Independent women drivers face a wide variety of issues with ridesharing companies. The origins of the problems suggest a need for a different source of authority in the management of the rideshare operations.

1. RIDEFARE
The asset management underpinnings
and implications, of on-demand service
in the so-called Sharing Economy

2. Women who drive independently for income are in two general but overlapping groups:
those who are part-time workers, and those who are self-employed.
In the overlap, specific conditions and decisions can determine whether
actual drive (earning) activity makes more sense leaning one way than the other.
When an external business organization engages a driver, each party intends to
gain explicit benefits that outweigh their respective risks. Therefore, the problem exists
of balancing their respective contributions versus their respective liabilities.
Part-time Self-Employed
Costs
Availability
Authority
Safety
Freelance
Subscribed
©2016 archestra research / malcolm ryder

3. STAKES ASSET INVENTORY
GENERIC STAKE CAPACITY FUEL
PERSONAL
DRIVER’S STAKE
GAS AUTOS
CARSHARE CO.’S
STAKE
AUTOS DRIVERS
WHO USES WHAT
TACTICS ASSET INVENTORY
GENERIC
CONSTRAINTS
ACQUISITION RETENTION
PERSONAL
DRIVER’S
PROPERTY BORROW $$
CARSHARE CO.’S LABOR LEASE DRIVERS
MAKING IT AVAILABLE
As a business model, most “ridesharing” is not about sharing rides; it’s about time-sharing cars.
The essential “fuel” in the “engine” of this effective car-sharing business is not cars; it’s drivers.
As time goes by, the business may switch from that fuel to a new alternative fuel: automation.
In the interim, drivers essentially subsidize car-sharing operations by “donating” their assets and their
inventory to the capitalization (assets and inventory) of the car-share company’s operations.
Without autos, there is no car-sharing business. But currently, without drivers there is no
car-sharing. This makes the business look like it is “about” drivers, but that is incorrect.
The business is about monetizing the operation as a service. Although it is discussed in
terms of a “service” economy, for drivers it is unfortunately more like manufacturing.
The operation itself only requires that the cars are usable and sharable – not by drivers
but by riders. The business is about riding on demand. The model “makes” fares.
©2016 archestra research / malcolm ryder

4. STAKES ASSET INVENTORY RESOURCE USAGE SPEND ECONOMY PAYOFF
GENERIC STAKE CAPACITY FUEL MOTOR DIRECTION CONSUMPTION MAINTENANCE DESTINATION
PERSONAL
DRIVER’S STAKE
GAS AUTO ENGINE STEERING SPEED MILEAGE CONVENIENCE
CARSHARE CO.’S
STAKE
AUTOS DRIVERS STREETS CALLS TIME DISTRIBUTION FARES
Personal driving is “worth” the effort when it is more convenient than not personally driving.
That is what makes convenience the “goal” or “end point” of getting value from driving.
But driving requires a car, and the car is useless without its “gas” (power), so the driver’s
essential asset is that power supply, and from there we find numerous influential factors
sitting between the asset and the end point of using it to gain intended value.
Likewise, car-share companies aim for converting their essential asset (cars) into
a business endpoint: fares. Yet the same kind of intermediating influences apply,
appearing in different forms. The current model of the business, as we already
recognize it, is to convert the convenience of personal driving into
fare-based auto usage. But that can change.
Basic material Enabling
tool
Potential
throughput
Real-time
opportunity
Potential
progress
Potential
limiter
Potential
benefit
VALUE CHAIN OF CAR-SHARE: the Economics of the Asset Utilization
UTILIZATION
ROLE:
©2016 archestra research / malcolm ryder

5. TACTICS ASSET INVENTORY RESOURCE USAGE SPEND ECONOMY PAYOFF
GENERIC
CONSTRAINTS
ACQUISITION RETENTION COMPETITION CONSISTENCY BUDGETING PERMISSION BENEFIT
PERSONAL
DRIVER’S
PROPERTY BORROW $$ DEBTS DISCIPLINE PAYMENTS LICENSE INDEPENDENCE
CARSHARE CO.’S LABOR LEASE DRIVERS SERVICES LOYALTY PROCESSES TERRITORY $$ PROFIT
CONSTRAINTS MANAGEMENT: Issues requiring Tactical Resolution
Drivers and car-share companies each find that getting value is constrained -- by the way
they handle intermediary factors between their base asset and their payoff.
Each party sees the constraints in a certain way; but the parties also constrain each other.
When we juxtapose how each party sees each type of constraint, it readily highlights
which issue of the individual driver becomes folded into which issue of the car-share company.
The juxtaposition raises the question of whether the driver issues and the company issues are
complementary or not – and therefore what must be attended to, for business.
Company hires the
driver to use the
driver’s own
property
Company pays
temp-worker $$
versus driver’s
expense of
obtaining a car
Driver’s competing
needs for $$ affect
level of interest in
the company’s own
production needs
Company wants
loyalty to affect
reliability of
driver’s routine
Company operations
impact driver’s own
financial strength &
leverage, thus
driver’s initiative
Company scales
service availability
based on drivers’
credentials
Company claims
its success is a
path to driver’s
success
THE
DRIVER-COMPANY
RELATIONSHIP:
©2016 archestra research / malcolm ryder

