[HN Gopher] Uber to pay $272M to Australian taxi operators
___________________________________________________________________
Uber to pay $272M to Australian taxi operators
Author : schappim
Score : 77 points
Date : 2024-03-17 23:03 UTC (23 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.smh.com.au)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.smh.com.au)
| farhanhubble wrote:
| Does someone know the real story? How can a company be fined for
| disrupting an existing business?
| andyferris wrote:
| When Uber entered the market, what they were doing was
| technically illegal (the taxi industry was regulated, Uber
| wasn't a registered provider, its drivers didn't own a taxi
| permit (which no longer exist), etc).
|
| You can generally sue for illegal behavior that causes you
| losses.
| lysp wrote:
| Further to that, taxi licences were limited in number and
| sought after.
|
| So it became less of driving a taxi and more about financial
| investment. People bought dozens of licences and leased them
| out.
|
| It no longer became about driving taxis and was more an
| investment.
|
| As soon as Uber came, those who invested heavily were left
| holding a useless (or heavily reduced) investment.
| farhanhubble wrote:
| Ah! So the government created artificial scarcity just as
| they do in housing.
| protocolture wrote:
| Correct. And the screeching from the taxi lobby was
| thunderous. We are better off now this has occurred,
| really its a sovereign risk issue and they should have
| sued the government instead.
| BadHumans wrote:
| I feel like you just ignored everything else that was
| said and just zeroed in on the one thing that aligns with
| your viewpoint.
| zo1 wrote:
| Not OP. But I theorize that almost every single ill
| plaguing society on a large level ATM can be traced back
| to a specific government action or refusal by the
| government to act.
|
| Homelessness? Check. Drunk driving fatalities? Check.
| Domestic violence? Check. Abusive monopolies on single-
| person transportation? Check.
| littlecosmic wrote:
| In theory government can do almost anything so it's hard
| for this statement to be wrong...
| Izkata wrote:
| The argument I've heard before (about the medallion
| system in the US, which had the same result as what GP
| described with licenses) was that since roads are a
| limited resource, this prevented too many taxis from
| causing excess traffic just driving around looking for
| customers.
|
| It's an interesting argument because having the app
| connect customers means they don't have to drive around
| aimlessly, which almost sidesteps the problem (they still
| have to pull over somewhere but aren't necessarily
| causing traffic).
| Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote:
| They could fix the whole system by issuing as many
| medallians as people want. Fixed reasonable price,
| renewable each year. You have to meet certain criteria
| for public safety, like good driving record, not a sex
| offender, the car must pass annual safety inspections,
| etc. But other that, let the market decide how many
| taxis.
| Ekaros wrote:
| It makes level of sense to limit number of medallions.
| And then also at same time cap prices and mandate
| availability. That is if you have a medallion you must
| have car on order or on road at all times. This could be
| achieved by multiple medallion owners working together so
| that there is a taxi available Wed-Thu night during
| rainstorm.
|
| Also you do not want to give out so many medallions that
| owners cannot possibly make a living. Now transferability
| outside selling whole business is stupid.
| aeyes wrote:
| > cap prices
|
| > Also you do not want to give out so many medallions
| that owners cannot possibly make a living
|
| Do you really think that some government agency can come
| up with the correct price and license cap using Excel
| magic? Of course not, most likely this will just lead to
| corruption and an inferior service.
|
| Let the free market find the price. If it's not possible
| to make a living people won't drive. Where I live taxis
| usually charge whatever Uber is showing.
| Ekaros wrote:
| If you want free market to find the price. Why not force
| Uber and Lyft to accept pricing from their drivers.
| Absolutely any pricing and any rules. I think that would
| be reasonable.
| throwawaymaths wrote:
| Thats what sidecar did, and the driver market rejected it
| because it was an awful and unsafe experience. Imagine
| trying to set rates while you're driving around!
| aeyes wrote:
| Uber shows how much they will pay, the driver doesn't
| have to accept the trip. If drivers don't accept Uber
| will have to adjust the price.
| sokoloff wrote:
| I can only imagine what NYC traffic would look like if
| there was an unlimited number of yellow cab medallions
| allowing pickups in NYC.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| Sounds like a racket. So still hard to fathom the legality.
| _kb wrote:
| Lobbying by the taxi industry has also been persistent for
| the past decade or so [0]. Along with some fairly excellent
| return political stunts from early days Uber [1].
|
| [0]: https://www.vice.com/en/article/gq9jzm/queenslands-taxi-
| driv...
|
| [1]: https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/uber-
| uses-hor...
| jabroni_salad wrote:
| Taxis are regulated and would be barred from operating if they
| fall out of compliance. this specific story is about taxi
| licenses which are of limited availability and costs a lot of
| money to get. Since Uber lobbied the govt for permission to
| operate without these, their value have freefalled and Uber is
| compensating the holders of those licenses.
|
| That protectionism hasn't stepped up properly the past ten
| years only shows that maybe governments found they would
| benefit from letting the taxis get slapped around a bit. There
| will probably be more stories like this in the future as Uber
| has become entrenched and now will be pressured to get more
| proper.
| plantain wrote:
| "Taxis are regulated" - well, kinda...
|
| They're only just now thinking up maybe potentially one day
| working towards regulating them.
| https://www.9news.com.au/national/rogue-taxi-drivers-
| could-b...
| protocolture wrote:
| >this specific story is about taxi licenses which are of
| limited availability and costs a lot of money to get.
|
| An unjust situation created by the government. Uber didnt
| pass the unjust laws protecting cabcharges monopoly.
| lozenge wrote:
| Take a look at page 79 of the first 'key document'
| https://www.mauriceblackburn.com.au/class-actions/join-a-cla...
