# Uber and Lyft Should Just Become Taxi Firms



## MHR (Jul 23, 2017)

And Get Over Themselves!​
If you hadn't heard, you must've had your head under a rock because there's a new story every week, but ride-hailing apps Uber and Lyft are in an intense legal battle in California right now over how the companies classify their drivers. Their future remains uncertain, but what happens if they are forced to shut down? What apps would move into their space?

CNN recently interviewed the creators of a couple of options, and they show that proven business models can still be supported and built upon using innovative technologies.

Dumpling, an app created by a Seattle-based startup, sprouted up among on-demand grocery services like Instacart, but it's subtly different.

Users of the app effectively become their own personal shopping small-business owner. Dumpling itself operates more as a one-stop-shop to get people working on their own terms than an on-demand service in its own right.

The app helps users get setup in business, build a website, and it offers business coaching, and prefunded credit cards, so they can get to work right away.

Users pay a setup fee and then enter into a monthly subscription option. Businesspeople that setup through Dumpling will register as a sole proprietor or an LLC, and so can operate entirely on their own terms. Something that Uber and Lyft say they cannot offer if they have to abide by AB5 regulations.

Dumpling now wants to offer Dumpling Drive to give Uber and Lyft drivers an alternate business opportunity. The only issue here, is that drivers must build up their own client base.

When using Uber, we don't really care about what driver we get, and that's part of the allure: we don't have to build our schedules around when our driver is free as there's usually a few waiting. But it shows that other business models are possible, this one could work if local groups of drivers work together to offer reliable localized services.

Another option might just be to make drivers employees, and come full-circle from being a ride-hailing business to just being a tech-focused taxi firm.

Dallas-based startup Alto says it will enter California this year, and for all intent and purpose it's an upmarket taxi firm. The company owns the vehicles, which it also maintains, drivers are fingerprinted, and are recognized as employees. Something that Uber and Lyft have avoided at all costs.

Unlike Uber and Lyft, which pay drivers based on the routes they complete, Alto pays its drivers an hourly rate.

Alto says many of its drivers work fewer than 10 hours a week, and are free to work at a time that suits them. Their full-time workers, however, are granted more work in exchange for being openly available to drive during high-demand times. That sounds fair.

What these two cases really show is that Uber and Lyft have plenty of scope to reinvent themselves. It doesn't mean that they're doomed to failure, in fact, far from it. But Uber and Lyft need to recognize this and acknowledge that they have the ability to comply with laws and adjust their business model accordingly. Rather than continuing to fight legislation just because it isn't happening on their terms.

The whole situation now is just steeped in bucket loads of irony.

Uber and Lyft sprung on to the scene years ago with the Silicon Valley mentality of moving fast, breaking stuff, and "disrupting." Being in pursuit of disruption is no excuse for flaunting laws and operating a morally questionable business.

It's not like the companies haven't had plenty of time to realign their businesses and fall-in with new regulations either. But the issue is what it would cost them to make all drivers employees. It would cost so much that the companies would rather fight AB5 with a $100 million proposition than just pay drivers benefits and recognize them as employees.

Now it appears that the ride-hailing companies are being shown a path which will lead them to having done nothing more than reinvent the old-fashioned taxi firm, with just a sprinkling of new-age tech. It's certainly not the sparkling sharing or gig-economy we were promised.

Back in February, the Financial Times reported that Uber was launching a phone-in service which lets users call a human to book a taxi, you know, just like the good old days.

Last month, the New York Times wrote about how Uber and Lyft are exploring a franchise-style business model, one that would be similar to what Dumpling currently offers. In effect, this would make Uber a taxi-firm chain that supplies the technology to licensees and lets them run their own businesses on their own terms. The companies becoming nothing more than specialist software houses.

It's kind of doing that already, though. Last month, Uber bought a specialist UK software firm that services the taxi industry. This gave it access to over 100 more locations in the nation without even having to recruit more drivers.

