Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Uber South Africa Launches $500 a Month Car Lease Which Includes Replacing Tires

Posted by samzenpus on from the company-car dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Taxi hailing platform Uber has experimented with vehicle financing schemes around the world this year: it launched a pilot program for car loans in three US towns in the summer and had a two year relationship with Santander too. It's South African arm has gone one step further, however, with an official vehicle leasing — rather than purchase — scheme backed by local lender Wesbank. For about $500 a month which covers the car, maintenance and even tire wear, drivers get access to a mid-sized sedan. Hertz and other car hire firms are also joining in with similar schemes to boost the number of Uber drivers in the country.

83 comments

  1. $500 for a lease? by guruevi · · Score: 1

    Seems a bit pricey. Unless it includes all mileage for a full-time taxi service, it's not all that attractive and if you do have a full-time taxi service, you might as well outright buy the car.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    1. Re:$500 for a lease? by Nutria · · Score: 1

      Exactly. We pay significantly less than that for a minivan in the US.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    2. Re:$500 for a lease? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It IS a bit pricey. Here in Canada, leases of common cars are in the range of $300/month. I'm not sure why story this is noteworthy.

    3. Re:$500 for a lease? by Harlequin80 · · Score: 1

      I'd expect at that cost it is a full cost car lease including fuel and servicing. If that is the case it isn't that expensive.

      I have a full cost lease, which covers finance, fuel, insurance, servicing, registration, tyres etc and it costs $483.15 for fortnight on a $50,000 car budgeted at 27,000 km per year.

    4. Re:$500 for a lease? by Harlequin80 · · Score: 1

      In addition to this I would highly recommend against buying your vehicle if you plan to do long term commercial work with it. You end up with a capital asset which is not tax deductible except for the depreciation schedule, which is often not that accurate. Also once they reach a certain mileage and age you will start to see problems that can put your business at risk. You are much better operating on a lease and turning the vehicle over regularly.

    5. Re:$500 for a lease? by inasity_rules · · Score: 1

      My mid sized sedan repayments are around R4 800/month. Cars are significantly more expensive here then in the US.

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    6. Re:$500 for a lease? by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

      Ex-taxi driver here (late 80's). The oldest taxi I ever drove was 5yrs old and had 1.2 million kilometers on the clock, even the door hinges on the passenger side had been replaced more than once. The average 24/7 cab in Melbourne racks up about 1000 km/day, (if you have more than one cab) the cheapest way to keep them on the road is to buy a late model sedan at a government auction that has ~100K on the clock, and have your own workshop and mechanic. A new car warranty is virtually pointless, if you buy a new car with a 100,000km warranty, the warranty will expire in the first 6 months. If you don't have a workshop and mechanic then you will be paying close to retail prices to maintain it.Of course with 1M+ km on the clock, the resale/salvage value is virtually nil.

      Leasing it for $500/mth including tyres and maintenance would be a bargain if it was $AU in Australia. However the idea is not new, open any newspaper to the "help wanted" section and you will see dozens of adverts attempting to sell/lease three ton courier trucks with a "guaranteed income".

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    7. Re:$500 for a lease? by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 3

      It's an interesting story because it means getting Uber cars on the road in places they haven't got to yet. I live in one of those places so I hope it works out and they come to me.

      It has to be risky for Uber, I'm imagining that Africans who want to be Uber drivers don't have much in terms of credit scores.

    8. Re:$500 for a lease? by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      My mid sized sedan repayments are around R4 800/month. Cars are significantly more expensive here then in the US.

      The last car I bought was at R1.8k/m. Once it was paid off I simply kept it.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    9. Re:$500 for a lease? by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      I agree with the in-house mechanic. The ambulance service where my sister worked for a number of years is co-located with a mechanic. The ambulance service gets their vehicles serviced for practically nothing, and the mechanic pays practically nothing for the space. It's a good deal for both of them.

    10. Re:$500 for a lease? by inasity_rules · · Score: 1

      That was either an entry level vehicle, or a long time ago. I will likely simply keep my car once it is paid off, it seems the best answer. By comparison, my brother in the states pays nearly half what I do for a similar vehicle.

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    11. Re:$500 for a lease? by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      That was either an entry level vehicle, or a long time ago. I will likely simply keep my car once it is paid off, it seems the best answer. By comparison, my brother in the states pays nearly half what I do for a similar vehicle.

