So basically you're saying because less black drivers are around at certain times because they don't want to work unsocial hours, there is surge pricing to incentivise them to do so? It doesn't sound a lot different to me.
Uber to lose licence to operate in London
- Thread starter antijoke
- Start date
Very different, as pretty much every job has "unsocial hours" pay levels for night work and weekends/bank holidays.
Most don't have "surge pricing" where because it's cold your British Gas repair will cost £300 rather than the normal £100, or because there is a football match it costs you £200 to get a tyre replaced rather than £50.
Uber's surge pricing is based on the idea that because you need the lift and may not have any other options you'll pay a lot more for it and can be completely unpredictable unlike normal antisocial hours pay (where you know it months in advance).
It's not a system that is intended to be complimentary to other methods of transport and give the customer good value, it's one that is intended to kill off as much of the competition as possible and then gouge you for every penny it can when you have little choice left.
That’s not surge pricing, surge pricing is dynamic depending on demand. It can happen at any time and can be manipulated by organised groups of Uber drivers to get higher fares.
TFL pricing is about demand and compensating a cabbie for hanging around in the early hours which is very unsociable.
THIS.
I’m not a cabbie or have any connection to the industry.
Uber is burning cash like it’s going out of fashion and it’s for one reason only, to kill off the competition in every market it operates in and then bleed it for every penny it can. It’s not sustainable and we can only hope the competition can ride it out until they run out of cash, hopefully the market isn’t damaged beyond repair when it does.
Calling out a plumber in the winter to fix a broken boiler *does* cost you more - believe you me I know quite a few! Surge pricing is simple demand/supply - like when garden furniture is cheaper at the end of the summer, or Centerparcs costing twice as much in the school holidays. Or like when you used to get a Minicab after the local town nightclub closes and you paid double. It's nothing new.
The good thing about surge pricing is that you can keep trying every few minutes and it tends to disappear/reduce dramatically. So sometimes I'll stay for another beer if I'm out somewhere and then try again later.
Last edited:
In all honesty, minicabs can charge double, triple, or whatever sum comes into their heads if you’re mug enough to pay it.
If you’re told that your normal fare will be doubled as cars are in demand, just hang up, and walk out into the street and hail a real taxi.
If you don’t have real taxis where you live, then you’re cattle trucked, you’ll be forever mugged.
No I’m patently not saying that, but you appear to be educationally challenged, so I’m not surprised that you equate Uber charging £40 for a £25 job, (as there’s a surge in demand), with the laid down by TFL tiered tariffs that apply 24/7/365 for Black Cab fares.
This is a sensible, and more eloquent version of my take on this.
Thanks for seeing it, and getting it right.
I saw this mentioned in the financial section of the New York Times, ages back, the piece was saying, “How much longer will Uber’s backers watch the haemorrhaging of $$ from Uber’s coffers?
You're another great example of why I never use black cabs. What a rude man.
Except that's ********. It might be true is uber made a very expensive complicated machine that required specialist knowledge and tooling thst would present a massive barrier to a new competitor
But it doesn't it requires a car and insurance.
If uber start to price gouge to any extent after they "kill off the competition" mini cab firms will be being set up by the end of the first week and uber will be back to square one.
Or a competing app will pop up using the exact same drivers.
There is no way for uber to ever maintain a monopoly simply because barriers to entry are so low.
The only competition they can kill off is black cabs because thier only advantage was being able to be hailed but apps typically work quicker than trying to flag a cab other than that they're just expensive slightly ****ier mini cabs.
Still probbaly cheaper to pay the made up doubble rate than the "real cab"
Depends a lot on which city you are in. In my experience Uber can often be much more expensive than a regular cab. The only good thing is you get the fair estimate before booking so can make a decision. Some of the trips I would do to the airport or so would have Uber at $55, regular taxi at $40 and Lyft at $30 for example. Uber is cheap at quiet times of th day but you have to be careful to double check or you get ripped off
Quick look at the tarrif rates. (Purely on time)
The cheapest one is 20p per 25 seconds of travel time (after initial fixed £2.6)
Uber per miniute is 15p. So already less than half the price of the cheapest black cab you can get. (Inital fee £2.5)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/uber/11902613/Proof-that-Uber-costs-less-than-black-cabs.html
In order to be more expensive than a black cab at tarrif 1 uber needs to be at surge price of x1.9
At a surge price of x2.5 it is equal to tarrif 3
Base value vs tarrif 3 its nearly a 3rd of the price of a black cab.
So yeah even if an uber is charging doubble its only going to be comparable to a black cab on basic rate without the faff of finding one
The cheapest one is 20p per 25 seconds of travel time (after initial fixed £2.6)
Uber per miniute is 15p. So already less than half the price of the cheapest black cab you can get. (Inital fee £2.5)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/uber/11902613/Proof-that-Uber-costs-less-than-black-cabs.html
In order to be more expensive than a black cab at tarrif 1 uber needs to be at surge price of x1.9
At a surge price of x2.5 it is equal to tarrif 3
Base value vs tarrif 3 its nearly a 3rd of the price of a black cab.
