Split Thread: Do U-Haul rates reflect population migration or economic health of various regions?

[Ziggurat]

Split thread from the Texas Tea thread here.

Posted By:LashL

Define "bad"? I mean, aside from your personal tastes.

You see, the thing about Texas is, well, people vote with their feet, too. And how are they voting? Well, the price to rent a 10' U-haul from Boston to Houston is currently $1731. The price from Houston to Boston is $738. Why the price differential? Because of a demand differentia: more people want to move from Boston to Houston than from Houston to Bostonl. And it's not just Boston either. Try it with any major blue-state city. The differences vary, but every one I price comes out significantly more expensive to move to Houston than from Houston. Evidently, people don't share your opinion of Texas. And that includes people not currently living in Texas.

Plus, as already mentioned, Cynthia McKinney.

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Define "bad"? I mean, aside from your personal tastes.

You see, the thing about Texas is, well, people vote with their feet, too. And how are they voting? Well, the price to rent a 10' U-haul from Boston to Houston is currently $1731. The price from Houston to Boston is $738. Why the price differential? Because of a demand differentia: more people want to move from Boston to Houston than from Houston to Bostonl. And it's not just Boston either. Try it with any major blue-state city. The differences vary, but every one I price comes out significantly more expensive to move to Houston than from Houston. Evidently, people don't share your opinion of Texas. And that includes people not currently living in Texas.

Plus, as already mentioned, Cynthia McKinney.

You got all that from the price of U-haul rentals? Apart from all the other possible confounding factors? And extrapolated that sample of two cities for all of Texas?

Ok, milk costs me a little over $2 here, so tell me about how Texans hate milk.

As for definitions of 'bad', Tricky seemed to list a bunch of stuff in the OP that he found objectionable. How much teaching evolution in school is 'aside from personal taste' might come down to personal taste.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

You got all that from the price of U-haul rentals? Apart from all the other possible confounding factors? And extrapolated that sample of two cities for all of Texas?

I'm looking at large city to large city, because that's what's comparable. And it's not just Boston, try it with another large city of your choosing.

But more importantly, there are no confounding factors which can account for more than a factor of 2 difference in the price. The price differential is due to a demand differential. When Uhaul has more one-ways in one direction than another, they need to ship those trucks back to keep inventories balanced, and that costs money. A lot of money. That's why demand differentials show up so strongly in one-way Uhaul rentals. But there is no such price differential for local Uhaul rentals. Renting a Uhaul for an in-town move in Boston is the same as an in-town move in Houston. That's why they can advertise a single price on their website without reference to location: demand differentials for in-town moves don't impose the huge costs that demand differentials in one-way moves do.

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I'm looking at large city to large city, because that's what's comparable. And it's not just Boston, try it with another large city of your choosing.

But more importantly, there are no confounding factors which can account for more than a factor of 2 difference in the price. The price differential is due to a demand differential. When Uhaul has more one-ways in one direction than another, they need to ship those trucks back to keep inventories balanced, and that costs money. A lot of money. That's why demand differentials show up so strongly in one-way Uhaul rentals. But there is no such price differential for local Uhaul rentals. Renting a Uhaul for an in-town move in Boston is the same as an in-town move in Houston. That's why they can advertise a single price on their website without reference to location: demand differentials for in-town moves don't impose the huge costs that demand differentials in one-way moves do.

And that means people like and agree with Tea Party politics or Texas politics.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

And that means people like and agree with Tea Party politics or Texas politics.

It means that people think Texas is a good place to live. Whether or not they like Texas politics, it's pretty clear that they don't share Tricky's perspective.

[Biscuit]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I'm looking at large city to large city, because that's what's comparable. And it's not just Boston, try it with another large city of your choosing.

OK I did L.A. to Boston - $2,954.00
And Boston to L.A. - $1,478.00

So by your logic more people are moving to Boston from L.A. right?

But L.A. is the 12th quickest growing city in America and Boston isn't even in the top 25?

Link

From that link

Quote:

The trend is a subset of a larger one showing continued U.S. population growth in the South and Southwest. In fact, of the 15 metro areas that added the most people, only New York (No. 7) and Seattle (No. 15) weren’t in those regions.

“A significant portion of the population growth in these Southern and Southwestern metropolitan areas is not due to the relocation of Americans from colder climates but to the influx of immigrants moving directly into these Southern and Southwestern metropolitan areas,” institute co-director Michael Emerson said in a statement. “This is the secret of Houston’s phenomenal growth over the past decade.”