|
| The law said you need a license to provide taxi services. Uber
| and its drivers didn't have that license. So the lawsuit is for
| the damages caused by Uber's illegal behaviour.
| farhanhubble wrote:
| But Uber wasn't and still isn't a taxi company. It's just an
| aggregator as they call it.
| Retric wrote:
| They can call themselves a hotdog stand, that doesn't mean
| the courts agree.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| How are they a taxi company? Certainly not thought of
| that way by your average person. Its taxis vs ride
| sharing.
| kijalo wrote:
| Disagree there. I think most people would prefer uber
| over taxi for service/convenience/cost, but I doubt
| modern uber would be considered that different to a taxi
| service.
| joshuaissac wrote:
| > Certainly not thought of that way by your average
| person. Its taxis vs ride sharing
|
| Uber operates primarily as a taxi service with an app
|
| Ride sharing is a non-core feature called UberPool, which
| lets users share Uber taxis with other users.
| TillE wrote:
| "Ride sharing" is the silliest euphemism, it's not
| sharing a ride unless the driver was going there already.
|
| If you don't want to lump them in with taxis, they're a
| car service with contract workers. That's all they are.
| Retric wrote:
| "a type of vehicle for hire with a driver, used by a
| single passenger or small group of passengers, often for
| a non-shared ride. A taxicab conveys passengers between
| locations of their choice." So yea that sounds like
| Uber/Lyft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxi
|
| I regularly see people say they'll call a cab and then
| use Uber/Lyft.
|
| Ride sharing generally means carpooling/picking up
| hitchhikers etc. Where the driver is going on the route
| anyway and is adding passengers for HOV access, gas
| money, or just conversation. https://rideshare.org/
|
| Uber's initial intention _was_ carpooling where someone
| would put in their intended destination and could pick
| people up for money. However the business model clearly
| switched to a taxi model with a paid driver not staying
| at the destination. They still wanted to call it ride
| sharing because what they where doing was often blatantly
| illegal
|
| PS: Their initial subsidized prices convinced many people
| to advocate for an exception which was often granted.
| That's the bit that's rarely talked about, they
| essentially bribed the general public.
| throwawaymaths wrote:
| > Uber's initial intention was carpooling where someone
| would put in their intended destination and could pick
| people up for money.
|
| Historically incorrect. Uber started out as a black car
| service (with California tpc licenses). _Lyft_ started as
| a pivot of the carpooling app zimride named after the
| founder.
|
| > Their initial subsidized prices convinced many people
| to advocate for an exception which was often granted
|
| That's not really what moved the needle. What moved the
| needle on exceptions was the sharp drop in drunk driving
| incidents and fatality.
| Retric wrote:
| > Lyft started
|
| Ahh ok.
| Retric wrote:
| PS: There was sharing but it was time sharing Limos, so I
| can see getting those swapped.
|
| https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-
| finance/11101...
|
| > Initially, the idea was for a timeshare limo service
| that could be ordered via an app. After the conference,
| the men went their separate ways. However, when Camp
| returned to San Francisco, he continued to be fixated on
| the idea and bought the domain name _UberCab.com._
| NoPicklez wrote:
| I think your average person does think that way.
|
| This entire debate and court case is between Taxi's and
| Uber, because they're competing by providing essentially
| the same thing.
|
| The passenger clearly doesn't care if the person driving
| them from A to B is using a company vehicle vs their own
| vehicle. Ride sharing is a silly name, as you're not
| really sharing the ride if the driver isn't going to the
| same place are they.
| gomox wrote:
| We hereby witness the effectiveness of Uber's PR machine
| tasked with creating that category with the specific goal
| of evading taxicab regulations.
| jimjimjim wrote:
| if it walks like a duck and...
| WheatMillington wrote:
| Not a taxi company, just a company that takes fares to
| drive people around.
| protocolture wrote:
| An unjust law, which was ignored justly.
|
| You don't have LGBT people paying cops because they committed
| buggery before it was legalised.
|
| Appealing to unjust laws for your argument is the weakest
| play in the book.
|
| Uber didnt cause any damage, decades of taxi monopoly caused
| damage. Uber corrected the injustice.
| joegibbs wrote:
| It's ridiculous - you provide bad quality service with high fees
| and scammy operators, another competitor enters the market and
| takes your market share, then you sue them and win for beating
| you? Imagine that in any other scenario.
|
| Not to mention, every trip in NSW has a $1.32 fee to help
| compensate taxi drivers.
|
| Taxi operators should have tried competing on merits like price
| and cracking down on dodgy drivers instead of suing. The last
| time I got a taxi it was $80 for a 10km trip that's $32 on Uber.
| If they weren't so terrible then Uber would have never had an in
| on the market in the first place.
| mvdtnz wrote:
| Uber settled, they didn't lose the suit. An Uber spokesperson
| even went as far as admitting there were "legacy issues" that
| they wanted to put behind them.
|
| > "Since 2018, Uber has made significant contributions into
| various state-level taxi compensation schemes, and with today's
| proposed settlement, we put these legacy issues firmly in our
| past," an Uber spokesperson said in an emailed response.
| NoPicklez wrote:
| I don't think they missed reading that.
|
| Just that regardless, the whole reason for the suit in the
| first place is just because a new company beat Taxi's at
| their game and the Taxi companies decided to complain rather
| than innovate.
| kevingadd wrote:
| They broke the law, if they didn't want to potentially pay
| fines or a settlement, they shouldn't have broken the law.
| They could have spent all this money lobbying in advance to
| get laws repealed or get an exception instead.
|
| In the grand scheme of things it seems like it worked out
| for them.
