Taxis & Ridesharing - articles, discussion ...

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> The graph that shows exactly when Uber wounded Brisbane's taxis

Brisbane taxi licences have plummeted in value by 78 per cent in just three years.

In 2014, standard taxi licences in the city were selling, on average, for more than half a million dollars.

Last year, that figure dropped to $113,003, as the dominance of ride-sharing service Uber sounded a near-death knell for Brisbane taxi licence owners.

The value of wheelchair-accessible maxi-taxi licences nosedived 60 per cent in three years to $111,179, on average, in Brisbane in 2017.

Across Queensland, the value of limousine licences dropped 76 per cent to $16,529, on average.

The plunge in the value of taxi licences can be revealed following Fairfax Media analysis of Queensland government open data.

Uber came to Brisbane in 2014, and ride-sharing was legalised in September 2016, shaving thousands of dollars from the sale price.

While 58 standard cab licences were sold in Brisbane in 2014, caution seemingly swept the market in 2015, with only 11 transfers, with 30 transfers in each of the two following years.

Taxi Council of Queensland chief executive Blair Davies said many licences were owned by "mum and dad" investors, whose investment was damaged due to the arrival of ride-sharing, which created an oversupply in transport options.

"Many of whom put their whole life into the taxi industry, and the taxi licence was their superannuation," he said.

Mr Davies said there were very few buyers for taxi licences in the market.

"Until we can get some certainty back into the market ... then it's going to be difficult for the people who hold those licences to get a reasonable price for their asset," he said.

"People who are selling those licences are doing so because their situation is desperate."

Mr Davies called on the government to level the playing field in compulsory third party insurance, as taxi licence holders paid $4461.80, while ride-sharing drivers paid $585.30.

He said $20,000 compensation paid to taxi licence holders, capped at two licences, was "completely inadequate".

"They need to find some more money to help out people who have seen their superannuation assets devastated by this government policy," Mr Davies said.

"The government really now needs to start getting serious about reviewing what it's done and fixing the problems."

Limousine Association Queensland president Frank Bonomo said many people had lost their retirement nest egg.

"Their income is reduced and their asset, they can't really sell... Realistically they can't do anything about it," he said.

"We've got people who have lost in excess of $1.2 million for 10 licences all because of a stroke of a pen to allow ride-share."

Mr Bonomo called for greater compensation for taxi and limousine licence-holders.

LNP transport spokesman Steve Minnikin said Labor's compensation package of $20,000 per licence, capped at two licences per owner, was "woefully inadequate".

"Mum and dad taxi owners whose licences were their retirement nest eggs now face a bleak future," he said.

A Transport and Main Roads spokesman said the government had provided support to the taxi and limousine industries through the $100 million Industry Adjustment Assistance Package, which included financial, advisory and incentive measures.

The package included $59.78 million in one-off transition payments made to eligible taxi and limousine licence holders and $26.7 million in industry hardship payments.

The spokesman said the government also funded $5.6 million to incentivise wheelchair-accessible taxis, $3.75 million for business advisory help and $4.3 million in waived fees for the existing industry.

Licence holders also had renewal fees waived for 12 months.

No new taxi licences were to be issued before 2018, and none have been issued so far this year.

"Department of Transport and Main Roads will continue to monitor the demand for taxi service licences," the spokesman said.

"Decisions about the need for additional licences and the number/timing of licences to be released will be based on demand analysis."

Last month, there were 3257 taxi licences and 574 limousine licences.

Uber was contacted for comment.

Licence sales recorded at zero dollars, often the result of transfers between family members or trust structures, were removed from the analysis.

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/Robert_Dow/status/988446942995791872

================

Couriermail --> Uber cars are causing congestion on Brisbane's city streets

ROADS in Brisbane's CBD and inner-city are being choked by an explosion of Uber cars.

Banned from using taxi ranks, hundreds of rideshare vehicles are circling streets and clogging loading zones as they wait for bookings from passengers.

And the RACQ says the situation will only get worse with other operators preparing to enter the local market.

"Rideshare is not going anywhere. It will only increase," Paul Turner, chief communications officer for the motoring organisation, said.

"We have a lot of Ubers floating around the city wanting to pull up. They can't use taxi ranks and they are not enough drop-off and pick-up points around the city.

"They use loading zones so we see freight traffic waiting to pull in because there is an Uber there."

The RACQ says many people who previously used public transport have ditched buses for Ubers too, adding to traffic volumes in the middle of the city.

"You still have private cars, you still have taxis, you still have buses and now you have Ubers," Mr Turner said.

"We're seeing different traffic flows and we need to adjust."

Uber now has more than 11,000 drivers in Brisbane, outnumbering taxis more than five to one.

Rival Ola, which was launched in Sydney and Perth, says it will begin services in Brisbane this year.

Taxify, which was launched in Sydney and Melbourne in December, is advertising for a Brisbane operations manager. and Australia manager Samuel Raciti said they "plan to have wheels on the ground in Brisbane very soon." Lyft may also introduce operations.

