7 ms·

I know a few people that are heavily invested into Uber here in Germany, with over 20 cars and drivers each. They will not be happy about this ruling. Here is

by nbzklr 7y ago

I know a few people that are heavily invested into Uber here in Germany, with over 20 cars and drivers each. They will not be happy about this ruling. Here is some context on how things worked thus far: Since Uber is not allowed to dispatch directly to independent drivers (see the ruling from 2015), they instead partnered with rental-car companies that employ the drivers. So in theory, Uber would dispatch a ride to one of their partners, who then dispatches it to one of their drivers. In practice, however, everything worked just as you know it from other countries, with the only difference being that Uber would send an email to the business owner containing two links: one to accept the ride and one to decline. Whenever the business owner clicks accept, the driver would get a text message with the approval. But at this time, he already would have accepted the ride in the app and be on his way. So effectively, the business owners had zero control. It is no surprise that the Taxi companies are mad, because they are unable to compete under the current set of rules. In addition, Uber has heavily subsidized rides with discounts of up to 50% for multiple weeks and generous hourly guarantees for their partners.

alkonaut 7y ago
> It is no surprise that the Taxi companies are mad, because they are unable to compete under the current set of rules. Apart from subsidies Uber might use, why aren't taxi companies able to compete? Is something stopping them from doing exactly what Uber is doing (Such as have good apps, pre payment etc.)? If that's the case, that they are bound from developing their own business by regulation - why is that?
- saiya-jin 7y ago
  You are expecting market behavior in business that for decades was pure monopoly. We all know the answers to those questions. In open market, taxi business in its current form would be dead long time ago. But not if you gave state-guaranteed monopoly on a service that many people simply need and have few other options.
  - usrusr 7y ago
    Where is that monopoly you are talking about? "Taxi" is not a company.
    - saiya-jin 7y ago
      Oh boy, I see I ruffled some feathers here, 10 downvotes within few minutes. Where I live, taxi drivers need to purchase medallion from given municipality, a massive investment. You can't just slap a taxi logo on the car and start driving people. From customers perspective this is a monopoly since they are all the same, charge all the same, have all the same drawbacks and most people hated them. From customer's perspective, they are indeed a 'taxi company'. Uber was the first competition to entrenched taxi driving business.
      - em-bee 7y ago
        exactly that. i have lived in germany for years. this is the first time i hear that they are all small businesses with 3-20 cars. all taxis have the same color, and prices are fixed. it looks more like a franchise than competing businesses. i don't think a business should be allowed to offer services below cost, nor should it be allowed to break the law, but on the other hand, the restrictions that exist in some places make no sense. a rental car has to return to the main office after each ride ??? what kind of nonsense is that?
        usrusr 7y ago
        > nor should it be allowed to break the law What if the law mandates that some services can only be provided in a certain way? If a simple label swap could give a free pass then why stop at taxis? "I did not steal that money, I was just providing a free surprise disposal service. Would it help if I sent a bill?"
        em-bee 7y ago
        i don't get what you are trying to say. the question is, why does the law have these mandates? and do they really make sense? some do, some don't. as it is, we have a bunch of laws that are unnecessary and should be removed. would that help uber? i don't know.
- usrusr 7y ago
  One difference: regulated taxis are not allowed to cherry-pick as hard as Ubers. Germany actually considers Taxis part of public infrastructure, even if universally outsourced. The assumption that profitable routes subsidize less profitable is deeply embedded in the system. It's similar to how no amount of free market ideology should allow emergency rooms to cherry-pick.
- zimpenfish 7y ago
  > Is something stopping them from doing exactly what Uber is doing I should imagine "not wanting to lose thousands/millions every month whilst they pay for people to develop software, etc." is a big factor. Life is a lot easier when you can throw money at problems like Uber, especially if you're (unfairly) subsidising your service to drive competitors into the ground.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  I think subsidies are the key here. Apps are dime a dozen; in Poland there are individual taxi companies with apps and pan-european networks with apps, all operating legally. I assume the situation is the same in Germany. But local taxi markets can't afford to continuously offer below-market price; they don't have the money reserves.
vosper 7y ago
