Uber

Spook_ie · 11-06-2019 3:15pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

Doesn't make it any less of an appeasement when it seems that no other jurisdiction is imposing the very same barrier to entry (i.e. no access unless you have a WAT).

You don't have to have a WAT, but you would have to have a vehicle suitable for classification as a limousine or a rental vehicle, which incidentally would allow you to take fares from the current Uber app. under the current Irish regulations.

makeorbrake · 11-06-2019 3:31pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

Again driver training is a progressive on going thing, you only need to read and try a test exam for the current applications for an SPSV drivers license to see the improvements required to get into the industry, but I forget, to you they are just barriers.

Either you or others here have suggested in past posts here that you couldn't possibly 'lower standards' by having uber drivers who aren't professionally trained on the road. Yet there have been many instances of people giving their experience of uber as superior to their experience of taxis.
You're not driving a Boeing 747. Furthermore, you can see the feedback on every driver via the app. They get the feedback - so if there's any deficiency - they get the opportunity to address it. If they don't address it, customers know there's a problem (and with some apps that means..) you select a different car/driver.
The 'professional driver' thing is just contrived nonsense.

Spook_ie wrote: »

As to discussing a topic, you're not you are asserting that things like WAT's only are designed as a foil to prevent ride sharing where as even when shown the recorded proof of Dail discussions preceding the advent of the idea of Uber's ride sharing platform, you ignore them.

Ah, I see. I don't agree with you on a topic and all of a sudden I'm not discussing the topic. Otherwise, that some quango or committee muttered something with regard to WAT's way back when doesn't mean to say that it's not being used as a blocking mechanism for uber/ride sharing today.

Spook_ie wrote: »

You don't have to have a WAT, but you would have to have a vehicle suitable for classification as a limousine or a rental vehicle, which incidentally would allow you to take fares from the current Uber app. under the current Irish regulations.

My understanding was that you have to have a WAT to get a taxi license.

11-06-2019 3:56pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

My understanding.........

Therein lies your problem

makeorbrake · 11-06-2019 3:56pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Therein lies your problem

Therein lies your contribution to the discussion. You dislike my point of view and the only way you can try and undermine it is with this suggestion. I had the audacity to ask a question - on a discussion forum no less.

Meanwhile, you act like you know all the answers yet not a word out of you to clarify where you infer there's a misunderstanding. Says it all really.

11-06-2019 5:19pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

Therein lies your contribution to the discussion. You dislike my point of view and the only way you can try and undermine it is with this suggestion. I had the audacity to ask a question - on a discussion forum no less.

Meanwhile, you act like you know all the answers yet not a word out of you to clarify where you infer there's a misunderstanding. Says it all really.

Don't dislike your pov, it's simply incorrect. It's been clarified to you with verifiable evidence which you choose to ignore.

You have an opinion, that's fine, cool for you, but when you have a multitude of people telling you that you misunderstand, are incorrect or just plain wrong and offer you verifiable facts, you continue with the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and singing lalalalalala.

makeorbrake · 11-06-2019 5:38pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Don't dislike your pov, it's simply incorrect. It's been clarified to you with verifiable evidence which you choose to ignore.

That's your opinion and not fact. What 'verifiable evidence'??

Deleted User wrote: »

You have an opinion, that's fine, cool for you, but when you have a multitude of people telling you that you misunderstand, are incorrect or just plain wrong and offer you verifiable facts, you continue with the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and singing lalalalalala.

That's funny. So whilst you think I should be wearing a tin foil hat in saying this, many of the contributors on this thread are taxi drivers. We know that as they've said so. So just because I'm outnumbered doesn't make my point of view any less valid (simply on the basis of being outnumbered).

Turkeys dont vote for christmas.

11-06-2019 6:02pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

That's your opinion and not fact. What 'verifiable evidence'??

That's funny. So whilst you think I should be wearing a tin foil hat in saying this, many of the contributors on this thread are taxi drivers. We know that as they've said so. So just because I'm outnumbered doesn't make my point of view any less valid (simply on the basis of being outnumbered).

Turkeys dont vote for christmas.

