PalenQ

Can't find recent post about Uber being barred by TfL to operate in London but today's NYTimes says they have apologized ... and will appeal, meaning it can continue during appeals process:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/25/b...n.html?mcubz=0

janisj

>>Can't find recent post about Uber being barred by TfL<<

Apparently you didn't look very hard . . .

http://www.fodors.com/community/europe/uber-vs-tfl.cfm

PalenQ

Apparently you didn't look very hard . . .>

Actually I did for a few minutes but obviously don't have your skills at doing so and as the main facts were repeated in this article...

Thanks a lot for tracking it down.

Cheers!

Have you ever taken Uber in London? Would you recommend it?

marvelousmouse

Have reached limit, darn. Lol. There was a totally useless op ed in NY times today about Uber's failing model. That writer considered London a success so I don't think they actually know much about Uber except that the stockholders are getting worried...

Anyway, the guy apologizing is trying to save a sinking ship. Will be interesting to see if the appeal works.

MLoughman

Uber is about to leave Montreal, Quebec as they can't / won't meet the government's requirements.

bilboburgler

I think marvelous nails it.

PatrickLondon

The details of exactly how they have and haven't failed haven't appeared in the newspapers yet. No doubt that will have to wait for the appeals tribunal to see all the evidence laid out.

Dukey1

Uber insists they can meet the Montreal training requirements in less time than Montreal is requiring. Uber also claims Montreal is about to deny a whole bunch of people the opportunity to make a living, etc., etc.

Dukey1

Janisj, are you going to acknowledge Pal's more than gracious thank you or simply sit there and feel self-satisfied?

kerouac

What's funny is that Uber feels the direction the wind is blowing in a lot of places, and this week they started running apologetic commercials in the Paris cinemas. "We've been growing fast and have made some mistakes..."

I saw in the paper that London is the only European market where Uber is not losing money.

marvelousmouse

It's because they need some good will. Not just from the cities; from their customers and drivers. The op-ed's main point was that the business model is not sustainable; they would need to increase fares to put money into their shareholders pockets because currently they subsidize their rides. They also have a high turn over rate for their drivers. What I found so funny though was the refusal to recognize the fares and driver turnover are structural issues inherent in the model. Any attempt at fixing either is going collapse their house. While using uber is not always about the low fare, it's what brings in new customers. It's what disrupts the taxi industry. And then drivers don't last long because it was always about supplemental income and either they got sick of the job, sick of the company, or real life intervened.

janisj

>>Actually I did for a few minutes but obviously don't have your skills at doing so and as the main facts were repeated in this article…<<

This one didn't take any 'sleuthing' really. Simply clicked on the UK and there it was.

>>Have you ever taken Uber in London? Would you recommend it?<<

Absolutely not. I posted reasons why in detail (as did others) on the other thread . . .

newtome

I'm actually very impressed with Uber's new CEO and hope we will be seeing some good changes down the road.

PalenQ

Absolutely not. I posted reasons why in detail (as did others) on the other thread . . >

You gave one reason not reasons:

That Uber drivers did not have to pass the required London street/road knowledge test that some say is archaic in light on GPS and real-time street congestion knowledge - Uber drivers want to devlier their loads in as quick as time as possible - has anything ever shown them to be slower in doing so?

Well if that is your only reason it's like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. One of Uber's top markets is London and Londoners have no problem using them a lot - they must like it overall - some warts to be worked out and some TfL complaints are valid

but IMO that archaic exam is not one - let the buyer beware of that and make their choice. Many of Uber drivers are not full time but do in off hours from work or retired folk, etc. To make them study eons for some stupid archaic exam, whose usefulness is dubious to me and many, is more like a cartel wishing to protect regular cabbies.

That's your only reason?

flanneruk

" Uber drivers are not full time but do in off hours from work or retired folk, etc. To make them study eons for some stupid archaic exam, whose usefulness is dubious to me and many, is more like a cartel wishing to protect regular cabbies."

Who gives a flying fart about your views?

The only views with any significance in this debate are those of the Greater London Authority and the 12,480,000 voters that give its decisions legitimacy.

The GLA's view's clear: twice as many London voters support it than oppose it.

