4 ms·

Yes because Uber didn’t have to actually compete with taxis. They offered a nicer service at a cheap cost and both of these things were an illusion. The price

Yes because Uber didn’t have to actually compete with taxis. They offered a nicer service at a cheap cost and both of these things were an illusion. The price was subsidized and the drivers weren’t required (at the time) to meet any of the regulations that apply to drivers or third party passengers (for good reasons.) So they replaced one crappy service with another that has a better UX. All other benefits seem to have vanished when forced to actually make money and we’ve seen a ton of rationale for the existing regulations in the process. Similar to Airbnb

admax88qqq 3y ago
Uber still provides a better service for me in areas where I can use it. It's not as cheap, but in the cities I live and travel to taxis are still sketchy and unreliable compared to Uber. Edit: honestly what is the rationale for the existing regulation? I see the arguments for regulation around employee protection. But a lot of the licensing regulations seem designed to enforce artificial scarcity and restrict competition. The medallion system in NYC comes to mind. The value of an NYC medallion was insane pre Uber, there's no good reason for that. Some of the licensing was clearly regulatory capture by existing taxi companies.
noirbot 3y ago
I don't disagree with most of that, and I generally try not to use Uber or Lyft these days, but "replace a crappy service with a crappy service with better UX" is... not a bad business model. Almost every time I've taken a normal cab, the car was worse than every Uber I've ever been in, they tried to bully me into paying cash, and half of the time there was a screen in the car showing me ads non-stop, and it still cost more. I had essentially sworn off of taxis, or even visiting cities where I would need to get a taxi. For all of their supposed regulation, there was almost no other industry I wanted to interact with less. Uber had a really low bar to clear, and even at increased prices, I'm unsure if it would drive me back to cabs.
lr4444lr 3y ago
Surprising to some, perhaps, but the average Uber ride did not end in violence or a vehicular accident injuring people that had to be prevented by regulation. To the dismay perhaps of taxi/limousine commissioners, the average driver was a relatively decent human being who - given the preexisting apparatus in place to license drivers - did a good job, and cared about his car and his rating on the app to continue to do so. What happened for decades in cities like New York where taxi medallions were so expensive you could retire on their sale was big tech disrupting a dysfunction at its best. As for the cost, I didn't lose any sleep at night worrying that I was subsidized by Saudi Royal Family money. When the prices went up, it was never at a rate much worse than a cab.
- jeremyjh 3y ago
  > ride did not end in violence or a vehicular accident injuring people That is not why registries and medallions existed. The point of it was to prevent a race to the bottom that crowded the streets with empty taxis all honking at each other.
  - techsupporter 3y ago
    > race to the bottom that crowded the streets with empty taxis all honking at each other Which is, to your point, exactly what has happened with Ubers and Lyfts in Seattle. In any popular neighborhood on any popular evening, public transport becomes even more difficult to use because Uber and Lyft drivers absolutely do not respect bus lanes or bus stops. They turn, even more than they already are, into fare pickup zones for these private companies. If a bus driver does manage to make it close enough to honk but far enough to not pick up someone safely, the gig worker does not do anything. I'm starting to see this at the new train station that opened on the north end of Seattle. There is a "kiss and ride" area and it is routinely covered up with people driving vehicles festooned with the logos of the app companies. Some have even figured out that, apparently, they can get even better ratings by dropping their fares off at the bus stops in the bus-only lanes. Meanwhile, there's nothing any of us can do because there is no public registry or complaint process for the public to gripe about app gig workers, and if you ask for one you are pilloried as wanting to "take away good pay from hard-working immigrants" or some other trope.
    - 331c8c71 3y ago
      Automated fines for driving on bus lanes was already done at scale in Moscow more than 10 years ago. I assume there's no budget to do this immediately in Seattle? In any case I guess one could try to organize and write to the police / local councils etc...
      - rendang 3y ago
        I can attest we do have that in Seattle, I've been ticketed by mail for accidentally turning into a street that was designated bus-only
seanmcdirmid 3y ago
> Yes because Uber didn’t have to actually compete with taxis. Taxis in many cities were/are horrible, Uber is a godsend in cities like Manila where the option is to (a) get ripped off (for sure) by a taxi or (b) use the Uber app and don't get ripped off. It is honestly an improvement. Likewise for didi dache in many Chinese cities where getting ripped off is common.

