On 01/04/2017 15:50, tim... wrote:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 14:36:46 on Sat, 1 Apr
2017, tim... remarked:
the one thing about the taxi trade is that they can't monopolies the
market through lower fares and then hike them when the competition
pulls out

the barriers to entry for a taxi company are so low that if you take
your fares back up to the regulated maximum the competition will soon
pile back in again.

to keep the competition out you have to keep your fares low forever

which is fine if your costs of operation really are low enough to
support that, but does mean that operating an unsustainably low fare
to grab market share doesn't work.

Except Uber is trying that.

I know

So your theory crashes in flames.

but as it hasn't got to the "lets put the fares up again" bit, how does,
where we are now prove that it will work?

There is a theory that its real MO is,

1) force out the competition

2) replace cars with self driving cars and put the fares up

But I don't believe that model will work either as:

a) I believe the date that driverless cars will be routinely available
is 10 years beyond what the optimists think the date will be. (We have
discussed this before and you were in the same place as me), Uber can't
survive that long subsidising fares.

A recent New Scientist article was discussing how you programme ethical
considerations into self-driving cars!


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

In message , at 15:50:48 on Sat, 1 Apr 2017,
tim... remarked:
the one thing about the taxi trade is that they can't monopolies the
market through lower fares and then hike them when the competition
pulls out

the barriers to entry for a taxi company are so low that if you take
your fares back up to the regulated maximum the competition will soon
pile back in again.

to keep the competition out you have to keep your fares low forever

which is fine if your costs of operation really are low enough to
support that, but does mean that operating an unsustainably low fare
to grab market share doesn't work.

Except Uber is trying that.

I know

So your theory crashes in flames.

but as it hasn't got to the "lets put the fares up again" bit, how
does, where we are now prove that it will work?

That's what the investors and the competition regulators do for a
living, predicting how it will all turn out.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 16:35:29 on Sat, 1 Apr 2017,
Basil Jet remarked:

Staying on the train and getting off a Surbiton (if it
stops) then taking a taxi might be one way to avoid it.

Having lived in Surbiton at one time, getting from there to Heathrow by
road is a nightmare.

When I lived in Sutton I used the X26 (or I think it was called 726
then) to get to Heathrow. It wasn't a nightmare, so I think you're
massively exagerating.

Mr Google says by car a little over an hour on a Monday morning, for 12
miles. That's pretty nightmarish.
--
Roland Perry

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
news
In message , at 12:15:44 on Sat, 1 Apr
2017, D A Stocks remarked:
I may well take another look at Uber when I make the reverse journey at
5.00 am on Monday morning: no more messing about with cash and and, if
my
initial experience is anything to go by, nicer cars, nicer drivers and
cheaper. What's not to like?

The alleged exploitation of their workers, the implications for
proportionate corporation tax receipts flowing to the UK, and the
possibility that having captured the market they can hike their fares.

the one thing about the taxi trade is that they can't monopolies the
market
through lower fares and then hike them when the competition pulls out

the barriers to entry for a taxi company are so low that if you take your
fares back up to the regulated maximum the competition will soon pile
back
in again.

to keep the competition out you have to keep your fares low forever

which is fine if your costs of operation really are low enough to support
that, but does mean that operating an unsustainably low fare to grab
market
share doesn't work.

History also shows that startups such as this are exceptional if they
succeed in the medium-long term, so what's your exit strategy if they
pull
out of the Brighton market?

catch the bus

He's a user not an investor

And they aren't selling a unique product

This is just a generic observation of the venture capital funded world,
not a prediction about any particular company trading today.

The BBC opines: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29653830

Careful, Recliner will be along soon to tell you you are an idiot

Huh? Why would I do that? I invest in many venture capital funds, and am
well aware that many startups fail. I've also long thought that many IT
companies are over-valued.

because that's what you did when I questioned the possibility that Uber
might fail in an earlier discussion

you used the spurious argument that some large company (Amazon was it) had
invested and they wouldn't be investing in a company that might fail.

On that basis you should hold the opinion that none of these billion dollar
companies can fail because it is 100% certain that all of them have the
backing of some large company or other

tim

"tim..." wrote in message
news


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
news


History also shows that startups such as this are exceptional if they
succeed in the medium-long term, so what's your exit strategy if they
pull out of the Brighton market?

catch the bus

He's a user not an investor

And they aren't selling a unique product

I will happily take a taxi that is there over one that I have to call up on
my 'phone, even if the fare is a bit more. However, when you find yourself
at the back of a 20 minute queue at the rank for a 5 minute journey it's
time to look for alternatives. If GTR and the licensed taxi operators banged
their heads together they could very easily sort this problem out at
Brighton but they don't show any sign of doing that.

