Chat Forum
It is currently Sat Feb 22, 2020 7:10 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 126 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 12:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12279
Location: Melbourne
Anonymous. wrote:
jdogscoop wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Anonymous. wrote:
6.Jones wrote:

Uber's model is fine. It simply needs to charge more, and spend less on R&D - like those driverless cars, and helicopters. There's a good analysis here:

https://news.crunchbase.com/news/understanding-uber-loses-money/

Not sure how the model is fine if their fundamental strategy for becoming profitable (getting rid of the drivers who take 75% of the fare) is something you feel they should virtually abandon

If I was CEO I'd bin it straight away. It's a risky and expensive strategy. Driverless cars will emerge anyway. Uber doesn't gain any obvious kind of commercial advantage by developing them themselves, unless they plan to pivot into the driverless car business, which would be insane. They have [and may be squandering] a potentially hugely profitable business, based on the idea of the gig economy. So what if the driver takes 75%? Each one only needs to be net profitable after taking the real cost of business onto account. That means charging more.


Shirley they prefer to give away 75% to the driver if the driver is the one supplying the car, car maintenance, gas and insurance.

They are spending billions on driverless carr&d because they don't want to give 75% of the fare to the driver


Who will own the cars?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 1:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11510
jdogscoop wrote:
Uncle Tangent wrote:

TBH, not sure why you're getting so heated up about this to call me a weirdo for saying that surge fares are often at the same time as a taxis more expensive rate, because they often are.


Your argument is a red herring.

95% of the time an Uber / Didi/ Ola / Ballsaccio ride is 50-70% cheaper than a taxi fare.

Sure, when Elton is breaking up at O2 arena both are expensive, but it's hardly the point is it?

I wasn't making an argument against anything you were saying, aside from associating surge pricing with stupidity, so still unsure why you've gone off half cocked.

You're counter arguing against arguments that aren't even being made ... in fact, if anything my comments back your points which you apparently can't see through the red mist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 2:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12279
Location: Melbourne
UncleFB wrote:
jdogscoop wrote:
Uncle Tangent wrote:

TBH, not sure why you're getting so heated up about this to call me a weirdo for saying that surge fares are often at the same time as a taxis more expensive rate, because they often are.


Your argument is a red herring.

95% of the time an Uber / Didi/ Ola / Ballsaccio ride is 50-70% cheaper than a taxi fare.

Sure, when Elton is breaking up at O2 arena both are expensive, but it's hardly the point is it?

I wasn't making an argument against anything you were saying, aside from associating surge pricing with stupidity, so still unsure why you've gone off half cocked.

You're counter arguing against arguments that aren't even being made ... in fact, if anything my comments back your points which you apparently can't see through the red mist.


You said it wasn't stupid to accept an expensive surge fare.

In reference to kiwinoz's point:

Quote:
They said the surge pricing of Uber makes them expensive compared to taxis.


It is stupid to accept an expensive surge fare if taxis are available.

No red mist here chief.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 2:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11510
jdogscoop wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
jdogscoop wrote:
Uncle Tangent wrote:

TBH, not sure why you're getting so heated up about this to call me a weirdo for saying that surge fares are often at the same time as a taxis more expensive rate, because they often are.


Your argument is a red herring.

95% of the time an Uber / Didi/ Ola / Ballsaccio ride is 50-70% cheaper than a taxi fare.

Sure, when Elton is breaking up at O2 arena both are expensive, but it's hardly the point is it?

I wasn't making an argument against anything you were saying, aside from associating surge pricing with stupidity, so still unsure why you've gone off half cocked.

You're counter arguing against arguments that aren't even being made ... in fact, if anything my comments back your points which you apparently can't see through the red mist.


You said it wasn't stupid to accept an expensive surge fare.

In reference to kiwinoz's point:

Quote:
They said the surge pricing of Uber makes them expensive compared to taxis.


It is stupid to accept an expensive surge fare if taxis are available.

No red mist here chief.

Why would you expect me to be commenting based on every post quoted, this is a forum, half cocked is the name of the game? I didn't respond to kiwinoz's post, I was just talking about the relative stupidity of accepting a surcharge fare.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 2:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12279
Location: Melbourne
UncleFB wrote:
jdogscoop wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
jdogscoop wrote:
Uncle Tangent wrote:

TBH, not sure why you're getting so heated up about this to call me a weirdo for saying that surge fares are often at the same time as a taxis more expensive rate, because they often are.


