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

Uber to pay $272M to Australian taxi operators

smh.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 178 posts

Re: Uber to pay $272M to Australian taxi operators

#61

Post by Ekaros »

Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #52
Izkata wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument I've heard before (about the medallion system in the US, which had the same result as what GP described with licenses) was that since roads are a limited resource, this prevented too many taxis from causing excess traffic just driving around looking for customers. It's an interesting argument because having the app connect customers means they don't have to drive around aimlessly, which almost sidesteps…

They could fix the whole system by issuing as many medallians as people want. Fixed reasonable price, renewable each year. You have to meet certain criteria for public safety, like good driving record, not a sex offender, the car must pass annual safety inspections, etc. But other that, let the market decide how many taxis.

It makes level of sense to limit number of medallions. And then also at same time cap prices and mandate availability. That is if you have a medallion you must have car on order or on road at all times. This could be achieved by multiple medallion owners working together so that there is a taxi available Wed-Thu night during rainstorm.

Also you do not want to give out so many medallions that owners cannot possibly make a living. Now transferability outside selling whole business is stupid.

Re: Uber to pay $272M to Australian taxi operators

#62

Post by [deleted] »

resolutebat wrote: post #36

It's worth noting that Australian taxis are generally terrible . They're expensive and notorious for ripoffs, particularly from the airport: scenic routes, bogus surcharges, "broken" credit card machines (plus 5% surcharge when they do work), drivers refusing destinations (by law they're not allowed to), and to top it all off they're not even safe, with taxi drivers responsible for a long string of sexual assaults. U…

[deleted]

Re: Uber to pay $272M to Australian taxi operators

#63

Post by johngladtj »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #19
lannisterstark wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If I had started an illegal gypsy taxi business I would have been fined or arrested. Why are there different rules for large corporations? Shouldn't you be wondering why is it illegal for you to do the first thing rather than the last? Why shouldn't you be able to start what you call a 'gypsy taxi business.' what's the need for arresting you? Is it that authoritarian of a nation?

do you disagree with all laws or just ones meant to protect workers' wages?

All the ones that restrict freedom without good reason

Re: Uber to pay $272M to Australian taxi operators

#64

Post by ghoomketu »

resolutebat wrote: post #36

It's worth noting that Australian taxis are generally terrible . They're expensive and notorious for ripoffs, particularly from the airport: scenic routes, bogus surcharges, "broken" credit card machines (plus 5% surcharge when they do work), drivers refusing destinations (by law they're not allowed to), and to top it all off they're not even safe, with taxi drivers responsible for a long string of sexual assaults. U…

Same here in India. A lot of people hate Uber but speaking for me personally it's been a godsend upgrade over the black yellow taxis we had here before.

I believe they are the #1 reason why foreigner tourists are scared of coming to India. The amount of scam and harrasment done by these old taxi drivers is just another level. The luxury and straightforwardness of app taxis is unparalleled to what we used to have before.

Re: Uber to pay $272M to Australian taxi operators

#65

Post by _kb »

andyferris wrote: post #5
farhanhubble wrote: post #2

Does someone know the real story? How can a company be fined for disrupting an existing business?

When Uber entered the market, what they were doing was technically illegal (the taxi industry was regulated, Uber wasn't a registered provider, its drivers didn't own a taxi permit (which no longer exist), etc). You can generally sue for illegal behavior that causes you losses.

Lobbying by the taxi industry has also been persistent for the past decade or so [0]. Along with some fairly excellent return political stunts from early days Uber [1].

[0]: https://www.vice.com/en/article/gq9jzm/queenslands-taxi-driv...

[1]: https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/uber-uses-hor...

Re: Uber to pay $272M to Australian taxi operators

#66

Post by aragilar »

protocolture wrote: post #34
EarthMephit wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the end of the day, Uber broke the Australian laws as they stood (even if you didn't agree with them). If I had started an illegal gypsy taxi business I would have been fined or arrested. Why are there different rules for large corporations?