Mr Turner said the RACQ had had concerns there were insufficient pick-up and drop-off points for some time and it needed to be tackled as a priority in Brisbane City Council's new transport plan which is currently being drawn up.

The City Council last audited vehicle drop-off/pick-up points in the city centre in 2014 before Uber even existed and says it has no plans to increase loading zone spaces in the CBD.

Uber's Queensland state manager Alex Golden said a survey of more than 1200 drivers found 87 per cent said CBD pick-ups were stressful and more than one in three resulted in confusion about where to collect or drop off.

"We have over 600,000 active riders in Brisbane that are currently relying on Uber to get a safe and reliable ride home from the CBD at all times of the day.

"By not considering safe, reliable and legal pick-up and drop-off zones for ridesharing users, thousands of Brisbane residents are forced into unnecessary, stressful experiences which the City Council can easily resolve with this new transport plan," Mr Golden said.

Taxi Council Queensland CEO Blair Davies said legalising rideshare services had "turned over our city streets to be run by people in the gig economy for their own profit at the expense of other road users".

The "unintended consequences" manifested as congestion, dangerous parking manoeuvres and passengers getting out of cars in unsafe locations.

He called for authorities to enforce rules on illegal stopping and said Brisbane should follow New York in considering a cap on the number of rideshare vehicles.

Brisbane Deputy Mayor Adrian Schrinner said the Council believed residents and visitors deserved a variety of travel options including rideshare.

All 55 recommendations made by the Parking Taskforce in 2014 had been implemented.

"In the CBD, ride share vehicles have access to more than 155 loading zones to pick up or drop off their passengers.

"While the Council will continue to review the allocation of spaces in the CBD, at this time we have no plans to expand the number of loading zone spaces.

"Council's traffic modelling does not indicate that there has been an increase in the amount of vehicle circling behaviour in the CBD since the emergence of ridesharing," he said.

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/SteveMinnikinMP/status/988651010607345664

[James]

It's a big problem which needs speedy resolution IMO.

You just have to look at Adelaide St in the CBD... far too many people, rideshare or not, getting dropped off in this precinct, congestion an already congested area in the PM peak. If the police started enforcing the rule of 'local traffic only' and only setting down passengers in dedicated loading zones (of which there are none between George and Edward Streets anyway), it would go a long way to easing the perpetual congestion and delays faced by buses using Adelaide Street.

Perhaps designated drop-off points could be used. People might have to walk a bit further, but walking never did anybody any harm.

[techblitz]

Ideally we need rideshare servicing inner busway stations better where there is true 'turn up and go' frequency.
Perhaps uber and bcc could work together to create some sort of discounting system....where you receive a discount off the normal/surge rate whenever you choose to be dropped off at one of these inner busway stations...where you are never waiting any longer than 5-10mins for a bus.

[techblitz]

As long as uber drivers don't use the busway as a short cut

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/brisbane-news/uber-driver-captured-driving-on-fortitude-valley-footpath-20180514-p4zf5a.html

An Uber driver has been filmed driving on a footpath in Fortitude Valley.

The video of the black hatchback was posted to social media on Sunday and showed the car driving down a footpath on Warner Street, in the inner-Brisbane suburb

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> New rideshare service Ola launches in Brisbane, Gold Coast

QUEENSLAND'S latest rideshare service, Ola, hits the roads today.

The new company will have drivers operating in both Brisbane and the Gold Coast.

Ola's head of operations in Australia, Wolf Aron, says he is convinced there is room in the market despite the presence of rivals such as Uber, GoCatch and the impending entry of Taxify.

"Based on the take-up across Perth, Melbourne and Sydney, we are expecting great results quickly in Brisbane and the Gold Coast."

Indian-owned, Ola has registered 30,000 drivers since launching in Australia in February.

It aims to recruit new drivers, and poach from competitors – by taking just 7.5 per cent commission for an introductory period. That compare to Uber's 25 per cent and 15 per cent for most others.

Ola's rate will rise to 15 per cent eventually, but Mr Aron won't give a timeframe.

The firm is offering customers one free ride worth up to $20 for a week.

Its app says normal rates will be a base $2 and $1.15 per kilometre, with a $7.50 minimum. Mr Aron says there will be no surge charging, where fares increase at busy times.

Drivers must undergo police checks and use vehicles made in 2010 or later.

Ola's arrival will add to concerns by the RACQ that rideshare vehicles are creating inner-city traffic congestion by circling the streets because there are insufficient parking or waiting bays. Uber already has 11,000 drivers in Brisbane.

Mr Aron said they were talking to local authorities about the issue but no particular strategies had been developed.

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Taxis building war chest in bid to sue over ride sharing

DESPERATE Queensland taxi licence owners are building a war chest to fund a looming legal fight with the State Government over its decision to legalise ride sharing.

