Uber Says Airport Ride-Share Plan Won’t Fly

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
I don't understand this plan. Why not just make Uber drivers get permits like taxis and limousines? That way it is fair to all involved.

In addition to fingerprint checks, drivers would have to display bumper decals and would make pickups at designated curbside spaces. The airport would also collect a $1.50 fee from each fare, as well as an annual $10,000 payment from the companies to help fund infrastructure and pay enforcement and other costs.
 
I think everyone understands it. Uber doesn't like following the rules. If they follow the rules then their prices tend to creep higher and put them in line with taxi and limo services. As long as they ignore the rules they can keep their costs down.
 
They make enough money, let the cabs and taxis keep the airport business. Uber should be for basically short rides on demand and not "shuttle service" to and from the airports, that's just going a bit too far if they don't want to become licensed like traditional cabs and taxis that have had to do that for decades upon decades.

They're not really doing anything I find appealing at this point in time, I don't get the hype personally.
 
Tiberian said:
They make enough money, let the cabs and taxis keep the airport business. Uber should be for basically short rides on demand and not "shuttle service" to and from the airports, that's just going a bit too far if they don't want to become licensed like traditional cabs and taxis that have had to do that for decades upon decades.

They're not really doing anything I find appealing at this point in time, I don't get the hype personally.
Click to expand...

So your argument is protectionism?
 
Steve said:
I don't understand this plan. Why not just make Uber drivers get permits like taxis and limousines? That way it is fair to all involved..
Click to expand...

I don't know how it is everywhere but down here it's simple... you can't... the permits are highly controlled, only x number are ever issued, and they are all owned by a handful of companies... it's basically a mafia...

I looked into a permit once to be a private car (not quite a taxi) and it was basically impossible and was going to cost tens of thousands of dollars to even try
 
Quix said:
They are a taxi service, one that doesn't like following the rules.
Click to expand...

That's exactly my point. For some reason people throw a tantrum when the idea that they should be subject to the same playbook as taxis.
 
FLECOM said:
I don't know how it is everywhere but down here it's simple... you can't... the permits are highly controlled, only x number are ever issued, and they are all owned by a handful of companies... it's basically a mafia...

I looked into a permit once to be a private car (not quite a taxi) and it was basically impossible and was going to cost tens of thousands of dollars to even try
Click to expand...

Yeah that completely sucks... there are is under and over regulation in the world for sure. Though I usually am cautious to dictate any industry as over regulated unless I am knowledgeable and well versed in it. I once went and ranted how in road construction there are lanes blocked off for a week before any work gets done. "useless stupid government blah blah blah..." My in-law for a major asphalt company explained the cause had multiple reasons; scheduling of many teams combined with weather, and even safety for the workers (apparently we are idiots the first few days due to lane cutoffs) creates an ever changing schedule and some things are just done early.

Heck...My own industry (software deployment) I have armchair quarterbacks complaining about the "waste" in requiring them to test their Java app against every java update. I even agreed to one admin who told me their app app didn't require flash and they weren't going to test updates against it (even though the app installed it automatically hmmmm). Well they were happy as a clam until their vendor told them a flash version would cause issue... breaking down my email box... I made them get back on the qualification list after I explained they were lucky they were notified prior to us deploying it... 2 days later I might add.

Though the case of the expensive and rare medallions you hear about is hard to see a justification of such a barrier.

Osirus said:
That's exactly my point. For some reason people throw a tantrum when the idea that they should be subject to the same playbook as taxis.
Click to expand...

Yea this quote from the artcle gets me all pissed...

The proposal “would raise substantial barriers to the Uber driver partners” and is “out of step with the dozens of airports across the country that have welcomed ride-sharing” with operating agreements.
Click to expand...

Ride sharing my ass... one hand they say "uber drivers partners" then they go on to say ride sharing? WTF If I am "ride sharing" then one would assume I am sharing my ride to somewhere I am going, like a car pool. They are cabs with private vehicles, just like town cars nothing different about'em.
 
FLECOM said:
I don't know how it is everywhere but down here it's simple... you can't... the permits are highly controlled, only x number are ever issued, and they are all owned by a handful of companies... it's basically a mafia...

I looked into a permit once to be a private car (not quite a taxi) and it was basically impossible and was going to cost tens of thousands of dollars to even try
Click to expand...
I don't understand why people forget this. In some cities those licenses can only be bought from existing cab companies rather than applying with the local municipality, and can cost up to or over a million dollars for ONE license(It's NYC where it's up to the millions, other large cities you're still looking at tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars).

