4 ms·
> Well, maybe. Nothing Kim is doing is going to directly lessen demand for medallions from the city. Sure he is, if he stops leasing medallions there will be 2
by jonknee 12y ago
> Well, maybe. Nothing Kim is doing is going to directly lessen demand for medallions from the city.
Sure he is, if he stops leasing medallions there will be 204 less medallions demanded at the $2,200/month price level. It already mentioned that this rate is going down, it used to be $2,500. Perhaps other cab companies will want to expand at the current pricing, but more likely is that the price will go down further.
Whoever is left holding ridiculously inflated medallions at the end of the day is who will be hurt. Which from what you are saying is actually individuals. That's tough, but it's also a risk to lay down $250,000 for a certificate from the city for the purely artificial bureaucratic ability to drive a car.
- aetherson 12y agoMy post may not make much sense with its parent post being deleted. That poster originally commented that Kim was hitting the city in its pocketbook. I was trying to point out that, while Kim's actions certainly do affect the whole ecosystem of SF rides-for-hire, he's not directly a customer of the city, and also to his contribution to the devaluing of taxi medallions probably pales in comparison to Uber and Lyft's contributions, and those aren't hypothetical in the future but already in the present.