It also struck a partnership with Thames Clippers, a boat taxi service that runs on London's River Thames. The deal saw Uber integrate boat tickets into its app and get a bunch of advertising on the side of the vessels.

Uber and Lyft are currently operating under reprieve from Californian legislators and are waiting on the US general election in November, which will let the public decide how it should classify drivers. Read this for more on that topic.

But it seems whatever happens, the companies that were once the disruptors, are now the disrupted. They should just become plain old taxi firms and get over themselves.

https://thenextweb.com/shift/2020/0...st-become-taxi-firms-and-get-over-themselves/


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

They do not want to be subject to the same regulations as taxicabs. Neither could compete if that happened.


----------



## mrpjfresh (Aug 16, 2016)

Is there anyone familiar with the law that can explain why Dumpling cannot match riders and drivers and charge a small fee? I'm guessing maybe something to do with TNC law requirements or is this even too much to do under AB5? It just seems silly to go to all the trouble to help drivers get fully set up their own driving business and then say "you're on your own" with literally the most vital part: customers. Perhaps they are leaving it to another company to come in and play broker instead?

Uber and Lyft doing too much, end to end, allowed them to be wildly successful (from a usage/popularity standpoint anyway) but also was a double edged sword because it's exactly why they are in their current predicament.


----------



## Mash Ghasem (Jan 12, 2020)

TNW needs a new graphic designer... 2 left arms on this *↑↑* poor guy!!


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> They do not want to be subject to the same regulations as taxicabs. Neither could compete if that happened.


They would have to PAY not ROB DRIVERS !



Mash Ghasem said:


> TNW needs a new graphic designer... 2 left arms on this *↑↑* poor guy!!


P.S.
Why does that guy
Have 2 Left Arms !?!?


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks (Aug 5, 2019)

mrpjfresh said:


> Is there anyone familiar with the law that can explain why Dumpling cannot match riders and drivers and charge a small fee? I'm guessing maybe something to do with TNC law requirements or is this even too much to do under AB5? It just seems silly to go to all the trouble to help drivers get fully set up their own driving business and then say "you're on your own" with literally the most vital part: customers. Perhaps they are leaving it to another company to come in and play broker instead?
> 
> Uber and Lyft doing too much, end to end, allowed them to be wildly successful (from a usage/popularity standpoint anyway) but also was a double edged sword because it's exactly why they are in their current predicament.


Match making in the transportation business is called dispatching.

Once you start doing things like controlling rates or dispatching, then you start failing the ABC test.

Right now Uber in C.A is failing the ABC test mostly due to controlling dispatching, making it fall under the category of transportation company.

What Uber, Lyft or Dumpling could do is show available drivers and allow the passengers to choose based on price, rate, car type.

They can not control rates or dispatch to pass the ABC test.

Dumpling particularly, is not interested to spend billions in creating ridership. It is leaving it up to the driver, like say how a real estate agent works. You get a website, proper license, then hand out your business card. Build your own client base if you can. But Dumpling is not going to do it for you and spend money.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Uber and Lyft want to have their cake and eat it too. The only way for them to remain setup in an independent contractor framework is if they are REGULATED to prevent them from taking more than 30% of the fare. Ideally, there would be a national minimum driver's rate set at $1.25 a mile and .25 a minute. This would put wait time at a reasonable rate so drivers wouldn't be too upset about waiting at a stop, waiting for pax to come to their car, and going through drive-thrus. 

As it stands, both platforms are trying to take 50%+ of the fare as a broker, which is simply criminal. At this rate, most drivers would be wise to become fully commercial and establish a client base, because these companies are ****ing awful.


----------



## Cereal Killer (Aug 10, 2020)

MHR said:


> View attachment 504910
> 
> And Get Over Themselves!​
> If you hadn't heard, you must've had your head under a rock because there's a new story every week, but ride-hailing apps Uber and Lyft are in an intense legal battle in California right now over how the companies classify their drivers. Their future remains uncertain, but what happens if they are forced to shut down? What apps would move into their space?
> ...


A rich in profits autonomous fleet is the ultimate goal. All this rubbish you just typed makes no sense for them.


