Uber to Resume in Calgary December 6 2016

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I thought I'd check what a normal taxi would cost for that trip at 64km, it is $94 +$3.60+$3.00(surcharge for special days and times,didn't realize cabs charged extra for New Years!). I left off time charges, as taxi's work differently though I suspect the taxi time charge would be more. I was surprised to see the fair would be similar to the non-surge price. I thought Uber was a lot cheaper. I then also noticed this was UberXL that charges more.

Not sure about UberXL, but the Uber that was being used in Calgary did seem cheaper than a cab. I live in the deep NW and a cab from 17th avenue to my house is $45 (excluding tip). Same ride in Uber was $34.

That said, I did not use Uber to save money. I would have preferred to take a cab because of the insurance issues and paid the extra 15 bucks or so. I used Uber because I was unable to get a cab most times and I could have Uber pick me up within 5-10 minutes regardless of the time of night.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I thought I'd check what a normal taxi would cost for that trip at 64km, it is $94 +$3.60+$3.00(surcharge for special days and times,didn't realize cabs charged extra for New Years!). I left off time charges, as taxi's work differently though I suspect the taxi time charge would be more. I was surprised to see the fair would be similar to the non-surge price. I thought Uber was a lot cheaper. I then also noticed this was UberXL that charges more.

regular Uber would have been 78.39 for that ride rather then 125.08 so it would have been significantly cheaper then a cab even not including time charges for the cab.

These guys did everything possible to ring up the biggest uber tab possible. Conspiracy theorist time. They were a plant by the cab association.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

That has been the crux of my argument all along, yes. The preference is that Uber be held to the same taxi rates as the other companies - and if they all think the rates are too low, petition for increases. But if the field was leveled the other way, then that would at least put everyone on equal footing.

What benefit is there to a fixed cost taxi rate that helps the consumer. In busy times they can't get a cab. In dead times they pay too high of a rate.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Dan02

These guys did everything possible to ring up the biggest uber tab possible. Conspiracy theorist time. They were a plant by the cab association.

I was thinking the same thing. I wouldn't put it past them.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by GGG

What benefit is there to a fixed cost taxi rate that helps the consumer. In busy times they can't get a cab. In dead times they pay too high of a rate.

The rate isn't why you can't get a cab in Calgary, but the lack of licenses.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The rate isn't why you can't get a cab in Calgary, but the lack of licenses.

So if the cabs want to also be able to charge a premium rate, they need to get rid themselves of the licensing system which is creating the monopoly. They vehemently refuse to do this and fight any increase to the amount of licenses tooth and nail. They can't have it both ways.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

So if the cabs want to also be able to charge a premium rate, they need to get rid themselves of the licensing system which is creating the monopoly. They vehemently refuse to do this and fight any increase to the amount of licenses tooth and nail. They can't have it both ways.

Well, nobody has said the cabbies want to charge a premium rate, so you are doing a find job of bashing down a strawman. That said, it is actually Uber that wants it both ways, given they are ignoring both regulations.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Well, nobody has said the cabbies want to charge a premium rate.

They already are, uber proved there are tons of people out there willing to drive for less.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Well, nobody has said the cabbies want to charge a premium rate, so you are doing a find job of bashing down a strawman. That said, it is actually Uber that wants it both ways, given they are ignoring both regulations.

The "crux" of your argument against Uber according to you is that is that they need to be held to the same fares as Taxi companies. You continually ignore the point brought up that taxi's are bound by city imposed rates because they are part of the licensing system which stipulates what they can charge. They can easily change this by scrapping the system and coming to the table and allowing the free market to prevail, but they fight this tooth and nail to the utmost detriment of the citizens of Calgary.

Your basically arguing that Uber needs to be on a level playing field as taxi companies, but completely ignoring the fact, that there can never be a level playing field while taxi industry backed licensing system exists.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Zamler - I give what I get. If AlpineOracle hadn't personalized it, I would not have.

Also, I wouldn't consider dealing with a bunch of people seeking to make excuses for Uber simply because they like it better than regular taxis as "drowning". Rather, I am amused by the demonstration of hypocrisy arrayed against me.



Heh. Your "he was given the cost" argument got blown up, time to move the goalposts.

Once again. Why should one taxi company be allowed to price gouge where others can't?

The difference resolute is that the taxi industry manufactures the supply / demand imbalance by restricting supply on purpose. That's why at least taxis get no sympathy from me.

Surge pricing is a natural supply / demand balancer that in the long run encourages supply at the right times. More cars, cars in the right places at the right times. For a decade plus I watched the cab industry give a flying F about demand in Calgary. You need capitalism, and no social interference to let the system work properly.

When you say you find its funny that the two groups are treated differently that's why.

[transplant99]

Alderman Ray Jones was on QR this morning making an argument very similar to Resolutes .

He got roasted by Kincaid and Breckenridge.


http://www.newstalk770.com/audio-on-demand-2/

Go to Jan. 5, 10AM hour, and it starts about 6 minutes in.

[GreatWhiteEbola]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Alderman Ray Jones was on QR this morning making an argument very similar to Resolutes .

He got roasted by Kincaid and Breckenridge.


http://www.newstalk770.com/audio-on-demand-2/

Go to Jan. 5, 10AM hour, and it starts about 6 minutes in.

Ladies and gentleman, your elected official, bloody obtuse...

The more I listen to this guy I can't believe he's on council. "Gouging", "consumer protection", "I know what my basic cost is"...he's an uneducated buffoon.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Alderman Ray Jones was on QR this morning making an argument very similar to Resolutes .

