Why UberCab is in trouble. This is the webpage of the S.F. taxi cartel

http://www.medallionholders.com/medallions.html

by uvdiv • 16 years ago

47 58 16 years ago

jluxenberg• 16 years ago

A "cab" operating in San Francisco without a medallion is illegal...is [not] subject to..meter inspections

Perfect example of regulations not keeping up with technology. If I request a "cab" via an iPhone app, I know exactly how far I'm going and how much its going to cost me before I even get in the cab.

nostromo2• 16 years ago

Not only that, but there could be a simple review system for drivers. It could actually improve quality by giving riders recourse. ("A+++ WOULD RIDE AGAIN")

jessriedel9• 16 years ago

The last thing I want to do when hailing a cab for a 4 minutes drive is check ebay-style reviews. I just want a cab to appear in front of me when I step out of a building.

sp4rki8• 16 years ago

This has nothing to do with UberCab because they are not dispatching cabs to their customers. UberCab is pre-arranging a limo/professional chauffeur/personal driver service with valid license and insurance policies required for private transport services to pickup a customer at a select location.

varikin• 16 years ago

How is that different than calling for a cab to pick you up at a certain place and time?

gojomo• 16 years ago

Well, in SF, you can call a cab and wait for hours with it never arriving.

It seems the key cab/limo distinction is usually reserved/roaming. While both can be dispatched/reserved, only cabs can roam and be hailed streetside.

UberCab is in compliance with that distinction -- they are reserved, just more instantly than ever before, because of the march of technology.

sp4rki8• 16 years ago

The difference is that instead of a yellow car, you get a black car. What is a limo service but a luxury version of a taxi service? The distinguishing factor is that one can pickup passengers on the street and by hail and the other is only made by prearrangement and is considered a PRIVATE luxury service.

uvdiv2• 16 years ago

I don't understand the laws; my link was to show that S.F. taxis operate as a cartel, and use city laws to enforce their cartel (through medallions and their quota). I don't know if this is precisely what the UberCab C&D is about (it's not been published), but it does show that the S.F. transport market is explicitly and intentionally anti-competitive.

That said, the other TechCrunch post seems to say the taxi licensing may be relevant -- the functions UberCab is doing can only be legally done by licensed taxis:

>* Ubercab operates much like a cab company but does not have a taxi license.

>...

>* Limos in U.S. cities usually have to prebook an hour in advance, by law, while only licensed taxis can pick someone up right away but Ubercab picks people up right away (again without a taxi license).

http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/24/ubercab/

If limos need to wait an hour to make a pickup, and taxis do not, then UberCab (I think) is doing what only taxis can do and thus needs that license, not the limo one. The fundamental problem is not that UberCab is licensed as a limo rather than a taxi, but rather that it is impossible for it to be licensed as a taxi -- that (as I understand) there is no reasonable way for them to legally do what they are doing.

I am not a lawyer.

lolname3• 16 years ago

They could make a deal with taxi companies, to pass the < 1hr fares to them instead.

Problem solved.

sp4rki8• 16 years ago

Oh no I understood the point of the link. Taxi operations in SF really is mob controlled. The thing is, UberCab was never meant to be a replacement to taxi cabs, it's a way to provide people with expedited black car services.

Ubercab operates much like a cab company but does not have a taxi license.

This is incorrect. They operate much like a sedan limousine company.

Limos in U.S. cities usually have to prebook an hour in advance, by law, while only licensed taxis can pick someone up right away but Ubercab picks people up right away (again without a taxi license).

This is also incorrect, the pertinent statues in taxi and limo commission law is this: ...assuring that affiliated vehicles and the drivers of such vehicles provide transportation only through pre- arrangement made with the base station and do not accept passengers by street hail or other than by dispatch by the base station

Using the phone app is by definition a pre-arrangement. The black cars are not picking random people off the streets, they're picking a preset customer in prearranged fashion.

but rather that it is impossible for it to be licensed as a taxi

Why should they? They are not a taxi company. Not only that, but they don't actually own the cars either, it's an affiliate program basically. They are a layer for independent private chauffeur services and limousine services companies to have ability to make their prearrangements on the phone.

tzs4• 16 years ago

> UberCab is pre-arranging a limo/professional chauffeur/personal driver service with valid license and insurance policies required for private transport services to pickup a customer at a select location.

