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

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

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 520 posts

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

#311

Post by ghaff »

Symbiote wrote: post #284
jclos wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The affordability is only one thing that draws people to Uber. The convenience of the app and the fact that the fare is prepaid (and therefore there is no incentive for the driver to fuck around to inflate their fare) are imho at least as important. If the fare is known in advance I can make an informed decision about whether I can afford this ride. Taking a normal taxi is just always a gamble: will they try to win m…

In London, for decades there have been competing services to the black cabs: minicabs. They had to be booked in advance (by phone, but that translates easily to booking by app), and the price had to be agreed in advance. From my understanding, this might be called "limousine service" in the USA, although unless you make a special request it will just be a fairly normal car. Mobile phones and then apps made the border…

"Limo service" in the US tends to mean a more upscale black car service. (Which is how Uber actually got started.) And, outside of markets like Manhattan, it usually requires booking a day or two in advance--although there's some flexibility, especially for regular customers.

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

#312

Post by mmahemoff »

omarhaneef wrote: post #242
itamarst wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would think Uber Autonomous Vehicles group would do everything they can not to hit pedestrians. Yet according to the NTSB, previous to killing a pedestrian in Arizona Uber had a weak safety culture ( https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Documents/2019-HWY18MH010-B... ). Even worse, "Pedestrian outside crosswalk not assigned goal of crossing street", "Tracking history not considered when classification changes", "Pred…

That is a very cynical view, one I do not share, but one that it seems is shared by most people here. But, for the sake of argument, let me grant you that some large subset of the decision makers were callous about these safety concerns. I don't know how they would still not be sensitive to the need to respond to the authority that has only conditionally let it have its license back. I mean, that sort of threat has a…

One reason may be the company culture can't do both things at the same time? There's a world of difference between the kind of people and processes you want in a safety-critical project versus a fast-moving app startup.

Uber has to straddle both sides with great risk of leaning toward the wrong side in any particular scenario.

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

#313

Post by omarhaneef »

mkolodny wrote: post #244
omarhaneef wrote: post #191

Something about this doesn't make sense to me. I take it for granted that the staff at Uber would do anything not to lose the license. I am sure that, for 17 months, they've been investing heavily in security systems, ID verification etc. They must have followed up on every complaint. If I were them, I would have just manually followed everything that the Cabs do till I had a technology in place. It also seems that t…

One possibility is that, as in the US [0], the London taxi industry has a lot of sway in politics. I'd guess that the taxi lobby had a lot to do with this decision. “Any London politician wants the black cabs on their side. They carry a political and electoral clout that is way beyond their numbers. There is nothing secret about that,” says Daniel Moylan, who was deputy chairman of TfL under Mr Johnson. [1] [0] https…

That is certainly possible -- although I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt.

However, if that were the case, why not just say no license? Why give an opportunity to Uber to show an improvement in their numbers? And why do it twice?

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

#314

Post by buboard »

itamarst wrote: post #201
omarhaneef wrote: post #191

Something about this doesn't make sense to me. I take it for granted that the staff at Uber would do anything not to lose the license. I am sure that, for 17 months, they've been investing heavily in security systems, ID verification etc. They must have followed up on every complaint. If I were them, I would have just manually followed everything that the Cabs do till I had a technology in place. It also seems that t…

You would think Uber Autonomous Vehicles group would do everything they can not to hit pedestrians. Yet according to the NTSB, previous to killing a pedestrian in Arizona Uber had a weak safety culture ( https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Documents/2019-HWY18MH010-B... ). Even worse, "Pedestrian outside crosswalk not assigned goal of crossing street", "Tracking history not considered when classification changes", "Pred…

SD vehicles are their pastime, being licenced is their bread and butter (or will be, after the vc well dries up)

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

#315

Post by alkonaut »

You can't hail a regular taxi in London with your phone still? Why? How do you get them? Call? Or do you have to wave your arms?

It's been 10 years since you could first do it in e.g. Stockholm with normal licensed taxis.

Edit what I mean are regular taxis, not "black cabs", "minicabs" etc. I mean the iconic taxis. If you can't hail those, why not?

