It's a commodity market, so price comes down to cost. Where that cost actually sits — driver pay or vehicle expense — flips completely depending on the labor market you're operating in.
Take any single trip and split the fare into three pieces: what the platform keeps, what the vehicle costs (rental or ownership, fuel, maintenance, insurance), and what's left over for the driver. The platform's share is fairly consistent — typically around 20% net, after accounting for whatever it gives back to drivers in incentives. The interesting part, and the part that actually determines strategy, is how the remaining 80% splits between vehicle cost and driver pay.
In a high-wage market, roughly three-quarters of that remaining 80% goes to the driver as take-home pay, and only about a quarter covers the vehicle. Labor is expensive; the car is comparatively cheap to run.
In a lower-cost-labor market, it's close to the reverse: roughly two-thirds of that 80% goes to vehicle costs, and only about a third ends up as driver take-home pay. Labor is cheap; running the car is what actually costs money.
Where labor dominates the cost structure, efficiency — trips per hour — is the single biggest lever available. A driver earning a fixed hourly-equivalent rate who completes two trips an hour instead of one has effectively halved his labor cost per trip. Everything about matching supply to demand precisely matters enormously here.
Where vehicle cost dominates instead, efficiency still helps, but the bigger lever is the cost of running the car itself — fuel above all, since it scales directly with how much a driver drives. This is exactly the setup where switching drivers to electric vehicles stops being a nice-to-have and starts being the single biggest economic lever available (worth its own explanation).
A short working call — I'll walk through your specific cost split.
Book a working call