I don't think the cost of Uhauls is quite the evidence you thought it was. There is more to their business model then you are giving them credit for.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Biscuit

OK I did L.A. to Boston - $2,954.00
And Boston to L.A. - $1,478.00

So by your logic more people are moving to Boston from L.A. right?

By my logic, yes, more people are moving from LA to Boston than from Boston to LA. You haven't presented any evidence that this is not true.

Quote:

But L.A. is the 12th quickest growing city in America and Boston isn't even in the top 25?

From your own source, LA's growth isn't due to people moving from Boston to LA, but from immigrants. Which means that comparing growth rates between the two cities doesn't indicate the direction of movement between them.

I still contend that U-Haul rates are a decent proxy for the direction of such inter-city migration, for reasons I already explained.

Quote:

I don't think the cost of Uhauls is quite the evidence you thought it was. There is more to their business model then you are giving them credit for.

So what else accounts for the price differential? I don't think you actually have an alternative explanation.

[jj]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I'm looking at large city to large city, because that's what's comparable. And it's not just Boston, try it with another large city of your choosing.

So, then, you're opposed to the common business practice of charging more money where there is money to be had?

Really?

[Biscuit]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

By my logic, yes, more people are moving from LA to Boston than from Boston to LA. You haven't presented any evidence that this is not true.

I presented the exact same evidence you presented for people moving from Boston to Houston. Why should my burden off proof be greater than yours?

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

From your own source, LA's HOUSTON'S growth isn't due to people moving from Boston to LA HOUSTON, but from immigrants. Which means that comparing growth rates UHAUL RATES between the two cities doesn't indicate the direction of movement between them.

FTFY

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I still contend that U-Haul rates are a decent proxy for the direction of such inter-city migration, for reasons I already explained.

You have no evidence for this.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

So what else accounts for the price differential? I don't think you actually have an alternative explanation.

I don't have to prove a negative. You have yet to prove your claim. That said I think a lot of things can explain it such as time of year (college kids relocating), state and other taxes including property, insurance costs, fleet repair facilities, proximity to major hubs, labor costs, facilities costs, and of course a more complex business model than you ascribe them.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by jj

So, then, you're opposed to the common business practice of charging more money where there is money to be had?

Really?

What on earth made you think I'm opposed to anything U-Haul did? I never said or implied anything of the sort. Is your reading comprehension really that bad?

[Biscuit]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

What on earth made you think I'm opposed to anything U-Haul did? I never said or implied anything of the sort. Is your reading comprehension really that bad?

I think you might need to re-read that. You don't think the affluence of a given market would be a primary factor in Uhaul's pricing scheme?

[jj]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

What on earth made you think I'm opposed to anything U-Haul did? I never said or implied anything of the sort. Is your reading comprehension really that bad?

Is there some reason you chose to evade the actual issue at hand, which is why U-Haul charges more, and chose, instead, to engage in a personal attack?

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Biscuit

I presented the exact same evidence you presented for people moving from Boston to Houston. Why should my burden off proof be greater than yours?

Who said it was any different? I accept that the U-Haul evidence presented suggests more people move from LA to Boston than from Boston to LA. I have no reason to believe that this is not true. Neither do you.

Quote:

FTFY

That's not a fix, that's a non-sequitor. Your first sentence is true with the modifications, and is a logical parallel to my argument that I do not take exception to. But your "corrected" second sentence now has absolutely no connection to the first sentence. You simply broke the argument completely. The logical parallel based on your modified first sentence would remain that growth rate differences between Boston and Houston don't indicate movement between Boston and Houston. But I never argued for such movement on the basis of growth rate differentials, so that in no way contradicts my argument. All you've managed to do is demonstrate that you can't keep track of logic.

Quote:

You have no evidence for this.

Yes I do. I already explained the evidence. Demand differentials will imbalance inventory over time, and unsustainably, unless U-Haul transports those trucks back themselves. That is expensive to do. Therefore the cost to U-Haul of trips between cities with net one-way migrations are different in the two different directions, and this difference is large. That cost differential will be compensated for in large part with price differentials. You have challenged nothing about this argument, and provided no other credible mechanism to account for the price differential.

