Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Uber

Options
1…3738404243…45

Comments

  • Options
    #1172
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    kippy wrote: »
    The post suggested Ireland was the last country to adobt anything innovative - which is an absolutely nonsensical statement to make.
    I've addressed specific points above.

    lol - something is not innovative because you mark it "not innovative" with no reasoning.

    case closed.


  • Options
    #1173
    kippy
    Registered Users Posts: 18,396 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    glasso wrote: »
    lol - something is not innovative because you mark it "not innovative" with no reasoning.

    case closed.

    I didn't see any reasoning in the original post as to why it was innovative.
    Posters earlier exchange on this was that "Experts in Innovation had said that Uber was innovative - hence it was innovative"

    Do you actually think this is innovative:
    Enabling people to work dynamically (on a limited basis).


  • Options
    #1174
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    there's shag all regulation in ireland on the quality of drivers, and not much more on the quality of cars. but uber supposedly self-regulates, and clearly the irish economy has a fantastic history when it comes to self-regulation.

    that was the big-stick argument at the outset that Taxi Drivers used to come out with - that you'd have all sorts of dodgy characters giving you a lift in an uber and that you're safe in a Taxi.

    then there were the multiple cases of taxi rapists in Ireland and the black cab taxi in the London area (who raped over 100 women over a period of years by drugging them) and all went quiet on that front.

    now the "argument" consists soley of the gospel that the regulations must be followed.


  • Options
    #1175
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    kippy wrote: »
    The post suggested Ireland was the last country to adobt anything innovative - which is an absolutely nonsensical statement to make.
    I've addressed specific points above.

    If you're going to comment, then comment - don't scribble over my post. And from what I've seen those 'comments' are nonsense. You have no idea what innovation is. Taxi drivers are the very ones that 'drive around anyways'...as in aimlessly. People who have an objective in going from A to B and switching the app on as they do so - there's a lot of power and efficiency in that...deny all you want but it lacks complete credibility to do so.

    As regards adoption of tech/ innovation in ireland, we are snails.


  • Options
    #1176
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,986 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    makeorbrake wrote: »
    ride sharing is not taxi-ing. Regulation can distinguish between hackney and taxi. It can do so with ridesharing and taxi'ing.

    it can't as ride sharing is a part of taxiing and hackneying.
    also there is nothing stopping someone from offering someone a lift as long as they don't take a fare in return, or advertise themselves as a psv.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1177
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    end of the road wrote: »
    it can't as ride sharing is a part of taxiing and hackneying.

    Eh, so change it. If the will is there, it can be done. ...and other than that, is it even referenced in any regulation? Is there a section in any regulation that mentions ride sharing? Most likely there isn't. So how is it a part of anything. It's not been dealt with.

    end of the road wrote: »
    also there is nothing stopping someone from offering someone a lift as long as they don't take a fare in return, or advertise themselves as a psv.
    Yeah, that's right up there with, 'ah, shur we have pooling in taxi's already'.

    As above - change it!


  • Options
    #1178
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,986 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    glasso wrote: »
    the average consumer could give a toss about the regulated taxi industry or how it would be disrupted (read: made cheaper) by the likes of Uber and Lyft.

    that is why we have the regulator, to care on their behalf. because if the taxi industry was allowed to be disrupted by a company like uber successfully getting around the regulations, it wouldn't be made cheaper long term if it removed independant drivers and companies from the market. prices would be jacked up.
    glasso wrote: »
    what exactly are the fantastic benefits for the consumer of these regulations?

    standards of vehicles. standards of drivers. price regulation to insure no jacking up of prices at will.
    glasso wrote: »
    they want cheaper transport options in a country that has poor public transport options and availability timewise (e.g. at night)

    in dublin and cork they are going to get that with night busses. for everyone else, there is hackneys and possibly other night buses if they live on such routes.
    glasso wrote: »
    it's like Dunnes Stores being able to stop Lidl coming to Ireland as they'd prefer not to have the hassle of competition.

    it's not. the taxi industry can't stop competition and neither can the regulator. however unfair competition via the flouting of regulations can be stopped and rightly so. if uber wish to launch their service on a large scale here, they can do so and are not being stopped from doing so, but are choosing not to do so as they aren't allowed to ride rough shot over everyone..