Your argument is a red herring.

95% of the time an Uber / Didi/ Ola / Ballsaccio ride is 50-70% cheaper than a taxi fare.

Sure, when Elton is breaking up at O2 arena both are expensive, but it's hardly the point is it?

I wasn't making an argument against anything you were saying, aside from associating surge pricing with stupidity, so still unsure why you've gone off half cocked.

You're counter arguing against arguments that aren't even being made ... in fact, if anything my comments back your points which you apparently can't see through the red mist.


You said it wasn't stupid to accept an expensive surge fare.

In reference to kiwinoz's point:

Quote:
They said the surge pricing of Uber makes them expensive compared to taxis.


It is stupid to accept an expensive surge fare if taxis are available.

No red mist here chief.

Why would you expect me to be commenting based on every post quoted, this is a forum, half cocked is the name of the game? I didn't respond to kiwinoz's post, I was just talking about the relative stupidity of accepting a surcharge fare.


If it's your only option, then of course it's not stupid to accept a surge fare. Especially if you're in danger.

If you do have options to avoid it, then it is stupid to accept a surge fare.

I haven't done so, but I have accidentally ordered an Uber Black instead of the standard Uber. Luckily I was only going a few kilometres but I was wondering why I was travelling in a high spec Merc with a driver who was in a suit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 2:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11510
jdogscoop wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
jdogscoop wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
jdogscoop wrote:
Your argument is a red herring.

95% of the time an Uber / Didi/ Ola / Ballsaccio ride is 50-70% cheaper than a taxi fare.

Sure, when Elton is breaking up at O2 arena both are expensive, but it's hardly the point is it?

I wasn't making an argument against anything you were saying, aside from associating surge pricing with stupidity, so still unsure why you've gone off half cocked.

You're counter arguing against arguments that aren't even being made ... in fact, if anything my comments back your points which you apparently can't see through the red mist.


You said it wasn't stupid to accept an expensive surge fare.

In reference to kiwinoz's point:

Quote:
They said the surge pricing of Uber makes them expensive compared to taxis.


It is stupid to accept an expensive surge fare if taxis are available.

No red mist here chief.

Why would you expect me to be commenting based on every post quoted, this is a forum, half cocked is the name of the game? I didn't respond to kiwinoz's post, I was just talking about the relative stupidity of accepting a surcharge fare.


If it's your only option, then of course it's not stupid to accept a surge fare. Especially if you're in danger.

If you do have options to avoid it, then it is stupid to accept a surge fare.

I haven't done so, but I have accidentally ordered an Uber Black instead of the standard Uber. Luckily I was only going a few kilometres but I was wondering why I was travelling in a high spec Merc with a driver who was in a suit.

Sheesh all I mean is ... disregard the kiwinoz post, and all I was saying is that even when uber has surge prices it can still be cheaper than taxis, as taxis have higher flagfall rates at certain times as well. Say 1am on Sunday morning in Sydney, even with a surge it will probably still be cheaper or similar to a taxi.

If a taxi is considerably cheaper then yes it would be silly to accept it, although I reckon I'd still take an Uber over saving $1-$5 in a taxi. I've never used Uber Black, it's one of those 'luxuries' that are in no way worth the extra for me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 3:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12279
Location: Melbourne
Yeah Uber Black is not worth it unless you want to impress a hot date or some such. That 2.5km ride cost me more than $20.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:21 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:18 pm
Posts: 1246
Uber could be a bit fûcked by events in London. And not just fûcked in London

https://www.londonreconnections.com/201 ... al-crisis/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 5:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7464
Had to study a Harvard paper on Uber in a course I was studying recently. What's going to happen Uber is regulators finally getting to grips with these new actors and regulating accordingly.
It's the regulatory gap that allows them to be successful and eventually once regulation catches up with them, they either adapt the model to conform or sink.

On a tangential note I had to meet the CEER (European electricity regulator) recently and their view was they have to become more proactive at regulating as opposed to continually being reactive. *shudder


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 7:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16687
Location: Perth
paddyor wrote:
Zakar wrote:
It's very enjoyable.

