8 ms·

Good for Quebec. This could quite feasibly lead to the development of a local competitor, providing job opportunities for local developers and tax dollars for t

Good for Quebec. This could quite feasibly lead to the development of a local competitor, providing job opportunities for local developers and tax dollars for the region / country. Ride sharing services are here to stay, but there's no particular reason that service has to be named 'Uber'.

nyxtom 9y ago
Austin did something similar and it has worked out great (for the most part) since we have Austin ride share which helps the local community.
- Afforess 9y ago
  I was under the impression the opposite was true. There several ride-sharing services in Austin for a while but their service and quality were abysmal, pickup times were long, and they all collapsed as soon as Uber and Lyft returned.
  - nyxtom 9y ago
    I've always used Austin Rideshare and haven't had a problem. That being said, one anecdote isn't enough. Sadly, overturning Austin's laws at the state level have been detrimental but most people I know use Austin Rideshare
  - briankelly 9y ago
    Not too mention a whole lot of drunk driving in the meantime.
moduspol 9y ago
But Uber operates without significant issue in countless other markets all over the world without the training Quebec requires. Is it possible the training is not as necessary as presumed? Aren't we opening up a can of worms by praising the idea of creating needless regulations to keep the status quo simply because it's perceived to be more local?
- nyxtom 9y ago
  Uber does not operate in other areas of the world without issue, this is simply not true. http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-everywhere-uber-is-banned-around-the-world-2015-4 http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-everywhere-uber-is-bann... Also, don't forget London.
  - moduspol 9y ago
    "other areas" != "all other areas"
    - yarrel 9y ago
      That refutes your argument, not the responses.
    - nyxtom 9y ago
      Someone else also made a point against this. We can count all the places where Uber operates and they have issues in the majority of them. If you also include the places where they have been banned then it's an even larger distribution of issues than non-issue locations.
      - moduspol 9y ago
        > We can count all the places where Uber operates and they have issues in the majority of them. And how many of those would be solved by 35 hours of training as is apparently required in Quebec? Besides, I said "significant issue." By that I mean the world keeps on spinning despite Quebec's training not being applied elsewhere. People aren't getting killed, injured, or swindled at a rate much higher than with taxis. That raises the question as to what this is really about: safety and protecting the public, or protectionism and keeping the status quo?
        nyxtom 9y ago
        It's a fair point that perhaps safety is a concern if you compare the numbers. I personally do not have all the numbers on hand to either confirm or refute that argument. Before you make that comparison I would suggest determining whether that's actually true in Quebec. To me it seems you've created a false dichotomy.
samstave 9y ago
Business idea: create a white-label Uber app and associated services for a local union of drivers that agree to operate in a specific area... An "Uber for Uber" as it were, and call it YouYou...
- microcolonel 9y ago
  The problem is that the prices would climb uncontrollably and against the will of the members, who would be scared or forbidden from violating the price controls (and even if they did, the public would assume they're charging more). Basically it'd be a taxi service, and taxi services suck. Taxi services suck because the drivers bargain against the consumers, and against eachother.
  - samstave 9y ago
    What is astonishing to me is that no genius has revealed the algorythm which can calc the following: cost-of::car, fuel, wait-time, distance, wear, depreciation, prosective-client-areas(adjacency, rider-sub-base), etc... == rate for ride. and this be a known fucking formula that is the basis on which pricing is held - and then the white-label services are just bidding over driver payment %.... also - tipping should not be allowed. /r/changemyview
    - s73ver_ 9y ago
      Wouldn't that algorithm just give the pure cost of the ride? Why would anyone drive for that if they're not going to make any money? And as far as tipping, you'd need to ensure your formula has a minimum so that drivers are making a living wage. Otherwise disallowing tipping means you're just trying to save face while not caring that the drivers are actually able to make a living.
      - samstave 9y ago
        Good points... what would you suggest?
mc32 9y ago
I think so too. Good for them and good for the locals. But let us not pretend this is not related to anti-globalism. I think it is and in many cases it's better for the locals, long term. Now, if Uber can and is willing to meet the new reqs, by all means, play but play by the rules.
- alexasmyths 9y ago
  How is it 'good for locals' that they have significantly less choice when wanting to go from A-B? Uber was a great service. I live in Montreal, and use cabs because they are parked outside my door - but I used Uber to go to the airport, and 'as a local' - I'm seriously miffed off at this.
olalonde 9y ago
That logic is flawed. If it worked, there's a bunch of other imports they could get rid of to "provide local job opportunities and tax dollars". Should Netflix be next? Seriously, this is 100% the taxi lobby at work. And it is very typical of Quebec politics: special interest groups being prioritized over consumers.
- nyxtom 9y ago
  It is and it isn't. It depends on whether there is a market to begin with. Local job opportunities depend on whether or not there is active startups waiting to compete. It's hard to compete if the main competitor is operating at a loss.
- s73ver_ 9y ago
  If the taxi industry has to undergo this training, how on earth is it fair that Uber doesn't? If they didn't require this, wouldn't this be the Uber special interest group being prioritized?
- refurb 9y ago
  Do a quick google search search for "Quebec snowplow mafia" and be prepared to be amazed. The corruption extends to thinks like construction as well. Not surprised with this outcome.
jcook818 9y ago
QC's politics have definitely helped foster some tech innovation in the taxi and ride-sharing space, like with Téo Taxi: http://teomtl.com/ http://teomtl.com/
alexasmyths 9y ago
"This could quite feasibly lead to the development of a local competitor, providing job opportunities for local developers and tax dollars for the region / country." Highly unlikely. Don't you think this has been tried in other regions? There have been some good efforts to do this, but it requires savvy, luck, a great experience, and a critical mass and really a lot of $$$ to break into markets. As evidence that it's not a 'local' thing I offer the fact that Uber and Lyft have no real similar competition almost anywhere. Wherever they have competition, it's in places like China from entities who have big $$ backing. Also - it's utterly ridiculous that drivers need '35 hours of training'. Training for what exactly? How to drive? How to read a map? Even if 'regular cab drivers' did previously need that kind of training - I don't think they need it anymore. Have Uber passengers experienced a problem with 'lost drivers'? Nonsense. I'll bet $100 that 'on average' most consumers would rate Uber as a better experience overall vis-a-vis regular cabs. This is bad for Quebec - it will put many people out of work, and it will not lead to any new innovation. FYI - I live in Montreal - and I never use Uber because there are a fleet of cabs parked outside my door. I talk to cabbies here often about the issue. My god man - it's like talking to someone from 1985. Cab companies themselves are notoriously fickle, cheap, unthoughtful. They have done ZERO to 'improve their game' over the last while. The cabbies have ZERO positive response to the issue, they just talk negatively about Uber, and have absolutely no sense that 'maybe they should do a few things better'. It's amazing how backwater cab companies can be - it's partly due to the way they are organized (often they are syndicates of owner's nobody is really in charge), and of course, a smattering of companies across the board in any city. It's really an archaic industry. Just 3 years ago - about 1/2 of 'Hochelaga Taxi' (my hood), did not even accept credit/debit!!! Now - they all have machines, but even the one's they bought are straight out of Myanmar. They're slow, crap. In 2017 you still can't get any 'Uber like features' out of the local cabs. I'd love to pay for my cab before, or 'on the way' or 'use my account' or something - but no. It will mean fewer jobs, less choice, less competition - and business as usual for the local medallion holders. It would seem rational that someone would just 'come along and make 'GoMyCab' but I'll bet any amount of money it won't happen. It's just too hard. Now - you have the double problem: Uber has been 'run out of town' by politiking - who is now going to back a 'rival'? Are VC's interested in investing in something risky - AND - that has to take on the cabal of local-yocal government officials + the Taxi Lobby who pushed a big multinational out? No. Also - there might not be enough scale in just one city to actually create enough surplus to create a great mobile experience etc.. This is one of the things I absolutely loathe about Montreal - it's the localist/anti-progress attitude here. It's 'politically populist' and they often don't make a lot of sense - AND - the city of Mtl is notoriously corrupt, though that's getting better. The 'Uber pendulum' has swung too far. There are some serious things to consider about Uber, and the economics of it are interesting, but I don't think that because they've had bad publicity, that city officials should be playing a populist game. I think there are better answers to 'the Uber problem'.
lhorie 9y ago
> This could quite feasibly lead to the development of a local competitor Wouldn't this regulation apply to competitors as well? If Uber has deemed that it's not feasible to be competitive with taxis/etc with the new regulations, how would a direct competitor be able to compete in the exact same regulatory environment?

nyxtom 9y ago

Austin did something similar and it has worked out great (for the most part) since we have Austin ride share which helps the local community.