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #1179
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,986 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    glasso wrote: »
    well this forum is basically vested interests (taxi drivers) arguing against consumers.

    it's not. there are taxi drivers here yes, but there are consumers as well. in fact, most of us argueing against the uber champions are consumers and we are happy for uber to come as long as they abide by our regulations. we should not change for them, they are not that important and are not required. they would be nice to have but are not necessary or critical to the running and functioning of the country.
    glasso wrote: »
    I've used Uber in several countries and found the cars and drivers to be of a high standard.

    great. so they won't have a problem complying with our regulations.
    glasso wrote: »
    In Ireland there are many problems in public transport both in urban and rural situations.

    there are however reducing regulations to favour 1 company certainly won't deal with them.
    glasso wrote: »
    Uber's flexibility could definitely help alleviate some of those issues (low barrier to entry - no plate or taxi insurance required as under Uber insurance etc) with part-time work.

    that is what we had post deregulation of the taxi industry and it failed. user feedback meant regulations to an extent reinstated. in fact we actually already have low barriers to entry.
    glasso wrote: »
    there is also no price competition in Ireland - due to the "regulations" - that's really the only "regulation" that both sides care about and the rest is smokescreen and semantics

    incorrect, psvs operate price competition. the regulations just prevent them from jacking up prices at will along with other price regulations that prevent the customer being charged unfair and unreasonable prices.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #1180
    usernamegoes
    Registered Users Posts: 901 ✭✭✭usernamegoes


    end of the road wrote: »
    it can't as ride sharing is a part of taxiing and hackneying.
    also there is nothing stopping someone from offering someone a lift as long as they don't take a fare in return, or advertise themselves as a psv.

    What are the differences between all the various PSVs as you see it?


  • Options
    #1181
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,986 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    makeorbrake wrote: »
    Have Uber broken irish regulations?

    As regards ridesharing generally, if you have a protectionist anti-innovation regulatory regime like we have in Ireland - then you'll end up with - in effect - no ride sharing services. That's where we're at right now.

    incorrect we don't have such a regime in ireland.


    glasso wrote: »
    I do understand that that is the current situation yes.

    I still believe that they can be more efficient that what is currently there and that their business model is sustainable long-term due to cross-efficiencies on food delivery and other long-term plays such as autonomous driving solutions.

    For the taxi drivers out there because Ireland is usually the last country to adopt anything innovative you're probably safe for the moment.

    Vested interests usually do well in this little country also in general

    The ideal situation would be to have 3 similar players offering a level of competition to each other.


    we have thousands of players competing with each other in the psv industry so what you are looking for already exists.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1182
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    end of the road wrote: »
    incorrect we don't have such a regime in ireland.
    Eh, that's your opinion - and I certainly don't share it. If we don't have ride sharing (in reality) in Ireland, then the regulator has failed - end of.

    end of the road wrote: »
    we have thousands of players competing with each other in the psv industry so what you are looking for already exists.
    It's not the same thing. Ride sharing is far more innovative. Given the chance, there won't need to be a need for your precious taxi drivers. Consumers would vote with their smartphones. You want to censor consumer choice and censor people's ability to participate in the sharing economy. Will you be holidaying in North Korea this year too?


  • Options
    #1183
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    end of the road wrote: »

    regulation

    standards of vehicles. standards of drivers. price regulation to insure no jacking up of prices at will.

    vehicles and driver standards have not shown to be issue with Uber in any general sense and we're not exactly renowned for high stds for either in Irish Taxis so moot.

    so basically it's all about price regulation

    the market would decide this - no need to regulate.


  • Options
    #1184
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    end of the road wrote: »
    incorrect we don't have such a regime in ireland.






    we have thousands of players competing with each other in the psv industry so what you are looking for already exists.

    rubbish. fares for taxis are regulated.

    for hackneys they are not.


  • Options
    #1185
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,986 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    glasso wrote: »
    the paying public would love 30% cheaper fares.

    the existing ecosystem (why don't you just say Taxi Drivers?) would not.


    that's what it boils down to.

    all this talk or "regulation" is just smokescreen


    30% cheaper fares aren't going to happen. uber isn't going to deliver it. even if we abolished the regulations or loosened them, going back to the failed model post deregulation, 30% cheaper fares would either not be achieved, or certainly wouldn't last long until the prices were jacked up
    , probably higher then what is currently being paid.

    makeorbrake wrote: »
    Eh, so change it. If the will is there, it can be done. ...and other than that, is it even referenced in any regulation? Is there a section in any regulation that mentions ride sharing? Most likely there isn't. So how is it a part of anything. It's not been dealt with.



