Live data from Hacker News

Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

usatoday.com

261–270 of 270 posts

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#261

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.

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.

They subsidize their drivers to keep their prices artificially low. It helps them out-compete the folks who have to turn a profit.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Yeah, and I bet after Borders shuts down, you'll see Amazon raise book prices sky-high! There's some truth to that: whenever I bother to check I find that Amazon is no longer price-competitive with brick-and-mortar. > If Uber tripled prices, a competitor would start up to cut into their market share. ...unless there's no actual profit at anything less than 3x the current prices. Isn't Uber running on a VC subsidy r…

To be fair, Uber has already been profitable in some markets.

3x the current prices would put us at roughly what taking the cab looked at before Uber cost-wise.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxi service and rental cars are a poor substitute for public transit. I love that I live in one of the few cities with a train that leaves directly from the airport.

Manchester, UK? Helsinki, Finland? Tokyo, Japan? (I now wonder how many others I don't know about from personal experience!)

Atlanta

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TL;DR: In an economy with government involvement as heavy as ours[1], it's ludicrous to claim that people should not only know the "true" value of something but know precisely when the gov't is going to decide that the market value should be allowed to revert to its "true" value. > Taxi drivers did not get screwed. It's medallion owners that got screwed Right, good catch, I wasn't thinking about that fact. That's not…

I'll never understand the lack of empathy required to see someone get screwed by unstable rules and conclude "well, it's your own damn fault The lack of empathy stems from the behaviour of medallion owners. They're right up there with patent trolls in their unlikeability. They purchase access to a government-granted virtual monopoly and use it to extract rent from hard-working people. They form industry associations…

I guess my code of ethics is independent of whether I "like" someone? It seems a little immature to be unable to acknowledge that someone was done wrong just because you don't like them for some reason. It's even more bizarre to assume that every investor in a taxi medallion must share the same perspective on the ethics of the industry as you do[1]. A lot of people just don't understand the details of the economic system they participate in, and deciding that that condemns them to being undeserving of sympathy is frankly more than a little disgusting. I thought my example of the role homeowners play in our economy would make this a lot clearer: I assume you wouldn't be so quick to "struggle to see what there is to like about" homeowners and decide that they deserve whatever economic injustice is wrought on them.

I can guarantee you there are plenty of things you do, from not worrying too much about the sweatshops you ultimately buy from to being complicit in the torture of millions of animals that many other people would consider unethical. Arguing that people don't deserve empathy if they aren't fully aware and fully conforming to your code of ethics isn't enlightened, it's just the same old gross "I want to be shitty to people I disagree with" under a thin veneer.

[1] FWIW, I agree with your assessment of how the industry works.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TL;DR: In an economy with government involvement as heavy as ours[1], it's ludicrous to claim that people should not only know the "true" value of something but know precisely when the gov't is going to decide that the market value should be allowed to revert to its "true" value. > Taxi drivers did not get screwed. It's medallion owners that got screwed Right, good catch, I wasn't thinking about that fact. That's not…

What is the "true" value of a taxi medallion, in a regulatory context where the government is setting the supply? You can compute the present value of the total profit you can expect to earn (average fares less expenses including the medallion) and if it's less than what the medallion costs, the medallion is overpriced.

> You can compute the present value of the total profit you can expect to earn

This isn't what we're talking about here. That's the equilibrium market price of the medallion, but the person I was responding to was saying that the overinflation due to supply restriction through gov't policy (i.e. medallions) was what was causing market value to diverge from "true" value. The fact that his goal is basically unreachable is sort of my point: his definition of "true" involves an ideal world in which taxis are optimally regulated.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#266
post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you also feel bad for the slumlord who spends a million dollars on a property that eventually gets condemned because he didn't take care of it? This is the wrong analogy, for trivially obvious reasons. As I'm sure you're aware, the drop in value of taxi medallions wasn't contingent on the owner being a bad driver. Put plainly, even a driver who went above and beyond to provide honest, high-quality service was af…

Really? It's that bad? OK - prior to Uber breaking onto the scene, which cab company in Chicago: 1. Provided universally clean cabs. 2. Provided an app that allowed me to easily acquire a cab without having to jump through hoops, as well as gave me real-time info on where the cab was at. 3. Provided an easy method for me to provide feedback on my driver so that they could weed out troublesome drivers. 4. allowed me t…

Dude, what are you talking about? I don't disagree with any of your bullet points.

I like Uber, I'm a heavy user, and I'm glad they exist. None of that changes the fact that the gov't had bad policy for twenty years and then screwed over the people who decided to operate within the policy regime. I've provided ample examples above: you can't decide that every taxi operator and medallion-holder deserves getting screwed by dishonest gov't without deciding that the same is true of every doctor and homeowner in the country. Hell, you'd be hard-pressed to find an industry _is_ run fully optimally, so you're basically throwing the entire concept of a stable regulatory environment out the window, which is just ludicrous.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#267
post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So yet again, America tries its own specific brand of something, yet again with minimal meaningful regulation, watch it turn to shit when the "market" acts on profit goals alone, and then claim it's a terrible idea that can never work. This brings us to: health care, banking, mobile phone networks, electoral systems, and now taxis. Meanwhile the civilised world has regulated taxi systems that work, where you know wha…

> Are you delusional? you are delusional. i want a ride. when i want a ride, i want a ride. what i dont want is to sit in a queue. uber provides that service by pricing people who are less well off out of taking a ride that they can give to me, while making more money off of me that they would make off of a queue. they prioritize the customer that spends more money with them, over the one who would spend less money w…

Not sure why they don't offer an express option. There's alot of people that will say fuck it and shut the app down and figure out an alternative or get pissed and never rely on uber again. offering a low priced queue would keep them.

they could offer a VIP button that's 10x as much for the same service too for people like you that like to flaunt your wealth.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you hyperlink one?

https://www.law360.com/articles/807776/uber-insurer-reach-se...

The paywalled article doesn't carry any information about the circumstances of the settlement.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

In this example, you are asking for the cab companies to calculate an average fare which will allow them to operate at a loss during the night. The cab company is taking the risk that their assumptions about how much to charge during the day will offset their losses at night. However, for this scenario, why does a cab company need to take on this risk? Why is the risk of not having a cab at a cheap price not borne by…

The municipal government mandates that the company who wins the bid for the airport franchise, is committed to always having a cab at the airport. The public good is served above the expediencies of corporate profit.

Re: Chicago taxi industry sliding towards collapse

#270

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.

I can't see why they're can't be a uber human driver option or you can simply ask from a cart boy to help with groceries.

Heck, with amazon groceries and other similar services, why do they even need to go to the store?

Post reply on HN