Afforess 9y ago
I was under the impression the opposite was true. There several ride-sharing services in Austin for a while but their service and quality were abysmal, pickup times were long, and they all collapsed as soon as Uber and Lyft returned.
- nyxtom 9y ago
  I've always used Austin Rideshare and haven't had a problem. That being said, one anecdote isn't enough. Sadly, overturning Austin's laws at the state level have been detrimental but most people I know use Austin Rideshare
- briankelly 9y ago
  Not too mention a whole lot of drunk driving in the meantime.

moduspol 9y ago

But Uber operates without significant issue in countless other markets all over the world without the training Quebec requires. Is it possible the training is not as necessary as presumed? Aren't we opening up a can of worms by praising the idea of creating needless regulations to keep the status quo simply because it's perceived to be more local?

nyxtom 9y ago
Uber does not operate in other areas of the world without issue, this is simply not true. http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-everywhere-uber-is-banned-around-the-world-2015-4 http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-everywhere-uber-is-bann... Also, don't forget London.
- moduspol 9y ago
  "other areas" != "all other areas"
  - yarrel 9y ago
    That refutes your argument, not the responses.
  - nyxtom 9y ago
    Someone else also made a point against this. We can count all the places where Uber operates and they have issues in the majority of them. If you also include the places where they have been banned then it's an even larger distribution of issues than non-issue locations.
    - moduspol 9y ago
      > We can count all the places where Uber operates and they have issues in the majority of them. And how many of those would be solved by 35 hours of training as is apparently required in Quebec? Besides, I said "significant issue." By that I mean the world keeps on spinning despite Quebec's training not being applied elsewhere. People aren't getting killed, injured, or swindled at a rate much higher than with taxis. That raises the question as to what this is really about: safety and protecting the public, or protectionism and keeping the status quo?
      - nyxtom 9y ago
        It's a fair point that perhaps safety is a concern if you compare the numbers. I personally do not have all the numbers on hand to either confirm or refute that argument. Before you make that comparison I would suggest determining whether that's actually true in Quebec. To me it seems you've created a false dichotomy.

samstave 9y ago

Business idea: create a white-label Uber app and associated services for a local union of drivers that agree to operate in a specific area... An "Uber for Uber" as it were, and call it YouYou...

microcolonel 9y ago
The problem is that the prices would climb uncontrollably and against the will of the members, who would be scared or forbidden from violating the price controls (and even if they did, the public would assume they're charging more). Basically it'd be a taxi service, and taxi services suck. Taxi services suck because the drivers bargain against the consumers, and against eachother.
- samstave 9y ago
  What is astonishing to me is that no genius has revealed the algorythm which can calc the following: cost-of::car, fuel, wait-time, distance, wear, depreciation, prosective-client-areas(adjacency, rider-sub-base), etc... == rate for ride. and this be a known fucking formula that is the basis on which pricing is held - and then the white-label services are just bidding over driver payment %.... also - tipping should not be allowed. /r/changemyview
  - s73ver_ 9y ago
    Wouldn't that algorithm just give the pure cost of the ride? Why would anyone drive for that if they're not going to make any money? And as far as tipping, you'd need to ensure your formula has a minimum so that drivers are making a living wage. Otherwise disallowing tipping means you're just trying to save face while not caring that the drivers are actually able to make a living.
    - samstave 9y ago
      Good points... what would you suggest?

mc32 9y ago

I think so too. Good for them and good for the locals. But let us not pretend this is not related to anti-globalism. I think it is and in many cases it's better for the locals, long term. Now, if Uber can and is willing to meet the new reqs, by all means, play but play by the rules.

alexasmyths 9y ago
How is it 'good for locals' that they have significantly less choice when wanting to go from A-B? Uber was a great service. I live in Montreal, and use cabs because they are parked outside my door - but I used Uber to go to the airport, and 'as a local' - I'm seriously miffed off at this.

