Uber

rireland

Europe is no place for innovation.

rireland

The high horse brigade wrote: »

Got 2x Taxis last sat on a family trip to the zoo and both of these were clapped out 12 year old smelly piles of 5hite, a Merc and an Avensis. Myself and my wife actually spoke about and compared this to our UK Uber trips in modern Prius, Superb and 508. The quality of Irish taxis is brutal

I was in the states and I got a basic uber...car arrives and it's a class new jaguar (didn't take any notice or expect anything special when ordering). Man said he did Uber as a hobby and liked to give people a surprise as his car should have been in the premium section.

rireland

rireland wrote: »

I was in the states and I got a basic uber...car arrives and it's a class new jaguar (didn't take any notice or expect anything special when ordering). Man said he did Uber as a hobby and liked to give people a surprise as his car should have been in the premium section.

but we are being told that the regulations are ensuring a high standard of car and driver in Ireland lol!

the only thing that the regulations actually provide is a high price to the consumer.

I once came across a taxi driver specimen in Dublin that looked exactly like this and with the smell off him and the car (dog hairs everywhere) to boot would floor a buffalo.

end of the road

glasso wrote: »

the only thing that the regulations actually provide is a high price to the consumer.

incorrect, they provide a lower price to the consumer then if there was no regulation, for which if there was no regulation people could charge what they like.

n97 mini

Spook_ie wrote: »

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/AMP/2019/05/20/lyft_uber_surge_pricing/&ved=2ahUKEwiH6I-C37_jAhUjRRUIHaA8BYwQFjALegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw2eX2pk3UH-JwJoRCYAZkkJ&ampcf=1

Yeah that works well.

Don't Dublin taxi drivers switch off MyTaxi (or whatever it's called now) at peak times so they can make even more money off each fare?

Difference is taxi drivers won't be sanctioned.

n97 mini

end of the road wrote: »

incorrect, they provide a lower price to the consumer then if there was no regulation, for which if there was no regulation people could charge what they like.

The regulator has only ever put the maximum fares up. Taxis don't have to charge the maximum, but they all do.

makeorbrake

end of the road wrote: »

incorrect, they provide a lower price to the consumer then if there was no regulation, for which if there was no regulation people could charge what they like.

This is a strategy taken amongst naysayers i.e. the notion that it's either protectionist innovation-unfriendly regulation OR no regulation. That's not what is being asked for. Regulation is key - but if it's done right, it will be pro-innovation and will enable the sharing economy.

n97 mini wrote: »

Don't Dublin taxi drivers switch off MyTaxi (or whatever it's called now) at peak times so they can make even more money off each fare? Difference is taxi drivers won't be sanctioned.

Their own version of surge pricing.

makeorbrake

glasso wrote: »

I once came across a taxi driver specimen in Dublin that looked exactly like this and with the smell off him and the car (dog hairs everywhere) to boot would floor a buffalo.

On most ride sharing platforms, users can rate the driver/car/experience - and add specific comments. ...which are then available to all other service users to see (and for the driver so that he/she can work towards improving the service offering going forward). That system in itself - if properly implemented - can weed out laggards - without the intervention of anyone.

Meanwhile, with taxis, we're told they're all so highly trained and have higher standards. We're supposed to take their word for that rather than use tech to add transparency which motivates continuous improvement.

Spook_ie

n97 mini wrote: »

Don't Dublin taxi drivers switch off MyTaxi (or whatever it's called now) at peak times so they can make even more money off each fare?

Difference is taxi drivers won't be sanctioned.

Taxi drivers dont make more money if they switch off the app, they just don't pay the 12% commission, the tax man at years end looks at the fares minus the costs, if there are less costs i.e the 12% then they make more profit and pay more tax. Standard accounting P+L

The real reason, well my real reason, is that I'm not inclined to drive 2-3km past people with outstretched arms to collect a passenger who may or may not be there. Too many cash users just hop into the first cab that comes along and don't bother cancelling until the designated driver presses his arrived button, I know for a fact that it happens because I've had customers in the car talking to each other about not cancelling the ordered taxi.

Not that I see a correlation between ridesharing and P+L accounts for a taxi.


EDIT

Don't Dublin taxi drivers switch off MyTaxi (or whatever it's called now) at peak times so they can make even more money off each fare?