      Long time ago. Plus, the car was a demo model, not new. The car now has +300000km under its belt and still serves me well. I might have to fork out money for a new car soon, but I sure as hell wouldn't be financing it. Buying cheap, 2nd hand with cash.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    12. Re:$500 for a lease? by Greyfox · · Score: 1
      For the cost of the vehicle itself, maybe. If you factor in insurance, maintenance and fuel, you'd probably get a bit closer. I believe it's illegal not to carry insurance in all 50 states, but the company's still going to need to have some of their own for the occasional jackass who doesn't. The driver would be paying for their own fuel, but vehicle depreciation from mileage is also something the company has to consider.

      That being said, you can find an older beater car for between $1000 and $2000 if you shop around a bit. In my youth I found an old RX/7 in pretty workable condition that the guy wanted $900 for. I drove that thing for several years and it was a pretty reliable vehicle that I could do many of my own repairs on.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    13. Re:$500 for a lease? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Exactly. We pay significantly less than that for a minivan in the US.

      Don't bother comparing with your US prices. Vehicles generally cost less for Americans than they do in other countries. More important is how it compares with other deals available locally. (That said, $500 USD every month is probably out of reach for most South Africans).

      You also need to take into account the financing costs -- as with all loans, it's likely to be more expensive for those with a weaker credit history. The price has probably been thought through carefuly based on who the deal is aimed at and what financial strings are attached.

      But I guess the biggest point here is to ask what relevance this whole thing has to Slashdot? Oh that's right, it's about Uber. Which is, you know, like a tech company. Well, they're not really; they're just a dodgy unlicenced taxi biz who have an app, but they want to be seen as a tech company so they keep making loads of noise on sites like this. But this car financing deal? Really? In what way is that relevant? Leasing cars is hardly a ground-shaking new innovation.

    14. Re:$500 for a lease? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A mid-sized sedan would cost around $10,000 in South Africa, which wouldn't include any maintenance or insurance. Insurance for a vehicle used as a taxi would probably be around $200 a month. $500 a month for a lease is far better than buying.

    15. Re:$500 for a lease? by Nutria · · Score: 2

      But I guess the biggest point here is to ask what relevance this whole thing has to Slashdot?

      I get down-voted every time I ask questions like this... :(

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    16. Re:$500 for a lease? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure why story this is noteworthy.

      It's noteworthy- or rather, *news*worthy- because it has the Uber name attached, without which it'd just be some rental finance scheme/deal. And the only reason the Uber name is attached- when it probably has sod all to do with them otherwise- is that it gets them into the news. End of story.

    17. Re:$500 for a lease? by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      what relevance this whole thing has to Slashdot?

      I get down-voted every time I ask questions like this... :(

      The post is an advert. The question remains unanswered though.

      In the UK, AFAIK long term car hire schemes are total packages, including services and tyres. The sort of people who have such hires, mostly though their company like travelling reps and PHBs, would never dream of stooping to look at their tyre wear anyway.

    18. Re:$500 for a lease? by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      It's an interesting story because it means getting Uber cars on the road in places they haven't got to yet..

      And why is that interesting? We don't see stories here about, say, Hertz opening new branches.

    19. Re:$500 for a lease? by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 1

      Because Hertz isn't a disruptive technology that's taking over the world.

    20. Re:$500 for a lease? by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      Replying to myself, sorry I didn't read TFA. Now I have and see it is about leasing cars to Uber taxi drivers, not to general public, but the /. article did not make that point clear. It is still not a /. matter though.

    21. Re:$500 for a lease? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Neither is Uber. They have a disruptive business model made possible by the ubiquity of cell phones, a pretty basic app and backend, and a variable pricing algorithm that really isn't all that complicated. Calling them a technology company is a bit of a stretch.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    22. Re:$500 for a lease? by inasity_rules · · Score: 1

      You're off by a factor of 2 there buddy. A Hyundai elantra is around R320k. That's US$22 000. And they're considered reasonable value.

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    23. Re:$500 for a lease? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In New Hampshire insurance is optional, so long as you're a good driver and never leave the state.