He got roasted by Kincaid and Breckenridge.


http://www.newstalk770.com/audio-on-demand-2/

Go to Jan. 5, 10AM hour, and it starts about 6 minutes in.

Many thanks for this. Sums up how a lot of arguments go with uneducated people in general.

Ald: "Well its price gouging!"
"Why"
Ald: "Cause....its....is gouging!"
"But he agreed to it, and thought the price was worth it"
Ald: "Well he didn't know.....and its gouging".


edit: Gets even better when they rail on him on why they limit taxi plates.

Ald: "Well we can't flood the market with too many plates"
"Why"
Ald: "Because they can't make any money with too many plates"
"Does the city's transport dept exist to move Calgarians or to ensure Taxis are profitable"
Ald: "Well......."

[GGG]

The only arguement for a minimum rate is it needs to be a certain level to ensure a person gets a reasonable wage and can maintain the vehicle at the same time.

Right now any profit is eaten by plate owners so the fixed rate is really just one further wealth transfer to plate owners. So even if you buy the argument that cab drivers should have a guaranteed rate to be profitable that is not what is currently occurring because of rented plates.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by GGG

The only arguement for a minimum rate is it needs to be a certain level to ensure a person gets a reasonable wage and can maintain the vehicle at the same time.

Why is that? what other business gets that kind of guarantee, i know mine doesn't.

[KevanGuy]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Alderman Ray Jones was on QR this morning making an argument very similar to Resolutes .

He got roasted by Kincaid and Breckenridge.


http://www.newstalk770.com/audio-on-demand-2/

Go to Jan. 5, 10AM hour, and it starts about 6 minutes in.

Good lord that was embarrassing. For Jones and our city. I'm only 14 mins in and I dont think I can finish it. Just brutal.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by KevanGuy

Good lord that was embarrassing. For Jones and our city. I'm only 14 mins in and I dont think I can finish it. Just brutal.

Yup.


Its hard to believe an elected official would publically admit he doesn't give a crap about what is best for his constituents or to try and achieve what w those same people want, but will sit there and unequivocally defend the existing system as the only one there should be.

Then when asked why, he answers with......"because".

IMO that's the kind of thing a guy should have to resign his seat over. Admitting he doesn't care and is way to narrow minded to even consider options.

[Ducay]

In the councilor's defense; I don't think its anything really that bad or something to be concerned over for Jones.

People (especially older) don't really know much of Uber, other than it is newfangled technology charging drunk people outrageous amounts and skirting the law.

He should have researched it more before debating the issue, because you could tell he started to understand their points by the end of it. You can tell their quite shielded from a true understanding even though he is on coucil and they have been dealing with this issue.

I do agree though, that 9x is a pretty big gouge though, while I agree with the hosts it exists as an incentive to get drivers on the road, that same incentive is achieved when the surge hits 4-5x. Getting much higher than that is pretty crazy (but again, it is hard to define gouging, and no one is forcing people to use uber), but to the unknowing masses, thats an insane amount to charge.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Ducay

He should have researched it more before debating the issue, because you could tell he started to understand their points by the end of it. You can tell their quite shielded from a true understanding even though he is on coucil and they have been dealing with this issue.

You're mistaken with Ray Jones. He's researched on this topic thoroughly. He's just nearing becoming a shill for the taxi companies.

2013:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...lief-1.1376084

Ald. Ray Jones isn't convinced that allowing more cabs onto Calgary streets would allow drivers to still earn a living.

"Not everybody's going to be happy," he said. "There's those that want us to open up the system totally. I don't think that would solve the problems. I think that would create problems for people because no one would make any money at it."

2014:
http://globalnews.ca/news/1410109/ne...se-cab-crunch/

“We’ve heard it loud and clear, that there is a shortage of cabs,” says Jones.

2014 (TEN DAYS LATER)
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/ca...394/story.html

Coun. Ray Jones — who last month said he would soon bring forward a notice of motion calling for the creation of 310 new taxi licences — said he has decided to hold off after being “inundated” with calls from cab drivers.

“They don’t want it,” Jones told the Herald on Sunday night at the Stampede grounds. “They say it will flood the market, that the drivers won’t be able to make enough money.”

2015:
http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...-door-for-uber

“It’s annoying that somebody can come in and tell you how to run your own business when the business has been running fine,” said Jones. “All we have to do is add more (taxi) plates.”

He's the councilor for Ward 5. Due to the large amount of cab drivers among his constituents, the taxi industry and Uber is certainly a hot-topic interest with him. He's well versed, but he doesn't want to hurt his chances at re-election so he wants to keep the cab drivers happy. Make sure that they are capable of making as much money as possible and pretend everything is just fine with the way things are.

[Kavvy]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

You're mistaken with Ray Jones. He's researched on this topic thoroughly. He's just nearing becoming a shill for the taxi companies.

2013:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...lief-1.1376084


2014:
http://globalnews.ca/news/1410109/ne...se-cab-crunch/


2014 (TEN DAYS LATER)
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/ca...394/story.html


2015:
http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...-door-for-uber


He's the councilor for Ward 5. Due to the large amount of cab drivers among his constituents, the taxi industry and Uber is certainly a hot-topic interest with him. He's well versed, but he doesn't want to hurt his chances at re-election so he wants to keep the cab drivers happy. Make sure that they are capable of making as much money as possible and pretend everything is just fine with the way things are.

So he is loyal to his constituency? Doesn't seem like the worst trait. Should he be loyal to the city over them? Honest question.

I don't love our cab industry, but this seems similar to a politician from a rural riding voting to keep farm subsidizes.