# Yellow taxi industry loses 58 prospective buyers in auction for medallions



## UberComic (Apr 17, 2014)

*Yellow taxi industry loses 58 prospective buyers in auction for medallions*

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=NYDailyNewsTw


----------



## UberComic (Apr 17, 2014)

Looks like the medallion holders might be losing money. It'll be interesting to see what happens next.


----------



## ElectroFuzz (Jun 10, 2014)

This was expected, the cartel has been broken.
Pfft, 1 million dollar for a "license to drive" is just wrong in so many ways.


----------



## No-tippers-suck (Oct 20, 2014)

HAHA.. Hey that's AWESOME !!!

*A Taxi Medaillion should generally be free to everyone* (just pay fees to the city, like a TCP Permit)
but this was a monopoly and now it's hopefully over or at least significantly damaged !

*I wish they loose all their invested money.*
(I just ask how many of them ever had to WORK THEMSELVES to earn it?)

It's not against the Taxidrivers at all - I'm a former Taxidriver as well,
it's just against those who think they can make the big cash, not having to work - just by investing their beautiful money..

We are the people that earned it with our hands !


----------



## UberXTampa (Nov 20, 2014)

I once had a ny city medallion owner as a rider! She had many medallions. I think this was quite significant.


----------



## pako garcia (Oct 30, 2014)

UberComic said:


> Looks like the medallion holders might be losing money. It'll be interesting to see what happens next.


Yeap they are loosing money and we are making millions
Looooooool


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Pako, uber is making millions. Not you. Drivers get thrown bare minimum because they are needed. Uber has said they will go to driverless cars as soon as they are able to do so, then the dtivers will be making "0" dollars and uber will be making billions.


----------



## No-tippers-suck (Oct 20, 2014)

Driverless cars? never gonna happen on public streets.
I am not worried about it


----------



## Long time Nyc cab driver (Dec 12, 2014)

If it weren't worth a million dollars people wouldn't be buying them.
The Indians were fighting to buy them. In 30 years it will be worth 4 million dollars, and Uber will be history.


----------



## No-tippers-suck (Oct 20, 2014)

You see NYC Cabdriver and exactly there I see the "taxiproblem"
People don't see it at a joboportunity they see it as an investment Usually whoever owns a Taximedaillion is not even near to want to actively
work hisself in the taxiindustry. To them it's just a lucrative investment.

*WHAT IF:*
- Taximedaillions were all confiscated by the city and made worthless first. No money back to whoever bought them.
*- Then they were offered for a $1500 dollar fee payable to the city. In the price range as TCP permit in LA or TLC in NYC*
plus a yearly renewal fee. Condition to DRIVE YOURSELF a minimum of 6days a week !
- LIMITED MEDAILLIONS to only 1 Medaillion per natural person, no more investments from stock brokers and ****ing bankers.
because they give a shit about the drivers, read the full story of the taxibusiness when the city allowed the medaillion owners to hire
taxidrivers as independent contractors instead of emplying them to avoid the minimum wage ! that was the worst thing that happened to the drivers.

*See how that would affect the market ! The market would regulate itself*
If business was good, more drivers HAD A CHANCE of affording paying for a Taxi franchise, more drivers would join.
If business was slow over a period of time the Driver = Medaillion owner, would have to return the medaillion to the city
YOU CAN'T SELL the medaillion to a third person anymore = THE TAXI MONOPOLY was destroyed then.
Just fair taxibusiness easy to come in or no financial disaster if someone returned the taximedaillion to the city.

I don't know if there is any city in the US that keeps it like that. As mentioned in other posts, I am German citizen and I for sure know
in Germany Berlin is the only city that offers anybody who meets the conditions can get a taxifranchise just for a 200 EURO fee
In most cities there they are still monopolized and price just for the paper is around 65.000 Euros. 
It's an unfair system that doesn't benefit the drivers who would love to work their own.
It's only benefitting people who see it as an investment. I was for example driving for people who were bankers and lawyers and just thought it's a great way to make money without having to ever sit in the car themselves. SCREW THEM !