I don't see why I should spend more money supporting a model that is totally
broken against a cheaper alternative that looks like it works rather well.

--
DAS

"D A Stocks" wrote in message
news
"Arthur Conan Doyle" wrote in message
news:uk9vdc1iusv3qbo78opsvoja1ik1sljco1@None...
"D A Stocks" wrote:

if my initial experience is
anything to go by, nicer cars, nicer drivers and cheaper. What's not to
like?

I used Uber Lux for a ride across London recently. Very nice. Wondered if
the
driver was doing a little moonlighting with his employer's vehicle, but
that's
his business.

I'm not sure if the rules for Uber Lux are different, but my understanding
is that Uber drivers use their own vehicles.

FSVO

The point about Uber's model is that they don't own them

but that doesn't mean that the driver does either - he could be "borrowing"
it

(FTAOD - I'm not making some pedantic point about Lease-Hire)

tim

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 15:50:48 on Sat, 1 Apr 2017,
tim... remarked:
the one thing about the taxi trade is that they can't monopolies the
market through lower fares and then hike them when the competition pulls
out

the barriers to entry for a taxi company are so low that if you take
your fares back up to the regulated maximum the competition will soon
pile back in again.

to keep the competition out you have to keep your fares low forever

which is fine if your costs of operation really are low enough to
support that, but does mean that operating an unsustainably low fare to
grab market share doesn't work.

Except Uber is trying that.

I know

So your theory crashes in flames.

but as it hasn't got to the "lets put the fares up again" bit, how does,
where we are now prove that it will work?

That's what the investors

Yep, they are taking the risk along with Uber.

That doesn't mean that they are any more correct in a view that it will
succeed.

and the competition regulators do for a living, predicting how it will all
turn out.

They can only take pre-emptive action if considering a takeover in an
industry.

They can only act retrospectively if a monopolistic position obtained from a
commercial advantage has been abused.

They have no mechanism to say to a new entrant - sorry you can't price your
product under costs because it may force a competitor into bankruptcy

tim




--
Roland Perry

In article , (D A Stocks)
wrote:

"Arthur Conan Doyle" wrote in message
news:uk9vdc1iusv3qbo78opsvoja1ik1sljco1@None...
"D A Stocks" wrote:

if my initial experience is
anything to go by, nicer cars, nicer drivers and cheaper. What's not to
like?

I used Uber Lux for a ride across London recently. Very nice. Wondered
if the driver was doing a little moonlighting with his employer's
vehicle, but that's his business.

I'm not sure if the rules for Uber Lux are different, but my
understanding is that Uber drivers use their own vehicles.

In the UK? Hire car law would make that rather difficult, AIUI.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article , (tim...)
wrote:

"D A Stocks" wrote in message
news
"Arthur Conan Doyle" wrote in message
news:uk9vdc1iusv3qbo78opsvoja1ik1sljco1@None...
"D A Stocks" wrote:

if my initial experience is
anything to go by, nicer cars, nicer drivers and cheaper. What's not to
like?

I used Uber Lux for a ride across London recently. Very nice. Wondered
if the driver was doing a little moonlighting with his employer's
vehicle, but that's his business.

I'm not sure if the rules for Uber Lux are different, but my
understanding is that Uber drivers use their own vehicles.

FSVO

The point about Uber's model is that they don't own them

but that doesn't mean that the driver does either - he could be
"borrowing" it

(FTAOD - I'm not making some pedantic point about Lease-Hire)

In this country any hire car is subject to local authority licensing and
testing.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 2017\04\01 19:00, wrote:
In article , (D A Stocks)
wrote:

"Arthur Conan Doyle" wrote in message
news:uk9vdc1iusv3qbo78opsvoja1ik1sljco1@None...
"D A Stocks" wrote:

if my initial experience is
anything to go by, nicer cars, nicer drivers and cheaper. What's not to
like?

I used Uber Lux for a ride across London recently. Very nice. Wondered
if the driver was doing a little moonlighting with his employer's
vehicle, but that's his business.

I'm not sure if the rules for Uber Lux are different, but my
understanding is that Uber drivers use their own vehicles.

In the UK? Hire car law would make that rather difficult, AIUI.

What? Most "minicabs" (outside of certain brands like Addison Lee) use
owner drivers, and about half of London taxis have owner drivers.