Quote:

I don't have to prove a negative. You have yet to prove your claim. That said I think a lot of things can explain it such as time of year (college kids relocating)

Pick any time of year you want. I picked August 31, but the price differential is persistent throughout the year. Hell, the prices themselves appear to be constant as far as I can tell from picking a few arbitrary dates throughout the year.

Quote:

state and other taxes including property, insurance costs, fleet repair facilities, proximity to major hubs, labor costs, facilities costs,

If these accounted for significant cost differentials to U-Haul, they would be reflected in local rate differences as well. But they aren't. U-Haul local pricing is uniform, which indicates that their cost differentials for these factors are not that significant.

Quote:

and of course a more complex business model than you ascribe them.

A business model so complex and subtle that it's not only beyond your ability to describe or even fathom, it's also so complex that it leads to uniform local rental pricing. And just to be clear, local pricing means the cost for rentals that are returned to the same store they are rented from. That pricing is the same across the nation.

Yeah, that's a real complex business model they've got there.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by jj

Is there some reason you chose to evade the actual issue at hand, which is why U-Haul charges more, and chose, instead, to engage in a personal attack?

I told you why they charge different rates. I never claimed or suggested that there was anything wrong with them charging different rates. So why did you ascribe to me a position I never expressed? Why did YOU evade that question?

[Biscuit]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Who said it was any different? I accept that the U-Haul evidence presented suggests more people move from LA to Boston than from Boston to LA. I have no reason to believe that this is not true. Neither do you.

Yes I do. If thats true its bucks the overall trend of more people moving to L.A. on a whole. Uhaul rates are NOT an indicator of a population movement that completely contradicts population movements that are backed by actual data.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

That's not a fix, that's a non-sequitor. Your first sentence is true with the modifications, and is a logical parallel to my argument that I do not take exception to. But your "corrected" second sentence now has absolutely no connection to the first sentence. You simply broke the argument completely. The logical parallel based on your modified first sentence would remain that growth rate differences between Boston and Houston don't indicate movement between Boston and Houston. But I never argued for such movement on the basis of growth rate differentials, so that in no way contradicts my argument. All you've managed to do is demonstrate that you can't keep track of logic.

Try again. You used uhaul rental rates to back up your claim that people are flooding to texas from all over the US, citing Boston to Houston rates specifically. I used actual sourced information to show that the key to the population growth in Texas is immigrants settling there and not Americans moving there thus even if your Uhaul argument made sense it would only account for a fraction of the population increase as it doesn't make sense at all it accounts for nothing.

Cities it is cheaper to move to from Houston.
1. Phoenix
2. Los Angeles
3. Seatle

Do you need me to go on? Their interstate rates are obviously based on a more complex model then just "Where are the most people moving." Because this is obvious it is not reliable evidence to cite these rates as evidence of population shift.

You have failed twice. You misunderstand the cause of Texas population growth and you use obviously unrelated information to try and affirm your misunderstanding.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Biscuit

Yes I do. If thats true its bucks the overall trend of more people moving to L.A. on a whole.

But your own source indicates that the growth of LA is driven by immigrants. The overall trend, by your own source, is being driven by something different than what I'm interested in finding out. So it cannot tell us what I want to know, and is therefore irrelevant.

Quote:

Uhaul rates are NOT an indicator of a population movement that completely contradicts population movements that are backed by actual data.

But your population growth data doesn't contradict my interpretation. Your data says nothing about the direction of movement between Boston and LA.

Quote:

Try again. You used uhaul rental rates to back up your claim that people are flooding to texas from all over the US, citing Boston to Houston rates specifically. I used actual sourced information to show that the key to the population growth in Texas is immigrants settling there and not Americans moving there

That means that there are significantly more immigrants moving to Texas than US citizens. That doesn't mean that I'm wrong about the direction of migration within the US. Elementary logic fail on your part.

Quote:

thus even if your Uhaul argument made sense it would only account for a fraction of the population increase

I never made any claim about what fraction of the population increase it accounted for. All I ever claimed was which direction the population flow was going. And nothing you have presented contradicts that claim.

Quote:

Cities it is cheaper to move to from Houston.
1. Phoenix
2. Los Angeles
3. Seatle

Do you need me to go on? Their interstate rates are obviously based on a more complex model then just "Where are the most people moving." Because this is obvious it is not reliable evidence to cite these rates as evidence of population shift.

