# 'Growth' in NYC



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

I drive a yellow cab in NYC.

This week, Uber had the nerve to tell the TLC it should increase funding, as Uber plans to punt another 10,000 cars into the market, and license approval isn't fast enough for their tastes.

A lot could be said about the incomprehensible hubris of this company, but the thing which strikes me most as a blatant lie is the idea of 'growth.'

There's absolutely no way NYC needs another 10,000 cars on the road to meet a supposed demand. The city has a large taxi fleet and a now equal number of app drivers. This is about flooding the most important taxi market on Earth (perhaps London is equal) with as many cars as possible, for the simple reason that Uber gets 30% of every ride.

This company is extremely dangerous, and once you start dismantling reliable jobs like the yellow cab industry, you're really messing with the fundamentals of society.


----------



## Luberon (Nov 24, 2014)

Medallions are as bad if not worse than Uber. Why should there be a 500,000 entry fee into a cab owners club? Let there be transparent rules - TLC license, commercial insurance, car inspection, affordable airport licenses and let the market take care of itself.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

It's the same way everywhere Uber goes. They don't give one **** if any drivers make a living. Their own drivers even less so.


----------



## Denouber (Jan 9, 2015)

Yeah those idiots want all the city start driving ! No one make money only them ! F em I m glad i m out.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Luberon said:


> Medallions are as bad if not worse than Uber. Why should there be a 500,000 entry fee into a cab owners club? Let there be transparent rules - TLC license, commercial insurance, car inspection, affordable airport licenses and let the market take care of itself.


The price of Medallions jumped drastically in the last decade, but that's unrelated to what Uber is doing.

The price barrier of Medallions (sold at auction) is there because of their intrinsic value, as a means of ownership. That is how it should be, you work hard for something, it gives incentive to do your job well, and follow the rules with the payoff of ownership.

However, fleet drivers (non owners) do fine as well.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> The price of Medallions jumped drastically in the last decade, but that's unrelated to what Uber is doing.
> 
> The price barrier of Medallions (sold at auction) is there because of their intrinsic value, as a means of ownership. That is how it should be, you work hard for something, it gives incentive to do your job well, and follow the rules with the payoff of ownership.
> 
> However, fleet drivers (non owners) do fine as well.


Medallions are nothing more than banks earning gobs of interest on something that has no more to do with transporting a person from point A to point B than a hood ornament.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> Medallions are nothing more than banks earning gobs of interest on something that has no more to do with transporting a person from point A to point B than a hood ornament.


The Medallion system was created as a means of ownership, to prevent dangerous Uber-type over saturation, and as a means to ensure proper regulation of a vitally necessary industry.

Paying off a Medallion is no different than paying off a mortgage. Your point is entirely without merit.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

In case you haven't realized you are on a uber driver forum. You don't drive for uber do you? So why are you here. I don't think you will find much sympathy for the taxi industry around here. But if you can show that the industry is evolving I'm all ears. Otherwise you are as out-dated as and 8 track tape.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> The Medallion system was created as a means of ownership, to prevent dangerous Uber-type over saturation, and as a means to ensure proper regulation of a vitally necessary industry.
> 
> Paying off a Medallion is no different than paying off a mortgage. Your point is entirely without merit.


A house has a useful purpose. A medallion is nothing more than a decoration.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> In case you haven't realized you are on a uber driver forum. You don't drive for uber do you? So why are you here. I don't think you will find much sympathy for the taxi industry around here. But if you can show that the industry is evolving I'm all ears. Otherwise you are as out-dated as and 8 track tape.


I feel it's appropriate, as these lawless crooks feel it's appropriate to invade NYC.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> The Medallion system was created as a means of ownership, to prevent dangerous Uber-type over saturation, and as a means to ensure proper regulation of a vitally necessary industry.
> 
> Paying off a Medallion is no different than paying off a mortgage. Your point is entirely without merit.


It does have merit. Its that system that screws the consumer in the end and keeps competition out.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> A house has a useful purpose. A medallion is nothing more than a decoration.


It's a permit do do street hails in NYC. In the real world, that right needs to be limited and regulated. It's value/purpose is obvious.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> I feel it's appropriate, as these lawless crooks feel it's appropriate to invade NYC.


Well good luck with that. I give you 10 days before you are banned for pissing wrong person off. Your accusations hold no merit.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> It does have merit. Its that system that screws the consumer in the end and keeps competition out.


Lie. NYC taxis are quite affordable compared to many other places. It keeps the job viable for drivers and ensures they're not running each other off the road for fares as happens in over saturated markets.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Well good luck with that. I give you 10 days before you are banned for pissing wrong person off. Your accusations hold no merit.


Don't see where I've made any inaccurate accusations.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> It's a permit do do street hails in NYC. In the real world, that right needs to be limited and regulated. It's value/purpose is obvious.


I have a permit to do TNC transportation in Columbus. It cost me $80. It's regulated and the city can limit them.

New York uses medallions because guys on Wall Street like to trade things they can hoard and manipulate the price of on the market.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Lie. NYC taxis are quite affordable compared to many other places. It keeps the job viable for drivers and ensures they're not running each other off the road for fares as happens in over saturated markets.


Guess not affordable enough. If uber has moved in guess there is a new level of affordability.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> I have a permit to do TNC transportation in Columbus. It cost me $80. It's regulated and the city can limit them.
> 
> New York uses medallions because guys on Wall Street like to trade things they can hoard and manipulate the price of on the market.


That's what it's worth in the Columbus market.

The claim that 80 years of Medallion ownership has been a Wall St game is patently untrue

The last decade is different, there was a shift to fleet owners and away from the percentage split and the price quadrupled, but that's another story.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Guess not affordable enough. If uber has moved in guess there is a new level of affordability.


Sure, same applies for stolen goods.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> That's what it's worth in the Columbus market.
> 
> the claim that 80 years of Medallion ownership has been a Wall St game is patently untrue
> 
> The last decade is different, there was a shift to fleet owners and away from the percentage split and the price quadrupled, but that's another story.


In Columbus, it's $80 because it's not transferable. I can't sell it to someone else. There's no market for selling it. So there's no market price for it. It's just a fee. A tax. A cost I pay to the government for the benefit of earning money doing transportation in the city.

New York could simply do the same, but it chooses the medallions because they want a market to trade transferable permits.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> In Columbus, it's $80 because it's not transferable. I can't sell it to someone else. There's no market for selling it. So there's no market price for it. It's just a fee. A tax. A cost I pay to the government for the benefit of earning money doing transportation in the city.
> 
> New York could simply do the same, but if choses the medallions because they want a market to trade transferable permits.


It's also $80 because it's a tiny market. I see no reason why NYC Medallions should not be transferable it's the most valuable taxi market on Earth. The transfer fees support the city, the TLC, the system itself. Uber has punched a giant hole in our budget, and the 30% cut they take on every ride primarily goes directly offshore.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> It's also $80 because it's a tiny market. I see no reason why NYC Medallions should not be transferable it's the most valuable taxi market on Earth. The transfer fees support the city, the TLC, the system itself. Uber has punched a giant hole in our budget, and the 30% cut they take on every ride primarily goes directly offshore.


I see no reason why they should be transferable. If one driver no longer wants to be a taxi, his exit allows the next driver to get a new permit simply by paying the fee to the city.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> I see no reason why they should be transferable. If one driver no longer wants to be a taxi, his exit allows the next driver to get a new permit simply by paying the fee to the city.


That doesn't make sense. The Medallion adds value over time. It's an incentive to work hard and have some form of retirement in a pensionless job with no benefits.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> That doesn't make sense. The Medallion adds value over time. It's an incentive to work hard and have some form of retirement in a pensionless job with no benefits.


The medallion does no more over time than my driver's license does.

If driver's licenses were limited, transferable and traded on a market, then when I want retire my drivers license would be some form of retirement too.

But it's completely unnecessary to make drivers licenses transferable and have a market for them. The state can simply issue them, regulate them, and limit them WITHOUT being transferable and having a market for them. New York could do the same with taxis too. They choose not to because they like to make artificial value out of anything they can.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> The medallion does no more over time than my driver's license does.
> 
> If driver's licenses were limited, transferable and traded on a market, then when I want retire my drivers license would be some form of retirement too.
> 
> But it's completely unnecessary to make drivers licenses transferable and have a market for them. The state can simply issue them, regulate them, and limit them WITHOUT being transferable and having a market for them. New York could do the same with taxis too. They choose not to because they like to make artificial value out of anything they can.


A drivers license isn't related to the right to do street hails in NYC. Not sure how many ways it can be spelled out that it's a job which needs to be staffed, and the incentive of ownership and increase in value of the Medallion has been historically necessary.

A switch to the ridiculous uber system means over saturation at will, lowered fare rates at will, 1/3 of the money being parked in the Caymans, city deprived of revenues.


----------



## puber (Aug 31, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> It's a permit do do street hails in NYC. In the real world, that right needs to be limited and regulated. It's value/purpose is obvious.


If meddallions are given to people or trust funds that don't know how to ****ing drive a car and just want to exploit the system, than it's ****ed up.
No driver or passenger have to pay and contribute to corruption.
All this medaiilon bullshit must go away.
No medallions for people who don't drive cabs themselves


----------



## puber (Aug 31, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> A drivers license isn't related to the right to do street hails in NYC. Not sure how many ways it can be spelled out that it's a job which needs to be staffed, and the incentive of ownership and increase in value of the Medallion has been historically necessary.
> 
> A switch to the ridiculous uber system means over saturation at will, lowered fare rates at will, 1/3 of the money being parked in the Caymans, city deprived of revenues.


Bullshit.
Uber stopped adding ubetblack/suv in california and many other states.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

puber said:


> If meddallions are given to people or trust funds that don't know how to ****ing drive a car and just want to exploit the system, than it's ****ed up.
> No driver or passenger have to pay and contribute to corruption.
> All this medaiilon bullshit must go away.
> No medallions for people who don't drive cabs themselves


People who are trying for ownership pay off the medallions. The fleets provide a service for drivers who aren't in a position to do that.

Not sure what the trust fund spiel is about.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

puber said:


> Bullshit.
> Uber stopped adding ubetblack/suv in california and many other states.


They currently want to add 10,000 additional cars in NYC. This year.

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/articl...-to-nearly-double-its-nyc-footprint-this-year


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> A drivers license isn't related to the right to do street hails in NYC. Not sure how many ways it can be spelled out that it's a job which needs to be staffed, and the incentive of ownership and increase in value of the Medallion has been historically necessary.
> 
> A switch to the ridiculous uber system means over saturation at will, lowered fare rates at will, 1/3 of the money being parked in the Caymans, city deprived of revenues.


A right to do street hails can simply be regulated and limited by the city issuing non-transferable permits.

Sorry to hear that you spent hundreds of thousands on your medallion. Must suck to realize it really has no more value than a video arcade token.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> A right to do street hails can simply be regulated and limited by the city issuing non-transferable permits.
> 
> Sorry to hear that you spent hundreds of thousands on your medallion. Must suck to realize it really has no more value than a video arcade token.


I'm a fleet driver.

Can't keep explaining the NYC Medallion system.


----------



## puber (Aug 31, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> A right to do street hails can simply be regulated and limited by the city issuing non-transferable permits.
> 
> Sorry to hear that you spent hundreds of thousands on your medallion. Must suck to realize it really has no more value than a video arcade token.


He is probably trying to pay it off and can't even sell it.
Heard of time shares?


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> I'm a fleet driver.
> 
> Can't keep explaining the NYC Medallion system.


I don't blame you. It's hard to explain why old and antiquated systems haven't died off naturally yet.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> I don't blame you. It's hard to explain why old and antiquated systems haven't died off naturally yet.


I've been hearing that nonsense since Uber decided to launch it's illegal insurance and regulations dodging 'business.'

NYC needs a real taxi fleet, period. The money stays here, not the Caymans, period.


----------



## puber (Aug 31, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> I don't blame you. It's hard to explain why old and antiquated systitself haven't died off naturally yet.


It's what shitty telemarketer would say to a potential buyer, "you are too stupid to see how my product can pay for itself and i can't explain it to an idiot like you".
We are not in a market for ny medallions, may be a nice looking bridge would do the trick...


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> I've been hearing that nonsense since Uber decided to launch it's illegal insurance and regulations dodging 'business.'
> 
> NYC needs a real taxi fleet, period. The money stays here, not the Caymans, period.


I'm one of the biggest anti-Uber posters here.

However... IMHO New York's medallion system is a bigger joke than Uber.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> I'm one of the biggest anti-Uber posters here.
> 
> However... IMHO New York's medallion system is a bigger joke than Uber.


It's worked well for 80 years.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> It's worked well for 80 years.


Worked?!?!?

New York City taxi jokes are 17% of the comedy club industry's revenues!!!


----------



## Luberon (Nov 24, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> I've been hearing that nonsense since Uber decided to launch it's illegal insurance and regulations dodging 'business.'
> 
> NYC needs a real taxi fleet, period. The money stays here, not the Caymans, period.


You are telling us 1938 medallions are the solution, why dont you drive a Model T? 
We drive for Uber but we are more critical of the company than you ever could be. Still that doesnt make medallions the answer.
The only beneficiaries of cab revenues should be the driver, the local municipalities and anyone who provides logistics support to either party (Insurance, hail, etc). 
500k is enough capital to set up a fleet of 10 Camrys complete with insurance and logistics, That is 20+ jobs killed so investor can have a passive income.
Whether the 500K goes to Wall st or Caymans is immaterial, the money supposed to provide jobs and better municipal services going to the 1%.
No Amigo, it is 2015 not 1955.


----------



## Luberon (Nov 24, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> It's worked well for 80 years.


Horses worked well for 10,000 years........ and still do


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Luberon said:


> You are telling us 1938 medallions are the solution, why dont you drive a Model T?
> We drive for Uber but we are more critical of the company than you ever could be. Still that doesnt make medallions the answer.
> The only beneficiaries of cab revenues should be the driver, the local municipalities and anyone who provides logistics support to either party (Insurance, hail, etc).
> 500k is enough capital to set up a fleet of 10 Camrys complete with insurance and logistics, That is 20+ jobs killed so investor can have a passive income.
> ...


It was $200,000 ten years ago. It shot up exponentially once the percentage split ended, because the income became more reliable and hence valuable to the garage fleets.

It's really a separate topic.

Back to the issue at hand, 'Uber' is intent on flooding NYC with cars, because every trip is 30% for them. This is what the Medallion system has prevented in NYC.


----------



## Luberon (Nov 24, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> It was $200,000 ten years ago. It shot up exponentially once the percentage split ended, because the income became more reliable and hence valuable to the garage fleets.
> 
> It's really a separate topic.
> 
> Back to the issue at hand, 'Uber' is intent on flooding NYC with cars, because every trip is 30% for them. This is what the Medallion system has prevented in NYC.