Let me know how you get on ordering Uber cabs in Ireland. I'll follow your progress with interest

end of the road · 11-06-2019 6:03pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

That's your opinion and not fact. What 'verifiable evidence'??

That's funny. So whilst you think I should be wearing a tin foil hat in saying this, many of the contributors on this thread are taxi drivers. We know that as they've said so. So just because I'm outnumbered doesn't make my point of view any less valid (simply on the basis of being outnumbered).

Turkeys dont vote for christmas.

the fact your point of view has been demonstrated to be factually incorrect makes it invalid however.

Spook_ie · 11-06-2019 6:15pm

Just for reference

https://www.uber.com/en-DE/drive/resources/vehicle-requirements/
https://www.uber.com/en-IT/drive/resources/vehicle-requirements/
https://www.uber.com/en-ES/drive/resources/vehicle-requirements/
https://www.uber.com/en-GR/drive/resources/vehicle-requirements/
https://www.uber.com/en-IE/drive/requirements/

Spook_ie · 11-06-2019 6:27pm

Interesting point about Uber in other countries having partnered to provide a vehicle, just wondering now how many of these classy Uber rides people get are actually a Hertz rental with a driver?

https://www.uber.com/us/en/o/drive/vehicle-solutions/

Spook_ie · 11-06-2019 6:29pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Let me know how you get on ordering Uber cabs in Ireland. I'll follow your progress with interest

Uber is available in Ireland, won't go into the details of when their Irish manager called MyTaxi because he couldn't get an Uber one Christmas.

makeorbrake · 11-06-2019 7:22pm

end of the road wrote: »

the fact your point of view has been demonstrated to be factually incorrect makes it invalid however.

Eh, no - you have not proven anything to the contrary. These are your opinion(s).

Spook_ie wrote: »

Just for reference

Your point?

makeorbrake · 11-06-2019 7:23pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Let me know how you get on ordering Uber cabs in Ireland. I'll follow your progress with interest

What's that supposed to mean? Uber is dead in Ireland because it's been regulated out of existence.

However, you will be delighted to know that for months now I have not used Uber. What may not appeal to you is that I use a rival service every day of the week (but that's not in Ireland what with its professionally trained taxi-men and impeccable wheelchair accessible cars).

end of the road · 11-06-2019 8:08pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

Eh, no - you have not proven anything to the contrary. These are your opinion(s).

Your point?

Plenty of posters have proved your statements incorrect. and no they aren't all taxi drivers nor do they have vested interests.

makeorbrake · 11-06-2019 8:15pm

end of the road wrote: »

Plenty of posters have proved your statements incorrect. and no they aren't all taxi drivers nor do they have vested interests.

Eh, once again, no you or they have not. We have differences of opinion but that's as far as it goes.

As regards vested interests, we have drivers here and drivers participating so yes, people with coloured views.

AndrewJRenko · 11-06-2019 8:57pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

What's that supposed to mean? Uber is dead in Ireland because it's been regulated out of existence.

Uber is dead in Ireland because it doesn't meet the standard of regulation for drivers and cars.

makeorbrake wrote: »

However, you will be delighted to know that for months now I have not used Uber. What may not appeal to you is that I use a rival service every day of the week (but that's not in Ireland what with its professionally trained taxi-men and impeccable wheelchair accessible cars).

I find it funny how your solution to problems with drivers and cars is LESS regulation?

makeorbrake wrote: »

Ah, I see. I don't agree with you on a topic and all of a sudden I'm not discussing the topic. Otherwise, that some quango or committee muttered something with regard to WAT's way back when doesn't mean to say that it's not being used as a blocking mechanism for uber/ride sharing today.

Your own personal ignorance of this matter is not an excuse. Lack of WAVs has been a huge issue in Ireland for years. Many people with disabilities are left stranded when calling for taxies. They can't book in advance for an airport trip or a job interview and have any confidence that they will get a WAV.

So the Regulator brought in this measure some years back to increase the number of WAVs in the fleet. It's working - slowly, but working. And your proposal would wipe out this progress in an instant.

makeorbrake wrote: »

What other country has imposed precisely this measure?

