The city has just 39 licensed cab drivers.

  • echo64@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    The apps weren’t profitable. They sold rides for less than it cost them, which killed the industry. That’s what all disruptive companies do, sell for an unprofitable price and have investor money make up the difference.

    Taxi companies could not compete. How could they? It didn’t matter if they were good or bad. There was no chance to compete because they all went out of business.

    Again, the apps didn’t win because they were better, it’s because they didn’t allow competition. In a sane world they would have had to have made a profit, and the taxi companies would have made their own app, and things would be pretty much equal across the board. But that never happened.

    • ABCDE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Again, the apps didn’t win because they were better, it’s because they didn’t allow competition.

      I rarely ever took cabs or other such transport because they’re universally dodgy as fuck. Apps made it convenient and accountable, thus succeeded.

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Honestly, it was both, plus a third thing.

      • Uber/Lyft pay like shit and run at a loss.

      • Cabs almost universally sucked. Nobody wanted to use one outside of somewhere like NYC; and only then because parking sucked so hard driving yourself is an even shittier option than the shitty cabs.

      • In places like NYC, the government over regulated cabs so hard the medallions cost into the 6 and 7 digits of dollars. Out-competing that simply involved…not paying 7-digit sums of cash just for the ability to work as a cabbie…