Uber loses licence to operate in London

renyeo

Well-Known Member
Moderator
Pending a successful appeal (it has 21 days to lodge the appeal with TfL), the thought of a London without Uber is unthinkable ... akin to Singapore without Grab.

:eek:

Full story,
http://bbc.in/2xz6HRV
 

Ultracraft

Well-Known Member
I think many taxi companies in Sg are hoping our government one day to do the same to the two Apps based companies. :biggrin:
 

Observingonly

Well-Known Member
Does our government have the balls to do it? But for sure, London will not be the last city to do it. It is going to spread like wild fire in Europe and even elsewhere in the world.

I remember one analyst said that Uber wouldnt last for 10 years. Of course it wouldnt die suddenly overnight but step by step, one place at a time. This may be just one of the many steps towards that.
 

Johnkoh

Active Member
Does our government have the balls to do it? But for sure, London will not be the last city to do it. It is going to spread like wild fire in Europe and even elsewhere in the world.

I remember one analyst said that Uber wouldnt last for 10 years. Of course it wouldnt die suddenly overnight but step by step, one place at a time. This may be just one of the many steps towards that.


Well, Uber is not the only ride-hailing app in London.

There are reasons why ride-hailing apps bloom in a matter of a few years. It could be price, the availability of current fleets of taxi drivers, the effectiveness of current metro systems.

Even if the metro system is fixed, (I believe it will improve but not without incidents), the only way Uber and grab will be out is when taxi companies lower down the fares and rent to the point that it is mutually beneficial to riders, drivers and the greedy corporations.

I also believe that if the scheme of taxi buyback should ever return, (drive for x numbers of years and taxis will be transferred to drivers') many will reconsider joining Uber and grab.

For now, I would say the market has been spoilt by corporations, just like rentals in coffee shops.

Whether it is taxis, Uber or grab, a considerable amount of earnings actually go to rental(and commission).
 

Ubercheaposcum

Well-Known Member
I think many taxi companies in Sg are hoping our government one day to do the same to the two Apps based companies. :biggrin:
One needs to go and one needs to stay. But which is it going to be?

Singapore is too small to have 2. One needs to stay to act as a buffer to keep taxi companies on their toes.
 

Mikasa A

Active Member
Why unthinkable for a world without Uber or Grab??? Is not the end of the world...They only create many "Gong Gong" drivers who will stop in the middle of the roads or even highway when they miss a turning n try to reverse instantly.. What a high-tec job they created for us...
 

R.M.Ahmad

Well-Known Member
Uber is a lot safer than London black taxis. A rider doesn't know anything about a black taxi,which s/he hires for a ride. S/he simply rides with a stranger, black taxi driver, whom s/he doesn't know anything about. No one keeps black taxi ride records or track it. On the contrary with Uber, the rider knows the driver in advance and the trip tracked and recorded. Additionally Uber is a lot cheaper and easier than black taxis. you can call a uber car to come to anywhere to pick you up. This is not so with black taxis.

The decision not to renew Uber licence is anti-competitive, anti free choice, harms interests of consumers, riders, and helps monopoly. When it comes to security, economy, free market, competition and consumer interests, the decision doesn't make any sense. So this decision to deprive 40,000 uber partner drivers from their bread and butter and harming the interests of millions of London riders must be politically motivated. One thing for sure is this: This decision will push more than 40,000 Londoners to the dole queue.
 

renyeo

Well-Known Member
Moderator
It's a shame really for local government to deprive people of jobs and sending the jobless ones back onto social benefits while culling the mobility of Londoners. But I suppose the great British sense of fair play might prevail in the appeal process ...
 

Observingonly

Well-Known Member
The great social divide it creates in every country it goes into is already a reason good enough for any govt to get rid of it. I read briefly some of the posts there and it is the same there as here : Cheap because of heavy money-dumping, and convenient because of over-supply - which is also a result of money dumping.

Corporations, taxi companies inclusive, need profits to suvive and grow. No one is in business to lose money. If losing billions every year is the new requirements of business, no one will be doing any business.

The reason why it has been, and still is, losing big is because of the fake market created by its good self.

Now with the two big market, China snd London, lost, it is obviously on a big decline. I dont think it will make it in India, and once that is also lost, it would just become a small player outside the US.
 

Observingonly

Well-Known Member
Why unthinkable for a world without Uber or Grab??? Is not the end of the world...They only create many "Gong Gong" drivers who will stop in the middle of the roads or even highway when they miss a turning n try to reverse instantly.. What a high-tec job they created for us...

'Unthinkable' is a convenient word to argue for anything which is actually thinkable. People who use this arguement should first ask themselves how Lonđon became and remains as the world No.2 financial center long before Uber was born.

For me, it is even more unthinkable to see in this thread the post by Bro R.M.Ahmad that Uber is 'a lot' safer than the London Black Cab. That cab is probably the most respected cab in the world.
 

Ubercheaposcum

Well-Known Member
I read with interest on the international forum on this topic and most views were that Uber had it coming.They were kicked out of Denmark for similar reasons.How I know? I happened to pick up a Danish engineer recently who's working in Jurong island.Here's what happened during our conversation.

He asked me what taxes and how much did Uber pay to the government in order to operate here.I told him nothing,no licensing fees nothing and they just bought a huge fleet of cars in and started operations.

He looked stunned and told me that the prices for cars in Denmark are only 10% cheaper than to Singapore. Uber didn't have a LCR type of company in Denmark.The Danish government gave Uber 3 ultimatums to adhere to in order to continue their operations there.Pay licensing fees(taxes)as to how a cab company would,install a taxi meter in their cars to prevent undercutting the original taxis and to send all their drivers for proper background checks and licensing similar to the current PHVL that we have.

Uber refused to be recognized as a taxi company to pay the taxes and were booted out instantly.I have a feeling that the world over is now more obvious to how Travis managed to skirt so many legal loopholes to operate unchecked that it's coming back to haunt Uber's new CEO.Judging by the return of protectionism sentiments coming out from the western governments currently,Uber's days appears numbered unless it puts it's hands up and admit that it is just a subsidized taxi service burning wads of investors cash and disrupting markets worldwide.

Will the ongoing corruption investigation by the FBI into it's ASEAN operations involve Singapore too?Allegations of Uber bribing government agencies to gain a foothold of the local transportation markets all over ASEAN? I have always pondered over why Uber was ever allowed here in the first place when most of us knows that the men in white are only interested in bringing in businesses that are extremely profitable to them such as F1 and the casinos.

And finally,will the protectionism sentiments that are currently sweeping over Europe and America blows over to Asia too?
 

Mikasa A

Active Member
LTA n their boss KBW don't bother about all this.. Taxi or not a taxi company is also not their concern..As long they provide continue to give cheapest service to the riders.. Convenience for riders to make a booking as n when they want..LTA will allow them to do anything they want.. Most importantly they will help LTA to achieve a Car-lite nation soon..less car on the road n less congestion. At the same time create few ten thousands of entrepreneur for Singaporean..
 

Observingonly

Well-Known Member
Bro, using private cars as taxis 24 hours a day runs counter to achieving a car-lite city, and drivers are no entrepreneurs (except the Chinese Uber Driver who was trying to upgrade himself to a Malay President).

Cheap because they brought money here to dump. I dont think you will still want to drive if they stop giving you boost and Cash Kings.
 

Ultracraft

Well-Known Member
It appears that some folks here are on the payroll of Grab and/or taxi companies. Just a wild speculation on my part. No offense intended. :biggrin:

Bro, using private cars as taxis 24 hours a day runs counter to achieving a car-lite city, and
Isn't taxi the same re your comment on "runs counter achieving car lite society"?

In the eyes of the authority, every vehicle used to ferry people from one place to another instead of each individual owning his/her own vehicle is in line with the government policy of a car lite society. Whether taxi or PHC, it serves the same purpose as buses and MRT. It is just that the latter two could ferry much more commuters.
 

renyeo

Well-Known Member
Moderator
According to the latest news, TfL's decision to revoke Uber London licence was - hear this - backed by the thousands of black cab drivers in the British capital.

Apparently the Mayor of London who acts as the chairman of TfL has gone out on a limp to kill Uber in order to appease the taxi drivers.

This is hardly competitive or even legal.
 