| protocolture wrote:
| >They could have spent all this money lobbying
|
| So the valid response to an unjust situation is to throw
| money at it and pray for change?
|
| That our laws should be decided on who has the most
| money? Cabcharge V Uber?
|
| Or that, the law being stupid and unjust, was ignored by
| Uber, to the benefit of millions of australians, who
| experienced cheaper fares, resulting in a massive push to
| get the law changed from the bottom up?
| mvdtnz wrote:
| Not everyone agrees with you that the situation was
| "unjust". And Uber is not the plucky underdog you're
| portraying them as. They built an empire on capital from
| the likes of Blackrock, JPMorgan, Softbank and other
| heavy hitters.
| theshackleford wrote:
| > Not everyone agrees with you that the situation was
| "unjust".
|
| More do, than don't. You won't find many shedding tears
| for the bullshit grift that was most of the Australian
| taxi industry. Good riddance to it and the completely
| terrible laws that allowed their nonsense to continue
| unabated for as long as it did.
| NoPicklez wrote:
| Exactly.
|
| Even if Uber had "Uber" funding, using Uber is a far
| better experience than using our Taxi services. Paying
| for and knowing how much your ride is going to cost
| before hand, using an app to be able to hail an Uber and
| see in real time as they're coming.
|
| Just the basics they never had
| protocolture wrote:
| They arent a plucky underdog, they are a very large
| monied dog whose interests align better with the consumer
| than cabcharges near legislative monopoly.
| weq wrote:
| The prices of cartel approved taxi plates crashed from
| ~200-150k to ~20k overnight once the market saw that the
| gov was letting Uber continue operating. Uber didnt compete
| on the same field, they created a new game, that was
| completely illegal in Australia, on another field. If a
| regular joe did that he would gaol.
|
| This payment compentsates those taxi licence holders who
| held the dip.
| protocolture wrote:
| Irrelevant. Uber flattened the market, removed cabcharge
| dominance. And removed the barrier to entry for other
| players.
|
| Just because the barrier to entry was a tradable
| government stamp is irrelevant. There shouldnt have been
| a barrier in the first place.
|
| Uber, in a weird, stupid, modernity sucks way, brought
| justice to an industry that had been unjust for a very
| long time. Love them or hate them, cabcharge is worse.
|
| >If a regular joe did that he would gaol.
|
| Also bad. The government and taxi lobby should not have
| set up a situation where giving a ride for money could
| lead to incarceration. This doesnt support your point, it
| just further illustrates that the situation was unjust
| until uber acted.
| mvdtnz wrote:
| You saying "irrelevant" doesn't make it so. The law of
| the land is, in fact, very relevant in a lawsuit.
| protocolture wrote:
| Its a thought terminating cliche. A law being a law
| doesnt end an argument. If the law shouldn't be, we are
| permitted to continue thinking towards its removal.
| EarthMephit wrote:
| At the end of the day, Uber broke the Australian laws as they
| stood (even if you didn't agree with them).
|
| If I had started an illegal gypsy taxi business I would have
| been fined or arrested. Why are there different rules for large
| corporations?
| lannisterstark wrote:
| >If I had started an illegal gypsy taxi business I would have
| been fined or arrested. Why are there different rules for
| large corporations?
|
| Shouldn't you be wondering why is it illegal for you to do
| the first thing rather than the last?
|
| Why shouldn't you be able to start what you call a 'gypsy
| taxi business.' what's the need for arresting you? Is it that
| authoritarian of a nation?
| jazzyjackson wrote:
| do you disagree with all laws or just ones meant to protect
| workers' wages?
| protocolture wrote:
| Just the ones designed to protect cabcharges monopoly.
| abigail95 wrote:
| if ride sharing didn't exist wages would be lower.
| companies like uber increase wages, see Seattle's law
| reducing the pay of drivers by enforcing minimums.
|
| those laws do not protect wages, uber was right to
| protest them.
| lannisterstark wrote:
| Giving certain monopolies complete control over the
| industry and not letting competition in which drives down
| the prices for consumers is anything but "protecting
| workers' wages."
|
| You don't work if you are getting 0 rides because they're
| too expensive for end-user. What wages?
| johngladtj wrote:
| All the ones that restrict freedom without good reason
| mianos wrote:
| The taxi laws didn't end up protecting the wages of the
| drivers. They ended up protecting the rights of the
| 'plate owners', who, having too much cash, used taxi
| plates as an investment and rented out the taxis to
| drivers on a nightly basis often for half cash. Which
| makes taxi drivers do anything for cash over recorded
| transactions.
|
| The whole system is crooked, even today.
| NamTaf wrote:
| I'm not wondering why it's illegal for me to start a fly-
| by-night taxi business because I understand that the
| regulation was developed over a long time to avoid dodgy
| drivers who'd scam passengers or worse.
|
| I can accept an argument where it was not fit-for-purpose
| for a tech-era reinterpretation of how vetted drivers
| deliver this service. Despite that, I think you're probably
| reaching if you were to try to tell me that you don't
| understand why the prevailing legislation existed in order
| to ensure passengers were picked up by vetted, known
| drivers whose identities were known and who could face
| recourse if they scammed passengers (e.g. by driving them
| around in circles to inflate fares), held passengers
| hostage or worse.
| EarthMephit wrote:
| I don't know, I used to catch gypsy cabs in London twenty
| odd years ago and you were taking your life into your own
| hands. There were some pretty shady operators. I can see
| why a government might want to license taxi drivers.
|
| > Why shouldn't you be able to start what you call a 'gypsy
| taxi business.' what's the need for arresting you? Is it
| that authoritarian of a nation?