I only get a cab when work is paying. I'm in one now, and apparently I'm his third job in 10 hours. It's like a horse and buggy driver whinging about cars, but I wonder if taxis will exist in 30 years for kitsch tourism purposes.

Uber is losing bags of cash every year. Their model of screw the labour and their supply of a vehicle to actually deliver the service can't last. They'll keep going to push out as many as they can and then push up prices. Taxis willl be back.

Oh, and even the visionary driverless cars they want won't be happening for a few decades yet and even if they did maintaining a fleet and deliveing a service with human intervention will still be quite expensive. It's a f**king taxi company bending labour laws masquerading as a tech bro.


All true, except that Uber with driverless cars is a business model that has low marginal cost, and would the potential to turn the car industry upside down. But as you say, decades away. There are two types of people that talk about the impending arrival of autonomous cars: bullshit artists and those people that fell for the bullshit.

I think we will soon see the likes of Uber go bust; being replaced by a similar service that costs a little more. Taxi licenses may survive but won’t be worth as much as they were 30 years ago.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 7:54 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:18 pm
Posts: 1246
towny wrote:
paddyor wrote:
Zakar wrote:
It's very enjoyable.

I only get a cab when work is paying. I'm in one now, and apparently I'm his third job in 10 hours. It's like a horse and buggy driver whinging about cars, but I wonder if taxis will exist in 30 years for kitsch tourism purposes.

Uber is losing bags of cash every year. Their model of screw the labour and their supply of a vehicle to actually deliver the service can't last. They'll keep going to push out as many as they can and then push up prices. Taxis willl be back.

Oh, and even the visionary driverless cars they want won't be happening for a few decades yet and even if they did maintaining a fleet and deliveing a service with human intervention will still be quite expensive. It's a f**king taxi company bending labour laws masquerading as a tech bro.


All true, except that Uber with driverless cars is a business model that has low marginal cost, and would the potential to turn the car industry upside down. But as you say, decades away. There are two types of people that talk about the impending arrival of autonomous cars: bullshit artists and those people that fell for the bullshit.

I think we will soon see the likes of Uber go bust; being replaced by a similar service that costs a little more. Taxi licenses may survive but won’t be worth as much as they were 30 years ago.


Even with driverless cars, the point made in the article on London reconnections still holds - the standard economies from the tech sector don’t scale in the same way for a taxi provider.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7647
It's quite good the way it is now with all the options we have.
Train, bus, taxi, uber
It will only get better


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:43 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:18 pm
Posts: 1246
Cartman wrote:
It's quite good the way it is now with all the options we have.
Train, bus, taxi, uber
It will only get better


Depends what you mean by ‘better’. Uber pays less tax, lower wages, poor background checks, less employee security.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15853
Location: Haunting your dreams
Biffer29 wrote:
Cartman wrote:
It's quite good the way it is now with all the options we have.
Train, bus, taxi, uber
It will only get better


Depends what you mean by ‘better’. Uber pays less tax, lower wages, poor background checks, less employee security.


Safer, more convenient, cheaper, cars cleaner, more reliable, less strange rants by drivers, newer cars etc etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:02 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:18 pm
Posts: 1246
Zakar wrote:
Biffer29 wrote:
Cartman wrote:
It's quite good the way it is now with all the options we have.
Train, bus, taxi, uber
It will only get better


Depends what you mean by ‘better’. Uber pays less tax, lower wages, poor background checks, less employee security.


Safer, more convenient, cheaper, cars cleaner, more reliable, less strange rants by drivers, newer cars etc etc.


Safer is up for debate, that’s one of the reasons they’ve lost their license in London.

It’s then a balance on how much you balance what I’ve put against what you’ve put. If you’re ok exploiting people for less than minimum wage, and the company freeloading on other taxpayers by making a minimal contribution to road upkeep through taxes then that’s your own moral decision.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:29 pm 
Online

Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:35 am
Posts: 5711
Location: England
Biffer29 wrote:
Uber could be a bit fûcked by events in London. And not just fûcked in London

https://www.londonreconnections.com/201 ... al-crisis/


That was both interesting and informative, cheers for posting the link.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3723
Biffer29 wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Biffer29 wrote:
Cartman wrote:
It's quite good the way it is now with all the options we have.
Train, bus, taxi, uber
It will only get better


Depends what you mean by ‘better’. Uber pays less tax, lower wages, poor background checks, less employee security.