The customer doesn't pay any extra so No not surge pricing by any meaning of the word.

usernamegoes

end of the road wrote: »

as a user the current price system insures i am not ripped off, whereas if it was left to the free market that is likely what would happen.
we have so much competition in the psv industry that we don't know what to do with it all.

Yeah, like virtually every other thing you buy. Give me a break. The price of airline seats is set by the free market and they are as cheap as chips relative to when we had a closed market.

Spook_ie wrote: »

And that's why it would be illegal, if it uses a GPS device as a taximeter it is by definition a taxi and regulated as a taxi, then there is the problem of inaccurate GPS plotting, it happens, especially in metropolitan or wooded areas where GPS signals can be weaker or subject to shadow.

It's not using a taximeter. It's using a phone to send the trip information to Uber to calculate the fare.

Spook_ie wrote: »

Not really, I'm suggesting there could be a new catagory of driver licensing that didn't need to incorporate route kniwledge, as is presently required. They would still be licensed, registered and regulated by the NTA.

Non-professional drivers in other words.

Spook_ie wrote: »

Again not really, that's an enforcement issue and as it is now, if i find a hackney working that method I'll report them and leave it to the NTA to enforce, likewise if Uber were doing it I'd report them.

Grand. Not sure what your point was then. Why bring it up?

Spook_ie wrote: »

No such thing as ridesharing insurance in Ireland, not the NTAs responsibility to ask for it, the ridesharing insurance you speak of is an American get around of their very limited liability insurance, already mentioned in previous posts Uber's $1000000 and a US states minimum insurance isn't a whole lot when compared to current unlimited liabilities of "for hire and reward" insurance, and no matter what way you want to color it is unlikely to happen here. As it is unlikely to happen in the rest of Europe.

No such thing exists because it's illegal. No insurance exists to insure weed farms because it's illegal, but legalise and guess what? It will exist.

Spook_ie wrote: »

So dispite you stating already that the vehicle similarity between hackneys and Ubers is nothing, you still want another class of SPSV when hackneys already covers it.

I have pointed out many difference between them. You are chosing to say those differences don't matter because it suits you and saying the differences between hackneys and taxis do matter because it suits you. That is why I asked you to tell us the differences you do think matter.

Spook_ie wrote: »

Just re-reading your reply, background check! Are you confusing SPSV driver licensing with SPSV vehicle licensing?

Maybe I am. I think the driver should require I license. Not the vehicle. New or NTA works for me.

end of the road wrote: »

incorrect, they provide a lower price to the consumer then if there was no regulation, for which if there was no regulation people could charge what they like.

People can charge what they like in most other industries, how's that getting on for you?

Spook_ie

usernamegoes wrote: »

Yeah, like virtually every other thing you buy. Give me a break. The price of airline seats is set by the free market and they are as cheap as chips relative to when we had a closed market.

It's not using a taximeter. It's using a phone to send the trip information to Uber to calculate the fare.

It's using the uncalibrated GPS function to trace a route and work out a fare, funny that's very similar to what a calibrated taximeter does, go figure.

Non-professional drivers in other words.

How could they be non professional drivers they would have sat a test regarding SPSV laws, Disability Handling, Driver and passenger rights and responsibilities etc. and have a shiny ID on the dash board. Talk about moving goal posts.

Grand. Not sure what your point was then. Why bring it up?

Because it is relevant to how Uber drivers are likely to supplement their income, to an extent I wouldn't blame them but I'd still report them.
EDIT MISSED THIS ONE

No such thing exists because it's illegal. No insurance exists to insure weed farms because it's illegal, but legalise and guess what? It will exist.

And the reason it doesn't exist is because we have an unlimited liability in regard to passengers, you seem to think that Uber etc. $1,000,000 coverage would be sufficient to cover for the costs of an accident. I already gave you in an earlier post people getting multi million euro settlements when they end up needing care for life, perhaps you think they should only get sufficient care for half that and then maybe euthenised.

END OF EDIT

I have pointed out many difference between them. You are chosing to say those differences don't matter because it suits you and saying the differences between hackneys and taxis do matter because it suits you. That is why I asked you to tell us the differences you do think matter.

I am saying that the current regulations regarding hackneys are quite suited to ride sharing with a minimal adjustment to SPSV driver licensing, just as they are so suited to Uber and other apps in London, Manchester, Paris, Berlin etc.