The limo/chauffeur/driver has a valid license to operate a limo service, not a cab service. They are operating as a cab service when dispatched by UberCab, and so if they do not have a cab license, it would seem that they are operating outside the law.

jessriedel9• 16 years ago

Exactly. In particular, limos need to arrange for pick-up at least 1 hour beforehand in SF to avoid being classified as taxis (if I remember correctly from the original article).

sp4rki8• 16 years ago

Why would they be operating a cab service? There are two things that separate cab service and black car service. 1) black car service drivers are not allowed to pick up passengers by street hail or any other method that is not dispatch by base station, and is booked on a private hire basis. 2) black car service is basically a private transportation in which a limo license has been granted, is suited by it's luxurious demeanor as a vehicle appropriate for ceremonies and uses of luxury or prestige.

The cars that UberCab dispatches are in appearance and in license compliant with black car services and are hired on-demand on a prearrangement basis through a phone application. In addition, a customer must register for the service and provide a credit card to use the service.

This are not random people calling a cab station, this are specific customers arranging for private transportation they could do by phone, but do so using an application instead.

sahillavingia• 16 years ago

I built a Taxi-related app for iPhone, specifically for Singapore [1]. I got several calls and emails from cab companies, first trying to brand my app with their company. Then, trying to buy the app off me for little-to-nothing. Then, threatening to "shut [me] down" claiming that this stuff wasn't allowed.

Months later, they've all tried to copy the crap out of my app. It's OK if they do it, but not anyone else.

[1] http://taxilah.com/

lolname3• 16 years ago

The page claims that the sedan services are cheaper... let's verify that claim on a few rides:

2 mile luxor cab: $7.15 5 mile luxor cab: $13.90 10 mile luxor cab: $25.15 1 minute idling luxor cab: $0.45

2 mile yellow cab: $7.15 5 mile yellow cab: $13.90 10 mile yellow cab: $25.15 1 minute idling yellow cab: $0.45

2 mile ubercab: $17.80 5 mile ubercab: $32.50 10 mile ubercab: $57.00 1 minute idling ubercab: $1.25

I fail to see the expense the article implies.

anigbrowl• 16 years ago

What page are you talking about?

fleitz• 16 years ago

The page strikes me as very racist, exactly what is a 'gypsy cab'?

ShabbyDoo2• 16 years ago

Would you prefer "Roma Cabs"? In all seriousness, I do agree although I don't think the average American even realizes that Gypsies/Roma are an actual, modern-day ethnic group.

tzs4• 16 years ago

There was an interesting thread on Reddit a couple months ago, where an American said he didn't understand why Europeans hate the Roma so much, and wondered if it was just a baseless prejudice like many Americans have toward Mexicans. The discussion was interesting. Here's the link: http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/d3hax/why_does_eu...

I was amazed at how many of the anti-Roma arguments sounded just like the anti-black arguments you'd find in the early 19th century in the US.

js2• 16 years ago

The word "gypped" is used indiscriminately by the average American as well.

tzs4• 16 years ago

It's an unlicensed cab, roaming around taking what work it can get. Historically, the name probably arose from the similarity to Gypsies, who roam around, taking what work they can get.

jessriedel9• 16 years ago

So I can understand the argument for taxi regulation and prohibiting unlicensed taxis: when I hail a taxi for a 5 minutes drive, I don't want to expend resources looking at competitors, checking to make sure the meter is legit, checking proof of insurance, etc. Since most people want the same thing out of a taxi (as opposed to, say, buying a car), it makes sense for a centralized government agency to do some regulating.

But what is the rationale for limiting the number of medallions? Why not just allow anyone who wants to become licensed to do so, while charging a fee which covers the cost of the licencing process?

The OP's article lists the obvious dangers of completely deregulating, but it doesn't explain the cap on medallions.

