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

Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 81 posts

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#51

Post by stale2002 »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #10
CamperBob2 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you own taxi medallions, I don't really see much cause for celebration. Unnecessary regulation is unnecessary. Edit: due to aggressive rate limiting on HN's part, I'm not able to respond to those who have chosen to reply rather than downvote. What I'd say in such a reply is this: despite all of the advantages of regulated taxi services that people are citing, rideshare services are still winning in the marketp…

Taxi drivers in my European country are subject to some requirements that make a lot of sense and help keep people safe. I've user Uber a lot and it's great but anything to up the quality of drivers is good. I've been down one way streets multiple times in Uber's, I've been in multiple near-misses, I've never had these things happen to me in taxi's. Not all taxi drivers are great either but the even the bad ones are…

If you really believe this, then why not let consumers decide for themselves which transportation services that they want to use?

If all these rules and regulations are so awesome, then consumers will overwhelming choose to buy from companies that follow them.

Thats how markets work.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#52

Post by jerven »

imrehg wrote: post #34
pilsetnieks wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are Uber-like services in Europe that somehow still manage to comply with the law, while bringing the same benefits to the end user. You don't have to ride roughshod over regulations and worker protections to be innovative and thriving.

I'd be curious to know any examples that really bring the same benefits (usability and features mostly, less about the price), I was looking for them, and couldn't find any (e.g. in London at the moment). Otherwise it's just hand waving argument...

I use both Uber and TaxiPhone app in Geneva Switzerland. The taxi phone app is better because it is more honest, no fake cars in the TaxiPhone app driving "in the middle of lake geneva (along the pedestrian ferry routes)" while the Uber app has dubious arrival times and while payment is straightforward nothing about the app is really better.

While the taxiphone app is branded Geneva it also works in other cities. Basically, it is a locally branded app but the infra is in 42 cities/regions and works in the "foreign" ones.

Uber is a bit cheaper during the night, but not always during the day and certainly not during rush hours in the city center.

Address search could be a bit better but otherwise it is as good as the uber one. At least it doesn't have this annoying inbuilt Dev recruitment tool, that stupidity almost ruined the day of a blind developer I know.

When booking a ride ahead of time e.g. to the airport with family the taxiphone website is best. You can arrange child seats etc.. and they will have them and arrive on time.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#53

Post by Veratyr »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #4
Piccollo wrote: post #3

Hurray.

Unless you own taxi medallions, I don't really see much cause for celebration. Unnecessary regulation is unnecessary. Edit: due to aggressive rate limiting on HN's part, I'm not able to respond to those who have chosen to reply rather than downvote. What I'd say in such a reply is this: despite all of the advantages of regulated taxi services that people are citing, rideshare services are still winning in the marketp…

> despite all of the advantages of regulated taxi services that people are citing, rideshare services are still winning in the marketplace. Have you ever thought about possible reasons for that?

It's pretty simple why they win in the marketplace: They're cheaper and easier to use.

There are a number of problems that riders aren't likely to think about though:

- Uber drivers can earn less than minimum wage

- They don't have to pass the same tests and adhere to the same regulations as taxis

- Their vehicles aren't built with the same safety features as taxis (for example the screen protecting the driver or the camera in the back)

It's the role of government to act in the people's best interest and that will often mean acting against the market.

Uber could likely operate without breaking the law by simply calling taxis with their app (and from memory it actually did exactly that in Germany once) but that wouldn't make them nearly as much money.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#54

Post by alkonaut »

imrehg wrote: post #34
pilsetnieks wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are Uber-like services in Europe that somehow still manage to comply with the law, while bringing the same benefits to the end user. You don't have to ride roughshod over regulations and worker protections to be innovative and thriving.

I'd be curious to know any examples that really bring the same benefits (usability and features mostly, less about the price), I was looking for them, and couldn't find any (e.g. in London at the moment). Otherwise it's just hand waving argument...

Stockholm has dozens of taxi companies and strict regulations (special training required etc, safety and insurance regulations, etc).

All the major companies, perhaps the top 10 - have apps with pre-paying and hailing or pre-booking in the app.

I haven't called a taxi by phone or hailed one on the street for years. I can't find when the first company launched their app, but I'm pretty sure I hadn't heard the name Uber when they did (which doesn't mean Uber weren't first - just that I hadn't heard of them because they didn't exist in Sweden then).

There are obviously no taxi medallions or similar, so anyone is free to start a taxi service and the cost for doing so is low. Usually you'd join one of the bigger players to be connected to a booking central and app service but you can just get a license and start driving.