----------



## Long time Nyc cab driver (Dec 12, 2014)

No-tippers-suck said:


> You see NYC Cabdriver and exactly there I see the "taxiproblem"
> People don't see it at a joboportunity they see it as an investment Usually whoever owns a Taximedaillion is not even near to want to actively
> work hisself in the taxiindustry. To them it's just a lucrative investment.
> 
> ...


----------



## Long time Nyc cab driver (Dec 12, 2014)

If you you drove a cab 13 year's you know as much as I do.
You're right. .


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

pako garcia said:


> Yeap they are loosing money and we are making millions
> Looooooool


Pako Garcia! Were you the successful applicant at UBER HQ for the job "Corporate Cockermouth"? Enjoy the millions you are making, I heard there is a never ending line of graduates wanting that job of yours when you develop lockjaw!


----------



## No-tippers-suck (Oct 20, 2014)

Thank you sir,
Yes I was a driver in the first 3 years, then I got a black car permit from the city (I mean in Germany, not here in the US)
BECAUSE the medaillions were 65.000 usually a 2 year old E-class with the paper was around 100.000 to 120.000 that's too much.

The system doesn't support the drivers who want to become owners and still drive themselves.
You see with some "power" how they were able to convince the cities to switch to independent contractor and avoided the minimum wage.
NOBODY GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THE PROBLEMS THAT THE DRIVERS HAVE ! That's very sad and should be changed somehow.

The market would simply regulate itself and see Uber as a pretty good comparison :
Uber driver saturation would also regulate itself IF Uber would charge a monthly or yearly fee like just saying another $200 per month
like a membership fee.. then just see how many "independent contractors" would opt out..

Result : it would be busier for the rest again.
but we know it's not gonna happen with greedy Uber.. the more cars the better for them.


----------



## jimsbox (Oct 20, 2014)

Long time Nyc cab driver said:


> If it weren't worth a million dollars people wouldn't be buying them.
> The Indians were fighting to buy them. In 30 years it will be worth 4 million dollars, and Uber will be history.


And what color is the sky in your world? Are you heavily invested in buggy whip manufacturing and AOL as well?


----------



## Long time Nyc cab driver (Dec 12, 2014)

The Taxi business will always be around, don't kid yourself.


----------



## Brooklyn (Jul 29, 2014)

Alot of these people don't understand how the NYC taxi business runs... Uber Shmuber... there can be a billion apps in NYC... the yellow cab will/never can disappear. No offense to you Jimsbox... but you're in Kansas City.. you don't understand the beast that NYC is.


Long time Nyc cab driver said:


> The Taxi business will always be around, don't kid yourself.


----------



## No-tippers-suck (Oct 20, 2014)

I AGREE the Taxi business will always be around, that's a fact to me !

hope you didn't mean me with (a lot of people..) 
Street hailing is the best method to get a ride and it might be nowhere in the world so common as in NYC.

"when I was driving in Germany I always remember a rider who hailed me on the road" and when she got in she remarked:
"Cool that was New York Style"

People in Germany were used to walk to a taxistand while dozens of empty cabs were passing.. they kept walking towards us.
I agree that NYC is different from many places in the world.

BUT you see my complain is about those who just own the medaillions without being a driver themselves.

In my pink world ONLY A TAXIDRIVER is allowed to own a medaillion, the investors can get the hell out and go to wallstreet.


