5 ms·

I'm not sure why this is even news to be honest; I live in London and noticed zero glitch in the consistency of my Uber rides. I don't think anyone actually tho

I'm not sure why this is even news to be honest; I live in London and noticed zero glitch in the consistency of my Uber rides. I don't think anyone actually thought this would be a problem when 1) they fulfil a service that everyone wants (cabs simply do not compare on speed, efficiency, price and ease of booking) and 2) the company is such a well known global brand, that there would be an uproar if it was banned and no politician would want that stain on their time in office.

geezerjay 8y ago
> I'm not sure why this is even news to be honest; IIRC national taxi cab associations of some european countries have used Uber's story in London as propaganda to sell the idea that Uber is being banned around the world, and thus it should also be banned in their nations as well. This story puts a stop to that propaganda effort.
paulie_a 8y ago
I am not in London so it is probably an unfair assumption. But the most important reason Uber is better is because cab drivers are unequivocally terrible in every way.
- jonplackett 8y ago
  This is so true. If cab drivers hadn’t been so universally crap to begin with, everyone wouldn’t have so readily switched to Uber.
  - paulie_a 8y ago
    A taxi is when I am incredibly desperate when an Uber will take ten minutes. But I regret the taxi every time. although Uber is a little more hit or miss with drivers/cleanliness of cars lately but still better than any alternative.
- biggc 8y ago
  > I am not in London My understanding is that London cabs are held to an extremely high standard (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_the_United_Kingdom#The_Knowledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_the_United_Kingdom...), as a result they're also extremely expensive.
  - gsnedders 8y ago
    Most people weren't using taxis in London regularly (they're too expensive for that), even prior to Uber; they were using private hires (or "minicabs") which is the exact same regulatory structure that Uber operates under (and have existed for 1960s). Uber's advantages in London came about in three main ways, AFAICT: individual ratings of drivers (massively decreasing variation in quality), tracking from ordering to pickup, and not having any issues with card payments (because they're the only way to pay!). Of course, the other private hire companies haven't stood still… The most notable difference in regulation from a passenger point of view between a private hire and a taxi is you can hail a taxi, but can't a private hire.
    - gaius 8y ago
      Uber's advantages in London came about in three main ways You forgot undercutting the competition using VC cash, oh and evading the taxes that all their competitors pay.
      - geezerjay 8y ago
        > You forgot undercutting the competition using VC cash I don't understand what point you were trying to make. Why do you assume incumbents have no investors? And why do you believe it's reasonablr to complain about how private investors decide where to invest theie cash? > oh and evading the taxes that all their competitors pay. Do you have any basis to support your assertion? Because I find it very odd how entire nation-wide corporativist associations, representing the entrenched incumbents and heavily invested in preserving their personal monopoly, fail to make such an assertion.
nmstoker 8y ago
Booking's easy I agree, but in much of London it's getting them to turn up in the right damn place that's a persistent challenge. I was open to trying them but I've got about a 40% failure rate for the cars (it was 50-50 for a while but has picked up a bit). Uber Eats works okay-ish, but you've got to text them every single time to remind them to read the delivery instructions (seems like a perfect task for automation!) What I can't get over is how much they struggle despite access to good GPS data.
- nmstoker 8y ago
  And I especially dislike the app dark patterns they use (ie many details are never shown again)

geezerjay 8y ago

> I'm not sure why this is even news to be honest; IIRC national taxi cab associations of some european countries have used Uber's story in London as propaganda to sell the idea that Uber is being banned around the world, and thus it should also be banned in their nations as well. This story puts a stop to that propaganda effort.

paulie_a 8y ago

I am not in London so it is probably an unfair assumption. But the most important reason Uber is better is because cab drivers are unequivocally terrible in every way.

jonplackett 8y ago
This is so true. If cab drivers hadn’t been so universally crap to begin with, everyone wouldn’t have so readily switched to Uber.
- paulie_a 8y ago
  A taxi is when I am incredibly desperate when an Uber will take ten minutes. But I regret the taxi every time. although Uber is a little more hit or miss with drivers/cleanliness of cars lately but still better than any alternative.
biggc 8y ago
> I am not in London My understanding is that London cabs are held to an extremely high standard (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_the_United_Kingdom#The_Knowledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_the_United_Kingdom...), as a result they're also extremely expensive.
- gsnedders 8y ago
  Most people weren't using taxis in London regularly (they're too expensive for that), even prior to Uber; they were using private hires (or "minicabs") which is the exact same regulatory structure that Uber operates under (and have existed for 1960s). Uber's advantages in London came about in three main ways, AFAICT: individual ratings of drivers (massively decreasing variation in quality), tracking from ordering to pickup, and not having any issues with card payments (because they're the only way to pay!). Of course, the other private hire companies haven't stood still… The most notable difference in regulation from a passenger point of view between a private hire and a taxi is you can hail a taxi, but can't a private hire.
  - gaius 8y ago
    Uber's advantages in London came about in three main ways You forgot undercutting the competition using VC cash, oh and evading the taxes that all their competitors pay.
    - geezerjay 8y ago
      > You forgot undercutting the competition using VC cash I don't understand what point you were trying to make. Why do you assume incumbents have no investors? And why do you believe it's reasonablr to complain about how private investors decide where to invest theie cash? > oh and evading the taxes that all their competitors pay. Do you have any basis to support your assertion? Because I find it very odd how entire nation-wide corporativist associations, representing the entrenched incumbents and heavily invested in preserving their personal monopoly, fail to make such an assertion.

nmstoker 8y ago

Booking's easy I agree, but in much of London it's getting them to turn up in the right damn place that's a persistent challenge. I was open to trying them but I've got about a 40% failure rate for the cars (it was 50-50 for a while but has picked up a bit). Uber Eats works okay-ish, but you've got to text them every single time to remind them to read the delivery instructions (seems like a perfect task for automation!) What I can't get over is how much they struggle despite access to good GPS data.

nmstoker 8y ago
And I especially dislike the app dark patterns they use (ie many details are never shown again)