|
| Why do we bother licensing drivers then too? Are we that
| much of an authoritarian nation that we need to control who
| drives a car? Should Uber drivers be allowed to drive
| without a driver's license too?
| protocolture wrote:
| Sure but the responsibility is always to break unjust laws.
| And in this instance they were able to demonstrate why the
| laws were unjust and succeeded in getting them changed. There
| shouldn't be consideration for unjust laws. Its like suing a
| german car company for not using enough slave labor. "Its the
| Law" is just a rhetorical was to shut down debate. It should
| never have been the law, and when it was contested it no
| longer was.
|
| >If I had started an illegal gypsy taxi business I would have
| been fined or arrested.
|
| You shouldnt have been. Thats the point.
|
| >Why are there different rules for large corporations?
|
| The large corporation defeated cabcharge dominance for all of
| us. They get minor consideration for that.
|
| Uber took us from a situation where a single large
| corporation had a complete monopoly, to a place where
| multiple large corporations compete, a place where you
| technically have the right to compete against them. They
| flattened the rules, they didn't create a new rule where only
| they get special consideration.
| aragilar wrote:
| Given uber developed software to block the regulator from
| regulating (see https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-19/the-
| uber-story/109129... and links therein), I'm not sure they
| can have said to have any moral ground in this.
|
| It's worth noting that the regulator also blocked a
| majority of Taxi providers from providing a single app
| (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-12/accc-blocks-launch-
| of...), I think uber should also be able to be regulated.
| protocolture wrote:
| They don't need moral ground just agency to act against
| the greater evil.
| zeofig wrote:
| They broke the law. Furthermore Uber's competitive advantages
| are fueled by incredibly dangerous financial practices. In the
| kind of "any other scenario" you're alluding to, the new kid on
| the block typically isn't infused with tens of billions of VC.
| protocolture wrote:
| >They broke the law.
|
| Law was unjust, they had a moral imperative to break it.
|
| >Furthermore Uber's competitive advantages are fueled by
| incredibly dangerous financial practices.
|
| And if Uber was seeking a monopoly this might be relevant,
| but they opened the market up for anyone, including those not
| doing scary financial practices.
|
| >the new kid on the block typically isn't infused with tens
| of billions of VC.
|
| Yes, so it should have been the case that the taxi monopolies
| were broken up decades ago. Not waiting around for VC capital
| to do it.
| zeofig wrote:
| >Law was unjust, they had a moral imperative to break it.
|
| I disagree that they had a moral imperative to break it.
| But our laws must be quite bad because foreign companies
| seem to love breaking them while claiming the moral
| highground.
|
| >And if Uber was seeking a monopoly this might be relevant,
| but they opened the market up for anyone, including those
| not doing scary financial practices.
|
| Is there any successful rideshare company without similar
| financial practices? I admit I don't know much about any of
| them other than Uber. Maybe I will be pleasantly surprised.
| I'm glad to hear that uber isn't seeking a monopoly.
|
| >Yes, so it should have been the case that the taxi
| monopolies were broken up decades ago. Not waiting around
| for VC capital to do it.
|
| Irrelevant to my point, but thanks for the take
| protocolture wrote:
| The biggest issue with Ubers financial practices (other
| than, not having much money) is that in the US they can
| also provide car finance, and can take the car payments
| directly from the trip payment. Its got a whiff of the
| company store about it. As far as I am aware none of
| their competitors do this anywhere.
|
| Considering the low value proposition of the Uber app, I
| am relatively surprised that theres no strong open source
| competitor with a very modest sum going to maintain the
| app. Such a hypothetical competitor would now also be
| allowed after ubers entrance.
| protocolture wrote:
| >But our laws must be quite bad because foreign companies
| seem to love breaking them
|
| There was a great interview I watched recently on ABC. A
| gentleman was politely explaining why theres a shortage
| of produce in Australia at the moment. He explained how
| the government increased requirements on local farmers,
| but haven't set the same requirements on imports. So
| large aggregators set up shop in countries with cheaper
| wages, and less onerous laws, can the produce there and
| ship it into Australia while pocketing the difference.
|
| The reporter conducting the interview was shocked, and
| immediately asked the standard question. "Should the
| government be seeking to impose penalties, or tariffs or
| some other kind of support"
|
| The farmer shook his head. He said he didn't think it was
| an issue of penalties, or tariffs. He just wanted the
| government to put the industry back the way they found
| it. But the reporter literally didn't understand his line
| of thinking. And kept asking. 2 more times he answered.
| No. No new laws please, just let us compete on the same
| basis as NZ. The NZ produce is being eaten by aussies
| anyway. so there's no net difference. Just let his
| business continue.
|
| So yeah I believe our laws are quite bad. For a variety
| of reasons. Mainly that the country is addicted to the
| idea of a great national project, and despite terrible
| results in these areas (National Energy Market (Debatable
| but I think it does a lot more harm than good), National
| Broadband Network, National Disability Insurance Scheme)
| governments of all stripes continue to smash anything
| that's right fit at a small scale to fit it into these
| dumb nasho boxes. I am just glad that the government of
| the day has forgotten about its pre election promise to
| disband all private fibre network providers and roll them
| into the NBN.
| whiterknight wrote:
| Yep and government can continue to squeeze because their
| options are leave (immediately replaced with competitor apps)
| or give them their cut.
| codedokode wrote:
| What is the difference between taxi licenses and medieval
| monopolies (corporations)? Corporations had exclusive right to do
| some trade (e.g. make bread or produce salt) and nobody else was
| allowed to do it.
| brainphreeze wrote:
| Government taking their cut(s) wherever possible
| bouncycastle wrote:
| they didn't break the law. Otherwise, if your boss asked you to
| drive their friend to the airport, then that would be illegal.