About 500 of the state's 1800 taxi licence owners have already offered financial backing to help sue the State Government for massive capital and revenue losses.

Individual taxi licence values have plunged hundreds of thousands of dollars since 2014 when the first ride share vehicles surfaced on Queensland roads.

The State Government eventually passed legislation in 2016 that legalised the industry.

Queensland Taxi Licence Owners' Association chief executive Paul Scaini said owners had entered one of the state's most highly regulated industries and felt "betrayed".

"The taxi and ride source industry needs to have restored to it a system in which there is safety, viability and sustainability," he said.

"It was there before the Government chose to legalise what was previously illegal ride source activities.

"They have financially broken an industry and have deliberately created an environment in which workers must work for below award remuneration and conditions and mum and dad financiers who partnered with the Government have been betrayed and left destitute."

He said the Government had refused to help the association contact the owners of about 3300 licences operating in the state.

He estimated about 1800 individuals or businesses owned those licences but the association had only been able to reach about half of them.

Katter's Australia Party leader Bob Katter said he would throw his "full fury" behind the licence owners as there was palpable outrage in the community over the Government's actions.

"Queensland is by far and away the worst of the states because we've got a series of really dumb people governing Queensland who don't understand Magna Carta or the British legal system," he said.

"If you agree to the principle that the government can take property or property rights off you any time they feel like it, then you are living in a system which we people under British law have not seen since 1215 at Runnymede," he said.

"If you allow the government to go in and take property off you, it might be a taxi licence today, it might be your home tomorrow.

"If this was an individual that did this, you'd sue him immediately."

[techblitz]

ABC --> Why taxi licence holders are killing themselves

Six drivers in New York have died by suicide since December after the value of licences fell from more than $1 million to just $130,000.

The Queensland Taxi Licence Owner's Association says four of its members have also killed themselves.

"Insolvencies and bankruptcies are on the rise," chief executive Paul Scaini says.

"Owners and workers suffer severe depression and at least four individuals have tragically self-harmed."
The Victorian Hire Care and Taxi Families group in Melbourne, where Ylmiz and Sevgi Hassan live, has reported at least seven recent suicides.

only one word....tragic....action needed NOW to stop more plate owners from taking their own lives...

[ozbob]

The West Australian --> Perth taxi drivers threaten industrial action in response to WA Government buyback scheme

ANGRY taxi plate owners have threatened to "disrupt Perth" in a major escalation of the battle over the McGowan Government's cabbie compensation plan.

Peter Rosengrave, representing a group of plate owners fighting the buyback scheme, warned the industry was now considering industrial action — with a go-slow strategy for Perth arterial roads on the cards.

The move comes in the wake of an unsuccessful attempt by taxi owners to get $290,000 for their plates as part of the compensation scheme announced in November.

The threat comes as plate owners put to the Government a new proposal to help fund a multi-million compensation payout to about 1000 operators.

And in a move to combat the Uber phenomenon, taxi plate owner John Golawski is launching a new smartphone app — www.flagit.net.au — to help traditional taxi operators compete.

"They (the Government) have totally decimated the industry. We are at breaking point," Mr Rosengrave said.

"With their proposal (for compensation), a lot of people will go bankrupt — none of us are earning the minimum wage.

"They (taxi operators) will disrupt Perth by slowing up the traffic and disrupting the traffic flow.

"This is not a hollow threat, we have no option. We were promised fair compensation, and we haven't got it.

"We are getting stonewalled."

The McGowan Government's plan has been dubbed the Uber Tax — an industry-funded voluntary taxi plate buyback scheme that would involve a 10 per cent levy on operators' total fare revenue.

The scheme, which has yet to be legislated for, was in response to the arrival of Uber in WA, which has affected the incomes of cabbies and plate owners.

Under the proposal, taxi operators would be offered a minimum $100,000 a plate.

However, Mr Rosengrave, along with fellow industry representatives Athan Tsirigotis and Mr Golawski, said that figure should be almost tripled to $290,000 a plate.

Transport Minister Rita Saffioti said her buyback scheme was "the most generous scheme of its kind in this country".

"Under the proposed legislation, taxi plates will be bought back at a minimum cost of $100,000 and a maximum of $290,000, depending on when the plate was purchased by the owner," she said.

"The proposed levy period will end once the $120 million for the buyback is raised and does not increase State debt."

But Mr Tsirigotis estimated that of the 1000 taxi plate owners eligible for compensation, about 600 would receive the minimum $100,000 payment.

He also argued that instead of a 10 per cent levy, which he said would be an administrative nightmare, the Government should charge all on-demand operators a weekly fee of $75, which would raise $65.5 million a year to fund compensation.

"The 10 per cent levy is a tax," Mr Tsirigotis said.

Mr Golawski said Flagit had been developed in WA and several taxi operators were already using the app.

He said passengers using it would be charged a minimum fare of $10, but the meter would only kick in after the first four minutes or 3km.

