Oh boy, I see I ruffled some feathers here, 10 downvotes within few minutes.
Where I live, taxi drivers need to purchase medallion from given municipality, a massive investment. You can't just slap a taxi logo on the car and start driving people. From customers perspective this is a monopoly since they are all the same, charge all the same, have all the same drawbacks and most people hated them. From customer's perspective, they are indeed a 'taxi company'.
Uber was the first competition to entrenched taxi driving business.
exactly that. i have lived in germany for years. this is the first time i hear that they are all small businesses with 3-20 cars. all taxis have the same color, and prices are fixed.
it looks more like a franchise than competing businesses.
i don't think a business should be allowed to offer services below cost, nor should it be allowed to break the law, but on the other hand, the restrictions that exist in some places make no sense. a rental car has to return to the main office after each ride ??? what kind of nonsense is that?
What if the law mandates that some services can only be provided in a certain way? If a simple label swap could give a free pass then why stop at taxis? "I did not steal that money, I was just providing a free surprise disposal service. Would it help if I sent a bill?"
i don't get what you are trying to say.
the question is, why does the law have these mandates? and do they really make sense? some do, some don't. as it is, we have a bunch of laws that are unnecessary and should be removed. would that help uber? i don't know.
Where I live, taxi drivers need to purchase medallion from given municipality, a massive investment. You can't just slap a taxi logo on the car and start driving people. From customers perspective this is a monopoly since they are all the same, charge all the same, have all the same drawbacks and most people hated them. From customer's perspective, they are indeed a 'taxi company'.
Uber was the first competition to entrenched taxi driving business.