19 ms·

Because they have the money and lawyers, so they can break the law. They like to call it Disruptive Innovation or some other fancy term. The problem with Uber

Because they have the money and lawyers, so they can break the law. They like to call it Disruptive Innovation or some other fancy term. The problem with Uber is they think every country is the same and welcomes them. I under that might be the case with U.S, but it doesn't mean taxi system in every country is broken and they are welcomed to "fix it".

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
hueving 10y ago
If the taxi system is not crap there, why are there citizens using Uber there? Uber wouldn't be operating if people weren't using it.
- pyrale 10y ago
  Subsidized rides (aka market share acquisition aka dumping)
- nisa 10y ago
  It's cheaper because it socializes the costs - usually Taxi drivers have to make a licence that involves knowledge of the area and likely other aptitude tests, as well as maintenance of the cars and insurance. Then there are laws that prevent working below a certain minimum income rate in Europe that also affect Taxi drivers as most of them don't operate on their own. Uber moves all these responsibilities to the owner of the car, now you are your own business man you face the majority of risks and Uber still gets a big chunk of profit. Uber doesn't care about your maintenance costs. Sometimes it works, often this encourages dangerous behavior to still have profits e.g. skipping maintenance, safe working times, vacation... Uber doesn't care that much about this. A lot of people work almost full time without enough compensation to warrant the stress. Besides that European countries - at least the bigger cities - have often excellent public transport that is inexpensive and mostly works. Taxis supplement that and Uber is trying to compete on price there, something that abuses the drivers in the long run. I hope Uber is kept out of Europe or is regulated to protect the drivers and users.
  - zzleeper 10y ago
    TBH, visiting non-uber cities is a complete pain in the ass for me; I would prefer uber even at the same price. The are less likely to rip you off, easier to catch (just press a button), to keep a record on for reimbursements, to pay (by cc), etc.
    - cmarschner 10y ago
      >The are less likely to rip you off, easier to catch (just press a button), to keep a record on for reimbursements, to pay (by cc), etc. In Germany all this is provided by regular taxi services.
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    How is Uber socializing the costs? Uber is directly providing Uber drivers with knowledge of the area (via maps), and requires maintenance of cars. Assuming I take an Uber, exactly what costs are paid for by someone other than myself, the driver and Uber?
    - TeMPOraL 10y ago
      > Uber is directly providing Uber drivers with knowledge of the area (via maps) It's not Uber who's providing the knowledge, but Google or whatever (freely available) mapping backend the drivers / Uber App use. > requires maintenance of cars Do they require it, or do they "require" it like proper insurance? > Assuming I take an Uber, exactly what costs are paid for by someone other than myself, the driver and Uber? The risk of uninsured driver getting himself (and you) in an accident in an improperly maintained car. Secondary costs of disruption (the negative kind) of transportation market due to one player outcompeting other by acting illegally and getting away with it. Destruction of provisions for those "worse off" in said market - i.e. it's fine if you're young and live in the middle of the city, but try getting an Uber as a grandma living on the outskirts. Drivers will refuse such unprofitable rides. Weakening of social trust in rule of law as a successful business keeps being successful by ignoring the law and attracts copycat (you could say the authorities are to blame for not reacting swiftly enough, but then again you need a criminal doing crime to show inadequacy of the law).
- philh 10y ago
  This could happen if Uber manages to be cheaper by avoiding taxes or breaking speed limits; or in general does something that's good for the customers, but bad for society, and so is forbidden. I don't know that that's the case. In other places, it seems to manage to be net good for the customers, good for society, and mostly only bad for existing taxi companies. But "people are using Uber" is far from sufficient evidence to say that taxis are crap.
- bogomipz 10y ago
  That's a false argument - "If Coke isn't crap why are citizens drinking Pepsi?" The Taxi system is not crap everywhere. There are certain markets that are underserved. There are also plenty of markets that Uber operates in that have an adequate Taxi system.
wodenokoto 10y ago
I think the underlying question of parent is: Uber is illegal in many European countries, so why did they back out of Hungary as opposed to, say, Norway?
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  That's a good question. Possible answers are that Hungarian market may not have turned out profitable enough for Uber to fight for it, and/or maybe authorities in Hungary are swifter than in Norway - similar to how Poland is still struggling with Uber while Germany managed to quickly ban the illegal parts.
- niftich 10y ago
  Hungary's current government takes a dim view on a number of topics and strongly favors the rule of law, or the appearance of enforcing those laws. In 2015, refugees and migrants were walking across the border with Serbia, so the government installed a wall topped with razor wire to corral them towards the designated entry points [1] In 2010, the country's laws for press and media were significantly changed, drawing widespread EU criticism [2]. (I'm providing context, not wishing to engage in political conversation) I think Uber made a judgement call that the Hungarian government would likely enforce the laws rather harshly, and did not want to deal with the consequences. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_border_barrier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_border_barrier [2] https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2015/hungary https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2015/hungary
- dzsekijo 10y ago
  The background story is: in Hungary, about one year before Uber's entry, large taxi companies lobbied for a very heavy regulation on transport services that fixed the rates and raised drivers' entry level significantly. The said purpose was to kill off the "taxi hyenas", but the reason and effect was to end competition by enforcing a uniformized premium level service. "Taxi hyenas" were replaced by the "taxi maffia" -- but not just the hyenas, but small and (to some rate) innovative companies were gone out of business. The taxi drivers who remained in business were in for the trade-off of investing into compliance with new regulation but making more money than before. So old school taxi was not simply lingering in its naturally backward state as in other countries, but there was an artificially fortified status quo. In that situation, when value personal transfer reappeared with Uber, it was therefore even more sore for the taxi companies and drivers, who took their position and the protection of their investment granted by the state. So what happened is nothing else just the taxi maffia enforced this grant and the state complied. Both sticking to decisions that once made (no regard of consequences), and heavy state control is quite to the taste of the government -- thus they complied happily. And once the government puts its weight into something, there is no question it's gonna happen. The only surprise element is that Uber resisted so far.
xiphias 10y ago
The Taxi fares were artificially raised a lot by Orban a few years ago and the prices are fixed. I stopped using taxis at that point and was forced to bring people to the airport myself. Uber was welcome by all the people in Hungary, with much nicer drivers as the taxi drivers themselves.
mmgutz 10y ago
I still don't understand how Uber is not a taxi service in the USA. I guess it's different when you use a smart phone instead of a land phone. Yeah I know the drivers are not technically employees but come on, we all know it's a more convenient taxi service.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

