4 ms·

I recently took an Uber when there was a 2X surge, where I am if it's above a ~1.3 surge taxis are cheaper. I was with another person, and we tried hailing a t

I recently took an Uber when there was a 2X surge, where I am if it's above a ~1.3 surge taxis are cheaper. I was with another person, and we tried hailing a taxi, but none of them bothered to pick us up, so we gave up and ordered an Uber. Once we were in the uber, we were able to split the fare with no issues at all. And the taxi drivers wonder why people prefer Uber.

koolba 9y ago
What were the circumstance that the taxis refused to pick you up? Every city that I’ve been to has laws against refusing taxi trips within the city limits.
- nebolo 9y ago
  Most likely they were full, which is why there was surge pricing.
  - frutiger 9y ago
    Not sure if this applies to the ancestor comment, but in New York City, the lights are on indicating when they are full, available for hailing or off duty. It is also illegal to not pick up a fare there, but drivers have refused in the past (depends on what you look like, where you are, the time of day, if you have airplane luggage, etc.)
  - pfarnsworth 9y ago
    No. Empty taxis would routinely drive past you in SF. It's common knowledge for those of us that lived in SF before Sidecar, Lyft and Uber.
    - kamaal 9y ago
      Not indulging sales is profitable than indulging in sales and then making a loss. Uber can ferry passengers around for cheap because some VC is pumping money into the company through a firehose. Take out the VC money, lets see how many Uber drivers will drive 80% below minimum wage to provide services. Its easy to blame the regular taxi drivers. How many people here on this forum would take huge salary cuts to add profits to somebody else's wallet?
      - pfarnsworth 9y ago
        I don't understand what you're saying. But it's easy to blame the regular taxi drivers because they are completely at fault. They could have increased the number of taxis, but they thought having a monopoly would make them richer. They could have provided better service, but they didn't want to. Now they have true competition, and their way of life is being erased because they don't want to admit that they are at fault. I'm glad that ridesharing, be it Lyft or Uber or whoever else comes up, has destroyed the taxi industry. It's a great example of how fragile a monopoly is and how terrible service gets perpetuated by monopolies and lazy people.
        kamaal 9y ago
        >>They could have increased the number of taxis And that will increase the supply of taxis and dilute wages. We are in a time, when even doctors control the supply of their kind so that they can have profitable careers. >>Now they have true competition, and their way of life is being erased because they don't want to admit that they are at fault. They have no competition. Unless Uber finds another set VCs to raise another $10 billion or so. And then VCs should be ok to not see a dollar of profit in return. Or Uber will have to raise its rates higher than regular taxis, and of course severely restrict the supply(You can't raise rates, with a oversupply of vehicles). Either option creating a system worse than taxi medallions.
        prepend 9y ago
        Higher rates based on supply and demand is vastly superior to medallions.
        pfarnsworth 9y ago
        Wrong. Uber dropped prices and the total number of rides increased. The taxi industry was lazy and limiting the number of drivers because they wanted to do the least amount of work for the most money. Now we have an industry that is new and helping a lot more people. There are 10x the number of Lyft and Uber drivers than taxi cabs, and it's working great. People who would never take taxis are taking Ubers now.
- askafriend 9y ago