Your evidence still doesn't contradict anything I've said. You have no reason to think that the direction of population flow within the US isn't from Phoenix to Houston, or Los Angeles to Houston, or Seattle to Houston.

Quote:

You have failed twice. You misunderstand the cause of Texas population growth

YOU made the claim about population growth statistics, not me. My argument never depended on population growth statistics. You keep trying to pin me to your straw man, but that's all it ever was: a straw man.

[theprestige]

Seems kind of strange to complain about appeals to worse problems, when the question at hand is what problem do people actually think is worse...

... Me? I prefer an hour with a full bladder to a minute with a kidney stone. Oh, wait--appeal to worse problems, a fallacy! Guess I should prefer the kidney stone instead.

[Biscuit]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

YOU made the claim about population growth statistics, not me. My argument never depended on population growth statistics. You keep trying to pin me to your straw man, but that's all it ever was: a straw man.

Adding data that disproves your theory isn't a straw man its evidence that refutes your claims.

I am not buying your uhaul theory and I don't think many others are either.

ETA: I don't think the extreme teabagger politics of Texas is what is drawing new immigrants to settle there.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Biscuit

Adding data that disproves your theory isn't a straw man its evidence that refutes your claims.

But it doesn't disprove my theory. You have shown data which addresses something different than my claim. It's therefore not logically possible for your data to disprove my claim. This is such a colossal logic failure on your part that your continued repetition of it, despite having the error explained to you, is rather troubling. You're clearly not equipped to handle this debate.

Quote:

ETA: I don't think the extreme teabagger politics of Texas is what is drawing new immigrants to settle there.

I never claimed it was. But it's not keeping people away, and it's not driving them out.

[Biscuit]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

But it doesn't disprove my theory.

Here is your theory because I think you have forgotten it.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

You see, the thing about Texas is, well, people vote with their feet, too. And how are they voting? Well, the price to rent a 10' U-haul from Boston to Houston is currently $1731. The price from Houston to Boston is $738. Why the price differential?

And then you jump to this conclusion.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Because of a demand differentia: more people want to move from Boston to Houston than from Houston to Bostonl.

One that is not born out by the larger numbers or any statistical data. Just the price uhaul is charging. This claim is an absurd conclusion to jump to but you dont just jump to it you double down on your theory!

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

And it's not just Boston either. Try it with any major blue-state city. The differences vary, but every one I price comes out significantly more expensive to move to Houston than from Houston. Evidently, people don't share your opinion of Texas. And that includes people not currently living in Texas.

I have already shown that Seattle and L.A. are cheaper the other way around so obviously you didn't even investigate your own theory to deeply. The highlighted part is perhaps the best part as you are implying that people are fleeing blue states for the tea party politics of Texas otherwise why would you have added the caveat "blue-state city?"

Your theory: People are leaving blue states for Texas
Your evidence: The price of a uhaul truck to Houston from a few cherry picked blue-state cities.

Now based on the actual causes for the population growth in Houston and a random sampling of uhaul rates I don't think your theory holds any water. I don't think politics is the reason for the the move as you imply and I don't think uhaul rates are based on such consideration alone.

Provide us with 1 demographic study that cites uhaul rates.

I will give you a hint: You need to show how many uhauls left Boston for Houston and vice versa if you want to correlate the rates to population shifts. I wouldn't bother though as I may as well claim that people in Houston want to eat at wolfgang pucks and my proof is that is costs less to rent a uhaul to L.A. then one from L.A. its just silly.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Biscuit

I have already shown that Seattle and L.A. are cheaper the other way around so obviously you didn't even investigate your own theory to deeply.

What are you talking about? It's cheaper to go from Houston to LA than LA to Houston ($803 vs. $1243). And it's cheaper to go from Houston to Seattle than Seattle to Houston ($761 vs. $1368). That matches what I claimed. Do you even have any clue whatsoever as to what I'm even saying?

Quote:

Your theory: People are leaving blue states for Texas
Your evidence: The price of a uhaul truck to Houston from a few cherry picked blue-state cities.

Can you find any counter-examples? Because what you apparently thought were counter-examples actually match my claim.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

No, appeal to worse problems would be saying that you shouldn't talk about or criticize having a full bladder because you don't have a kidney stone.

Fair enough. And what is it when someone points out that Houston may not be as horrible as you might think, given that many people seem to prefer it to Boston?

