Slashdot Mirror
Uber In Retreat Across Europe
HughPickens.com writes: Mark Scott reports at the NY Times that Uber is rapidly expanding its ride-hailing operations across the globe but some of Uber's fiercest opposition has come in Europe, where the culture clash between the remorseless competition of the US tech industry and the locals' respect for tradition and deference to established interests is especially stark. In Frankfort, Uber shut its office after just 18 months of operation spurred in part by drivers like Hasan Kurt, the owner of a local licensed taxi business, who had refused to work with the American service. Uber antagonized local taxi operators by prioritizing its low-cost service, and then could not persuade enough licensed drivers to sign up, even after it offered to pay for licenses and help with other regulatory costs that totaled as much as $400 for new drivers. "It's not part of the German culture to do something like" what Uber did says Kurt. "We don't like it, the government doesn't like it, and our customers don't like it."
Uber also pulled out of Hamburg and Düsseldorf after less than two years of operating in each of those German cities. In Amsterdam, Uber recently stopped offering UberPop, in Paris and Madrid, Uber has been confronted by often violent opposition from existing taxi operators, while in London, local regulators are mulling changes that could significantly hamper Uber's ambitions there. Uber's aggressive tactics have turned off potential customers like Andreas Müller who tried the company's Frankfurt service after first using Uber on a business trip in Chicago. Müller said he liked the convenience of paying through his smartphone, but soon turned against the company after reading that it had continued operating in violation of court orders and did not directly employ its drivers, who are independent contractors. "That might work in the U.S., but that's not how things are done here in Germany," says Müller. "Everyone must respect the rules."
Uber also pulled out of Hamburg and Düsseldorf after less than two years of operating in each of those German cities. In Amsterdam, Uber recently stopped offering UberPop, in Paris and Madrid, Uber has been confronted by often violent opposition from existing taxi operators, while in London, local regulators are mulling changes that could significantly hamper Uber's ambitions there. Uber's aggressive tactics have turned off potential customers like Andreas Müller who tried the company's Frankfurt service after first using Uber on a business trip in Chicago. Müller said he liked the convenience of paying through his smartphone, but soon turned against the company after reading that it had continued operating in violation of court orders and did not directly employ its drivers, who are independent contractors. "That might work in the U.S., but that's not how things are done here in Germany," says Müller. "Everyone must respect the rules."
This is the biggest thing for me.
I started travelling recently for business when I changed jobs in 2012. Since then, I spent two years hailing taxis ... every single one of them tried to cheat in one way or another. In Seattle, taxi drivers have a flat fee of $40 to take you from the airport to downtown; I never paid less than $45. In DC, taxis would say "Yes, I take cards" but when they get to your destination they refuse to take your card. In Texas they pretended their credit card machine was broken. When they give you a receipt (if they give you a receipt) the receipt is blank, and you're expected to write in whatever you feel like, so you can expense a different amount of money and pocket the change.
Now I ride Uber and the payments aren't an issue. I even like chitchatting with the drivers.
You have it backwards. Uber drivers are conning you. They're invariably not covered with you in the car. They may not fiddle the cost, but if you're in an accident, you are utterly fucked insurance-wise. Ask to see their insurance before getting in, they'll drive off there and then.
You have a smart-phone, learn to use if you want a taxi. If so many are ignoring you, there's probably a good reason. You probably look like a yob or drunk, and they'd rather not bother.
Uber is playing by the rules In London which, depending on who you ask, is part of Europe. That said, the city is considering bringing in new rules to prevent Uber from fairly competing with other types of taxi drivers.
I take about 30 or 40 Ubers a year, and every SINGLE Uber driver I have had has been a licensed minicab operator - in other words the same driver I would be getting if I called a phone number and asked for a cab. These guys are experienced and licensed, and prefer Uber because they earn 5-10% more per hour with Uber than they do with their traditional employer.Did I mention that Uber charge 20-30% less than the traditional minicab firms saving me a bunch of money?
So magically, Uber has chopped around 35% off the cost of private road transport in London that was previously going straight into the pockets of some already very wealthy people. Now the worker and the customer get that 35%. So I win, the driver wins, the only people who lose are the cab firm owners who have traditionally been raking the money in at our expense.