      As for maintenance, typically leases don't last much longer than the bumper to bumper warranty. The only maintenance should be brakes, brake fluid, oil, coolant, transmission fluid, power steering fluid, and windshield washer fluid. I suppose if the car had an ancient battery, topping that up, too.

      Out of all those, on a typical car 3 years old that has been softly driven, you will only need to change the oil and windshield washer fluid (which might cost $100 a year if you go somewhere expensive). If you order a set of winter tires, you'll get an easy 4 years out of them, otherwise, figure one tire change at $500. Many companies say the transmission fluid is lifetime, the coolant is good for 5 years, brake fluid for 5 (or lifetime), power steering for 5, and the batteries are sealed nowadays.

      So, over a 3 year lease, we're looking at a bit over $20 in maintenance a month.

    24. Re:$500 for a lease? by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      I you think Hertz isn't a disruptive technology, wait until they have one million cars.

    25. Re:$500 for a lease? by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 1

      I didn't say they're a technology company, I said they're a disruptive technology. Was Amazon a technology company 10 years ago? No, and yet they changed the face of retail. Now, Walmart is playing catch-up. Therefore: disruptive technology. Same with Uber and taxis.

    26. Re:$500 for a lease? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because Uber is just the right mix of technology, societal impact, exposure of regulation issues, and dealing with personal rights, that it is an exact match for the type of stuff on Slashdot for many years.

    27. Re:$500 for a lease? by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      While you can get a lease for $300 a month here the article states that they are basically writing the car off after five years of use because some of the drivers are driving 11,000 km a month. To get a $300 a month lease you normally get around 20,000 to 25,000 km. Even the drivers mentioned in the article that weren't doing much distance were still doing 3,000 to 5,000 km a month. I went onto Toyota Canada's website and the most that they will let you put onto a lease is 40,000 km a year which is pretty much were these drivers are starting. Going from 22,500 km to 40,000 on their lease calculator adds $100 a month to the lease so if they got a good annual amount of km thrown in it would be a good package.

    28. Re:$500 for a lease? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      None of the leases check mileage, until it's time to turn it in. Feel free to lease a car with 500 mi per year limit, and buy it out at the end. The buy out may even be less than the mileage penalty.

      Leases are often good because they have complicated and confusing rules that can be gamed by buyers.

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    29. Re: $500 for a lease? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember it's Africa. They go there to exploit and do what they can never do in their home country.

  2. Tech news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is a leasing plan by a taxi operator "tech news"? It isn't even using bitcoins or some micropayment scheme. Goodbye, Slashdot, I've finally had enough Uber.

    1. Re:Tech news? by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      It involves computers, somewhere.

  3. In Russia, you pay taxi company to drive for it! by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

    >> For about $500 a month, (Uber) drivers get access to a mid-sized sedan (that they can use to drive people around for Uber)

    In Soviet Russia*, you pay taxi company to drive for it!

    (*=for values of Soviet Russia equal to "South Africa")

  4. Uber should provide its employees... by EzInKy · · Score: 3

    ...everything they need to do their. jobs.

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    1. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sorry, that's not a business plan you can sell to the Silicon Valley vultures.

    2. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by EzInKy · · Score: 1

      Silicon Valley "Vultures", given their ultra intellect, should know better than anyone that can't sustain a viable economy without people who have money to spend on their services.

      --
      Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    3. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the job doesn't pay well enough maybe the contractors shouldn't work for these companies. People need to take responsibility for there own actions sometimes. I love how just because people are use to traditional employment situations they automatically expect them. That's not how the world should work. If your a contractor it is up to you to demand more money than what you'd be otherwise paid as an employee else you lose. Taking the rotten deal and then complaining about it after is just stupid. I've held low pay jobs in my life and it sucks, but ultimately you move on because the low-skill jobs don't pay well enough to live off. Many of the low skill jobs don't bring in enough money or can be automated or outsourced. Bitching about it just makes the USA a less attractive place to invest (which means fewer low pay jobs).