You've noticed how all black taxis in the UK are wheelchair accessible, right?

makeorbrake wrote: »

Please go back and read the section of text you wrote this in response to. Uber/Lyft innovated with that - you lot more recently responded to it. They were the ones that innovated (despite some of you here having suggested that there is and has been no innovation).

Uber and Hailo both launched in 2011, in different continents. Uber did not innovate with app ordering. The only innovation is bypassing regulations. The Irish regulator has done their job, by maintaining standards, and improving the quality of the fleet over time.

As for the 'you lot' - I'm not a taxi driver. I've never been a taxi driver. This might wreck your head a bit, but it's possible that people who don't have a vested interest in the sector disagree with you.

makeorbrake wrote: »

Ok, is this thread for communists only? Or I guess selective communists given the self employed nature of the taxi gig.

Have you ever worked a second job? I've done so many times. I would wager that most have. Have you ever worked overtime in a job?

According to your logic, you would ban anyone working a minute over 40 hours/week. I didn't know that your involvement in this discussion was for benefit of those poor unfortunate uber drivers....
Maybe its someone who goes to college who wants to work a few hours. They don't have a first job to begin with. Maybe its someone that wants to get some money together for a deposit on a house, etc? Maybe it's someone who just happens to be going the same direction - and want's to switch on the app so that they can receive a few quid so they don't even need to work extra hours in their first job?

No, I wouldn't ban second jobs at all. Neither would I create the American dream where people HAVE to have a second job to basically survive.

makeorbrake · 11-06-2019 9:27pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Uber is dead in Ireland because it doesn't meet the standard of regulation for drivers and cars.

Uber is dead in Ireland as it's being blocked by a regulator that's appeasing the taxi lobby.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

find it funny how your solution to problems with drivers and cars is LESS regulation?

I believe in regulation that doesn't stifle innovation.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Your own personal ignorance of this matter is not an excuse.

Calling me 'ignorant' is a reflection on yourself.

I don't have to apologise to anyone for having the audacity to ask a question on a discussion forum.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Lack of WAVs has been a huge issue in Ireland for years. Many people with disabilities are left stranded when calling for taxies. They can't book in advance for an airport trip or a job interview and have any confidence that they will get a WAV.

I'm not unsympathetic to the needs of the disabled. However, there is no doubt in my mind that there are some using the issue to prop up their own interests.

There are all manner of ways that W.A. transportation can be incentivised without stifling innovation.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You've noticed how all black taxis in the UK are wheelchair accessible, right?

Right. So are you saying the only way to get a taxi license in the UK (without shelling out thousands) is to agree to drive a WAV?

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Uber and Hailo both launched in 2011, in different continents. Uber did not innovate with app ordering.

We can get into semantics as much as you want. Go out and ask people who they believe pushed forth ride sharing via application. You can dispute what you want - measures by taxi's worldwide were a reaction by and large. I'm talking on a worldwide scale.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The Irish regulator has done their job, by maintaining standards, and improving the quality of the fleet over time.

The irish regulator has appeased taxi drivers and stifled innovation. As regards 'maintaining standards', you've already read the feedback from uber users to the effect that they find uber to be of a higher standard than the taxi (experienced in different markets).

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

As for the 'you lot' - I'm not a taxi driver. I've never been a taxi driver. This might wreck your head a bit, but it's possible that people who don't have a vested interest in the sector disagree with you.

Neither here nor there. There are fella's driving taxi's who are actively participating in this discussion. No problem at all in that - quite the opposite. However, everyone arrives with their own bias. Do I believe everyone of the naysayers here is a taxi driver - no, I don't - nor have I ever suggested that.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

No, I wouldn't ban second jobs at all. Neither would I create the American dream where people HAVE to have a second job to basically survive.

Well, maybe you're getting a tad ahead of yourself in your assumptions. It's entirely a different discussion.

usernamegoes · 11-06-2019 9:43pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Your own personal ignorance of this matter is not an excuse. Lack of WAVs has been a huge issue in Ireland for years. Many people with disabilities are left stranded when calling for taxies. They can't book in advance for an airport trip or a job interview and have any confidence that they will get a WAV.

So the Regulator brought in this measure some years back to increase the number of WAVs in the fleet. It's working - slowly, but working. And your proposal would wipe out this progress in an instant.