 It was $200,000 ten years ago.
>> That is still worth 5 Camrys = 10+ Jobs. It wasnt a good thing then, it is worse now.
It shot up exponentially once the percentage split ended, because the income became more reliable and hence valuable to the garage fleets.
>> Surprise, the wealthy and powerful found a way to tweak the market to their advantage. A bad idea getting worse

It's really a separate topic.
>> I get it, taxis are off limits but uber is not

Back to the issue at hand, 'Uber' is intent on flooding NYC with cars, because every trip is 30% for them. This is what the Medallion system has prevented in NYC.
>>Medallions mean you have to pay through the nose to lease a cab and work 70 hours/week to make a living. How is that better?

I agree with Hammer, pay an annual fee to the city, get non transferable hail license and the city decides how many licenses to sell and for how much. If you wanna get a fleet, go ahead and offer better service that drivers will come to you.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Luberon said:


> It was $200,000 ten years ago.
> >> That is still worth 5 Camrys = 10+ Jobs. It wasnt a good thing then, it is worse now.
> It shot up exponentially once the percentage split ended, because the income became more reliable and hence valuable to the garage fleets.
> >> Surprise, the wealthy and powerful found a way to tweak the market to their advantage. A bad idea getting worse
> ...


Can't really sift through this mountain of nonsense. Complain about Medallions however you wish.

Uber wants to flood NYC with 10,000 additional cars, claiming there is demand for it.

It's a lie, period, and as a legit yellow cab driver, it's extremely disappointing that this is being allowed.

Supporting a 'we're not in the transportation business' company like Uber is insane.


----------



## Luberon (Nov 24, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Can't really sift through this mountain of nonsense. Complain about Medallions however you wish.
> 
> Uber wants to flood NYC with 10,000 additional cars, claiming there is demand for it.
> 
> ...


Whether you support them or not Uber will get drivers on the road. Time for you to decide how you wanna react? Complaining about the inevitable, sticking with an obsolete sinking ship or making the most of a bad situation?
_"Our lives are not determined by what happens to us but how we react to what happens,..."_
--- Wade Boggs


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Luberon said:


> Whether you support them or not Uber will get drivers on the road. Time for you to decide how you wanna react? Complaining about the inevitable, sticking with an obsolete sinking ship or making the most of a bad situation?
> _"Our lives are not determined by what happens to us but how we react to what happens,..."_
> --- Wade Boggs


My reaction is that it is an illegal company doing illegal virtual street hails. In many or most places, it is enabling drivers to operate with inadequate insurance, and to undercut legitimate cabs by avoiding regulations.

The word isn't obsolete, it's legitimate. Uber is a criminal company, and labeling it 'innovative' is frankly anti-American.


----------



## Luberon (Nov 24, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> My reaction is that it is an illegal company doing illegal virtual street hails. In many or most places, it is enabling drivers to operate with inadequate insurance, and to undercut legitimate cabs by avoiding regulations.
> 
> The word isn't obsolete, it's legitimate. Uber is a criminal company, and labeling it 'innovative' is frankly anti-American.


And your reaction changes what?


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Luberon said:


> And your reaction changes what?


I made no claim of changing it. That's the job of regulators.


----------



## Jeeves (Apr 10, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> I have a permit to do TNC transportation in Columbus. It cost me $80. It's regulated and the city can limit them.
> 
> New York uses medallions because guys on Wall Street like to trade things they can hoard and manipulate the price of on the market.


Isn't it also the case in Columbus that even taxis can't do streethails?

Hackenstein you need to consider that we are not your enemy. And if you don't have a medallion yourself, why not just switch to Uber? In NYC it is legit and you would be permitted and insured. Have you considered it financially?


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Jeeves said:


> Isn't it also the case in Columbus that even taxis can't do streethails?
> 
> Hackenstein you need to consider that we are not your enemy. And if you don't have a medallion yourself, why not just switch to Uber? In NYC it is legit and you would be permitted and insured. Have you considered it financially?


Street hails and the use of taximeters in NYC are the exclusive right of individuals/ fleets who purchase the Medallion at auction. They pay for what is promised by the city as an exclusive right, but this criminal Uber bullshit is a run around by claiming the app which functions as a taximeter is not a taximeter because it utilizes GPS and isn't a physical meter. I'm not interested in working for crooks who siphon money out of NYC and lower their rates at will and who are about to shove 10,000 additional cars on the road, which absolutely harms legitimate yellow cab business. I'm a native New Yorker, not interested in selling out to Silicon Valley.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Jeeves said:


> Isn't it also the case in Columbus that even taxis can't do streethails?


If they can't, no one enforces that. I see them do it. But there's not a lot of areas in Columbus for taxis to troll looking for them.


----------



## Jeeves (Apr 10, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Street hails and the use of taximeters in NYC are the exclusive right of individuals/ fleets who purchase the Medallion at auction. They pay for what is promised by the city as an exclusive right, but this criminal Uber bullshit is a run around by claiming the app which functions as a taximeter is not a taximeter because it utilizes GPS and isn't a physical meter. I'm not interested in working for crooks who siphon money out of NYC and lower their rates at will and who are about to shove 10,000 additional cars on the road, which absolutely harms legitimate yellow cab business. I'm a native New Yorker, not interested in selling out to Silicon Valley.


You are on repeat.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Jeeves said:


> You are on repeat.


Probably, since there's nothing more to say about it.

Should be great trying to do my job with another 10,000 cars on the road. And that means mainly in Manhattan, where most of the work is. This would normally trigger an environmental impact study, but the regulators have all been bought. It wasn't enough for Uber to have the same number of cars as yellow cabs, they now want twice as many. Whichever Russian said the US would choke on Capitalist excesses was correct.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> In case you haven't realized you are on a uber driver forum. You don't drive for uber do you? So why are you here. I don't think you will find much sympathy for the taxi industry around here. But if you can show that the industry is evolving I'm all ears. Otherwise you are as out-dated as and 8 track tape.


So there shouldn't be a Government agency regulating the expansion of its city and blocks of land? Where they are, how big, what type of residence or land usage? The price on a block of land also represents the city's infrastructure costs its bringing to that new land user. It costs money to build roads, provide utilities.

If you didn't have a price, usage and size control on greenfield blocks of land, you would have unsupported chaotic development. People ending up in squalor trying to make a life in a anarchy.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> So there shouldn't be a Government agency regulating the expansion of its city and blocks of land? Where they are, how big, what type of residence or land usage? The price on a block of land also represents the city's infrastructure costs its bringing to that new land user. It costs money to build roads, provide utilities.
> 
> If you didn't have a price, usage and size control on greenfield blocks of land, you would have unsupported chaotic development. People ending up in squalor trying to make a life in a anarchy.


Government regulation is only as good as the rules it creates and who it's for. Taxi regulations were created to protect the people and the industry in the 1920's and 30's. They have had a ban-aid slapped over them since then and the taxi industry has found ways to use them to exploit the consumer and keep out competition. There is a reason Taxi's are considered the outhouse of the transportations world. You don't want to use it unless you need to.

Updated regulations isn't what's needed. it's a complete overhaul. And as you see here there is money in the medallion system that people don't want to part with. I know if I was watching my $800,000 investment evaporate overnight I would fight it tooth and nail. But in the end what has this system done for the consumer. Ensure that there is just enough supply to jack prices in many markets, keep quality as low as possible and exploit drivers who pay huge fees to make less.

Many studies have proven the current Taxi system is broken. But what's the answer here. Someone in the end is going to loose. And my money is the Taxi industry is going to be at the loosing end and from the ashes a new system will be reborn out of it. Uber is not the new system of the future. It's only the flame that's going to bring about change to an already stale industry. No different than the music and the movie industry when they were faced with pirates of their own.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> A house has a useful purpose. A medallion is nothing more than a decoration.


A Medallion (we call them Plates here), can provide the owner with a consistent income, not cut by indiscriminate "on boarding" or rate cuts.

A bank would lend money to a Medallion owner to buy a house. What would a bank lend to a UBER driver on the strength and consistency of their earnings?


----------



## Jeeves (Apr 10, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> A Medallion (we call them Plates here), can provide the owner with a consistent income, not cut by indiscriminate "on boarding" or rate cuts.
> 
> A bank would lend money to a Medallion owner to buy a house. What would a bank lend to a UBER driver on the strength and consistency of their earnings?


A new car at 20% apr?


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Government regulation is only as good as the rules it creates and who it's for. Taxi regulations were created to protect the people and the industry in the 1920's and 30's. They have had a ban-aid slapped over them since then and the taxi industry has found ways to use them to exploit the consumer and keep out competition. There is a reason Taxi's are considered the outhouse of the transportations world. You don't want to use it unless you need to.
> 
> Updated regulations isn't what's needed. it's a complete overhaul. And as you see here there is money in the medallion system that people don't want to part with. I know if I was watching my $800,000 investment evaporate overnight I would fight it tooth and nail. But in the end what has this system done for the consumer. Ensure that there is just enough supply to jack prices in many markets, keep quality as low as possible and exploit drivers who pay huge fees to make less.
> 
> Many studies have proven the current Taxi system is broken. But what's the answer here. Someone in the end is going to loose. And my money is the Taxi industry is going to be at the loosing end and from the ashes a new system will be reborn out of it. Uber is not the new system of the future. It's only the flame that's going to bring about change to an already stale industry. No different than the music and the movie industry when they were faced with pirates of their own.


Uber can't even abide by insurance laws unless forced to. They've been banned by entire countries for very good reason.

Sidestepping rules and doing virtual street hails/ flooding markets with cars is not in any way a valid alternative to Medallions.

And if you think 'Uber' cars, which are mostly now newish will be any better than the stereotype you've painted of yellow cabs with the advent of perpetually lower rates and over saturated markets, you're dead wrong.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Government regulation is only as good as the rules it creates and who it's for. Taxi regulations were created to protect the people and the industry in the 1920's and 30's. They have had a ban-aid slapped over them since then and the taxi industry has found ways to use them to exploit the consumer and keep out competition. There is a reason Taxi's are considered the outhouse of the transportations world. You don't want to use it unless you need to.
> 
> Updated regulations isn't what's needed. it's a complete overhaul. And as you see here there is money in the medallion system that people don't want to part with. I know if I was watching my $800,000 investment evaporate overnight I would fight it tooth and nail. But in the end what has this system done for the consumer. Ensure that there is just enough supply to jack prices in many markets, keep quality as low as possible and exploit drivers who pay huge fees to make less.
> 
> Many studies have proven the current Taxi system is broken. But what's the answer here. Someone in the end is going to loose. And my money is the Taxi industry is going to be at the loosing end and from the ashes a new system will be reborn out of it. Uber is not the new system of the future. It's only the flame that's going to bring about change to an already stale industry. No different than the music and the movie industry when they were faced with pirates of their own.


So you identify with Pirates, is that correct?


----------



## Jeeves (Apr 10, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Uber can't even abide by insurance laws unless forced to. They've been banned by entire countries for very good reason.
> 
> Sidestepping rules and doing virtual street hails/ flooding markets with cars is not in any way a valid alternative to Medallions.
> 
> And if you think 'Uber' cars, which are mostly now newish will be any better than the stereotype you've painted of yellow cabs with the advent of perpetually lower rates and over saturated markets, you're dead wrong.


Sorry but it's not going anywhere. Wouldn't it be best to adapt one way or another?


----------



## bilyvh (Feb 4, 2015)

So the discussion has come down to the merit of the medallion system and whatnot. What about the actual issue at hand, being an inflow of 10,000 new drivers? I mean I can't blame Uber, they don't give a shit about anyone, it's all about the moolah. The problem is it's destroying an entire industry, not just current Uber drivers, but black car/livery/yellow. Surges will be a thing of the past. The only thing is Uber has to play by the rules here unlike everywhere else which is a good thing. TLC will do it's own thing IF some crook/corrupt official doesn't ammend laws to 'expedite' the process. I knew this was coming, this is just a get rich quick scheme, those at the start made their money and are starting to cash out, I just feel bad for all the new drivers, I see lots driving brand new 2015 camrys, most probably locked into 5 yr loans. This is just a joke, but what can you expect.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

bilyvh said:


> So the discussion has come down to the merit of the medallion system and whatnot. What about the actual issue at hand, being an inflow of 10,000 new drivers? I mean I can't blame Uber, they don't give a shit about anyone, it's all about the moolah. The problem is it's destroying an entire industry, not just current Uber drivers, but black car/livery/yellow. Surges will be a thing of the past. The only thing is Uber has to play by the rules here unlike everywhere else which is a good thing. TLC will do it's own thing IF some crook/corrupt official doesn't ammend laws to 'expedite' the process. I knew this was coming, this is just a get rich quick scheme, those at the start made their money and are starting to cash out, I just feel bad for all the new drivers, I see lots driving brand new 2015 camrys, most probably locked into 5 yr loans. This is just a joke, but what can you expect.


Yes, exactly. And the 10,000 is just for 2015. Uber returns basically nothing to the city, taxpayers on the hook for the additional road maintenance, residents breathe in the extra pollution.

Uber washes it's hands and does an electronic transfer to a shell company in the Caymans with it's 30%.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> So you identify with Pirates, is that correct?


No identify with what happens in the world when they come under attack by pirates. And how successful it is when an industry tries to stop it.

When all they need to ask is what is it that the customers want. The music industry tried to force how they sell music on the public. They failed as people went around the law to do what they wanted.

Now most people have gone to buy music in a legal manner when the options presented themselves to be consumer friendly. The music industry may not make the same money as they have done in the past. But they did evolve to still make money. And the industry is now more vibrant with new indie bands who in the past would never have had an opportunity to sell their music.

I think a new industry will emerge from the Taxi business in the end. One that consumers will want to take, not be forced to take. That's not an Uber thing, like I said they are only the match in all of this. They can be eliminated in this mess just as fast if they don't watch what consumers think.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Yes, exactly. And the 10,000 is just for 2015. Uber returns basically nothing to the city, taxpayers on the hook for the additional road maintenance, residents breathe in the extra pollution.
> 
> Uber washes it's hands and does an electronic transfer to a shell company in the Caymans with it's 30%.


Maybe the answer is to revoke 10,000 Taxi licenses to those who don't make the cut? Shouldn't the best be rewarded? Taxi or Uber? Give all options a fair chance to compete.


----------



## bilyvh (Feb 4, 2015)

Hackenstein, I share your sentiment, but in reality if we think about it Uber is doing nothing illegal by putting 10,000 cars on the road. Just make the analogy, what if instead of Uber it was Dial 7 or Carmel saying we got a shitload of demand we are putting 10,000 cars on the road. Which in in any case means that this demand is coming from customers that maybe decided to use superior services compared to yellow/black/other livery. So they can flood the streets with 10,000 or 100,000 they don't care, the TLC doesn't care because they get licensing/inspection/registration fees, so it's a win-win for everyone customers, TLC, the only losers being drivers and maybe the city because Uber does stash money away in the Caymans.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

bilyvh said:


> Hackenstein, I share your sentiment, but in reality if we think about it Uber is doing nothing illegal by putting 10,000 cars on the road. Just make the analogy, what if instead of Uber it was Dial 7 or Carmel saying we got a shitload of demand we are putting 10,000 cars on the road. Which in in any case means that this demand is coming from customers that maybe decided to use superior services compared to yellow/black/other livery. So they can flood the streets with 10,000 or 100,000 they don't care, the TLC doesn't care because they get licensing/inspection/registration fees, so it's a win-win for everyone customers, TLC, the only losers being drivers and maybe the city because Uber does stash money away in the Caymans.


