6 ms·

Every time I see an article about Uber or taxi drivers I feel thankful that I live in a place where apps like Hailo exist. Every time I read the comments on the

Every time I see an article about Uber or taxi drivers I feel thankful that I live in a place where apps like Hailo exist. Every time I read the comments on these types of articles I see people pointing out what the people want/need and how taxi companies could make it work while thinking to myself "Hailo already does this". It was created by ex-taxi drivers too and every taxi driver I talk to speaks very highly of them and how they manage to satisfy both drivers and passengers. Hopefully they can manage to expand further

christophilus 11y ago
Hailo looks pretty good. I'd never heard of it before. However, VTC Cab operates "as a nonprofit association with a membership fee" which is pretty sweet. I'd like to see more platforms operate that way-- either as a non-profit, or as a co-op-- in order to avoid the exploitive nature of platforms like this.
- netcan 11y ago
  I don't quite get why it matters if it's for profit or not. If its about the uber-driver split then we're talking about lowering the 20% fee, not a huge deal in the scheme of things. Presumably the fee will not be that far from that 20% cut. The more substantial part of the grievances that taxi and limo drivers usually have with uber is about prices and the number of participants in the market. That is a negative sum game. Drivers' gains come at the expense of consumers and (often) other drivers.
  - cheez 11y ago
    What ends up happening with for profit and relatively low entry (or well-defined entry) markets is that it's a race to the bottom in prices. Someone is going to have to pay more or be paid less. Investors won't want to be paid less and consumers don't want to pay more. So it's the people providing the service who bear the brunt of the force of competition. They get paid shit and/or get treated like shit. From this perspective, a co-op for taxis sounds like a splendid idea for everyone except investors.
    - netcan 11y ago
      I'm think you've got a leap there. I agree that when the barriers to entry go down (as uber does to the taxi market) prices go down. Obviously the drivers don't like this. But, as you said it's not just investors in the mix. It's the consumers that this plays against.. But, for this dynamic to be more favorable for drivers you need to price fix and/or get drivers out. Either way, it's not the best for consumers. It also seems unlikely to succeed unless they can prevent new drivers from undercutting them on Uber. This is effectively a cartel of some sort, regulating prices and producers. I'm not against co-ops. In some cases they make sense and maybe this is such a case, but they are not a neutral party. They have their interests and those are not necessarily everyone's best interests. They also will use regulation and/or market power to benefit themselves at others expense, if possible.
      - sharemywin 11y ago
        you act like co-ops work different than any other organization. Uber has used political power to get politicians to back down which is basically the same as getting politicians to pass regulations.
      - pre 11y ago
        A co-op isn't supposed to be a neutral party, it's supposed to represent the workers (and possibly, the customers, depending what type of co-op). The reason I would support a co-op version of Uber over the actual Uber is exactly because that would be an organisation run democratically by it's drivers. I'd prefer one where customers got a vote too over that as it goes. But this is why it makes a difference whether it's a corporation, a non-profit, a worker's co-op or a workers-and-customers co-op: Who gets control? Who gets the profit? Non profit's are marginally better than corporations because at least the few in control can't obviously easily use their power to directly claim it's resources for themselves. Worker's Co-ops are marginally better than non-profits, because they give democratic powers over the decisions of the organisation to all of the workers, not just the bosses. Customer Co-ops are marginally better than Worker's Co-ops because the customers also get a vote in that democratic enterprise. And of course, often, visionary leadership from a single benign dictator that can ignore his customers, his workers, his shareholders and just DO THE RIGHT THING is powerful like dynamite. Dynamite can be used for good or evil, obviously. As you said, some things need managing in different ways. Also: I've never actually used Uber or any of these other apps. I tend to get the bus frankly. The bus timetable apps are great ;)
  - hackuser 11y ago
    > we're talking about lowering the 20% fee, not a huge deal in the scheme of things. A 20% of your revenue is a huge deal for any business, and a bigger deal for people in the working class. > Presumably the fee will not be that far from that 20% cut. I don't see a reason to presume this. The development and operating costs of the app shouldn't be that high. > Drivers' gains come at the expense of consumers and (often) other drivers. And at Uber's expense.
untog 11y ago
Unfortunately Hailo already tried to expand further - they were in New York until a few months ago, but were barely a blip on the radar compared to Uber and (to a lesser extent) Lyft.
- the9to5 11y ago
  Assuming you meant NYC, the problem for Hailo/Mytaxi/etc is that yellow cabs are only allowed to pickup street hails and can not be dispatched to you directly. So unless such regulations are loosened, these apps just won't work.
  - untog 11y ago
    There was/is an active pilot for "e-hailing", which Hailo participated in. I tried it - hailed a cab with the app and it drove up to meet me. However, people kept trying to get into it while I made my way over to it - people just aren't used to yellow cabs behaving that way.
manuelflara 11y ago
I'm not sure if Hailo works like MyTaxi, which is quite popular in Barcelona (specially since Uber got banned). Personally, I don't like it. It's just an app that replaces calling a taxi company. So yeah, better than calling, I agree, but it's not as good a service as Uber. Why? Because you're dealing with taxis. In Barcelona, you either live in a part of town where there are taxis driving by your street all the time anyway, so why use it? Or, like me, live somewhere where taxis don't really go as much. So when I use MyTaxi, they're always quite far, and very often cancel the ride when I've already been waiting for a few minutes, probably someone hailed them on the street. So overall, not the awesome experience that Uber always has been for me.
- SlashmanX 11y ago
  Hailo is actually available in Barcelona (as well as Madrid), and it deos basically work as you describe. However, your issues sound very similar to how it was in Dublin but they started expanding further and now they cover the entire county and they're pretty damn good. There's even competitors over here (Lynk is one I think), which is usually a great sign.
  - viscanti 11y ago
    If anything, I think the Hailo case shows that these drivers will have a tough go of things. Hailo managed to get significant funding, had their own in-house engineering team and still had to pull out of all of North America. It's a difficult market to compete in (unless taxi manages to leverage their monopoly status to keep new apps like Uber out).

