Uber

makeorbrake · 03-07-2019 12:51am

n97 mini wrote: »

Don't get annoyed, get the bus! Eventually taxis will go the way of the dinosaurs. Can't wait for the 24/7 bus routes to start in Dublin, like they have in Cork.

Ironically if we had Uber, the taxpayer wouldn't need to subsidise bus routes, but here we are!

Not in Ireland but only with complete desperation will I take a taxi here. As regards Ireland, I'd crawl on my hands and knees before I'd get into one.

As regards the tweet, it just came up on my twitter feed a bit earlier. I'm not sure what city the guy is referring to (i think its stateside) but no matter - it's a city where the powers that be have ran uber out....hence the guys experience. Sound familiar?

Stephen15 · 03-07-2019 1:44am

markodaly wrote: »

So, less than 1% of the population. We should order the entire taxi industry and the barrier of entry into it, because of 1% of the population?

I take it we should do away with any sort of accessibility requirements as they cost more to implement for operators. Sure what's the point on wheelchair ramps and lifts in public buildings and who needs lowfloor buses and trams waste of money for only 1% of the population if you ask me. I hope you never find yourself in a wheelchair some day and needing a taxi or any sort of public transport

As I said and Ill say it again. The current setup is there to benefit the existing taxi drivers, not the consumer or new entries into the industry.
At least be honest about this.

There is an adequate supply of taxis atm which serves the demand. Allow more licences and you risk overssturating the market with too many taxis causing traffic congestion.

makeorbrake · 03-07-2019 1:50am

Stephen15 wrote: »

I take it we should do away with any sort of accessibility requirements as they cost more to implement for operators. Sure what's the point on wheelchair ramps and lifts in public buildings and who needs lowfloor buses and trams waste of money for only 1% of the population if you ask me. I hope you never find yourself in a wheelchair some day and needing a taxi or any sort of public transport

No, we just need to stop people from shamefully hiding behind such issues in an effort to keep other services out (either out of self interest financially or wayward ideological grounds).

Stephen15 wrote: »

There is an adequate supply of taxis atm which serves the demand. Allow more licences and you risk overssturating the market with too many taxis causing traffic congestion.

If there would be more more cars on the streets, its because more people can afford to travel (via ride sharing). It's only taxi's that drive around looking for fares - clogging up the streets.

end of the road · 03-07-2019 11:44am

n97 mini wrote: »

Don't get annoyed, get the bus! Eventually taxis will go the way of the dinosaurs. Can't wait for the 24/7 bus routes to start in Dublin, like they have in Cork.

Ironically if we had Uber, the taxpayer wouldn't need to subsidise bus routes, but here we are!

they would just have to subsidize the massive extra road maintenance costs instead and spend big money on dealing with the congestion from all these space wasting cars.
looks like subsidizing some buses would be cheaper and better for the public then relying on uber.

n97 mini · 03-07-2019 11:49am

end of the road wrote: »

they would just have to subsidize the massive extra road maintenance costs instead and spend big money on dealing with the congestion from all these space wasting cars.
looks like subsidizing some buses would be cheaper and better for the public then relying on uber.

Motor tax and vrt cover road maintenance, and more.

Night buses are exactly that. No congestion at night.

end of the road · 03-07-2019 12:17pm

n97 mini wrote: »

Motor tax and vrt cover road maintenance, and more.

doesn't matter. uber wouldn't ultimately get us out of subsidizing night busses in the long term.

n97 mini wrote: »

Night buses are exactly that. No congestion at night.

and night busses will remove more single vehicles. even better.

makeorbrake · 03-07-2019 12:35pm

end of the road wrote: »

doesn't matter. uber wouldn't ultimately get us out of subsidizing night busses in the long term.

Yet they would provide a far more affordable transit option for people at a higher service level - hence this horrendous uptick in traffic congestion that you all talk about.

end of the road wrote: »

and night busses will remove more single vehicles. even better.

I see - you want to ban taxi's when night buses run then?

end of the road · 03-07-2019 12:56pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

Yet they would provide a far more affordable transit option for people at a higher service level - hence this horrendous uptick in traffic congestion that you all talk about.

until they have to put up the prices. the night bus can be even more affordable again and it is less risky then relying on the hope that uber will always remain in it's current form.

makeorbrake wrote: »

I see - you want to ban taxi's when night buses run then?

no, i don't want to bann taxis. taxis can run away if they feel it is viable and so can uber within the regulations as they already do.
however the idea that uber is some saviour for us having to provide night buses is just a load of nonsense. people want night buses, we wanted night buses years ago. now we are getting them. the choice of night bus or a public service car will be available which is how it should be and how it will be in dublin and cork.

makeorbrake · 03-07-2019 1:47pm

end of the road wrote: »

until they have to put up the prices. the night bus can be even more affordable again and it is less risky then relying on the hope that uber will always remain in it's current form.