----------



## Uber's Guber (Oct 22, 2017)

tohunt4me said:


> P.S.
> Why does that guy
> Have 2 Left Arms !?!?


Because he's never right!


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Match making in the transportation business is called dispatching.


.................only for lack of anything better to call it..........................I refer to it as "call assignment" or "request assignment", but that does not roll off the tongue as easily as does "dispatching". Real dispatching reqiures a human being on a microphone who actually knows what he is doing. This is how a driver makes money. Some dumb[donkey] computer program connected to a satellite is not dispatching.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

It’s completely legal and in place in Orlando, only thing is the drivers hate taking Uber fares because of the large bite out of the pie.

I myself have found that when it’s busy enough for Uber taxi to exist that I’m better off ignoring it for regular cab fares.


----------



## islanddriver (Apr 6, 2018)

tohunt4me said:


> They would have to PAY not ROB DRIVERS !
> 
> 
> P.S.
> ...


Because the article is from CNN. What do you expect.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> It's completely legal and in place in Orlando, only thing is the drivers hate taking Uber fares because of the large bite out of the pie.


They used to take a twenty per-cent chunk of ours, as well. This was back when there was a default tip setting of twenty per-cent. The result was that usually you got your fare plus a paltry tip. If the customer changed the tip setting, you got less. At some point, they decided to make it a flat two dollar user fee to the customer and we got whatever was on the meter plus whatever tip the customer gave. At that point, there was still a default tip setting. When Uber implemented platform wide tipping, the customer had to tip every time. This has diminished the tips on Uber Taxi. Still, we do get the meter. The one thing that we do not get is the call charge.

DFHV Regulations specifically prohibit charging for a call on an application summons. The provider can charge the customer a user fee. The driver can charge for a call from h is own cab company, though. It has cost extra to call a cab in the District of Columbia since the 1920s.


----------



## REX HAVOC (Jul 4, 2016)

From my understanding Taxi drivers are not considered employees. They pay daily gate to cover the use of the cab and medallion, cover their own gas and then keep the rest. How would that work in an Uber model since their is no medallion and we own the cars.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

If Uber and Lyft admitted to being just taxi firms instead of technology companies, their stock would crater. 

Also if they had to follow a traditional taxi model then they would mostly only be able to service in city passengers. 

Most of America didn't have any sort of taxi service before rideshare due to cost to service rural areas.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Most of America didn't have any sort of taxi service before rideshare due to cost to service rural areas.


Exactly,

In the podunk town i grew up in we didn't have taxis.

My choices in transportation?

The school bus,

Mom's minivan

The shoelace express

Huffy Human propelled 2 wheeled conveyance

and my personal favorite...

Dirt bikes that we weren't supposed to ride on the roads (especially underage) but the cops never cared unless we were being super stupid because they knew we could just make for the woods and be gone if they tried. I mean if you've ever tried to run down a dirt bike in the woods in West Virgina... With a crown victoria... well, you would KNOW not to try.


----------



## ANT 7 (Oct 14, 2018)

They are taxi services........they just can't quite admit it though........heh.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

REX HAVOC said:


> From my understanding Taxi drivers are not considered employees. They pay daily gate to cover the use of the cab and medallion, cover their own gas and then keep the rest. How would that work in an Uber model since their is no medallion and we own the cars.


There are some of us cab drivers who own our own cab. I am one such.



ANT 7 said:


> They are taxi services........they just can't quite admit it though........heh.


T. Kalanick actually did admit, on record, that Uber was doing the same thing that the cab companies were doing. This was back when there was only Uber Black.


----------



## REX HAVOC (Jul 4, 2016)

Another Uber Driver said:


> There are some of us cab drivers who own our own cab. I am one such.


So does the state consider you an employee or independent contractor?

It puzzles me as to why the state doesn't just require Uber to reclassify as taxis and keep us as independent contractors?


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

*Q: *


REX HAVOC said:


> does the state consider you an employee?


*A:* No.


----------