Safer, more convenient, cheaper, cars cleaner, more reliable, less strange rants by drivers, newer cars etc etc.


Safer is up for debate, that’s one of the reasons they’ve lost their license in London.

It’s then a balance on how much you balance what I’ve put against what you’ve put. If you’re ok exploiting people for less than minimum wage, and the company freeloading on other taxpayers by making a minimal contribution to road upkeep through taxes then that’s your own moral decision.



Being a Uber driver is voluntary right? I don't see how it is exploitive.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3723
Zakar wrote:
Plato'sCave wrote:
wamberal99 wrote:
It's all a precursor to the main game, innit? Pools of intelligent vehicles which we just call for and which deliver us to the destination.


Which will be superb.


Amen. That's Ubers grand plan, and they'll lose money until that happens.



That's like me having a grand plan to become a cyborg.

A pleasant fantasy isn't much of a business plan.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2020 11:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15853
Location: Haunting your dreams
Biffer29 wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Biffer29 wrote:
Cartman wrote:
It's quite good the way it is now with all the options we have.
Train, bus, taxi, uber
It will only get better


Depends what you mean by ‘better’. Uber pays less tax, lower wages, poor background checks, less employee security.


Safer, more convenient, cheaper, cars cleaner, more reliable, less strange rants by drivers, newer cars etc etc.


Safer is up for debate, that’s one of the reasons they’ve lost their license in London.

It’s then a balance on how much you balance what I’ve put against what you’ve put. If you’re ok exploiting people for less than minimum wage, and the company freeloading on other taxpayers by making a minimal contribution to road upkeep through taxes then that’s your own moral decision.


It's a bit much holding the most regulated cab market in the world as your comparison point.

I am 100x more comfortable with my Mrs or friends being in a late night uber versus a cab. Both the driver and passenger are gps tracked, versus an identical, namless, off grid cab. Nothing is 100% safe, but Uber is vastly safer.

Aren't your road taxes paid for by vehicle owners? I don't see what that has to do with Uber, as the drivers pay their own vehicle registration costs. None of the drivers, to.my knowledge, are held as chattel slaves by Uber, so it's fair to say 'exploitation' of free willing private contractors is being extremely hyperbolic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 12:17 am 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:18 pm
Posts: 1246
Sonny Blount wrote:
Biffer29 wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Biffer29 wrote:
Cartman wrote:
It's quite good the way it is now with all the options we have.
Train, bus, taxi, uber
It will only get better


Depends what you mean by ‘better’. Uber pays less tax, lower wages, poor background checks, less employee security.


Safer, more convenient, cheaper, cars cleaner, more reliable, less strange rants by drivers, newer cars etc etc.


Safer is up for debate, that’s one of the reasons they’ve lost their license in London.

It’s then a balance on how much you balance what I’ve put against what you’ve put. If you’re ok exploiting people for less than minimum wage, and the company freeloading on other taxpayers by making a minimal contribution to road upkeep through taxes then that’s your own moral decision.



Being a Uber driver is voluntary right? I don't see how it is exploitive.


This is pretty much the neoclassical economist line for why there should be no worker protection at all. Its also what Hmrc are challenging, this idea that they're all private contractors not employees.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3723
Biffer29 wrote:
Sonny Blount wrote:
Biffer29 wrote:

Safer is up for debate, that’s one of the reasons they’ve lost their license in London.

It’s then a balance on how much you balance what I’ve put against what you’ve put. If you’re ok exploiting people for less than minimum wage, and the company freeloading on other taxpayers by making a minimal contribution to road upkeep through taxes then that’s your own moral decision.



Being a Uber driver is voluntary right? I don't see how it is exploitive.


This is pretty much the neoclassical economist line for why there should be no worker protection at all. Its also what Hmrc are challenging, this idea that they're all private contractors not employees.


Sounds like a problem with labour laws more than Uber. The laws are going to have to update to work with modern modes of earning a living.

People also have a particular one size fits all picture of work that they prefer.

It may be that driving an Uber does not need to be anyone's full time job and its something people do to supplement their income. Trying to legislate on the basis that someone should be able to live solely as an Uber driver may just be working against reality.