      People complaining about $7 an hour need to spend some time looking for a better job. Failing that spend some time researching starting your own business. I did. I interviewed, was offered a good high salary job out of college (for an entry level position), and then immediately turned it all down. This was in 2008. I was a 'greedy' bastard who wanted more for myself and I was in a position to get more long term by investing in myself. However the initial cost was high. I proceeded to work for $9 hour with no benefits for a year despite having a computer science degree and better full time full benefits job offered to me. The benefit to taking a lower skill part time job was I'd work only 30 hours a week and that was a condition of my employment. That provided me with the money and time start a small company. It would not be the company I wanted to start though. Having no money to do so that $9 hour got me off the ground. It took another 3 years to get the 2nd company I really intended to start off the ground. The first company was merely to bring in the 'real money'. And no I didn't know if I was going to succede or fail at either company. But ultimately 8 years in and I make six figures now. There is near zero chance I'd be making six figures had I gone into the regular job market. I just don't have *that* strong of skills within the market to which demand six figures. I'd probably be making $60-80 thousand a year today with no real potential for advancement short of moving up to management maybe.

    4. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      is that cayenne8? roman_mir? Perhaps super_kendall.

    5. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      The problem is, these companies are purposely targeting people who make bad choices. That is a big important part of this 'new economy'. They're basically giving a big 'screw you' to people who would like a job on an even, fair playing field because enough people have now lost their houses, and are desperate enough to do the job. This has an effect on everyone because it allows companies to take advantage of people in desperate situations, which means good job opportunities will be ever more in short supply.

      It is basically threatening to make everything a part time job, including many jobs that are traditional today.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    6. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by swillden · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, making them treat all drivers as full-time employees will exclude the people who really want to do part-time, own-schedule work. I've gotten a couple of Uber rides from stay-at-home moms who are just making a few extra bucks while the kiddos are in school. They like that they can work when they have time, and simply not bother to log in on days they have stuff to get done.

      Trying to force all jobs into one mold screws those who don't want a job that fits the mold.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    7. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Well we shall see how it all pans out. There is a person in Canada who is trying to sue Uber because they got into an accident with their minivan and it was a total write-off and the insurance company wouldn't pay for it due to commercial use. As more of these happen it is hard to see how 'a few dollars' here and there is going to cover it.

      They're not trying to force all jobs into one mould. They're just trying to keep them safe and fair for the employee.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    8. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by swillden · · Score: 1

      Well we shall see how it all pans out. There is a person in Canada who is trying to sue Uber because they got into an accident with their minivan and it was a total write-off and the insurance company wouldn't pay for it due to commercial use. As more of these happen it is hard to see how 'a few dollars' here and there is going to cover it.

      I agree that Uber should provide better insurance, which would solve that problem. They currently provide liability coverage, but they need to provide collision coverage, and medical coverage in countries that don't have socialized medicine (a Canadian shouldn't have an issue there, right?). It would be fine for them to charge drivers for this coverage, or allow drivers to find their own. They should also probably offer short- and long-term disability coverage. Those are typically very cheap.

      They're not trying to force all jobs into one mould. They're just trying to keep them safe and fair for the employee.

      ... by forcing all jobs into one mold. If there's a problem with lack of insurance, then that problem should be addressed head-on, not by trying to force them to treat their contractors as employees, or to follow other taxi-oriented regulations that aren't relevant under a ride-call model.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    9. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, making them treat all drivers as full-time employees will exclude the people who really want to do part-time, own-schedule work. I've gotten a couple of Uber rides from stay-at-home moms who are just making a few extra bucks while the kiddos are in school. They like that they can work when they have time, and simply not bother to log in on days they have stuff to get done.

      Trying to force all jobs into one mold screws those who don't want a job that fits the mold.

      You can work part time as a taxi driver too, you know. There is nothing new in what Uber offers.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    10. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by swillden · · Score: 1

      You can work part time as a taxi driver too, you know. There is nothing new in what Uber offers.

      Yeah, you just try calling up a cab company and telling them you want to work random hours, or not, on a whim and without any pre-scheduling.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    11. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      The problem is... on one hand you have people who want to make 'a few bucks' doing this. Should they be able to? It's beyond debate that allowing this to happen will harm the livelihoods of a million cab drivers who were told by the government that it was save to sink life savings into it because they were protected by a set of regulations. I just it is a shit deal for all of them, to convert their entire industry into a 'for a few bucks' industry.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    12. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by swillden · · Score: 1

      The problem is... on one hand you have people who want to make 'a few bucks' doing this. Should they be able to? It's beyond debate that allowing this to happen will harm the livelihoods of a million cab drivers who were told by the government that it was save to sink life savings into it because they were protected by a set of regulations.