> It is no surprise that the Taxi companies are mad, because they are unable to compete under the current set of rules. (Caveat that I’m going entirely off your comment, with no background info): the middlemen businesses sound like small taxi companies, where the bookings come from Uber rather than directly from customers. Why can’t the taxi companies compete by building an app that provides the booking part?
- ovi256 7y ago
  >Why can’t the taxi companies compete by building an app that provides the booking part? Yes, why can't they ? Turns out building apps users will use is not a commodity that can be bought off the shelf.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    Actually, those apps are very much a commodity. Everyone and their dog has one. However, users are price-sensitive, and apps need marketing - both of those concerns turn competition into money spending game; Uber has more money and exploits the international scale of their business.
- _pmf_ 7y ago
  > Why can’t the taxi companies compete by building an app that provides the booking part? They have. The ruling is completely arbitrary.
  - pgeorgi 7y ago
    The ruling doesn't look arbitrary to me: Uber pretended to not be part of the transaction, while they were a) the public face to the customer, b) offering the ride at a given price, c) negotiated with a specific driver to fulfill it (and only then got the middleman on board to sign off on the transaction). As usual for Uber they went for the sketchiest way possible to deal with regulations, as if they're looking for ways to argue about them in court as often as possible. Their problem: no court (except one) in Germany makes law because we don't have the Anglo-saxon concept of case law.
0ld 7y ago
There's a taxi company in my city (EU, but not Germany) which doesn't go mad or cry for govt help, and instead provides experience very similar to Uber with its app, runs "full scale" licensed taxis and their prices are very close (and frequently lower) than Uber's. So that I prefer using their service, as they can drive on the bus lanes and in the old town. What do they do wrong?
- ajdlinux 7y ago
  As someone who doesn't live in your city, if I were to visit, I'd rather not install another app, create another account, and sort out payment (including capturing receipts for corporate expense claims). Uber has the advantage of being ubiquitous among a certain class of travellers - this obviously is not an insurmountable advantage, but it does mean I naturally tend towards using Uber when travelling unless there's a particularly compelling local alternative. Everything else about your taxi service sounds good, and I'd be more than happy to use them, I'm just lazy. (And from other comments, I see that there's taxi company apps like FreeNow which seem to be gaining regional market share?)
  - achow 7y ago
    For non-visitors (locals), who I assume would be bulk of riders, installing of Uber or another app is same. Once they become habituated to one app, they would be very sticky.
    - ajdlinux 7y ago
      Locals are probably the majority of riders, but a majority by how much? Taxis are a high volume, low margin business, and losing purely the foreign business traveller market alone to Uber has got to sting.
  - pgeorgi 7y ago
    > Uber has the advantage of being ubiquitous among a certain class of travellers Which is funny because Uber's shtick is to complain about the evil taxi cartels, while statements like yours indicate that they're really the biggest of them all.
odiroot 7y ago
> It is no surprise that the Taxi companies are mad, because they are unable to compete under the current set of rules. They're mad because it ruins their monopoly. Taxis are ridiculously expensive in Germany, also known to use tricks to charge you extra. I would never consider ordering a taxi here.
- distances 7y ago
  My experience from Berlin is quite different. Taxis were reasonably priced and service was good, didn't see any foul play. I was using the "MyTaxi" app to book rides.
  - davezatch 7y ago
    In comparison with any other major city where Uber operates, taxis are quite expensive here.
    - distances 7y ago
      I'm more familiar with the Nordics, so it may be my view is somewhat tainted by the expensive end of the spectrum.
    - tilolebo 7y ago
      You should go to Paris, then. Order a taxi during "peak hours": 5 EUR. Then they charge you with an "approaching fee". Basically, they make you pay for the distance they traveled on their way to pick you up. So last time I took one, I jumped in and was already charged for 21 EUR before the ride even began. The ride itself just cost 10 EUR...
      - davezatch 7y ago
        Yeah I probably should have clarified a bit :) In North and South America, and in other European cities (though certainly not all!), my experience has been that Uber is 99% of the time 1. better UX, and 2. cheaper than taxis, _generally_. In Berlin, taxi service is generally professional/clean/fine, but it's quite expensive, and when I travel to other places I get quickly spoiled by the Uber experience/cost. I understand why they ban it here, but from an end-user perspective, really wish they didn't.