If it was as simple as Uber running out of $, none of you would be bothered. But we all know that with ride sharing generally, it will remain significantly cheaper than taxis. Uber isn't the only show in town.

Otherwise, a night bus and uber are not comparable. Not even sure why you'd go there.

end of the road wrote: »

the choice of night bus or a public service car will be available which is how it should be and how it will be in dublin and cork.

It's a bit rich you talking about 'choice' when you're all about doing everything you can to make sure the consumer doesn't get choice.

kippy · 03-07-2019 2:36pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

If it was as simple as Uber running out of $, none of you would be bothered. But we all know that with ride sharing generally, it will remain significantly cheaper than taxis. Uber isn't the only show in town.

Otherwise, a night bus and uber are not comparable. Not even sure why you'd go there.

It's a bit rich you talking about 'choice' when you're all about doing everything you can to make sure the consumer doesn't get choice.

You keep hammering on and on about this but just because someone wants something (ie a choice) doesn't mean they should necessarily have it, particularly are there is a bigger picture in providing these choices. I shouldn't need to provide any examples of this.

makeorbrake · 03-07-2019 2:52pm

kippy wrote: »

You keep hammering on and on about this

That's bi-directional at best.

kippy wrote: »

just because someone wants something (ie a choice) doesn't mean they should necessarily have it, particularly are there is a bigger picture in providing these choices. I shouldn't need to provide any examples of this.

The problem with your 'bigger picture' is that it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

Spook_ie · 03-07-2019 3:44pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

<snipped>

For this reason, I switched to InDriver...and that app here has gained traction. So much so - that Uber have had to pull in their antlers. I still rarely use uber but I always check the price on their platform when ordering an InDriver.

The funny thing about all the makorbake posts is that his preferred app of InDriver would probably pass for use in Ireland, as long as they set themselves up as a dispatch operator.

EDIT Scrub that they ruled themselves out of Ireland, maybe they'll get into the UK after Brexit on Oct. 31st

1.4. inDriver do not offer services to subjects in Member States of the European Union, European Economic Area.

makeorbrake · 03-07-2019 4:11pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

The funny thing about all the makorbrake posts is that his preferred app of InDriver would probably pass for use in Ireland, as long as they set themselves up as a dispatch operator.

'Funny how?'

It all boils down to the same thing. They won't promote a platform in a jurisdiction that is anti-innovation.

I'll be summoning one in half an hour now that you mention it...and it will be 40% less than the mega expensive crowd over at Uber. A taxi won't even enter in to the decision making process.

Spook_ie · 03-07-2019 4:14pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

'Funny how?'

It all boils down to the same thing. They won't promote a platform in a jurisdiction that is anti-innovation.

I'll be summoning one in half an hour now that you mention it...and it will be 40% less than the mega expensive crowd over at Uber. A taxi won't even enter in to the decision making process.

Funny in that until I read their T&Cs there didn't seem to be an impediment to InDriver being available in Ireland.

makeorbrake · 03-07-2019 4:18pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

Funny in that until I read their T&Cs there didn't seem to be an impediment to InDriver being available in Ireland.

That's quite alright - it was a 'Goodfella's' reference.

If Uber is detested in certain circles in Ireland, I think (in those circles) InDriver would be hated more. Would be interesting to see the fall out from the use of an auction type fare approach.

But same zero sum game....it's all theoretical whilst an irish regulator continues to stifle innovation.

Spook_ie · 03-07-2019 5:46pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

That's quite alright - it was a 'Goodfella's' reference.

If Uber is detested in certain circles in Ireland, I think (in those circles) InDriver would be hated more. Would be interesting to see the fall out from the use of an auction type fare approach.

But same zero sum game....it's all theoretical whilst an irish regulator continues to stifle innovation.

Irish regulations wouldn't be stifling InDriver, as long as they don't exceed maximum fare order, which is what Uber failed to take on board with their app. They started surge pricing and taxis were charging more than a metered fare would have cost, against the regulations, they were informed to stop and desist as they were breaking the law.

