9 ms·

Uber becomes legal in NSW, Australia – taxi owners to be compensated

31 points by BishoyDemian 11y ago

pavel_lishin 11y ago
> The perpetual owners of taxi plates, about 5800 people, will receive a $20,000 payment for the plate. Multiple plate owners will receive a maximum of $40,000. > Both taxi and Uber drivers will also have to pay the government a $1 levy per trip for a maximum of five years to fund the compensation package. So, "here's $20k, now start paying us back"? I wonder how long it takes to accrue 20k rides in a taxi.
- joseakle 11y ago
  For an average of 7 rides/day ~7 years, 20 rides/day ~3 years. Assuming the car is working daily.
  - repsilat 11y ago
    Having a taxi collect a $1 just to redistribute it back to taxi drivers seems a little pointless. The real impact will be in the levy money collected by Uber drivers, so the ratio of Uber drivers to taxi medallions is very relevant.
voltagex_ 11y ago
The Tele is a tabloid but appears to be the best source for this article. September: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-28/uber-drivers-face-suspension/6808582 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-28/uber-drivers-face-susp... Here's what's probably the press release that was used for this article: http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/about/news-events/news/ministerial/2015/151217-ride-sharing.html http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/about/news-events/news/ministerial...
jseliger 11y ago
Actually, this article raises a point I'd not considered: Why doesn't Uber just start buying medallions, especially in large / angry markets? In NYC, medallions are down to $600,000: http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-taxi-medallion-king http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-taxi-medallion-king. Presumably Uber wouldn't have to buy all the medallions out there, but if it bought enough it could circumvent much of the political opposition from current holders.
- tacostakohashi 11y ago
  Because buying them would push up the price, especially once the sellers realized the motive. If they could really buy them all for $600,000 / each they probably would. Nevertheless, having the government compulsorily aquire and compensate previous owners in an orderly fashion, where they all get the same compensation instead of being able to push up the price by holding out is a wonderful solution to this kind of problem. It would be great to see this happen more in the US, taxi medallions and rent regulation are obvious areas where just compensating the current beneficiaries as a one-off, then opening up the market would do everyone a world of good.
- badusername 11y ago
  Buying worthless taxicab medallions to circumvent political opposition seems like a fool's errand. 13,605 NYC taxicab medallions at a cost of $600,00 is $8.1 Billion, for an asset that's destined to be worth zero in a few years.
ank_the_elder 11y ago
Why aren't we addressing the safety aspects of Uber rather than making it legal? Can we not ensure that the cars are professionally insured, professionally driven and kept up to standard and safe to be in? That should be our number one priority before allowing the company to continue operating. Some random examples: http://www.cnet.com/au/news/sydney-ridesharing-driver-charged-with-sexual-assault/ http://www.cnet.com/au/news/sydney-ridesharing-driver-charge... http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/uber-driver-arrested-over-alleged-sex-assault-in-melbourne/news-story/200c9101a4f31ec7218507d7bd6b6d4a?= http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/uber-driver-arres... http://metro.co.uk/2015/09/08/uber-driver-dragged-passenger-out-of-car-and-ran-over-her-5381679/ http://metro.co.uk/2015/09/08/uber-driver-dragged-passenger-...
- dsymonds 11y ago
  None of the particular examples you link to are somehow impossible to occur in existing "legal" taxis. Anecdotally, Uber cars are safer in those regards than taxis, despite regulation there.
- tarikjn 11y ago
  > Can we not ensure that the cars are professionally insured, professionally driven and kept up to standard and safe to be in? Could the same question not be asked about taxis? A more objective question would be to ask if they are professionally insured, professionally driven and kept up to standard to a level comparable to taxis in the area. Examples of incidents don't mean much without a statistical comparison with comparable incidents with taxis.
  - mannykannot 11y ago
    > Examples of incidents don't mean much without a statistical comparison with comparable incidents with taxis. Right; they are only slightly better than rhetorical questions. Fortunately, davewongillies' answer shows that these issues are apparently being addressed in this case. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10755756 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10755756
- davewongillies 11y ago
sarne777 11y ago
As an American resident of NSW, I had no idea Uber wasn't legal, I just knew they couldn't pick up from the airport. I've been using the service regularly since moving here. Perhaps this helps explain why locals I've met seem to favor taxis.
- dav43 11y ago
  I would have to differ on this. I only ride uber in Sydney since I got back from o/s in Jan-2015. I would say, once the locals have ridden uber (i have introduced family and friends on the service), no one that i know prefers taxis.
victorhooi 11y ago
This is awesome news! As a NSW taxpayer, I'm not too sure I agree with the government doling out our taxpayers to compensate a dying/legacy industry, or tacking on $1 per Uber ride to pay them out but I suppose the taxi lobby is strong, and the government needs to pander to them. I'm curious what licensing is required, will be good to hear more details.
- cletus 11y ago
  The government has sold taxi licensed/medallions for the right to provide this service. If this were real estate eminent domain would apply and the owners would be compensated. It seems consistent to compensate existing license holders.
  - victorhooi 11y ago
    Well, not really. It's not like the government took away the rights of taxi drivers to drive people around. It's just that there's a new entrant now, and they actually need to compete. In fact, taxi medallion prices went down post-2011 (before Uber) because the government released more, because consumers (i.e. everyday people) complained about crazy prices. You don't see the government compensating people there. It would be like if the government handed out licenses to build 1000 apartments. Then, they realised, jeez, house prices are crazy, we better issue more licenses. Or we better re-zone to allow super-high density apartments, or allow people to sub-let apartment (cause in this make-believe world, that wasn't possibly before). Would the original 1000 apartment owners be clamoring for government handouts?
    - nsxwolf 11y ago
      Yeah, but the new entrant decided to not play by the same rules as everyone else. They just started breaking the law, and they just get to win for some reason. If you're just going to let that happen, you should compensate the people that played by the rules but got screwed over by your failure to enforce those rules.
    - notatoad 11y ago
dav43 11y ago
Can someone explain what I'm missing? 20,000 in perpetuity at the approx 2.5 rate in oz is PV of 800,000? But the plates hit there highs of 475,000 in 2011?

