5 ms·

They might have teeth, but they didn’t use them here. Uber’s 2021 revenues were around 6000 million USD, and the fine was 21 million USD. ”The FTC is even more

by nikanj 5y ago

They might have teeth, but they didn’t use them here. Uber’s 2021 revenues were around 6000 million USD, and the fine was 21 million USD. ”The FTC is even more useless” isn’t really a good argument, and I don’t disagree - the whole Uber/AirBnB business model is built on the realization that you can just blatantly ignore regulators, and pay the miniscule fines out of petty cash

cletus 5y ago
In what world do you think the ACCC, which only really has jurisdiction over Australia, should fine Uber some large portion of their worldwide revenue of $6B for misleading messaging about cancellations?
- praestigiare 5y ago
  A world in which an Australian regulatory agency should protect Australian consumers by levying a fine which makes it financially untenable to operate in Australia with these deceptive practices.
  - Handytinge 5y ago
    Like... 10% of their turnover in fines? Which is what they did.
- PretzelPirate 5y ago
  GDPR fines are based on worldwide revenue, so it’s not outrageous to think that other policies/organizations would do the same. If they don’t, fines aren’t going to be effective motivators.
  - jcranberry 5y ago
    The EU has a big enough market that access outweighs the cost. If Malta tried to fine Uber a percentage of its global revenue they'd pack up shop and leave immediately. Australia is about one fifteenth the size of Europe in population.
    - nikanj 5y ago
      I think you've just perfectly explained the problem: "If we punish them hard enough that they care, they might leave". You can't do credible enforcement, if your primary goal is ensuring the company continues to grace you with their presence
      - jcranberry 5y ago
        It's not about a particular company it's about global/international companies in general. Plus imposing a global revenue fine for this kind of issue would be absurd. It only needs to be enough for their bottom line to look better by complying rather than making the change.
        afarrell 5y ago
        Specifically, the bottom line of the business unit within the company which earns revenue from the business.
      - cletus 5y ago
        This is roughly equivalent to saying we should put people in jail for 5 years for speeding because for some people a $50 fine just isn't that much. Punishments need to be proportionate. Executing people for stealing hub caps may well reduce the incidence of that but that doesn't make it OK. Misleading cancellation messaging just isn't that big of a deal. I really wish people would focus on the severity of what happened rather than just saying "it's not enough" just because they seemingly hate Uber. People's personal dislike of a company or person is not a basis for determining a punishment.
        nikanj 5y ago
        Incidentally, countries like Finland issue fines based on your income - and if you're rich, speeding nets you a cool six-digit fine https://www.boredpanda.com/finland-progressive-speeding-tickets-fines/ https://www.boredpanda.com/finland-progressive-speeding-tick... The US also believes in punitive damages, i.e. "We fine you $1000 for what you did, and then add $1000,000,00 because you don't really care about $1000"
- tremon 5y ago
  Because otherwise, multinational companies will use their global profits to bankroll illegal activities within any nation's borders, and will keep on doing so until the nation relents.
dahfizz 5y ago
The real question is whether Uber made >$26m using the deceptive cancellation messages in Australia. The goal of fines isn't to bankrupt companies, but to change behavior. If you can make a specific behavior unprofitable, the fine is successful.

by nikanj 5y ago

cletus 5y ago

In what world do you think the ACCC, which only really has jurisdiction over Australia, should fine Uber some large portion of their worldwide revenue of $6B for misleading messaging about cancellations?

praestigiare 5y ago
A world in which an Australian regulatory agency should protect Australian consumers by levying a fine which makes it financially untenable to operate in Australia with these deceptive practices.
- Handytinge 5y ago
  Like... 10% of their turnover in fines? Which is what they did.
PretzelPirate 5y ago
GDPR fines are based on worldwide revenue, so it’s not outrageous to think that other policies/organizations would do the same. If they don’t, fines aren’t going to be effective motivators.
- jcranberry 5y ago
  The EU has a big enough market that access outweighs the cost. If Malta tried to fine Uber a percentage of its global revenue they'd pack up shop and leave immediately. Australia is about one fifteenth the size of Europe in population.
  - nikanj 5y ago
    I think you've just perfectly explained the problem: "If we punish them hard enough that they care, they might leave". You can't do credible enforcement, if your primary goal is ensuring the company continues to grace you with their presence
    - jcranberry 5y ago
      It's not about a particular company it's about global/international companies in general. Plus imposing a global revenue fine for this kind of issue would be absurd. It only needs to be enough for their bottom line to look better by complying rather than making the change.
      - afarrell 5y ago
        Specifically, the bottom line of the business unit within the company which earns revenue from the business.
    - cletus 5y ago
      This is roughly equivalent to saying we should put people in jail for 5 years for speeding because for some people a $50 fine just isn't that much. Punishments need to be proportionate. Executing people for stealing hub caps may well reduce the incidence of that but that doesn't make it OK. Misleading cancellation messaging just isn't that big of a deal. I really wish people would focus on the severity of what happened rather than just saying "it's not enough" just because they seemingly hate Uber. People's personal dislike of a company or person is not a basis for determining a punishment.
      - nikanj 5y ago
        Incidentally, countries like Finland issue fines based on your income - and if you're rich, speeding nets you a cool six-digit fine https://www.boredpanda.com/finland-progressive-speeding-tickets-fines/ https://www.boredpanda.com/finland-progressive-speeding-tick... The US also believes in punitive damages, i.e. "We fine you $1000 for what you did, and then add $1000,000,00 because you don't really care about $1000"
tremon 5y ago
Because otherwise, multinational companies will use their global profits to bankroll illegal activities within any nation's borders, and will keep on doing so until the nation relents.

dahfizz 5y ago

The real question is whether Uber made >$26m using the deceptive cancellation messages in Australia. The goal of fines isn't to bankrupt companies, but to change behavior. If you can make a specific behavior unprofitable, the fine is successful.