----------



## jimsbox (Oct 20, 2014)

Remember typewriters, AOL, Blockbuster Video, cassette tapes,VCRs, Walkmen? Looks like the trend is set and the writing is on the wall, it may not mean the total demise of taxis but the behaviour and attitude of the taxi services are going to have to adapt. How many people have you heard say they are so glad to have taxis so they don't have to use Uber or Lyft? I hear virtually every passenger express the opposite feeling in the form of they will never use taxis again now that they have experienced Uber and Lyft.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Same thing happened to the Yellow Pages. They pretty much controlled business advertising for decades. Then along came the internet and google amd poof their monopoly was gone. But, when something comes along and changes the staus quo, smart companies adapt. Yellow pages became YP. Com they are no where near as big as before but their costs have gone down substantially. No more big heavy books to print and deliver. No more thousands of offices or thousands of salespeople. I think this may happen to the taxi industry. Uber came along and disrupted the way things were done but taxi companies have been around a long time. They will adapt and become better for it. Ubers biggest advantage is money. Investors are fickle todays big "Innovation" is tomorrows "Myspace" or "AOL". 
Their second biggest advantage is breaking the law. Government will step in and regulate uber. The rules may change, but they will change for everyone. Taxi companies will adapt and become "TNC's" themselves. 
Ubers third advantage is their marketing success at finding drivers. As word gets around that drivers make minimum wage, it will become harder and harder to replace the drivers that keep quitting. If the courts ever decide drivers are employees (which in my opinion, they are) that could strike a near fatal blow for uber.
When it comes right down to it Uber is just an app. There will be another with better bells and whistles soon.


----------



## jimsbox (Oct 20, 2014)

observer said:


> Same thing happened to the Yellow Pages. They pretty much controlled business advertising for decades. Then along came the internet and google amd poof their monopoly was gone. But, when something comes along and changes the staus quo, smart companies adapt. Yellow pages became YP. Com they are no where near as big as before but their costs have gone down substantially. No more big heavy books to print and deliver. No more thousands of offices or thousands of salespeople. I think this may happen to the taxi industry. Uber came along and disrupted the way things were done but taxi companies have been around a long time. They will adapt and become better for it. Ubers biggest advantage is money. Investors are fickle todays big "Innovation" is tomorrows "Myspace" or "AOL".
> Their second biggest advantage is breaking the law. Government will step in and regulate uber. The rules may change, but they will change for everyone. Taxi companies will adapt and become "TNC's" themselves.
> Ubers third advantage is their marketing success at finding drivers. As word gets around that drivers make minimum wage, it will become harder and harder to replace the drivers that keep quitting. If the courts ever decide drivers are employees (which in my opinion, they are) that could strike a near fatal blow for uber.
> When it comes right down to it Uber is just an app. There will be another with better bells and whistles soon.


Very possible there are superior apps already available but the most important issue is can they get sufficient capitalization to get traction in the real world.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

No-tippers-suck said:


> Driverless cars? never gonna happen on public streets.
> I am not worried about it


Even trains needs drivers... not going to happen in the next few decades. Who knows after that.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

No-tippers-suck said:


> I AGREE the Taxi business will always be around, that's a fact to me !
> 
> hope you didn't mean me with (a lot of people..)
> Street hailing is the best method to get a ride and it might be nowhere in the world so common as in NYC.
> ...


The thing about NYC, when it rains and during other super busy times, it is hard to get a cab. I hate standing on a corner trying to wave a cab down. Pre-Uber days, in NYC I regularly order a private car when I needed to go to the airport or somewhere else I needed to be on time. Same price as a cab for long rides and I knew they would show up. I also generally take a private car from the airport into the city. Again, same price as a cab and I don't have to stand in the long cab lines. Personally, I hate taking cabs in Manhattan or any other city. I never use them in LA. I opt to drive to the airport and park my car rather than spend the $50+ taking a cab to the airport (from Beverly Hills - not a long ride) and then the return. Maybe now I will take an Uber. When I travel to Miami, I rent a car instead of having to take a cab to and from South Beach to the airport. Personally, as a consumer, I'm so grateful for Uber. As a driver, I love driving Uber Plus part-time (I have a day job). It's the easiest money I have ever made and I can work whenever I want or not.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

Long time Nyc cab driver said:


> The Taxi business will always be around, don't kid yourself.


There is definitely a market for them, especially for people w/ bad credit who can't get a credit card.