Though a substantial number of London voters are undecided on the issue 43% of them, when polled this week, support the ban. Just 20% think Uber should be allowed to continue ripping off its drivers and duck the social responsibilities London requires of its taxi drivers.

It's completely unimportant what foreigners think about that. No doubt they tolerate law-breaking at home - but our laws, and our culture, are ours.

Whining about them might make sense if an American fad offered Londoners benefits. Claiming that for this pointless mode of public transport is as laughable as Uber's performance.

Goldman Sachs estimates Londoners spend $11.5 bn on taxis every year. Uber's UK tax filings indicate its drivers took just £100 mn ($134 mn) in all of the UK last year. Or at most 1.1% of London's spending on taxis. Even though Uber alleges it has more London drivers than the black cab system.

Of course your typical techo-fanatic moron thinks $135 mn's a lot of money, which is why the press rabbits on about this so much. The reality is: 99 times out of 100, a Londoner wanting a taxi chooses a proper one.

Uber's whinges are just a smokescreen for the real problem. Its service is virtually useless in the civilised world.

Not completely useless: Uber actually made a small profit on its UK operations last year. But that profit, were it repeated across Uber's network, wouldn't come anywhere near supporting its preposterous share price. Its london performance demonstrates the obviously absurd truth

Uber needs the whingeing about "unfairness" are a ploy to hide the real threat - which isn't to the system's viability, but to the Ponzi scheme its founders rely for their farcical
and manifestly spurious "worth" claims.

The instant the truth about the company's profits becomes understood, those billions in fake wealth will turn into thousands, and the adulation into mockery.

TSo the perpetrators of the swindle dewill turn into mockery.

marvelousmouse

I don't think London is nearly down on Uber as you claim. For one thing, it's not an outright ban. They're allowing uber to operate while they appeal, which means that while they object to Uber's slipshod reporting of sexual assault, they think it's safe enough to operate. Gross on the part of TfL.

For another thing, I was reading various British news sources last night, and many Londoners see Uber as the diverse underdog taking on the white male cabal of taxi drivers. I was a bit surprised by that. Lots of resentment over cab fares. Uber would not make the money it does in London if it really was not useful to a large number of people. Apparently, it's not pointless.

I don't agree with Palen on the test and I don't like Uber in general. But I also think the outcome could go either way.

As a side note, sexual assault is horrific but did it occur to none of these riders that anything could happen when they got into a stranger's car? Uber's failure to cooperate is revolting but I wish some people would show a little more common sense. Don't couchsurf on a random guy's couch, don't climb into a stranger's car. Would think that's common sense...

PatrickLondon

>>don't climb into a stranger's car. Would think that's common sense...<<

When every other minicab driver has to be checked against criminal records as a condition of getting their TfL licence, and any employing company has to have records and procedures to deal properly with such matters (to say nothing of the conditions for a black-cab licence), why should Uber be an AYOR operation?

marvelousmouse

Who says they should be?

But people need to think for themselves rather than blindly trust companies and in a culture where the idea of stranger danger is so prevalent, I really don't get why Uber is seen as an exception. I've got acquaintances who don't want to ride the bus in broad daylight because of homeless people, yet will climb into an Uber in a strange city to save some money. I just find that really odd. There's nothing about Uber's model that has ever screamed safe to me.

PalenQ

I don't agree with Palen on the test and I don't like Uber in general. But I also think the outcome could go either way>

It's only that test that seems rather ridiculous in today's world and all the other reasons flanner et al give against Uber seem valid.

I could care less actually - yes requiring Uber drivers to have background checks, etc makes sense. I have no dog in the fight but if the only reason one could give against Uber is that their drivers don't need to pass that test well that to me is a red herring but all the other issues raised

and I agree with flanner: <It's completely unimportant what foreigners think about that. No doubt they tolerate law-breaking at home - but our laws, and our culture, are ours.>

Yeh you got the insane idea of a monarchy still in 21st-century and you are of course welcome to keep it if you want, etc.

I really do not care at rat's rear about Uber just curious as to what Londoners (and flimflanner ain't a Londoner so his/her/its opinion don't matter either).

PalenQ

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...ys-theresa-may

Theresa May criticizes TfL and Mayor of London for revoking Uber's license - 'putting many jobs at risk'