olalonde 9y ago

That logic is flawed. If it worked, there's a bunch of other imports they could get rid of to "provide local job opportunities and tax dollars". Should Netflix be next? Seriously, this is 100% the taxi lobby at work. And it is very typical of Quebec politics: special interest groups being prioritized over consumers.

nyxtom 9y ago
It is and it isn't. It depends on whether there is a market to begin with. Local job opportunities depend on whether or not there is active startups waiting to compete. It's hard to compete if the main competitor is operating at a loss.
s73ver_ 9y ago
If the taxi industry has to undergo this training, how on earth is it fair that Uber doesn't? If they didn't require this, wouldn't this be the Uber special interest group being prioritized?
refurb 9y ago
Do a quick google search search for "Quebec snowplow mafia" and be prepared to be amazed. The corruption extends to thinks like construction as well. Not surprised with this outcome.

jcook818 9y ago

QC's politics have definitely helped foster some tech innovation in the taxi and ride-sharing space, like with Téo Taxi: http://teomtl.com/ http://teomtl.com/

alexasmyths 9y ago

"This could quite feasibly lead to the development of a local competitor, providing job opportunities for local developers and tax dollars for the region / country." Highly unlikely. Don't you think this has been tried in other regions? There have been some good efforts to do this, but it requires savvy, luck, a great experience, and a critical mass and really a lot of $$$ to break into markets. As evidence that it's not a 'local' thing I offer the fact that Uber and Lyft have no real similar competition almost anywhere. Wherever they have competition, it's in places like China from entities who have big $$ backing. Also - it's utterly ridiculous that drivers need '35 hours of training'. Training for what exactly? How to drive? How to read a map? Even if 'regular cab drivers' did previously need that kind of training - I don't think they need it anymore. Have Uber passengers experienced a problem with 'lost drivers'? Nonsense. I'll bet $100 that 'on average' most consumers would rate Uber as a better experience overall vis-a-vis regular cabs. This is bad for Quebec - it will put many people out of work, and it will not lead to any new innovation. FYI - I live in Montreal - and I never use Uber because there are a fleet of cabs parked outside my door. I talk to cabbies here often about the issue. My god man - it's like talking to someone from 1985. Cab companies themselves are notoriously fickle, cheap, unthoughtful. They have done ZERO to 'improve their game' over the last while. The cabbies have ZERO positive response to the issue, they just talk negatively about Uber, and have absolutely no sense that 'maybe they should do a few things better'. It's amazing how backwater cab companies can be - it's partly due to the way they are organized (often they are syndicates of owner's nobody is really in charge), and of course, a smattering of companies across the board in any city. It's really an archaic industry. Just 3 years ago - about 1/2 of 'Hochelaga Taxi' (my hood), did not even accept credit/debit!!! Now - they all have machines, but even the one's they bought are straight out of Myanmar. They're slow, crap. In 2017 you still can't get any 'Uber like features' out of the local cabs. I'd love to pay for my cab before, or 'on the way' or 'use my account' or something - but no. It will mean fewer jobs, less choice, less competition - and business as usual for the local medallion holders. It would seem rational that someone would just 'come along and make 'GoMyCab' but I'll bet any amount of money it won't happen. It's just too hard. Now - you have the double problem: Uber has been 'run out of town' by politiking - who is now going to back a 'rival'? Are VC's interested in investing in something risky - AND - that has to take on the cabal of local-yocal government officials + the Taxi Lobby who pushed a big multinational out? No. Also - there might not be enough scale in just one city to actually create enough surplus to create a great mobile experience etc.. This is one of the things I absolutely loathe about Montreal - it's the localist/anti-progress attitude here. It's 'politically populist' and they often don't make a lot of sense - AND - the city of Mtl is notoriously corrupt, though that's getting better. The 'Uber pendulum' has swung too far. There are some serious things to consider about Uber, and the economics of it are interesting, but I don't think that because they've had bad publicity, that city officials should be playing a populist game. I think there are better answers to 'the Uber problem'.

lhorie 9y ago

> This could quite feasibly lead to the development of a local competitor Wouldn't this regulation apply to competitors as well? If Uber has deemed that it's not feasible to be competitive with taxis/etc with the new regulations, how would a direct competitor be able to compete in the exact same regulatory environment?