(Please, no comments about "because the taxi cartels control the government!". I understand the incentives for existing taxis to erect barriers to the market. I'm more interesting in the rationale of those who argue that a limited number of medallions is in the public interest.)

scott_s• 16 years ago

Difficulty in regulating at scale? A license is more than just a badge that means "I paid a fee."

jessriedel9• 16 years ago

>Difficulty in regulating at scale?

The per-licence cost of regulating should go down with increased scale (unless there's something really surprising I'm not considering).

>A license is more than just a badge that means "I paid a fee."

I don't understand what you mean here. I said the licence should reflect the cost to the city for doing the regulating. And the regulating should include stuff like ensuring the meters work, checking insurance, etc.

dpatru• 16 years ago

> The experience of other cities over many years has shown that open-entry "deregulation" of taxis is poor public policy. . . . In a nutshell, the problem is that the capital costs of entering the taxi business are low. In an unregulated market, anyone with the price of a used car can enter the business. While this may sound good to free-market fans, experience with taxis has shown that quality goes down, prices go up, and public safety is compromised.

So there you have it: the taxi cartels want regulation to keep prices low.

xsmasher• 16 years ago

>quality goes down, prices go up, and public safety is compromised

That jumped out at me too; I can't imagine how deregulation would raise prices for consumers. I'd love to see a cite for that.

I would have believed "too many taxis == too much traffic," AKA tragedy of the commons, but not this.

aamar2• 16 years ago

The reason seems to be to make traffic manageable.

It's similar to the idea of cap-and-trade pollution regulation. Each individual producer profits with pollution, but people believe the environment can only sustain some level, after which we have serious harm to both polluters and non-polluters. This environmental capacity is analogous to SF's (assessment of) traffic capacity.

I don't know why SF doesn't allow trading or transferring the medallion, the way many other cities do.

jamesaguilar• 16 years ago

Seems like a red herring to me. Taxis aren't by any means the majority of the traffic in SF, so I doubt having more of them would cause a major issue. If anything, it would make things more manageable by easing the parking situation (since prices would be lower and people would not need to drive).

uvdiv2• 16 years ago

Well, on the progressive side, when they want rent they argue that market prices are "unfairly low" (or high). Creating artificial scarcity is one way to inflate prices to "fair" levels, e.g. "living wages":

>Ward 1 Councilman Jim Graham introduced legislation Tuesday to limit the number of taxicabs in D.C. through either a medallion system, like ones used in New York City and Chicago, or a certification system. [...] A glut of drivers could jeopardize the chances of any cabbies making an adequate living, Graham has said.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Cap-on-D_C_-cabs-sug...

...Though in this particular case the backstory turned out to be "the taxi cartels control the government".

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/24/dc-council-m...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/crime/Ethiopian-comm...

jessriedel9• 16 years ago

Thanks! This is the kind of example argument I was looking for.

(And of course it makes terrible economic sense. If the city wanted to transfer wealth to the taxi drivers from other citizens, it would be more efficient to just have a transparent tax and payment system, rather than a hidden cost through a monopoly. But I figure I don't have to convince you of that...)

fizx• 16 years ago

Maybe an extra 5000 cars on the road in the most traffic-dense parts of the city isn't ideal.

jessriedel9• 16 years ago

But is that actually an argument that is given? Is there data showing that taxis are a significant contributor to congestion?

If this were a real problem, it would be better to estimate the marginal cost to the city for having an extra car on the road for an extra day (or minute or whatever) and charge that. Then, let the market decide how that affects the number of taxis. (Also, if this were true, it would be an argument for charging everyone, not just taxis, to drive in the city.)

ebaysucks• 16 years ago

If there is demand for taxi regulation, there is an incentive for entrepreneurs to supply it (e.g. quality labels).

The need for positive freedom does not proof the legitimacy of positive rights.

stcredzero2• 16 years ago

Hailing cabs street-side is really only implementing what Ubercab is doing, but with stochastic pre-distribution of roaming service providers. It's an early industrial-revolution way of doing things because back then we didn't have electronic networks. Really, it should be irrelevant in modern countries.

Why UberCab is in trouble. This is the webpage of the S.F. taxi cartel

Related Stories