Maybe I am. I think the driver should require I license. Not the vehicle. New or NTA works for me. {/quote]
So again you want Uber etc. to regulate the vehicles rather than a government department set up specifically to carry out that mandate, keeping in mind that all these app companies are profit driven, how do you think that will pan out?

People can charge what they like in most other industries, how's that getting on for you?

I know it was a response to EoTR's post but I'd love to charge more than I'm allowed, however, the meter won't let me put my own rate in, you know the maximum regulated fare order that taxis follow.

Spook_ie

n97 mini wrote: »

The regulator has only ever put the maximum fares up. Taxis don't have to charge the maximum, but they all do.

You wouldn't know as you never use taxis, so therefore I can only assume that on a quiet Wednesday evening you've never sought a discount.

n97 mini

Spook_ie wrote: »

Taxi drivers dont make more money if they switch off the app, they just don't pay the 12% commission, the tax man at years end looks at the fares minus the costs, if there are less costs i.e the 12% then they make more profit and pay more tax. Standard accounting P+L

The real reason, well my real reason, is that I'm not inclined to drive 2-3km past people with outstretched arms to collect a passenger who may or may not be there. Too many cash users just hop into the first cab that comes along and don't bother cancelling until the designated driver presses his arrived button, I know for a fact that it happens because I've had customers in the car talking to each other about not cancelling the ordered taxi.

Not that I see a correlation between ridesharing and P+L accounts for a taxi.


EDIT



The customer doesn't pay any extra so No not surge pricing by any meaning of the word.

They switch off the app so they can make more money, simple as.

n97 mini

Spook_ie wrote: »

You wouldn't know as you never use taxis, so therefore I can only assume that on a quiet Wednesday evening you've never sought a discount.

Never sought and never been offered.

One cheeky cnut in Lucan always rounds up. Meter says €8.60 and he says "that's a tenner please".

makeorbrake

Spook_ie wrote: »

You wouldn't know as you never use taxis, so therefore I can only assume that on a quiet Wednesday evening you've never sought a discount.

Haggling...how very modern and consumer friendly. And how often does that work out?

Spook_ie

n97 mini wrote: »

Never sought and never been offered.

One cheeky cnut in Lucan always rounds up. Meter says €8.60 and he says "that's a tenner please".

So you do use taxis then despite

n97 mini wrote: »

<Snipped>


I'll take your word for it. As I've said before I don't use taxis.


<snipped>.

https://www.nationaltransport.ie/taxi-and-bus-licensing/taxi/operating-an-spsv/taxi-fares/discounts/

Discounts
As a taxi driver, you have the right to charge the amount calculated on the taximeter, but you may charge less if you wish. You should record any discount in writing on the receipt.

You may not charge more than the national maximum taxi fare, as calculated on the taximeter (plus any permitted extras that apply).

Hardly likely to be offered a discount, I certainly wouldn't offer you a discount out of the goodness of my heart, but if you were in Swords on a quiet weekday night for example and wanted to go to Lucan I'd be open to dealing and so would most other taxi drivers, just don't expect a half price deal

n97 mini

Spook_ie wrote: »

So you do use taxis then despite

Several years ago. He's probably retired now, the auld codger.

n97 mini

glasso wrote: »

I once came across a taxi driver specimen in Dublin that looked exactly like this and with the smell off him and the car (dog hairs everywhere) to boot would floor a buffalo.

I think we've all had him, or someone who looks just like him!

I've also had "I'm a Doooblin taxi driver... I can get you anything, you name it, guns, drugs, whatever ya like buddy". And the "It's Christmas and I've seven kids and no money to buy them presents, so anything you have would help...". I've also had a taxi run out of petrol. Fortunately it conked out 100 metres from a filling station and the driver had a jerry can in the boot. He was kind enough to stop the meter too as he walked up to get a fill. And not forgetting the lad that had some sort of a spat with another taxi driver which was still going on after I boarded as they were pulling in in front of each other coming down the M1 and slamming on the brakes. I actually reported him.

makeorbrake

n97 mini wrote: »

I've also had "I'm a Doooblin taxi driver... I can get you anything, you name it, guns, drugs, whatever ya like buddy". And the "It's Christmas and I've seven kids and no money to buy them presents, so anything you have would help...". I've also had a taxi run out of petrol. Fortunately it conked out 100 metres from a filling station and the driver had a jerry can in the boot. He was kind enough to stop the meter too as he walked up to get a fill. And not forgetting the lad that had some sort of a spat with another taxi driver which was still going on after I boarded as they were pulling in in front of each other coming down the M1 and slamming on the brakes. I actually reported him.