      Buggy-whip makers.

      I note your point about how this is different because government regulation was involved, but I really don't see it. Many industries are erased or restructured by technological progress, and whether or not the change is related to government regulation doesn't make any difference. Also, I think your claim that people were "told by the government that it was safe" is simply false. Government never said any such thing. Government merely said that taxis must have medallions and people made assumptions about the future. Past performance is no indication of future returns and all that, in any business.

      I just it is a shit deal for all of them, to convert their entire industry into a 'for a few bucks' industry.

      Oh, it's worse than that, because before long their industry is going away completely, not just transitioning to part-timers. The part-timer transition may actually delay the complete disappearance of the jobs.

      Frankly, I'm a lot more worried about truckers than cabbies. There are a lot more of them, and many of them live in areas with fewer local opportunities. Self-driving systems will erase the long-haul truck driving industry before they eliminate cabs.

      But the solution isn't to continue applying regulations to prop up industries that no longer make sense, it's to help the people in those industries transition. I suspect that we're heading into a period of such rapid transition that we're going to have to think very seriously about some sort of basic living stipend to avoid mass poverty, plus extensive educational assistance. On the plus side, the same rapid transition will dramatically reduce production and transportation costs, which should help us fund the transitional support.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    13. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      There is still a problem with your argument, and here is why it is unfair to compare them to buggy whip makers. The regulations are there because unregulated, things didn't work. There were too many cars on the road, and people got so competitive that there were injuries and deaths from speeding and taking short cuts. Taxis in my area have to have safety shields and emergency lights, and in fact one Uber driver just got attacked; face slammed into the drivers side window and a shield would have helped him. Another driver has lost the family minivan with no coverage or replacement because they had no commercial insurance.

      These are not just simply laws that were put in place to help people make a few bucks. These laws are there for valid backreasons and they shaped the industry. As a citizen of a city with cab regulations, not only do I agree with these laws, I feel I have a right to have them protected. I don't have a right to buggy whips, but I do have a right for my legal system to uphold the laws because this does affect me even if I never step in a taxi or an Uber car. As a person that shares the roads, I definitely have a say in this matter and the way it works is through the government because the government is the only representation of the people.

      You and Uber are the ones skirting the process and trampling on our rights. Being able to hail rides by phone is only one part of the full service that my city gets. I would like to be convinced that an Uber type service will also not be a step back on all the other requirements before I am willing to budge on taxi laws.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    14. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by swillden · · Score: 1

      There is still a problem with your argument, and here is why it is unfair to compare them to buggy whip makers. The regulations are there because unregulated, things didn't work.

      Of course, because without some mechanism for being able to determine the trustworthiness of driver, regulation is required. Networked mobile devices provide an alternative reputation system.

      Taxis in my area have to have safety shields and emergency lights... in fact one Uber driver just got attacked; face slammed into the drivers side window and a shield would have helped him

      Safety shields are one option. Another is the more normal societal mechanism for discouraging that sort of thing... prosecuting the violent criminals. This is particularly easy with Uber/Lyft, since the company has the rider's contact information on file. Drivers also have the option of making use of technology to install cameras in their vehicles. Or they can install safety shields, sure. Why must the law decide how they protect themselves?

      I agree with these laws

      That's fine, and if a majority of citizens agree with you, that's how it will be. I'll vote otherwise, and we'll all see how it shakes out.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    15. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      But by allowing Uber to exist and perhaps using Uber, you have already been allowed to make your vote. How long do you think I will have to wait to make mine?

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    16. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      To be fair, you didn't even grant us the dignity of waiting for a vote to be called. You just went ahead and tread on our world.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    17. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by swillden · · Score: 1

      To be fair, you didn't even grant us the dignity of waiting for a vote to be called. You just went ahead and tread on our world.

      As far as I can tell, Uber isn't actually breaking laws, not unequivocally. That's why they're still operating, in the space that is also operated by contract limousines and livery companies, which have never followed the taxi laws, because they're not taxis. Where Uber is clearly not allowed by the law, they've been shut down.