Would you support the regulator bringing in a regulation that requires all taxis are WAV by their next renewal date or within one year? Do you think that fewer taxi overall would be better for those who need WAVs or worse. Would all the WAVs be taken by users who don't need them because there are many fewer cars overall thereby making it harder for wheelchair users to get a cab at all!

Spook_ie · 11-06-2019 9:51pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

Eh, once again, no you or they have not. We have differences of opinion but that's as far as it goes.

As regards vested interests, we have drivers here and drivers participating so yes, people with coloured views.

And people who don't live here, we still allow your input weird as that is.

AndrewJRenko · 11-06-2019 9:54pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

Calling me 'ignorant' is a reflection on yourself.

I don't have to apologise to anyone for having the audacity to ask a question on a discussion forum.

I'm not unsympathetic to the needs of the disabled. However, there is no doubt in my mind that there are some using the issue to prop up their own interests.

There are all manner of ways that W.A. transportation can be incentivised without stifling innovation.

I didn't call you ignorant. I referred to your ignorance on this topic, which is obvious. And you didn't 'ask a question' - you waded in with definitive statements that showed your obvious ignorance of the matter and the recent history in Ireland.

People with disabilities don't want your sympathy. They want to be able to get to work, get to the airport, get home from the pub without undue hassle, just like everyone else.

Maybe you'd like to put your solutions to this issue that has challenged the taxi sector worldwide on the table so we can see how they might work?

makeorbrake wrote: »

Right. So are you saying the only way to get a taxi license in the UK (without shelling out thousands) is to agree to drive a WAV?

I don't know, and I'm not going to do your research for you. I'm pointing out the difference in the current situation in Ireland and the UK, where there are large numbers of wheelchair accessible taxis in major cities.

makeorbrake wrote: »

We can get into semantics as much as you want. Go out and ask people who they believe pushed forth ride sharing via application. You can dispute what you want - measures by taxi's worldwide were a reaction by and large. I'm talking on a worldwide scale.

'Go out and ask people what they believe'? Are you serious? Is the world of fake news where opinions trump facts? The facts are that Hailo and Uber launched at the same time, within a few months. Uber did not innovate with app ordering. They innovated with bypassing regulation, just like AirBNB and lots of other 'great' tech solutions.

makeorbrake wrote: »

The irish regulator has appeased taxi drivers and stifled innovation. As regards 'maintaining standards', you've already read the feedback from uber users to the effect that they find uber to be of a higher standard than the taxi (experienced in different markets).

Have you read the feedback from people with disabilities about how Uber's services are not accessible? Have you read about Uber's ludicrous legal strategy of claiming not to be a transport provider to avoid having to provide accessible services?
https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Woman-in-Wheelchair-Denied-An-Uber-Ride-a-Bigger-Problem-Advocate-Says-486502331.html

https://www.thedailybeast.com/uber-disability-laws-dont-apply-to-us

http://fortune.com/2015/05/22/uber-lyft-disabled/

makeorbrake wrote: »

The irish regulator has appeased taxi drivers and stifled innovation. As regards 'maintaining standards', you've already read the feedback from uber users to the effect that they find uber to be of a higher standard than the taxi (experienced in different markets).

Neither here nor there. There are fella's driving taxi's who are actively participating in this discussion. No problem at all in that - quite the opposite. However, everyone arrives with their own bias. Do I believe everyone of the naysayers here is a taxi driver - no, I don't - nor have I ever suggested that.

Well, maybe you're getting a tad ahead of yourself in your assumptions. It's entirely a different discussion.

Spook_ie · 11-06-2019 10:03pm

usernamegoes wrote: »

Would you support the regulator bringing in a regulation that requires all taxis are WAV by their next renewal date or within one year? Do you think that fewer taxi overall would be better for those who need WAVs or worse. Would all the WAVs be taken by users who don't need them because there are many fewer cars overall thereby making it harder for wheelchair users to get a cab at all!

No because I couldn't afford to take the hit and like many others would be forced into renting a WAT, people like makeorbake are already foaming at the mouth because of reports that people have to wait for a taxi at busy times and want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's a slow progress but it is progress all the same.

