It’s Cheaper to Buy Uber in These Cities Than to Have a Car.
This week, Mary Meeker of investment firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers released her 2018 Annual Internet Trending Report . There were plenty of tidbits out there, covering everything from which city is likely to be the next big tech hub to how people shop online. Another interesting topic was also touched on: where is it better to use the ride sharing service.
According to Meeker’s report, it’s cheaper to take Uber than to have a car in four of the five largest US cities, Techcrunch highlighted this weekend .
Specifically, Uber is cheaper in Chicago, Washington, New York, and Los Angeles. Dallas, the last city in the top five in the country, is cheaper to own a car.
The fact that car rental is cheaper than driving a car comes as no surprise. I live in San Francisco (which is not one of the largest cities in the US) and have come to the same conclusion a long time ago. Taking Lyft when I want to, I rarely spend more than $ 150 a month. Parking space in the parking lot behind my apartment costs $ 350 a month. So they give me a lift, and I don’t have to worry about parking, insurance, or paying for a car for less than half of what I would have to just leave my car overnight – kind of an easy task. On the rare occasion that I “need” to drive, I use Zipcar.
I would venture to say that for most major cities, travel sharing makes more sense than owning a car. When you move somewhere where everyone has their own driveway and where parking can be found earlier, the opposite is likely to happen.
It’s also worth noting that Meeker has included “pool” fares in her comparison when you agree to share that cheap ride with someone else for a big discount. Sometimes this is not a problem, but when you need to get somewhere quickly or take a lot of things with you, it can be a little problematic.
All of this goes to show that if you live in a big city it might be worth evaluating it to see if you can save some money by ditching your personal wheels.