      One good example is Las Vegas. Vegas determined that they were not complying with the laws and shut them down until the appropriate agency made a new set of regulations for them, with public input. Another is London, where they're operating under the "minicab" laws, which have offered a more cost-effective alternative to the traditional black cabs for decades. Another is Brussels, where they're operating as a car service for a private association (which you join by requesting a car). Those happen to be the cities I've visited recently, where I didn't just rent a car, so I used Uber. And in other cities they're simply not operating because the laws will have to be changed to allow it.

      Your complaint strikes me as very similar to that of people who criticize corporations for "cheating" on their income taxes by using loopholes to legally avoid taxes. They're obeying the law. If you're not happy with what the law says, then work to change it. Don't criticize people for reading it carefully and following it in the manner most advantageous to them. Or, at least, don't try to claim they're breaking the law when they're not.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    18. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by swillden · · Score: 1

      But by allowing Uber to exist and perhaps using Uber, you have already been allowed to make your vote. How long do you think I will have to wait to make mine?

      As long as you're alive and able to communicate with your elected representatives.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    19. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Ok so let me get this straight. Uber is willing to stop doing business until I talk with my elected representatives? I think you are dreaming.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    20. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Fine, but it's still gaming the system. No different than a person who realizes they can live off welfare all their lives. Also they are breaking the law in most juristictions.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    21. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Also, then you have to accept other areas where people have found to skirt the laws.. such as murder for hire on Silk Road. Perhaps we should stop hunting for these people and just see what life becomes like if we just let the markets work without regulation.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    22. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by swillden · · Score: 1

      Also, then you have to accept other areas where people have found to skirt the laws.. such as murder for hire on Silk Road. Perhaps we should stop hunting for these people and just see what life becomes like if we just let the markets work without regulation.

      What are you on about? Conspiracy to commit murder is illegal. That's not an edge case at all.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    23. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by swillden · · Score: 1

      Fine, but it's still gaming the system. No different than a person who realizes they can live off welfare all their lives.

      If the system is set up to allow that, that's what the system allows. If that's not what we want, then we should fix the system.

      Also they are breaking the law in most juristictions.

      So you say. The officials charged with reading and enforcing the laws don't agree. If you can identify the specific letter of the law being broken, you should take it to your elected officials and get them to pressure the relevant agencies to enforce the law. But I would be very surprised if you could do that, because if they were actually breaking the law that would already have happened. There's been enough time for everyone to catch up.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    24. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by swillden · · Score: 1

      Ok so let me get this straight. Uber is willing to stop doing business until I talk with my elected representatives? I think you are dreaming.

      Why in the world would they do that? They'll continue operating until it's demonstrated that they're violating existing laws or new ones are passed to shut them down. That's as it should be. The presumption is that you can do whatever you like unless it's specifically restricted. Would you really want to live in a world where it's necessary to ask permission for anything you want to do?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    25. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      They will be prosecuted, I'm assuming. Too many municipalities where there are clear restrictions for taxi services.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    26. Re:Uber should provide its employees... by swillden · · Score: 1

      They will be prosecuted, I'm assuming. Too many municipalities where there are clear restrictions for taxi services.

      They can only be prosecuted if Uber actually meets the definition of a taxi service. Not the generic notion of what we think taxi services are, but the specific legal definition. This is why Uber is legal in many areas where taxis are regulated, because the legal definition of "taxi" includes things like street hailing, etc., that Uber doesn't do. This issue has been gestating long enough that I suspect Uber has already been shut down everywhere it's actually illegal.

      From my perspective, of course, I hope the locales with regulations that prohibit Uber fix their laws to make it legal. I hugely prefer Uber over traditional taxi services. It's so much more convenient and pleasant. And cheaper. My wife has also been thinking about driving for extra money, though we need to make sure the insurance coverage is adequate.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  5. Re:In Russia, you pay taxi company to drive for it by Harlequin80 · · Score: 1

    In * you pay taxi company to drive for it. Where * is every country in the world.

  6. Uber uber Alles by swell · · Score: 1

    "A prefixal use of uber, adverb and adjective, with the basic meaning "over, beyond."..."

    Soon we can expect Uber insurance company, Uber auto manufacturing, Uber legal defense fund, Uber uniform company, and special Uber discounts at Disney World, all for Uber drivers (who may or may not be employees).

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:Uber uber Alles by cyberthanasis12 · · Score: 1

      It sounds like system D.