    Yeah, that's right up there with, 'ah, shur we have pooling in taxi's already'.

    As above - change it!


    there is nothing to change. ride sharing is hackneying and taxiing so it is included by default within our regulation.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #1186
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    end of the road wrote: »
    30% cheaper fares aren't going to happen. uber isn't going to deliver it. #
    Uber isn't the only show in town and nobody ever regulated for one specific company.

    end of the road wrote: »
    there is nothing to change. ride sharing is hackneying and taxiing so it is included by default within our regulation.
    Ride sharing is not taxi-ing or hackneying. It is it's own category.


  • Options
    #1187
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,986 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    makeorbrake wrote: »
    Eh, that's your opinion - and I certainly don't share it. If we don't have ride sharing (in reality) in Ireland, then the regulator has failed - end of.

    it's not my opinion, it's fact that we don't have the type of regime you claim we have, in ireland.
    makeorbrake wrote: »
    It's not the same thing. Ride sharing is far more innovative. Given the chance, there won't need to be a need for your precious taxi drivers. Consumers would vote with their smartphones. You want to censor consumer choice and censor people's ability to participate in the sharing economy. Will you be holidaying in North Korea this year too?

    it is the same thing. ride sharing is hackneying and taxiing by another name. therefore there will be a need for such taxi drivers. nothing is being censored. the sharing economy and participation in it can happen away as long as our regulations are abided by.


    glasso wrote: »
    vehicles and driver standards have not shown to be issue with Uber in any general sense and we're not exactly renowned for high stds for either in Irish Taxis so moot.

    so basically it's all about price regulation

    the market would decide this - no need to regulate.


    every need for regulation to prevent the customer from being potentially screwed.

    the market would decide price is exactly why we need regulation, because the market has shown that it can't be trusted in relation to the psv industry.

    glasso wrote: »
    rubbish. fares for taxis are regulated.

    for hackneys they are not.


    that makes no difference to the fact we have price competition. the competition can happen within the regulated fare structure which ixists to protect the consumer.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #1188
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,986 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    makeorbrake wrote: »
    Uber isn't the only show in town and nobody ever regulated for one specific company.

    exactly so we don't need to change the regulations on the basis of facilitating uber's offering which is already facilitated as part of our current regulations.
    makeorbrake wrote: »
    Ride sharing is not taxi-ing or hackneying. It is it's own category.

    it is hackneying and taxiing by another name. everything it does is exactly what hackneying and taxiing allows.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #1189
    usernamegoes
    Registered Users Posts: 901 ✭✭✭usernamegoes


    end of the road wrote: »

    it is the same thing. ride sharing is hackneying and taxiing by another name. therefore there will be a need for such taxi drivers. nothing is being censored. the sharing economy and participation in it can happen away as long as our regulations are abided by.

    What are the important differences between taxis and hackneys?


  • Options
    #1190
    Spook_ie
    Registered Users Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭Spook_ie


    glasso wrote: »
    rubbish. fares for taxis are regulated.

    for hackneys they are not.

    Fares for hackneys are regulated via the fact that if a hackney quotes you a €100 for a fare and you know a taxi will cost you less than €50 then it's unlikely the hackney will get your business.

    It boils down to we are already regulated for Uber the same way as London, Manchester etc. in that the vehicle must be licensed, the driver must be licensed and the vehicle must be insured for hire and reward.

    The only thing stopping Uber is the government signed up for section 9 of the UN Charter on People with Disabilities and the NTA were tasked to achieve the target of at least 10% of vehicles to be WAVs, they have said themselves they are on target to achieve this by 2020. At which time I expect the WAV regulations to be waived and anybody can put an SPSV on the road ( taxi, limo or hackney ) providing they follow the regulations.

    As discussions with Usernamegoes, there could well be consideration given to ease the driver licensing requirements ( knowledge tests ) with the onset of SatNavs. But drivers and vehicles would still have to be licensed by the NTA and not by Uber, Lyft etc.


