Uber Banned In London

[dribbles]

Can't believe so many are agreeing with this. Uber is actually capitalism done right. A new business model coming in and running great to the benefit of the consumer and pushing out the massively outdated and overpriced cab model. But nah lets allow cabs to keep their monopoly with their shit prices and worse service.

Labour left wing loons are in charge of London, just what you expect from them.

[Acidbaron]

Europeans don't like us. Uber is just the last US tech company to be attacked by European regulations.

I am sorry that we do not embrace your american ideology that your workforce is treated as shit. You can either accept these companies have issues because they break our laws or pretend there is some big conspiracy, you may want to look at how much US activity there already is that has no issues in the EU what so ever. Also EU courts didn't say anything on this, an UK court decided and this is very much being done on a national level, EU has not banned Uber anywhere and they don't have to act since they break enough laws on a national level and countries are still very much within their right to act.

[antelope591]

I'm not sure being the most lossmaking private company in tech history is good capitalism...

Amazon operated at a loss for a very long time and now they're the biggest company in the world (or top 3 at worst). Saying they're losing money in the short term doesn't mean much. They're still in the expansion stage.

[Acidbaron]

I'm not sure being the most lossmaking private company in tech history is good capitalism...

How dare ye speak of facts, thee posts lack emotion and blind faith! begone!

[Swalload]

Great news! This shady buisness model should be banned everywhere. I'm glad it is banned in my country already!

Fuck cab prices. If a random company with an APP can provide the same service for half the price or often even less than that, there's no reasons for cabs to rob people by as much as they do right now.

Fuck cabs.

[ro9ue]

Uber: Can we renew license?
UK: Nope.

Lyft:

[Machismo]

Efficient for Uber in the sense that since drivers aren't considered employees, they have no standard employee benefits, but Uber makes a cut of their efforts anyhow. Is that what you meant?

It's a voluntary agreement between two entities that does not result in any harm to others, so I'm all for it.

[Acidbaron]

Fuck cab prices. If a random company with an APP can provide the same service for half the price or often even less than that, there's no reasons for cabs to rob people by as much as they do right now.

Fuck cabs.

Therefor there needs to be a point made about cab prices, what are generally too high in all of europe. Considering governments wants people to not drink and drive and use other means of transport when going out, a case around the prices need to be made.

And Uber needs to be treated separately from this, we cannot justify such practices merely for the sake in an attempt to lower tax faires. It is in my opinion a different discussion.

[Deja Thoris]

This is wrong. There is a critical difference between driving thousands of less-efficient existing suppliers out of business because you’ve built an overwhelmingly better mousetrap, versus driving more efficient suppliers out of business using artificial market power like uber are trying. Uber are seeking quasi-monopolistic dominance by flaunting loopholes in existing regulations subvert the regulatory regime which actually exists for very good reasons.

This is without even talking about the other problems (sexual assualts, driver conditions).

Expect the usual moaning for comfy middle classes about thier expensive lifestyle choices that is a cheat to meet thier needs at the expense of others.

What the fuck is this even?

Are you implying Londoners should accept a 2nd or 3rd rate "hail or phone a taxi" model rather than embrace something that gives them flexibility?

What else do you do in your spare time? Lobby for typewriter ribbon manufacturers?

[Deleted]

Amazon operated at a loss for a very long time and now they're the biggest company in the world (or top 3 at worst). Saying they're losing money in the short term doesn't mean much. They're still in the expansion stage.

Amazon and Uber have massively different buisness models.

'Amazons business model is based on powerful competitive advantages over the businesses it was seeking to supplant while the Ubers model seek to “disrupt” an industry with economics that are actually worse than existing competitors. Amazon could offer consumers much wider choices than they ever had before, eliminated all of the costs of retailing, achieved huge warehousing and distribution efficiencies and clearly had scale economies that no traditional competitor could match. Ubers model (software/brand company plus its “independent” contractors) fails each of these efficiency/competitive/technological tests. Uber isn’t transforming the consumer product—it offers the exact same service as traditional taxi/limo operators. Uber—even a future, more mature Uber-- will have much higher driver, insurance, training, ownership and maintenance costs. The massive subsidies that create the appearance that Uber offers better/cheaper service are not sustainable.'

Uber can't subsidise its rates forever which is the only reason its cheaper.

[Mosotti]

I didn't realize $100+ an hour (to be fair on weekends) was minimum wage where you live

Man I should move there

Are you by any chance the CEO of Uber lurking around here?

[Acidbaron]

It's a voluntary agreement between two entities that does not result in any harm to others, so I'm all for it.

Except when one party wants unemployment pay after their contract ends, and this is what uber refuses to contribute to, that type of social taxes what the system is based upon. Therefor we cannot look at this in a vacuum.

Their model simply does not work here, the whole of EU is working against social dumping but somehow Uber expects to come here and deploy a model that does just that. Expect the company to be banned in more and more nations.

[Serpha]

This is based on nothing more than a regressive mentality towards business. Uber was simply more efficient, and it pissed off their competition who had a longer standing with the government.

https://www.theguardian.com/business...-tax-last-year

Old article but still valid.

[Jeezy911]

Now everyone can take public transportation instead for double the cost. Isn't big government fun?

[Daedius]

Uber are cunts, very exploitative buisness model and practices.

They can get fucked.

[Swalload]

Therefor there needs to be a point made about cab prices, what are generally too high in all of europe. Considering governments wants people to not drink and drive and use other means of transport when going out, a case around the prices need to be made.

And Uber needs to be treated separately from this, we cannot justify such practices merely for the sake in an attempt to lower tax faires. It is in my opinion a different discussion.

Oh it's not just Europe, I live in Canada and everything here is very spread out, from downtown to home it can easily cost close to 50$ in a cab. The same Uber ride costs less than 20.

But here Uber isn't banned, there was a law made to allow them to work here, it slightly increased their prices, but it still costs less than half of a cab ride.

[Acidbaron]

Oh it's not just Europe, I live in Canada and everything here is very spread out, from downtown to home it can easily cost close to 50$ in a cab. The same Uber ride costs less than 20.

But here Uber isn't banned, there was a law made to allow them to work here, it slightly increased their prices, but it still costs less than half of a cab ride.

I don't see why laws can be made here to achieve the same, i see the ban as a first response measure. Something used to respond in force against Uber unwillingness to comply to the laws here.

I believe Italy was one of the first to ban it here, perhaps they already have something in place now.

[ejpaints]

The safety concerns cited by London are not baseless. I know of at least 1 Uber driver in my area that is a convicted felon for violent crime with a history of mental health issues and drug addictions. He's not exactly the type of person you want driving you around if the right stimuli sets him off. But, Uber just hires whatever random person applies.

The drivers go unpaid often as well. If the fair screws over Uber, the driver eats the loss, not Uber.

[Loosecannon]

This is going to be very costly to the London economy (aside from just the Uber drivers).

Many people i know used to go home early from the pub/night out/etc in order to get the last tube because black cabs were outrageously priced and hard to get even get if you could afford. Since Uber has come into being, this is not such an issue for most people, and London's nightlife is busy most evenings. Pretty sure this will die out again when a trip home goes from 10 quid back up to 30.

On topic - I like uber, and generally have had good experiences with them (not so for black cabs). So I'm really hopeful this is overturned.

[schwarzkopf]

We don't have slavery, now do we?

Well, to be fair - modern slaves aren't as well off, modern slaves have to pay for their own food and shelter.

So Uber is cheaper - just not better. Abusive practices against workers is not better.