Quote:

And as what you identify as the question at hand actually isn't then I'd say that the red herring has been pretty successful.

I'm pretty confident that my interpretation of this thread is quite reasonable. I don't doubt you feel the same way about yours.

[Stellafane]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Fair enough. And what is it when someone points out that Houston may not be as horrible as you might think, given that many people seem to prefer it to Boston?

I've never thought of Houston as being horrible. But what makes you think people prefer living there than Boston? On a lark, I did a quick search on "quality of life index" and the first global survey I found listed Boston as the 36th most livable city on earth (and #3 in the USA, behind Honolulu and SF), well ahead of Houston. Surely you're not equating preference with sheer size?

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Stellafane

I've never thought of Houston as being horrible. But what makes you think people prefer living there than Boston? On a lark, I did a quick search on "quality of life index" and the first global survey I found listed Boston as the 36th most livable city on earth (and #3 in the USA, behind Honolulu and SF), well ahead of Houston. Surely you're not equating preference with sheer size?

More people are renting cargo trucks for one-way trips from Boston to Houston than from Houston to Boston. Maybe they never thought to index the quality of life in Boston?

[jj]

Originally Posted by theprestige

More people are renting cargo trucks for one-way trips from Boston to Houston than from Houston to Boston. Maybe they never thought to index the quality of life in Boston?

Please provide evidence for your assertion. If you can not provide testable, verifiable evidence for your assertion, especially in the light that prices are higher where there is money to be had, I think it's time to admit you can't provide evidence.

[TragicMonkey]

Um, renting a Uhaul truck and moving yourself isn't the only way to relocate. Indeed, if your'e moving for a particularly good job, sometimes your employer foots the bill and hires professionals to do all the work and driving.

[BenBurch]

U-Hauls seasonally track the academic year. That is the big thing you need to factor out.

Next thing you need to realize is that there is a contrarian effect at work here.

People who move to a good job usually can afford movers or have them provided if we are talking a professional situation. Those are not U-Haul. For that look at, for example, Mayflower or some other nationwide mover.

On the other hand, people who have lost their really good jobs and pretty much everything they had usually move home to Mom's towing U-Haul.

[jj]

Ahh, here is is. Let us consider the simplistic analysis used to justify the nonsensical claim in the op:

1) The rental company wants to try to keep traffic as balanced as they can.
2) They can charge a lot more in an affluent area
3) They can't possibly charge nearly that much from people trying to escape a blighted area.
4) Obviously, they will charge much, much less in the blighted area, just to get their trucks back where they belong.

So much for the absurd, irrational claim in the op.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by jj

Ahh, here is is. Let us consider the simplistic analysis used to justify the nonsensical claim in the op:

1) The rental company wants to try to keep traffic as balanced as they can.
2) They can charge a lot more in an affluent area
3) They can't possibly charge nearly that much from people trying to escape a blighted area.
4) Obviously, they will charge much, much less in the blighted area, just to get their trucks back where they belong.

So much for the absurd, irrational claim in the op.

So they charge lots of money to affluent people who are moving to blighted areas. Why are these affluent people moving to blighted areas? And the people who are leaving blighted areas to move to affluent areas and don't have the money to pay much to move... how is it that they can afford to move to affluent areas?

Your theory doesn't actually make sense. Especially since local rates are the same in both affluent areas and blighted areas.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by BenBurch

U-Hauls seasonally track the academic year. That is the big thing you need to factor out.

Actually, the prices don't seasonally track the academic year. They're flat. I just priced the same Houston to Seattle trip for every month between now and next June (the farthest they have available) and the price is exactly the same, regardless of date. So I'm not sure why you think that has anything to do with the price differential.

[Beerina]

Originally Posted by BenBurch

U-Hauls seasonally track the academic year. That is the big thing you need to factor out.

Next thing you need to realize is that there is a contrarian effect at work here.

People who move to a good job usually can afford movers or have them provided if we are talking a professional situation. Those are not U-Haul. For that look at, for example, Mayflower or some other nationwide mover.

On the other hand, people who have lost their really good jobs and pretty much everything they had usually move home to Mom's towing U-Haul.

People hurting and looking for jobs hit the road without necessaly having one, or having one and not having a nice executive move package.

Exactly the kind of people who rent a U-Haul. People got on ships to the US by the millions without a job lined up.

I would submit your scenario is the vast exception rather than the rule.


