|
|
|
|
|
by x_throwaway80bf
3025 days ago
|
|
I agree generic consumer opinion won't really take into account the subsidy and unprofitability situation. That is in fact my entire point: because generic consumer opinion or anecdotes don't qualify themselves based on the subsidy mechanism, it means generic consumer opinion or anecdotes are largely irrelevant for purposes of comparing with older taxi experiences or assessing a claimed value-add of a newer ride-hailing company. In other words it doesn't add information to say that consumers like to be given better quality things for free. > I need to get from one point to another in a safe, economical manner, and NYC's Yellow Taxi fleet is failing at that. This seems like a red herring tacked on at the end, since Uber is not providing this either (because of the subsidy) and from an analytical perspective, it's irrelevant if average consumers are aware of this yet or not. |
|
Medallion owners could have been more flexible with leasing terms as Uber flooded the zone, but did not.
Taxi drivers could have ceased discriminating against outer boroughs, but did not.
Medallion owners relied upon the monopoly to extract as much money from the market as possible without investing in vehicles or drivers or technology.
Taxi drivers frittered away the minimal public support they receive with strikes against GPS and credit card machines.