Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

ww2.kqed.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 91 posts

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#41

Post by cujo »

derekp7 wrote: post #7

Here's the thing I don't understand -- if the main attraction (from a customer point of view) is the app (with everything that comes with it), why haven't the cab companies got in on the same game? Either put out their own app to hail rides (and maybe give their cabs a more luxury look to them), or sign up as Uber/Lyft drivers themselves? Or is there something I'm missing?

The game changer is the uber/lyft drivers are doing in their free time and generally __want__ to do it. So they show up when scheduled, have a pleasant demeanor, and make the whole experience one that isn't uncomfortable.

Cabbies are there for the cash and their attitude and style reflect that. Cab rides are typically reckless, the drivers rude, and the cars uncomfortable.

Of course, these are sweeping generalizations, so take it with a grain of salt.

Regardless, the game changer is the experience from app to to destination. Not just the app.

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#42

Post by Malician »

derekp7 wrote: post #7

Here's the thing I don't understand -- if the main attraction (from a customer point of view) is the app (with everything that comes with it), why haven't the cab companies got in on the same game? Either put out their own app to hail rides (and maybe give their cabs a more luxury look to them), or sign up as Uber/Lyft drivers themselves? Or is there something I'm missing?

Right now Uber offers better service in every way which matters to me, and usually has much lower prices to boot.

The cab system is an entrenched monopoly with a lot of inefficiencies and people stealing value along the way.

Being able to lie on the phone and say "the cab is 15 minutes away!" when it's going to be half an hour is a feature, not a bug - for the industry. It's the equivalent of asking reform from the music industry or Hollywood - not going to happen.

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#43

Post by rhino369 »

brc wrote: post #29

Sad story but every economic change for the better creates winners and losers. You can't regulate away loss without regulating away improvement. He is better off forgetting the medallion and finding work somewhere else to repay the loan. He should be able to make a few dollars renting the medallion in the meantime. As for the government stepping in - live by the fake government market, die by the fake government mark…

>Sad story but every economic change for the better creates winners and losers. You can't regulate away loss without regulating away improvement.

The government isn't a third party here. Compensating him isn't just handing him money for a bad investment. It's compensating him for the fact that SF scammed him out of a quarter million dollars.

The reason why the government should have to compensate here isn't because he lost money and pour him. It's because the government sold him a license and then devalued the license on purpose.

You could argue that the city never promised to prevent all sorts of transportation competition. And he took that risk knowing that, for example, people could take limos or whatever. But you at least have to have that debate. You can't just write it off as a bad investment. The government is the cause of his loss. Not the market.

>As for the government stepping in - live by the fake government market, die by the fake government market. I have no sympathy for people who build businesses behind government firewalls or with government subsidies, and suffer when those rules change.

You act like cabs were regulated for the cab drivers benefit, but that's not how or why they were regulated. They were regulated for the benefit of the city and the rides. The medallion system was the other side of a compromise between the city and the taxis. The city would regulate pricing and dictate key parts of their business model, but in exchange they would be protected from competition. It was a quid pro quo.

IF you think the medallions shouldn't have been sold in the first replace, why isn't just returning them for the price paid the best solution?

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#44

Post by Scoundreller »

Multiplayer wrote: post #37
panorama wrote: post #9

This is an especially poignant story, and it's hard to not feel bad for this driver. On the other hand, people face investment risk all the time, i.e. when franchising a restaurant. When Chipotle or whoever comes in and devours the fast food market, I wonder if the local struggling burger franchisee asks the city for help? I can't speak on behalf of other cities, but anyone who has lived in SF pre-Uber has no shortag…

It's not quite the whole story. Medallions used to be almost free, which is why the waitlist was 10 years. They started charging 250k, but you can give them back for 200k. From the MTA site: By capping the sale price of medallions, the MTA insulates medallion holders from market fluctuations, either up or down. When drivers want to resell, the price is what they paid, minus a 5 percent transfer fee. The agency said i…

> For those cabbies who paid nearly nothing for their medallions...

I'd argue they did pay for them, they worked for below-average wages for 10 years in the hopes of a payoff. Long-term drivers tend to see getting a medallion as a retirement plan.

