6 ms·

"hope he doesn't get caught until after he has come out ahead." You've just described Airbnb & Uber's entire business plan.

TeMPOraL 11y ago
I usually describe it as "taking trust that keeps the society together and burning it to generate dollars".
- jessriedel 11y ago
  How does Uber hurt trust?
  - TeMPOraL 11y ago
    Uber's business model is based on throwing VC money at lawyers that can keep local administration at bay and let them freely ignore the law. Meanwhile, they try to paint themselves as a white knight going against the Evil Taxi Mafia. It erodes trust people have in the rule of law. I agree my comment above doesn't fit Uber in such obvious way as it fits AirBnB, but Uber is actually sociopathic in its DNA, starting from top-level management[0]. A lot of things they did and do were based on abuse of trust and civility. [0] - Source: scroll down to the bottom of this page, enter "Uber" in the search bar, and browse through relevant submissions from the last two years; we've covered all the antisocial behaviour of Uber and its management here, on HN.
    - Balgair 11y ago
      Come on, you got to give a better source than that. If you tell us to basically google it, that's not a source, that's an assignment. Nor is telling us that a comment is a source. You have to give us at least an article or link to even pretend you are sourcing something.
      - TeMPOraL 11y ago
        I'm not asking to Google it, I'm asking to type it into the Hacker News search bar, which fetches the results from this site, and sorting them by popularity. Me giving a list would amount to just copy-pasting headings from those results. But ok, random issues from the top of my head: - sabotaging competition, hiring people to do this, facilitating mass cancellation of rides by providing them with burner iPhones and credit cards - blatantly breaking local taxi regulations - employee/contractor issues and related tax issues - Uber management declaring they'll set up a fund to ruin a journalist's life because the latter dared to voice criticism about the company - God's Eye view and privacy issues - encouraging drivers without proper insurance - tricking drivers into (and helping them) getting loans for a new car, and then (after a year or two) adjusting payment rates so that they basically stay locked in Uber All of them discussed at length on HN, most of them covered on the first page of search results.
        Balgair 11y ago
        Then link to them! copypasting the results, though easy to search, is just as easy for you to do too. Save the reader the effort. The web is a god-send because of links and that ease of info transfer. This is not print where I know I have to look it up.
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
    - baddox 11y ago
      > It erodes trust people have in the rule of law. By showing that some laws are bad? What's wrong with that? I don't think people should have trust in the rule of law.
      - TeMPOraL 11y ago
        > By showing that some laws are bad? No. By showing that through breaking them, having enough resources to keep the government at bay. They provide a good service and throw a lot of freebies initially to convince people they're cool, and then when people learn that their local administration is trying to ban/fine Uber, citizens are upset at the officials. Meanwhile taxi drivers ask themselves, why should they follow the law if Uber doesn't have to, and the whole startup ecosystem is looking at Uber as an example of perfect company and trying to replicate their methods. I don't know about you, but I don't want to see breaking the law as the modus operandi of startups in the future. > I don't think people should have trust in the rule of law. In other words, let's just give up on the whole "civilization" thingie, pack our bags and go back to the caves we came from.
        baddox 11y ago
        > No. By showing that through breaking them, having enough resources to keep the government at bay. I don't think that's bad. I think deliberately breaking bad laws is a reasonable and effective means to get rid of bad laws. > Meanwhile taxi drivers ask themselves, why should they follow the law if Uber doesn't have to, and the whole startup ecosystem is looking at Uber as an example of perfect company and trying to replicate their methods. I think taxi drivers should ask themselves that, even before Uber and its kind existed. > I don't know about you, but I don't want to see breaking the law as the modus operandi of startups in the future. I don't have a problem with it if I don't like the laws that are being broken. > In other words, let's just give up on the whole "civilization" thingie, pack our bags and go back to the caves we came from. Following all laws regardless of their merits is hardly the defining characteristics of civilization.
        TeMPOraL 11y ago
    - Thriptic 11y ago
      > Uber's business model is based on throwing VC money at lawyers that can keep local administration at bay and let them freely ignore the law. Meanwhile, they try to paint themselves as a white knight going against the Evil Taxi Mafia. It erodes trust people have in the rule of law. That's fair, but if there was trust in local government and it was doing its job well then there wouldn't be such overwhelming popular support for Uber to begin with. Many licensed taxi services allowed by local governments provide terrible service, and local governments frequently show no interest in improving quality or lowering barriers to entry for new competition as long as they are collecting large amounts of money from medallion sales. This is people voting with their wallets and telling government they don't like the ramifications of existing regulations.