by nbzklr 7y ago

alkonaut 7y ago

> It is no surprise that the Taxi companies are mad, because they are unable to compete under the current set of rules. Apart from subsidies Uber might use, why aren't taxi companies able to compete? Is something stopping them from doing exactly what Uber is doing (Such as have good apps, pre payment etc.)? If that's the case, that they are bound from developing their own business by regulation - why is that?

saiya-jin 7y ago
You are expecting market behavior in business that for decades was pure monopoly. We all know the answers to those questions. In open market, taxi business in its current form would be dead long time ago. But not if you gave state-guaranteed monopoly on a service that many people simply need and have few other options.
- usrusr 7y ago
  Where is that monopoly you are talking about? "Taxi" is not a company.
  - saiya-jin 7y ago
    Oh boy, I see I ruffled some feathers here, 10 downvotes within few minutes. Where I live, taxi drivers need to purchase medallion from given municipality, a massive investment. You can't just slap a taxi logo on the car and start driving people. From customers perspective this is a monopoly since they are all the same, charge all the same, have all the same drawbacks and most people hated them. From customer's perspective, they are indeed a 'taxi company'. Uber was the first competition to entrenched taxi driving business.
    - em-bee 7y ago
      exactly that. i have lived in germany for years. this is the first time i hear that they are all small businesses with 3-20 cars. all taxis have the same color, and prices are fixed. it looks more like a franchise than competing businesses. i don't think a business should be allowed to offer services below cost, nor should it be allowed to break the law, but on the other hand, the restrictions that exist in some places make no sense. a rental car has to return to the main office after each ride ??? what kind of nonsense is that?
      - usrusr 7y ago
        > nor should it be allowed to break the law What if the law mandates that some services can only be provided in a certain way? If a simple label swap could give a free pass then why stop at taxis? "I did not steal that money, I was just providing a free surprise disposal service. Would it help if I sent a bill?"
        em-bee 7y ago
        i don't get what you are trying to say. the question is, why does the law have these mandates? and do they really make sense? some do, some don't. as it is, we have a bunch of laws that are unnecessary and should be removed. would that help uber? i don't know.
usrusr 7y ago
One difference: regulated taxis are not allowed to cherry-pick as hard as Ubers. Germany actually considers Taxis part of public infrastructure, even if universally outsourced. The assumption that profitable routes subsidize less profitable is deeply embedded in the system. It's similar to how no amount of free market ideology should allow emergency rooms to cherry-pick.
zimpenfish 7y ago
> Is something stopping them from doing exactly what Uber is doing I should imagine "not wanting to lose thousands/millions every month whilst they pay for people to develop software, etc." is a big factor. Life is a lot easier when you can throw money at problems like Uber, especially if you're (unfairly) subsidising your service to drive competitors into the ground.
TeMPOraL 7y ago
I think subsidies are the key here. Apps are dime a dozen; in Poland there are individual taxi companies with apps and pan-european networks with apps, all operating legally. I assume the situation is the same in Germany. But local taxi markets can't afford to continuously offer below-market price; they don't have the money reserves.

vosper 7y ago

> It is no surprise that the Taxi companies are mad, because they are unable to compete under the current set of rules. (Caveat that I’m going entirely off your comment, with no background info): the middlemen businesses sound like small taxi companies, where the bookings come from Uber rather than directly from customers. Why can’t the taxi companies compete by building an app that provides the booking part?