| mihaic wrote:
| In many places it is illegal to ask someone to drive if that's
| not their explicit job.
|
| Either way, not sure how you can equate asking something of an
| employee and asking the same from a gig worker. Uber has broken
| the law in plenty of places, and have always tried to wing it.
| xeromal wrote:
| That's a joke. lol
|
| "Hey mom, can you take me to the airport please? Sorry son,
| it's illegal."
| em-bee wrote:
| i doubt it's illegal to ask, but more like it is legal to
| refuse.
|
| the main problem is that it's unclear who pays when there is
| an accident.
| pjd7 wrote:
| Taxi's in NSW/Sydney are much better these days. Uber X are
| typically shit by comparison.
|
| A $95 UberX ride home is about $109 in a taxi for me.
|
| Talking to a few friends who also live a similar distant from the
| CBD/downtown find that Taxi's are the better / more reliable
| option these days too.
|
| The taxi is pretty much always newer, with a professional driver
| who usually isn't almost falling asleep behind the wheel. The
| quality of the driving is typically significantly higher. It
| feels like a safer ride.
|
| Of the recent UberX's I have caught, the car was typically in
| need of a suspension replacement or significant servicing and
| around 6-7 years old or older.
|
| Most recent taxi rides I have had a car around 12 months old or
| less.
|
| Taxi's are better regulated and provide a better service. I'll
| happily pay the little premium there is in this market to use one
| over an Uber.
|
| On a recent trip to NZ the uber to taxi price comparison was
| massively different.. Taxi was like 2.5x more expensive..
| resolutebat wrote:
| And _why_ are they better "these days"? Because competition
| from Uber forced them to up their game.
|
| They still suck though, and ripoffs and even sexual assault
| remain legion.
| protocolture wrote:
| I ordered an uber from one side of the Sydney CBD to the other.
|
| We got to talking about ubers situation in the CBD. He told me
| he doesnt normally accept fares in the CBD because he gets
| pushed around by the police. As he was saying that, a
| motorcycle cop ordered him to pull over for an inspection. I
| thanked him and decided to walk the rest of the trip.
|
| Anyway, now armed with the reason I couldn't get an uber
| reliably in the CBD I found that Uber into the CBD, taxi out of
| the CBD was the best way forward.
| aragilar wrote:
| Or, you know, public transport...
| theshackleford wrote:
| He said "best" not barely adequate at the best of times.
| protocolture wrote:
| I mean if I am in the Sydney CBD I am there for work. I
| usually need access to a variety of suburbs, the airport
| and the CBD itself for various work engagements. I need to
| be on time, and spend ideally less than 45 minutes in
| transit between engagements.
|
| When I am on my own time in Sydney, I have an opal card and
| will train everywhere possible.
| mianos wrote:
| Also living in Sydney, and catching Uber often. I find the
| complete opposite. The cars are old and beat up and Ubers are
| always newish. Taxis are always smelly, Ubers much less so.
|
| Maybe my experience is more a result of being closer to the
| city.
| FireBeyond wrote:
| > Of the recent UberX's I have caught, the car was typically in
| need of a suspension replacement or significant servicing and
| around 6-7 years old or older.
|
| This was a pet hate of mine in Australia. Order an UberXL "Fits
| your group of 6 riders (or extra luggage) comfortably" and most
| of the time someone was showing up in a Honda CRV or Passport
| (which has 5 seats). We had five passengers plus some luggage
| at times.
|
| And when you cancel because that "XL" option won't meet your
| needs then the app starts hitting you for repeated
| cancelations, despite the fact that all of these vehicles don't
| actually fit the description and capacity described.
| resolutebat wrote:
| It's worth noting that Australian taxis are generally _terrible_.
| They 're expensive and notorious for ripoffs, particularly from
| the airport: scenic routes, bogus surcharges, "broken" credit
| card machines (plus 5% surcharge when they do work), drivers
| refusing destinations (by law they're not allowed to), and to top
| it all off they're not even safe, with taxi drivers responsible
| for a long string of sexual assaults.
|
| Uber and its competitors have their own problems, but they're
| still way better, and they've forced positive change onto taxis
| as well with 13CABS (the largest company) now offering an Uber
| clone app with fixed fares, tracking, etc.
| ghoomketu wrote:
| Same here in India. A lot of people hate Uber but speaking for
| me personally it's been a godsend upgrade over the black yellow
| taxis we had here before.
|
| I believe they are the #1 reason why foreigner tourists are
| scared of coming to India. The amount of scam and harrasment
| done by these old taxi drivers is just another level. The
| luxury and straightforwardness of app taxis is unparalleled to
| what we used to have before.
| somishere wrote:
| I loved getting taxis in India for exactly these reasons, I
| used to get taken to random shops way out of the way of where
| I needed to go ... I'd just go along along with it, total
| adventure time! But I can see how it could grate after the
| novelty wore off. Or if you were maybe being a bit cautious
| as a traveller.
| Atotalnoob wrote:
| This can be really scary for women who are traveling.
|
| You could be possibly sexually assaulted, trafficked, or
| other things.
| mianos wrote:
| You forgot dirty and smelly. Specially compared to any Uber.
| Living in Sydney, I have had few not so clean Ubers, here and
| there, but nothing compared to how bad taxis are.
| Nursie wrote:
| > It's worth noting that Australian taxis are generally
| terrible.
|
| Over here in Western Australia they are generally better than
| Uber. You know what sets the traditional operators apart from
| Uber in Perth?
