Uber London loses licence to operate

Re:Uber London loses licence to operate by sol_remmy on Friday September 22, 2017 @02:32PM (#15314574)

> Frankly, it happened in Austin. Lyft and Uber threw a hissy fit and the market was happy to fill in the gaps.

Good luck with that, the markets are not remotely comparable:

Austin: 900k pop; In a red state known for low regulatory burden; No established mass transit to compete with; No established tax companies

London: 8.8M pop; High regulatory burden; City's incentive: each Uber rider is a potential lost customer for the Underground; Taxi companies have influence with legislators

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber London loses licence to operate by caoilte on Friday September 22, 2017 @03:52PM (#15315216)

The only incentive TFL has is to make travel as efficient as possible.

The underground is way too crowded, but so are the roads (mainly because of taxis these days).

This makes Uber a better bet than taxis (more efficient) buses better than both, bikes best of all and something in between a nirvana.

However, none of that matters as long as Uber think they're above the law.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber London loses licence to operate by OJFord on Saturday September 23, 2017 @06:20AM (#15319088)

> The only incentive TFL has is to make travel as efficient as possible.

TfL has the incentive to follow London mayoral policy; the MoL has concerns beyond travel.

[ Parent | on HN ]