
Everybody Hates Uber - zxcdsf
https://lawless.tech/everybody-hates-uber-regulations-outraged-taxi-drivers-and-in-house-scandals-that-ruin-their-business/
======
Jyaif
I remember the nightlife before Uber in Paris... It sucked. The ridiculously
rare taxis were always only taking people that accepted to (over)pay in cash.
In other words you were basically auctioning a ride home. Also, I doubt that
they were declaring that cash as income.

I love Uber and all their competitors.

~~~
jordigh
Doesn't Uber do that auctioning too? They call it price surging. Typically
only happens during events where there's a spike in demand, like a very
popular concert, for example.

~~~
whorleater
Sure, but the auction itself is largely hidden away from you, instead of
competing with other riders on price. In this case availability + east of use
trumps "weird auctioning for rides"

------
jordigh
It's possible to give riders good, modern conveniences like being able to
order and pay with a pocket computer app _without_ breaking taxicab
regulations. That is, it's possible to be a cab company with good service, a
good fleet, and good app integration. Here in Montréal we have Téo Taxi as an
example of this kind of service. As a plus, their fleet is also all-electric.

[https://teomtl.com/en/](https://teomtl.com/en/)

Legally speaking; they're plain cabs. They have the same fares as all other
cabs, and follow all the regulations that other cabs obey. The company that
owns them has also bought another cab service, Taxi Diamond, which has begun
to operate in a similar manner, with a pocket computer app, and the two fleets
may even share with each other. During peak hours when a Téo is unavailable,
you may get a Diamond instead.

I know similar services have popped up elsewhere in the world. I don't know if
Uber is directly responsible for these updates to cab services, but their
existence means that it's possible to be better without having to break all
existing laws. Laws which exist to protect both consumers and employees.

~~~
marcosdumay
Yes, it is possible. It even happened more than once over the world.

What is also clear is that modern taxi regulations serve much more to create a
lucrative market for favored people than to protect common people, promote an
economy, or increase the safety of society. The fact that a few times it got
distorted into something that was actually good for everybody does not make
the regulation good, it's just something that happen to anything that is
widespread.

------
toptal
I strongly disagree with this. I enjoy the Uber experience and the customer
support that the company provides.

To me, Uber is a great company both as a customer and entrepreneur.

~~~
anyfoo
I don’t understand your comment. Did you even read the article, or did you
just read the headline and reactively decided to reply on an unreflected whim?
What, exactly, are you trying to say in the context of this article? When you
heard about the Equifax breach, was your reaction “But their customer service
person the other day was a really nice guy”?

------
Gustomaximus
I'm surprised no-one seems to mention this view;

I enjoy the service. I dislike the Uber company morals.

Personally Ive tried using a local version of Uber (Gocatch) mutiple times and
it's just not as good. I really dislike continually immoral behaviour of Uber
and would like to support an alternate. But the service has to work and in
Australia there doesn't seem to be an option. I feel this is a huge business
opportunity if someone can get a competitor right. But I've never seen good
marketing to pull people from Uber and it seems to be getting ever harder
position to break. I think in my region the guys really missed an opportunity
as Uber seem to be cleaning up their act and giving free press to competitors.

~~~
justboxing
> I dislike the Uber company morals.

I totally agree with this statement and the one preceding it, but since when
did we start (or stop) using a company's products and services based on the
company (or individual CEO, founders') moral behavior?

If you did deep enough, you can find plenty of immoral behavior and moral
shortcoming on almost every major company and/or CEOs, founders. Even Apple
(CEO Jobs was famous for not donating even a penny to charity, being a "d*ck"
to his co-workers... etc). Does that mean you stop using iphones? Or stop
filling Gas because Chevron and Exxon 'don't care about the environment'?

By that notion -- judging a company or service based on moral behavior and
deciding to not use them -- one cannot properly function on a day to day basis
in the modern world.

~~~
Gustomaximus
> but since when did we start (or stop) using a company's products and
> services based on the company (or individual CEO, founders') moral behavior?

Since forever. At the bottom of this comment I've linked a study saying 50% of
people will change their purchasing power on a companies perceived moral.

Brand has always been a massive component of a companies value and sales
driver. There's a strong reason companies publicise good acts, donations to
charities etc and have been doing this since early days of the modern economy.
And this is increasing important the more elastic and comparable a
product/service.

>By that notion -- judging a company or service based on moral behavior and
deciding to not use them -- one cannot properly function on a day to day basis
in the modern world.