admax88qqq 3y ago

Uber still provides a better service for me in areas where I can use it. It's not as cheap, but in the cities I live and travel to taxis are still sketchy and unreliable compared to Uber. Edit: honestly what is the rationale for the existing regulation? I see the arguments for regulation around employee protection. But a lot of the licensing regulations seem designed to enforce artificial scarcity and restrict competition. The medallion system in NYC comes to mind. The value of an NYC medallion was insane pre Uber, there's no good reason for that. Some of the licensing was clearly regulatory capture by existing taxi companies.

noirbot 3y ago

I don't disagree with most of that, and I generally try not to use Uber or Lyft these days, but "replace a crappy service with a crappy service with better UX" is... not a bad business model. Almost every time I've taken a normal cab, the car was worse than every Uber I've ever been in, they tried to bully me into paying cash, and half of the time there was a screen in the car showing me ads non-stop, and it still cost more. I had essentially sworn off of taxis, or even visiting cities where I would need to get a taxi. For all of their supposed regulation, there was almost no other industry I wanted to interact with less. Uber had a really low bar to clear, and even at increased prices, I'm unsure if it would drive me back to cabs.

lr4444lr 3y ago

Surprising to some, perhaps, but the average Uber ride did not end in violence or a vehicular accident injuring people that had to be prevented by regulation. To the dismay perhaps of taxi/limousine commissioners, the average driver was a relatively decent human being who - given the preexisting apparatus in place to license drivers - did a good job, and cared about his car and his rating on the app to continue to do so. What happened for decades in cities like New York where taxi medallions were so expensive you could retire on their sale was big tech disrupting a dysfunction at its best. As for the cost, I didn't lose any sleep at night worrying that I was subsidized by Saudi Royal Family money. When the prices went up, it was never at a rate much worse than a cab.

jeremyjh 3y ago
> ride did not end in violence or a vehicular accident injuring people That is not why registries and medallions existed. The point of it was to prevent a race to the bottom that crowded the streets with empty taxis all honking at each other.
- techsupporter 3y ago
  > race to the bottom that crowded the streets with empty taxis all honking at each other Which is, to your point, exactly what has happened with Ubers and Lyfts in Seattle. In any popular neighborhood on any popular evening, public transport becomes even more difficult to use because Uber and Lyft drivers absolutely do not respect bus lanes or bus stops. They turn, even more than they already are, into fare pickup zones for these private companies. If a bus driver does manage to make it close enough to honk but far enough to not pick up someone safely, the gig worker does not do anything. I'm starting to see this at the new train station that opened on the north end of Seattle. There is a "kiss and ride" area and it is routinely covered up with people driving vehicles festooned with the logos of the app companies. Some have even figured out that, apparently, they can get even better ratings by dropping their fares off at the bus stops in the bus-only lanes. Meanwhile, there's nothing any of us can do because there is no public registry or complaint process for the public to gripe about app gig workers, and if you ask for one you are pilloried as wanting to "take away good pay from hard-working immigrants" or some other trope.
  - 331c8c71 3y ago
    Automated fines for driving on bus lanes was already done at scale in Moscow more than 10 years ago. I assume there's no budget to do this immediately in Seattle? In any case I guess one could try to organize and write to the police / local councils etc...
    - rendang 3y ago
      I can attest we do have that in Seattle, I've been ticketed by mail for accidentally turning into a street that was designated bus-only

seanmcdirmid 3y ago

> Yes because Uber didn’t have to actually compete with taxis. Taxis in many cities were/are horrible, Uber is a godsend in cities like Manila where the option is to (a) get ripped off (for sure) by a taxi or (b) use the Uber app and don't get ripped off. It is honestly an improvement. Likewise for didi dache in many Chinese cities where getting ripped off is common.