A little like milk or paper rounds used to be. Usually a supplementary income for a household that also had other streams of income.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 2:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 1:50 am
Posts: 4417
Biffer29 wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Biffer29 wrote:
Cartman wrote:
It's quite good the way it is now with all the options we have.
Train, bus, taxi, uber
It will only get better


Depends what you mean by ‘better’. Uber pays less tax, lower wages, poor background checks, less employee security.


Safer, more convenient, cheaper, cars cleaner, more reliable, less strange rants by drivers, newer cars etc etc.


Safer is up for debate, that’s one of the reasons they’ve lost their license in London.

It’s then a balance on how much you balance what I’ve put against what you’ve put. If you’re ok exploiting people for less than minimum wage, and the company freeloading on other taxpayers by making a minimal contribution to road upkeep through taxes then that’s your own moral decision.


You clearly have never been in a fully-licensed Sydney cab.

Some of them are death traps ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4844
Sydney - likely to die of extreme motion sickness from shit driving in cabs...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11510
kiwigreg369 wrote:
Sydney - likely to die of extreme motion sickness from shit driving in cabs...

That's just the condition of the roads really!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:41 am
Posts: 1718
Biffer29 wrote:
Uber could be a bit fûcked by events in London. And not just fûcked in London

https://www.londonreconnections.com/201 ... al-crisis/

Excellent article (If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck). I particularly liked the bit where the Uber barrister hoisted herself with her own petard. I also liked this:
"As Uber have increasingly discovered, however, taxis are not technology. Every journey carries a number of fixed costs that simply don’t scale. Most particularly: driver and tax."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 861
Macrosan wrote:
Biffer29 wrote:
Uber could be a bit fûcked by events in London. And not just fûcked in London

https://www.londonreconnections.com/201 ... al-crisis/

Excellent article (If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck). I particularly liked the bit where the Uber barrister hoisted herself with her own petard. I also liked this:
"As Uber have increasingly discovered, however, taxis are not technology. Every journey carries a number of fixed costs that simply don’t scale. Most particularly: driver and tax."


But it is particularly the fixed cost element that is pushing drivers to the Uber model. Or Grab/Gojek in Singapore.

Talking to a Grab driver last week that is a recent convert from being with a taxi company, his taxi was costing him $120 per day before he picked up a ride. To get that back, the taxi really needed to be on the road 24 hours a day. Which means you need the primary driver and a relief driver on 12 hour shifts.

The taxi company wasn't helping him find a relief driver (and didn't have a brother/wife/relative or anything that could do it) so was struggling.

In contrast Grab was costing him about $60 per day before accepting jobs so far more affordable for him to still make money on a 12 hour shift.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6659
Location: Shangri-La
Altazuma wrote:
Macrosan wrote:
Biffer29 wrote:
Uber could be a bit fûcked by events in London. And not just fûcked in London

https://www.londonreconnections.com/201 ... al-crisis/

Excellent article (If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck). I particularly liked the bit where the Uber barrister hoisted herself with her own petard. I also liked this:
"As Uber have increasingly discovered, however, taxis are not technology. Every journey carries a number of fixed costs that simply don’t scale. Most particularly: driver and tax."


But it is particularly the fixed cost element that is pushing drivers to the Uber model. Or Grab/Gojek in Singapore.

Talking to a Grab driver last week that is a recent convert from being with a taxi company, his taxi was costing him $120 per day before he picked up a ride. To get that back, the taxi really needed to be on the road 24 hours a day. Which means you need the primary driver and a relief driver on 12 hour shifts.

The taxi company wasn't helping him find a relief driver (and didn't have a brother/wife/relative or anything that could do it) so was struggling.

In contrast Grab was costing him about $60 per day before accepting jobs so far more affordable for him to still make money on a 12 hour shift.


I was going to mention Grab as it is particularly useful here in Yangon. Most cab drivers don't speak English and it is customary here to negotiate taxi prices before you get in. Grab takes both these problematic issues out of the equation and it works out cheaper if you are not use to haggling. It also uses legitimate taxis so is not increasing competition for existing taxi drivers rather it is giving some an edge. There is also some points programme I haven't worked out yet. I love it, it means I don't have to think about getting a car here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 24175
The cheerleading over our own destruction is interesting.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1711
Location: The Shipwreck Coast
The odour of the taxi is the biggest put off for me


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15853
Location: Haunting your dreams
Mullet 2 wrote:
The cheerleading over our own destruction is interesting.