Taxi Regulations actually state you can negotiate a fixed fare which as long as the taxi meter is engaged and doesn't read less than the negotiated fare is the due fare, so offering a lower price is already in the regulations. Which from what I'm reading is what InDriver does by allowing passengers to offer and see if a driver accepts.

But it's all irrelevant because InDriver have ruled themselves out.

end of the road · 03-07-2019 6:11pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

If it was as simple as Uber running out of $, none of you would be bothered. But we all know that with ride sharing generally, it will remain significantly cheaper than taxis. Uber isn't the only show in town.

Otherwise, a night bus and uber are not comparable. Not even sure why you'd go there.

i never went there. i never compared either of them.
taxi ride sharing is only cheaper then a taxi either due to invester money or lesser regulation and standards which ireland has no need to implement as the psv regulations are perfectly fine for all forms of public service vehicle operation.

makeorbrake wrote: »

It's a bit rich you talking about 'choice' when you're all about doing everything you can to make sure the consumer doesn't get choice.

incorrect. giving the consumer choice is absolutely what i am about. i am just not willing to lower standards and remove our regulations to benefit 1 of those choices at the expence of the other. they can compete on a level playing field and whichever has the greater merrit will win.

makeorbrake wrote: »

That's quite alright - it was a 'Goodfella's' reference.

If Uber is detested in certain circles in Ireland, I think (in those circles) InDriver would be hated more. Would be interesting to see the fall out from the use of an auction type fare approach.

But same zero sum game....it's all theoretical whilst an irish regulator continues to stifle innovation.

as we know, the irish regulator is not stifling innovation. apps are available depending on the public service vehicle operator. ride sharing is available if one wants to do it.
so, nothing of uber's offering is being stifled.

makeorbrake · 03-07-2019 9:37pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

Irish regulations wouldn't be stifling InDriver, as long as they don't exceed maximum fare order, which is what Uber failed to take on board with their app. They started surge pricing and taxis were charging more than a metered fare would have cost, against the regulations, they were informed to stop and desist as they were breaking the law.

So that got ironed out but there is still no uber usage in Ireland? Somethings wrong in the market then.

As an aside, I can't stand surge pricing - but then I simply won't pay it. I choose another service, don't travel those times or choose another means of transportation entirely. If a regulator wants to iron that out, no problem. Otherwise, nobody forces people to do anything they don't want so long as there's a functioning market with options.

Spook_ie wrote: »

But it's all irrelevant because InDriver have ruled themselves out.

They will have looked at Uber, seen that there has been no take-up, figured out why....worked out that its a protectionist anti-innovation based regulatory environment and moved on. Simples.

end of the road wrote: »

Otherwise, a night bus and uber are not comparable. Not even sure why you'd go there.

I didn't go there.

end of the road wrote: »

taxi ride sharing is only cheaper then a taxi either due to invester money or lesser regulation and standards which ireland has no need to implement as the psv regulations are perfectly fine for all forms of public service vehicle operation.

On the VC and IPO money, so they will blow through it - then what? If any of you are opposed to them, then you have nothing to worry about. ....unless there's still some value in their proposition post investment runway.

On the standards, we've been over this and we're not going to agree on it. Most people's experience has been better with Uber than with taxis (as per comments posted here). In any event, there is no stumbling block to adherence to standards aside from this WAV situation. That's the one that makes it impossible.

makeorbrake · 03-07-2019 9:47pm

end of the road wrote: »

incorrect. giving the consumer choice is absolutely what i am about. i am just not willing to lower standards and remove our regulations to benefit 1 of those choices at the expense of the other. they can compete on a level playing field and whichever has the greater merit will win.

If you really are about giving the consumer choice, then you will find a way to accomodate all stakeholders. The stumbling block here is the WAV issue.

end of the road wrote: »

as we know, the irish regulator is not stifling innovation. apps are available depending on the public service vehicle operator. ride sharing is available if one wants to do it.
so, nothing of uber's offering is being stifled.

That's not correct. If you are I are car owners and drivers - lets say we're going on a specific journey OR we have a couple of hours free of an evening - it should be a case (with a car that's been tested - having been screened as a driver and in adherence with every other regulation) that we can switch on the app - and work away.

You put that WAV requirement and ride sharing is killed stone dead.
That's before we get to the work the regulator should be done in kicking the insurance industry into touch (they can't get to step B if they fail at step A).