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#45

Post by Scoundreller »

r00fus wrote: post #17
matheweis wrote: post #4

This isn't unique to San Francisco, the entire industry is in a free fall nationwide... It is incredible to watch the effects of a little innovation and (effectively) deregulation. Chicaco: "Once a sure bet, taxi medallions becoming unsellable" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9564478 http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/05/17/taxi-medallion... New York: "New York City Taxi Medallion Prices Keep Falling" https…

Don't forget that the "innovator" is operating illegally in many jurisdictions and is actively trying to buy protection (i.e., lobbying).

In Toronto, it feels like the entire public is on Uber's side. But that could be good PR as well, since I can only poll my circle of friend-users.

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#46

Post by jonny_eh »

Scoundreller wrote: post #45
r00fus wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget that the "innovator" is operating illegally in many jurisdictions and is actively trying to buy protection (i.e., lobbying).

In Toronto, it feels like the entire public is on Uber's side. But that could be good PR as well, since I can only poll my circle of friend-users.

Good PR or superior product + service?

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#47

Post by differentView »

r00fus wrote: post #17
matheweis wrote: post #4

This isn't unique to San Francisco, the entire industry is in a free fall nationwide... It is incredible to watch the effects of a little innovation and (effectively) deregulation. Chicaco: "Once a sure bet, taxi medallions becoming unsellable" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9564478 http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/05/17/taxi-medallion... New York: "New York City Taxi Medallion Prices Keep Falling" https…

Don't forget that the "innovator" is operating illegally in many jurisdictions and is actively trying to buy protection (i.e., lobbying).

>Don't forget that the "innovator" is operating illegally in many jurisdictions and is actively trying to buy protection (i.e., lobbying).

Don't forget their most unfair practice of kicking out rude and bad drivers that provide terrible customer service. If the cabs can do that, people would like them too, but that's just a totally ridiculous thought.

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#48

Post by driverdan »

sandworm101 wrote: post #12

Cab driver /= medallion owner. For every poor hardworking cab driver who has taken a mortgage out to buy a medallion, there are a dozen sleazy operators who own piles of them, do not drive, and have leased them out to cabbies at horrific rates.

> there are a dozen sleazy operators who own piles of them, do not drive, and have leased them out to cabbies at horrific rates.

How is that sleazy? If cabbies are willing to pay then it sounds like the market is working.

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#49

Post by [deleted] »

qq66 wrote: post #39
panorama wrote: post #9

This is an especially poignant story, and it's hard to not feel bad for this driver. On the other hand, people face investment risk all the time, i.e. when franchising a restaurant. When Chipotle or whoever comes in and devours the fast food market, I wonder if the local struggling burger franchisee asks the city for help? I can't speak on behalf of other cities, but anyone who has lived in SF pre-Uber has no shortag…

People face investment risk all the time, but medallions are a case of a city setting explicit expectations when selling the medallions and then changing the terms of the deal post facto. Chipotle devoured a huge chunk of the fast food market, but the city didn't collect money from McDonalds for a guarantee that Chipotle wouldn't be allowed to enter. Notably, this is illegal by federal law for auto manufacturers and…

[deleted]

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#50

Post by rubyn00bie »

I had a great professor who specialized in (Economics of) Public Utilities who made a very important distinction about types of regulation; of which, he said there are essentially two: economic and "safety and soundness." He said, about them, economic regulation is strictly* bad. Safety and soundness, is always* good. Make sure you know which type a regulation is, e.g. Many financial regulations are for safety and soundness of "the markets"; not economic.

In this case, I think it's key point out, the pain felt is due to economic regulation. Which was/is putting up barriers for entering and exiting the market. The government removed competition, it raised prices, and was generally bad (I.e. State santioned monoplies). When innovation, and change, eventually moved around those economic barriers it was bad for those protected by 'em.

I hope going forward any regulations are strictly safety and soundness related with taxi service. It'll save a lot of pain on all sides.

* If you've taken enough Econ, you'll know strictly and always are going "depend on ..."

Post reply on HN