As I said, there would normally be an environmental impact study. Not a peep out of the TLC.

I do not buy at all that there is a demand for 10,000 additional cars by customers. It's a demand by Uber for as many 30% rides as they can get, with zero regard for NYC.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> A Medallion (we call them Plates here), can provide the owner with a consistent income, not cut by indiscriminate "on boarding" or rate cuts.


So can an annually issued $100 to $500 city taxi permit that's regulated and limited.



> A bank would lend money to a Medallion owner to buy a house. What would a bank lend to a UBER driver on the strength and consistency of their earnings?


I said before medallions exist for the purpose of banks extracting interest from them. Banks can't however extract much interest at all from annual $100 to $500 city permits. This is why banks lobby government to use a medallion system. Do you see the problem yet? Let me spell it out for you... B... A... N... K... S!


----------



## bilyvh (Feb 4, 2015)

And I think a lot of people on here don't understand the way the medallion system works and it's intent. So here is the answer for you guys, basically you abolish the medallion, and anyone with a heartbeat can now pickup street-hails, everyone now becomes an Uberer. Oh wait, I think this is the main complaint on this board, that there are too many drivers and no one can make a living wage? Yeah, now you know why.

Hackenstein, I agree, Uber does not give a shit, it's quite cynical. But I think a lot of drivers are waking up to the truth, I mean a lot of drivers are still signing up, but the demographic is definetely different, lots of part-timers, people very new to the industry, those smart enough see through the Uber BS and stay with their old bases/clients.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> As I said, there would normally be an environmental impact study. Not a peep out of the TLC.
> 
> I do not buy at all that there is a demand for 10,000 additional cars by customers. It's a demand by Uber for as many 30% rides as they can get, with zero regard for NYC.


Is that 10,000 in NYC or all of NY state? I don't know where the number comes from so sorry about that.

I can tell you NY City does not need more cars from what I can see. I was looking at an Uber map when I was at their Toronto HQ and the entire Island of Manhattan the whole thing from end to end was cars where you could not see the roads underneath. In some areas you could see 3 layers of cars on top of themselves.

So Ya I can't see more cars in NYC Where the hell do you put them.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Is that 10,000 in NYC or all of NY state? I don't know where the number comes from so sorry about that.
> 
> I can tell you NY City does not need more cars from what I can see. I was looking at an Uber map when I was at their Toronto HQ and the entire Island of Manhattan the whole thing from end to end was cars where you could not see the roads underneath. In some areas you could see 3 layers of cars on top of themselves.
> 
> So Ya I can't see more cars in NYC Where the hell do you put them.


NYC.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> So can an annually issued $100 to $500 city taxi permit that's regulated and limited.
> 
> I said before medallions exist for the purpose of banks extracting interest from them. Banks can't however extract much interest at all from annual $100 to $500 city permits. This is why banks lobby government to use a medallion system. Do you see the problem yet? Let me spell it out for you... B... A... N... K... S!


Don't be talking trash about my peeps now. We will charge interest on anything. We don't discriminate on Taxi Medallions. And I can say I'm sure they are small potatoes to your credit card balances.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> So can an annually issued $100 to $500 city taxi permit that's regulated and limited.
> I said before medallions exist for the purpose of banks extracting interest from them. Banks can't however extract much interest at all from annual $100 to $500 city permits. This is why banks lobby government to use a medallion system. Do you see the problem yet? Let me spell it out for you... B... A... N... K... S!


You're completely full of shit.

Ever hear of Mellrose Credit Union? These aren't high interest back breaking loans. It's the same as a mortgage. It used to be the American Way, how the Middle Class built a life.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Don't be talking trash about my peeps now. We will charge interest on anything. We don't discriminate on Taxi Medallions. And I can say I'm sure they are small potatoes to your credit card balances.


I let the truth do it's own trash talking. I'm just the messenger.


----------



## bilyvh (Feb 4, 2015)

Actionjax said:


> Is that 10,000 in NYC or all of NY state? I don't know where the number comes from so sorry about that.
> 
> I can tell you NY City does not need more cars from what I can see. I was looking at an Uber map when I was at their Toronto HQ and the entire Island of Manhattan the whole thing from end to end was cars where you could not see the roads underneath. In some areas you could see 3 layers of cars on top of themselves.
> 
> So Ya I can't see more cars in NYC Where the hell do you put them.


The answer is you put them on every single block in the city so that Molly and Jake and Chester and every other kewl dude and gal can get an Uber car waiting for them even before they come down the stairs from their hip pad!


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> NYC.


Well if that's the case your system will burn it self out like it did in the 1930's and drivers will be the ones to suffer. That sucks for your industry.

But I think the offensive should not be Anti-Uber, it does not work with the consumer market. It needs to be Pro-Cab. You do have advantages to Uber in many ways. Exploit that to the public and win people back. I think with the quality of some Uber drivers they make that case for you on their own.

You guys offer so much more, problem is people get hit in the face every day with the negative. Give things a facelift and get out there and sell the product for it's strengths and people will come.

And get an App of your own. NY is primed and ready for it.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> You're completely full of shit.
> 
> Ever hear of Mellrose Credit Union? These aren't high interest back breaking loans.


 A loan of any interest amount is unnecessary. It's all just part of the cost of taxis. Just issue the same amount of taxi permits as there are drivers in the current medallion system and the number of drivers on the road doesn't change. The $100 to $500 permits will be muh cheaper than financing a $500,000 medallion. Cheaper costs for the taxi drivers leads to higher profits for the driver, lower costs to the pax, or some combination there of. The medallion system is a completely unneeded cost that only the banks benefit from by financing them.

Of course, current medallion owners will experience denial over this truth.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

bilyvh said:


> The answer is you put them on every single block in the city so that Molly and Jake and Chester and every other kewl dude and gal can get an Uber car waiting for them even before they come down the stairs from their hip pad!


Ya that is not sustainable. Not for anyone. Even me my pro Uber as people say thinks that is stupid.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

bilyvh said:


> The answer is you put them on every single block in the city so that Molly and Jake and Chester and every other kewl dude and gal can get an Uber car waiting for them even before they come down the stairs from their hip pad!


Not far off. Which is why it's a virtual street hail, and shits on the spirit of the Law, if not the letter.

It's all about jumping through loopholes, some of them created by TLC Commissioners who quit and got paid by Uber. It's disgusting.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> A loan of any interest amount is unnecessary. It's all just part of the cost of taxis. Just issue the same amount of taxi permits as there are drivers in the current medallion system and the number of drivers on the road doesn't change. The $100 to $500 permits will be muh cheaper than financing a $500,000 medallion. Cheaper costs for the taxi drivers leads to higher profits for the driver, lower costs to the pax, or some combination there of. The medallion system is a completely unneeded cost that only the banks benefit from by financing them.
> 
> Of course, current medallion owners will experience denial over this truth.


This is an insane post.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> A loan of any interest amount is unnecessary. It's all just part of the cost of taxis. Just issue the same amount of taxi permits as there are drivers in the current medallion system and the number of drivers on the road doesn't change. The $100 to $500 permits will be muh cheaper than financing a $500,000 medallion. Cheaper costs for the taxi drivers leads to higher profits for the driver, lower costs to the pax, or some combination there of. The medallion system is a completely unneeded cost that only the banks benefit from by financing them.
> 
> Of course, current medallion owners will experience denial over this truth.


Actually not true. Most owners who use this to drive a cab consider this their social security when they get old. They treat it like an investment and factor this into their retirement plan. And since they have grown in value some would say they are a good investment vehicle. But that's Driver/Owners. But some are just owners of the plates and don't spend 30 seconds in a taxi. Those are the guys who need them revoked and put them back to the workers who do drive for a living.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Actually not true. Most owners who use this to drive a cab consider this their social security when they get old. They treat it like an investment and factor this into their retirement plan. And since they have grown in value some would say they are a good investment vehicle. But that's Driver/Owners. But some are just owners of the plates and don't spend 30 seconds in a taxi. Those are the guys who need them revoked and put them back to the workers who do drive for a living.


The guy doesn't seem to understand that Medallions carry minimum per-year driving requirements. You can't just buy them and sit on them, you are correct.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Actually not true. Most owners who use this to drive a cab consider this their social security when they get old. They treat it like an investment and factor this into their retirement plan. And since they have grown in value some would say they are a good investment vehicle. But that's Driver/Owners. But some are just owners of the plates and don't spend 30 seconds in a taxi. Those are the guys who need them revoked and put them back to the workers who do drive for a living.


Yes, if there was a exchange market system for a limited number of issued video arcade tokens and that market was manipulated by the holders of the tokens, the holders would have asset value in their portfolios to retire with. But this doesn't exist, because it's unnecessary. The arcade can just issue, regulate and limit the tokens themselves. They don't need the video game players to setup a market system for them. But of course if a bank could make money making loans to those wanting to buy video game tokens on the market, the bank would prefer that the arcade use the market system. There's nothing for the bank to do if the players can just get tokens from the arcade management.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> The guy doesn't seem to understand that Medallions carry minimum per-year driving requirements. You can't just buy them and sit on them, you are correct.


Here in Toronto you can buy them and sit on them. Council is trying to change this but has ben thrown into court over it. So we are in a wait and see situation.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Is that 10,000 in NYC or all of NY state? I don't know where the number comes from so sorry about that.


*Uber looks to nearly double its NYC footprint this year*
*http://www.crainsnewyork.com/articl...-to-nearly-double-its-nyc-footprint-this-year*


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Here in Toronto you can buy them and sit on them. Council I trying to change this but has ben thrown into court over it. So we are in a wait and see situation.


Interesting. It was done here early on to combat Gangsters trying to buy them all.

The TLC was established for similar reasons.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> Yes, if there was a exchange market system for a limited number of issued video arcade tokens and that market was manipulated by the holders of the tokens, the holders would have asset value in their portfolios to retire with. But this doesn't exist, because it's unnecessary. The arcade can just issue, regulate and limit the tokens themselves. They don't need the video game players to setup a market system for them. But of course if a bank could make money making loans to those wanting to buy video game tokens on the market, the bank would prefer that the arcade use the market system. There's nothing for the bank to do if the players can just get tokens from the arcade management.


If a banks business strategy is all around the NYC taxi medallion system I would say pull your money out of said bank. No Bank that I have heard of bases it's growth on a single market. But then again our Banking system held out quite well when the US banks were crying for bailouts. So anything is possible.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Interesting. It was done here early on to combat Gangsters trying to buy them all.
> 
> The TLC was established for similar reasons.


Sounds like we need some of the same sound regulations around here. Most of the owners are either ex-politicians or family of current ones. Also dispatch companies own a chunk as well as Fleet operators. Very few drivers hold a plate today. Any talk of changes or introducing more has been met with huge fights by the industry.

Right now Uber is the only one who is causing a big enough stir to change a lot of that.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> If a banks business strategy is all around the NYC taxi medallion system I would say pull your money out of said bank. No Bank that I have heard of bases it's growth on a single market. But then again our Banking system held out quite well when the US banks were crying for bailouts. So anything is possible.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ting-instead-on-the-death-of-taxi-medallions/


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> *Uber looks to nearly double its NYC footprint this year*
> *http://www.crainsnewyork.com/articl...-to-nearly-double-its-nyc-footprint-this-year*


Thanks for that.

I wouldn't have had the same viewpoint if it wasn't for what I had seen at the Uber office and that map with all the cars in Manhattan. Uber doesn't need more cars. They need to clean up what they have and create better jobs.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ting-instead-on-the-death-of-taxi-medallions/


I stand corrected there are still idiots in this world making the same financial mistakes.


----------



## bilyvh (Feb 4, 2015)

Create better jobs and Uber do not go together. Here is a fun fact, new Uber Black/SUV 'partners' are now forced to accept UberX jobs. How about them apples? Driving a $60,000 SUV for $8 jobs or get deactivated. This farce has no ending in sight.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

bilyvh said:


> Create better jobs and Uber do not go together. Here is a fun fact, new Uber Black/SUV 'partners' are now forced to accept UberX jobs. How about them apples? Driving a $60,000 SUV for $8 jobs or get deactivated. This farce has no ending in sight.


I think that's the big issue. For them it's quantity not quality. Problem is the numbers look good in news headlines.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> I stand corrected there are still idiots in this world making the same financial mistakes.


That bank is nothing more than a leech on taxi industry revenues.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> I think that's the big issue. For them it's quantity not quality. Problem is the numbers look good in news headlines.


It's 30% per ride. That's all they care about, this is vulture capitalism in action. Suck out as much value as possible from a market, park it in a tax haven, call it a day. The claim that there is 'demand' by passengers for an additional 10,000 cars is sociopathic. They'll want another 10,000 in 2016.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Don't go disowning some sweet writing there Actionjax!



Actionjax said:


> Government regulation is only as good as the rules it creates.
> 
> Uber is not the new system of the future. It's only the flame that's going to bring about change to an already stale industry. No different than the music and the movie industry when they were faced with pirates of their own.


So just because current regulations aren't "good" Piracy is to be condoned? Do you really believe that Uber's motivation is to provide a better Taxi System? With all stakeholders being a winner?


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Ya that is not sustainable. Not for anyone. Even me my pro Uber as people say thinks that is stupid.


Not unless they are driverless cars


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Don't go disowning some sweet writing there Actionjax!
> 
> So just because current regulations aren't "good" Piracy is to be condoned? Do you really believe that Uber's motivation is to provide a better Taxi System? With all stakeholders being a winner?


I know as a consumer I love using it. Have for 3 years now. So to the consumer they believe they are the winner. They do believe they are getting a better taxi system. They say it all the time. They don't care about drivers and the system. They just want their cheep ride. Are you going to preach to them they are wrong? Good luck with that.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> That bank is nothing more than a leech on taxi industry revenues.


People are leaches, banks are the enabler. Lets get that straight.

Let me guess you believe still Guns kill people all by themselves.


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Is that 10,000 in NYC or all of NY state? I don't know where the number comes from so sorry about that.
> 
> I can tell you NY City does not need more cars from what I can see. I was looking at an Uber map when I was at their Toronto HQ and the entire Island of Manhattan the whole thing from end to end was cars where you could not see the roads underneath. In some areas you could see 3 layers of cars on top of themselves.
> 
> So Ya I can't see more cars in NYC Where the hell do you put them.


That is 10,000 in New York City area not New York State.


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> I know as a consumer I love using it. Have for 3 years now. So to the consumer they believe they are the winner. They do believe they are getting a better taxi system. They say it all the time. They don't care about drivers and the system. They just want their cheep ride. Are you going to preach to them they are wrong? Good luck with that.


Since I stopped driving Fuber in Jan 2015 due to rate cuts I will not give Fuber or Lyft a dime of my money as a pax. I will take a cab or high speed rail to downtown because I live close to dowtown Dallas. Least I know cabs are commercially insured properly. Addiction issue @Actionjax?? I am sure their is 12 step Uber withdrawal program somewhere in Canada.