Observingonly

Well-Known Member
I read with interest on the international forum on this topic and most views were that Uber had it coming.They were kicked out of Denmark for similar reasons.How I know? I happened to pick up a Danish engineer recently who's working in Jurong island.Here's what happened during our conversation.

He asked me what taxes and how much did Uber pay to the government in order to operate here.I told him nothing,no licensing fees nothing and they just bought a huge fleet of cars in and started operations.

He looked stunned and told me that the prices for cars in Denmark are only 10% cheaper than to Singapore. Uber didn't have a LCR type of company in Denmark.The Danish government gave Uber 3 ultimatums to adhere to in order to continue their operations there.Pay licensing fees(taxes)as to how a cab company would,install a taxi meter in their cars to prevent undercutting the original taxis and to send all their drivers for proper background checks and licensing similar to the current PHVL that we have.

Uber refused to be recognized as a taxi company to pay the taxes and were booted out instantly.I have a feeling that the world over is now more obvious to how Travis managed to skirt so many legal loopholes to operate unchecked that it's coming back to haunt Uber's new CEO.Judging by the return of protectionism sentiments coming out from the western governments currently,Uber's days appears numbered unless it puts it's hands up and admit that it is just a subsidized taxi service burning wads of investors cash and disrupting markets worldwide.

Will the ongoing corruption investigation by the FBI into it's ASEAN operations involve Singapore too?Allegations of Uber bribing government agencies to gain a foothold of the local transportation markets all over ASEAN? I have always pondered over why Uber was ever allowed here in the first place when most of us knows that the men in white are only interested in bringing in businesses that are extremely profitable to them such as F1 and the casinos.

And finally,will the protectionism sentiments that are currently sweeping over Europe and America blows over to Asia too?

Instead of Protectionalism, I see it as awakening coupled with political courage to put wrong doings right that result in what we are seeing now.

These so-called tech companies knows that in time of crisis, their best shield is the masses they have been throwing money at. This is what we have witnessed where Uber had been banned and are witnessing it in London now.

For Singapore, I dont think our loving government has waken up nor do they have the political courage to risk their votes and political career to do the same.
 

Observingonly

Well-Known Member
It appears that some folks here are on the payroll of Grab and/or taxi companies. Just a wild speculation on my part. No offense intended. :biggrin:


Isn't taxi the same re your comment on "runs counter achieving car lite society"?

In the eyes of the authority, every vehicle used to ferry people from one place to another instead of each individual owning his/her own vehicle is in line with the government policy of a car lite society. Whether taxi or PHC, it serves the same purpose as buses and MRT. It is just that the latter two could ferry much more commuters.

I have replied you but accidentally deleted it. Lazy to rewrite. But the gist was:

I am not on taxi companies' payroll.

Taxi cos has a strict quota imposed by LTA to buy cars based on economic performance and co's performance, while any private car can be used as PH car and run 24 hour.

The popularisation of PH will not kill people' s desire to buy cars but will fuel it up even more given that it is so easy to convert a private car to a PH car to pay for the cost of ownership now.
 

Observingonly

Well-Known Member
Not renewing a business licence is an Executive prerogative outside the Judiciary's purview. The party concern can only appeal up the Executive chain but in most likely hood will fail. Decision like this must have already discussed and approved at the highest Executive level the Cabinet and no one would stick his neck out to reverse the decision.

In Singapore, we saw similar cases of the Precidential Election where Mr Tan Cheng Bok was turned away from court, as well as Huang Jing, who appealed to the Minister and failed.

So I am quite sure that Uber will have to leave London. All peace will restore.
 

Justacabby

Active Member
In sg 1 coe chao chao $50k. 1 car erp 1 day $10. Petrol tax $0.60/L.

Mouth say 1 thing, mind think of $.

Pinky pinky number 1
 

Ultracraft

Well-Known Member
Taxi cos has a strict quota imposed by LTA to buy cars based on economic performance and co's performance, while any private car can be used as PH car and run 24 hour.

The popularisation of PH will not kill people' s desire to buy cars but will fuel it up even more given that it is so easy to convert a private car to a PH car to pay for the cost of ownership now.
PHC is limited by the number of COE being issued and PDVL. LCR obviously would stop buying cars when there is a significant drop in the take up rate.
 
Top