|
| _They show up_
|
| That simple. You book a cab, you get a cab, more or less when
| you want it. You request an Uber and someone might come. They
| might not. They might accept the ride and then drive in circles
| for 15 minutes to try to make you cancel (it's not 100% clear
| what this does, but it's either just cancellation fee farming
| or to try to trigger a surge).
|
| Uber's been pretty fucked over here for a while.
| somishere wrote:
| You've nailed it.
|
| Uber went south in Cairns in exactly the same way about when
| Didi and the others came out.
|
| Call a cab and it turns up. Reliability is everything.
| FireBeyond wrote:
| Huh, Cairns was so much the same. Watched that happen too.
| Most of the time we had to resort to enduring a cancelation
| or two before someone would show up. My parents ended up
| calling a taxi half the time.
| smackeyacky wrote:
| It's weird how different cities in Australia have such
| different Uber experiences.
|
| Newcastle (north of Sydney) Uber is near unusable.
| Cancellations etc. as others have detailed here. Taxis are a
| bit slow but they do at least pick you up.
|
| Sydney - great.
|
| Brisbane - great.
| werrett wrote:
| You know that is a direct result from competition from
| rideshare alternatives, right?
|
| Growing up in the late 90s and early 2000s, taxis always
| added an exciting extra frisson to any airport trip or
| evening date. Would they turn up at all? Would they turn up,
| honk their horn, and drive away if you didn't run out the
| door in under a minute? Were you going to be left stranded at
| the end of the night with a constantly engaged taxi call
| line? Leaving you to resort to calling friends and family to
| pick you up?
|
| Perth taxis were some of the most expensive and hardest to
| book in all of my experiences around Australia, pretty much
| right up to the late 2010s, which unsurprisingly was a few
| years after Uber's entrance into the market.
|
| If taxis are a better service than Uber now, that's great. We
| probably want to keep that competitive pressure to keep the
| bastards honest.
| falloutx wrote:
| If you are on long contract with a cab company, for example if
| you are a corporation who regularly needs a cab to pick people
| up from Airport, the prices are almost 4x per trip as compared
| to Uber. Even at peak hours Uber is much better
| inkyoto wrote:
| > [...] "broken" credit card machines (plus 5% surcharge when
| they do work), drivers refusing destinations (by law they're
| not allowed to) [...]
|
| You have forgotten to mention the cab operators sending
| complaints, e.g. about overcharging, to /dev/null. There is no
| feedback loop with the company, either, e.g. being able to
| report a bad cabbie.
|
| The taxi industry has outlived itself and has to go now.
| stevage wrote:
| I've taken lots of taxis over the years and never experienced
| any of that. I do believe the stories of sexual assault though.
| bowsamic wrote:
| I honestly think people forget how bad taxis were in general
| before Uber. In many places people just didn't use them because
| they were considered unreliable, expensive, and dangerous. Taxi
| companies had a reputation of being scummy. Now a lot of taxi
| companies have decided to be better, and it's largely due to
| pressure from Uber
|
| Uber, for all its faults, is the classic example of
| "disruption". Now great taxi experiences are the new normal
| tianqi wrote:
| This is like compensating purse snatchers because the promotion
| of mobile payments reduces their income. Sydney's taxi is a shame
| to this wonderful city.
|
| I still remember when I first just arrived in Sydney, I took a
| taxi from the airport to Waterloo and was charged $95, which made
| me fearful of Sydney prices. It took me time to realise that I
| had just run into a scam and that the ride should have cost just
| $20+. Nowadays I would never take taxi. That's why "they lost
| income when Uber entered".
| tensor wrote:
| Toronto is notorious for this too. Either the credit card
| machine is broken and you must pay too much cash, or the credit
| card machine steals your card number, or you are refused a ride
| because it's not far enough.
|
| Even travelling through Europe I've been refused a ride because
| it was too short, and got overcharged by 2-3x once. I'd use
| Uber at this point even if it's more expensive than a taxi.
| papruapap wrote:
| In 90% of all countries really, most common scam ever. That
| is why travelers use Uber more than natives.
| alistairSH wrote:
| _Either the credit card machine is broken and you must pay
| too much cash..._
|
| Wouldn't you just respond "Sorry, no cash!" and walk away?
| It's literally true for me - I rarely have more than $10 cash
| on hand, because I never need it.
| jncfhnb wrote:
| Because they're threatening
| alistairSH wrote:
| I guess it depends on the location. I had a car service
| pull this on my at Denver International a few years ago.
| He wasn't asking for more than the flat-fee from downtown
| to the airport, so I hit the ATM and gave him the cash.
| But if I had been in a hurry, he would have been SOL, I
| would have gone straight to security and not given it a
| second thought.
| jncfhnb wrote:
| Damn, I guess you're hypothetically really resilient to
| that sort of thing
| rchaud wrote:
| Threatening? Most taxicabs have cameras inside, and I've
| never heard of a driver getting violent with a passenger
| over an inability to pay (different from a refusal to
| pay), considering their picture and cab ID are
| prominently displayed inside the cab.
| snapcaster wrote:
| This and the sibling comment both show a pretty big lack
| of sympathy or empathy. Maybe you've never been in a
| situation where the line is blurry between dangerous/not-
| dangerous but maybe just assume everyone besides you
| isn't a moron and it's not as easy as you're saying
| alistairSH wrote:
| It's not a lack of empathy, I literally don't know how
| this would work in the driver's favor. I rarely carry
| cash. If we got to the destination and the driver
| demanded cash, what's he expecting will happen?
| Everywhere I've taken a cab in the last decade requires
| cabs to have CC readers.
| gorbypark wrote:
| Generally the idea is that they say the machine doesn't
| work, and if you say you have no cash / won't go to an
| ATM the machine magically starts working.