I guess it's a bit late to worry our soulless robots in the real estate industry.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 24175
Zakar wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
The cheerleading over our own destruction is interesting.


I guess it's a bit late to worry our soulless robots in the real estate industry.



Robots are awful at lying.

But don't despair, I'm sure there are other livelihoods that you can crow are being undercut by gig contracts and falling standards. :thumbup:

But hey, you're ok...for now


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3723
Mullet 2 wrote:
The cheerleading over our own destruction is interesting.



This is how new jobs are created.

If the taxis are cheaper, people spend the money they saved on other things. There is now more money for people in non-Taxi driving jobs, and everybody can get around cheaper.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 24175
So I keep hearing.

50 year old taxi drivers will get new jobs working in tech.

It's a fantasy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15853
Location: Haunting your dreams
Mullet 2 wrote:
So I keep hearing.

50 year old taxi drivers will get new jobs working in tech.

It's a fantasy


Haven't you heard, uber is a tech taxi interface position.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15853
Location: Haunting your dreams
Mullet 2 wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
The cheerleading over our own destruction is interesting.


I guess it's a bit late to worry our soulless robots in the real estate industry.




Robots are awful at lying.

But don't despair, I'm sure there are other livelihoods that you can crow are being undercut by gig contracts and falling standards. :thumbup:

But hey, you're ok...for now


True, but a house can be listed on a website, and I'm sure you could put a robot in a blue suit at the door handing out brochures and beeping the same phrase over and over again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 24175
Anyway we Europeans have stopped them in their tracks and rightly so

Want to be a taxi?
Get a taxi licence
Police vetting
suitable vehicle
sit the knowledge
and have your car submitted to more regular safety checks


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 24175
Zakar wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
The cheerleading over our own destruction is interesting.


I guess it's a bit late to worry our soulless robots in the real estate industry.




Robots are awful at lying.

But don't despair, I'm sure there are other livelihoods that you can crow are being undercut by gig contracts and falling standards. :thumbup:

But hey, you're ok...for now


True, but a house can be listed on a website, and I'm sure you could put a robot in a blue suit at the door handing out brochures and beeping the same phrase over and over again.


Can a robot make up a bid?

Anyway I work in the public sector now but do keep on with the estate agent line. It amuses me no end.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 20, 2020 12:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15853
Location: Haunting your dreams
The Uber app has a quiet mode in Australia now. Bliss.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16306
kiwinoz wrote:
guy smiley wrote:
I get around that whole just another car thing by checking the make, model and rego when making the booking.


No not riding in, being two cars behind the plum in the Yaris who has suddenly stopped to let someone out.

You wouldn't survive in Jo'burg, mate.

We caught a black cab in London from Paddington to Bayswater last December. Cab driver couldn't find the address. My GF didn't help by asking him why he didn't use Google Maps. The more flustered he got, the more U-turns he made, the more everyone's temper frayed. Charged us the full wack, though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 20, 2020 9:10 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11422
Location: Mostly London........Mostly
Mullet 2 wrote:
Anyway we Europeans have stopped them in their tracks and rightly so

Want to be a taxi?
Get a taxi licence
Police vetting
suitable vehicle
sit the knowledge
and have your car submitted to more regular safety checks


Is this really of any use these days?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 126 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AnkleTap, bessantj, BetterByBoat, Biffer29, bimboman, Bing [Bot], Boomslang, ChipSpike, Da iawn diolch, danny_fitz, danthefan, de_Selby, Double, DragsterDriver, Flametop, Flockwitt, franch fan, Frodder, Google Adsense [Bot], Gospel, grimoald, grubberkick, iarmhiman, I like haggis, Insane_Homer, james garner, Jeff the Bear, Lazy Couch potato, Lemoentjie, Lobby, Luciano, Luckycharmer, maxime, Mr Mike, Mr. Very Popular, New guy, Nolanator, not_english, ovalball, pigaaaa, P in VG, Plato'sCave, polyallstar, quartz, Rowdy, saffer13, Saint, Salanya, Sandstorm, sockwithaticket, Still Not Playing, Theflier, The Man Without Fear, Toulon's Not Toulouse, Troll, Wendigo7, Winnie, zt1903 and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group