves to be unethical: during actual emergencies, they doubled their prices (hurricane Sandy) and tripled their prices (recent terrorist shootout in Sydney, Aus.). If they're going to ignore the safety of the public at a moment when customers cannot budget in advance for the overcharge, then they should pay extremely high government taxes or be shut down. I just remembered that Uber has threatened to reveal the GPS-tracked activities of (member) journalists who criticize the company, too. So yeah, Uber fails at ethics."
  
  
• "I would say no to Uber for myself, but I don't have a problem with other people using it. It's just that I'm a woman who usually travels alone, and getting into a car with the wrong man could be disastrous." [Ed: See previous article in Daily Beast to confirm some of your fears.]
  
  
• "As a small-'l' libertarian, I don't believe in government regulation of the transportation industry (or of anything else, for that matter...) Based on the way Uber has been described on LVA, it sounds like a good example of a free-market solution--sort of like jitneys--so tentatively, I'm for it. But of course the big question is, if you take Uber to a strip club, does the driver get a kickback from the club and do you have to pay the entry fee to reimburse them??" [Ed: This is an interesting question better discussed over at ToplessVegasOnline.com, but our instinct would be no to the kickback, since officially the driver is independent, but possibly also "no" to the cover charge, since it's almost equivalent to arriving in your own car, or that of a friend. But there's another question: If a friend, especially if the friend is a local, gives you a ride to strip club but doesn't stay themselves, do you have to pay a cover or is it treated like driving yourself there?]
  
  
• "Uber should not be allowed to exist: It sets a very dangerous precedent. Its purpose is to undercut represented labor and it eliminates protections that workers have fought for (and died for) over the last 100 years in this country. The consumer has been blinded by the media's anti-union stance for decades and a creation such as Uber simply confirms this nightmare."
  
  
• "I rarely use cabs in Vegas because it is too aggravating. I'd rather pay extra and rent a car where at least I know what it's going to cost me. In principle I am against Uber, because the drivers are not paying license fees to the city and if they get into an accident, I don't believe I would be covered as well as I would be in a licensed cab." [Ed: Oh, no worries there -- there are practically zero traffic accidents in Las Vegas :-)]
  
  
• "Yes to Uber! While I'm fine with taking a cab from big hotels and popular tourist sites, it can be a real hassle getting a cab at an alternate location. And cab company customer service leaves a lot to be desired. Uber is an excellent option that is great for the consumer and will force cab companies to improve their game."
  
  
• "Would use Uber in Vegas as we have used Uber here in Dallas and have never had a problem."
  
  
• "After having a near monopoly and providing crappy service in so many ways, now that competition surfaces the taxi oligopoly suddenly screaming 'Not fair' smacks of so much BS. I don't agree with the Uber business model entirely but anything that breaks the corrupt taxi cartel can't be all bad. Let the market decide."
  
  
• "Uber the concept is a good idea. Uber the company is evil - use a competitor. Specific to Vegas, there are so many cabs available - I could only see needing Uber if I am outside of the strip / tourist areas - never had a problem getting a cab in less then five minutes."