      - TeMPOraL 11y ago
        I agree. Of course the issue isn't binary, it's additive. Uber is just one of the many forces that are now destabilizing the relationship between people and the government (many of them are of government's own doing). But just because the house is already on fire, doesn't mean you should be free to pour gasoline into it. The thing is, Uber isn't even really innovative. In Europe, we had a (arguably slow-going) process of reforming taxi laws going on for years. There were transportation upstarts that tackled taxi regulations through legal channels and in many places, my own country included, they managed to keep themselves on the market. Whatever tension there was between them and taxi companies got resolved in courts, regulations were updated and everyone was better off. But then Uber came and basically said, "fuck regulations, we have money to burn, what you're going to do?".
- breischl 11y ago
  (max comment depth reached, replying to @jessriedel) There are taxi regulations that they're ignoring, such as access to disabled-friendly options. I suspect most of the drivers don't have the correct insurance either, so if you're in a car crash you might be in for a nasty surprise. But it does seem less exploitative than what many AirBnB hosts are doing.
  - brbsix 11y ago
    Even worse, there are reports that Uber is suspending drivers who register their vehicles with commercial licenses. There have also been a number of individual reports of drivers refusing to serve blind passengers or disabled individuals with service dogs. Of course these are most likely just individual instances, and not some widespread practice, but it is disturbing nonetheless.
  - afarrell 11y ago
    http://newsroom.uber.com/nyc/2014/08/wheelchair-accessible-rides-with-uberwav/ http://newsroom.uber.com/nyc/2014/08/wheelchair-accessible-r... """The Uber app is built to expand access to transportation options for all, including people with disabilities, and we are constantly innovating our platform and operations to meet that demand. Today, we are announcing a new platform innovation: the ability to request a wheelchair accessible vehicle in New York City’s outer boroughs."""
    - breischl 11y ago
      Indeed, and that's good progress. But that's only one of their operating areas, and they've been ignoring those regulations for years already. IIRC there are other regulations they're not complying with, but I don't recall what they are off the top of my head.
      - afarrell 11y ago
        It's true and this is a long time coming. I think they are in Philly too, but they need to roll out more, especially with winter coming.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  That's a phenomenal quote.
- ihsw 11y ago
  > trust that keeps the society together The success of Uber and Airbnb rides on that, you are correct, but we have seen that people are generally good about working within that trust. Every single month, millions of people take the risk you are talking about and they're fine. People hop into cars with complete strangers (or homes of complete strangers) where there is a minimal level of security, and they're fine. We are witnessing the capacity at which society is willing take risk with one-another, and I think we are going to increasingly see the limits being tested. Direct financial risk is right around the corner and we will see people lending to each-other on a large scale.
  - TeMPOraL 11y ago
    I didn't mean that kind of trust. You see, AirBnB and Uber are perfect for their customers. They offer quality services cheaper and better than the alternatives. But the true cost of those services is hidden from the customers. In case of AirBnB, it's the issue with subletting we're discussing here, which a) damages neighbourhoods quality of life, and b) antagonizes landlords and people who want to rent. It is to be expected that, as AirBnB grows popular, landlords will be much more suspicious and the contracts they offer will be worse for people seeking a place to live. In case of Uber, they blatantly break the law and have enough money to get away with it. This destroys the trust other taxi drivers have in their local administration ("Why are you letting them get away with it? Why do we have to follow law?") which, as we've seen over the last year, leads them to desperate, stupid-ass protests and gridlocking cities. That antagonizes taxi drivers and general population, the latter then loses trust in the administration which, for some obviously completely unreasonable reason, tries to ban the great Uber.
    - ihsw 11y ago
      Why are you conflating the taxi-driver desperation and the general population's trust in the administration? Many see the taxi-driver cartels for what they are, and act in the interest of the general populace by removing the restrictions. This restores trust in the administration. And whether Airbnb actually damages the quality of life in neighborhoods is not proven, and I highly doubt landlords will get more suspicious. Insurance providers for vehicle owners and homeowners aren't making noise, so the risk is only to incumbents' business models.
NDizzle 11y ago
Don't forget that was also youtube's business plan. edit: Also Napster's business plan. Can't win 'em all!

