|
|
|
|
|
|
by bubblethink
1405 days ago
|
|
|
But why ? You start with the place with the most impact and deal with the long tail later. So NYC should be the first. Several states don't allow direct sales of electric vehicles despite how well it works in other states. It's a pointless legal issue that will drag on for years/decades. If Tesla et al. had the same impunity and legal cover as Uber, they would be selling everywhere, and we would all be better off. |
|
|
Because your "long tail" of poorly functional taxi systems consisted of cities like Los Angeles, Houston, and San Diego. These aren't tiny even when compared to New York. "Most impact" should be the largest city without a functional taxi system. THOSE should have been the focus and then you would have had demand pull into New York and Chicago.
But, no, Uber wanted the "growth hack" of burning VC cash to transfer a bunch of people from the already functional taxi system into the ridesharing system.
> If Tesla et al. had the same impunity and legal cover as Uber, they would be selling everywhere, and we would all be better off.
Laws exist for a reason. Sometimes, such as the case of Tesla, those laws go out of date and should be changed. The medallion system, however, came into existence to avoid malfeasance by drivers. And, as we have seen, as Uber has reduced pay to the drivers, we are getting the exact problems medallions were put in place to solve.