Sure but the responsibility is always to break unjust laws. And in this instance they were able to demonstrate why the laws were unjust and succeeded in getting them changed. There shouldn't be consideration for unjust laws. Its like suing a german car company for not using enough slave labor. "Its the Law" is just a rhetorical was to shut down debate. It should never have been the law, and when it was contested it n…

Given uber developed software to block the regulator from regulating (see https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-19/the-uber-story/109129... and links therein), I'm not sure they can have said to have any moral ground in this.

It's worth noting that the regulator also blocked a majority of Taxi providers from providing a single app (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-12/accc-blocks-launch-of...), I think uber should also be able to be regulated.

Re: Uber to pay $272M to Australian taxi operators

#67

Post by mianos »

resolutebat wrote: post #36

It's worth noting that Australian taxis are generally terrible . They're expensive and notorious for ripoffs, particularly from the airport: scenic routes, bogus surcharges, "broken" credit card machines (plus 5% surcharge when they do work), drivers refusing destinations (by law they're not allowed to), and to top it all off they're not even safe, with taxi drivers responsible for a long string of sexual assaults. U…

You forgot dirty and smelly. Specially compared to any Uber. Living in Sydney, I have had few not so clean Ubers, here and there, but nothing compared to how bad taxis are.

Re: Uber to pay $272M to Australian taxi operators

#68

Post by aragilar »

protocolture wrote: post #50
pjd7 wrote: post #35

Taxi's in NSW/Sydney are much better these days. Uber X are typically shit by comparison. A $95 UberX ride home is about $109 in a taxi for me. Talking to a few friends who also live a similar distant from the CBD/downtown find that Taxi's are the better / more reliable option these days too. The taxi is pretty much always newer, with a professional driver who usually isn't almost falling asleep behind the wheel. The…

I ordered an uber from one side of the Sydney CBD to the other. We got to talking about ubers situation in the CBD. He told me he doesnt normally accept fares in the CBD because he gets pushed around by the police. As he was saying that, a motorcycle cop ordered him to pull over for an inspection. I thanked him and decided to walk the rest of the trip. Anyway, now armed with the reason I couldn't get an uber reliably…

Or, you know, public transport...

Re: Uber to pay $272M to Australian taxi operators

#69

Post by mianos »

pjd7 wrote: post #35

Taxi's in NSW/Sydney are much better these days. Uber X are typically shit by comparison. A $95 UberX ride home is about $109 in a taxi for me. Talking to a few friends who also live a similar distant from the CBD/downtown find that Taxi's are the better / more reliable option these days too. The taxi is pretty much always newer, with a professional driver who usually isn't almost falling asleep behind the wheel. The…

Also living in Sydney, and catching Uber often. I find the complete opposite. The cars are old and beat up and Ubers are always newish. Taxis are always smelly, Ubers much less so.

Maybe my experience is more a result of being closer to the city.

Re: Uber to pay $272M to Australian taxi operators

#70

Post by Nursie »

resolutebat wrote: post #36

It's worth noting that Australian taxis are generally terrible . They're expensive and notorious for ripoffs, particularly from the airport: scenic routes, bogus surcharges, "broken" credit card machines (plus 5% surcharge when they do work), drivers refusing destinations (by law they're not allowed to), and to top it all off they're not even safe, with taxi drivers responsible for a long string of sexual assaults. U…

> It's worth noting that Australian taxis are generally terrible.

Over here in Western Australia they are generally better than Uber. You know what sets the traditional operators apart from Uber in Perth?

They show up

That simple. You book a cab, you get a cab, more or less when you want it. You request an Uber and someone might come. They might not. They might accept the ride and then drive in circles for 15 minutes to try to make you cancel (it's not 100% clear what this does, but it's either just cancellation fee farming or to try to trigger a surge).

Uber's been pretty fucked over here for a while.

Post reply on HN