They cover that all in the professional training. That's why you pay the extra.:D

Spook_ie

n97 mini wrote: »

They switch off the app so they can make more money, simple as.

When you actually think about it, a FreeNow customer means that if the fare is less than €17 a driver makes MORE money off the FreeNow app, so as I said it comes down (in my case ) to the confidence I have in the customer being there, but unlike surge pricing, which I assume is what you are trying to allude to, the customer isn't paying any extra. In fact if they use the old fashioned method of sticking an arm in the air they'll save them selves €2.

usernamegoes

Spook_ie wrote: »

It's using the uncalibrated GPS function to trace a route and work out a fare, funny that's very similar to what a calibrated taximeter does, go figure.

Yeah, similar but it is not a taximeter. So that's one point of difference already.

How could they be non professional drivers they would have sat a test regarding SPSV laws, Disability Handling, Driver and passenger rights and responsibilities etc. and have a shiny ID on the dash board. Talk about moving goal posts.

Grand, ridesharing should not have to do that. That's two.

Because it is relevant to how Uber drivers are likely to supplement their income, to an extent I wouldn't blame them but I'd still report them.
EDIT MISSED THIS ONE

So are hackney drivers according to you though. This point was in response to the differences. If hackney drivers do it does that mean they are the same as taxis? What's the point of saying this in the context of a discussion about the differences between taxis, limos, hackneys and ridesharing?

And the reason it doesn't exist is because we have an unlimited liability in regard to passengers, you seem to think that Uber etc. $1,000,000 coverage would be sufficient to cover for the costs of an accident. I already gave you in an earlier post people getting multi million euro settlements when they end up needing care for life, perhaps you think they should only get sufficient care for half that and then maybe euthenised.

It doesn't exist because it's illegal. I have no problem with requiring drivers of ridesharing to have ridesharing insurance with no liability cap. Problem solved.

I am saying that the current regulations regarding hackneys are quite suited to ride sharing with a minimal adjustment to SPSV driver licensing, just as they are so suited to Uber and other apps in London, Manchester, Paris, Berlin etc.

I have pointed out various reasons they're different. By the same argument we could say hackneys could be taxis with small changes like having them have a meter and a roof sign.

Maybe I am. I think the driver should require I license. Not the vehicle. New or NTA works for me. {/quote]
So again you want Uber etc. to regulate the vehicles rather than a government department set up specifically to carry out that mandate, keeping in mind that all these app companies are profit driven, how do you think that will pan out?

Well they would be regulated by the government reasonably by having an NCT where required. I'm happy with that, if good enough for most cars on the road. No one would be forced to use them if they didn't trust the company.

I know it was a response to EoTR's post but I'd love to charge more than I'm allowed, however, the meter won't let me put my own rate in, you know the maximum regulated fare order that taxis follow.

Yeah, another difference between taxis and ridesharing. Taxis aren't allowed charge more than the maximum fare. Ridesharing should be.

makeorbrake

Spook_ie wrote: »

In fact if they use the old fashioned method of sticking an arm in the air they'll save them selves €2.

I'd advise against. It would only encourage joe maxi's roaming the streets looking for fares - causing added congestion and burning up more fossil fuels whilst emitting pollutants. They do enough of that kind of thing already.

There's no speculative street roaming with the app based ride sharing approach. It's purely point A to point B.

n97 mini

Spook_ie wrote: »

When you actually think about it, a FreeNow customer means that if the fare is less than €17 a driver makes MORE money off the FreeNow app, so as I said it comes down (in my case ) to the confidence I have in the customer being there, but unlike surge pricing, which I assume is what you are trying to allude to, the customer isn't paying any extra. In fact if they use the old fashioned method of sticking an arm in the air they'll save them selves €2.

My reply was to ride-sharing drivers turning off the app to drive up prices and therefore the money they make, which is what the story linked to was about. Taxis do the same thing, albeit the money they make is at the expense of FreeNow (what a stupid name) rather than the customer.