----------



## ElectroFuzz (Jun 10, 2014)

observer said:


> Same thing happened to the Yellow Pages. They pretty much controlled business advertising for decades. Then along came the internet and google amd poof their monopoly was gone. But, when something comes along and changes the staus quo, smart companies adapt. Yellow pages became YP. Com they are no where near as big as before but their costs have gone down substantially. No more big heavy books to print and deliver. No more thousands of offices or thousands of salespeople. I think this may happen to the taxi industry. Uber came along and disrupted the way things were done but taxi companies have been around a long time. They will adapt and become better for it. Ubers biggest advantage is money. Investors are fickle todays big "Innovation" is tomorrows "Myspace" or "AOL".
> Their second biggest advantage is breaking the law. Government will step in and regulate uber. The rules may change, but they will change for everyone. Taxi companies will adapt and become "TNC's" themselves.
> Ubers third advantage is their marketing success at finding drivers. As word gets around that drivers make minimum wage, it will become harder and harder to replace the drivers that keep quitting. If the courts ever decide drivers are employees (which in my opinion, they are) that could strike a near fatal blow for uber.
> When it comes right down to it Uber is just an app. There will be another with better bells and whistles soon.


One of their big advantage is the current economic situation.
As soon as the economy starts booming (if ever) they will have a
very hard time finding drivers and keeping these low fares.

In a way Uber is like a pioneer in the field.
They will create a new industry, clear the legal hurdles, go public and make tons of money.
But after that I foresee new competitors coming into the market
and they might dominate it too.


----------



## jsixis (Dec 14, 2014)

observer said:


> Pako, uber is making millions. Not you. Drivers get thrown bare minimum because they are needed. Uber has said they will go to driverless cars as soon as they are able to do so, then the dtivers will be making "0" dollars and uber will be making billions.


driverless cars hahahaha you still have maintenance which cost way more then a driver.
It will never happen


----------



## jsixis (Dec 14, 2014)

ElectroFuzz said:


> One of their big advantage is the current economic situation.
> As soon as the economy starts booming (if ever) they will have a
> very hard time finding drivers and keeping these low fares.
> 
> ...


 I agree, Uber is just a flash, there is always a company that studies the pioneer and then decides to do it correctly.
I just hope the replacement for Uber arrives before I am too poor to do this.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

jsixis said:


> driverless cars hahahaha you still have maintenance which cost way more then a driver.
> It will never happen


Not necessarily true. 
Maintenance on a NEW car is minimal. Just ask the rental car business. They generally keep cars for only 2-3 years and get new ones. When driverless cars do appear, Uber will buy new cars. So their expenses will be low. A lease on a car is what?? 700 per month? Drivers cost more than that. Insurance costs? Uber will self insure, the reason they don't self insure now is they don't own the vehicles. 
All costs, vehicle lease, fuel, and maintenance are deductible to Uber.
Remember, Uber will be keeping 100% of the fare. If they lose money because fares are to low and their expenses are to high. They will raise fares. 
They have no incentive to do so now because they have an endless supply of drivers willing to lose money driving for Uber.


----------



## jsixis (Dec 14, 2014)

observer said:


> Not necessarily true.
> Maintenance on a NEW car is minimal. Just ask the rental car business. They generally keep cars for only 2-3 years and get new ones. When driverless cars do appear, Uber will buy new cars. So their expenses will be low. A lease on a car is what?? 700 per month? Drivers cost more than that. Insurance costs? Uber will self insure, the reason they don't self insure now is they don't own the vehicles.
> All costs, vehicle lease, fuel, and maintenance are deductible to Uber.
> Remember, Uber will be keeping 100% of the fare. If they lose money because fares are to low and their expenses are to high. They will raise fares.
> They have no incentive to do so now because they have an endless supply of drivers willing to lose money driving for Uber.


I worked for enterprise, I know what new cars require to run 30k miles. You still have regular maintenance, plus the stuff customers break and lots of cleaning.