6. VALUE-SEEKING: Leveraging driver participation in the Car-share Co.
ISSUES ASSET INVENTORY RESOURCE USAGE SPEND ECONOMY PAYOFF
GENERIC
CONSTRAINTS
ACQUISITION RETENTION COMPETITION CONSISTENCY BUDGETING PERMISSION BENEFIT
CHALLENGES SOURCING DEVELOPMENT SCARCITY RANDOMNESS WASTE OPPORTUNITY CHOICE
EXPANSIVE:
POLICY
for CARSHARE CO.
PURCHASING MARKETING INCENTIVES PROMOTIONS MONITORING CONTRACTS MARGINS
RESTRICTIVE:
POLICY vs. DRIVERS
STANDARDS QUALIFICATIONS RATINGS TRENDS PENALTIES LITIGATION FEES
The car-share company counts on managing constraints in the company’s favor, and to do that it
reacts to challenges in characteristic ways. Because investors make the company much larger than
the driver pool, it is then predictable that the company’s policies will dominate the way that
issues get attention and are handled. The concern of drivers is that the policy for expanding
the company can be too restrictive for the drivers. This can be the case because
the company is actually not “about“ driving: it is actually about riding on demand.
Signup bonuses
Car inspections
Ad campaigns
Background checks
Revenue share%
Customer satisf’n
Demand forecast’g
Request coverage
Route tracking
Performance reqmts
City “takeovers”
Labor practices
Surge pricing
Minimum earnings
FOR THE COMPANY:
ABOUT THE DRIVERS:
©2016 archestra research / malcolm ryder

7. AUTHORITY: Car-share Co. influence on the Drivers
ISSUES: ASSET INVENTORY RESOURCE USAGE SPEND ECONOMY PAYOFF
VARIABLE
BUSINESS VALUE
FACTORS:
ACQUISITION RETENTION COMPETITION CONSISTENCY BUDGETING PERMISSION BENEFIT
Company policies are variable, and the push-pull of issues on drivers generally does not reflect
much authority from the drivers’ side. As long as drivers see the work as “self-employment”,
there are quality of life factors that come with the “job” and set it in comparison to any other
financially comparable use of time. The basic terms of the comparison are always the same:
freedom of choice about where and when to safely make and keep enough $$/hour.
Signup bonuses
Car inspections
Ad campaigns
Background checks
Revenue share%
Customer satisf’n
Demand forecast’g
Request coverage
Route tracking
Performance reqmts
City “takeovers”
Labor practices
Surge pricing
Minimum earnings
FOR THE COMPANY:
ABOUT THE DRIVERS:
As typical of a VC investor-backed car-share company, the above behaviors often indifferently affect
women drivers. Oakland-based Wuumz, Inc. studies and models alternatives that originate in
drivers’ ownership of the management function for the primary benefit of women drivers.
The benefit is determined based on what women specifically need in order to have
freedom of choice about where and when to safely make and keep enough $$/hour.
©2016 archestra research / malcolm ryder

8. IMPACTS: Car-share Co. decisions affecting Women Drivers
ISSUES: ASSET INVENTORY RESOURCE USAGE SPEND ECONOMY PAYOFF
VARIABLE
FACTORS of
BUSINESS VALUE
ACQUISITION RETENTION COMPETITION CONSISTENCY BUDGETING PERMISSION BENEFIT
REQUEST FOR PRESENTATIONS
Signup bonuses
vs.
Car inspections
Ad campaigns
vs.
Background checks
Revenue share%
vs.
Customer satisf’n
Demand forecast’g
vs.
Request coverage
Route tracking
vs.
Performance reqmts
City “takeovers”
vs.
Labor practices
Surge pricing
vs.
Minimum earnings
FOR THE COMPANY:
(versus)
ABOUT THE DRIVERS:
Conditions imposed on drivers affect whether drivers can benefit from company policies and
operational decisions. Our attention is on what women specifically need in order to have
freedom of choice about where and when to safely make and keep enough $$/hour.
A model in which drivers own the management function must address any risks and inhibitions
that work against women drivers reaching their goal, including initial investment and underwriters.
• Rent-to-Share
• Subsidies
• Taxes
• Total Own’shp
Cost
• Etc.
• Training
• References
• Recommend’ns
• Etc.
• Earnings
bonuses
• Rating systems
• Etc.
• Scheduling
• Apps usage
• Compliance
• Etc.
• Commitment
• Privacy
• Etc.
• Total Hours
• Time of day
• Health
• Safety
• Etc.
• Driver vs. driver
competition
• Etc.Suggested topics
about Driver
concerns and
options:
Human Resources Performance Management Sales & ROIEquity Support
©2016archestraresearch/malcolmryder

9. ©2017 Malcolm Ryder / Archestra Research
www.archestra.com
mryder@archestra.com