3 ms·
Regulations imposed to protect incumbents. Evidence on the insurance fees? Evidence on licenses? Evidence on price? Anecdotally in my city they're 300% cheaper
by dylanjermiah 11y ago
Regulations imposed to protect incumbents. Evidence on the insurance fees? Evidence on licenses? Evidence on price? Anecdotally in my city they're 300% cheaper than taxi's.
Evidence on paying drivers 'badly'?
Investing in growth > short term profitability (which they could do of they wanted to miss future markets)
- mgkimsal 11y agohow can something be 300% cheaper? do they pay me to take rides?
- kuschku 11y agoThe court case in Germany has all the evidence you asked for. UberPop was banned (not UberBlack, though) because Uber refused to only hire drivers who had a chauffeurs license; because Uber refused to pay insurance. And anecdotal evidence of the uber pricing is that it’s not a bit more expensive than any other taxi or chauffeur services. Paying drivers 'badly': There were multiple submissions about this topic on HN, use the search.
- Nursie 11y agoRegulations are not always imposed to protect incumbents. This meme is really winding me up lately. Sure, it seems like in the US market there are protections in place for existing firms - tax medallions etc. This does not apply everywhere and some of the regulations around this industry are genuinely for consumer protection. Uber may well have a case for some of the regs to be reviewed, but you can't just blithely dismiss every rule as protectionist.