If you compare Uber to the Black Cabs in London, things look even better - Uber are around half the price and offer better service, routes and accountability.
Finally, people will moan about "Surge Pricing" - but that with Uber when surge pricing kicks in I can still GET an Uber, I just have to pay a bit more money for it. At the busier times of night, the times when Uber surge pricing kicks in, if I try ordering a regular cab I'm usually told I can't have one or that there is a wait of an hour or more. So Surge pricing gives me MORE options, even though I may decide not to use that option. With traditional providers, I'm walking the 7 miles home at 3am...
Well, let me offer a different perspective:
When an American says "yarg, teh free markets" ... or some bullshit about how regulation is bad and the market will solve the problem ... or how unrestricted Capitalism will save us all ... the rest of the world thinks sod off you ignorant ass, we see what your bullshit theories do, and we disagree with them.
Uber's bullshit "the rules don't apply to us because we're special" isn't accepted outside of circles of American Libertarians.
The rest of the world thinks it's a crock of shit, and an utter lie by delusional people who thinks this concept of laissez-faire capitalism being shoved up our asses is the last thing we want.
So, yes, in a lot of ways this "remorseless competition of the US industry" (it's not just tech) is not something we want. Precisely because it's a cancer which leaves carnage in its wake solely to benefit some nameless shareholders in another country.
Why would we accept job losses so the bastards who run Uber can get rich at the expense of everyone else in the world?
Sorry, but we're tired of transferring our jobs and money to international (*cough* American *cough*) interests who give nothing back and pretend like they don't owe society a damned thing.
The rest of the world thinks Americans are a bunch of selfish, self-entitled bastards who feel it's their right to come in and take from the local economy and ship all the money elsewhere.
Same in France. Stupidly restrictive taxi regulation lead to a nonsense : taxi drivers are so powerful that they don't care about customers, there's not enough taxis (you can wait for an hour to get one), and the service is just poor and expensive. As a side effect, taxi license reselling has become an investment for newcomers and a life insurance for old drivers, which makes it impossible to get out of the system without getting all drivers mad (and in a bad situation).
But the fault is on the taxi lobby for pushed their monopoly too far. Some would say it is understandable, because it means better situation for them, so why not do it ?
My answer : because some day, it may backfire at you, and you'll deserve it.
If people are upset and someone tries to change the balance, you'll get no support from the population. I don't know how people feel in Germany, but in France, most people who use taxis frequently are quite happy with Uber trying to shake the coconut tree (as we say).
Has anyone here met an Uber driver who is making a comfortable living driving for Uber full time? I haven't.
All the drivers I've spoken too are doing it for extra cash or barely scraping by.
This is my problem with Uber and the so-called sharing economy. The future looks like multiple part-time jobs and low pay to me.
Uber may ultimately fail, but that doesn't really matter - something else similar will take its place, and the only question is one of how long the process will take. There is a strong parallel between Uber and Napster. In both cases a disruptive technology was used to render existing scarcities obsolete. Those vested in the status quo fought back, but continue to lose ground - the market 'spoke' in the way it always does, but in these cases the incumbents didn't like what the market was saying.
Napster is dead, but online sharing of music and videos is here to stay. Uber may die, but if it does then other services will take its place, and will be with us for a long time. Then, something else will come along to replace these services, and there will be hand-wringing and protests against the loss of the 'traditional' services. It's the way of the world.
And the true elites - the ones who could heat their mansions by burning thousand-dollar bills and still be obscenely rich after a few decades - just love these controversies. It keeps everyone's attention off of the fact that without extreme wealth concentration, everyone in the entire world could enjoy a decent and comfortable standard of living and quality of life while working cooperatively to limit population growth and reverse global warming. Yes, maybe it's time to cue the John Lennon song 'Imagine'; but the true and vast potential of humankind needs to be pointed out and acknowledged and encouraged more.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
So, assuredly, non-advanced services education are not provided for free, right?
Because it would discourage a potential doctor from studying medicine if they could also get free education for becoming an artist.
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch