Uber consumer perceptions

interviewee, who implied that it was of no importance who the driver was, that additional information about the driver or anything else in addition was not needed or the respondents were simply not interested, and that one gets “the relevant information anyways” (Interviewee Uber).

Community, belonging, eco-friendliness and trend were named as attributes that do not fit Uber, according to in-depth interviewees. “I never noticed belonging”, “I don’t think that people in general feel better or feel that they belong to Uber” and “I don’t interact with anyone” justify the lack of the first two attributes (Interviewees Uber). One interview respondent also said that becoming “best friends with the driver” was not what the person wanted (Interviewee Uber). The respondents also mentioned that driving a car was never really eco-friendly, hence an association with environmental friendliness is not applicable. However, one noted that taking an Uber was still better than “driving alone, and better than drunk driving” (Interviewee Uber). Interviewees would not “use Uber in the long-run because it is a trend”, whereas netnography suggested that trend could be a factor, as users said “feels like everyone is driving with Uber at the moment” (Netnography Uber).

When asked about their satisfaction with the service and platform, respondents stated that they were indeed satisfied, have never had a problem, or that the problem

“handling was very simple” (Interviewee Uber). Netnography showed a mixed picture, as some users highlighted that it was a “great service” and had nice and friendly drivers, whereas others stated “worst service ever I’ve taken worldwide”, or “Uber is not worth it” (Netnography Uber).

5.4.2.2 Company mission

Concerning Uber’s vision and mission statement of making transport as reliable as running water, none of the interviewees was aware. However, some believed it to be

“a nice approach”, whereas others’ first thoughts were that “water is not so reliable worldwide”, or “packed motorways, traffic jams” (Interviewees Uber). It was argued that the company was still missing a lot in order to reach this goal and that “there are problems”, but that it was an “innovative idea” (Participant focus group). Focus group

participants believe that Uber is revolutionizing the taxi industry as “they want to digitalize it”, “Service transfer 2.0, User to User without diversions”.

5.4.2.3 Negative associations

According to Uber interviewees, the brand should work on authenticity and credibility, further increase transparency, and work on its company statement. A Twitter user mentioned once loving Uber, but now feels “very guilty and a little bit ashamed”

whenever having to use the service (Netnography Uber). Another was wondering whether Uber had “almost reached its zenith”, as only cheap advertising in the form of gifting is helping it (Netnography Uber). The need for heightened authenticity and credibility is implied by statements of Uber interviewees such as “more credibility, still a lot of conflicts that you read about”, “not as credible as a normal taxi”, “never know how Uber is reacting” and “work on the credibility, especially in regards to the employment contracts”.

Comments online suggested that during rush hour, Uber would usually raise prices, and “the times when a car is arriving are sometimes not correct”. Other users pointed out that sometimes a price was deducted from their card, which was higher than what the application showed during ordering, without a surge price factor. This is supported by other user statements such as “at which factor the price is higher than the normal price” or “offered the price surge without any notification” (Netnography Uber). It was noted that this difference of offered price and actual payment should have been at least communicated by the app (Netnography Uber). In addition, complaints on Twitter and Facebook were raised about the advertisement of “cheaper than a taxi”, when sometimes a taxi is in fact cheaper than Uber, for example due to the surge-price (Netnography Uber). An additional point of nuisance is the navigation system used in the application. According to netnography, some users faced problems during Uber rides due to a seemingly outdated navigation system that was leading to “in the rarest cases actually the fastest” routes or by “real-time information” that was “absolutely not in coherence with the actual situation on the street” (Netnography Uber). Both netnography and in-depth interviews showed that there was a dissatisfaction with the

“recruitment of new drivers” (Netnography Uber). It was shown that knowledge of the

German or even English language and knowledge of the location were clearly lacking sometime, and some drivers “don’t buckle up”, or are watching TV while driving (Netnography Uber). A Facebook user post indicated that drivers have a “big responsibility” as they are “transporting unknown people in their car”, and it was questioned why it is normal for a “business idea like yours” to have drivers drivers lacking “professional qualification” (Netnography Uber).