  In San Francisco, the story goes that before the ride-sharing days, if you lived in Potrero Hill or in the Richmond, Taxi Drivers would refuse to pick you up even if you called their dispatch center (they would just no-show). So the end result was that people who lived in those districts were not served equally. Yes it's technically illegal, no there is no one enforcing that. Uber/Lyft come along and create an incentive structure where the driver can't discriminate even if they want to, and everybody wins. There are real benefits to what ride-sharing companies have been able to accomplish.
  - goseeastarwar 9y ago
    People don't understand how miserable getting a cab in SF was prior to Uber. It speaks to the original commenter's point that it really was, and still is, providing an exceptional service compared to what existed previously.
    - gav 9y ago
      It wasn't just SF, in LA it was miserable unless you were staying at a hotel that had waiting taxis... and then you were screwed for the return trip. You had to call and wait 20-40 minutes and it was far from guaranteed that they'd show. I don't think I would I have moved to LA without Uber and Lyft.
  - pfarnsworth 9y ago
    It's not just Portero Hill or Richmond. It was everywhere in SF. We lived in Castro, Noe and Twin Peaks, and taxis would never come to pick us up. Also, one time I had to wait 1.5 hrs in SOMA before a taxi would come pick me up. A dozen taxis passed me, empty, because they wanted the more expensive rides to the airport, etc. I watch eagerly to see the complete demise of taxis in SF, I hate them with a passion.
  - leadBelly 9y ago
    The "No Thanks" button says otherwise. It's easy to avoid places you don't feel comfortable driving to.
- xapata 9y ago
  Laws don't seem to matter when they're not enforced. The taxi dispatch system is perverse, because riders will take a street hail if one shows up before the dispatched taxi. Because of that, dispatched taxi will take any street hail they pass on the way to their intended pickup. So, riders call competing dispatchers, taking the first to arrive and guaranteeing at least one driver is wasting their time and gasoline. So, many drivers disobey the dispatcher, etc. Etc.
- prepend 9y ago
  While there are laws, have fun trying to file a complaint / anything happen. You love red tape? You’ll love trying to navigate it to report a cab that didn’t shown up on time. I tried this a few times. I had a cab scheduled to take me to the airport. They didn’t show. I called, they said I never scheduled anything but could have a car there within an hour. That would make me miss my flight. My wife drove me and was late to work. I tried calling the city and the cab company said “we have no record.” And that was the end. Even though I had a call record showing I called the cab company the day before. Nothing happened except about an hour of me on the phone, two letters and a lot of frustration. Another time, a cab in NY ran over my foot and broke some bones. Despite a police report, the cab company denied that it was them and never paid. They self insure (per NY rules) with a law firm. Seriously, not an insurer, a law firm. They denied claim. NY taxi commission received my complaint and did nothing. The reality is that the laws are pretty useless as they aren’t / can’t be enforced. I also tried reporting when thit driver was different than the license shown. Nothing happened. I have a bunch of these stories over the decades of using taxis. Uber is much better because they log everything and actually care about their customer. That’s why if I must trade, I’d rather take the extremely small chance of being raped or harasssed and the driver definitely being caught and convicted than a taxi.
Klathmon 9y ago
I had an older coworker book 2 separate taxis from 2 separate taxi services because he really needed to be somewhere, and neither showed up... After calling both services one said they never had a record of his reservation and the other said that there just weren't any available and one would be there within an hour... I helped him sign up for Uber, and I don't think he's ever taken a taxi again. Uber may be a shitty company in a lot of ways, but they do what they say they do, and they do it well. Every bad experience I've had has swiftly and appropriately dealt with.