----------



## ElectroFuzz (Jun 10, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> It's 30% per ride. That's all they care about, this is vulture capitalism in action. Suck out as much value as possible from a market, park it in a tax haven, call it a day. The claim that there is 'demand' by passengers for an additional 10,000 cars is sociopathic. They'll want another 10,000 in 2016.


You were laughing last time I told you that UBER has already devalued the medallion system
by putting 10,000 extra cars on the streets.
It's round 2 now.... and it's all done 100% legally.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Txchick said:


> Since I stopped driving Fuber in Jan 2015 due to rate cuts I will not give Fuber or Lyft a dime of my money as a pax. I will take a cab or high speed rail to downtown because I live close to dowtown Dallas. Least I know cabs are commercially insured properly. Addiction issue @Actionjax?? I am sure their is 12 step Uber withdrawal program somewhere in Canada.


Trust me get into a Toronto cab and you will get why Uber is so well loved here. We are a city of drivers. Our Subway system is a joke and public transit is mostly surface.

We are just finally getting a rail line to the Airport. Most cities have had this in the 90's and we are turning ours on in a month. And at $30 per person 1 way Uber cost is $32. $55 for an airport limo.

For now I just hope UberSelect comes here. UberX is starting to get a little shady now.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> People are leaches, banks are the enabler. Lets get that straight.
> 
> Let me guess you believe still Guns kill people all by themselves.


Companies are people. That was established in 1868 here in the states. Might be different in Canada though.

A company and a gun are completely different. Not sure why you think they are similar... but again maybe it's different in Canada.


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Trust me get into a Toronto cab and you will get why Uber is so well loved here. We are a city of drivers. Our Subway system is a joke and public transit is mostly surface.
> 
> We are just finally getting a rail line to the Airport. Most cities have had this in the 90's and we are turning ours on in a month. And at $30 per person 1 way Uber cost is $32. $55 for an airport limo.
> 
> For now I just hope UberSelect comes here. UberX is starting to get a little shady now.


I can go to a Dallas Mavericks basketball game dowtown at American Airlines on high speed rail for $5.00 round trip takes 12 minutes to get there on high speed rail. Our high speed rail goes to DFW airport and a day pass for all day is $5.00 on DART. Cab drivers in Dallas just don't have a bad rap here. They are competitively priced compared to Uber black or SUV from DFW airport. Uber X cannot do pickups at DFW. My conviction after driving for Uber for 7 months is I want give them a DIME of my money. They are a horrible company, put them in a tie with Amazon. Don't buy a thing from Amazon either.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> My reaction is that it is an illegal company doing illegal virtual street hails. In many or most places, it is enabling drivers to operate with inadequate insurance, and to undercut legitimate cabs by avoiding regulations.
> 
> The word isn't obsolete, it's legitimate. Uber is a criminal company, and labeling it 'innovative' is frankly anti-American.


Uber drivers in NYC supposedly have commercial insurance and the required licenses. What's your beef on those counts?


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> Uber drivers in NYC supposedly have commercial insurance and the required licenses. What's your beef on those counts?


From what I gather the concern is strategy, not so much regulations. How the strategy of Uber is opposite of what the Taxi industry has done for years. But that's a wild guess. I'm starting to tune these kind of things out.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> Uber drivers in NYC supposedly have commercial insurance and the required licenses. What's your beef on those counts?


They're using taximeters and doing virtual street hails. They're undercutting legitimate taxis by being allowed to price gouge (surges can be manipulated), and are not even required to pay the MTA or disability tax or equip their cars to accommodate disabled passengers. I can repeat it another 100 times if necessary.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> They're using taximeters and doing virtual street hails. They're undercutting legitimate taxis by being allowed to price gouge (surges can be manipulated), and are not even required to pay the MTA or disability tax or equip their cars to accommodate disabled passengers. I can repeat it another 100 times if necessary.


There is no meter in my car. I have a smart phone and an app.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> They're using taximeters and doing virtual street hails. They're undercutting legitimate taxis by being allowed to price gouge (surges can be manipulated), and are not even required to pay the MTA or disability tax or equip their cars to accommodate disabled passengers. I can repeat it another 100 times if necessary.


From what I hear NYC Uber drivers are entirely legal across the board for taking fares through the app. Street hails are still your territory.

Nothing illegal going on there. Meters and disability issues are your issues, not Uber drivers. I believe Uber also has handicap assistance specialist drivers as well.

So again, nothing illegal whatsoever or they wouldn't be on the road. As to surges? Demand/supply is a good old fashioned capitalist method of doing biz. And part of why cabs can't cover all the action.

I'm sure it bites. But Uber is being done above board in NYC or they wouldn't be there.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

ElectroFuzz said:


> You were laughing last time I told you that UBER has already devalued the medallion system
> by putting 10,000 extra cars on the streets.
> It's round 2 now.... and it's all done 100% legally.


An app being used as a taximeter is illegal. It was made 'legal' by a crooked TLC Commissioner. It's about as 'legal' as the legalized bribery the SCOTUS green lighted with Citizen's United. There is such a thing as the spirit of the law.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> There is no meter in my car. I have a smart phone and an app.


It calculates the fare based on time and distance. It _functions_ as a taximeter.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> From what I gather the concern is strategy, not so much regulations. How the strategy of Uber is opposite of what the Taxi industry has done for years. But that's a wild guess. I'm starting to tune these kind of things out.


I'd like to see Uber and Lyft and any other ride share company make their drivers comply with regs. similar to NYC. Commercial insurance, licensing, random substance testing. It would be good for both public and drivers imho.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> It calculates the fare based on time and distance. It _functions_ as a taximeter.


What if I just used Google maps and counted out loud to the rider. How would that work?


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> It calculates the fare based on time and distance. It _functions_ as a taximeter.


Having a taximeter or not hasn't stopped Uber from operating *legally* in NYC. So far anyway. If the cab industry thinks that's an issue (a taximeter) it's not an issue that has played out in court resulting in stopping Uber in NYC. I would think if your industry thought that was a toehold they'd have thrown their resources to proving it by now.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> From what I hear NYC Uber drivers are entirely legal across the board for taking fares through the app. Street hails are still your territory.
> 
> Nothing illegal going on there. Meters and disability issues are your issues, not Uber drivers. I believe Uber also has handicap assistance specialist drivers as well.
> 
> ...


When a market is flooded with cars, which NYC already is, and Uber wants to double, it's a virtual hail due to the lack of meaningful wait time. For the millionth time, it was permitted in here by Ashwini Chhabra, who immediately quit the TLC and went to 'work' for Uber after he screwed with the regulations and declared an app which functions as a taximeter is not actually a taximeter, because it uses GPS. A three year old can see through that argument.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> I'd like to see Uber and Lyft and any other ride share company make their drivers comply with regs. similar to NYC. Commercial insurance, licensing, random substance testing. It would be good for both public and drivers imho.


I couldn't agree more. I think that Uber and Lyft could run that kind of program with government oversight and random audits of compliance. I don't think government's running these things is always the most cost effective ways of doing it.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> What if I just used Google maps and counted out loud to the rider. How would that work?


It would work like an inaccurate taximeter.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> An app being used as a taximeter is illegal. *It was made 'legal' by a crooked TLC Commissioner. *It's about as 'legal' as the legalized bribery the SCOTUS green lighted with Citizen's United. There is such a thing as the spirit of the law.


How it was made legal is entirely irrelevant unless and until proven otherwise.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> When a market is flooded with cars, which NYC already is, and Uber wants to double, it's a virtual hail due to the lack of meaningful wait time. For the millionth time, it was permitted in here by Ashwini Chhabra, who immediately quit the TLC and went to 'work' for Uber after he screwed with the regulations and declared an app which functions as a taximeter is not actually a taximeter, because it uses GPS. A three year old can see through that argument.


I don't know. I just did a look up on Wikipedia. They don't call out smartphone apps on it.

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

Internet never lies. Even a 4 year old knows that.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> How it was made legal is entirely irrelevant unless and until proven otherwise.


Corruption is how it was made 'legal.' Go play with Ayn Rand.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> It would work like an inaccurate taximeter.


What if I used a real long measuring tape out the back of my car and still counted?


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> I couldn't agree more. I think that Uber and Lyft could run that kind of program with government oversight and random audits of compliance. I don't think government's running these things is always the most cost effective ways of doing it.


Licensing ride share drivers should easily cover the cost of .gov bureaucracy spot checks for compliance, along with some hefty fines for non-compliance by drivers or ride share companies. I'd even predict that .gov everywhere will catch on to this new source of revenue and employment soon enough.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> I don't know. I just did a look up on Wikipedia. They don't call out smartphone apps on it.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taximeter
> 
> Internet never lies. Even a 4 year old knows that.


Right, it's not a physical taximeter. It functions the same as one.

People pay serious money for the right of use of a taximeter, and for the right to street hails. Uber sidesteps all of it. They toss a few bucks for base affiliation, don't have to invest in Medallions, suck all the money out, and the peanut gallery cheers.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Corruption is how it was made 'legal.' Go play with Ayn Rand.


Your opinion on the subject is irrelevant if it's legal. I think we all know that politicians in general are corrupt.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

I think I need to get me one of these...they are cool.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> *When a market is flooded with cars, which NYC already is, and Uber wants to double,* it's a virtual hail due to the lack of meaningful wait time. For the millionth time, it was permitted in here by Ashwini Chhabra, who immediately quit the TLC and went to 'work' for Uber after he screwed with the regulations and declared an app which functions as a taximeter is not actually a taximeter, because it uses GPS. A three year old can see through that argument.


I would agree that is a bullshit deal. The question is really how to stop it. Driver flooding is happening everywhere.

It's more of a testimony of an utterly broken employment situation in most parts of the world. People gotta work to eat. There is no choice to not work to eat.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> I would agree that is a bullshit deal. The question is really how to stop it. Driver flooding is happening everywhere.
> 
> It's more of a testimony of an utterly broken employment situation in most parts of the world. People gotta work to eat. There is no choice to not work to eat.


Welcome to the Taxi days of the great depression. Next step $2 flat rates anywhere.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Welcome to the Taxi days of the great depression. Next step $2 flat rates anywhere.


I might think regulatory hurdles would cut down on driver numbers to some extent, but maybe not. The cost of commercial insurance would certainly put up some difficulties for part timers. And I really question how many 20 year olds smoke pot in their offtime as well, which is a problem imho. Drivers should have no 'residue' in their system whatsoever. It's a public safety issue for mandating random substance testing. Those 2 counts alone would thin the driver herd to some extents.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> I might think regulatory hurdles would cut down on driver numbers to some extent, but maybe not. The cost of commercial insurance would certainly put up some difficulties for part timers. And I really question how many 20 year olds smoke pot in their offtime as well, which is a problem imho. Drivers should have no 'residue' in their system whatsoever. It's a public safety issue for mandating random substance testing. Those 2 counts alone would thin the driver herd to some extents.


Agree. Toughen up on the screenings and if it comes to limits well why not have it that the APP regulates that. You go online and it says the maximum number of connections exceeded. Please try again later.

Could cut down on the number issue. First come first serve.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> I would agree that is a bullshit deal. The question is really how to stop it. Driver flooding is happening everywhere.
> 
> It's more of a testimony of an utterly broken employment situation in most parts of the world. People gotta work to eat. There is no choice to not work to eat.


NYC had the strongest regulations you could ask for. NYC is not like other places. It took Bloomberg and his crew of psychotic sellouts to break it. Fleet owners resisted Bloomberg's billion dollar gift to Nissan which requires virtually everyone buy the NV200. He told one of the largest Medallion holders he would ruin the industry at a basketball game. Bloomberg is an investor in both Uber and Lyft, and was during his terms as Mayor, the third of which he stole/bought.

The previous TLC Commissioner, David Yassky, went to work for Lyft.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Agree. Toughen up on the screenings and if it comes to limits well why not have it that the APP regulates that. You go online and it says the maximum number of connections exceeded. Please try again later.
> 
> Could cut down on the number issue. First come first serve.


The ride share companies could also easily implement an on call feature to bring in drivers as needed. Would cut down numbers some more from there. Set up some frameworks for deployment. But these are more interoperational issues that need internal help. They are vastly STILL underestimating what the market 'could' produce. At least in my city. This biz still has a long ways to go on this count.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> NYC had the strongest regulations you could ask for. NYC is not like other places. It took Bloomberg and his crew of psychotic sellouts to break it. Fleet owners resisted Bloomberg's billion dollar gift to Nissan which requires virtually everyone buy the NV200. He told one of the largest Medallion holders he would ruin the industry at a basketball game. Bloomberg is an investor in both Uber and Lyft, and was during his terms as Mayor, the third of which he stole/bought.


Seriously the cab industry has been ****ed up for a very long time. They needed a kick in the ass no matter how or from whom it arrived.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

If you live in the suburbs of just about any major city in the U.S. you still can't get a cab in a reasonable amount of time for a fare to or from a restaurant or bar. That's the reality of a ****ed up industry.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> Seriously the cab industry has been ****ed up for a very long time. They needed a kick in the ass no matter how or from whom it arrived.


Whatever makes your brain vibrate.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> If you live in the suburbs of just about any major city in the U.S. you still can't get a cab in a reasonable amount of time for a fare to or from a restaurant or bar. That's the reality of a ****ed up industry.


Two separate issues. NYC is it's own thing.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Whatever makes your brain vibrate.


It's the reality of the ****ed up cab system. Sorry your industry got caught behind the service curb.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Welcome to the Taxi days of the great depression. Next step $2 flat rates anywhere.


Yep. The 'glory days' of pre- Medallions.

While Uber's offshore account fills to the point of exploding.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Two separate issues. NYC is it's own thing.


It looks like you're going to be dealing with a fresh horde of service providers. And I'm equally sure it's going to hurt all drivers.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> It's the reality of the ****ed up cab system. Sorry your industry got caught behind the service curb.


What you have are baseless talking points. Why don't you do a little research already.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> What you have are baseless talking points. Why don't you do a little research already.


The facts have been sufficiently spread. Uber is legal there. New drivers by the score will be added legally.

Shortline? You're gonna take a hurtin. And so are all other drivers. There ain't gonna be enuf pie to spread around.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> The facts have been sufficiently spread. Uber is legal there. New drivers by the score will be added legally.
> 
> Shortline? You're gonna take a hurtin. And so are all other drivers. There ain't gonna be enuf pie to spread around.


You're not really adding anything, no offense.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> You're not really adding anything, no offense.


Just sayin' Uber reality is about to smack y'all in the azz including Uber drivers.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> What you have are baseless talking points. Why don't you do a little research already.


Sorry this is the truth. Many articles have been written about this kind of thing. I know it stings to hear it but it is the truth. Not calling out NYC as it's one of the better ones. But in general Taxi industry has been behind.


