Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#171

Post by yaa_minu » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 2:13 PM UTC

MrAlex94 wrote: post #139

yaa_minu wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that you're being downvoted shows how much of a socialist hell-hole HN has become. No one is forcing people to drive for uber and no one is forcing the rider to use uber. In my city, Accra, Taxis were so expensive until uber came to the market and forced down the price. The only system that puts the consumer (read: common man) first is the free market (if and only if politicians would allow it to work).

I disagree. The UK could be viewed as more "socialist" than Ghana, but it is consistently ranked as more economically free: https://www.heritage.org/index/visualize?cnts=unitedkingdom|... Also, with the tactics Uber has historically used - in a "proper" free market, would they not become a monopoly? And then they could charge what they please, ending up in the same position that previous taxi companies have been in.

> I disagree. The UK could be viewed as more "socialist" than Ghana...

Yes, Ghana has been through a lot of dictatorship rule until recently when we saw the light of reducing government involvement in people's lives. But why does that matter here?

>Also, with the tactics Uber has historically used - in a "proper" free market, would they not become a monopoly?

How so? it's very easy to start a ride-hailing service. In fact, I've lost count of how many of them we have here in Accra. Uber itself has been forced to reduce its charges by other competitors like Yango[1], Bolt(Taxify) and even ironically the traditional taxi providers.

These days, I don't even bother to order uber or Yango or Taxify because the taxis are responding to the competition.

[1] https://yango.yandex.com/en_gh/

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#172

Post by NikolaNovak » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

pluma wrote: post #158

aedron wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel the same way. I can hardly decide whether I dislike Uber or the taxi industry more.

Well, Uber is more exploitative for the drivers and less safe for the riders, so the choice seems clear. On the other hand Uber has a flashy logo and an app and is sometimes cheaper.

It may be specific to markets.

In Canada's national capital region (Ottawa/Gatineau), where I travel to frequently, I've used Uber extensively even though it's more expensive and less convenient (taxi is right in front of hotel, Uber I have to call and wait for), simply because all cars were in good shape and all drivers were polite and reasonable.

For some reason in that region, majority of taxi drivers:

a) Have cars that are falling apart. Not just significant rust on the car, but frequently wonky suspension, brakes, bearings, etc.

b) They strongly believe they are rally drivers, and traffic lights, pedestrians, let alone bicycles, are their mortal enemies.

Further, all Uber drivers were happy to be Uber drivers, and 70%+ of Taxi drivers were profoundly, existentially unhappy to be Taxi drivers, and would spend entirety of their ride letting me know why.

----

Now, in principle, just from theory and articles, I'd agree that Uber feels it is / should be more exploitative of drivers and less safe for riders. I personally just haven't found it that way in practice... :-/

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#173

Post by stuaxo » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

dominotw wrote: post #160

>At least 14,000 trips involved drivers who weren’t who the riders thought they were, any idea what the source of this info is? And not sure what the timeframe here is. Is it 14000 since Uber started operating in london?

Not sure, but as a passenger in London it's happened to a few times

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#174

Post by oefrha » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

ourlordcaffeine wrote: post #169

pen2l wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I share your feelings exactly. When I was in London, the ease of ordering a ride with your smartphone was a reliable comfort in a foreign land. Maybe if I hadn't undergone shitty experiences in Paris et al. being swindled by the train operations, I wouldn't be taking Uber's side, but it just is that Uber has just worked for me so many times when other options failed.

Same here. Most of the taxi drivers in the city where I live only take cash, and every time I have ridden with one, they have cheated and taken a detour. Uber, automatic payment by card and no cheating on the route.

Wow, care to share where you live? I’ve hardly ever heard stories of taxi drivers cheating locals (needless to say tourists are cheated all the time).

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#175

Post by emiliobumachar » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

gorgoiler wrote: post #32

Deliveroo should suffer a reckoning too, if there’s any sense in the world. Have you ever seen a bunch of Deliveroo riders clogging up the public space outside a restaurant or other public space? Why should one business get to exploit pavements for profit, without regulation. Private companies shouldn’t be able to co-opt public space without scrutiny or permission. Or maybe I’m too ethical and not being enough of a h…

I've never seen them, they don't operate in my area. That said, your complaint was unclear.

