
Uber banned in Portugal - rafaqueque
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/5463-uber-cab-service-banned-in-portugal
======
jobvandervoort
Great country to live, awful country to start/host any kind of company.
Unfriendly tax climate, lack of startup infrastructure, lots and lots of
bureaucracy.

Their (national association of road transport) next step is trying to get Uber
to pay up for missed income - or as they state it "compensation for damages to
the industry" [1].

[1]: [http://www.publico.pt/sociedade/noticia/uber-proibida-de-
ope...](http://www.publico.pt/sociedade/noticia/uber-proibida-de-operar-em-
portugal-1693930)

~~~
royjacobs
Well, Uber has issues here in The Netherlands as well. Here it's also illegal
to run your own taxi company. It's a very regulated business.

I don't think legislators would have a problem with Uber per se, it's just
that they cheerfully ignore the existing legislation (and pay the fines
incurred by the drivers) and basically just try to force themselves onto the
market. If they would take the time to get proper legislation passed it could
end up fine.

But why would governments that explicitly forbid illegal taxi services start
making an exception for Uber?

~~~
icebraining
_If they would take the time to get proper legislation passed it could end up
fine._

Except that doesn't work (with a few exceptional countries/cities), because
the incumbents have massive political capital and Uber doesn't, and it's very
hard to get popular support for something people haven't experienced.

I don't like Uber for other reasons, but regarding this tactic, I'm fine with
it.

Even if we agree that these laws are important, surely there's no short term
harm in having Uber around - it's not like they're dumping waste or performing
unlicensed surgery - the courts just have to issue a ruling and everything can
go back to normal in a week.

~~~
phatfish
I would love to know who these "incumbents with massive political capital"
are. Where i live most licensed taxi firms are small businesses run by local
people providing local jobs.

Uber are now stomping these small companies by ignoring local law because they
can afford the fines or just don't care.

I agree they are being allowed to do this in many places, and that it the
fault of the government -- but i am certainly NOT fine with it.

They want to be the taxi service for the world which is a fast track to
disaster for everyone except Uber.

~~~
icebraining
_I would love to know who these "incumbents with massive political capital"
are. Where i live most licensed taxi firms are small businesses run by local
people providing local jobs._

Yes they are. And they group themselves (here in Portugal we have a single,
national association of taxi companies, which was the organization that got
the court to ban Uber) and have long standing relationships with local parties
and politicians.

The fact that they're small business is irrelevant; we're talking about
_political_ capital, ie., influence, not money.

A good example is how the Portuguese court ruled without even hearing Uber.

 _Uber are now stomping these small companies by ignoring local law because
they can afford the fines or just don 't care._

By stomping, you mean competing?

------
Lennu
This is much due to the fact that in some european countries the government
gives monopoly status to some business areas if they are willing to work how
the government want them to work. This usually has a negative impact on the
winnings of the local company.

For example taxis are supposed to work and be reachable all around the country
with the same prices, not just in high volume areas. If there is a new company
that steps on the prices of the high volume areas, the older local company
won't be able to offer the service in low volume areas.

People get angry if they don't have good services in their living areas.

------
mdemare
If there's one country where Uber is needed...

When I was there last year, we were given a list of 5 taxi phone numbers. When
you needed a taxi, you'd cycle through the numbers until you found one that 1)
answered the phone 2) was available 3) managed to understand where you wanted
to be picked up. When we were leaving and needed to catch a bus, I made 15
fruitless phone calls, then asked somebody for a ride.

~~~
Uberphallus
At least it's cheap-ish (last time I was in Porto, at least).

If there's a country it's France. An airport ride to my place, 16 km (10
miles), no more than 20 minutes, goes for a whooping 60EUR/66USD, more than
the roundtrip flight to London. Nope.

And when I needed a ride at 4-5AM I called only to be hung up because "I
didn't book it 24h in advance".

~~~
oleganza
It's not "cheap" if you cannot take a ride. Total cost is a sum of the price,
time wasted and the risk of being late. "Cheap" taxi that is impossible to
catch is not actually cheap.

That's the same fallacy as when people whine about Uber's "surge pricing".
When there is huge demand, Uber prices may go up 2x, but you still will be
able to get a ride in 5 minutes instead of waiting half an hour or not even
knowing if you will be able to catch a car at all.

~~~
CaptainZapp
You conveniently omit that Uber, in some cases, jacked up prices 8 fold.

There's a very good reason why taxis are regulated in most jurisdictions. If
Uber doesn't like such regulations they're free to try to change it. And they
do have very heavy hitting lobbyists on their payroll to do just that.

They are not free, however, to break the law.

------
Idiocracy
10 words in to become incorrect, and that was due to sentence structure. Top
comment on Hackernews is also wrong.

These two reasons are why Uber (a crappy company anyway, do use their
competitors, don't reward their anticompetitive policies) are banned.

> by the Court of Lisbon which accepted an injunction filed by Antral, the
> road carriers association.

Incorrect

> Politicians are too short sighted, always protecting the status quo.

Incorrect.

~~~
dylanjermiah
Why is uber a crappy company? And how have they been anticompetitive?

~~~
efaref
Apparently being better than the competition is anti-competitive.

~~~
coldtea
Being "better than the competition", by e.g. using children of slave labour is
anti-competitive yes.

Being "better than the competition", by sidestepping laws and regulations,
like Uber does, is also anti-competitive.

------
lessthunk
Politicians are too short sighted, always protecting the status quo.

~~~
mavdi
Short sighted for protecting the income of the vulnerable taxi drivers and
small time taxi companies? Since the introduction in London, waves of Minicab
offices have closed down. Hats off to them to resist this. Not everything in
life is automation and money saving. I'm sure the Portuguese have a decent
taxi service as is.

~~~
dylanjermiah
Why should we save jobs which are less efficient than other alternatives?
Should the government have saved jobs (kill innovation) when 97% of humanity
were farmers?

~~~
mavdi
Because there is something good about a locally run business as inefficient as
it may be. Uber sucks the income into some tax haven blackhole, with very
little regard to the local economy and community. Uber kills any local
transportation enterprise, everyone ends up being an employee rather than a
small business owner.

------
elcct
So much for the free market...

~~~
aric
I agree that it's sheer insanity to prevent people from interacting
consensually. It's ironic, considering drugs are decriminalized in Portugal.
Free markets can't effectively exist as long as corporations as we know it
exist. It's not as if there was a "free market" prior to this.

~~~
elcct
Regulation is the reason why corporations are thriving.

~~~
CaptainZapp
Regulation is also the reason why your cabby has mandatory rest times, which
are strictly enforced.

They're the reason why (at least where I live) there's a alcohol limit of 0
0/00 for taxi drivers, with zero tolerance for violating it.

Those pesky regulations enforce mandatory maintenance standards for vehicles.
They don't only have to look shiny. They actually have to be safe to drive.

Damn regulations dictate valid and adequate insurance, which covers commercial
driving activity and covers the drivers liability in case you are hurt,
maimed, or killed.

Regulations enforce that you can't be price gouged, they enforce some sensible
mandatory standards (drivers may be prohibited by law to refuse transportation
because you're blind and need a guide dog) and provide you with a venue to
complain when things go wrong.

But hey, just do away with all that in the name of commerce.