Fixing the WAT problem should have been tackled back in 2000 by making all new applications WAT only, now you have 15-20000 babies in the bath. The only equitable way to deal with that IMO is to remove the VRT on WATs but make it payable on removal from the fleet the same way as if you were importing it. You could even give it a TX area plate to prevent abuse and give people 5-10 years warning, like we were warned about age and size rules being brought in

AndrewJRenko · 11-06-2019 10:15pm

usernamegoes wrote: »

Would you support the regulator bringing in a regulation that requires all taxis are WAV by their next renewal date or within one year? Do you think that fewer taxi overall would be better for those who need WAVs or worse. Would all the WAVs be taken by users who don't need them because there are many fewer cars overall thereby making it harder for wheelchair users to get a cab at all!

It's an unworkable suggestion, and probably beyond the legal powers of the regulator. We need more WAVS on the street, and the current system is making this happen.

usernamegoes · 11-06-2019 10:41pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

No because I couldn't afford to take the hit and like many others would be forced into renting a WAT, people like makeorbake are already foaming at the mouth because of reports that people have to wait for a taxi at busy times and want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's a slow progress but it is progress all the same.

Fixing the WAT problem should have been tackled back in 2000 by making all new applications WAT only, now you have 15-20000 babies in the bath. The only equitable way to deal with that IMO is to remove the VRT on WATs but make it payable on removal from the fleet the same way as if you were importing it. You could even give it a TX area plate to prevent abuse and give people 5-10 years warning, like we were warned about age and size rules being brought in

But you could still do drive a taxi provided you followed the regulation. Is that not your point?

Spook_ie · 11-06-2019 11:34pm

usernamegoes wrote: »

But you could still do drive a taxi provided you followed the regulation. Is that not your point?

Yes I could and if WATs for all was decided on then I'd comply with that regulation BUT not overnight or within a year, given 5 years notice and then on end of life of whichever vehicle I were driving maybe. As it stands at the moment if it were brought in overnight I'd still owe 9k on this car before even starting to put by any money to help fund it's replacement.

makeorbrake · 12-06-2019 1:15pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I didn't call you ignorant. I referred to your ignorance on this topic, which is obvious. And you didn't 'ask a question' - you waded in with definitive statements that showed your obvious ignorance of the matter and the recent history in Ireland.

The arrogance. I asked a simple question which is the complete opposite of making definitive statements. Right back at ye : Yer taxi driving buddies are renowned at being experts at everything - I guess that's where you picked that up, right? :rolleyes:

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

People with disabilities don't want your sympathy. They want to be able to get to work, get to the airport, get home from the pub without undue hassle, just like everyone else.

GTF out of here with your faux concern and pathetic attempt to take the moral high-ground!

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I don't know, and I'm not going to do your research for you. I'm pointing out the difference in the current situation in Ireland and the UK, where there are large numbers of wheelchair accessible taxis in major cities.

YOU DONT KNOW? - and you call me ignorant? GTF. Secondly, in case it escaped your attention, this is a discussion forum. I don't have any obligation to do 'research'. And once again, stop hiding behind the disability issue.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

'Go out and ask people what they believe'? Are you serious? Is the world of fake news where opinions trump facts?

Says it all that you would invoke a trumpism here!

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The facts are that Hailo and Uber launched at the same time, within a few months. Uber did not innovate with app ordering. [/url]

And you follow up by talking about FACTS when your facts are lies? Give me a break.

There were 4 technology companies that had apps launched before Hailo. Notwithstanding that, Hailo was just another application from just another technology company. The taxi industry didn't bring that about either.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have you read the feedback from people with disabilities about how Uber's services are not accessible?

Stop trying to hide behind the disability issue. Is every taxi in Ireland wheelchair accessible? Then your point is null and void.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Uber did not innovate with app ordering.

Of course they have innovated by enabling technology to in turn enable ordinary people to use their existing vehicles for ride sharing purposes.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

They innovated with bypassing regulation, just like AirBNB and lots of other 'great' tech solutions.

Wrong (and you can keep on with this and I'll keep correcting you...as you want). There is no regulation for ride sharing in ireland. Ride sharing is not taxi-ing. It's quite common for a new technological approach to emerge and no regulation existing to govern it to begin with.