I'd love to datamine the records of U-Haul and Mayflower both. BTW the real Mayflower folks didn't have jobs lined up, either.

[Ziggurat]

BTW, U-Haul's own website backs up my theory about the cause of the difference.
http://reservations.uhaul.com/resweb...aspx#calculate

Quote:

Why does it cost less to move from Point A to Point B than vice versa?
Many variables go into establishing rates. There are times when more people are moving out of a city than into it. Because we want more equipment going back to that city we will often discount the rate.

The only factor they actually give for the direction dependence of the price is exactly what I said would dominate the difference: the imbalance in demand.

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Actually, the prices don't seasonally track the academic year. They're flat. I just priced the same Houston to Seattle trip for every month between now and next June (the farthest they have available) and the price is exactly the same, regardless of date. So I'm not sure why you think that has anything to do with the price differential.

So, unless demand is constant throughout the year which seems highly unlikely, the price differential is clearly not being based solely on traffic in each direction. If it was it would vary throughout the year to reflect relative changes in the balance of traffic.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Jaggy Bunnet

So, unless demand is constant throughout the year which seems highly unlikely, the price differential is clearly not being based solely on traffic in each direction. If it was it would vary throughout the year to reflect relative changes in the balance of traffic.

Well, no. First off, see my previous post where U-Haul states that they do exactly what I said they do in terms of adjusting prices because of differing demands. And second, seasonal variations due to factors like kids moving to/from college are cyclic and predictable, so if they were important then U-Haul could incorporate them into its pricing in advance. But the net flow of demand cannot be easily predicted in advance. If it changes, then U-Haul can adjust their rates at that time, but they won't do so ahead of time since they have little basis for predicting how it will change. And if the timescale for it changing is longer than the typical reservation lead time, then there's not much need to incorporate that into current reservation pricing even if they did have some idea of how it would change.

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

But the net flow of demand cannot be easily predicted in advance.

Really? Did the business only start this year, or do they perhaps have access to historic information? Are there no seasonally predictable factors that would influence demand?

Strange how other transport businesses somehow manage to predict travel patterns and amend their pricing accordingly. Is U-Haul really so badly run or have such antiquated systems that it can't change its prices dynamically to reflect both predicted demand changes and to update those predictions based on actual booking experience?

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Jaggy Bunnet

Really? Did the business only start this year, or do they perhaps have access to historic information? Are there no seasonally predictable factors that would influence demand?

Strange how other transport businesses somehow manage to predict travel patterns and amend their pricing accordingly. Is U-Haul really so badly run or have such antiquated systems that it can't change its prices dynamically to reflect both predicted demand changes and to update those predictions based on actual booking experience?

They can change their pricing any time they want to, as often as they want to. But I don't have access to that information. I only have access to what the pricing is right now. And right now they don't vary the pricing for reservations made today, regardless of when the reservation is for.

But I find it strange that you're still trying to contest the dominance of net traffic flow in pricing differentials when U-Haul themselves tell us that. However accurate or inaccurate my deductions about their pricing model may be, I don't know why you don't believe them, After all, they do know rather authoritatively.

[OnlyTellsTruths]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

The only factor they actually give for the direction dependence of the price is exactly what I said would dominate the difference: the imbalance in demand.

It would look pretty bad if they came out and said that people will pay more in certain areas. So they charge more.

Have we compared the cost of living in both cities?

[jj]

I notice that dissembling has replaced argument. It's obvious that when it's convenient, the people making absurd claims are willing to abandon free market ideals.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by jj

I notice that dissembling has replaced argument. It's obvious that when it's convenient, the people making absurd claims are willing to abandon free market ideals.

What on earth are you talking about? Who has abandoned free market ideals?

[rwguinn]

The free-market does rule for U-haul.
If you are moving to East Bugspit, ND, you can expect to pay more, simply because the U-Haul guy in East Bugspit has to pay to get the excess inventory off his lot and over to a place that needs it.
I moved my stuff from Tulsa, OK to Aledo, TX (Just an apartment worth-Contractors often use U-Haul because they move so much). The cost to Aledo was about $50 LESS than to Fort Worth (20 miles) because the Ft Worth guy had too many trailers on his lot, and Aledo was near empty.
IF they do not have enough people going out of a place, they have to pay to move the things around so that there are enough in any one place to supply the people who need them.