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

Uber London loses licence to operate

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 609 posts

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#371

Post by aidos »

dx034 wrote: post #213
jjp wrote: post #113

The TFL press release summarises the points on why the licence is not being renewed - https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2017/septem... TfL considers that Uber's approach and conduct demonstrate a lack of corporate responsibility in relation to a number of issues which have potential public safety and security implications. These include: Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences. Its approach…

I'm quite certain that the last one is the important point. All the others can easily be fixed. But that the company had a program to avoid regulation should be enough to ban it. Unless they do a full code audit, there's no way to know if they still use these techniques.

Interestingly they claimed that technology is to defend themselves against fraudulent activity (fake accounts, competitors, sting operations).

From what I understand, it works by marking accounts as fake (using credit card lookups etc) and then showing them fake cars that never pick them up.

Imagine being falsely flagged by that system and just always having a terrible time getting a cab and not knowing why!

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#372

Post by tomblomfield »

I don't think the Mayor of London or TfL really expect to shut down Uber. It would be a deeply unpopular move. There's an acceptance that Uber has improved things for riders, albeit at the expense of the Black Cab industry, and London wants to welcome innovative technology firms.

However, I also suspect that Uber hasn't been as co-operative as TfL would like on several issues mentioned, and so this feels like a warning shot to get them to be better corporate citizen. Quote from an MP; "No company, however big and powerful, will be allowed to flout our laws and regulations."

Uber could have reacted by saying "we acknowledge our shortfallings, and we'll work closely with TfL and the Mayor of London to ensure we put passenger safety first. We hope to avoid any interruption in service and continue to play a valuable part in London's diverse and effective public transportation system."

Instead, they took a typically Travis-ish stance and said "Screw you, people love us because we're cheaper, we'll fight this and we'll win," without any acknowledgment of their failings.

Perhaps new leadership can change this approach.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#373

Post by seanmcdirmid »

conanbatt wrote: post #363
Nursie wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> The Taxi business in every city is a 'monopoly'. Shares in this 'rent seeking entity' are bought by owning 'medallions'. This is just not true, and the medallion system doesn't seem to exist outside of the US. The rest of your post is just as much nonsense. There's a whole list of reasons Uber are having this happen, and none of it's political. Oh, and according to Uber, they aren't jobs - or else they'd have to c…

> This is just not true, and the medallion system doesn't seem to exist outside of the US. We have licenses in argentina which are basically the same. While the taxi drivers that are unionized flipped out cars and threw stones at Uber offices down here, they claimed Uber wasnt safe. At least 50% of taxis in argentina dont have working seatbelts.

Seat belt? Most taxis in china hide that under the seat cover.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#374

Post by brentm »

overcast wrote: post #254

Uber needs to license their software to existing companies. Stop trying to push cab companies out of business, and start trying to be cabOS. The user experience is why we use the thing, I don't give a rats ass who is picking me up, as long as they are safe and courteous. And they come pick me up with a few taps of a phone app.

They won't license their software any time soon. They decided against it in the earliest days and it really wouldn't fit with the Uber brand today. Maybe once they are a public, growth from new markets has slowed and they are chasing profits they sign license deals to open up otherwise closed off markets. I am skeptical that many taxi commissions in major cities would line up to license though. As of now the current system obviously works well enough for them (and that's to say nothing about the little those orgs likely trust Uber). If they have successfully banished Uber (etc) to the point where Uber wants to license software just to join the market I'd expect revenue split terms would be so unfavorable to Uber that they would not be interested.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#375

Post by Nursie »

conanbatt wrote: post #359
Nursie wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like the idea that every rational company must skirt the very edges of the law, regardless of good ethics, to maximise profit. I don't personally believe either to be true, and I do believe there's a very real difference between out-competing the competition and using a ton of VC money to undercut them, or skirting rules and regulations that may add cost.

Taxis have an ACTUAL monopoly. Are you seriously siding with "banning potential monopoly" to protect an entrenched centuries old monopoly.

>> Taxis have an ACTUAL monopoly

Not really, there are lots of private-hire firms in London.

>> Are you seriously siding with "banning potential monopoly" to protect an entrenched centuries old monopoly.