There would also be no price surges, owners and operators would be "properly licensed and registered" and cars would carry security cameras.

Cabs using the app will have stickers to alert passengers.

[tazzer9]

They lost on an investment.  All investments are a gamble.  Too bad, taxi's in australia sealed their own fate years ago and continue their war just shows how out of touch they really are.   

[#Metro]

The Government and Industry created a regulatory racket that has now collapsed. The only other place where this style of regulation comes close is Pharmacies. Which too is just a magnet for future disruption.

Although it is theoretically possible for the State Government to buy licences at full value pre-Uber, doing so would easily cost $1-$2 billion dollars.

That's $1-2 billion dollars in return for no new goods or services produced. It is purely to buy back an intangible government permission that has no value or use once bought back. You can see why State and Territory Governments would rather sheet the cost to someone else than place it on the public account.

[techblitz]

What we know is this:

1. Rideshare aint going nowhere...theres too much venture capital invested for it to fail...
2. taxi licence plate owners are finite.
3. Due to natural population growth the rideshare market will scale infinitely.
4. Governments still have some muscle here to call the shots where they see fit.

Given these variables you have an opportunity for the rideshare market as a whole(all players) and governments to meet halfway.....offer a long term if need be...compensation guarantee to the license plate owners that they will eventually be paid out in full.....compensate the banks in return for freezing any mortgage backed loans etc. Everything is tied to the valuation of the rideshare market.

Or we can just continue to sprout simplistic one liners like 'bad business decision' and continue paying lawyers while more and more plate owners take their own lives...

remember the fundamental thing here....licence plate owners are finite....the rideshare market isn't.....this can be done....the taxi plate owners just want a fairer deal..

[#Metro]

1. Rideshare aint going nowhere...theres too much venture capital invested for it to fail...
2. taxi licence plate owners are finite.
3. Due to natural population growth the rideshare market will scale infinitely.
4. Governments still have some muscle here to call the shots where they see fit.

These are good points.

Something that I wonder about: What would have happened if Uber had not entered the taxi market, but self-driving autonomous taxis had instead?

Should you buy a taxi licence for a taxi that doesn't have anyone driving it? (Driverless)

Would the value of the licences have also tanked in this scenario too? What would have been a reasonable response - ban self-driving taxi?

The future for the taxi industry looks like a terminal one. Due to technological change, if self-driving cars become a thing, there will be no need

to have licence plates or humans driving the taxi. They will go the way of the telephone exchange operator, travel agents, and the Kodak film camera.

[red dragin]

Interestingly Uber drivers went on strike this morning, because Uber has changed the pricing model and the drivers are now not making as much money and making below minimum wage.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/uber-drivers-strike-across-australia-this-morning/news-story/5a0ce64c24380bdf7b29b72045f79440?nk=366a5ff77b4c6aa96f39bd23d7dfd0cf-1533538504

Not really a surprise.

Don't forget on the taxi 'Licences' (Business licence, not a drivers licence) the Government racked in plenty in transfer duty on the sales. Now the industry has collapsed due to lack of law enforcement, they are crying poor. Farmers take the gamble on the weather but can get help.

[James]

Maybe if the taxi industry hadn't:
1. Taken users for a ride by intentionally going the long or slow way in order to increase their fare,
2. Operated taxis which were old, filthy, or had drivers more focused on using their hands free to talk to their mates rather than provide actual customer service,
3. Charged extortionate prices for short distance trips (e.g. a fare to travel to a neighbouring suburb in the evening could cost $20!),
perhaps the taxi industry wouldn't have found themselves in a situation where their licenses are worthless after the general public flocked to Uber because of its lower prices, better customer service and fare guarantee.

While it is sad to see people losing investments and taking their lives because of it, perhaps if the taxi industry hadn't taken the public for a ride (literally), the community would have rallied around them. FWIW, I take Uber much less now - sadly, all the bad taxi drivers are now driving for Uber. A number of drivers I've had recently have been unapproachable and I find myself having to give directions again.

[#Metro]

Taxi industry is terminal, just like travel agents and telephone operators.

If Uber had never arrived, it would only last until driverless taxis appeared on the scene.

Licence values would then collapse anyway.

[SurfRail]

I still happily use taxis on the Gold Coast.  Much better standards of service than in any of the capitals in my view.

[techblitz]

@james you cannot heap all taxi drivers/operators into the same basket.....and I don't think the admin of this forum appreciates it.....he has previously stated that there are a lot of good operators out there......and I agree...

It seems were going to have to go further in-depth here on why cabbies are/were the way they are for your own sake......so you can perhaps take off the 'cabbies have only themselves to blame' rose colored glasses...

First of all.......there are two types of operators......single plate owners and multi plate owners.
You will find that the stark majority of single plate owners treated their car just like their house.....it was their life.......nothing meant more than holding their business to the highest standards of cleanliness and street knowledge to gain repeat and happy customers....it was a way of life for them. For you to heap them in with the other lot just shows your lack of empathy and lack of knowledge on the industry.