----------



## bilyvh (Feb 4, 2015)

The majority of you equate a taxi of being total shit, rundown pieces of metal, where in reality NYC is a different animal. Taxis here are replaced every 6 years, they undergo strict inspections twice a year. Also the cars here are all 'street-hail' unlike what I imagine most of you are calling a cab on a phone, or pre-dispatched. It's a very dense city, people make money on turnover, not miles driven. Cab drivers are generally knowledgeable. Regarding apps for taxis, Hailo used to to business in NYC, but they couldn't take the competition from Uber and left. It's a different industry than what you're used to in other parts of America/Canada.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

bilyvh said:


> The majority of you equate a taxi of being total shit, rundown pieces of metal, where in reality NYC is a different animal. Taxis here are replaced every 6 years, they undergo strict inspections twice a year. Also the cars here are all 'street-hail' unlike what I imagine most of you are calling a cab on a phone, or pre-dispatched. It's a very dense city, people make money on turnover, not miles driven. Cab drivers are generally knowledgeable. Regarding apps for taxis, Hailo used to to business in NYC, but they couldn't take the competition from Uber and left. It's a different industry than what you're used to in other parts of America/Canada.


Correct. 200 point inspection 3x/yr. Cars must pass.

The car I drive now is under a year old.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

bilyvh said:


> The majority of you equate a taxi of being total shit, rundown pieces of metal, where in reality NYC is a different animal. Taxis here are replaced every 6 years, they undergo strict inspections twice a year. Also the cars here are all 'street-hail' unlike what I imagine most of you are calling a cab on a phone, or pre-dispatched. It's a very dense city, people make money on turnover, not miles driven. Cab drivers are generally knowledgeable. Regarding apps for taxis, Hailo used to to business in NYC, but they couldn't take the competition from Uber and left. It's a different industry than what you're used to in other parts of America/Canada.


I've used Taxi in Manhattan several times. It was always easy to obtain prompt courteous service. I seriously don't know how in the hell they could squeeze any more taxi's or Uber's on the streets, which were densely packed nearly everywhere. I just can't imagine what 10,000 more of them would do or achieve.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> I've used Taxi in Manhattan several times. It was always easy to obtain prompt courteous service. I seriously don't know how in the hell they could squeeze any more taxi's or Uber's on the streets, which were densely packed nearly everywhere. I just can't imagine what 10,000 more of them would do or achieve.


I think that's a fair assessment. I was wowed by the NYC taxi service asking why couldn't they all work like this. And that was back in 2008 before Uber was around. As far as quality of cars they were nothing more than anywhere else. But you never had to wait for one.

But the industry in general is broken. NYC is one of the better ones but not without it's faults too. I get the displeasure with Uber. But there is a way to fix them. Just compete with them. Play to the strengths of the Cab business. To start with you don't charge for surge. You are fixed price.


----------



## bilyvh (Feb 4, 2015)

The fact of the matter is the following: an average UberX driver in NYC right now makes the equivalent per shift as a well-seasoned yellow-cab driver. The only exceptions being maybe when it's surging heavily, then earnings may be a tad bit higher, but for informational purposes, the earnings are relatively equal. So then the question is, why the hell would you commit to becoming a new UberX driver, buying a brand-new Camry and locking yourself into a 5yr loan, when you can go to a garage and simply lease by shift, no 5 yr loans, no car maintenance, no insurance payments, car washes, depreciation, etc. With this piece of news it's becoming even more apparent this trend will not last. It's getting to the point where you will be driving only morning rush and evening rush to make money. Hell, no longer am I working 60-70 hour weeks, slaving away 6 days a week. Now I work select hours, maybe pulling in together 45-50 hours to make some dough. Drivers are not stupid, a good chunk are realizing this game is coming to an end and already planning a way out. Problem is, Uber has obliterated the whole industry, so it's becoming difficult to maintain the same livelihood as before Uber.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

bilyvh said:


> *Problem is, Uber has obliterated the whole industry*, so it's becoming difficult to maintain the same livelihood as before Uber.


I think that about sums it up. The strong will depart the arena. Only the ignorant will remain.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> I think that's a fair assessment. I was wowed by the NYC taxi service asking why couldn't they all work like this. And that was back in 2008 before Uber was around. As far as quality of cars they were nothing more than anywhere else. But you never had to wait for one.
> 
> But the industry in general is broken. NYC is one of the better ones but not without it's faults too. I get the displeasure with Uber. But there is a way to fix them. Just compete with them. Play to the strengths of the Cab business. To start with you don't charge for surge. You are fixed price.


This is the thing: You want a standard rate of fare? Then you need a pretty serious system which enables that.

You want price gouging when the wind blows? Then do whatever, **** the city you're in, contribute nothing, rip off passengers because 'they agreed to pay it.'

When you put those two things together, it should never be suggested that they be made to compete.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

bilyvh said:


> Problem is, Uber has obliterated the whole industry


They take pride in that.

Not wise given it may not end well, and they'll be to blame. Rarely do businesses recover when customers get sick of their services and move on. Blackberry was worth $80 billion at one point because it owned 70% of the smartphone market. Uber is looking very Blackberryish to me.


----------



## puber (Aug 31, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> They take pride in that.
> 
> Not wise given it may not end well, and they'll be to blame. Rarely do businesses recover when customers get sick of their services and move on. Blackberry was worth $80 billion at one point because it owned 70% of the smartphone market. Uber is looking very Blackberryish to me.


What's blackberry doing these days? Are they still around at least in canada?


----------



## Vas62 (Dec 19, 2014)

bilyvh said:


> The fact of the matter is the following: an average UberX driver in NYC right now makes the equivalent per shift as a well-seasoned yellow-cab driver. The only exceptions being maybe when it's surging heavily, then earnings may be a tad bit higher, but for informational purposes, the earnings are relatively equal. So then the question is, why the hell would you commit to becoming a new UberX driver, buying a brand-new Camry and locking yourself into a 5yr loan, when you can go to a garage and simply lease by shift, no 5 yr loans, no car maintenance, no insurance payments, car washes, depreciation, etc. With this piece of news it's becoming even more apparent this trend will not last. It's getting to the point where you will be driving only morning rush and evening rush to make money. Hell, no longer am I working 60-70 hour weeks, slaving away 6 days a week. Now I work select hours, maybe pulling in together 45-50 hours to make some dough. Drivers are not stupid, a good chunk are realizing this game is coming to an end and already planning a way out. Problem is, Uber has obliterated the whole industry, so it's becoming difficult to maintain the same livelihood as before Uber.


That's why I upgraded my FHV license to hack license and forgot about that stupid idea of getting 2015 Suburban or Yukon.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

puber said:


> What's blackberry doing these days? Are they still around at least in canada?


I think they have only 5% of the market now.

There was a time where people were calling every smartphone a "blackberry". The more I compare it to Uber, the more uncanny the comparison gets.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

puber said:


> What's blackberry doing these days? Are they still around at least in canada?


I still use a Blackberry. Still the most secure platform on the market. Too bad they screwed them selves when they didn't evolve to their customers needs.

They are still force in the business space. Consumer it's a non starter.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> I still use a Blackberry. Still the most secure platform on the market. Too bad they screwed them selves when they didn't evolve to their customers needs.
> 
> They are still force in the business space. Consumer it's a non starter.


I heard they are coming out with a smart phone/big screen competitor. Security is supposedly superior than anything out there, if there is such a thing anymore.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> I think they have only 5% of the market now.
> 
> There was a time where people were calling every smartphone a "blackberry". The more I compare it to Uber, the more uncanny the comparison gets.


Bad companies to compare to. Blackberry was a company that lead the industry in smartphone tech. Uber has led nothing in the transportation business. They found a way to exploit a system that had flaws. Uber is more like Napster. They didn't invent the digital music industry, they found a way to exploit it.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> I heard they are coming out with a smart phone/big screen competitor. Security is supposedly superior than anything out there, if there is such a thing anymore.


I thought they already did. There is the Passport and the Z30. Unless they are going bigger.

Good thing is most Android apps work now with the latest update. I have all the apps I need from the Android stores. But I think that came a little too late. If they had that at launch that would have given them a fighting chance.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> This is the thing: You want a standard rate of fare? Then you need a pretty serious system which enables that.
> 
> You want price gouging when the wind blows? Then do whatever, **** the city you're in, contribute nothing, rip off passengers because 'they agreed to pay it.'
> 
> When you put those two things together, it should never be suggested that they be made to compete.


I don't know. I have been telling my riders if you see a surge over 2.0 order a Taxi it's cheaper. They can still do that on Uber. I know as a consumer I would do that. Exploit Uber for their flaws.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Bad companies to compare to. Blackberry was a company that lead the industry in smartphone tech. Uber has led nothing in the transportation business. They found a way to exploit a system that had flaws. Uber is more like Napster. They didn't invent the digital music industry, they found a way to exploit it.


Uber is not in the transportation business. So the fact that it has led nothing in the transportation business is a moot point.

Napster is another good company to compare uber to, in addition to blackberry. Apple entered both their spaces and showed both companies how to do it right.

I predict the same is going to happen to uber.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> I thought they already did. There is the Passport and the Z30. Unless they are going bigger.


Wasn't sure on the roll out. Just read an article about it a couple months ago from a Blackberry fan who puts up a financial site I read daily who's a junkie in the space and a security freak.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> Uber is not in the transportation business. So the fact that it has led nothing in the transportation business is a moot point.
> 
> Napster is another good company to compare uber to, in addition to blackberry. Apple entered both their spaces and showed both companies how to do it right.
> 
> I predict the same is going to happen to uber.


You know nothing about Blackberry I guess if you are comparing it to Uber. And Apple entered a space to loose it to Google. So that point is short lived.

Why don't you read what is said. "UBER has lead NOTHING in the transportation business" I didn't say they were I said they have done NOTHING in that space.

You are very selective sometimes on what you read. Blackberry built the smartphone business. They screwed up and didn't retain it. That's different than what Uber is.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> I don't know. I have been telling my riders if you see a surge over 2.0 order a Taxi it's cheaper. They can still do that on Uber. I know as a consumer I would do that. Exploit Uber for their flaws.


I don't think you understand. Being required to provide a set rate of fare means the city needs to protect that system for both the general public and drivers.

The idea that we should be made to 'compete' with price gouging is insane. But that's apparently what the new TLC Chairwoman thinks should happen.

They pay none of the real costs of doing business, and are permitted to price gouge, but WE should compete with THEM

**** the US already, the whole thing is so corrupt it's absurd.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> I don't think you understand. Being required to provide a set rate of fare means the city needs to protect that system for both the general public and drivers.
> 
> The idea that we should be made to 'compete' with price gouging is insane. But that's apparently what the new TLC Chairwoman thinks should happen.
> 
> ...


If Uber floods the streets with drivers I'd expect a lot less 'price gouging' by surge. And a lot less biz for you guys in the process as more than likely they'll initiate substantial price cutz to go with it.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> I don't think you understand. Being required to provide a set rate of fare means the city needs to protect that system for both the general public and drivers.
> 
> The idea that we should be made to 'compete' with price gouging is insane. But that's apparently what the new TLC Chairwoman thinks should happen.
> 
> ...


Competition is the American way. You want a fixed protected system. Go to the Soviet Union. Oh ya they tried that and became Russia. Rebranded for the good of the people.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> You know nothing about Blackberry I guess if you are comparing it to Uber. And Apple entered a space to loose it to Google. So that point is short lived.
> 
> Why don't you read what is said. "UBER has lead NOTHING in the transportation business" I didn't say they were I said they have done NOTHING in that space.
> 
> You are very selective sometimes on what you read. Blackberry built the smartphone business. They screwed up and didn't retain it. That's different than what Uber is.


Uber built the smartphone ride hailing app business. They're going to screw it up and lose it. Very similar to how blackberry and napster screwed up


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Competition is the American way. You want a fixed protected system. Go to the Soviet Union. Oh ya they tried that and became Russia. Rebranded for the good of the people.


Hey genius, there's no competition within the yellow cab business for fare prices. Understand? NONE. You want a price standardized extension of the public transportation system which people can rely on for a set fare? Then you don't suggest that price gouging bullshit be shoved in the same market as 'competition.' You want to talk about the American Way? That involves a level playing field, control on unfair competition, properly regulated Capitalism. Pitting Yellow cabs, with the enormous costs the industry ponies up to operate, and agrees to abide by the rules, vs slimy price gouging ********* bullshit is extremely ****ed up.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Hey genius, there's no competition within the yellow cab business for fare prices. Understand? NONE. You want a price standardized extension of the public transportation system which people can rely on for a set fare? Then you don't suggest that price gouging bullshit be shoved in the same market as 'competition.' You want to talk about the American Way? That involves a level playing field, control on unfair competition, properly regulated Capitalism. Pitting Yellow cabs, with the enormous costs the industry ponies up to operate, and agrees to abide by the rules, vs slimy price gouging ********* bullshit is extremely ****ed up.


Properly regulated capitalism? Not sure where you are from. Regulations and Capitalism is like building a fence with nothing but posts. Some people may hit the post but the majority find ways to just go in between them.

And yes I do think what you are saying as price gouging be used as a tactic. Why should Uber have all the fun. Point is you can always undercut them during surges. They are 2.0x you are 1.5x. Be the WalMart of the transport business. You have the inventory, the standards, so why not fight them on price.

Why not be 20% cheaper during slow times like 1AM to 5 AM Monday to Thursday. When most cabs lie dormant. Wouldn't it be good to keep them moving and making money? Flexible pricing models do have advantages. Why as a consumer can't I get a break on things like a Taxi. I don't mind as a consumer paying more when demand is high and supply is low. And I like paying less when it's off peek. Why not charge more if the price of Gas goes up and a break when it falls.

Funny how it's the taxi industry who feels a one size fits al approach works with consumers now a days.

There was a time when Hydro was charged the same across the board. Now they have peek and off peek. You want to be considered a essential service like hydro you may need to bend a little like they have.


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

Uber cars in NYC are classified as a"For Hire Vehicle". FHV can only do prearranged pick ups and do not require a taxi-meter.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Properly regulated capitalism? Not sure where you are from. Regulations and Capitalism is like building a fence with nothing but posts. Some people may hit the post but the majority find ways to just go in between them.
> 
> And yes I do think what you are saying as price gouging be used as a tactic. Why should Uber have all the fun. Point is you can always undercut them during surges. They are 2.0x you are 1.5x. Be the WalMart of the transport business. You have the inventory, the standards, so why not fight them on price.
> 
> ...


No, the point is we cannot alter our metered fare, ever, by law. Uber uses it's price gouging to also undercut yellow cabs at other times.

NYC needs standard fares in it's public transportation system, which cabs are an extension of. In order to do that, you don't insert a price gouging bullshit app which is also permitted to flood the market with double or perhaps triple the number of cabs.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Backdash said:


> Uber cars in NYC are classified as a"For Hire Vehicle". FHV can only do prearranged pick ups and do not require a taxi-meter.


You tap an app on the street, a car arrives a few minutes later. Nothing like the black car industry as far as wait time. It's a virtual hail.

The app functions as a taximeter, which has never been allowed for non-Medallion cars, until the bullshit ruling that it's 'not' a taximeter.

