3 ms·
> Uber says there is a surplus, people driving cars with empty seats, and they attempt to capture that surplus. From an economic point-of-view that is a good ar
by Xylakant 12y ago
> Uber says there is a surplus, people driving cars with empty seats, and they attempt to capture that surplus. From an economic point-of-view that is a good argument. The surplus undeniably exists, and it would be beneficial to reduce it.
This is actually not what Uber says. Ride-Sharing would be fully valid as long as the fee paid is lower than the cost for the car owner. It's specifically exempt from the law. However, the fee that Uber proposes is far above the accepted costs per kilometer (it's roughly 1 EUR, while the accepted costs are roughly 30cent), so they don't qualify. There's a german startup (Wundercar) that tries to capture specifically that market and they just reduced their prices in response to a similar injunction.
- noelwelsh 12y agoI didn't know Germany had laws about this case. I meant in the general sense that their business model is based on exploiting this surplus. It is their value proposition, if you like.
- Xylakant 12y ago> I didn't know Germany had laws about this case. We have laws for everything.
- Padding 12y agoIndeed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rinderkennzeichnungs-_und_Rindfleischetikettierungs%C3%BCberwachungsaufgaben%C3%BCbertragungsgesetz http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rinderkennzeichnungs-_und_Rindf...
- jacquesm 12y agoThe wp page says it got repealed.
- Xylakant 12y agoIt was replaced, can't let a good law go to waste [1]. Mecklenburg-Vorpommern with it's highest mountain of 179 m above sea level (49m above the surrounding area) even has a law about cable cars, though that's a EU thing. We're really well equipped with laws. [1] though not by a law, but some administrative process
- Vik1ng 12y agoThis Act shall not be subject to... 1. Passenger cars when they are free of charge or the total price does not exceed the operating cost of the trip https://translate.google.de/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gesetze-im-internet.de%2Fbundesrecht%2Fpbefg%2Fgesamt.pdf&edit-text=&act=url https://translate.google.de/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&pre...
- wooter 12y agotake $20 bucks from a friend for a ride to the airport? FELON! now thats a sensible policy...
- pgeorgi 12y agoGerman laws (being structures after the civil code) are intent based, which differs from the british common law derivatives which work by the letter. Hence the important question resulting from that quote is: Does the driver derive taxable income from the activity of driving the car? Getting $20 for the one-off trip won't get you there, not by a long shot. Getting $20 for every time you're driving people to the airport 20 times a day, 200 days a year is a different matter (assuming a short trip where $20 work out).
- wooter 12y agoand yet again, people act like the law of supply and demand doesn't exist, and price-fixing hasn't been proven to be detrimental in every instance in history, ever.
- Xylakant 12y agoThis is not about price fixing. Uber can (and in UberBlack does) legally operate a car-for-hire operation that is cheaper than cabs. This is about not complying with safety and other operating regulations, which makes it easy for UberPop to significantly undercut the competitions prices. So the competition sued for unfair business practices (since complying with safety regulation costs them money) and the case is so clear that the court granted without any oral arguments a preliminary, enforceable injunction.