hueving 10y ago

If the taxi system is not crap there, why are there citizens using Uber there? Uber wouldn't be operating if people weren't using it.

pyrale 10y ago
Subsidized rides (aka market share acquisition aka dumping)
nisa 10y ago
It's cheaper because it socializes the costs - usually Taxi drivers have to make a licence that involves knowledge of the area and likely other aptitude tests, as well as maintenance of the cars and insurance. Then there are laws that prevent working below a certain minimum income rate in Europe that also affect Taxi drivers as most of them don't operate on their own. Uber moves all these responsibilities to the owner of the car, now you are your own business man you face the majority of risks and Uber still gets a big chunk of profit. Uber doesn't care about your maintenance costs. Sometimes it works, often this encourages dangerous behavior to still have profits e.g. skipping maintenance, safe working times, vacation... Uber doesn't care that much about this. A lot of people work almost full time without enough compensation to warrant the stress. Besides that European countries - at least the bigger cities - have often excellent public transport that is inexpensive and mostly works. Taxis supplement that and Uber is trying to compete on price there, something that abuses the drivers in the long run. I hope Uber is kept out of Europe or is regulated to protect the drivers and users.
- zzleeper 10y ago
  TBH, visiting non-uber cities is a complete pain in the ass for me; I would prefer uber even at the same price. The are less likely to rip you off, easier to catch (just press a button), to keep a record on for reimbursements, to pay (by cc), etc.
  - cmarschner 10y ago
    >The are less likely to rip you off, easier to catch (just press a button), to keep a record on for reimbursements, to pay (by cc), etc. In Germany all this is provided by regular taxi services.
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  How is Uber socializing the costs? Uber is directly providing Uber drivers with knowledge of the area (via maps), and requires maintenance of cars. Assuming I take an Uber, exactly what costs are paid for by someone other than myself, the driver and Uber?
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    > Uber is directly providing Uber drivers with knowledge of the area (via maps) It's not Uber who's providing the knowledge, but Google or whatever (freely available) mapping backend the drivers / Uber App use. > requires maintenance of cars Do they require it, or do they "require" it like proper insurance? > Assuming I take an Uber, exactly what costs are paid for by someone other than myself, the driver and Uber? The risk of uninsured driver getting himself (and you) in an accident in an improperly maintained car. Secondary costs of disruption (the negative kind) of transportation market due to one player outcompeting other by acting illegally and getting away with it. Destruction of provisions for those "worse off" in said market - i.e. it's fine if you're young and live in the middle of the city, but try getting an Uber as a grandma living on the outskirts. Drivers will refuse such unprofitable rides. Weakening of social trust in rule of law as a successful business keeps being successful by ignoring the law and attracts copycat (you could say the authorities are to blame for not reacting swiftly enough, but then again you need a criminal doing crime to show inadequacy of the law).
philh 10y ago
This could happen if Uber manages to be cheaper by avoiding taxes or breaking speed limits; or in general does something that's good for the customers, but bad for society, and so is forbidden. I don't know that that's the case. In other places, it seems to manage to be net good for the customers, good for society, and mostly only bad for existing taxi companies. But "people are using Uber" is far from sufficient evidence to say that taxis are crap.
bogomipz 10y ago
That's a false argument - "If Coke isn't crap why are citizens drinking Pepsi?" The Taxi system is not crap everywhere. There are certain markets that are underserved. There are also plenty of markets that Uber operates in that have an adequate Taxi system.

