Slashdot Mirror


Taxi Owners Sue NYC Over Uber, While Court Overrules Class-Action Appeal (thestack.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Taxi owners in New York have filed a lawsuit against cab-hailing app giant Uber, citing damaged revenues and a hefty fall in value of NYC's 'medallion' business. The case against the city and its Taxi and Limousine Commission claims that the regulators have unfairly permitted Uber to steal away business from the regulated cab industry. Getting away without regulation has enabled Uber drivers to compete directly, and drown out official taxi companies. A further lawsuit case hovering over Uber this week, is its request to immediately appeal an order approving class certification filed by its own drivers. The appeal was denied by a U.S. court yesterday.

7 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. NYC taxi system could DESTROY uber by ZorinLynx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The taxi system already has good infrastructure in place and could destroy Uber if they wanted to, simply by competing fairly and adopting the "choose where you want to go before the cab gets to you" model.

    But instead of doing this, they try to take the easy way out and sue.

    Think of how optimized the cab system could be if they used Uber's model? But no, it's still based on the old "hail a cab and tell them where you're going" system.

    1. Re:NYC taxi system could DESTROY uber by stephanruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't know much about Uber, I don't see how their model is different from a regular taxi. They both need to pick you up at your current location and then you need to tell them where to go.

      I don't see how Uber knowing in advance where you want to go could change the outcome.

      No, in fact it's the taxi drivers that usually have more information about rides than Uber drivers.

      Once booked, an Uber car can not be flagged someone else, it can not hear about other people needing rides to other locations, and it can not make itself available for other tentative bookings. First in, first out. That's how it works. There is no inventory sitting in queues waiting midway to be processed (if you don't mind me using the metaphors of lean manufacturing).

      In the case of a taxi however, even if they're using a taxi app, there is no guarantee that they're coming to pick you up, because someone else could flag them on the way, they may get a more attractive offer of someone needing a ride to the airport (instead of a five minutes ride), they may not like the color of your skin or the way you're dressed or the way you speak, and they're always trying to book their next ride before they're finished with their existing one.

      In the case of Uber also, the inability to do double-booking is important, but it's not the only thing that makes the service better. Since the transaction goes through whether you're picked up or not, you better be there when the Uber driver shows up. And the Uber driver better pick you up, because otherwise he'll get a charge back on his account and he'll get a very bad customer rating on his profile (assuming the gps data from both phones do not contradict the story of the customer).

      Not only that, but as a user using the Uber app, you're instantly reassured after ordering the Uber car, since you're seeing its dot immediately moving towards you. In the case of a taxi however, even if you were to pinpoint its real-time location on a map, you would probably see the dot moving away from you as it is trying to finish its last ride.

      Combine that with the fact that the medaillon system is archaic and highly inflexible, it's no wonder medaillon holders are not happy. During peak hours, Uber drivers can come out of nowhere. Their marginal costs for Uber are constant. In the case of a medaillon holder however, during peak hours, he can't split his medaillon(s) in two. The most he can do is to force a rotation of drivers to use his medaillon 24 hours a day 7 days a week even during low peak hours, to make sure he squeezes out every penny that he can out of that medaillon (or medaillons) so he can try to recoup his investment. And that doesn't solve the problem, that in places like New York or San Francisco, there are not enough taxis during peak hours, so it's not even worth trying to get one during those times. So before services like Uber came along, people opted for public transportation if they could during peak hours, or they opted to bring in their own car, and paid outrageous amounts for parking.

    2. Re: NYC taxi system could DESTROY uber by lymond01 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I was in NYC for a taxi strike in the 90s. For a person who walked and took the subway, it was heaven. Half the cars disappeared from the streets. So much quieter.

    3. Re:NYC taxi system could DESTROY uber by tompaulco · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The "hard" option is to compete, and taxis can't do that. That'd be hard.

      It would be easy to compete if they didn't have to obey the law. If the city would reimburse all of their sunk costs on Taxi medallions, remove the regulations which regulate the prices that taxis can charge and remove the insurance and inspection requirements, then taxis could easily compete with uber and due to their economies of scale, they could crush Uber. But unfortunately, Uber chooses to continue to operate without paying any attention to the rules which other companies in the same sector have to obey.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    4. Re:NYC taxi system could DESTROY uber by TapeCutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I drove taxis 25yrs ago, we had computerised dispatch back then (with a dispatcher entering the data), all of them now have their own app where the user fills out their own details. The taxi dispatchers are there to answer the phones, the dispatch company is usually owned and operated as a co-op between the individual taxi owners. AFAIK Uber doesn't offer the "human on a phone" option, it's web form or nothing.

      Since there are thousands of taxi owners paying for a few drones in a call center it is an insignificant part of the cost of running a taxi. By far the biggest cost of running a cab is maintenance, fuel, insurance, and the interest you pay on the loan you took out for the "medallion".

      If hipsters want to change the law into a race to the bottom for owner-operators, then the first thing they must do is buy back those medallions at a fair price. People have worked their entire lives to pay for a single medallion, a bunch of parasites who believe the law doesn't apply to them are rapidly making them worthless.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  2. Customers aren't property. by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Uber is eating their lunch because cabs SUCK. I have no sympathy at all for those rent-seeking bastards.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  3. my niece doesn't understand dial telephones by turkeydance · · Score: 3, Insightful

    you know...watching an old movie with my sister (she LOVES movies) and her daughter asks about the tech in the movie. "why would anyone...?" take your pick: landline, taxi, whatever. well, she does LOVE horses, so there. bottom line: her generation doesn't care about medallions/taxis/etc.