TeMPOraL 11y ago

I usually describe it as "taking trust that keeps the society together and burning it to generate dollars".

jessriedel 11y ago
How does Uber hurt trust?
- TeMPOraL 11y ago
  Uber's business model is based on throwing VC money at lawyers that can keep local administration at bay and let them freely ignore the law. Meanwhile, they try to paint themselves as a white knight going against the Evil Taxi Mafia. It erodes trust people have in the rule of law. I agree my comment above doesn't fit Uber in such obvious way as it fits AirBnB, but Uber is actually sociopathic in its DNA, starting from top-level management[0]. A lot of things they did and do were based on abuse of trust and civility. [0] - Source: scroll down to the bottom of this page, enter "Uber" in the search bar, and browse through relevant submissions from the last two years; we've covered all the antisocial behaviour of Uber and its management here, on HN.
  - Balgair 11y ago
    Come on, you got to give a better source than that. If you tell us to basically google it, that's not a source, that's an assignment. Nor is telling us that a comment is a source. You have to give us at least an article or link to even pretend you are sourcing something.
    - TeMPOraL 11y ago
      I'm not asking to Google it, I'm asking to type it into the Hacker News search bar, which fetches the results from this site, and sorting them by popularity. Me giving a list would amount to just copy-pasting headings from those results. But ok, random issues from the top of my head: - sabotaging competition, hiring people to do this, facilitating mass cancellation of rides by providing them with burner iPhones and credit cards - blatantly breaking local taxi regulations - employee/contractor issues and related tax issues - Uber management declaring they'll set up a fund to ruin a journalist's life because the latter dared to voice criticism about the company - God's Eye view and privacy issues - encouraging drivers without proper insurance - tricking drivers into (and helping them) getting loans for a new car, and then (after a year or two) adjusting payment rates so that they basically stay locked in Uber All of them discussed at length on HN, most of them covered on the first page of search results.
      - Balgair 11y ago
        Then link to them! copypasting the results, though easy to search, is just as easy for you to do too. Save the reader the effort. The web is a god-send because of links and that ease of info transfer. This is not print where I know I have to look it up.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
  - baddox 11y ago
    > It erodes trust people have in the rule of law. By showing that some laws are bad? What's wrong with that? I don't think people should have trust in the rule of law.
    - TeMPOraL 11y ago
      > By showing that some laws are bad? No. By showing that through breaking them, having enough resources to keep the government at bay. They provide a good service and throw a lot of freebies initially to convince people they're cool, and then when people learn that their local administration is trying to ban/fine Uber, citizens are upset at the officials. Meanwhile taxi drivers ask themselves, why should they follow the law if Uber doesn't have to, and the whole startup ecosystem is looking at Uber as an example of perfect company and trying to replicate their methods. I don't know about you, but I don't want to see breaking the law as the modus operandi of startups in the future. > I don't think people should have trust in the rule of law. In other words, let's just give up on the whole "civilization" thingie, pack our bags and go back to the caves we came from.
      - baddox 11y ago
        > No. By showing that through breaking them, having enough resources to keep the government at bay. I don't think that's bad. I think deliberately breaking bad laws is a reasonable and effective means to get rid of bad laws. > Meanwhile taxi drivers ask themselves, why should they follow the law if Uber doesn't have to, and the whole startup ecosystem is looking at Uber as an example of perfect company and trying to replicate their methods. I think taxi drivers should ask themselves that, even before Uber and its kind existed. > I don't know about you, but I don't want to see breaking the law as the modus operandi of startups in the future. I don't have a problem with it if I don't like the laws that are being broken. > In other words, let's just give up on the whole "civilization" thingie, pack our bags and go back to the caves we came from. Following all laws regardless of their merits is hardly the defining characteristics of civilization.
        TeMPOraL 11y ago
  - Thriptic 11y ago
    > Uber's business model is based on throwing VC money at lawyers that can keep local administration at bay and let them freely ignore the law. Meanwhile, they try to paint themselves as a white knight going against the Evil Taxi Mafia. It erodes trust people have in the rule of law. That's fair, but if there was trust in local government and it was doing its job well then there wouldn't be such overwhelming popular support for Uber to begin with. Many licensed taxi services allowed by local governments provide terrible service, and local governments frequently show no interest in improving quality or lowering barriers to entry for new competition as long as they are collecting large amounts of money from medallion sales. This is people voting with their wallets and telling government they don't like the ramifications of existing regulations.