You will find most of the issues/concerns stemmed from multi-plate operators.....a while back(just before UBER entered Brisbane)...i lived with 3 indian cabbies for about 12 months....who game me insights into their employer....these 3 gents came here with nothing to their name and were sharing 1 room and 1 double bed. That alone explains their situation.
They knew how to operate a car and had a general idea of driving in QLD....so naturally they looked to cab driving..

I learned quite a bit from many of our dinner convos and we became quite good friends...

1. The multi-plate owner was struggling due to cost of licences...
2. Owner was only ever interested in improving his bottom line by using cheap labor.....he did have some aussie drivers but majority were immigrant.
3. Due to the number of plates he had he would go through periods of struggling to find staff.
4. It was due to those random shortages that it becomes a workers market......hence as a desperately needed employee you can do whatever you want( eg: speak on the phone loudly,not maintain hygiene etc,not working hard on getting to know the streets etc)
5. These 3 gents were rotating around the clock at random times night/days. A lot of the single plate operators had stability. It was the multi-plate employees who didn't...

Lets be clear here I'm not making excuses for any of the above but you need to realise why it is/was like this in the taxi industry.

And could you pleeease modify your post above and put some blame on the governments price of the licence? It makes your post rather noobish.....because I'm pretty sure cabbies didn't 'enjoy' overcharging when they were paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for a licence...

[#Metro]

And could you pleeease modify your post above and put some blame on the governments price of the licence? It makes your post rather noobish.....because I'm pretty sure cabbies didn't 'enjoy' overcharging when they were paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for a licence...

The purpose of the licences was to restrict the number of licences and thus protect whoever had one from competition that would drive the prices/wages down.

IIRC The government does not set the price of licences in the open market. Just like the government does not set the buy/sell price of your house but might influence it through zoning.

[James]

@james you cannot heap all taxi drivers/operators into the same basket.....and I don't think the admin of this forum appreciates it.....he has previously stated that there are a lot of good operators out there......and I agree...

First of all, we are all welcome to our opinions on this forum, even if we don't always agree (within reason, I'm sure Bob would ban anybody who advocated for the conversion of the Ipswich/Springfield lines into motorways).

I am sure there are good drivers out there, but the taxi operators (and probably the government) were all aware of the rort and chose to do nothing. Instead of advocating for the users and establishing minimum sets of standards, English tests and so forth, they just kept taking people's money with high fares and low service. Instead of looking to employ decent drivers, owners hoarded licenses and employed cheap labour in order to make a quick buck.

Above all, the cost of a cab was just incredibly expensive and seemed to rise very quickly over the space of a few years in the late 2000s. From about $20 from the Airport to the CBD to $40+ in the space of 5-10 years, and an explanation why was never given. You just sucked it up.

$30 to travel from Fortitude Valley to Toowong in a taxi... get real. I'd rather walk. Truly - I've done it before. Good exercise.

And could you pleeease modify your post above and put some blame on the governments price of the licence? It makes your post rather noobish.....because I'm pretty sure cabbies didn't 'enjoy' overcharging when they were paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for a licence...

Nobody was forced to buy a license at inflated prices. Of course, the government is at fault for restricting licenses in such an illogical manner in the first place, but it was the big taxi lobbyists who put pressure on the government for it to be this way in the first place.

I do feel sorry for the innocent people caught up in this, but given how unprofessional some drivers were and how it was pot luck on what driver you got - this is why people went to Uber. The taxi made its bed, and now it has to lie in it. If they hadn't ripped off consumers for the better part of a decade, perhaps there'd be more sympathy.

[techblitz]

but it was the big taxi lobbyists who put pressure on the government for it to be this way in the first place.

More often that not they were protesting on the government releasing too many licences which would create an excess supply.....this === detriment to the bottom line....so naturally they are going to lobby to have them restricted.
Its simple economics..
How is it any different from uber drivers protesting when uber messes around with pricing structures?
Drivers are going to protest because it hits their bottom line...

I certainly hope we are agreeing that the government cannot be exhonerated here.....two key points.

1.They let the market price of licences balloon due to hype within the industry(hype is mainly word of mouth on how much cabbies are making)....they did nothing to try and reign it in.
And as red dragin stated:

Don't forget on the taxi 'Licences' (Business licence, not a drivers licence) the Government racked in plenty in transfer duty on the sales.

add on gst for the high cab fares == cash cow


2.As stated above....if too many licences were released...cabbies would go on the warpath(protests/disruption) due to the price they paid for a licence. Hence the only way the government could release more licences would have been compensation to the current plate owners for loss to their bottom line.....they simply weren't interested in coming to a solution beneficial to the everyday punter...

Theres really only one way to sum up the debacle...