| dmix wrote:
| The city taxis are wayyy dirtier than Uber too, reviews were
| a godsend.
| notyourwork wrote:
| I've had good luck with broken credit card machines working
| when I declare I have no cash. Maybe it's because of my
| stature and/or luck.
| rchaud wrote:
| I'm in Toronto and never experienced any of this. Even before
| Uber, if a drivers' credit card machine wasn't working,
| they'd tell me before I got in. 95% of the time there was no
| issue with their machine. I used legitimate taxicab companies
| - if one wasn't available on the street corner, you could
| call their dispatch and they'd send one over.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| > I used legitimate taxicab companies
|
| There really are no "legitimate taxicab companies" in
| Toronto.
|
| You have dispatching companies and companies that rent out
| cars with branding to drivers, but they're all independent
| contractors.
|
| In theory a dispatching/car providing company could boot a
| contractor off of its system, but it's a fine line for them
| where they've taken fewer risks on this than Uber, because
| they absolutely do not want to be considered employers.
|
| Even if you haven't encountered the "card not working, cash
| only", I'm surprised you never encountered the "right too
| short"/"don't want to go there" refusal.
| MattGaiser wrote:
| This is also my experience with Toronto (and Athens and
| Barcelona and numerous other cities).
|
| I'll stand for a half hour in the rain before I take another
| Toronto cab.
| gentleman11 wrote:
| I have never had an experience like this with a taxi in any
| city
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| Same in New York. Also fuck you if it's shift change or
| you're my former black roommate, who despite being a habitual
| suit wearer and Brown graduate would get passed by 90% of the
| cabs on Fifth Avenue.
|
| Since Uber, granted, they've massively improved. But take it
| away and, of course, the incentive structure guarantees one
| outcome.
| a_random_canuck wrote:
| I've taken many taxis in Montreal and London and other
| European cities, and in Taiwan, and have never had anything
| like this happen to me.
|
| Instead I get Uber drivers who refuse to come to my pickup
| spot and drive around in circles hoping I'll cancel the trip
| first so they can still get paid something.
| Nursie wrote:
| The taxi firms lost income because it wasn't a level playing
| field.
|
| They played by the rules where Uber's well-known modus operandi
| in many countries was to skirt the rules or downright ignore
| them, while using billions of dollars of investor money to
| undercut the market.
|
| I'm glad they exist to shake up the taxi market, and the rules
| changes were probably overdue. But I'm also glad uber got
| fined, because they behaved like pirates here and in many other
| countries. And I'm glad they didn't succeed in putting everyone
| else out of business, which seemed to be the play.
| golergka wrote:
| As a costumer, I'm glad they skirt the rules because they
| provide better service for cheaper, and I certainly hope that
| traditional taxi parks go out of business, because compared
| to Uber and other apps they're horrible.
| dahdum wrote:
| Did you take many taxis before Uber/Lyft? It was an
| adversarial relationship - your taxi driver would try their
| very best (they practice every day!) to rip you off any which
| way they can. Their lobby stopped any competition or reform,
| and they exploited the most vulnerable.
|
| I have no sympathy at all for the taxi cartels - only their
| victims.
| stevage wrote:
| I did take taxis in Melbourne and Sydney before and after
| the arrival of Uber. I never had any issues with any taxi
| drivers, except one racist arsehole in Townsville.
| FireBeyond wrote:
| Hah. Australian ex-pat living in Seattle. Took my
| girlfriend and her daughter to Australia to catch up with
| my family, etc. We did Sydney, Cairns and Melbourne.
| Hell, even with Uber... multiple pretty openly racist
| drivers in Cairns (I am extremely left wing, but my
| partner and friends like to tease that I could pass for a
| 'good old boy', so too many people feel comfortable just
| erupting in tirades and assuming I'll be in agreement).
|
| Actually, in CNS, the most common problem was
| cancelations with Uber. Of maybe a dozen or more Uber
| trips I took in 4 days there, only one or two didn't have
| any cancelations. Usually it required one or even more
| cancelations before a driver would actually "commit".
| stevage wrote:
| I used to get the opposite problem using GoCatch to call
| taxis to the airport in the morning. They were so keen
| for my business they would often call me up to confirm
| they were on the way. I had no desire for a phone call at
| like 5.30am...
| AndrewKemendo wrote:
| How much "should" it cost?
|
| $90 is too much but $20 is just right?
|
| Why?
| gruez wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_clearing
| muro wrote:
| Taxis in Sydney are regulated and can't just decide what to
| charge. Travelers might not know, of course. If at all
| possible, take a picture.
| maccard wrote:
| The single best thing that Uber did to taxi companies was it
| eliminated this bullshit in so many places. I live in
| Edinburgh, and prior to Uber this sort of stuff was rampant.
| Now, all the private hire and black companies have apps, accept
| card payments, are clean.
|
| I'm Irish, and on my last trip to Dublin, I ended up with a
| EUR70 taxi. The driver wouldn't take card, so he drove around
| until we found an ATM, by which time the meter was EUR75. I
| paid him the EUR70 and he left me at the ATM, without a receipt
| for me to claim reimbursement.
|
| I have absolutely no sympathy for this nonsense.
| disgruntledphd2 wrote:
| > The driver wouldn't take card,
|
| For future visitors to Ireland, note that this has been
| illegal since last year. The taxis are _required_ to accept
| card. If this does happen to you, ask what their number is
| and say you 'll call ComReg and this problem will almost
| certainly disappear.
