GRcade

Obligatory,

Buy your own car then you alcoholic povo scum!

KK wrote:Their business model, as it currently stands, isn't working at all. They had a net revenue of $6.5 billion for 2016, yet made a loss of $2.8 billion. They sold off their Chinese part of the business because that too was losing a fortune. Losing London would put them further in the gooseberry fool.

Their business model is to undercut traditional taxis even if it makes a loss. They want to force taxis out of the market, and they want to replace their own workforce with self-driving cars.
If the plan works then in a few years they will control the market and easily make all of their losses back with higher prices and lower overheads.

A self-driving car service seems more like the domain of a Google, Facebook or Apple. Would Uber ever be able to compete with them anyway? Such a service seems quite a way off, and I can't see how Uber can carry on pissing off governing bodies worldwide and making such substantial losses.

Used them a few times in my area and in America and have always been cheaper than the local cabs and pretty punctual.

KK wrote:A self-driving car service seems more like the domain of a Google, Facebook or Apple. Would Uber ever be able to compete with them anyway? Such a service seems quite a way off, and I can't see how Uber can carry on pissing off governing bodies worldwide and making such substantial losses.

They've ditched google maps and are mapping themselves with their own app. When you drive using the Uber app you are helping Uber map the globe. This will be used for the driverless cars Uber are developing. I thought this was quite well known and it's why Black Cabbies have a problem with them.

I’ve never used them but from what I gather it’s a terrible company but the opposition to them (in London at least) seems to be worrying that they’ll kill off the traditional taxis.

They should be forced to become a less shitty company, but I’ve no problem with them outcompeting the traditional taxis.

I haven't used them on principle since their actions after the fist Immigration Ban in the states. They are an awful, awful company; a bunch of Silicon Bros who have strong armed their way into everyday life through underhanded means and are a danger to both their drivers and customers. This is nothing but good news.

Some 3.5 million passengers and 40,000 drivers use the Uber app in London.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640

40k drivers just in London?

That’s a lot of people that will be looking for work.

Why are they only banned in London?

Uber's approach and conduct demonstrate a lack of corporate responsibility in relation to a number of issues which have potential public safety implications. These include:

Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
It's approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.

These aren't things that only affect London.

Drumstick wrote:Why are they only banned in London?

Each town/ city etc. do their own licensing of cabs, so each town can make the rules a bit.

Drumstick wrote:Why are they only banned in London?

Uber's approach and conduct demonstrate a lack of corporate responsibility in relation to a number of issues which have potential public safety implications. These include:

Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
It's approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.

These aren't things that only affect London.

Transport for London (TfL) refused a new licence to operate in London. They don’t have jurisdiction anywhere else in the country.

Moggy wrote:

Some 3.5 million passengers and 40,000 drivers use the Uber app in London.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640

40k drivers just in London?

That’s a lot of people that will be looking for work.

Would the 40k drivers all be doing it full time though? Some will be doing it to supplement income.

Still a big number either way mind you.

Yeah I image a big wedge are casuals that do a bit here and there, but still those people no doubt use it to make ends meet and now dont have that.

Tomous wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Some 3.5 million passengers and 40,000 drivers use the Uber app in London.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640

40k drivers just in London?

That’s a lot of people that will be looking for work.

Would the 40k drivers all be doing it full time though? Some will be doing it to supplement income.

Still a big number either way mind you.

Maybe they should all start playing Warhammer 40k?
A 40k game with 40k people would be pretty darn epic.

Moggy wrote:

Drumstick wrote:Why are they only banned in London?

Uber's approach and conduct demonstrate a lack of corporate responsibility in relation to a number of issues which have potential public safety implications. These include:

Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
It's approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.

These aren't things that only affect London.

Transport for London (TfL) refused a new licence to operate in London. They don’t have jurisdiction anywhere else in the country.

My point is, if these things are serious problems then the government or whomever's responsibility it is to oversee this on a national level should be enforcing this nationwide, not just in the capital.

Oh ffs. What's the Uber equivalent? I know Lyft is Uber's biggest rival but that's only in the USA. Won't be using black cabs because they cost way more.

And Uber drivers normally use 2 phones. The Uber app map operating on one device and another using either Waze or Google Maps to navigate London.

Google will be better placed to do self driving cars though. Far more advanced in the tech and skills needed to make it a reality.

Drumstick wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Drumstick wrote:Why are they only banned in London?

Uber's approach and conduct demonstrate a lack of corporate responsibility in relation to a number of issues which have potential public safety implications. These include:

Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
It's approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.

These aren't things that only affect London.

Transport for London (TfL) refused a new licence to operate in London. They don’t have jurisdiction anywhere else in the country.

My point is, if these things are serious problems then the government or whomever's responsibility it is to oversee this on a national level should be enforcing this nationwide, not just in the capital.

Uber is a shitty company, but taxi licensing isn’t done on a nationwide basis.

Tomous wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Some 3.5 million passengers and 40,000 drivers use the Uber app in London.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640

40k drivers just in London?

That’s a lot of people that will be looking for work.

Would the 40k drivers all be doing it full time though? Some will be doing it to supplement income.

Still a big number either way mind you.

Yeah a lot of them will be part time, but they’ll be relying on that money and will be looking to replace that money if they can no longer drive.

Surely a better solution would be to clamp down on the shitty aspects of the company and force them to be more responsible.

Moggy wrote:Uber is a shitty company, but taxi licensing isn’t done on a nationwide basis.

So the fact that the rest of the country is still allegedly "at risk" due to these practices is due to the councils not taking action? Are you honestly telling me that the government, even if it saw it necessary, does not have the power to enforce a nationwide ban on a company like Uber? That's bonkers.

Drumstick wrote:

Moggy wrote:Uber is a shitty company, but taxi licensing isn’t done on a nationwide basis.

So the fact that the rest of the country is still allegedly "at risk" due to these practices is due to the councils not taking action? Are you honestly telling me that the government, even if it saw it necessary, does not have the power to enforce a nationwide ban on a company like Uber? That's bonkers.

I’m sure the government could, but Uber haven’t done anything to warrant the UK government shutting the whole operation down.