The best part about how cab licenses get handled, is that uber only exists because existing cab services are garbage and no one is able to start a competing business to replace them by winning over customers as a licensed cab service. In most other service industries, a new competing business can start out on the same terms as the existing crappy company. This is not the case with taxis.
 
nysmo said:
How is craigslist not like Wal-Mart?
Click to expand...

for one: Craig's list you just sign up and start selling/posting something. You can't sign up on Wal-Mart and just start selling. You need approval, become a vendor and employee or what have you.

Uber also requires drivers to be approved, they even provide cell phones to their "ride-share partners". Uber clearly wants there to be full time "drivers"... Using the term "ride-sharing" seems to be more about circumventing laws and regulations. That imo is just garbage. I am for lessening requirements but loops holes are not the way. I mean look at our swiss cheese tax code... that is what you get a mess if you continue on the... I don't want to fix, just put more crap on top attitude.
 
Merc1138 said:
I don't understand why people forget this. In some cities those licenses can only be bought from existing cab companies rather than applying with the local municipality, and can cost up to or over a million dollars for ONE license(It's NYC where it's up to the millions, other large cities you're still looking at tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars).

The best part about how cab licenses get handled, is that uber only exists because existing cab services are garbage and no one is able to start a competing business to replace them by winning over customers as a licensed cab service. In most other service industries, a new competing business can start out on the same terms as the existing crappy company. This is not the case with taxis.
Click to expand...

I completely get that... So your opinion is uber is peacefully demonstrating by breaking the law or circumventing it via loop hole? There could be a point there but the lie to that believe imo is the fact that uber will NOT comply with local regulation even if allowed to. I don't think a bumper sticker, fingerprint and $1.50 access is even close to a $10k-million license.
 
dandirk said:
Uber also requires drivers to be approved, they even provide cell phones to their "ride-share partners".
Click to expand...
Except for the fact that their background check didn't catch a convicted murderer and several sex offenders.
 
In fairness to Atlanta Airport (which the article is about), they are consistently the busiest airport in the world. Although not all of their 100 million+ passengers leave the airport they probably have a large number who do. Controlling traffic at the airport and insuring the safety of all of their visitors should be a priority for them and their requests from Uber/Lyft don't seem unreasonable. The issue with insuring that the waiting Uber/Lyft drivers don't interfere with other waiting individuals or the taxi services is also not unreasonable. I am definitely more on the side of ATL on this one.
 
dandirk said:
for one: Craig's list you just sign up and start selling/posting something. You can't sign up on Wal-Mart and just start selling. You need approval, become a vendor and employee or what have you.

Uber also requires drivers to be approved, they even provide cell phones to their "ride-share partners". Uber clearly wants there to be full time "drivers"... Using the term "ride-sharing" seems to be more about circumventing laws and regulations. That imo is just garbage. I am for lessening requirements but loops holes are not the way. I mean look at our swiss cheese tax code... that is what you get a mess if you continue on the... I don't want to fix, just put more crap on top attitude.
Click to expand...

Exactly, Uber's use of the term "ride share" is just a smokescreen designed to make them sound different than taxis. Municipal officials & administration shouldn't even use that term when describing Uber as it only validates them. Until Uber is in compliance with local laws, whatever those laws may be, the best term to use is "bandit cab" because that's what they are.
 
Tiberian said:
They make enough money, let the city who owns the airport keep the airport business.
Click to expand...
FTFY.

Airports are huge cash cows for cities because they get a piece of every cab that goes through there. Yes taxis are known to gouge passengers in some markets, and in others there is simply a flat rate from the airport into the city. But if the airport didn't require a pickup fee for every cab that goes through there, then taking a cab from the airport wouldn't cost so damn much, especially in many cities where the airport isn't actually in the city you want to go, might as well rent a car for a day.
 
Bootleg Usher said:
Exactly, Uber's use of the term "ride share" is just a smokescreen designed to make them sound different than taxis. Municipal officials & administration shouldn't even use that term when describing Uber as it only validates them. Until Uber is in compliance with local laws, whatever those laws may be, the best term to use is "bandit cab" because that's what they are.
Click to expand...

How exactly do you define a taxi? You make it sound like uber drivers are pretending to be doctors or something. It's just a fucking guy driving a fucking car from point A to B. They have no special qualifications or skillset that separates them from you and me. The only reason this whole taxi conglomerate exists is due to decades of secret under-the-table handshakes and cronyism. They built themselves a nice cozy corrupt system based upon bribes and elected officials. Uber simply cut out all the bullshit, and now taxi drivers are mad because they invested in said bullshit and got hosed. It's like being angry that you invested in Enron but only because they got caught.

I can sell my used bike on CraigsList today without having to have a business license. I should be able to fucking drive you across town in my own goddamn car if I feel like it too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top