As Uber keeps jamming the city full of cars, the wait time will be even less, and it is for all intents and purposes a street hail, which is only permitted by law by Medallion cabs.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> No, the point is we cannot alter our metered fare, ever, by law. Uber uses it's price gouging to also undercut yellow cabs at other times.
> 
> NYC needs standard fares in it's public transportation system, which cabs are an extension of. In order to do that, you don't insert a price gouging bullshit app which is also permitted to flood the market with double or perhaps triple the number of cabs.


Again you really haven't answered the question. Why does it need to be that way? Why not change the way you do business. Competition is knocking at your door, people are migrating to Uber as they like the model Uber provides. What do you do?

A) Dynamically change your business model to be more dynamic and more in tune to the current environment.
B) Fight change against the consumer and hand the keys to your competitor.

In case you haven't noticed, the regulators are not running to your aid. And that's the facts.

Companies who don't change to meet the consumer face extinction. Regardless if it's Blockbuster, HMV, Kodak, or even Blackberry. Thoes who don't evolve and fight change are doomed like companies before it.

It doesn't mean we are better for it, it's just the facts.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Again you really haven't answered the question. Why does it need to be that way? Why not change the way you do business. Competition is knocking at your door, people are migrating to Uber as they like the model Uber provides. What do you do?
> 
> A) Dynamically change your business model to be more dynamic and more in tune to the current environment.
> B) Fight change against the consumer and hand the keys to your competitor.
> ...


For the same reason you can't have dollar buses following MTA buses. Use your thinking cap.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> For the same reason you can't have dollar buses following MTA buses. Use your thinking cap.


If $1 busses were what the consumer wanted then we would be having a different conversation.

Again tell be why dynamic pricing won't work? Why a fixed price is better for a market? Why I can't get a discount Taxi at quiet times?

Your fight with Uber is frankly like watching a drowning man who is being told to swim. Only the man can do it, he can watch others, get some support but ultimately they will be still in the middle of the lake drowning.

So I say start swimming or just stay still and drown. Because your screaming help won't save you.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Again you really haven't answered the question. Why does it need to be that way? Why not change the way you do business. Competition is knocking at your door, people are migrating to Uber as they like the model Uber provides. What do you do?
> 
> A) Dynamically change your business model to be more dynamic and more in tune to the current environment.
> B) Fight change against the consumer and hand the keys to your competitor.
> ...


*Maybe they can petition to surge?*

Either that or they can just keep their forthcoming soon to be worthless monopoly on street hails.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> If $1 busses were what the consumer wanted then we would be having a different conversation.
> 
> Again tell be why dynamic pricing won't work? Why a fixed price is better for a market? Why I can't get a discount Taxi at quiet times?
> 
> ...


Patently wrong.

Of course consumers 'want' a $1 bus. However, the only way you achieve that is by sidestepping regulations.

You can either fund a system which guarantees a set fare, or you can play around with criminal bullshit and siphon business off to price gouging gypsy cabs.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> *Maybe they can petition to surge?*
> 
> Either that or they can just keep their forthcoming soon to be worthless monopoly on street hails.


What you fools want is 50,000 desperate drivers smashing into each other for tidbits.

The number of cars is limited out of necessity, how many times can people use the absurd 'monopoly' line.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> What you fools want is 50,000 desperate drivers smashing into each other for tidbits.
> 
> The number of cars is limited out of necessity, how many times can people use the absurd 'monopoly' line.


It's certainly true you have a monopoly on street hails bought at the price of fixed fares.

I'd guess that most people will catch on at some point that it's easier to push a button on their phone to get a cab rather than raise their arm and hope it works.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> It's certainly true you have a monopoly on street hails bought at the price of fixed fares.
> 
> I'd guess that most people will catch on at some point that it's easier to push a button on their phone to get a cab rather than raise their arm and hope it works.


No, we have a particular market which has a particular demand. Yellow cabs are extremely important, the city cannot function without them.

The number is limited so it is a viable job for drivers, while providing good service for passengers. Put your hand up nearly any time and you get a cab.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Yellow cabs are getting an app btw


I wonder why. 

Could it be because someone over there woke up?


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> No, we have a particular market which has a particular demand. Yellow cabs are extremely important, the city cannot function without them.
> 
> The number is limited so it is a viable job for drivers, while providing good service for passengers. Put your hand up nearly any time and you get a cab.


And you have a city monopoly for a fixed price for that market. I think you might just be smelling a lot less of that kind of biz.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> And you have a city monopoly for a fixed price for that market. I think you might just be smelling a lot less of that kind of biz.


Yeah I guess the subway is a 'monopoly' too.

How utterly clownish.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Yeah I guess the subway is a 'monopoly' too.
> 
> How utterly clownish.


There's no question that your street hails are a monopoly. Uber certainly can't do that or your ***** session would be even worse.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Yeah I guess the subway is a 'monopoly' too.
> 
> How utterly clownish.


Some services inherently function better as monopolies, and are thus regulated as utilities.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> There's no question that your street hails are a monopoly. Uber certainly can't do that or your ***** session would be even worse.


The system didnt work properly without what you need to term a 'monopoly.' Is that typical for a 'monopoly?'

It's a limit to the number of cars allowed on the road for street hails, period.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> The system didnt work properly without what you need to term a 'monopoly.' Is that typical for a 'monopoly?'


It's a monopoly without any question. It would still work without your monopoly, y'all just wouldn't make as much money.

Will still say though that the street hail will eventually fall from the pax preference of choice when they can stay inside when it's raining or cold and just push a button on their phone and have a ride show up, hopefully in a couple min.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> It's a monopoly without any question. It would still work without your monopoly, y'all just wouldn't make as much money.
> 
> Will still say though that the street hail will eventually fall from the pax preference of choice when they can stay inside when it's raining or cold and just push a button on their phone and have a ride show up, hopefully in a couple min.


No, its a necessary limit in a limited market.

Yellow cabs are getting an app, but Uber will always be a criminal company.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> No, its a necessary limit in a limited market.
> 
> Yellow cabs are getting an app, but Uber will always be a criminal company.


Obviously that's not the case. You're riding wishes.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> Obviously that's not the case. You're riding wishes.


The TLC app has been in a pilot program for approximately one year. They plan on implementing it and making clear who is price gouging and who is not. You want choice, you got it.


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

Hackenstein said:


> You tap an app on the street, a car arrives a few minutes later. Nothing like the black car industry as far as wait time. It's a virtual hail.
> 
> The app functions as a taximeter, which has never been allowed for non-Medallion cars, until the bullshit ruling that it's 'not' a taximeter.
> 
> As Uber keeps jamming the city full of cars, the wait time will be even less, and it is for all intents and purposes a street hail, which is only permitted by law by Medallion cabs.


A virtual hail is not a hail anymore than virtual reality is reality 
But I get it, you dont like the way things ("bullshit ruling"} are being done. That in itself doesnt make you right or wrong only that you dont like it.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Backdash said:


> A virtual hail is not a hail anymore than virtual reality is reality
> But I get it, you dont like the way things ("bullshit ruling"} are being done. That in itself doesnt make you right or wrong only that you dont like it.


If Uber floods NYC with another 20,000 cars, they're parked on every corner, and you tap an app and the car is there nearly instantly, will it be a street hail then?

Not in your world.


----------



## lu181 (Nov 3, 2014)

They need to bulk up for when tlc force them to pick up in other boro's. The recent customer data they gave TLC is going to show they only pick up in certain neighborhoods they will be forced to expand to cover the hood. They will also be forced to add ADA compliant vehicles


----------



## DrJeecheroo (Feb 12, 2015)

Actionjax said:


> In case you haven't realized you are on a uber driver forum. You don't drive for uber do you? So why are you here. I don't think you will find much sympathy for the taxi industry around here. But if you can show that the industry is evolving I'm all ears. Otherwise you are as out-dated as and 8 track tape.


I drive uber on occasion, and I definitely symphathise with him. Wait till your rates drop below $1/mile and we'll see how much of an uber fan you are.


----------



## DrJeecheroo (Feb 12, 2015)

Hackenstein said:


> Street hails and the use of taximeters in NYC are the exclusive right of individuals/ fleets who purchase the Medallion at auction. They pay for what is promised by the city as an exclusive right, but this criminal Uber bullshit is a run around by claiming the app which functions as a taximeter is not a taximeter because it utilizes GPS and isn't a physical meter. I'm not interested in working for crooks who siphon money out of NYC and lower their rates at will and who are about to shove 10,000 additional cars on the road, which absolutely harms legitimate yellow cab business. I'm a native New Yorker, not interested in selling out to Silicon Valley.


It's almost pointless to debate to the uberites. UBER itself has brainwashed them into thinking they can just brazenly go into any city and be exempt from any regulations.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

DrJeecheroo said:


> I drive uber on occasion, and I definitely symphathise with him. Wait till your rates drop below $1/mile and we'll see how much of an uber fan you are.


Well till they do I'm fine with the current setup. I keep hearing the wait till your rates drop. Guess till it does I will continue to support change in my market.


----------



## ldriva (Jan 23, 2015)

Actionjax said:


> Well if that's the case your system will burn it self out like it did in the 1930's and drivers will be the ones to suffer. That sucks for your industry.
> 
> But I think the offensive should not be Anti-Uber, it does not work with the consumer market. It needs to be Pro-Cab. You do have advantages to Uber in many ways. Exploit that to the public and win people back. I think with the quality of some Uber drivers they make that case for you on their own.
> 
> ...


Exactly. Increase your level of service to compete. I have not met one passenger who said "I love cabs."


----------



## ldriva (Jan 23, 2015)

Fe that! 


bilyvh said:


> Create better jobs and Uber do not go together. Here is a fun fact, new Uber Black/SUV 'partners' are now forced to accept UberX jobs. How about them apples? Driving a $60,000 SUV for $8 jobs or get deactivated. This farce has no ending in sight.


----------



## Vexus (Mar 8, 2015)

The free market will provide. Unfortunately, it means a lot of people will lose. That is just the way it goes. If 20,000 people sit around in cars all day waiting to give a ride; nah. Nah man. You're just not there yet. You just don't get it.

The fact I can use my car for commute to work, perform my well paying duties, and then hit up an app and make an extra $100 on the day, is why cabs are done. Because sitting around in a car driving people places is a shit waste of your human potential. I sincerely want everyone doing Uber to use their free time to better their life purpose. For a few it will be driving - perhaps @Hackenstein is a true magician of the road - but for everyone else I hope these rideshares help others achieve other goals.

I for one look forward to 1-2 months from now when my used car is reimbursed into my bank account that I then look around and say, "I need a new XYZ!" I'll then go online and make it happen, with the only expense being time I choose to use as I see fit.

What else would we be doing? Playing video games? Watching TV? This is much more productive.

As far as my view on Uber, the fact that they will force people out of full-time waste-of-human-potential full days driving around, means they will force people to create new businesses and try new things to make money, basically injecting some kick-start into this country. ****ing Saints if you ask me.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Vexus said:


> The free market will provide. Unfortunately, it means a lot of people will lose. That is just the way it goes. If 20,000 people sit around in cars all day waiting to give a ride; nah. Nah man. You're just not there yet. You just don't get it.
> 
> The fact I can use my car for commute to work, perform my well paying duties, and then hit up an app and make an extra $100 on the day, is why cabs are done. Because sitting around in a car driving people places is a shit waste of your human potential. I sincerely want everyone doing Uber to use their free time to better their life purpose. For a few it will be driving - perhaps @Hackenstein is a true magician of the road - but for everyone else I hope these rideshares help others achieve other goals.
> 
> ...


And when someone figures out a way to dismantle the job you're on your way to by creating an uber-like scheme where it's siphoned away by not-really-legal part timers, you'll cheer, right?

You've factored a steady job into the equation. In ubertopia, that no longer exists.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> And when someone figures out a way to dismantle the job you're on your way to by creating an uber-like scheme where it's siphoned away by not-really-legal part timers, you'll cheer, right?
> 
> You've factored a steady job into the equation. In ubertopia, that no longer exists.


Uber is stiffing every driver. Might as well include all you taxi guys too.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

ldriva said:


> Exactly. Increase your level of service to compete. I have not met one passenger who said "I love cabs."


Or perhaps require uber drivers to adhere to the same rules as taxis, with all inherent costs, and see who provides better 'service.'

It's easy to pass out water and chocolates when you're allowed to write your own rules.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Or perhaps require uber drivers to adhere to the same rules as taxis, with all inherent costs, and see who provides better 'service.'
> 
> It's easy to pass out water and chocolates when you're allowed to write your own rules.


How about just doing the basics like accept my credit card and not argue that the machine I always broken, or how about a car that's clean. Hell I don't want water or chocolates. I want to be treated fairly. Have recourse when I am not.

That is the crap I deal with in my market. I have gone through 3 credit card replacements this past year because some dipshit in a cab sold it overseas. And you know why I know it was cabs. Because I have a supplementary card just for taxi's so it doesn't screw me up on other things.

So you tell me is that the service I'm paying for?

Please go cry me a river on your plight. Go fix yourself first and Uber has no valid reason to exist.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> How about just doing the basics like accept my credit card and not argue that the machine I always broken, or how about a car that's clean. Hell I don't want water or chocolates. I want to be treated fairly. Have recourse when I am not.
> 
> That is the crap I deal with in my market. I have gone through 3 credit card replacements this past year because some dipshit in a cab sold it overseas. And you know why I know it was cabs. Because I have a supplementary card just for taxi's so it doesn't screw me up on other things.
> 
> ...


I always accept credit cards, and my car is clean.

Spare me the bullshit stereotypes.

Again, get back to me on how awesome the condition of uber cars and drivers are if they're required to pay the bills everyone else is.

In fact, I'd bet what you described already applies to the majority of uber drivers in places where the rate has been cut to the bone. Except the cc part, since they can't do the ********* routine without it.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> I always accept credit cards, and my car is clean.
> 
> Spare me the bullshit stereotypes.
> 
> ...


It's not a stereotype when you actually deal with it. So it's far from bullshit.

And I don't give a dam about what happens with an Uber drivers car. This was pointed at what issues I have with the current taxi service in my area. That makes Uber welcome in my opinion.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> It's not a stereotype when you actually deal with it. So it's far from bullshit.
> 
> And I don't give a dam about what happens with an Uber drivers car. This was pointed at what issues I have with the current taxi service in my area. That makes Uber welcome in my opinion.


I don't give a **** about complaints about taxis when the 'solution' involves breaking the law and avoiding costs like commercial insurance.

Let me drive without commercial insurance and I'll blow smoke up your ass too.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> I don't give a **** about complaints about taxis


And there lies the problem with why I don't give a **** about taxi's either. Good luck in your war. Something tells me you are already loosing.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> And there lies the problem with why I don't give a **** about taxi's either. Good luck in your war. Something tells me you are already loosing.


In other words, you support breaking the law and enabling quasi- taxis to drive without commercial insurance.

I don't have a war, I just want to do my job. It's psychopaths like Uber who are intent on destroying legitimate business.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> In other words, you support breaking the law and enabling quasi- taxis to drive without commercial insurance.
> 
> I don't have a war, I just want to do my job. It's psychopaths like Uber who are intent on destroying legitimate business.