So the bottom line is - in ANY city where there isn't a US-style medallion bureaucracy surrounding taxis I just don't see the point of Uber. Uber is Taxi. If there are 100 taxi companies with apps, then with Uber they are 101.

US cities (and others worldwide) should just buy back all medallions at the last transfer price and then allow free competition.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#55

Post by Veratyr »

stale2002 wrote: post #51
k-mcgrady wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxi drivers in my European country are subject to some requirements that make a lot of sense and help keep people safe. I've user Uber a lot and it's great but anything to up the quality of drivers is good. I've been down one way streets multiple times in Uber's, I've been in multiple near-misses, I've never had these things happen to me in taxi's. Not all taxi drivers are great either but the even the bad ones are…

If you really believe this, then why not let consumers decide for themselves which transportation services that they want to use? If all these rules and regulations are so awesome, then consumers will overwhelming choose to buy from companies that follow them. Thats how markets work.

Because individuals won't make decisions that benefit society as a whole. They'll make decisions that benefit themselves and themselves alone.

People will simply use whatever's cheapest and easiest without much thought into anything else.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#56

Post by alkonaut »

friedman23 wrote: post #13

What is the saying, "Cutting off the nose to spite the face"? As Europe continues to add laws and regulations targeted at American tech companies they will further prevent any innovative businesses from growing and thriving in Europe. Also before you respond, I am really not interested in legalist arguments, especially when the laws themselves were designed by and for entrenched interests. It's been 17 years since th…

Names such as Battlefield, Candy Crush, Angry Birds and Minecraft are known internationally now, right?

There are more studios per capita in the nordics than anywhere else. Obviously the games industry is just one niche but those are examples of somewhat successful companies.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#57

Post by toomuchtodo »

stale2002 wrote: post #50
toomuchtodo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

anti-worker, anti-customer, anti-morals. Let Uber die by a thousand cuts.

Pro-consumer. Consumers overwhelming support ridesharing because of how cheap it is. Also, if a consumer doesn't like these service, they are free to use any number of other transportation services. That is what this fight is about. Letting consumers decide for themselves which services they prefer.

Consumers would support slavery if it was legal, hence labor laws and regulations. Just because you're a tech platform doesn't mean you're a special snowflake.

Consumers may choose from any service that follows regulations set forth by government.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#59

Post by bogomipz »

will_brown wrote: post #42
friedman23 wrote: post #13

What is the saying, "Cutting off the nose to spite the face"? As Europe continues to add laws and regulations targeted at American tech companies they will further prevent any innovative businesses from growing and thriving in Europe. Also before you respond, I am really not interested in legalist arguments, especially when the laws themselves were designed by and for entrenched interests. It's been 17 years since th…

As a member of the tech/HN community it's very easy to take your position about laws benefiting the entrenched market incumbents, but you can't ignore tech has those very same lobbying/legal protections. For example, take the New York market with the limited number of taxi medallions, prior to Uber there was stricter regulation and enforcement against individual drivers illegally operating rides for hire. Though when…

You start by saying "the New York market" which presumably you mean New York City by citing taxi medallions. Then you say

>"when Uber comes along they facilitate these types of illegal ride for hire operations all over the country"

How did you go from Uber operating in NYC resulting in "facilitating illegal ride for hire operations all over the country in your next sentence?" Uber didn't start in NYC. I don't see the connection, can you explain?

Illegal ride for hire in NYC are what are informally known as "Gypsy Cabs"(not a politically correct term but its not mine term.) I have not seen or heard any evidence that the presence of these has increased with the introduction of Uber. Please provide a citation.

I am quite doubtful that given the availability now of Uber/Lyft along with the already existing licensed yellow cabs, green cabs and livery cabs that people are at all inclined to elect to take an unlicensed cab.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#60

Post by alkonaut »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #4
Piccollo wrote: post #3

Hurray.

Unless you own taxi medallions, I don't really see much cause for celebration. Unnecessary regulation is unnecessary. Edit: due to aggressive rate limiting on HN's part, I'm not able to respond to those who have chosen to reply rather than downvote. What I'd say in such a reply is this: despite all of the advantages of regulated taxi services that people are citing, rideshare services are still winning in the marketp…

I think people are conflating two different things: medallion systems (bad) and other regulation (good)

Saying Uber should follow regulations that other taxi companies follow is just common sense imho. That includes minimum pay, insurance regulation, background checks, training requirements, employment security etc.

That some cities regulate the number of taxis via medallions or monopolies is a related but different topic. I find that practice very strange, and that I hope will be gone in most places soon. The irony though is that cities that don't have medallion systems are tougher markets for Uber because there Uber doesn't have the same obvious edge.

Post reply on HN