Robotaxis are cheaper than car ownership now

I did the math. Pencil and paper. Then a spreadsheet to make sure.

At Waymo’s current San Francisco pricing, two rides per day (roughly a commute), costs approximately $30-40 per day. Call it $35 average. That’s about $1,050 per month.

Now the car. In San Francisco.

Monthly car payment on a mid-range sedan: $450. Insurance: $200. Gas: $180. Parking (if you’re lucky enough to find a monthly spot): $300-400. Maintenance averaged over the year: $100. Registration and taxes: $50.

Total: approximately $1,280-1,380 per month.

The Waymo is cheaper. By $200-300 a month.

The crossing

I’ve been waiting for this moment. Not the safety crossing (Waymo is already statistically safer than human drivers). Not the convenience crossing (no parking, no maintenance, no gas stations). The economic crossing.

When a robotaxi costs less than owning a car, the adoption argument changes. It stops being about trust and technology and philosophy. It becomes about money. And money arguments win.

The math gets better

This comparison assumed two rides per day. If you add weekend rides, Uber rides to the airport, the occasional late-night trip, the Waymo cost goes up but so does the car cost (more gas, more miles, more maintenance).

If you factor in the AAA’s full cost of car ownership (which includes depreciation, a massive hidden cost), the car is even more expensive. A new car loses 20% of its value the first year. That’s pure loss. The Waymo doesn’t depreciate. It’s a service.

And the Waymo prices will come down. As the fleet grows, as the technology improves, as the per-ride cost decreases with scale, the economics get more favorable. Meanwhile, car costs are going up. Insurance premiums are rising. Gas prices are volatile. Parking in cities is getting more expensive.

The lines are diverging. And they crossed.

What this means for cities

If robotaxis are cheaper than car ownership, some percentage of urban residents will stop owning cars. That percentage might be small at first. But it compounds.

Fewer cars means fewer parking garages. Fewer parking garages means more space for housing, parks, shops. Fewer cars means less traffic (robotaxis can be shared, route efficiently, and don’t cruise for parking). Less traffic means shorter ride times, which makes the robotaxi even more attractive.

It’s a positive feedback loop. And it starts with the economics crossing.

I don’t think car ownership disappears. People outside cities will still need cars. People who drive for pleasure will still own cars. But for urban commuters who view a car as a transportation tool rather than a lifestyle choice, the economic argument for ownership just broke.

I’ve been writing about self-driving cars for seven years. The safety data convinced me it works. The rain ride convinced me it’s reliable. The math just convinced me it’s inevitable.

Related thinking: