[basicallydan]

I'd like to highlight this part of the article:

> In several of the protests, drivers aren't specifically targeting Uber and other service providers, but what they say is outmoded regulation that makes it hard for them to compete. Part of Uber's challenge in Europe is the variety of regulations governing the continent, even among the 28-member European Union, each of which has different unions and different rules.

It's easy to dismiss off the protestors as old hat for not reacting gracefully to a changing market, but the issue at least in London seems to largely be with the fact that their existing businesses are subject to more costs and regulations than the kinds that Uber and other services are facing.

So let's spare a thought for the taxi drivers who've spent years building up their skills and knowledge of the local area, especially in places like London [1], and hope that they can be given the opportunity to compete with Uber. After all, if it weren't for the existing Taxi industry it's possible companies like Uber wouldn't even exist.

There should be space in the market for both the traditional offering and the fancy new one, and I hope that they can learn from each other and improve as a result of the competition, rather than die out.

EDIT: To be clear, I'm not saying Uber should be forced to play by the rules. I'm saying that it might be time for the rules to be re-assessed based on developments in the industry.

[1]: In London, our famous black cabs are driven only by cabbies who've spent months learning London like the back of their hands in order to give their customers the fastest (and most interesting, in many cases) journey possible. See The Knowledge: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_the_United_Kingdom#...

[davidgerard]

>It's easy to dismiss off the protestors as old hat for not reacting gracefully to a changing market, but the issue at least in London seems to largely be with the fact that their existing businesses are subject to more costs and regulations than the kinds that Uber and other services are facing.

This is the fundamental issue: Uber's business advantage is to evade regulations that apply to its competitors; its business strategy is to try to drive them out of the market before regulation catches up with them.

[davidw]

Don't you think that's a bit simplistic? In some places, like here in Italy, the taxi folks are pretty nasty:

http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Cronache/2006/07_Luglio/2...

Short English version: economist and professor writes an editorial advocating liberalizing taxis, and some taxi drivers printed a flyer with his face, home address and phone number, inviting taxis to honk when they go by his house.

And don't forget that a lot of that regulation - in some places - may have been written by the industry in question in order to maintain the status quo:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture

[Xylakant]

Uber tries to sell on the same, simplistic narrative: We're disruptive, we're good! Berlin for example has a very different Taxi market - it's mostly small players, 1-3 cars (there's roughly 7600 taxi in Berlin, distributed over around 3000 companies). Still, Uber tries to sell based on "we're breaking a monopoly" while skirting the regulation and strong-arming the competition.

The recent injunction against Uber in Berlin is ignored by Uber and the taxi company that fought for it in court stated that they won't pursue that since Uber threatend to countersue for damages, effectively threatening to use their funding as leverage over a company that owns three cars.

The case you're citing is also a bit problematic: Italy is a bit a problematic state when it comes to threatening and lack of help from courts. The same thing could happen to an economist and professor writing an editorial advocating against Uber - just not by taxi drivers, but by Uber drivers. I'd blame that on Italy, not on Taxis.

[davidw]

The taxi drivers in Italy are a reasonably powerful lobbying force. When they don't get their way, they get pretty nasty in lots of ways: parking their cars in the middle of already crowded roads and things like that.

My point was that the analysis of Uber was a bit simplistic in that there are some positive aspects to wrecking what was once a cozy monopoly created by regulations that are not there for the customer, but for the entrenched industry. It's probably different in different places, which is why a more complex, case by case analysis is likely needed.

[petercooper]

I generally agree, although it's not just the disparity in regulations, but that the disadvantages of not being a licensed taxi are fading.

(You probably know all of the below being in the UK but I thought I'd flesh it out for those overseas.)

Black taxi and minicab operators have been in competition for decades, with regulation finally coming to minicabs about 10 years ago, and an uneasy but mostly quiet co-existence since then.

This co-existence has been underlined by the difference in how minicabs and taxis work. Taxis can be flagged down in the street, taxis can use taxi lanes, taxis can use official taxi ranks at airports and train stations. Minicabs, at least within the M25, are restricted in this regard. They have to be pre-ordered and within perhaps 5 miles of Charing Cross, it's probably a lot easier to flag down a taxi. Minicabs tend to focus on account work, pre-booked airport runs, courier stuff, and suburban journeys.

The problem Uber and things like it introduce is that the friction involved in getting a minicab is almost wiped out. You still have to pre-book, but they have cars milling around everywhere, all trackable, with no surly operators to call. You almost get the taxi ordering experience but with minicab-level drivers and prices. As far as I understand it, the contention of taxi drivers in cities like San Francisco is not so different to this.

So I contend the problem is that "minicab style" services are significantly increasing in quality through things like Uber and even the apps minicab companies are themselves producing (such as Addison Lee's) and therefore taxis are losing many natural advantages.

Having worked in the minicab industry many moons ago, my personal opinion is that this is no bad thing, since minicabs have had a deservedly notorious reputation in the past, and I don't think taxis will die out because there's always going to be a "flag down" market.

What perhaps would redress the balance would be applying the congestion charge to minicabs to help maintain central London as a predominantly taxi zone, and enforcing a toll for minicab airport pickups. It's all about taking baby steps to maintain the uneasy balance that has so far worked for decades. (Or, alternatively, open the whole thing up, shake off 150 years of regulations, and have everyone on a level playing field.. but that won't go down well.)

[Djehngo]

Every time I have gotten an Uber in London the car has been a Toyota Prius, I don't know if that particular car is still congestion charge exempt but even if it isn't what's to stop minicabs all starting to drive vehicles which are exempt?

[petercooper]

They are licensed. Licensed minicabs of any type are currently exempt, I believe. The rule could simply be that all minicabs are subjected to the fee, it'd be enforced by license plate as it is for other motorists.

[rikf]

As a London native for almost 10 years I cant tell you how many times I have been ripped off by black cab drivers taking longer routes then they could have. I also cant tell you how difficult it can be at certain times to find a taxi to take you home so people inevitably end up using unlicensed "mini cabs" to get home. This all because the licensing regulations are stuck in the stone age. Hopefully Uber will drag London kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

As a side note I also dont think there is anything stopping a London black cab driver from signing up for Uber.

[basicallydan]

No, I don't think so either. But that doesn't mean they should. Firstly, they might like driving their black cab a lot more than Uber's cars. I'm a big, big fan of the hackney carriage for the way it's designed specifically for carrying 5 passengers in this context.

Perhaps it would be nice to see Uber using hackney carriages, I dunno. At any rate, I agree that Uber should be a force for good here in improving the licensing regulations.

Personally I've always had good experiences with black cab drivers, and many times they've given me a discount. But I've also found the same thing with Uber drivers.

[dalore]

Minicabs are usually licenses, look for the logo on the car. Can get them pretty much any high street. They are banned from picking up passengers on the street but a loophole is they hang outside of major clubs and you can ask the club for a taxi which they can then pick you up.

Or do you actually mean the unlicensed ones of people going around saying "oi, need a cab?"

[ZoFreX]

> As a side note I also dont think there is anything stopping a London black cab driver from signing up for Uber.

Uber just today announced black cabs as an option in London. I'm not really sure what I feel about this, there is very little differentiation between Hailo and Uber now.

[antr]

i've used addison lee whenever i struggle to find a cab (or know i'm going to have trouble find a cab). except for a couple of occasion where the mini cab driver has been a bit late, i've never felt i've had cab issues in london.

[vixin]

'to give their customers the fastest etc.,'. Nice if it works that way but plenty of customers don't agree that that's what happens. And of course it is inarguably a monopoly.

As noted by one journalist

"If black cab drivers are as good as they think they are, then they’ll beat the new competition on a level playing-field. If they’re not as popular, they’ll have to bring down their high prices. Either answer leaves the consumer better off."

[dalore]

The article barely mentions it, but you can take a much shorter version of the knowledge that only covers a specific area. Means that black cab can only pick up from the area they did the test (but can drive outside). Quite often it means that cab driver doesn't know squat and uses a GPS anyway.

The ones that do the full test don't like the guys that did the short test.

[outrightfree]

@basicallydan - related to your point about The Knowledge. Doesn't satnav make that test somewhat anachronistic now?

[basicallydan]

It depends largely on the satnav. London is such a complex city with a lot of nooks and crannies that people don't really understand and that satnav may or may not know about. Black cab drivers are also privy to the experience of knowing what places are busy when, and why, which satnav tools often can do too but not necessarily to the same degree of accuracy as a black cab driver whose job is to think on their feet and react to changes in the environment based on what they know and what they observe.

With a minicab driver simply following instructions from a satnav, you might as well just have a self-driving car, which is no bad thing.

With a black cab driver using their knowledge and experience and eschewing the instructions from a system which wasn't designed specifically for London, you may have a more reliably fast journey.

Plus, they could even give tourists some interesting facts about the places they're driving through!

[Silhouette]

Also, in the UK taxis can go many places where regular motorists aren't allowed, particularly in big cities like London. It seems unlikely that a satnav, even one that provides some sort of real time traffic information, will provide accurate information about expected journey times taking restricted routes into account.

[lukasm]

There is no point in this training and buying extra hardware. I don't believe that there should be any extra regulations for it, but to solve the problem you need political capital. Make it simple and fair to everybody. For licence pay x for month. For entering strict city centre, extra y.

[rwmj]

Try taking a black cab from Heathrow airport to anywhere just a few miles away (basically anywhere which isn't a full fare to the centre of London). You will literally be screamed and sworn at.

[antr]

I've used a black cab from Heathrow to central London a few times, but I still find using the Heathrow express more convenient and cheaper. Later getting a cab in Paddington to anywhere in central London is a breeze... compared to the M4/A4 constant traffic jams.

[basicallydan]

EDIT: I misread, this is my response when thinking they wanted to go TO Heathrow

Well then, that's a perfect example of a situation where Uber would be more appropriate. Black Cab drivers are meant for quick journeys through London. Why should they go well out of their way? It's their business.

(although, there's no need for people to scream and swear at you)

[rwmj]

FROM heathrow.

[izolate]

LHR is on the outskirts of London. Asking a cabbie to go even further out from the airport is kinda rude. That's what minicabs are for.

[basicallydan]

Oops, my bad - I misread. Sorry :)

[mantrax5]

> It's easy to dismiss off the protestors as old hat for not reacting gracefully to a changing market, but the issue at least in London seems to largely be with the fact that their existing businesses are subject to more costs and regulations than the kinds that Uber and other services are facing.

If they're not old hat, and so on, and their business pays more taxes, why not branch off into Uber clones? If Uber does it, they can too.

[rwmj]

They've done that already: Hailo. Interesting story:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/05/23/taxi_rage/