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

Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 263 posts

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#251

Post by somebodyother »

jrockway wrote: post #48

I don't really like Uber's business practices but they do fill an essential niche in New York City. A couple years ago, the city allowed independent car services to paint their cars green and take street hails. They previously did this, of course, but it wasn't legal. And of course, not every "black car" became a green cab, so this still happens. It's the standard way to get around the outer boroughs of New York. I w…

Also, sometimes you're trying to get somewhere very reasonable in Manhattan, but you can't hail a cab because of your, say, skin color. Uber solved that.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#252

Post by pbreit »

danieltillett wrote: post #141
pbreit wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if they face a new entrant they can easily just lower prices and suffocate them.

This is totally illegal. As I mentioned before this might be their model, but I hope not.

It's only possibly illegal if they clearly price at a loss. But that's extremely unlikely since their marginal costs are zero.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#253

Post by pbreit »

danieltillett wrote: post #136
pbreit wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't cut prices. Since there are 2 or 3 parties they split the fare. Huge liquidity advantage.

I think we are talking past each other here. Any competitor with an equal number of drivers can offer the equivalent to Uber pool in a market. I was referring to a business model where Uber cut prices in a small market when a new competitor enters to kill them before they can get going. This model works really well once you are an established business (the Standard Oil model) hence why it is illegal.

Yes, we probably are. Not much of what you write makes any sense. Cutting prices is obviously not illegal. In extremely rare circumstances if the pricing is clearly below cost, you might have something. But that's even more unlikely in the software or service industries.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#254

Post by soyiuz »

jasonbarone wrote: post #248
soyiuz wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I take cabs daily and my experience does not match yours. Most NYC cabbies are quite friendly. Most are also immigrants with interesting stories. In Harlem, where I live, cabs will actively honk for any potential fare, especially to the airport. You'll have multiple cabs trying to get you if you have a suitcase. From my conversations with drivers, they prefer airport fares.

I don't doubt that they are friendly but honestly that's irrelevant to most people. The problem is, while they may be friendly, nearly all of them will want to pickup and drop off in the same location because they know it's harder to pickup outside of Manhattan. This doesn't happen with Uber's model. Also, I'm paying for a ride somewhere. The top priority for me is not sitting in hot, smelly, filth. I'll stick with U…

1. NYC taxi cabs are actually pretty clean. Most have AC. Most are only a few years old. You can pass on the hail if you don't like the vehicle.

2. Today Uber has clean, nice smelling cars because it is new. Let's talk after Uber matures a bit like the cabs. We'll be back to where we started, only under the influence of an international monopoly. That does not bode well for the consumer.

3. Uber cannot really solve the imbalance of demand between Manhattan and the peripheries. Uber forces drivers to have a certain acceptance rate threshold. NYC forces drivers not do discriminate based on destination. In either case, drivers will try to game the system to avoid the less profitable journeys.

4. Look to places like Russia and India for the future of Uber. Drivers have 4+ cell phones, subscribing to different services in parallel with holding a cab license.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#255

Post by eru »

vasilipupkin wrote: post #216
eru wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory, they should pay lower rent for a bad location. Uber, in driving up their profits, should in the longer term also drive up their rent. The landlord will eat all the advantage eventually.

it won't drive up their rent, because it's a really not a great neighborhood and doesn't show any sign of improving

Neighbourhood with Uber is commercially better than neighbourhood without Uber. Thus, rent should go up.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#256

Post by eru »

danieltillett wrote: post #137
eru wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Winning all the legal battles might not be their best case. They are getting good at fighting legal battles, and a permanent state of lawfare might be to their advantage (because they are better at fighting it than competitors).

If this is their business model it is a very interesting one. Create continual legal battles with the local authorities to scare off new entrants to the market. I wonder if any business has ever used this model successfully before?

In a more general sense, quite a few businesses rely heavily on complicated regulatory environments that virtually ensure than only people who can afford lawyers can compete.

Of course, there's a difference between continual legal battles and just needing a lawyer.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#257

Post by soyiuz »

task_queue wrote: post #202
VexXtreme wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you need to reexamine the meaning of the word "monopolized". Having a single state-sanctioned business (and therefore backed by the threat of violence) is somehow less monopolistic than having a free market where the best service provider is rewarded by becoming the most popular and profitable one?

This is a false equivalence. There isn't one and only one State Taxi Company. There are hundreds if not thousands of successful private taxi companies in each state. There's one Uber and maybe Lyft if you're lucky. In the grey-area taxi market, they might fit the definition of a monopoly. I wouldn't argue that though because I know nothing about that market and reading that sentence back makes me laugh. Microsoft ope…

In strong agreement with task_queue here. The taxi industry is legislated on the city level. Uber is poised to become an international actor, with larger gross revenues than the GDP of many small countries (projected $10bil in 2015).

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#258

Post by cheald »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #238
jrockway wrote: post #48

I don't really like Uber's business practices but they do fill an essential niche in New York City. A couple years ago, the city allowed independent car services to paint their cars green and take street hails. They previously did this, of course, but it wasn't legal. And of course, not every "black car" became a green cab, so this still happens. It's the standard way to get around the outer boroughs of New York. I w…

> The "ridesharing services" rectify this problem; I've never had an Uber driver refuse to take me anywhere. If the licensed taxis want to be free from competition, they need to follow their own rules. This is because all hails on Uber are tracked, and enough refusals would be noticed, and the driver would be fired. It's shitty that green (or yellow) cabs do this; there should be a way to hold them accountable, but f…

It's a lot less hassle, effort, and stress to just use a service that actually wants my business, though.

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#259

Post by vasilipupkin »

eru wrote: post #255
vasilipupkin wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it won't drive up their rent, because it's a really not a great neighborhood and doesn't show any sign of improving

Neighbourhood with Uber is commercially better than neighbourhood without Uber. Thus, rent should go up.

maybe, but it will stay ridiculously low for reasons unrelated to Uber

Re: Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio’s plan to rein them in

#260

Post by marssaxman »

ethanbond wrote: post #55
onewaystreet wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Uber's vicious and cavalier attitude towards law in general is really disgraceful. If a law is wrong and stupid why is it disgraceful for someone to fight to remove it (sometimes that means breaking it)?

Well, for one, Travis et al. will never have the possibility of personal responsibility for anything that Uber does. Don't mistake a scorched-earth profit march for some type of civil disobedience.

It can be both.

One can decry Uber's asshole spirit and questionable business practices while applauding the political change their unpleasant activity is accomplishing.

Post reply on HN