So, yes, the regulator is holding innovation back.

end of the road · 03-07-2019 9:57pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

If you really are about giving the consumer choice, then you will find a way to accomodate all stakeholders. The stumbling block here is the WAV issue.

no, it's not the stumbling block.
all stakeholders are accommodated via the psv regulations.

makeorbrake wrote: »

That's not correct. If you are I are car owners and drivers - lets say we're going on a specific journey OR we have a couple of hours free of an evening - it should be a case (with a car that's been tested - having been screened as a driver and in adherence with every other regulation) that we can switch on the app - and work away.

that is how it is already as long as the car meets the standards.

makeorbrake wrote: »

You put that WAV requirement and ride sharing is killed stone dead.
That's before we get to the work the regulator should be done in kicking the insurance industry into touch (they can't get to step B if they fail at step A).

it's not killed stone dead at all. the WAV regulations do not effect ride sharing.

makeorbrake wrote: »

So, yes, the regulator is holding innovation back.

they aren't. they are just holding the non-serious players back who would just be wasting everyone's time.

usernamegoes · 03-07-2019 10:38pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

Irish regulations wouldn't be stifling InDriver, as long as they don't exceed maximum fare order, which is what Uber failed to take on board with their app. They started surge pricing and taxis were charging more than a metered fare would have cost, against the regulations, they were informed to stop and desist as they were breaking the law.

Taxi Regulations actually state you can negotiate a fixed fare which as long as the taxi meter is engaged and doesn't read less than the negotiated fare is the due fare, so offering a lower price is already in the regulations. Which from what I'm reading is what InDriver does by allowing passengers to offer and see if a driver accepts.

Can you advise us what the maximum fare is for hackneys and limousines please.

makeorbrake · 03-07-2019 10:46pm

end of the road wrote: »

no, it's not the stumbling block.
all stakeholders are accommodated via the psv regulations.

BS. How are they facilitated if you make them go out and buy a specific car (WAV) - when they have a car that has passed a road-worthiness test and is otherwise perfectly fine?

end of the road wrote: »

that is how it is already as long as the car meets the standards.

Yet they can't get a license without changing the car they already have to meet the (WAV) requirement. That doesn't work.

end of the road wrote: »

it's not killed stone dead at all. the WAV regulations do not effect ride sharing.

Isn't a WAV a requirement for a license?

end of the road wrote: »

they aren't. they are just holding the non-serious players back who would just be wasting everyone's time.

This is pure gold. These are precisely the people who form (or should form) part of that innovation. Those are the very people that need to be enabled - to go out dynamically and work for a couple of hours, to turn on the app as they drive in to work/into the city, etc.

This is what the regulator is holding back. And as regards 'wasting everyones time' - please explain what you mean by that?

n97 mini · 03-07-2019 11:09pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

?LThis is pure gold. These are precisely the people who form (or should form) part of that innovation. Those are the very people that need to be enabled - to go out dynamically and work for a couple of hours, to turn on the app as they drive in to work/into the city, etc.

This is it. Having used Uber and Lyft in the US daily for 6 months over a 3 year period, I only met one driver who didn't have another job. She was a stay at home mom whose kids were all at school. The rest were students to blue collar to white collar workers who were trying to boost their income. One guy was doing it so he could buy a boat to take his family on holidays.

The profile of Irish taxi drivers is completely different. Anecdotally very few have an education beyond inter cert. They're only working in the taxi industry because they can't get better employment elsewhere. There are no students, blue collar or white collar workers who are part timing it.

With that comes an entitlement culture. Taxi drivers are "entitled" to make a living from taxi driving, as they can't make a living doing anything else.

Spook_ie · 03-07-2019 11:18pm

usernamegoes wrote: »

Can you advise us what the maximum fare is for hackneys and limousines please.

The maximum fare for a hackney/limo is what the customer is prepared to pay, an advantage over taxis in times of short supply, however, hackney's and limos don't have to use a taximeter, which Uber try to impose via using a mobile phone and GPS to calculate a rate instead of a pre agreed fare as hackney's/limos are obliged to do.

n97 mini · 03-07-2019 11:37pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

The maximum fare for a hackney/limo is what the customer is prepared to pay, an advantage over taxis in times of short supply, however, hackney's and limos don't have to use a taximeter, which Uber try to impose via using a mobile phone and GPS to calculate a rate instead of a pre agreed fare as hackney's/limos are obliged to do.

It's pre-agreed on Uber too, as the app shows the price before you book your ride. By booking it, you're agreeing to it. Nice thing is Lyft does the same, so you have a choice. In my experience 4 out if 5 times Lyft is cheaper. But it depends on location more than anything.