  • Options
    #1191
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    end of the road wrote: »
    exactly so we don't need to change the regulations on the basis of facilitating uber's offering which is already facilitated as part of our current regulations.
    Completely wrong and it seems deliberately misunderstood.

    Uber doesn't define ride sharing. There are other platforms. The current regulations are for taxi's and hackneys - that doesn't address the issue of ride sharing.
    end of the road wrote: »
    it is hackneying and taxiing by another name. everything it does is exactly what hackneying and taxiing allows.

    No, it's not. If it was, why don't we see it on the streets of Ireland? Why is it - when you ask people here if we have Uber, they say no?

    It hasn't been enabled - as current regulation has smothered it at birth.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1192
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    end of the road wrote: »



    every need for regulation to prevent the customer from being potentially screwed.

    the market would decide price is exactly why we need regulation, because the market has shown that it can't be trusted in relation to the psv industry.



    that makes no difference to the fact we have price competition. the competition can happen within the regulated fare structure which ixists to protect the consumer.

    I open my Uber/ Lyft app - get an idea of current prices and trip estimate - if I don't like the price I don't take it. without modern technology mabye but this is an non-issue now.

    what price competition happens in the current taxi fare situation?
    please provide examples? there might be set fares to Dublin airport from parts of Dublin but that is where taxis are effectively competing against a hackney market, not picking up from street.


  • Options
    #1193
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    Spook_ie wrote: »
    Fares for hackneys are regulated via the fact that if a hackney quotes you a €100 for a fare and you know a taxi will cost you less than €50 then it's unlikely the hackney will get your business.

    So it's ok if a discernment is made between two categories when it suits you but when it doesn't (in the case of ride sharing) then you change tact.

    Can only be self interest or wayward ideology at play.


  • Options
    #1194
    Spook_ie
    Registered Users Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭Spook_ie


    glasso wrote: »
    I open my Uber/ Lyft app - get an idea of current prices and trip estimate - if I don't like the price I don't take it. without modern technology mabye but this is an non-issue now.

    what price competition happens in the current taxi fare situation?
    please provide examples? there might be set fares to Dublin airport from parts of Dublin but that is where taxis are effectively competing against a hackney market, not picking up from street.

    So if there's a hackney market then Uber should be able to work in Ireland, there is no regulation that says "Uber you can't work here" but there is a requirement for Uber to work within any other regulations.


  • Options
    #1195
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    Spook_ie wrote: »
    So if there's a hackney market then Uber should be able to work in Ireland, there is no regulation that says "Uber you can't work here" but there is a requirement for Uber to work within any other regulations.

    There's consideration for hackneys and consideration for taxis in the existing regulation. No such provision or consideration has been made for ride sharing services.


  • Options
    #1196
    Spook_ie
    Registered Users Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭Spook_ie


    Uber requirements in France, Germany and GB.

    France
    Take the VTC exam
    The VTC exam allows you to get the VTC card, mandatory to become a professional driver. If you come to one of our partner reception areas, we will present you the offers to better prepare this exam.
    VTC for Drivers and vehicles

    Germany
    Start making money by driving for a fleet in your area. Joining a fleet is a quick and easy way to start driving. To start, you'll need a private hire driving license (P-Schein).
    P-Schein Wiki
    Vehicle requirements
    BoKraft


    GB
    In order to drive on the Uber app, you'll need a private hire licence from a council that Uber is licensed by. If you don't have one, that's OK - we'll help you get started with a personalised Ignition appointment where we offer advice and support after you sign up.
    Vehicles

    So it would seem that Uber works in France, Germany and GB (probably a few others as well ) under the equivalent of a hackney license but Ireland needs a rideshare regulation. Haters just got to hate.


  • Options
    #1197
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    Spook_ie wrote: »
    So it would seem that Uber works in France, Germany and GB (probably a few others as well ) under the equivalent of a hackney license but Ireland needs a rideshare regulation. Haters just got to hate.

    The reality is the 'haters just got to hate' gets returned to sender as that's what's emanating from the naysayer camp. It's all good and well picking out jurisdictions that suit. Bear in mind also - to your cherry picking - that when it comes to adoption of new tech/innovative business models and cultivating and nurturing new tech/business models, the Europeans have been the laggards more recently. Not the Americans and the Asians.

    By the way, of the three that you highlighted, which of them insists that you WONT get a license unless you have a WAV??