This feels all or nothing. People act on what they know. Or what they care
about. One does not have to be fully informed to have these decisions. Nor
stop using a product where you feel let down by a companies morals. Only use
an alternate when a person feels the alternate is a reasonable replacement.

The study I found with a quick search.
[https://theamericangenius.com/business-marketing/company-
eth...](https://theamericangenius.com/business-marketing/company-ethics-
actually-affect-purchase-decisions-study/)

------
Fricken
I've never paid for an Uber, but I have enough non-tech friends who swear by
it, including one who spends over $1000/month on it.

For Uber the world is like a big Risk board. They invade territories all over
the world and roll the dice. Some they win and some they lose, but they win
more than they lose, and the more territories they hold, the more armies they
get to play with next round.

------
amanzi
I love using Uber and am willing to look past their previous corporate
offences since their new CEO seems focused on righting the wrongs. Uber's key
problem is that their core business is illegal in most countries, since most
countries have laws and regulations to protect passengers in taxis. Whether or
not those laws and regulations should be changed is up for debate, but I think
we need to refer to Uber as a taxi company instead of a ride-share company.

------
patriot_prayer
Consumers love Uber.

------
unixhero
Uber rules. From Mexico City, Rome to Lisboa.

------
AmericanChopper
It's pretty obvious that customers love Uber, which is why they're so
ubiquitous. The main opponents to Uber are simply motivated by commercial
incentive. It's the same in any industry that's threatened by new business
models.

~~~
Broken_Hippo
I have no commercial incentive to hate them. I'm also not in an area where I'm
forced to take them due to lack of public transportation options, fortunately.

Buses run on time. Every taxi I've taken here is clean. Pricing is upfront. An
app exists so I can order a cab, but in the center of town, I know _exactly_
where to find a cab if I'm out at a bar. I can also walk the 45-55 minutes
home from there, but I don't always want to in winter.

I prefer a system that doesn't screw over drivers. I don't want to be rated by
the driver on whether or not I'm a good passenger. It seems trivial. I want
someone driving for pay to have a special driver's license endorsement.

I don't want to willingly give money to a company with a culture such as them.
If I were in an area where another such service was available instead, I'd
choose the one that is willing to work with lawmakers and cities instead of
flagrantly avoiding them.

That's not to say that taxi service is good everywhere or doesn't need change.
I'm a supporter of public transportation and wish it were expanded. I'd only
take Uber if there was absolutely no other option whatsoever, though.

~~~
andrenth
Then don’t use uber and let others who don’t care about these things use it?

~~~
Broken_Hippo
I do not use them. I'm not even sure if Uber itself exists where I'm at, and
have not checked. And No, not really, though it isn't like I'm forcing folks
to avoid them. I'm vocal about the dislike, though. I encourage others to use
other options when reasonable options exist. I'll encourage folks to talk to
their governments to put reasonable options in place. And so on.

------
rhizome
I've decided to honk every time an Uber/Lyft double-parks in front of me.
These services, while offering some convenience, are also affirmative action
for bad drivers. They make everything about driving in the city more annoying,
but people who don't have cars and/or don't drive don't seem to appreciate
this as they have their driver let them off in the most inopportune places.

~~~
yladiz
What you've said relates two unrelated things. Drivers who double park suck,
but Uber/Lyft drivers aren't the only ones that do. If it makes you feel
better just honk at all cars that double park.

~~~
rhizome
Uber/Lyft drivers are the only ones that pull up with their hazards on just as
soon as their car is on the far side of the intersection. They're the only
ones biding their time in the bike lane waiting for another fare. They _aren
't_ the only ones bouncing between the lane lines checking their phones, but
that's a little less appropriate for honking. I _will_ flash highbeams at them
if they're truly egregious.

I know what I'm talking about, I drive, bike, and walk in this city, and I pay
attention and I know the laws. And I don't know where you get that this is to
make myself "feel better," because my intent is to make these cars' presence
uglier for the neighborhoods in which they behave this way.

~~~
yladiz
The only thing you do by honking your horn at a car in a lane they're taking
up is 1) they move if they're not there for a reason or need to be there, or
2) being briefly annoying to the driver, if they're even in the car, which the
driver will promptly forget. If you know the laws and see a car breaking a
law, then call the police and tell them someone is breaking the law, since
it's their responsibility and not yours to police.

~~~
rhizome
Like I said, it's not so much about them remembering (though that would be
nice), it's about providing a memory for those within earshot.

 _If you know the laws and see a car breaking a law, then call the police and
tell them someone is breaking the law_

Do you live in a city with a big gigcar presence? These incidents only last a
minute, so other strategies are necessary. FWIW, they are invariably also
blocking the bike lane.