As I said a few pages back, I have no problem with surge pricing based on actual demand. It's designed to get more drivers on the road to meet a temporary increase in demand, and in my experience usually doesn't last long. As I also if there's a surge on, I'll have another pint and wait for it to settle

makeorbrake

n97 mini wrote: »

I'll have another pint and wait for it to settle

I'd be horrified if ye didn't let the pint of plain settle :eek:

n97 mini

makeorbrake wrote: »

I'd advise against. It would only encourage joe maxi's roaming the streets looking for fares - causing added congestion and burning up more fossil fuels whilst emitting pollutants. They do enough of that kind of thing already.

There's no speculative street roaming with the app based ride sharing approach. It's purely point A to point B.

That's the thing. I spoke to a former taxi driver a couple of years ago who had switched to Uber. He said that even though his hourly rate is less, his weekly pay is more, as he doesn't spend any time now cruising around fishing for fares. Nearly all of his driving now is fare paying.

n97 mini

makeorbrake wrote: »

I'd be horrified if ye didn't let the pint of plain settle :eek:

Pun intended. In the land of Uber it's all IPAs I'm afraid!

Spook_ie

usernamegoes wrote: »

Yeah, similar but it is not a taximeter. So that's one point of difference already.

If you use any kind of meter instead of agreeing a fare in advance, which is what n97 and others keep telling me that Uber etc. does then you are defacto operating with an uncalibrated taximeter, whether that uses GPS positioning or a mechanical measure.

Grand, ridesharing should not have to do that. That's two.

Yet you said

usernamegoes wrote: »

<snipped>



Maybe I am. I think the driver should require I license. Not the vehicle. New or NTA works for me.


<snipped>

Flip flop your position much?

So are hackney drivers according to you though. This point was in response to the differences. If hackney drivers do it does that mean they are the same as taxis? What's the point of saying this in the context of a discussion about the differences between taxis, limos, hackneys and ridesharing?

As I said it is a way that hackney drivers worked against the actual rules, as I would expect Ridesharing drivers to also do, either would get reported by me and hopefully prosecuted by the NTA and Gardai

It doesn't exist because it's illegal. I have no problem with requiring drivers of ridesharing to have ridesharing insurance with no liability cap. Problem solved.

You mean commercial insurance then?

I have pointed out various reasons they're different. By the same argument we could say hackneys could be taxis with small changes like having them have a meter and a roof sign.

Possibly, there are many similarities between the vehicle recommendations for taxis and hackneys, but luggage size is one that hackney to taxi would fall foul of, also the legal requirements would be different too

Well they would be regulated by the government reasonably by having an NCT where required. I'm happy with that, if good enough for most cars on the road. No one would be forced to use them if they didn't trust the company.

Again with the regulation by a profit driven company.:eek:

Yeah, another difference between taxis and ridesharing. Taxis aren't allowed charge more than the maximum fare. Ridesharing should be.

I actually think that if ride-share were allowed to fluctuate prices then why not taxis?

Again you seem to be thinking that I'm comparing an SPSV Taxi to an SPSV Hackney to a proposed SPSV Ride-sharing, I'm not I'm saying that you don't need another category of SPSV Ride-share fits nicely under the umbrella of SPSV Hackneys, vehicle license, all of your proposals want to lessen the regulations in comparison to hackneys.

n97 mini

Spook_ie wrote: »

If you use any kind of meter instead of agreeing a fare in advance, which is what n97 and others keep telling me that Uber etc. does then you are defacto operating with an uncalibrated taximeter, whether that uses GPS positioning or a mechanical measure.

You get a quote before you book. Nearly all of the time you pay what you're quoted. The other times it's due to unforeseen things like RTAs, road closures etc.

Do you have an issue with using metering based on GPS, which is completely accurate? I don't.

Spook_ie

Just to prove that Uber is allowed under current regulations

Spook_ie

n97 mini wrote: »

You get a quote before you book. Nearly all of the time you pay what you're quoted. The other times it's due to unforeseen things like RTAs, road closures etc.

Do you have an issue with using metering based on GPS, which is completely accurate? I don't.

I have a problem with it being used in anything other than a taxi, especially as it is uncalibrated and unsealed, if Uber want in then Uber should (and so far does ) play by the regulations