wodenokoto 10y ago

I think the underlying question of parent is: Uber is illegal in many European countries, so why did they back out of Hungary as opposed to, say, Norway?

TeMPOraL 10y ago
That's a good question. Possible answers are that Hungarian market may not have turned out profitable enough for Uber to fight for it, and/or maybe authorities in Hungary are swifter than in Norway - similar to how Poland is still struggling with Uber while Germany managed to quickly ban the illegal parts.
niftich 10y ago
Hungary's current government takes a dim view on a number of topics and strongly favors the rule of law, or the appearance of enforcing those laws. In 2015, refugees and migrants were walking across the border with Serbia, so the government installed a wall topped with razor wire to corral them towards the designated entry points [1] In 2010, the country's laws for press and media were significantly changed, drawing widespread EU criticism [2]. (I'm providing context, not wishing to engage in political conversation) I think Uber made a judgement call that the Hungarian government would likely enforce the laws rather harshly, and did not want to deal with the consequences. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_border_barrier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_border_barrier [2] https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2015/hungary https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2015/hungary
dzsekijo 10y ago
The background story is: in Hungary, about one year before Uber's entry, large taxi companies lobbied for a very heavy regulation on transport services that fixed the rates and raised drivers' entry level significantly. The said purpose was to kill off the "taxi hyenas", but the reason and effect was to end competition by enforcing a uniformized premium level service. "Taxi hyenas" were replaced by the "taxi maffia" -- but not just the hyenas, but small and (to some rate) innovative companies were gone out of business. The taxi drivers who remained in business were in for the trade-off of investing into compliance with new regulation but making more money than before. So old school taxi was not simply lingering in its naturally backward state as in other countries, but there was an artificially fortified status quo. In that situation, when value personal transfer reappeared with Uber, it was therefore even more sore for the taxi companies and drivers, who took their position and the protection of their investment granted by the state. So what happened is nothing else just the taxi maffia enforced this grant and the state complied. Both sticking to decisions that once made (no regard of consequences), and heavy state control is quite to the taste of the government -- thus they complied happily. And once the government puts its weight into something, there is no question it's gonna happen. The only surprise element is that Uber resisted so far.

xiphias 10y ago

The Taxi fares were artificially raised a lot by Orban a few years ago and the prices are fixed. I stopped using taxis at that point and was forced to bring people to the airport myself. Uber was welcome by all the people in Hungary, with much nicer drivers as the taxi drivers themselves.

mmgutz 10y ago

I still don't understand how Uber is not a taxi service in the USA. I guess it's different when you use a smart phone instead of a land phone. Yeah I know the drivers are not technically employees but come on, we all know it's a more convenient taxi service.