Interviewees indicated potential improvements concerning service and credibility, namely by having a contact person taking care of problems, or by simply solving the conflicts that they hear about in the news. Netnography showed that “an update of your navigation system” would be good as well in order to avoid “tedious detours”. Drivers should generally be selected more carefully, “based on stricter criteria” (Netnography Uber), strengthening the knowledge of the language and knowing their “way around the place”. In case of a technological problem, the driver would then still be able to find the way (Interviewees Uber). Another idea given by an interview respondent was getting the phone number of the driver beforehand.

In terms of transparency, Uber interview respondents wish to know how employees are treated, how the system with the matchmaking of user and driver in general is working, and wish that the (newly introduced) non-transparent surge price factor be changed back to its old system of “public depiction of the price calculation factor”

(Interviewee Uber).

5.4.2.4 Security & reliability issues

Another topic covered in in-depth interviews were security and reliability issues, and the question arose whether or not drivers should have additional backup checks. One respondent said that it was “good for the consumer if there are background checks”, as in case of a problem with the technology the “driver is left with nothing”, given that the whole system is based on technology. Others on the other hand said that they were not aware of the types of driver background checks conducted and that they do not see a problem in the fact that, as opposed to local taxi drivers, Uber drivers do not need a taxi concession.

5.4.2.5 Legal issues

Legal issues are an often discussed topic in the focus group, in-depth interviews as well as in online communities. Interview respondents had the “feeling that Uber is illegal”, “certain taxes are not paid”, and that it was a “legal twilight zone” (Participant focus group). A user was questioning Uber on Facebook and doubted that drivers had to “pass the expensive training”, “to pay chamber contribution” and “taxes for social insurance”, and whether there was a “passenger insurance” (Netnography Uber). On the other hand, focus group participants were unsure of who should take responsibility with statements such as “I don’t know if it’s on the brand or on the state to regulate this” and “the legislature has to react. I don’t think it’s the fault of the companies”. When asked about whether legal issues and scandals named in newspapers were influential to decision making and usage behavior, an Uber interview respondent said that despite knowing that “abroad it’s being banned” it was “not really affecting me”, yet another hasn’t “heard anything really in Austria” but “if the regulation is not very extreme in my own country then it would not influence me”. Yet another respondent said that it was a conflicting situation as on the one hand, when speaking with a driver personally “they said it is so great here”, yet news paint another picture. However, it was also said that if there were “really terrible scandals”, users would think about further using Uber (Interviewee Uber).

5.4.2.6 Working conditions

Both interview respondents and focus group participants mentioned the drivers’

working conditions and expressed concerns. “They exploit the drivers”, “terrible working conditions”, “as a main income it’s not so good” support this. An interview respondent wished to know more about the situation in Austria, and a focus group respondent suggested that Uber should “advocate for fairness”.

5.4.2.7 UberEats

A brief discussion with interviewees about the transition from people transportation to delivery services showed that they had mixed feelings. One respondent argued that it gives rise to new competition on the online delivery market, and with the concept of first delivery for free consumers are enticed. On the other hand, some believed that the introduction of UberEats in Austria was “unnecessary”, that a similar concept “has

already been there before”, and that a bike food delivery “does not really fit their core business”. One respondent remarked that “Some say they are doing this because they will be banned soon” and with this concept they can “still have a piece of the cake”.

5.4.2.8 Disruption

Interview respondents believed that Uber as a taxi industry disruptor was good and that it “stimulates the market”, especially as it is known that “taxi prices are horrendous”, and that “taxis have to react” to this change and influence. However, it was also noted that it might be “hard for the industry at the moment”, that the “taxi industry is disadvantaged in some way”, and that there was a “better solution for both”

Uber and taxi companies. Users in online communities, however, mentioned that Uber

“will destroy the whole taxi industry, even if it is socially questionable”, and that it will

“destroy workplaces” (Netnography Uber). One Uber interview respondent predicted that “a complete switch to Uber is not going to happen”, despite the fact that many other professions “ceased to exist”, as especially older people might prefer taxis as opposed to driving with Uber. It was further said that everything was “in a state of flux”

(Interviewee Uber).