    2. Re:Uber uber Alles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or Substance D

    3. Re:Uber uber Alles by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Sure, a company that doesn't have to follow laws can easily move into any market segment can't it? I mean, it could start manufacturing some medications and skip all the pesky drug restrictions that ratchet up the price for everyone else.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  7. jack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does that include a kaffer, or do you have to provide your own?

    1. Re:jack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does that include a kaffer, or do you have to provide your own?

      Right, Uber will struggle because every respectable South African will have a "boy" to drive him already.

    2. Re:jack by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      Right, Uber will struggle because every respectable South African will have a "boy" to drive him already.

      Plenty of unrespectable ones though, I suppose.

  8. $500??! by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 3, Funny

    For the kind of cars i drive, $500 would buy me a replacement car every month.

    --
    (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    1. Re:$500??! by swillden · · Score: 1

      For the kind of cars i drive, $500 would buy me a replacement car every month.

      And Uber wouldn't allow you to use that kind of car to transport its customers. Of course, I imagine you have no desire to transport Uber's customers anyway, so it works out, but it means your car-buying habits aren't relevant to the conversation.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  9. Get your ass to South Africa by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 2

    Time to finally finish my Johnny Cab bot and sign him up as an Uber driver! Along with the Go Pros to capture the terrified looks on the vict^H^H^H^H riders' faces.

    "Hellua day, huh?"

  10. liability and labor issues by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Now this does make uber more liability in case of accidents and This can also lead to labor issues like with FedEx and there drivers that had to Lease / rent or buy FedEx trucks but where not W2's and the courts said that they can be 1099's due to the rules. Now if this really there car to use then they should be able use it on lift / for other stuff as well.

  11. So Uber is a taxi company by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2

    Taxi hailing platform Uber. . .

    So Uber is admitting it's a taxi service but doesn't believe it has to abide by rules for taxi companies, nor do its drivers who don't have a business license or insurance to protect their passengers.

    Good to know people can make up whatever shit they want. I think I'll open a theme park, with blackjack and hookers, and call it recreation sharing. I'll make a ton of money since I won't have to worry about paying taxes or dealing with any ridiculous licensing or permits.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1. Re:So Uber is a taxi company by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Im waiting for them to start producing medications. Imagine all the overhead they can save on that, not having to follow government regulations.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    2. Re:So Uber is a taxi company by swillden · · Score: 1

      Taxi hailing platform Uber. . .

      So Uber is admitting it's a taxi service

      Actually it was "An anoymous reader" who called it a taxi service.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:So Uber is a taxi company by plopez · · Score: 1

      and outsource to "Technicians" to prescribe and fill prescriptions.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  12. Terms by JBMcB · · Score: 1

    Read the terms of the lease, they are usually distance-limited.

    This would make them useless for even a part-time taxi-style service.

    --
    My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
    1. Re:Terms by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Read the terms of the lease, they are usually distance-limited.

      This would make them useless for even a part-time taxi-style service.

      And the distance limitation is usually something pretty low like 5000 miles a year (in the UK). They're not even that useful for regular commuting unless you live in London and do ten miles a day.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  13. Yawn... it's been done already by plopez · · Score: 1

    Yawn.... same old model. Cab companies have been leasing to prospective drivers for years and car companies, rental agencies, and dealership have been leasing for years to other drivers.

    Wake me when they come up with something truly innovative. You know, something that is new and not just has "on a mobile device" or "on a computer" tacked on the end.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    1. Re:Yawn... it's been done already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, but...the secret is you don't have to pay the lease. Paying the lease is following the rules and rules can be ignored when you are a disruptive technology.

  14. Someone having a chuckle in TFS? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

    "Taxi hailing platform Uber"?! At least we know this wasn't written by Uber's PR company, unlike most Uber stories.

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  15. Expensive - medical cover? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does this crazy high price also include medical cover? Given the mafia like state of the formal/informal taxi industry in South Africa, you'd also hope the cars are bullet proof too.

  16. Sold my soul to the Company Store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so the company owns the dispatch "app" and the vehicle yet claims none of the responsibility, putting all that on the sucker..err..driver who signs up to pay most of what he makes (or more) towards the "lease" of the vehicle he or she needs to do the job. Fall behind in lease payments when ridership lowers or Uber drivers saturate the area market, then pay out of pocket. Is there a real nasty early termination fee too?