If you don't think you are in a war then prepare for the invasion.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> If you don't think you are in a war then prepare for the invasion.


Get some self respect. Stop working for anti-American vultures.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Get some self respect. Stop working for anti-American vultures.


I'm not American, I'm Canadian. So by definition this statement does not apply to me.


----------



## UberBlackPr1nce (Dec 28, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> A drivers license isn't related to the right to do street hails in NYC. Not sure how many ways it can be spelled out that it's a job which needs to be staffed, and the incentive of ownership and increase in value of the Medallion has been historically necessary.
> 
> A switch to the ridiculous uber system means over saturation at will, lowered fare rates at will, 1/3 of the money being parked in the Caymans, city deprived of revenues.


And you think all these foreign illegal taxi drivers are spending their money in USA. Lol


----------



## UberBlackPr1nce (Dec 28, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> I've been hearing that nonsense since Uber decided to launch it's illegal insurance and regulations dodging 'business.'
> 
> NYC needs a real taxi fleet, period. The money stays here, not the Caymans, period.


No, it goes to the family in the driver's native country.


----------



## UberBlackPr1nce (Dec 28, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> My reaction is that it is an illegal company doing illegal virtual street hails. In many or most places, it is enabling drivers to operate with inadequate insurance, and to undercut legitimate cabs by avoiding regulations.
> 
> The word isn't obsolete, it's legitimate. Uber is a criminal company, and labeling it 'innovative' is frankly anti-American.


uber has created it's own clientèle. Most of the people I have spoken with say they never really took cabs in the past but the take an uber at least 2 times a week. Uber didn't take your pax. I haven't taken a cab in 10 years but I would book an uber before I think about getting in a cab.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberBlackPr1nce said:


> uber has created it's own clientèle. Most of the people I have spoken with say they never really took cabs in the past but the take an uber at least 2 times a week. Uber didn't take your pax. I haven't taken a cab in 10 years but I would book an uber before I think about getting in a cab.


Of course they're taking our 'pax.' Look at what happened in SF.

Illegal uninsured gypsy cabs who don't have to play by the rules. That's awesome.


----------



## bilyvh (Feb 4, 2015)

You won't find any sympathy on this board. Join your brethren at yellowcabnyc.com, where everyone just yells 'ban ubet now!!111' at their monitor screens.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Of course they're taking our 'pax.' Look at what happened in SF.
> 
> Illegal uninsured gypsy cabs who don't have to play by the rules. That's awesome.


We're not cabs. We're ride share/TNC. Cheaper, faster better service in most places, except maybe for a street hail in NYC is faster if the driver happens to look your way, where the pings are still arms being raised in the dark of night in hopes of being seen...


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

scrurbscrud said:


> We're not cabs. We're ride share/TNC. Cheaper, faster better service in most places, except maybe for a street hail in NYC is faster if the driver happens to look your way, where the pings are still arms being raised in the dark of night in hopes of being seen...


You're gypsy cabs operating without commercial insurance in most places.


----------



## scrurbscrud (Sep 11, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> You're gypsy cabs operating without commercial insurance in most places.


Some of us actually do have commercial insurance, including the drivers in NYC. Through the ride share companies all drivers have it (with limitations.)

Beef zero.


----------



## stuber (Jun 30, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> In case you haven't realized you are on a uber driver forum. You don't drive for uber do you? So why are you here. I don't think you will find much sympathy for the taxi industry around here. But if you can show that the industry is evolving I'm all ears. Otherwise you are as out-dated as and 8 track tape.


I disagree. Cabbies should be welcome here too. I'm fine with the medallion system, but with one caveat, they shouldn't be owned by anyone not driving a car. Make them available to owner/drivers only.


----------



## Lidman (Nov 13, 2014)

bilyvh said:


> You won't find any sympathy on this board. Join your brethren at yellowcabnyc.com, where everyone just yells 'ban ubet now!!111' at their monitor screens.


 I drive a cab and occasionally lyft. Any cab driver is welcome to post on this forum. You're not the forum police.


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

nana nana poo poo


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> I drive a yellow cab in NYC.
> 
> This week, Uber had the nerve to tell the TLC it should increase funding, as Uber plans to punt another 10,000 cars into the market, and license approval isn't fast enough for their tastes.
> 
> ...


If you look at it objectively, both the cab industry and Uber are a lot alike. Neither can afford to care about the welfare of the drivers or pax and make the model work. One thing that Uber has done in my opinion is exposed all the local cab companies and their local monopolies to the whole world. Uber has basically taken the local cab model and applied it on a worldwide scale and now the whole world can see just what a cut throat business this is, traditional taxi's and ride-shares all included.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberTaxPro said:


> If you look at it objectively, both the cab industry and Uber are a lot alike. Neither can afford to care about the welfare of the drivers or pax and make the model work. One thing that Uber has done in my opinion is exposed all the local cab companies and their local monopolies to the whole world. Uber has basically taken the local cab model and applied it on a worldwide scale and now the whole world can see just what a cut throat business this is, traditional taxi's and ride-shares all included.


What are you talking about. I pay a daily lease, the car is clean and properly maintained. Garage takes care of all repairs.

Uber sidesteps all of it, no proper inspections, drug testing, background checks, commercial insurance.

Over saturates any market at will, cab companies do not do that.


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Lidman said:


> I drive a cab and occasionally lyft. Any cab driver is welcome to post on this forum. You're not the forum police.





Hackenstein said:


> What are you talking about. I pay a daily lease, the car is clean and properly maintained. Garage takes care of all repairs.
> 
> Uber sidesteps all of it, no proper inspections, drug testing, background checks, commercial insurance.
> 
> Over saturates any market at will, cab companies do not do that.


I'm talking about the business model...They both use independent contractors, they both try to separate liability between driver and company, They both control the $ (commission amount, rates, lease amount, ) call it whatever you want....they both control it. The way I see it is Uber is trying to make a worldwide cab company. Yes, Uber does tend to not follow rules but the way their businesses work are very similar.


----------



## Actionjax (Oct 6, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Over saturates any market at will, cab companies do not do that.


That's because they are regulated. If they weren't it wouldn't be a matter of if. It would be a matter of when.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberTaxPro said:


> I'm talking about the business model...They both use independent contractors, they both try to separate liability between driver and company, They both control the $ (commission amount, rates, lease amount, ) call it whatever you want....they both control it. The way I see it is Uber is trying to make a worldwide cab company. Yes, Uber does tend to not follow rules but the way their businesses work are very similar.


That's completely untrue. The garage is solely responsible for the insurance and car. Only expenses I pay are lease and gas. I must get a drug test once a year, defensive driving every 3 years, my initial background check was a legitimate check unlike the bullshit uber pulls. I must pass the taxi school course. The car undergoes a mandatory 200 point inspection 3x a year. But aside from all that, streets are a commodity. Taxi companies don't flood the market and make it unprofitable for drivers. That's part of why we have medallions. Medallions also contribute real revenues to the city. Uber contributes nothing.



Actionjax said:


> That's because they are regulated. If they weren't it wouldn't be a matter of if. It would be a matter of when.


Yes. Hence the very real need for proper regulation. Or, as some people seem to need to call it, an 'over regulated cartel monopoly bla bla bla.'


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> That's completely untrue. The garage is solely responsible for the insurance and car. Only expenses I pay are lease and gas. I must get a drug test once a year, defensive driving every 3 years, my initial background check was a legitimate check unlike the bullshit uber pulls. I must pass the taxi school course. The car undergoes a mandatory 200 point inspection 3x a year. But aside from all that, streets are a commodity. Taxi companies don't flood the market and make it unprofitable for drivers. That's part of why we have medallions. Medallions also contribute real revenues to the city. Uber contributes nothing.
> 
> Yes. Hence the very real need for proper regulation. Or, as some people seem to need to call it, an 'over regulated cartel monopoly bla bla bla.'


They might be responsible but your paying for it and some through your lease payments. Uber drivers have no lease payment but pay their own expenses. Lease payments or maintenance? pick your poison


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberTaxPro said:


> They might be responsible but your paying for it and some through your lease payments. Uber drivers have no lease payment but pay their own expenses. Lease payments or maintenance? pick your poison


Don't really get what point you're trying to make. The 'lease' in this case refers to the daily rental charge for a 12 hour shift. They bought the medallion and car.

Btw, if these app companies add another 20,000 cars as they stated they intend to do, the traffic created by that alone is enough to seriously impact business.

This was the whole point of the Medallion system, but the TLC got sold out under Bloomberg.


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Don't really get what point you're trying to make. The 'lease' in this case refers to the daily rental charge for a 12 hour shift. They bought the medallion and car.
> 
> Btw, if these app companies add another 20,000 cars as they stated they intend to do, the traffic created by that alone is enough to seriously impact business.
> 
> This was the whole point of the Medallion system, but the TLC got sold out under Bloomberg.


I used to own a small cab company in CT (7 cars) sold it because I saw Uber moving in. The guy who bought it from me he isn't worried about Uber. Uber is playing by a different set rules and they have the money to get away with it. They just had a hearing about Uber in Hartford CT about how to regulate them in CT. It looks like they are going to establish a SEPARTE set of rules for rideshares which is exactly what Uber wants. They hired lobbyists out the wazoo get what they want. I used to be on the cab side of this discussion but now I've jumped ship and gotten out of the way! Uber 1. moves in, 2. gets the public to like them, 3. throws large amounts of money at the politicians to finish off the job. Then they repeat it over and over. The taxi business the way we know it will be a dinosaur and I don't think it can be stopped. You can fight it or join it but it is a lot of fun to discuss either way!


----------



## Vexus (Mar 8, 2015)

Hackenstein said:


> That's completely untrue. The garage is solely responsible for the insurance and car. Only expenses I pay are lease and gas. I must get a drug test once a year, defensive driving every 3 years, my initial background check was a legitimate check unlike the bullshit uber pulls. I must pass the taxi school course. The car undergoes a mandatory 200 point inspection 3x a year. But aside from all that, streets are a commodity. Taxi companies don't flood the market and make it unprofitable for drivers. That's part of why we have medallions. Medallions also contribute real revenues to the city. Uber contributes nothing.
> 
> Yes. Hence the very real need for proper regulation. Or, as some people seem to need to call it, an 'over regulated cartel monopoly bla bla bla.'


You don't realize it I guess, but you are paying for the insurance, the car, the repairs, the school course, the 200 point inspection 3x a year, the medallion, and the guy sitting at home collecting on said medallion.

I see the money I pay Uber at work in their aggressive growth. I also can maintain my car as well as any shop. I can also be responsible enough to get my own car fixed should something happen. I also have the great satisfaction that if my car goes out during a ride, the passenger can immediately grab someone else with no big hassle.

I would also like to state that I rarely ever took a taxi unless I really had to or friends were all going in on the cost or something. But when I found out about Uber I pretty much decided to never use a taxi again, and I can see myself using Uber for getting around town in the future. I'd never take a cab 3 miles down the road, but $5 to an Uber driver when it's raining? Yes. Very yes. Point being, I can see Uber is bringing more riders into the pie, not really stealing taxis. Just today I saw a lady of young but successful age hop into a cab in the middle of the street. So either she has a flip-phone, just needed to get somewhere quick and there was a taxi in the street, doesn't know about Uber, or prefers paying more to go places.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Vexus said:


> You don't realize it I guess, but you are paying for the insurance, the car, the repairs, the school course, the 200 point inspection 3x a year, the medallion, and the guy sitting at home collecting on said medallion.
> 
> I see the money I pay Uber at work in their aggressive growth. I also can maintain my car as well as any shop. I can also be responsible enough to get my own car fixed should something happen. I also have the great satisfaction that if my car goes out during a ride, the passenger can immediately grab someone else with no big hassle.
> 
> I would also like to state that I rarely ever took a taxi unless I really had to or friends were all going in on the cost or something. But when I found out about Uber I pretty much decided to never use a taxi again, and I can see myself using Uber for getting around town in the future. I'd never take a cab 3 miles down the road, but $5 to an Uber driver when it's raining? Yes. Very yes. Point being, I can see Uber is bringing more riders into the pie, not really stealing taxis. Just today I saw a lady of young but successful age hop into a cab in the middle of the street. So either she has a flip-phone, just needed to get somewhere quick and there was a taxi in the street, doesn't know about Uber, or prefers paying more to go places.


You forgot to mention that most uber drivers sidestep the cost of commercial insurance. In NYC they sidestep the cost of a Medallion entirely, which is leading to massive over saturation and increase in congestion, are allowed to use a virtual taximeter, and do virtual street hails. All they are are gypsy cabs with a cellphone.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> In Columbus, it's $80 because it's not transferable. I can't sell it to someone else. There's no market for selling it. So there's no market price for it. It's just a fee. A tax. A cost I pay to the government for the benefit of earning money doing transportation in the city.
> 
> New York could simply do the same, but it chooses the medallions because they want a market to trade transferable permits.


Because NYC Medallions grow in value, so it's an incentive for ownership and the eventual ability to sell it and have some form of retirement. NYC is an entirely different market.


----------



## Lidman (Nov 13, 2014)

I never understood why medallions are or were ridiculously expensive.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> I think I need to get me one of these...they are cool.


I would like a meter in the car just to constantly remind pax how cheap they are.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Actionjax said:


> Competition is the American way. You want a fixed protected system. Go to the Soviet Union. Oh ya they tried that and became Russia. Rebranded for the good of the people.


The Soviet Union BECAME Russia? I'm pretty sure Russia was around long before the Soviet Union.


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Vexus said:


> You don't realize it I guess, but you are paying for the insurance, the car, the repairs, the school course, the 200 point inspection 3x a year, the medallion, and the guy sitting at home collecting on said medallion.
> 
> I see the money I pay Uber at work in their aggressive growth. I also can maintain my car as well as any shop. I can also be responsible enough to get my own car fixed should something happen. I also have the great satisfaction that if my car goes out during a ride, the passenger can immediately grab someone else with no big hassle.
> 
> I would also like to state that I rarely ever took a taxi unless I really had to or friends were all going in on the cost or something. But when I found out about Uber I pretty much decided to never use a taxi again, and I can see myself using Uber for getting around town in the future. I'd never take a cab 3 miles down the road, but $5 to an Uber driver when it's raining? Yes. Very yes. Point being, I can see Uber is bringing more riders into the pie, not really stealing taxis. Just today I saw a lady of young but successful age hop into a cab in the middle of the street. So either she has a flip-phone, just needed to get somewhere quick and there was a taxi in the street, doesn't know about Uber, or prefers paying more to go places.


*Exactly!* so many cab drivers I've encountered don't realize that they are the ones paying for the cab companies repair garages, car purchases, insurance expenses and everything else they pay for. They think the cab companies are banks that have all kinds of money to spend on the drivers. In the taxi world you pay for everything you get whether you call it a lease payment or anything else. Taxi companies don't pay for ANYTHING their not charging the drivers for one way or another. They just do the books for you, and they charge you for that!