----------



## pako garcia (Oct 30, 2014)

No-tippers-suck said:


> Driverless cars? never gonna happen on public streets.
> I am not worried about it


Apsolutely not
You dont hAve toworry about driverless cars; the only thing you have to woory is to get the 5 stars, or not tobe fired ramdonly as the app use to do


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

jsixis said:


> I worked for enterprise, I know what new cars require to run 30k miles. You still have regular maintenance, plus the stuff customers break and lots of cleaning.


Just curious how much you estimate these monthly costs are per car?
I don't think Uber will get rid of all drivers. They would need too much money. What they will do is deploy them to the most lucrative markets. Any drivers in these markets would get the pick ups Uber doesn't want. Remember Uber will know who the best passengers are and keep those for themselves. 
Surges?? They will be Ubers first, anything they can't handle will go to the drivers.


----------



## Sly (Aug 30, 2014)

observer said:


> Pako, uber is making millions. Not you. Drivers get thrown bare minimum because they are needed. Uber has said they will go to driverless cars as soon as they are able to do so, then the dtivers will be making "0" dollars and uber will be making billions.


GPS keeps sending me the wrong way on one way roads and doesn't handle road closings very well. It'll be a long while before driverless cars can be supervisor free.


----------



## No-tippers-suck (Oct 20, 2014)

@observer :

I absolutely disagree with your idea that "Uber" would "buy or lease" the driverlesscar (which in my opinion never gonna happen!)
If so they will more likely push those risky costs to some sort of investors : i.e. independent contractors. They will also be responsible to
take care of the maintenaince and put their heads on the line IF ANYBODY EVER GETS KILLED in an DRIVERLESS CAR !

Do not ever believe that Uber ever would take that kind of risk !



observer said:


> Not necessarily true.
> Maintenance on a NEW car is minimal. Just ask the rental car business. They generally keep cars for only 2-3 years and get new ones. When driverless cars do appear, Uber will buy new cars. So their expenses will be low. A lease on a car is what?? 700 per month? Drivers cost more than that. Insurance costs? Uber will self insure, the reason they don't self insure now is they don't own the vehicles.
> All costs, vehicle lease, fuel, and maintenance are deductible to Uber.
> Remember, Uber will be keeping 100% of the fare. If they lose money because fares are to low and their expenses are to high. They will raise fares.
> They have no incentive to do so now because they have an endless supply of drivers willing to lose money driving for Uber.


I read someones very realistic statement that trains are still not driverless, and that would be really really easy, right?
even easier than pilot'less airliners or driverless cars.. they already have their own tracks and are not using public streets so they are never confronted
with any individual traffic that could make mistakes and accidently kill the people in the "driverless" vehicle..

OH...hold on.. trains (unless driving in isolated tunnels still have contact with indivial traffic.

yah.. NOT GONNA HAPPEN !


----------



## No-tippers-suck (Oct 20, 2014)

@ Sly :

EXACTLY SIR !!
If they even can't change that



Sly said:


> GPS keeps sending me the wrong way on one way roads and doesn't handle road closings very well. It'll be a long while before driverless cars can be supervisor free.


----------



## AintWorthIt (Sep 30, 2014)

Long time Nyc cab driver said:


> The Taxi business will always be around, don't kid yourself.


I have a telephone booth I'd like to show you.


----------



## Long time Nyc cab driver (Dec 12, 2014)

ElectroFuzz said:


> One of their big advantage is the current economic situation.
> As soon as the economy starts booming (if ever) they will have a
> very hard time finding drivers and keeping these low fares.
> 
> ...


----------



## Long time Nyc cab driver (Dec 12, 2014)

That's right, Uber can only jerk people around because of the poor economy. 92 million people not working. If and when the economy is good a certain amount of people will tell uber to F off.
It's already happening in NYC, with driver's demonstrations. 
And these are people from third world countries, some uneducated.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Long time Nyc cab driver said:


> That's right, Uber can only jerk people around because of the poor economy. 92 million people not working. If and when the economy is good a certain amount of people will tell uber to F off.
> It's already happening in NYC, with driver's demonstrations.
> And these are people from third world countries, some uneducated.