| tsujamin wrote:
| Sydney taxis are extortionate and often operate illegally
| around the airport, but also taxi plates in Australia costed
| $100,000's (on the market, not sure how much when released by
| the government) and that investment got trashed by ride-share
| entry. From that perspective I've got some sympathy.
| willcipriano wrote:
| Taxi companies lobby for very expensive taxi registration to
| raise barrier to entry and prevent competition.
|
| Someone finds a way around this malfeasance.
|
| "Hey you gotta pay us for lost income, we spent a lot on
| those taxi medallions!"
| bigDinosaur wrote:
| Why should we have sympathy because of an artificial
| constraint on the supply of taxi drivers? They're really
| nothing special except by being in an artificially protected
| market.
| araes wrote:
| The article said they cost $500,000 (each), which was
| probably the least believable part of the article. If they
| actually cost $100,000, that might be close to reasonable.
|
| Somebody can probably do 5-6 rides a day at $50 a ride for a
| $100,000 tag. That's pretty believable for an average over a
| year. Even $200,000 might be. I have difficultly believing
| they're all making money needing 30 rides at ~$50 every day
| all year long for a $500,000 tag.
|
| > value of his three taxi licence plates - worth about
| $500,000 each.
| Atotalnoob wrote:
| I would believe the 500k number. Taxi badges are
| ridiculously priced. I think NYC's was over 1.5m.
|
| Keep in mind, they are able to lease the badge out, so you
| can have your cab running 24/7.
| StackRanker3000 wrote:
| Why are you assuming it must necessarily be paid for in the
| first year? Are they not keeping these plates indefinitely,
| unless sold?
| somishere wrote:
| Meh. Last time I got an uber from Sydney airport the guy made
| us get in at the entry to the multi store car park across from
| the rideshare pickup. I just assumed because he didn't want to
| pay a fee. He then couldn't reverse out because someone turned
| up behind him and so did a run through the car park. Had a
| strange chat with him on the drive into town where he tried to
| tell me he was a student and had only been in Sydney for a
| couple of months, but it was totally suspicious, he kept
| getting carried away and relaxing into a undeniable western
| Sydney accent. My wife was in the car next to me texting me
| like crazy that something was up but I was just playing along.
| No idea what the go was in the end. Unsettling but otherwise
| uneventful trip. I didn't tip. I avoid uber from the airport
| now and just get a cab or a train. Price is about the same.
|
| Edit: I should probably add that I don't avoid uber completely,
| still use it when travelling, esp. if I'm somewhere without a
| taxi rank. But I prefer a cab from the airport. It's genuinely
| less hassle.
| askl wrote:
| Why would you even use a taxi for that? There seems to be a
| decent public transit connection. It costs $2.90 for that trip.
| Staple_Diet wrote:
| Depends when they made that trip. I lived in that area for a
| while. The train is a little bit exxy and only used to go to
| Greensquare. You'd need two buses otherwise and there is sfa
| room for bags, so if you have luggage etc a taxi is an easier
| option for the $20 it should cost.
| someuser2345 wrote:
| If it's your first time in a new city, you probably just want
| to get to your hotel as fast as possible instead of learning
| the transit system.
| askl wrote:
| I've only traveled in Europe and Asia so far but this never
| looked like an issue to me.
|
| Also I'd also use the transit system for the following days
| in the city, so have to learn about it anyways. (Not that
| there's really anything to learn)
| decafninja wrote:
| Lugging around luggage through buses and transit,
| especially if there are stairs involved, is not pleasant.
|
| It's not pleasant in cities with great transit like Tokyo
| or Seoul, and it's downright miserable in most of the
| cities being discussed here in this thread.
| DeusExMachina wrote:
| Isn't a scam not an official taxi, though?
|
| I don't know the situation in Sydney, but where I usually
| travel, it's the unlicensed taxis that overcharge and scam
| people, i.e., not the real taxis.
|
| Licensed taxi companies charge standard fares.
| earthling8118 wrote:
| That's wishful thinking but not true. I've directly called a
| legitimate taxi company before and been scammed and had to
| pay over triple the price. This was after specifically
| discussing the flat cost that this particular trip had. Due
| to circumstances I'm not going to discuss here I had no
| choice but to pay it, but if I'd been in a different
| situation I would have left.
| dorkwood wrote:
| The last taxi I ever took in Sydney drove twice the distance he
| needed to so he could charge me a higher fee. And that wasn't
| the first time something like that had happened. I've now been
| using Uber for years and I'm yet to be so blatantly scammed.
| chx wrote:
| All these takes here.
|
| Two preambles: Y'all need to read Invisible Hands, really need
| to. That book is about how various losely connected sometimes
| even competing groups of businessmen worked to roll the New Deal
| back. It's not a conspiracy theory, there was no shadow cabal
| behind the scenes -- but the goal was common.
| https://wwnorton.com/books/Invisible-Hands/
|
| Second, Amazon was started to become a monopoly in retail and
| only begun with books because it was a relatively easy thing to
| work with.
|
| Similarly, while Uber started with fancy cars soon enough it
| became a means to destroy the protections organized labor managed
| to get in the last hundred or so years. Or at least what remained
| of them. In this the company was exceptionally successful by
| creating what is called the "gig economy". As people hate taxis,
| using that market for this purpose was the easy way. If you think
| past the introduction of UberX in 2012 Uber had anything to do
| with transportation then, pardon the pun, you have been taken for
| a ride.
| RomanPushkin wrote:
| My friend drives Red Cab in San Francisco. A couple of weeks ago
| he charged ~$500 from SFO airport to San Jose (taxi meter price).
| He informed the passenger, since he thought it's going to be too
| much for her, and gotten the response he shouldn't count her own
| money, and should just drive there, lol.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-03-18 23:02 UTC)