Nope. That's a wilful misreading of what I've been posting and I'm not sure it warrants much response. I'm siding with protecting a diverse market from an unethical company who appear to be bending the rules and sinking a ton of investor money into distorting the market in an effort to capture it.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#376

Post by djsumdog »

squigg wrote: post #358
erwan wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This decision has officially nothing to do with tax evasion/optimization. It is on grounds of consumer protection that Uber's licence is not being renewed. Anyone who has taken a black cab should immediately understand the hypocrisy motivating this decision. The user experience is absolutely horrendous and there's no good tracking system to make black cab drivers accountable. In short, as everyone knows, it is just a…

I'm sorry but you will have to do more to explain your point on black cab user experience being horrendous. Whilst it can be hard to get a hold of one at times, in my experience of 20 years of using them, the user experience is great - the drivers are typically friendly and get you there as quickly as they can. I have used Uber many times in London and abandoned it months ago, as the drivers don't have the local know…

I've only taken a London cab a handful of times, but I never had a bad experience. I don't think I've had a bad experience with Uber drivers either...maybe one or two weird conversations .. same with Lyft drivers.

I just want to know if Uber drivers can average the same income as cabbies working the same hours. In New Zealand, several Uber drivers use to be cabbies and switched from Wellington Combined because they earned more money with Uber. That was years ago and I'm curious if that's still the case or if those drivers have switched back. In Berlin, the Uber app hails a regular taxi driver that's under standard taxi regulations from the city, so there it's more just a billing system.

Everywhere else I've taken Lyft/Uber, the drivers never started out in taxis. It's turning the taxi industry into a "gig economy" I realize a lot of people got their start in new cities as taxi drivers; immigrants from generations back. Things are changing. It's not good or bad, just different.

The biggest concern is Uber as a company. Most of the rides I've mentioned I've taken with others. I prefer public transport when possible, Lyft when I have to. For a while on HN, ever week was another post: Greyball, the Hell map, the two harassment blog posts, anti-union efforts against drivers, hiring Eric Holder for damage control, the continuing Google/Waymo self driving tech court case, etc.

Are there any recent posts on how much drivers earn? I've heard it's going down each year. Is it worth it to lose an entire career path for some people for cheaper rides?

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#377

Post by UK-AL »

jnsaff2 wrote: post #155

Here's a little perspective from another company trying to bring Uberesque services to London. Not trying to defend Uber but the motives of british establishment might be a bit more selfish then they want you to know. https://blog.taxify.eu/2017/09/bringing-fairer-ride-hailing-...

Black cab drivers are very active, and quite violent lobbyists towards tfl.

I have literally seen black cab drivers spit at uber drivers.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#378

Post by mnx »

vertex-four wrote: post #313
mnx wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, except most people won't bother. So it gives in fact less accountability.

If this is a problem, write an app that emails/faxes/whatever a report to TfL? Could even integrate some CV stuff to read a license plate number from the phone's camera. This is the sort of thing that takes large organisations a while to build, but could be a weekend project for an interested developer.

Still would need to be popularised to actually give any benefit (i.e. similar levels of accountability for minor shittinies as uber's ratings). people are lazy. Rating an uber takes seconds, and is built in to same app you need to order it. I am guessing many people don't rate anyway. Also, making an app that that does this well is NOT a weekend sized project.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#379

Post by matthewmacleod »

collyw wrote: post #63
googleme wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could not disagree more - often times, especially if travelling with multiple people it is far more convenient, comfortable and can even be more affordable than taking public transport. While I agree that London has great public transport, Uber has been a game changer for myself and many people I know.

>"While I agree that London has great public transport" This must be a different London from the one I was in ten years ago.

Well—aside from the fact that London's public transport was pretty good ten years ago—it's not the same, no. There have been substantial improvements in the past 10 years, including the expansion of the Overground service, new rolling stock all over the place, capacity improvements, some 24-hour running at weekends, clawback of TfL Rail, system-wide contactless card support, improved bus services, the imminent arrival of Crossrail…

So yes, it's different.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#380

Post by jerf »

microcolonel wrote: post #165
Nursie wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Who said anything about them seeking to become a worldwide cab monopoly? They behave as if they are attempting this, IMHO. >> They are a cab company I believe, depending on which way the wind was blowing, they might dispute this. Their argument is that they are not a cab company, merely a service for connecting drivers and potential passengers. This is how they avoid pesky things like employment laws. >> Any other…

> They behave as if they are attempting this, IMHO. Every rational company should behave as if they're attempting to become a monopoly, this is a completely meaningless point to argue either way.

Every company should attempt to be the best in their field, yes. However, that does not in general encompass taking vast piles of VC money to run a loss-leader service for years and years on end in an attempt to monopolize an entire sector by undercutting all the competition that has to actually make a profit pretty much every quarter, with their valuation almost entirely based on the idea that they can succeed and then raise prices to become profitable.

Yes, there is a qualitative difference here.

Post reply on HN