ovi256 7y ago
>Why can’t the taxi companies compete by building an app that provides the booking part? Yes, why can't they ? Turns out building apps users will use is not a commodity that can be bought off the shelf.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  Actually, those apps are very much a commodity. Everyone and their dog has one. However, users are price-sensitive, and apps need marketing - both of those concerns turn competition into money spending game; Uber has more money and exploits the international scale of their business.
_pmf_ 7y ago
> Why can’t the taxi companies compete by building an app that provides the booking part? They have. The ruling is completely arbitrary.
- pgeorgi 7y ago
  The ruling doesn't look arbitrary to me: Uber pretended to not be part of the transaction, while they were a) the public face to the customer, b) offering the ride at a given price, c) negotiated with a specific driver to fulfill it (and only then got the middleman on board to sign off on the transaction). As usual for Uber they went for the sketchiest way possible to deal with regulations, as if they're looking for ways to argue about them in court as often as possible. Their problem: no court (except one) in Germany makes law because we don't have the Anglo-saxon concept of case law.

0ld 7y ago

There's a taxi company in my city (EU, but not Germany) which doesn't go mad or cry for govt help, and instead provides experience very similar to Uber with its app, runs "full scale" licensed taxis and their prices are very close (and frequently lower) than Uber's. So that I prefer using their service, as they can drive on the bus lanes and in the old town. What do they do wrong?

ajdlinux 7y ago
As someone who doesn't live in your city, if I were to visit, I'd rather not install another app, create another account, and sort out payment (including capturing receipts for corporate expense claims). Uber has the advantage of being ubiquitous among a certain class of travellers - this obviously is not an insurmountable advantage, but it does mean I naturally tend towards using Uber when travelling unless there's a particularly compelling local alternative. Everything else about your taxi service sounds good, and I'd be more than happy to use them, I'm just lazy. (And from other comments, I see that there's taxi company apps like FreeNow which seem to be gaining regional market share?)
- achow 7y ago
  For non-visitors (locals), who I assume would be bulk of riders, installing of Uber or another app is same. Once they become habituated to one app, they would be very sticky.
  - ajdlinux 7y ago
    Locals are probably the majority of riders, but a majority by how much? Taxis are a high volume, low margin business, and losing purely the foreign business traveller market alone to Uber has got to sting.
- pgeorgi 7y ago
  > Uber has the advantage of being ubiquitous among a certain class of travellers Which is funny because Uber's shtick is to complain about the evil taxi cartels, while statements like yours indicate that they're really the biggest of them all.

odiroot 7y ago

> It is no surprise that the Taxi companies are mad, because they are unable to compete under the current set of rules. They're mad because it ruins their monopoly. Taxis are ridiculously expensive in Germany, also known to use tricks to charge you extra. I would never consider ordering a taxi here.

distances 7y ago
My experience from Berlin is quite different. Taxis were reasonably priced and service was good, didn't see any foul play. I was using the "MyTaxi" app to book rides.
- davezatch 7y ago
  In comparison with any other major city where Uber operates, taxis are quite expensive here.
  - distances 7y ago
    I'm more familiar with the Nordics, so it may be my view is somewhat tainted by the expensive end of the spectrum.
  - tilolebo 7y ago
    You should go to Paris, then. Order a taxi during "peak hours": 5 EUR. Then they charge you with an "approaching fee". Basically, they make you pay for the distance they traveled on their way to pick you up. So last time I took one, I jumped in and was already charged for 21 EUR before the ride even began. The ride itself just cost 10 EUR...
    - davezatch 7y ago
      Yeah I probably should have clarified a bit :) In North and South America, and in other European cities (though certainly not all!), my experience has been that Uber is 99% of the time 1. better UX, and 2. cheaper than taxis, _generally_. In Berlin, taxi service is generally professional/clean/fine, but it's quite expensive, and when I travel to other places I get quickly spoiled by the Uber experience/cost. I understand why they ban it here, but from an end-user perspective, really wish they didn't.