Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse • Hacker News Board

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#171

Post by DrScump » Sat, Jun 10, 2017, 8:34 AM UTC

agotterer wrote: post #137

nserrino wrote: post #25

I probably won't ever take a taxi again, but have some sympathy for the cab drivers who put their life savings in medallions. The city effectively promised them the exclusive right to give taxi rides, but didn't do anything about a non-medallion entity doing that same thing. They put hundreds of thousands of dollars into something meaningless.

Its hard to even consider taking a taxi at this point. I was in Chicago last weekend and considered taking a taxi from the airport into the city. Taxi wanted ~$60 and Uber wanted ~$25. The same thing happened in SF a few months back. The driver wanted $90 to goto Palo Alto and I took an Uber pool for $23. Granted I don't believe for a second that's the actual rate and I'm confident the driver was trying to take advan…

"Wanted"?

Aren't taxi fares set specifically by regulators in both places?

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#172

Post by dingo_bat » Sat, Jun 10, 2017, 8:47 AM UTC

basseq wrote: post #3

I'm left wondering... so what? The "personal transportation" market has massively changed. Whether it's for the better or worse simply doesn't matter . Veteran Chicago cabbie John Aikins,67, who is facing foreclosure on two medallions for which he owes more than $330,0000, said he has little hope that the industry can be saved. "It feels like the city is just watching us collapse," Aikins said. "Right now, there are…

Why is Veteran Chicago cabbie John Aikins not driving for Uber?

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#173

Post by dingo_bat » Sat, Jun 10, 2017, 9:11 AM UTC

tlogan wrote: post #60

alkonaut wrote: post #5

How are they making so much less money than Uber? Simply by paying drivers more? Because if they don't have things like booking, pre-paying via apps etc then of course they are losing business - but in that case why don't they? I don't use Uber over taxis simply because I can get the exact same service from a taxi, but the drivers are better off in terms of pay and schedule (as far as I know).

I do not know about you but I have very low requirement: I just want that when I take my wife on a date to use transportation which does not smell bad and it is not dirty. Nothing else. So I have to chose Lyft or Uber.

I'm curious, is buying a car out of the question?

I also face the same problem when going out with my wife and hate hailing taxis on the road. Uber is just so much better, I am even ready to pay more than what they are asking. But every few weeks I think about buying a small car, so I don't have to depend on Uber.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#174

Post by ojosilva » Sat, Jun 10, 2017, 9:59 AM UTC

taxicabjesus wrote: post #167

sundaeofshock wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VCs are needed until a self-driving car can pick an elderly passenger at the airport and help them with their baggage when they get home. Uber will run out of money long before we have self-driving cars.

> VCs are needed until a self-driving car can pick an elderly passenger at the airport and help them with their baggage when they get home. This is a very good point. Also consider that many more people need help with groceries than with luggage.

Just call the "Human Uber" service instead, which will come with a pair of hands. I doubt that's more than 5% of their market, so it justifies having a differentiated price for the extra help you get.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#175

Post by mschuster91 » Sat, Jun 10, 2017, 10:05 AM UTC

A point that I have yet to see in the debate: while everyone seems to like the "old cab industry" going downhill (which may very well be deserved, given shady practices like racial discrimination, detours etc.), no one seems to think about the ultimate consequence:

People without smartphones or credit cards will have no way of getting individual point-to-point transportation any more. This especially includes old people (who e.g. rely on cabs to transport them to doctors, grocery stores etc), people who do not want smartphones or cellphones in general due to privacy reasons (e.g. tracking by network operators, or not wanting everything they do on their phone fed to Google), and minors who do not have a credit card - when I was young I always had 50€ in cash with me so I could fetch a cab home when public transport failed.

Also, there are many people who do not want to use Uber, Lyft etc. for ethical or other reasons - it is unclear if the driver has proper insurance for his vehicle, it is not regulated how long the driver has been behind the wheel (it's easy to end up in a crash when driving tired, I speak from personal experience), it's not regulated how much money the drivers make (owner-operated businesses usually don't fall under minimum wage regulations) and for what it's worth it's not guaranteed that the vehicle is technically fit to be on the road (which cabs usually are, with yearly inspections by independent auditors in Germany, for example).

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#176

Post by GnarfGnarf » Sat, Jun 10, 2017, 10:53 AM UTC

basseq wrote: post #3

I'm left wondering... so what? The "personal transportation" market has massively changed. Whether it's for the better or worse simply doesn't matter . Veteran Chicago cabbie John Aikins,67, who is facing foreclosure on two medallions for which he owes more than $330,0000, said he has little hope that the industry can be saved. "It feels like the city is just watching us collapse," Aikins said. "Right now, there are…

I take your point. However there is one case where traditional cab companies provide a benefit. When a city issues permits for the lucrative airport business to one specific cab company, it is with the understanding that there will be cars waiting for passengers around the clock, even during unprofitable times of the day.

If the cab business becomes a free-for-all, there will be no one waiting at the airport at 3:00 AM. Granted, there isn't a lot of traffic at certain times, but the public interest is best served when there are always cabs available.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#177

Post by PacketPaul » Sat, Jun 10, 2017, 12:19 PM UTC

TulliusCicero wrote: post #47

bitJericho wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We'll see what you think of the cab industry when uber raises their prices by 3 times in order to become profitable, after the cabbies all gone.

Yeah, and I bet after Borders shuts down, you'll see Amazon raise book prices sky-high! People always claim this will happen, and it never seems to. If Uber tripled prices, a competitor would start up to cut into their market share.

I guess you have never rode Uber during "surge" times. Sometimes the pricing becomes insane.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#178

Post by PacketPaul » Sat, Jun 10, 2017, 12:23 PM UTC

bitJericho wrote: post #26

tstactplsignore wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Whether it's for the better or worse simply doesn't matter Yikes- I have only a little sympathy for the taxi industry, but it is very scary that you do not believe we should be concerned with whether market forces improve society or not. I think it is extremely important to the vast majority of people that any enormous change in transportation occurs for the benefit of society - the ideology that capitalism is an en…

We'll see what you think of the cab industry when uber raises their prices by 3 times in order to become profitable, after the cabbies all gone.

How are these guys not profitable? It is basically an app that gets paid to match riders with rides.

My guess is they are spending a lot of money expanding. Once done, they will be instantly profitable.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#179

Post by PacketPaul » Sat, Jun 10, 2017, 12:26 PM UTC

clock_tower wrote: post #146

weberc2 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original comment referred to price gouging due to lack of competition. VC money might subsidize the rides (or more likely find ongoing development?), but Uber and Lyft are bound to be cheaper than taxis for as long as they can remain less entangled with governments (less artificial price inflation).

The problem is that Uber loses money on every ride, so they'll have to raise their rates as soon as they stop being subsidized by VCs -- unless they have self-driving taxis by then.

How are they losing money on each ride? They are not managing fleets of cars, employees, etc. It's an app.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#180

Post by PacketPaul » Sat, Jun 10, 2017, 12:30 PM UTC

gehwartzen wrote: post #145

rayiner wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Libertarians (at least, ones that aren't the anarchist kind) don't believe in freedom. They believe in property rights, which are by definition an encumberance on freedom. (The difference between mere possession and a property right is that the latter is enforced through the government's monopoly on violence.)

This is the argument I usually get into with my more libertarian friends who think property rights and individual freedoms don't impose limits on one another. What happens when someone buys the land all around your house and prevents you from even getting to or leaving your property?

If you buy land where the only access is through another person's private property, that is your own fault. The purchaser has a responsibility to do their own due diligence.