The government failed because they didn't cap the price of licences to a respectable level....the cabbies failed because they paid too much and because many fell victim to industry hype..

So...multiple parties are to blame...not just one...

[#Metro]

"Government is to blame" well, this is what the taxi industry wanted... Ban and can the competition. Were they going to do that when driverless taxi arrives on the scene?

[techblitz]

@ metro I think you are going to be proven very wrong on the benefits of the open system that you seem to be advocating for...which is let as many rideshare cars onto the streets without restriction and let demand/supply do its thing.

Are there not articles coming out already of uber cars flooding our streets? Where are you in lala land or something??
You contradict yourself arguing for better public transport when there is a real possibility of ridesharing/driverless becoming cheaper than public transport.....where does that leave the benefits of your so called 'open market'??
You also contradict yourself via the immigration issue......if you let in more people who struggle to find a job doesn't that mean more risk of flooding the gig economy?? Which ultimately means more cars on the road??
At some point in time there is going to be a need for balance.....and to maintain a balance...sometimes you will need to put restrictions in place...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/01/opinion/stop-uber-from-flooding-new-york.html

On Tuesday evening, the New York City Council introduced a bill to place a temporary cap on the number of for-hire vehicles — the kind provided by services like Uber and Lyft — allowed on the city's streets.

It's about time: In recent years these cars have flooded New York, clogging our streets and driving down fares and with them, income for tens of thousands of drivers. Professional drivers, more than 90 percent of whom are immigrants of color, once earned a middle-class living but now face eviction, bankruptcy and even hunger. In  the last year six of them have committed suicide.

[techblitz]

A very indepth article covering both rideshare and history of taxis in NYC

https://jalopnik.com/how-new-york-became-the-center-of-the-fight-against-ube-1827871915

Policy proposals are on the table, most recently being a minimum wage for all drivers in the city or a possible cap on ride-hailing cars for a year, yet there seems to be little agreement among the companies, drivers, and policymakers, on which is the correct path forward.

Ring a bell??

this....

Today, roughly 35 percent of miles driven by Ubers and Lyfts in the city today are without any passengers, just roving the city looking for fares at any given time.

So where the so called benefits now huh?? At least cabs were parked most of time while waiting for fares...


this guy nails it in the comments

Having spent a good chunk of time in SF and seen companies like Uber and Lyft come about it's infuriating seeing how badly everything was handled. But of course most people just summarize it as "cabs = euh, uber is cool!" and don't pay much attention beyond that. The city royally screwed up with the medallion mess and letting the disruptors come in and do whatever they wanted without following any of the established rules others had followed and paid in to. And then the companies start lobbying and pressuring cities through publicity stunts.

Cabs absolutely sucked – they've improved to an extent but still have issues. But pretending like Uber and Lyft are our saviors is a joke. They are ruthless corporations. Every single improvement they've made from background checks to liability insurance came after consistent pressure. Their end game is to run the cabbies out of business and have a monopoly. They can't make money today even after being heavily subsidized by their VC backers. Where do you think their prices are going once there's no competition left?

Also many Uber drivers are full time, ex cabbies. Their "just drive for fun money!" schtick is absolute nonsense designed to get around wage laws. Make them have some skin in the game by having to guarantee a $XX/hour base wage regardless of whether a driver has passengers or not. Then they'll start caring about how many cars they flood the market with at any given time. Also figure out a way to get cabbies out above water with the medallions – that was entirely the cities' screw up and they need to own up to it.

[#Metro]

Hey Techblitz, the only two industries I know with these regulations are taxi and pharmacies. The rest of private industry is not regulated this way, and gets by without it.

Taxi industry is terminal. You have driverless taxi or car appear, industry will cease to exist. How will you regulate it then?

[techblitz]

You have driverless taxi or car appear, industry will cease to exist. How will you regulate it then??

if you plan ahead accordingly then you minimise problems with the transition......suitable agreements between the disrupted and the disruptor will see the best outcome...

There are going to be a lot of smaller sectors that end up being disrupted in the future from the high V.C backed 'walk in let all hell break loose' strategy.
Its not a fair strategy..
There needs to be fair transitions or else its not only more misery...but it will probably paint the disruption market in a negative light overall...
You are mainly going to see a lot of issues relating to workers income security.
And as the person commenting on that article states.....these disruptors more often than not will only act on concerns when there is hardline public pressure to do so...and minimum wage guidelines should probably be the first point of discussion.

[#Metro]

What's going to be in the agreement?

[techblitz]

I think an agreement between parties for a steadier entry of the disruptor into the market to help absorb income loss of the disrupted could be a start.
Obviously it simply delays the inevitable but that can be the difference between the disrupted parties sanity and going literally insane at at the thought of a large/sudden income loss.
Offering to transition the disrupted over to the disruptors platform on a set no commission structure perhaps another one.

Just walking in and letting all hell break loose is the most daft way to approach it imho.....
Lessens bad press coverage as well if there is a fairer transition process....the governments can also chip in where necessary....

