Read on Twitter
This is why the ruling on safety grounds is important.
Effectively, TfL haven't denied them based on the model, they've denied based on Uber being shit at delivering that model
(14,000 illegal journeys, flaws in the app registration process etc) https://twitter.com/alexbrooks/status/1198918972026044416
Effectively, TfL haven't denied them based on the model, they've denied based on Uber being shit at delivering that model
(14,000 illegal journeys, flaws in the app registration process etc) https://twitter.com/alexbrooks/status/1198918972026044416
Essentially they've once again exposed the real flaw at the heart of Uber's model:
To meet the safety / regulatory requirements in London they must act like a proper taxi firm.
BUT doing that instantly opens them up to all the OTHER employee (and tax!) implications of doing so.
To meet the safety / regulatory requirements in London they must act like a proper taxi firm.
BUT doing that instantly opens them up to all the OTHER employee (and tax!) implications of doing so.
And they can't do the latter.
Because their profitability (current, in London's case, or future in global terms) is contingent on them not carrying the same burden of driver recruitment, policing and support (leave etc) as a 'regular' cab firm.
Because their profitability (current, in London's case, or future in global terms) is contingent on them not carrying the same burden of driver recruitment, policing and support (leave etc) as a 'regular' cab firm.
The driver has ALWAYS been the weak point in the Uber argument, and always will be.
It is a the biggest point of regulatory risk, AND IT REPRESENTS A FIXED COST.
Driver costs DO NOT drop with economies of scale, which is the Silicon Valley model they've pitched to everyone.
It is a the biggest point of regulatory risk, AND IT REPRESENTS A FIXED COST.
Driver costs DO NOT drop with economies of scale, which is the Silicon Valley model they've pitched to everyone.
This is why they're investing so heavily in driverless tech. They're racing against reality. They NEED to engineer the driver out as quickly as possible.
They have no path to global profitably, or maintaining the 'we're just an app' model as long as there is a driver in the car.
They have no path to global profitably, or maintaining the 'we're just an app' model as long as there is a driver in the car.
Anyway, all this is covered in my Uber piece, which will go up this week.
I just can't finish writing it until I see more info on the judgement.
We don't write pieces based solely on press releases. It's not the @lonrec way!
I just can't finish writing it until I see more info on the judgement.
We don't write pieces based solely on press releases. It's not the @lonrec way!
In the meantime, he's the piece I wrote when Uber got their license rejected before: https://www.londonreconnections.com/2017/understanding-uber-not-app/
