Image : Pexels

This week Mary Meeker from the investment firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers released her 2018 annual internet trends report. There were a lot of tidbits in there covering everything from what city is likely to be the next big tech hub to how people are shopping on the internet. It also tackled another interesting topic: where you’re better off using a ride-sharing service.




According to Meeker’s report, it’s cheaper to take Uber than to own a car in four out of the five largest cities in the United States, Techcrunch highlighted this weekend.



Specifically, it’s cheaper to Uber in Chicago, Washington DC, New York, and Los Angeles. Dallas, the final city in the nation’s top five, it’s cheaper to own a car.




The fact that it’s cheaper to take a ride-sharing service than drive isn’t exactly a surprising one. I live in San Francisco (which isn’t one of the largest cities in the US) and long ago came to the same conclusion. Taking Lyft whenever I want I rarely spend more than $150 a month. A parking space for a car in the lot behind my apartment is $350 a month. So I can get a ride and not have to worry about parking or insurance or a car payment for less than half of what it would cost for me to just leave my car overnight — kind of a no-brainer. In the rare instance when I do “need” to drive, I use Zipcar.

I’d venture to say for most large cities, ride-sharing probably makes more sense than car ownership. When you move somewhere where everyone has their own driveway and parking is earlier to find, the reverse is more likely to be true.

It’s also worth noting Meeker included “Pool” fares in her comparison, where you’re agreeing to share that cheap ride with someone else for a deep discount. Sometimes that’s not an issue, but times where you need to get somewhere fast or have a lot to carry with you it can be a bit problematic.




All that said, if you live in a large city, it might be worth pricing it out to see if you could save some cash by ditching your personal wheels.