So yeah even if an uber is charging doubble its only going to be comparable to a black cab on basic rate without the faff of finding one
I suggest you look more closely at how the New York medallion system works. It is explicit in New York that supply is restricted.
You can implicitly restrict supply by arbitrarily making it difficult to become a taxi as well. It is how protectionism works around the world and not just in the taxi industry. You can even make it sound okay by claiming its an even playing field.
None of this is a secret. Speak to any economist. It is why trade unions in any industry love regulations and want more regulations as it protects the incumbent workers.
You're another great example of why I never use black cabs. What a rude man.
I’d already patiently explained the Rates, 1, 2, and 3, and the hours that they applied, 7 days per week, and 365 days per year, they didn’t suddenly spring in whenever a Black Cab driver wanted them to, unlike the surge pricing that Uber operate, big concert finishing at the Albert Hall?, high demand for cars?, up goes the charge.
It seemed that you couldn’t get that into your head, that is why I labelled you educationally challenged, but you choose to think that it was rude, fair enough, your call.
You never use Black Cabs you say, on behalf of all the Black Cab drivers that I know, thanks, it is gratefully appreciated.
That is your privilege, knock yourself out.
No problem buddy, there are many like me now, especially in the City. You had it good for a while but now black cabs are more and more a legacy business, catering for nobody.
What Joe Bloggs doesn't realise is that the uber fare is subsidised by the investors.
The passenger pays only 40% of the total fare the other 60% is picked up by the investors.
Worldwide, uber fares would have to more than double just to break even. And none of the increase would go to the driver.
Last year uber lost $5Bn. That's a big number.
How big? Every HOUR uber loses over $500K.
Uber have a problem later this year when they appeal the workers rights case.
A case they will probably lose.
Then they will have to decide to raise fares to 2018 levels to the pay for NI contributions, sick pay, holiday pay et al, or add even more more losses to the $5Bn.
The passenger pays only 40% of the total fare the other 60% is picked up by the investors.
Worldwide, uber fares would have to more than double just to break even. And none of the increase would go to the driver.
Last year uber lost $5Bn. That's a big number.
How big? Every HOUR uber loses over $500K.
Uber have a problem later this year when they appeal the workers rights case.
A case they will probably lose.
Then they will have to decide to raise fares to 2018 levels to the pay for NI contributions, sick pay, holiday pay et al, or add even more more losses to the $5Bn.
If uber lose the workers rights case, would that not impact all other minicab companies, and indeed black cab drivers who are self employed, not employees of TfL?
No problem buddy, there are many like me now, especially in the City. You had it good for a while but now black cabs are more and more a legacy business, catering for nobody.
I get what you mean, there’s nothing to stop Uber from decimating Black Cabs in London now.
I think that there’ll always be a place for Black Cabs though, they’ll still get a living, but you’re right, they’ll never get the living that I had in the golden years, but fortunately I’m out now and laughing, although I feel the pain of those still in the trade.
I was lucky, I bought property at the right time, and I’ve got enough invested that we can kick back and relax, eat in good restaurants etc.
Granted, the days of sliding off to Rome or Athens for a long weekend every couple of months have gone out of the window, but I can drum up a couple of weeks in Tahiti, or Valparaiso, Chile annually, far from the tattooed Sun readers.
Shhh...
Black cabs who are regulated by the TFL and given the ability to operate by TFL and promoted by TFL i.e. without TFL black cabs wouldn't exist, are self employed.
Uber drivers who are run by Uber and helped to operate by Uber are empolyed by Uber.
Going back to one of my previous posts. Companies and employees, if given the ability will regulate the competition out of existence. This isn't unique to black cabs.
They aren't losing that percentage in the UK. Almost the entirety of that money was lost trying to explode into China, Russia and india (where they did provide bonuses or subsidies to drivers). They have now quit in those countries after burning through cash.
Uber is also burning it's cash not by subsidising drivers in mature markets but trying to grow very quickly across multiple markets. Uber drivers aren't being paid anything close to black cabs for fares (something which a subsidy would suggest).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43536322
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/36938812
They weren't losing to traditional taxis, but companies very similar to Uber.
Last edited:
Unrelated I guess, but it shows the mindset of the media vs Uber when you see the reporting of this terrible accident in Leeds where some youths lost their lives. "HORROR UBER CRASH" headlines from the likes of Sky, The Mirror, Mail etc. despite the accident looking like the Uber driver was an innocent party and just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
It seems any story involving an Uber driver, the story that there was even a tenuous connection to Uber makes the headline, rather than the terrible loss of life.
It seems any story involving an Uber driver, the story that there was even a tenuous connection to Uber makes the headline, rather than the terrible loss of life.