christophilus 11y ago

Hailo looks pretty good. I'd never heard of it before. However, VTC Cab operates "as a nonprofit association with a membership fee" which is pretty sweet. I'd like to see more platforms operate that way-- either as a non-profit, or as a co-op-- in order to avoid the exploitive nature of platforms like this.

netcan 11y ago
I don't quite get why it matters if it's for profit or not. If its about the uber-driver split then we're talking about lowering the 20% fee, not a huge deal in the scheme of things. Presumably the fee will not be that far from that 20% cut. The more substantial part of the grievances that taxi and limo drivers usually have with uber is about prices and the number of participants in the market. That is a negative sum game. Drivers' gains come at the expense of consumers and (often) other drivers.
- cheez 11y ago
  What ends up happening with for profit and relatively low entry (or well-defined entry) markets is that it's a race to the bottom in prices. Someone is going to have to pay more or be paid less. Investors won't want to be paid less and consumers don't want to pay more. So it's the people providing the service who bear the brunt of the force of competition. They get paid shit and/or get treated like shit. From this perspective, a co-op for taxis sounds like a splendid idea for everyone except investors.
  - netcan 11y ago
    I'm think you've got a leap there. I agree that when the barriers to entry go down (as uber does to the taxi market) prices go down. Obviously the drivers don't like this. But, as you said it's not just investors in the mix. It's the consumers that this plays against.. But, for this dynamic to be more favorable for drivers you need to price fix and/or get drivers out. Either way, it's not the best for consumers. It also seems unlikely to succeed unless they can prevent new drivers from undercutting them on Uber. This is effectively a cartel of some sort, regulating prices and producers. I'm not against co-ops. In some cases they make sense and maybe this is such a case, but they are not a neutral party. They have their interests and those are not necessarily everyone's best interests. They also will use regulation and/or market power to benefit themselves at others expense, if possible.
    - sharemywin 11y ago
      you act like co-ops work different than any other organization. Uber has used political power to get politicians to back down which is basically the same as getting politicians to pass regulations.
    - pre 11y ago
      A co-op isn't supposed to be a neutral party, it's supposed to represent the workers (and possibly, the customers, depending what type of co-op). The reason I would support a co-op version of Uber over the actual Uber is exactly because that would be an organisation run democratically by it's drivers. I'd prefer one where customers got a vote too over that as it goes. But this is why it makes a difference whether it's a corporation, a non-profit, a worker's co-op or a workers-and-customers co-op: Who gets control? Who gets the profit? Non profit's are marginally better than corporations because at least the few in control can't obviously easily use their power to directly claim it's resources for themselves. Worker's Co-ops are marginally better than non-profits, because they give democratic powers over the decisions of the organisation to all of the workers, not just the bosses. Customer Co-ops are marginally better than Worker's Co-ops because the customers also get a vote in that democratic enterprise. And of course, often, visionary leadership from a single benign dictator that can ignore his customers, his workers, his shareholders and just DO THE RIGHT THING is powerful like dynamite. Dynamite can be used for good or evil, obviously. As you said, some things need managing in different ways. Also: I've never actually used Uber or any of these other apps. I tend to get the bus frankly. The bus timetable apps are great ;)
- hackuser 11y ago
  > we're talking about lowering the 20% fee, not a huge deal in the scheme of things. A 20% of your revenue is a huge deal for any business, and a bigger deal for people in the working class. > Presumably the fee will not be that far from that 20% cut. I don't see a reason to presume this. The development and operating costs of the app shouldn't be that high. > Drivers' gains come at the expense of consumers and (often) other drivers. And at Uber's expense.

untog 11y ago

Unfortunately Hailo already tried to expand further - they were in New York until a few months ago, but were barely a blip on the radar compared to Uber and (to a lesser extent) Lyft.

the9to5 11y ago
Assuming you meant NYC, the problem for Hailo/Mytaxi/etc is that yellow cabs are only allowed to pickup street hails and can not be dispatched to you directly. So unless such regulations are loosened, these apps just won't work.
- untog 11y ago
  There was/is an active pilot for "e-hailing", which Hailo participated in. I tried it - hailed a cab with the app and it drove up to meet me. However, people kept trying to get into it while I made my way over to it - people just aren't used to yellow cabs behaving that way.

manuelflara 11y ago

I'm not sure if Hailo works like MyTaxi, which is quite popular in Barcelona (specially since Uber got banned). Personally, I don't like it. It's just an app that replaces calling a taxi company. So yeah, better than calling, I agree, but it's not as good a service as Uber. Why? Because you're dealing with taxis. In Barcelona, you either live in a part of town where there are taxis driving by your street all the time anyway, so why use it? Or, like me, live somewhere where taxis don't really go as much. So when I use MyTaxi, they're always quite far, and very often cancel the ride when I've already been waiting for a few minutes, probably someone hailed them on the street. So overall, not the awesome experience that Uber always has been for me.

SlashmanX 11y ago
Hailo is actually available in Barcelona (as well as Madrid), and it deos basically work as you describe. However, your issues sound very similar to how it was in Dublin but they started expanding further and now they cover the entire county and they're pretty damn good. There's even competitors over here (Lynk is one I think), which is usually a great sign.
- viscanti 11y ago
  If anything, I think the Hailo case shows that these drivers will have a tough go of things. Hailo managed to get significant funding, had their own in-house engineering team and still had to pull out of all of North America. It's a difficult market to compete in (unless taxi manages to leverage their monopoly status to keep new apps like Uber out).