3 ms·

Can you be more specific here? At a glance it looks like they're upturning a very corrupt, half functioning system with one that works. (anecdotally, I'd have t

Can you be more specific here? At a glance it looks like they're upturning a very corrupt, half functioning system with one that works. (anecdotally, I'd have taxis I've called never show up and for me taxi prices are 2x Uber. Furthermore, we all know Taxis are a government enforced monopoly in many places.)

TeMPOraL 11y ago
All the things I'm talking about can be found by scrolling down this page and typing "Uber" in the search bar, filtering for stories from past few years. We've been discussing all the shenanigans Uber has been pulling over the years here, on HN. There was a lot of things, including: - sabotaging competition, at some point even hiring people to do it and providing them with burner iPhones and credit cards - threatening journalists - privacy issues - tax evasion and the whole contractor vs. employee thing - (purposefully) basing their business on drivers without proper insurance - abusive rating system (though here I'm not sure if this isn't simply a good idea with very hard to solve side effects) There was also a long article posted here few months ago that detailed the way Uber squeezes the money out of the drivers (already locked-in by car loans they were encouraged to take) once they establish their market domination. And note, I am not denying that the current system is corrupt and barely functioning. I'm happy that it's getting upturned. But we've been doing it in Europe for some years now, and it didn't require anyone to behave like this.
- HappyTypist 11y ago
  > - sabotaging competition, at some point even hiring people to do it and providing them with burner iPhones and credit cards They were trying to sign drivers on competitor services up to Uber. They weren't sabotaging anything and were taking legitimate rides, just promoting Uber while taking them.
  - TeMPOraL 11y ago
    Signing drivers wasn't the problem - ordering and cancelling rides en masse was. That's why people doing this were provided with burner phones and credit cards.
d215 11y ago
In Amsterdam - third most expensive place in the world to take a cab - a government enforced monopoly was broken down at the end of the 90s. The result was that prices actually went up and service went down. Also, special staff has been appointed to allocate taxis at taxi stands, otherwise taxi drivers end up fighting over clients. So, this situation is indeed quite suitable for Uber to take over, but it is not because of a government enforced monopoly. I guess most people in Amsterdam are nostalgic about government regulated taxi business.

TeMPOraL 11y ago

All the things I'm talking about can be found by scrolling down this page and typing "Uber" in the search bar, filtering for stories from past few years. We've been discussing all the shenanigans Uber has been pulling over the years here, on HN. There was a lot of things, including: - sabotaging competition, at some point even hiring people to do it and providing them with burner iPhones and credit cards - threatening journalists - privacy issues - tax evasion and the whole contractor vs. employee thing - (purposefully) basing their business on drivers without proper insurance - abusive rating system (though here I'm not sure if this isn't simply a good idea with very hard to solve side effects) There was also a long article posted here few months ago that detailed the way Uber squeezes the money out of the drivers (already locked-in by car loans they were encouraged to take) once they establish their market domination. And note, I am not denying that the current system is corrupt and barely functioning. I'm happy that it's getting upturned. But we've been doing it in Europe for some years now, and it didn't require anyone to behave like this.

HappyTypist 11y ago
> - sabotaging competition, at some point even hiring people to do it and providing them with burner iPhones and credit cards They were trying to sign drivers on competitor services up to Uber. They weren't sabotaging anything and were taking legitimate rides, just promoting Uber while taking them.
- TeMPOraL 11y ago
  Signing drivers wasn't the problem - ordering and cancelling rides en masse was. That's why people doing this were provided with burner phones and credit cards.

d215 11y ago

In Amsterdam - third most expensive place in the world to take a cab - a government enforced monopoly was broken down at the end of the 90s. The result was that prices actually went up and service went down. Also, special staff has been appointed to allocate taxis at taxi stands, otherwise taxi drivers end up fighting over clients. So, this situation is indeed quite suitable for Uber to take over, but it is not because of a government enforced monopoly. I guess most people in Amsterdam are nostalgic about government regulated taxi business.