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberTaxPro said:


> *Exactly!* so many cab drivers I've encountered don't realize that they are the ones paying for the cab companies repair garages, car purchases, insurance expenses and everything else they pay for. They think the cab companies are banks that have all kinds of money to spend on the drivers. In the taxi world you pay for everything you get whether you call it a lease payment or anything else. Taxi companies don't pay for ANYTHING their not charging the drivers for one way or another. They just do the books for you, and they charge you for that!


If I were to lease a Medallion it would cost roughly the same as what I'm paying now. I would then have to buy the car, pay for parking, repairs, insurance, inspections all of it.

Uber, on the other hand, sidesteps even the cost of the Medallion by claiming it's not in the transportation business, and by virtue of bribing a former TLC commissioner, got permission to use a phone app as a taximeter, which is the exclusive right of Medallion holders, who pay a lot of money for that right.

Uber is a criminal company, it's a Wall Street scam. It would not exist if it had to play by the rules.

The CEO even said it's criminal, in reference to Lyft's model, before he stole it and called it 'UberX.'


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

In NYC Uber plays by the FHV rules. 
How they got to be the rules is debatable. You clearly dont like the rules but they are none the less the rules.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Backdash said:


> In NYC Uber plays by the FHV rules.
> How they got to be the rules is debatable. You clearly dont like the rules but they are none the less the rules.


Using a taximeter is the exclusive right of Medallion owners.

Whether I 'like' the rules is irrelevant. It's a criminal rules change. Someone paid for those rights and they're being robbed.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/akchhabra


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

Like I said, debatable how they got to be the rules.
You think it was a criminal rule change the TLC disagrees. The TLC runs the thing you dont, TLC wins, Hackenstein loses.


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> If I were to lease a Medallion it would cost roughly the same as what I'm paying now. I would then have to buy the car, pay for parking, repairs, insurance, inspections all of it.
> 
> Uber, on the other hand, sidesteps even the cost of the Medallion by claiming it's not in the transportation business, then by virtue of bribing a former TLC commissioner, got permission to use a phone app as a taximeter, which is the exclusive right of Medallion holders, who pay a lot of money for that right.
> 
> Uber is a criminal company, it's a Wall Street scam. It would not exist if it had to play by the rules.


The rules aren't the rules anymore! They have changed. Almost every state legislature that has taken up this issue has come out with SEPERATE rules for rideshare companies. Even in NYC where you are Uber is 100% legal now. Even UberX drivers are commercially licensed and their vehicles are registered with the Taxi and Limousine Commission. If I had a NYC Medallion I would have sold it already. Just because taxi rules and customs have been around for 100+ years doesn't mean they can't change. The problem with the taxi industry is that the individual companies can't work together to fight off this Uber threat. Taxi companies generally hate each other and they have not been able to unite in time to fight the organized attack on the industry by Uber and others. "The times they are a changin". "There's a new sheriff in town". Once the rules change its hard to bring the old ones back.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Backdash said:


> Like I said, debatable how they got to be the rules.
> You think it was a criminal rule change the TLC disagrees. The TLC runs the thing you dont, they win you lose.


It's not 'debatable,' it's criminal.

It's not 'debatable' that Uber drivers are mostly using personal insurance. That should not be allowed at all, ever.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberTaxPro said:


> The rules aren't the rules anymore! They have changed. Almost every state legislature that has taken up this issue has come out with SEPERATE rules for rideshare companies. Even in NYC where you are Uber is 100% legal now. Even UberX drivers are commercially licensed and their vehicles are registered with the Taxi and Limousine Commission. If I had a NYC Medallion I would have sold it already. Just because taxi rules and customs have been around for 100+ years doesn't mean they can't change. The problem with the taxi industry is that the individual companies can't work together to fight off this Uber threat. Taxi companies generally hate each other and they have not been able to unite in time to fight the organized attack on the industry by Uber and others. "The times they are a changin". "There's a new sheriff in town". Once the rules change its hard to bring the old ones back.


Yes I get it you sold your soul and want criminals to run the show.


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Using a taximeter is the exclusive right of Medallion owners.
> 
> Whether I 'like' the rules is irrelevant. It's a criminal rules change. Someone paid for those rights and they're being robbed.
> 
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/akchhabra


People buy stocks in the stock market and loose money all the time. Medallions are the same kind of thing....they are not guaranteed to go up in value. Over the years they have gone up and down just like a stock.


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> It's not 'debatable,' it's criminal.
> 
> It's not 'debatable' that Uber drivers are mostly using personal insurance. That should not be allowed at all, ever.


but it is allowed now in a lot of places...they changed the rules. good luck changing back


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberTaxPro said:


> People buy stocks in the stock market and loose money all the time. Medallions are the same kind of thing....they are not guaranteed to go up in value. Over the years they have gone up and down just like a stock.


Completely unrelated and irrelevant.


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Completely unrelated and irrelevant.


unless you own a medallion!


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

Hackenstein said:


> It's not 'debatable,' it's criminal.
> 
> It's not 'debatable' that Uber drivers are mostly using personal insurance. That should not be allowed at all, ever.


You do realize that it being "criminal" is your opinion right? I mean you do know that dont you?

In NYC FHV cannot operate without the proper insurance. I live in NYC so what happens elsewhere has no importance to me.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Backdash said:


> You do realize that it being "criminal" is your opinion right? I mean you do know that dont you?
> 
> In NYC FHV cannot operate without the proper insurance. I live in NYC so what elsewhere has no importance to me.


No, it's definitely criminal.

In virtually every market aside from NYC, Uber drivers use personal insurance. The company would not currently exist if that were not the case. The fact that they do exist is doing a lot of harm to legitimate businesses. But that is, after all, what Wall Street does.


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

Hackenstein said:


> No, it's definitely criminal.
> 
> In virtually every market aside from NYC, Uber drivers use personal insurance. The company would not currently exist if that were not the case. The fact that they do exist is doing a lot of harm to legitimate businesses. But that is, after all, what Wall Street does.


So we agree in NYC its not criminal..


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Backdash said:


> So we agree in NYC its not criminal..


It is criminal. They're using an app as a taximeter to calculate the fare. That right was paid for by Medallion owners. The TLC sold out and doesn't care. Pathetic.


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Yes I get it you sold your soul and want criminals to run the show.


I was in the taxi business but thank God it never got my soul. Taxi business is the real "evil empire" not the Yankees


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

Hackenstein said:


> It is criminal. They're using an app as a taximeter to calculate the fare. That right was paid for by Medallion owners. The TLC sold out and doesn't care. Pathetic.


Again the TLC, the agency that sets the regualtions disagrees. The TLC wins, Hackenstein loses...


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> It is criminal. They're using an app as a taximeter to calculate the fare. That right was paid for by Medallion owners. The TLC sold out and doesn't care. Pathetic.


TLC just follows the laws....it doesn't make them. It makes regulations but not laws.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Backdash said:


> Again the TLC, the agency that sets the regualtions disagrees. The TLC wins, Hackenstein loses...


I understand, you think corruption is awesome. Once it's in place it's legitimate. Brilliant.



UberTaxPro said:


> TLC just follows the laws....it doesn't make them. It makes regulations but not laws.


Yes, it is a regulatory agency. I'm sure there was a point in there somewhere.


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> No, it's definitely criminal.
> 
> In virtually every market aside from NYC, Uber drivers use personal insurance. The company would not currently exist if that were not the case. The fact that they do exist is doing a lot of harm to legitimate businesses. But that is, after all, what Wall Street does.


Things are changing. The taxi business is like the post office...slowly going out of business because we don't need them anymore. Just because you call them legitimate doesn't mean we need them anymore.


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> I understand, you think corruption is awesome. Once it's in place it's legitimate. Brilliant.
> 
> Yes, it is a regulatory agency. I'm sure there was a point in there somewhere.


point is the TLC is following the NEW law. If you look at a little history, there has never been an industry more corrupt then the taxi industry. Taxi companies have been paying off politicians since the beginning of time


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

Hackenstein said:


> I understand, you think corruption is awesome. Once it's in place it's legitimate. Brilliant.


Actually I dont think corruptions is awesome. Please stop thinking for me. As to whether its legitimate or not, AGAIN, thats debatable. Any further comments you may have as to criminality, legitimacy, crooked, bribery or whatever are just part of the debate that you engage in here. They have no weight in the decisions that have been made or will be made by the NYC TLC.

All Im saying is, NYC TLC wins, Hackenstein loses


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberTaxPro said:


> point is the TLC is following the NEW law. If you look at a little history, there has never been an industry more corrupt then the taxi industry. Taxi companies have been paying off politicians since the beginning of time


So you're saying the TLC doesn't make the laws, but this law was in fact made by the TLC. Or perhaps you mean regulation. Perhaps you're confused.

I don't give a shit about the history of the taxi industry, this law, regulation whatever you think it is was clear cut. The app functions as a taximeter and it's illegal.



Backdash said:


> Actually I dont think corruptions is awesome. Please stop thinking for me. As to whether its legitimate or not, AGAIN, thats debatable. Any further comments you may have as to criminality, legitimacy, crooked, bribery or whatever are just part of the debate that you engage in here. They have no weight in the decisions that have been made or will be made by the NYC TLC.
> 
> All Im saying is, NYC TLC wins, Hackenstein loses


You think corruption is awesome. You are enamored by the idea that once it's in place, it's legitimate.


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

Just to be accurate its you who think that I think corruption is awesome, not me. I dont think corruption is awesome.
In regards to NYC TLC your argument is weak, its based in anger and frustration. Justified or not its a losing approach.

Besides,
NYC TLC wins, Hackenstein loses


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> Because NYC Medallions grow in value, so it's an incentive for ownership and the eventual ability to sell it and have some form of retirement. NYC is an entirely different market.


It creates a market for bank loans. Welcome to NYC.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> It creates a market for bank loans. Welcome to NYC.


So do mortgages. So does small business. Whatever that means.



Backdash said:


> Just to be accurate its you who think that I think corruption is awesome, not me. I dont think corruption is awesome.
> In regards to NYC TLC your argument is weak, its based in anger and frustration. Justified or not its a losing approach.
> 
> Besides,
> NYC TLC wins, Hackenstein loses


You love corruption, clearly. You're glad that Chhabra allowed app companies to use a virtual taximeter. I'd suggest you stop claiming otherwise.


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

Yeah it's about me.

NYC TLC wins, Hackenstein loses​


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Backdash said:


> Yeah it's about me.
> 
> NYC TLC wins, Hackenstein loses​


I get it, you're glad the TLC 'wins' by selling out and allowing virtual taximeters.

Being proud of that position is bizarre.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> So do mortgages. So does small business. Whatever that means.


Homes and businesses are real estate. Not video arcade tokens.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> Homes and businesses are real estate. Not video arcade tokens.


A permit to do street hails in NYC is as valuable as a home or a business.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Hackenstein said:


> A permit to do street hails in NYC is as valuable as a home or a business.


Only because banks convinced the city to choose to make a permit permanent and transferable.

In cities were banks haven't bought the city government, the city charges $100 to $500 for a non-transferable permit, and limits the number of them accordingly.

We've been through this over and over and over again before. You prefer a system where taxis need HUGE loans to buy a medallion which produces a TON of interest for the bank issuing the loan.

I don't prefer that because it just allows the banks to milk a TON of money from the fares for providing NO BENEFIT for the riders. A few ounces of cheap metal has no more useful purpose than a video arcade token does. Non-transferable permit systems do not have this HIGH additional cost in the business model.

You like the worthless video arcade token system. I get it. But you're not going to convince me it's better. It's the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen, and this is coming from someone who is very aware of Travis Kalanick's ridiculous vision for Uber.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> Only because banks convinced the city to choose to make a permit permanent and transferable.
> 
> In cities were banks haven't bought the city government, the city charges $100 to $500 for a non-transferable permit, and limits the number of them accordingly.
> 
> ...


Don't really get what you're after. The Medallion is an investment and chance at ownership. It changed significantly in the past decade with fleets bidding the price way up, but this is a new development. Transfer fees go to the city, another area where Uber contributes nothing.


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

Hackenstein said:


> I get it, you're glad the TLC 'wins' by selling out and allowing virtual taximeters.
> 
> Being proud of that position is bizarre.


Right & I think that 2+2=3 & that the sky is green. Please explain why that matters.

Whether anyone is glad or sad about it is completely unimportant. Fact is that the TLC runs the show.

You can accept it, figure out a way to implement change or continue your silly ranting.

Bottom line, 
NYC TLC wins, Hackenstein still loses...


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Backdash said:


> Right & I think that 2+2=3 & that the sky is green. Please explain why that matters.
> 
> Whether anyone is glad or sad about it is completely unimportant. Fact is that the TLC runs the show.
> 
> ...


Yes, I know, for the 1000th time, you applaud corruption.


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

Hackenstein said:


> Yes, I know, for the 1000th time, you applaud corruption.


Yeah I applaud corruption. So still, NYC TLC wins, Hackenstein is a loser... 
I'm fat and ugly too. Wait, I stink like butt too.

Still NYC TLC wins, Hackenstein loses.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Backdash said:


> Yeah I applaud corruption. So still, NYC TLC wins, Hackenstein is a loser...
> I'm fat and ugly too. Wait, I stink like butt too.
> 
> Still NYC TLC wins, Hackenstein loses.


Good to know you admit it.

I'm not trying to beat the TLC, merely pointing out their ruling was corrupt.

Thanks for playing.


----------



## Vexus (Mar 8, 2015)

Fun to see how adamant Hackenstein is about the Old Days Of Taxi. A man who has been in the system so long he has lost his passion and dreams. That part isn't fun, but the adamant stance against Uber is.

Horses lost to cars. Phones lost to mobile. Letters lost to email. Things change. Change with it or be disgruntled.


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

Vexus said:


> Fun to see how adamant Hackenstein is about the Old Days Of Taxi. A man who has been in the system so long he has lost his passion and dreams. That part isn't fun, but the adamant stance against Uber is.
> 
> Horses lost to cars. Phones lost to mobile. Letters lost to email. Things change. Change with it or be disgruntled.


Nothing old about taxis. A completely legitimate properly regulated business.

Uber is a law breaking illegal enterprise.

The fact that it uses a cellphone app to break the law doesn't make it legitimate or innovative.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

I hold a medallion in Charlotte. It's "worthless" because it's non transferrable.
I truly feel bad for my hack brothers in medallion equity cities. UberGypsy (x) is deflating medallion equity everywhere.
I have no beef with Uber, just license and insure your cars to the same level I do.
Uber will go away in Charlotte. .75 a mile is not a viable gross to operate a cab, gypsy or otherwise. 
Metrics show a pre tax net of $16 for 100 paid miles in UberX, here in Charlotte. 
I'll be at the hearing tomorrow. In a suit, tie, and clean shirt. I'm smart, articulate, and intend to press for equal licensing across the board.
this whole situation is evil. The manipulation which got UberX drivers to undermine my industry, the consumers who exploit it.
quit now before your car is a toilet...
OR stand with me to kill UberX and become licensed.
we are a nation of laws.
it's not a grey area.


----------