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/TaxiQLD/status/1027102161564520449

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Taxi drivers on the road to bankruptcy

THE value of Queensland's taxi industry has plunged as much as 80 per cent since Uber and other ride share companies disrupted one of the state's most regulated industries.

Licences that once sold for more than $500,000 are now struggling to attract a quarter of their original value with owners outraged after governments from both sides of politics had been promising for decades they would never deregulate the industry.

The pain isn't isolated to regions where Uber is operating, with equally dramatic crashes in rural areas where ride-sharing businesses are yet to reach.

Across Queensland, average taxi licence prices have fallen 77 per cent from $380,941 in 2012 to just $85,676 this year.

In Brisbane, average prices dropped 74 per cent from $417,309 in 2014 to $105,775 this year. In Toowoomba, prices have fallen 87 per cent to $42,333, Sunshine Coast values dropped 81 per cent $78,750 and the Gold Coast has experienced a 64 per cent fall from $503,060 to $179,894.

Taxi Council of Queensland chief executive Blair Davies said the value of licences had been "decimated".

"What we're seeing now is many of those mum and dad investors who bought these licences and were self-funded retirees are now heading off to Centrelink and trying to get pensions and it's a terrible thing," he said. "Some owners have sat and watched as their asset value has gone down by $400,000 plus and it's devastating for them."

The Government has provided some "transitional" payments to licence owners but they were taxable, limited to $20,000 per licence and capped at a maximum of two licences. Mr Davies said it was crucial the Government intervened and "levelled the playing field", with huge discrepancies in the fees and regulations faced by taxi and Uber drivers.

"We're hoping the Government will be open and honest to accepting there has been a range of unintended consequences of their regulation and they need to make amends, particularly for the damage they've done to licence holders," he said.

Uber started operating illegally in Brisbane in late 2014 and aggressively lobbied successive State Governments until ride sharing was legalised statewide in September 2016.

Many operators believe the industry has hit rock bottom and have called 2018 the worst year ever. Revenues and driver earnings have also been cut in half with many in the industry admitting they failed to recognise the mortal threat Uber represented and did not launch an adequate counter attack.

Passengers have been the big winners with thousands of extra cars on the roads generally offering lower prices.

Splinter lobby group the Queensland Taxi Licence Owners' Association, which formed after believing TCQ had not been militant enough fighting Uber, has been part of a recent legal push to sue the State Government over the loss in licence values. Association president Paul Scaini said the Government should pay decent compensation to all licence owners and then ensure taxi and ride share operators paid the same costs to keep their cars on the road.

"The licence owners, who partnered with the government, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, they've effectively been screwed because their returns have dropped from $3000 to say $800 a month and their capital value is pretty much worthless," he said.

Katter's Australian Party leader Bob Katter has been a driving force behind the legal effort, which is backed by at least 500 licence owners gathering a legal war chest to fund a high-powered legal team to sue the State Government.

A Transport and Main Roads spokesman said taxi licence values were determined by an open market and that no new perpetual licences would be released, "meaning existing licences retain value as a source of revenue generation for owners". "We understand the impacts of industry disruption which is why we established the $100 million Industry Adjustment Assistance Package to help taxi and limousine ­licence owners and operators transition to the new environment."

COUPLE BURNED THROUGH $1M IN LOST DECADE

SCOTT and Liz Hasted refer to their time as taxi licence owners as the lost decade.

They estimate they "burned" about $1 million in that time, mainly on buying two licences for $840,000 that they were forced to sell last year at the fire sale price of $135,000 each.

They still have $680,000 in bank debt on those licences. Every time they open their bank statements they get a bitter reminder about the damage insurgent ride-share companies did to Queensland's 3247 taxi licence owners.

"I feel really sorry for anybody who still has cabs," Mrs Hasted said.

"I know, I look at the bank statements. I've got all these zeros there that I've got to pay back but I really feel sorry for people who are still in it, it's like scraping your fingernails down a blackboard."

By the time Uber launched on Brisbane streets in 2014, the Hasteds (pictured) were running their two taxis as well as leasing out nine other licences to give them a fleet of 11 cars.

As passengers dropped taxis in droves for the trendy new service, their profits evaporated until they felt like they were just "burning money".

Instead of looking at a fully funded retirement in their early 60s, they think they'll be working into their 70s to pay off the debt.

RETIREMENT LEFT IN RUINS

TONY Coco started working as an apprentice mechanic in the taxi industry when he was 15. He's 73 now and done just about every job possible in his 58 years in the industry, from being a driver to managing a fleet of taxis in Brisbane.

He and wife Jan purchased four taxi licences, which they slowly saved up for – starting with one for $9000 in the 1960s when Mr Coco was 21, another for $120,000 in 1988 and two more for $350,000 in the early 2000s.

Mr Coco said the values, which were worth more than $2 million combined at the industry's peak, had sharply declined with the introduction of Uber.