Did they go beyond simple parking into more egregious use of public space, like parking on the sidewalk or blocking traffic?

Or is it about public parking? Would it be okay if they were customers instead of delivery workers? How much of a difference does it make that a corporation is involved?

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#176

Post by AllanHoustonSt » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 2:16 PM UTC

kingkawn wrote: post #145

AllanHoustonSt wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also good luck getting reasonable (or any) cab service outside of Manhattan and NW Brooklyn. It was even worse pre rideshare days. Those are the areas that would need something like rideshare more since they're both less dense with less expansive public transit. I don't know if private transport is ultimately unsustainable. That's something people much smarter than me will have to figure out how to measure. But I do…

There were black car services that covered the entire city. The further out you got the cheaper most of this services would become.

I still think having a network of drivers all around you and being able to track the status of your ride both pre-arrival and during the ride itself makes rideshare a better product. Depending where you are those dispatched drivers can take a while to get to you.

Of course you can just have a bunch of black car services in your phonebook that are dispersed around the city but.. at that point why not just use rideshare?

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#177

Post by madeofpalk » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 2:16 PM UTC

readhn wrote: post #144

On one hand i am glad that a transnational company is getting stopped like that, especially when breaking the rules. they are basically a giant money hoover that comes in and sucks the money offshore with offshore interests as #1 priority. on the other hand, often it often takes an outsider to disrupt a well established and corrupt market in order to move it forward.

You’re able to like Uber as a service, but also be upset that they’re failing to meet the regulations that have been put in place to protect everyone.

What it sounds like is that people were able to buy/use/borrow “verified” Uber Driver accounts, and upload their own photo into the app to allow them to drive for Uber without the correct background and license checks. I think it’s fair for a regular to give Uber a slap on the wrist for allowing this to happen, whether in purpose or not.

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#178

Post by UK-Al05 » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 2:16 PM UTC

gjulianm wrote: post #143

UK-Al05 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Full employment is includes the fact people are going to be out of work for other reasons like in the process of switching jobs. Also you have to remember that people work for best option they have right now. If uber wasn't their best option they simply move to a better job. If you ban uber you simply remove the current best option for most people working for uber.

Above you said "they're doing it because they like working for Uber". Now you say it's just the best option they have. That's quite different > If uber wasn't their best option they simply move to a better job. Simply? You know there are costs and risks associated with changing jobs, right? > If you ban uber you simply remove the current best option for most people working for uber This is blackmail and using workers…

People who want Uber banned are often middle-class people following their left-wing ideology pretending to be on side of the working class worker. That or black cab drivers.

If you actually listen to vast majority workers working Uber they're ok with it. They enjoy the flexibility and the lack of obligations. If people want more fixed work they can get it at the moment.

Essentially you are taking the choice away from these people to work for uber, based on your own version of your morals and not theirs.

Your imposing your own morals on people who don't want your morals. That can be dangerous.

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#179

Post by stuaxo » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 2:17 PM UTC

readhn wrote: post #144

On one hand i am glad that a transnational company is getting stopped like that, especially when breaking the rules. they are basically a giant money hoover that comes in and sucks the money offshore with offshore interests as #1 priority. on the other hand, often it often takes an outsider to disrupt a well established and corrupt market in order to move it forward.

It's almost completely killed the minicab business.

It looks like their offices are still there but when you go in there is an empty room with a phone.

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#180

Post by yaa_minu » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 2:17 PM UTC

lidHanteyk wrote: post #128

yaa_minu wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that you're being downvoted shows how much of a socialist hell-hole HN has become. No one is forcing people to drive for uber and no one is forcing the rider to use uber. In my city, Accra, Taxis were so expensive until uber came to the market and forced down the price. The only system that puts the consumer (read: common man) first is the free market (if and only if politicians would allow it to work).

[flagged]

No, let's look at it from a more philosophically objective point of view.

Why do you think that the millions of Londoners who voluntarily chose Uber over traditional taxi services should be denied the freedom to choose what taxi services to use?