  • Options
    #1198
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,986 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    makeorbrake wrote: »
    Completely wrong and it seems deliberately misunderstood.

    Uber doesn't define ride sharing. There are other platforms. The current regulations are for taxi's and hackneys - that doesn't address the issue of ride sharing.



    No, it's not. If it was, why don't we see it on the streets of Ireland? Why is it - when you ask people here if we have Uber, they say no?

    It hasn't been enabled - as current regulation has smothered it at birth.

    the current regulations are for psvs regardless of what they are or call themselves.
    we don't see uber on the streets because they do not wish to compete.
    uber's offering is enabled and has not been smothered.
    glasso wrote: »
    I open my Uber/ Lyft app - get an idea of current prices and trip estimate - if I don't like the price I don't take it. without modern technology mabye but this is an non-issue now.

    what price competition happens in the current taxi fare situation?
    please provide examples? there might be set fares to Dublin airport from parts of Dublin but that is where taxis are effectively competing against a hackney market, not picking up from street.


    regulation insures that the customer is protected from being charged unreasonable prices and is better then the operators being left to decide.
    an app is not enough to regulate price, regulation is and being overcharged can be just as much an issue with an app as without.


    makeorbrake wrote: »
    There's consideration for hackneys and consideration for taxis in the existing regulation. No such provision or consideration has been made for ride sharing services.


    because ride sharing services are no different to other psvs such that separate regulation would be needed to regulate them. the current regulation is sufficient to regulate them.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #1199
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    end of the road wrote: »
    the current regulations are for psvs regardless of what they are or call themselves.
    we don't see uber on the streets because they do not wish to compete.
    uber's offering is enabled and has not been smothered.
    The current regulations have taxi's and hackneys in mind - they don't consider ride sharing services. It's not a case of 'regardless of what they call themselves'. You guys have already acknowledged that hackneys and taxis are treated differently yet when it's ride sharing, yer like "oh, that's just the same thing".

    Of course ride sharing is being smothered if there isn't any ride sharing going on. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.
    end of the road wrote: »
    regulation insures that the customer is protected from being charged unreasonable prices and is better then the operators being left to decide.
    an app is not enough to regulate price, regulation is and being overcharged can be just as much an issue with an app as without.
    Is it really? Uber is but one company. There are many other platforms who don't use surge pricing. They are being excluded also. Other than that, prices are still cheaper with Uber than they would be with taxi's when on surge pricing. So how exactly is the consumer being safeguarded?
    end of the road wrote: »
    because ride sharing services are no different to other psvs such that separate regulation would be needed to regulate them. the current regulation is sufficient to regulate them.

    Incorrect. See above. You're quite happy that there's a distinction between hackneys and taxis yet because it suits, you don't want any enablement in the regulations for ride sharing.


  • Options
    #1200
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,986 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    makeorbrake wrote: »
    The current regulations have taxi's and hackneys in mind - they don't consider ride sharing services. It's not a case of 'regardless of what they call themselves'. You guys have already acknowledged that hackneys and taxis are treated differently yet when it's ride sharing, yer like "oh, that's just the same thing".

    Of course ride sharing is being smothered if there isn't any ride sharing going on. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.


    Is it really? Uber is but one company. There are many other platforms who don't use surge pricing. They are being excluded also. Other than that, prices are still cheaper with Uber than they would be with taxi's when on surge pricing. So how exactly is the consumer being safeguarded?



    Incorrect. See above. You're quite happy that there's a distinction between hackneys and taxis yet because it suits, you don't want any enablement in the regulations for ride sharing.

    ride sharing is happening and everything that is a component of it is already within the psv regulations. there is nothing different about the basic components of ride sharing that would require new/separate regulation.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1201
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    end of the road wrote: »
    ride sharing is happening and everything that is a component of it is already within the psv regulations. there is nothing different about the basic components of ride sharing that would require new/separate regulation.
    There is - it needs to be enabled for the benefit of all stakeholders. The existing regulations have never even touched on the topic.

    Has the regulator even met with Uber/Lyft/InDriver/Beat/DiDi, etc?

    As regards your claim that it 'is happening', when you've had a stream of people come on here and say they would use ride sharing if it was available to them in Ireland, that means there's been a regulatory failure.


Advertisement