Spook_ie · 04-07-2019 11:35am

n97 mini wrote: »

It's pre-agreed on Uber too, as the app shows the price before you book your ride. By booking it, you're agreeing to it. Nice thing is Lyft does the same, so you have a choice. In my experience 4 out if 5 times Lyft is cheaper. But it depends on location more than anything.

Shame that they still throw in the price surging though, and even gone to the extent of trying to conceal it.
https://www.theverge.com/2016/6/23/12017002/uber-surge-pricing-upfront-fare-app-update-announcement

So how will riders know when surge pricing is in effect? After all, many penny-pinching riders prefer to wait until after it is over before hailing a ride. Instead of an in-your-face, blue-font-in-a-black-circle notification, the updated version of the app warns riders with a line of faint text about "increased demand" located under the fare. Other than that, surge pricing is MIA.

Not to mention the stories of customers paying over the odds.
https://therideshareguy.com/how-much-money-are-drivers-losing-from-upfront-pricing/
and even of Uber charging some customers more if they think the customer will pay more
https://thepointsguy.com/news/ubers-upfront-pricing-can-be-way-off-but-you-may-get-around-it/

What we know is that Uber has dynamic pricing, it’s admitted that it’s charging some riders based on what it thinks they will pay and that upfront pricing can work against or in favor of riders’ wallets.

spacetweek · 04-07-2019 8:47pm

There are 3 great things about Uber:

- You can pay by card, you don't even have to have the card on you so the vehicle doesn't need a card machine
- You can watch the car approach on the app.
- It greatly increases the supply of taxis in a city that has few.

(1) and (2) apply to MyTaxi/Hailo, and (3) doesn't apply to Dublin as it has far too many taxis.

So why exactly would Uber be a good thing for Ireland? As far as I can see in cities like London it probably replaces public transport for some people and adds to the number of cars on the road.

makeorbrake · 04-07-2019 11:47pm

spacetweek wrote: »

So why exactly would Uber be a good thing for Ireland? As far as I can see in cities like London it probably replaces public transport for some people and adds to the number of cars on the road.

So if there's always an expectation that there's going to be more people using it -rather than taxis (given an expectation of increased congestion), then the service is wildly popular then.

There's a whole host of ways that could be tackled if there was a will (and it's that will to do anything that's missing). Uber pool for one - that takes cars off the streets. Who's to say licensing couldn't be conditional (provided its progressively so)?

Otherwise, licensing could be done in a way to take ride sharing back to the way it was originally intended. Someone a couple of posts above referred to 'non serious players' that would waste everyones time - but that misses the point of ride sharing so much - it's not funny. These are exactly the people that should be enabled.

If someone switches on the app on a drive across town or on a long commute into or out of the city, that serves multiple purposes;

1. More efficient use of the existing car fleet
2. The opportunity for the driver to reduce costs or make a modest few quid
3. More transportation options for would-be passengers

If anyone was interested, that could all be incentivised (the IF being key there).

The same for someone that wanted to work for a couple of hours dynamically. There is great power in that for society and for an economy.

n97 mini · 04-07-2019 11:59pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

Shame that they still throw in the price surging though, and even gone to the extent of trying to conceal it.
https://www.theverge.com/2016/6/23/12017002/uber-surge-pricing-upfront-fare-app-update-announcement

Not to mention the stories of customers paying over the odds.
https://therideshareguy.com/how-much-money-are-drivers-losing-from-upfront-pricing/
and even of Uber charging some customers more if they think the customer will pay more
https://thepointsguy.com/news/ubers-upfront-pricing-can-be-way-off-but-you-may-get-around-it/

I've read both articles you've linked to. The title of one is misleading. The article text says they're making surge pricing more transparent. I see nothing wrong with that.

They second confuses me. They're allegedly quoting higher prices, but the actual price charged is lower. Not sure what people are complaining about.

If you don't like Uber, use a different ride-sharing company, there are plenty of them out there.

usernamegoes · 06-07-2019 8:34am

Spook_ie wrote: »

The maximum fare for a hackney/limo is what the customer is prepared to pay, an advantage over taxis in times of short supply, however, hackney's and limos don't have to use a taximeter, which Uber try to impose via using a mobile phone and GPS to calculate a rate instead of a pre agreed fare as hackney's/limos are obliged to do.

Gotcha. Pre-agreed, same as Uber. Should we ban hackneys and limos to "protect the consumer from high prices that they agree to pay"?

Uber

Comments