And next you go after AirBNB? Dude, you have no credibility.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have you read about Uber's ludicrous legal strategy of claiming not to be a transport provider to avoid having to provide accessible services?

I've been to their offices here and talked to them about what they are. And what they are is a technology company. Uber is a platform - that enables individuals to go out and ride share. Of course they're not a traditional transport provider - with the exception of where they have their own autonomous cars on the road in the U.S.

Spook_ie · 12-06-2019 1:37pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

<snipped>
I've been to their offices here and talked to them about what they are. And what they are is a technology company. Uber is a platform - that enables individuals to go out and ride share. Of course they're not a traditional transport provider - with the exception of where they have their own autonomous cars on the road in the U.S.

Time for you to come clean about your interest in this, it would seem from some of your posts you aren't in Ireland yet you go to the Uber offices somewhere in the world to ask them, smells big time to me.

Anyways matters not what Uber say they are, the EU say they are a transport company and that's the fact.

https://www.politico.eu/article/uber-ecj-ruling/

Spook_ie · 12-06-2019 1:52pm

Chicken or Egg, does it matter who was first, both started officially in 2011 according to Wiki

Following a beta launch in May 2010, Uber's services and mobile app officially launched in San Francisco in 2011.[67][68] Originally, the application only allowed users to hail a black luxury car and the price was 1.5 times that of a taxi.[69]

Hailo began in late 2010, after a meeting between three London taxi drivers and three technology entrepreneurs, including co-founders Jay Bregman, CEO,[8][9][11][12][13][14] Ron Zeghibe, Executive Chairman, Caspar Woolley, Chief Operations Officer, and Russell Hall, Gary Jackson, and Terry Runham, Driver Community Leaders.

On November 1, 2011 Hailo officially launched to passengers in London.[3][4] By the end of 2012, Hailo had launched in Dublin, Boston, Toronto, and Chicago,[8][13][15] but by late 2014 had discontinued services in North America.[16].

makeorbrake · 12-06-2019 1:54pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

Time for you to come clean about your interest in this, it would seem from some of your posts you aren't in Ireland yet you go to the Uber offices somewhere in the world to ask them, smells big time to me.

Eh, Sherlock, there's no mystery here. I was the one that said that I've been to their offices and I've repeatedly stated that I'm living overseas. They have offices/customer service centres in other jurisdictions where anyone can walk in off the street and talk to them.

Spook_ie wrote: »

Anyways matters not what Uber say they are, the EU say they are a transport company and that's the fact.

https://www.politico.eu/article/uber-ecj-ruling/

That may well have been the ruling by the ECJ in Europe but it stands to reason you run an app, you're a technology company. But of course, this is highly political. Not just in the irish context but worldwide.

makeorbrake · 12-06-2019 1:55pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

Chicken or Egg, does it matter who was first, both started officially in 2011 according to Wiki

Actually, I would make the point that it doesn't matter one iota. The bottom line is that the innovation came from the tech sector via tech companies. It didn't come from the taxi industry.

Spook_ie · 12-06-2019 2:01pm

makeorbrake wrote: »

<snipped>

There were 4 technology companies that had apps launched before Hailo. Notwithstanding that, Hailo was just another application from just another technology company. The taxi industry didn't bring that about either.

<snipped>

Name them with supporting information or we're going to need to change your username to Makeyourmindup

Following a beta launch in May 2010, Uber's services and mobile app officially launched in San Francisco in 2011.[67][68] Originally, the application only allowed users to hail a black luxury car and the price was 1.5 times that of a taxi.[69]

Hailo began in late 2010, after a meeting between three London taxi drivers and three technology entrepreneurs, including co-founders Jay Bregman, CEO,[8][9][11][12][13][14] Ron Zeghibe, Executive Chairman, Caspar Woolley, Chief Operations Officer, and Russell Hall, Gary Jackson, and Terry Runham, Driver Community Leaders.

On November 1, 2011 Hailo officially launched to passengers in London.[3][4] By the end of 2012, Hailo had launched in Dublin, Boston, Toronto, and Chicago,[8][13][15] but by late 2014 had discontinued services in North America.[16].

Uber

Comments