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

#316

Post by acallaghan »

V-2 wrote: post #302
gorgoiler wrote: post #240

After living for years in London, it’s hard to compare Ubers with black cabs. In the centre of town during the day black cabs are often ubiquitous, immediately available, and skilled at getting you the hell out of dodge. Something for which I’m happy to pay a premium. Anywhere else they can be capricious and scarce. After 11pm this is the case with in fact almost all black cabs anywhere in the city, when a very diffe…

If it's indeed so hard to find a good Uber driver, you'd expect them to be driven out of the market by customers themselves. And if they compensate for that by eg. lower price, then how is it different from any other market. You want premium quality, you pay extra - you're fine with compromising on it, you go for the cheaper option.

The market is skewed as Uber runs huge losses and is operating at a loss, that's how it's different to other markets.

Also, Uber are paying under the minimum wage in the UK, or at least the regional minimum living wage in London. Uber don't pay taxes in the UK like a London minicab company would, then they underpay their drivers and expect our welfare system to pick up the slack on their crummy wages.

Minimum wages should apply to gig type working like Uber/Deliveroo etc as much as it does to everyone else. This is the market failure.

Without a minimum wage, sick pay, materity/paternity leave pay, of course you can make the ride cheaper.

Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uber-verdic...

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

#317

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

dls2016 wrote: post #308
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> underpaid drivers This is and always will be a matter of opinion. Uber is not putting a gun to anyone's head. If it's not profitable for you to drive, you don't have to.

> Uber is not putting a gun to anyone's head. But their platform has a near-monopoly in many markets, which they use to set prices while simultaneously classifying drivers as independent contractors.

>while simultaneously classifying drivers as independent contractors.

They are independent contractors. There's no time you have to be at work. There's no amount of time you have to work a given day of the week, or during the whole week. If they were forced to turn them into employees, that would all go away.

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

#318

Post by VBprogrammer »

72deluxe wrote: post #293
BurningFrog wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Takeaway: Maybe London should spend some effort becoming more naviagatable, instead of demanding professional drivers acquire a PhD level education (the Knowledge) to find their way.

No offence, and I can see that you've been downvoted but how do you actually propose solving this "unnavigable" problem? By bulldozing existing property that is owned by multitudes of private landowners and building new roads or something else?? Honestly, what's your solution?

I doubt there is a good solution to the problem in general but having ridden a motorcycle aimlessly around central London on my own little sight-seeing trips I can certainly get on board with the idea that London has been designed to be minimally navigable without knowing exactly where you are going (or having a GPS which does the same). This is at least partially due to one way streets, turning restrictions, traffic restrictions (bus / cycle only routes), no entries etc.

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

#319

Post by mikojan »

thathndude wrote: post #200
harel wrote: post #198

I'm not a fan of companies like Uber or AirBnB who attempt a violent takeover of a market. However, as a consumer who needs to get from A to B, or stay at some random city, I find those services invaluable. The black cabs in London are expensive, never around when you need them, and until recently might have refused card payments (now they just seem unhappy about it). At the very least I was hoping Uber would make th…

Yep. I'm always amazed at how quickly people crap on Uber. In hindsight it's not a particularly revolutionary service. But does everyone remember how much the Taxi system sucked?

That's a questionable dichotomy considering there's ample research showing Uber is cannibalizing public transit and regulations on Taxis have historically been put in place for a variety of reasons that one should at least consider.

Nobody denies that people like Uber for reasons but what does it even mean for a Taxi system to suck when compared to a super exploitative, unregulated enterprise such as this? As a driver, this is not only about compensation. It's about a critical lack of security in all aspects of your life. And if, as a passenger, you can't really afford decent service and working conditions maybe you are trying to live beyond your means and you should really be boarding a train or bus instead. And if you can't, that, to me, seems like a political problem that shouldn't be solved on the backs of some of the most vulnerable sectors of society.

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

#320

Post by acallaghan »

BurningFrog wrote: post #267
gorgoiler wrote: post #240

After living for years in London, it’s hard to compare Ubers with black cabs. In the centre of town during the day black cabs are often ubiquitous, immediately available, and skilled at getting you the hell out of dodge. Something for which I’m happy to pay a premium. Anywhere else they can be capricious and scarce. After 11pm this is the case with in fact almost all black cabs anywhere in the city, when a very diffe…

Takeaway: Maybe London should spend some effort becoming more naviagatable, instead of demanding professional drivers acquire a PhD level education (the Knowledge) to find their way.

Okay mate, let's put nice straight roads and wide junctions through middle of London just to make it easier for cars?

Cars are an extremely modern invention for London - the city is almost 2000 years old, and has some really fancy, really old, really precious stuff in the way.

Post reply on HN