That's because in a lot of "third world countries" unions are very strong. The rich control the government. The rich control the businesses. The rich control the media. The only way the poor can change anything is by banding together and protesting. Since unions have been weakened here in the US, the rich have become richer, the middle class has become poor and the poor have become poorer.


----------



## Long time Nyc cab driver (Dec 12, 2014)

observer said:


> That's because in a lot of "third world countries" unions are very strong. The rich control the government. The rich control the businesses. The rich control the media. The only way the poor can change anything is by banding together and protesting. Since unions have been weakened here in the US, the rich have become richer, the middle class has become poor and the poor have become poorer.


----------



## Long time Nyc cab driver (Dec 12, 2014)

*Dude, I'm talking about third world people driving in the United States, I'm sure they have strong unions in Pakistan, Bangladesh, China, India, Trinidad, the Dominican Republic. In NYC white people don't work for uber for the most part. Just like no white people drive yellow cabs. You could say I'm racist, but those are the facts son. And yes under our Lord and savior, the all mighty one, Obama. The rich have become richer, the middle class poor, and the poor have learned how to work the system. Not that I can blame them.*


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Long time Nyc cab driver said:


> *Dude, I'm talking about third world people driving in the United States, I'm sure they have strong unions in Pakistan, Bangladesh, China, India, Trinidad, the Dominican Republic. In NYC white people don't work for uber for the most part. Just like no white people drive yellow cabs. You could say I'm racist, but those are the facts son. And yes under our Lord and savior, the all mighty one, Obama. The rich have become richer, the middle class poor, and the poor have learned how to work the system. Not that I can blame them.*


 My point was that since unionizing and protesting to change things in their countries is common, they do that here in the US to protest uber policies. The biggest question is why are drivers only protesting in NYC. Why aren't they protesting all over the country? Why aren't YOU protesting? We in the US have become sheep and the wolves of wall street know that. Unions may or may not be the answer but we the people need to be UNITED.


----------



## makes_sense (Sep 26, 2014)

Hate to break it to you just enjoy it while its here


----------



## DriverJ (Sep 1, 2014)

No-tippers-suck said:


> Driverless cars? never gonna happen on public streets.
> I am not worried about it


Are you serious? The technology is there. I guarantee you it will happen. Why wouldn't it?


----------



## ElectroFuzz (Jun 10, 2014)

DriverJ said:


> Are you serious? The technology is there. I guarantee you it will happen. Why wouldn't it?


Not in our lifetime.
We might see some limited "closed loop roads" in downtown areas.
We might see "auto pilot cars" (still needs a driver)
but everywhere?...... probably decades away.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

No-tippers-suck said:


> @observer :
> 
> I absolutely disagree with your idea that "Uber" would "buy or lease" the driverlesscar (which in my opinion never gonna happen!)
> If so they will more likely push those risky costs to some sort of investors : i.e. independent contractors. They will also be responsible to
> ...


http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car


----------



## DriverJ (Sep 1, 2014)

observer said:


> http://theoatmeal.com/blog/google_self_driving_car


Bet those horseless carriages and flying contraptions never catch on either.


----------



## No-tippers-suck (Oct 20, 2014)

You just posted a link without a personal statement..
So you believe in the Google propaganda then ?

I posted this picture before in another thread.. it said "within 10 years"
and the reason why the cute flying saucers never made it is not that we wouldn't be able to build them.
It's simply humanity.. We will never be ready for that.

NOT AS LONG the streets and freeways will be closed to the public completely.
because some smart engineers forgot that there are still people that cause accidents out there.
They will not be able to coexist with driverless cars.

But we might see them at big airports like LAX.. google cars picking us up at the terminal and shuttling us to our parked cars on streets closed to the public.
"Maybe.."


----------