koolba 9y ago

What were the circumstance that the taxis refused to pick you up? Every city that I’ve been to has laws against refusing taxi trips within the city limits.

nebolo 9y ago
Most likely they were full, which is why there was surge pricing.
- frutiger 9y ago
  Not sure if this applies to the ancestor comment, but in New York City, the lights are on indicating when they are full, available for hailing or off duty. It is also illegal to not pick up a fare there, but drivers have refused in the past (depends on what you look like, where you are, the time of day, if you have airplane luggage, etc.)
- pfarnsworth 9y ago
  No. Empty taxis would routinely drive past you in SF. It's common knowledge for those of us that lived in SF before Sidecar, Lyft and Uber.
  - kamaal 9y ago
    Not indulging sales is profitable than indulging in sales and then making a loss. Uber can ferry passengers around for cheap because some VC is pumping money into the company through a firehose. Take out the VC money, lets see how many Uber drivers will drive 80% below minimum wage to provide services. Its easy to blame the regular taxi drivers. How many people here on this forum would take huge salary cuts to add profits to somebody else's wallet?
    - pfarnsworth 9y ago
      I don't understand what you're saying. But it's easy to blame the regular taxi drivers because they are completely at fault. They could have increased the number of taxis, but they thought having a monopoly would make them richer. They could have provided better service, but they didn't want to. Now they have true competition, and their way of life is being erased because they don't want to admit that they are at fault. I'm glad that ridesharing, be it Lyft or Uber or whoever else comes up, has destroyed the taxi industry. It's a great example of how fragile a monopoly is and how terrible service gets perpetuated by monopolies and lazy people.
      - kamaal 9y ago
        >>They could have increased the number of taxis And that will increase the supply of taxis and dilute wages. We are in a time, when even doctors control the supply of their kind so that they can have profitable careers. >>Now they have true competition, and their way of life is being erased because they don't want to admit that they are at fault. They have no competition. Unless Uber finds another set VCs to raise another $10 billion or so. And then VCs should be ok to not see a dollar of profit in return. Or Uber will have to raise its rates higher than regular taxis, and of course severely restrict the supply(You can't raise rates, with a oversupply of vehicles). Either option creating a system worse than taxi medallions.
        prepend 9y ago
        Higher rates based on supply and demand is vastly superior to medallions.
        pfarnsworth 9y ago
        Wrong. Uber dropped prices and the total number of rides increased. The taxi industry was lazy and limiting the number of drivers because they wanted to do the least amount of work for the most money. Now we have an industry that is new and helping a lot more people. There are 10x the number of Lyft and Uber drivers than taxi cabs, and it's working great. People who would never take taxis are taking Ubers now.
askafriend 9y ago
In San Francisco, the story goes that before the ride-sharing days, if you lived in Potrero Hill or in the Richmond, Taxi Drivers would refuse to pick you up even if you called their dispatch center (they would just no-show). So the end result was that people who lived in those districts were not served equally. Yes it's technically illegal, no there is no one enforcing that. Uber/Lyft come along and create an incentive structure where the driver can't discriminate even if they want to, and everybody wins. There are real benefits to what ride-sharing companies have been able to accomplish.
- goseeastarwar 9y ago
  People don't understand how miserable getting a cab in SF was prior to Uber. It speaks to the original commenter's point that it really was, and still is, providing an exceptional service compared to what existed previously.
  - gav 9y ago
    It wasn't just SF, in LA it was miserable unless you were staying at a hotel that had waiting taxis... and then you were screwed for the return trip. You had to call and wait 20-40 minutes and it was far from guaranteed that they'd show. I don't think I would I have moved to LA without Uber and Lyft.
- pfarnsworth 9y ago
  It's not just Portero Hill or Richmond. It was everywhere in SF. We lived in Castro, Noe and Twin Peaks, and taxis would never come to pick us up. Also, one time I had to wait 1.5 hrs in SOMA before a taxi would come pick me up. A dozen taxis passed me, empty, because they wanted the more expensive rides to the airport, etc. I watch eagerly to see the complete demise of taxis in SF, I hate them with a passion.
- leadBelly 9y ago
  The "No Thanks" button says otherwise. It's easy to avoid places you don't feel comfortable driving to.
xapata 9y ago
Laws don't seem to matter when they're not enforced. The taxi dispatch system is perverse, because riders will take a street hail if one shows up before the dispatched taxi. Because of that, dispatched taxi will take any street hail they pass on the way to their intended pickup. So, riders call competing dispatchers, taking the first to arrive and guaranteeing at least one driver is wasting their time and gasoline. So, many drivers disobey the dispatcher, etc. Etc.
prepend 9y ago
While there are laws, have fun trying to file a complaint / anything happen. You love red tape? You’ll love trying to navigate it to report a cab that didn’t shown up on time. I tried this a few times. I had a cab scheduled to take me to the airport. They didn’t show. I called, they said I never scheduled anything but could have a car there within an hour. That would make me miss my flight. My wife drove me and was late to work. I tried calling the city and the cab company said “we have no record.” And that was the end. Even though I had a call record showing I called the cab company the day before. Nothing happened except about an hour of me on the phone, two letters and a lot of frustration. Another time, a cab in NY ran over my foot and broke some bones. Despite a police report, the cab company denied that it was them and never paid. They self insure (per NY rules) with a law firm. Seriously, not an insurer, a law firm. They denied claim. NY taxi commission received my complaint and did nothing. The reality is that the laws are pretty useless as they aren’t / can’t be enforced. I also tried reporting when thit driver was different than the license shown. Nothing happened. I have a bunch of these stories over the decades of using taxis. Uber is much better because they log everything and actually care about their customer. That’s why if I must trade, I’d rather take the extremely small chance of being raped or harasssed and the driver definitely being caught and convicted than a taxi.

Klathmon 9y ago

I had an older coworker book 2 separate taxis from 2 separate taxi services because he really needed to be somewhere, and neither showed up... After calling both services one said they never had a record of his reservation and the other said that there just weren't any available and one would be there within an hour... I helped him sign up for Uber, and I don't think he's ever taken a taxi again. Uber may be a shitty company in a lot of ways, but they do what they say they do, and they do it well. Every bad experience I've had has swiftly and appropriately dealt with.