Uber Finally Accepts Cash -- For Autorickshaws In Delhi

An anonymous reader writes Car-hailing giant Uber has launched a new service called UberAUTO in Delhi, which will not only make no charge for hailing an autorickshaw, but will permit customers to pay cash for the first time in the company's history. As there seems to be no specific reason why the three-wheeled carriers should be exempt from Uber's online-only payment policy, the move invites speculation that the $40 billion firm is experimenting with unlocking another revenue stream.

Comments

Won't work in the US

[mitcheli]

Cash payments, while really nice for the drivers, would open them up to attack. In markets like DC. Uber drivers have to have clear signage indicating they are driving for Uber (see how many you can spot on the street corner sometime). But if they have this signage, there's nothing saying they can't be carjacked or mugged.

Re:Won't work in the US

[jklovanc]

Most regular taxis take cash.

Re:Won't work in the US

[Half-pint HAL]

Cash payments, while really nice for the drivers, would open them up to attack.

Autorickshaws are a type of mini-taxi common in India. They are already cash-based operations.

The summary says:

there seems to be no specific reason why the three-wheeled carriers should be exempt from Uber's online-only payment policy,

...but as they're typically metered anyway rather than fixed price, there's a very good reason -- Uber are moving into an established market sector, not creating a new one. They're effectively trying to be "central dispatch" to a bunch of existing self-employed taxi drivers.

New revenuestream?

[Anonymous Coward]

...experimentig with unlocking another revenue stream...

Since most of Ubers business model seems to be based on "ignore local law, regulations, ignore having expensive insurance, ..."

Let me guess, this new revenuestream is based on "skip reporting GST or income tax too"

It's a farce

[OverlordQ]

Still trying to say you're not a taxi service at this point is getting pretty ridiculous.

Re:It's a farce

[Locke2005]

Lower prices at what cost? It appears their business model is based on not paying taxes licensing fees and not paying for commercial insurance. Lower cost due to an unfair competitive advantage gained by being scofflaws... is that the kind of business model we want to encourage?

Re:It's a farce

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you a taxi driver? If not why do you care? Uber means lower prices.

I care because I want to be able to safely hail a cab at 3:00am and not get gouged, robbed, raped, or abandoned in a ghetto.

The reason why taxi laws exist, in nearly every country on the planet, is always initially due to consumer protection.

The "draconian" and "tyranical" "protectionist" taxi laws help make it safe for the consumer/rider and ensure certain things like:
Accountability.
Driver licensing and insurance.
Vehicle maintenance and safety standards.
Access for people with disabilities.
Round the clock service availability.
Non-discrimination.
Fair caps to prevent gouging.
and much more that your inexperience and ignarance doesn't yet have a clue about.

The regulation also limits or prevents;
Gouging.
Being thrown out/dropped off in unreasonable locations.
Criminal predation.
Industry domination by organized crime.
and lots more.

These "ride share" services with their hipster Prius drivers provide none of these assurances and CAN represent a significant danger to the public. Dangers that have been largely eliminated by regulating bus, taxi, and limosine services.

Here's an example:
In my area limosine services have a legally mandadted minimum charge. At first this seems ridiculous and anti-free market. But, the reason is that taxi services are required to provide round-the-clock service. Limosines are not. This places an unreasonable hardship on taxis, if limo services can undercut taxi prices which must have "padding" in order to be able to provide round-the-clock service without going out of business.

Lower prices don't benefit you if you can't get a ride when you need one, do they?

Sadly, bus, taxi regulation has been proven to be a requirement over and over and over again. Letting ride share services enjoy the income benefits without having to adhere to ANY of the requirements is ridiculous and unsustainable.

Re:It's a farce

[tmosley]

Sorry, but they do, in fact, pay for commercial insurance. The other costs are the fault of government intervention in the marketplace on behalf of the taxi companies. Fuck them both is a broken broomhandle. Medallions are fascism, plain and simple. The merger of government and corporate power to produce income for the government and shield the corporation from competition. Uber is what will make THEM behave, not the other way around.

Re:It's a farce

[tmosley]

Funny, since a taxi driver can rape you, murder you, and dump the body without leaving any evidence that you were ever in his cab, as opposed to Uber where the company knows exactly when and where you got in and out, what route you took, etc. An Uber driver raping a passenger is like a guy raping someone in the lobby of a police station. He's going to get caught, and he knows it. So in reality, it just doesn't happen, except maybe when someone just poses as an Uber driver, but fuck, you can pose as a police officer and rape someone too.

"... first time in company's history" == 2 yrs???

[DutchUncle]

Overdramatic much?

Autorickshaws market is tough

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

The autorickshaw market is brutal, on the customers. It is ripe for taking. The Indian autorickshaw drivers routinely tamper with the meter, haggle with the customer, demand tips on top of the metered rate, refuse to fares etc etc. Most Indians are fed up with them and those who could afford the wait time and money prefer to use "call taxis". But..

It will be a tough market to break into. Most of these autorickshaws are actually owned by the traffic policemen and lower level politicians with strong criminal nexus. The actual driver is usually a hired hand. Some of them rent the vehicle for a flat per-diem rate. The policemen do not enforce the laws on the book for "their" autorickshaws. If they decide to selectively enforce all the law on the book on uber affiliated drivers, Uber will find it difficult to handle.

Unless Uber gets into cahoots with a local politician with enough clout, this won't work for Uber. Even if it works, it won't work for the ordinary Indians. Corruption in USA is distant, does not affect the daily life directly, it is more abstract. In India, it hits you right between the eyes, in every turn. From getting simple driver license renewal to getting the building permits to getting electricity connection to getting a death certificate to legal heir certificate to... every where there is a someone sheepishly grinning with a hand held out, "Saar, take care of the usual saar"