    - TeMPOraL 11y ago
      I agree. Of course the issue isn't binary, it's additive. Uber is just one of the many forces that are now destabilizing the relationship between people and the government (many of them are of government's own doing). But just because the house is already on fire, doesn't mean you should be free to pour gasoline into it. The thing is, Uber isn't even really innovative. In Europe, we had a (arguably slow-going) process of reforming taxi laws going on for years. There were transportation upstarts that tackled taxi regulations through legal channels and in many places, my own country included, they managed to keep themselves on the market. Whatever tension there was between them and taxi companies got resolved in courts, regulations were updated and everyone was better off. But then Uber came and basically said, "fuck regulations, we have money to burn, what you're going to do?".
breischl 11y ago
(max comment depth reached, replying to @jessriedel) There are taxi regulations that they're ignoring, such as access to disabled-friendly options. I suspect most of the drivers don't have the correct insurance either, so if you're in a car crash you might be in for a nasty surprise. But it does seem less exploitative than what many AirBnB hosts are doing.
- brbsix 11y ago
  Even worse, there are reports that Uber is suspending drivers who register their vehicles with commercial licenses. There have also been a number of individual reports of drivers refusing to serve blind passengers or disabled individuals with service dogs. Of course these are most likely just individual instances, and not some widespread practice, but it is disturbing nonetheless.
- afarrell 11y ago
  http://newsroom.uber.com/nyc/2014/08/wheelchair-accessible-rides-with-uberwav/ http://newsroom.uber.com/nyc/2014/08/wheelchair-accessible-r... """The Uber app is built to expand access to transportation options for all, including people with disabilities, and we are constantly innovating our platform and operations to meet that demand. Today, we are announcing a new platform innovation: the ability to request a wheelchair accessible vehicle in New York City’s outer boroughs."""
  - breischl 11y ago
    Indeed, and that's good progress. But that's only one of their operating areas, and they've been ignoring those regulations for years already. IIRC there are other regulations they're not complying with, but I don't recall what they are off the top of my head.
    - afarrell 11y ago
      It's true and this is a long time coming. I think they are in Philly too, but they need to roll out more, especially with winter coming.
toomuchtodo 11y ago
That's a phenomenal quote.
ihsw 11y ago
> trust that keeps the society together The success of Uber and Airbnb rides on that, you are correct, but we have seen that people are generally good about working within that trust. Every single month, millions of people take the risk you are talking about and they're fine. People hop into cars with complete strangers (or homes of complete strangers) where there is a minimal level of security, and they're fine. We are witnessing the capacity at which society is willing take risk with one-another, and I think we are going to increasingly see the limits being tested. Direct financial risk is right around the corner and we will see people lending to each-other on a large scale.
- TeMPOraL 11y ago
  I didn't mean that kind of trust. You see, AirBnB and Uber are perfect for their customers. They offer quality services cheaper and better than the alternatives. But the true cost of those services is hidden from the customers. In case of AirBnB, it's the issue with subletting we're discussing here, which a) damages neighbourhoods quality of life, and b) antagonizes landlords and people who want to rent. It is to be expected that, as AirBnB grows popular, landlords will be much more suspicious and the contracts they offer will be worse for people seeking a place to live. In case of Uber, they blatantly break the law and have enough money to get away with it. This destroys the trust other taxi drivers have in their local administration ("Why are you letting them get away with it? Why do we have to follow law?") which, as we've seen over the last year, leads them to desperate, stupid-ass protests and gridlocking cities. That antagonizes taxi drivers and general population, the latter then loses trust in the administration which, for some obviously completely unreasonable reason, tries to ban the great Uber.
  - ihsw 11y ago
    Why are you conflating the taxi-driver desperation and the general population's trust in the administration? Many see the taxi-driver cartels for what they are, and act in the interest of the general populace by removing the restrictions. This restores trust in the administration. And whether Airbnb actually damages the quality of life in neighborhoods is not proven, and I highly doubt landlords will get more suspicious. Insurance providers for vehicle owners and homeowners aren't making noise, so the risk is only to incumbents' business models.

NDizzle 11y ago

Don't forget that was also youtube's business plan. edit: Also Napster's business plan. Can't win 'em all!