"I don't think we need to get rid of Uber but I think they should pay the same as we do and have the same rules," he said.

"We always planned for this to be our retirement and I would like for my wife to be able to take it easy and for us to go on a holiday.

"It's very unfair and I think something needs to change."

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Professional driver numbers double as wages collapse

QUEENSLANDtaxi driver earnings have plummeted over 40 per cent since Uber first arrived on Brisbane streets in 2014, new figures reveal.

The Courier-Mail can also reveal that the number of drivers licensed to carry private passengers in the state has more than doubled in the two years since ridesharing was legalised.

The explosion in authorised driver numbers from 16,012 in 2016 to nearly 34,000 in June this year has led to escalating tension on city streets, and a warning that the industry is on the verge of a "chaotic breakdown".

Analysis of driver earnings over the past five years highlights a steady erosion since ridesharing arrived on Brisbane streets in early 2014.

In 2013, full-time taxi drivers were earning between $45,500 and $64,500 for working five shifts of up to 12 hours.

Those earnings had dropped to between $26,250 to $39,250 at the end of last year, with drivers often working longer hours.



Analysis done by the Queensland Taxi License Owners' Association has shown drivers were struggling to make $16 an hour, which was below the national minimum wage.

Ride Share Drivers Association of Australia secretary Les Johnson said low earnings were also common in the rideshare industry, with many drivers not factoring in realistic running costs for their vehicles.

The association has been calling for the introduction of a minimum rideshare fare to ensure drivers can earn a living wage.

Taxi operators have reported that many drivers who left the industry to operate a rideshare vehicle have since returned to driving taxis because they believed they had more earning potential.

The State Government has not collected data on the total number of rides in taxis and rideshare vehicles, however there is near universal agreement in the industry that more people than ever are using private vehicles for point-to-point transport.

But while the number of trips have risen so has the number of drivers, with many targeting peak periods such as Friday and Saturday nights.

Arthur Wood, who operated four taxis based at Strathpine, said drivers were so desperate for customers on the weekends that it was "bordering on chaos".

"You've got this ill-disciplined mass of drivers jostling for fares, and it's almost like a medieval carnival watching them on a Friday night or a Saturday night," he said.

"You've got the rideshare drivers who aren't supposed to use ranks, and they're just trawling the streets, driving around and around in circles looking for illicit hails, which they're not allowed to take, but they do take for cash fares, and they're also trying to jostle in to pick up the fares that are booked.

"We are on the verge of a chaotic breakdown, which is not good for passengers."

Uber Queensland state manager Alex Golden said more than 7000 Queenslanders were using the Uber app to earn extra income on their own schedule.

"We want driver-partners to be successful, which is why we are investing in innovations to encourage more riders to choose the app, and proactively share information about when and where the best times to drive are," he said.

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Taxi owners must accept it's a risky business, says Mark Bailey

TAXI licence owners must accept that the State Government never "guaranteed" their investments in a "private market", says Transport Minister Mark Bailey.

On the second anniversary of ride-sharing being legalised in Queensland, Mr Bailey said the taxi industry was still learning to adjust to a "totally new era".

The Minister seemed to close the door on any future payouts or compensation for taxi licence owners, who have lost up to 80 per cent of their licence values in the 4½ years since Uber first appeared illegally on Brisbane streets.

He said the Government had provided $100 million in transitional assistance payments and a hardship fund as well as other incentives to "try and assist the taxi industry" but the owners had to accept the risk attached to their initial investment.

"There's no doubt it's been challenging for people who've got investments but that is the marketplace that's operating," he said.

"We've put $100 million in there to try and help people through some of this transition. A lot of industries that go through transitions don't get that sort of assistance but we certainly can't, as a government, guarantee people's private investments."

He said the Government was currently watching the results of regulation in other jurisdictions such as New York, in the US, where a cap has been introduced on ride-share vehicle numbers.

[#Metro]

It's not a private market, certainly not when the sole producer and controller of supply is the Queensland Government.

And if the Government controlled supply, it has done so for a purpose. So what was that purpose? And there you have it - an implied government guarantee.

To fully compensate all to full prior value would cost billions, in exchange for no new goods or services. Once govt re-acquires the licenses they are a useless valueless intangible / imaginary asset.

So it's not hard to see why QLD Gov't is trying to get out of this.

[SurfRail]

They don't have to try to get out of anything, they aren't "in" anything to begin with.  A licence is a permission to operate, not a revenue stream.

[verbatim9]

They don't have to try to get out of anything, they aren't "in" anything to begin with.  A licence is a permission to operate, not a revenue stream.

[#Metro]

A licence is a permission to operate, not a revenue stream.

It is a permission to operate, but much more than that when the number of permissions are restricted to keep the price up.

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/railbotforum/status/1053316962921603073

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/fel_caldwell/status/1065486029170167808

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/9NewsGoldCoast/status/1065492840812146693