31 points by BishoyDemian 11y ago

> The perpetual owners of taxi plates, about 5800 people, will receive a $20,000 payment for the plate. Multiple plate owners will receive a maximum of $40,000. > Both taxi and Uber drivers will also have to pay the government a $1 levy per trip for a maximum of five years to fund the compensation package. So, "here's $20k, now start paying us back"? I wonder how long it takes to accrue 20k rides in a taxi.

joseakle 11y ago
For an average of 7 rides/day ~7 years, 20 rides/day ~3 years. Assuming the car is working daily.
- repsilat 11y ago
  Having a taxi collect a $1 just to redistribute it back to taxi drivers seems a little pointless. The real impact will be in the levy money collected by Uber drivers, so the ratio of Uber drivers to taxi medallions is very relevant.

voltagex_ 11y ago

The Tele is a tabloid but appears to be the best source for this article. September: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-28/uber-drivers-face-suspension/6808582 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-28/uber-drivers-face-susp... Here's what's probably the press release that was used for this article: http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/about/news-events/news/ministerial/2015/151217-ride-sharing.html http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/about/news-events/news/ministerial...

jseliger 11y ago

Actually, this article raises a point I'd not considered: Why doesn't Uber just start buying medallions, especially in large / angry markets? In NYC, medallions are down to $600,000: http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-taxi-medallion-king http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-taxi-medallion-king. Presumably Uber wouldn't have to buy all the medallions out there, but if it bought enough it could circumvent much of the political opposition from current holders.

tacostakohashi 11y ago
Because buying them would push up the price, especially once the sellers realized the motive. If they could really buy them all for $600,000 / each they probably would. Nevertheless, having the government compulsorily aquire and compensate previous owners in an orderly fashion, where they all get the same compensation instead of being able to push up the price by holding out is a wonderful solution to this kind of problem. It would be great to see this happen more in the US, taxi medallions and rent regulation are obvious areas where just compensating the current beneficiaries as a one-off, then opening up the market would do everyone a world of good.
badusername 11y ago
Buying worthless taxicab medallions to circumvent political opposition seems like a fool's errand. 13,605 NYC taxicab medallions at a cost of $600,00 is $8.1 Billion, for an asset that's destined to be worth zero in a few years.

ank_the_elder 11y ago

Why aren't we addressing the safety aspects of Uber rather than making it legal? Can we not ensure that the cars are professionally insured, professionally driven and kept up to standard and safe to be in? That should be our number one priority before allowing the company to continue operating. Some random examples: http://www.cnet.com/au/news/sydney-ridesharing-driver-charged-with-sexual-assault/ http://www.cnet.com/au/news/sydney-ridesharing-driver-charge... http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/uber-driver-arrested-over-alleged-sex-assault-in-melbourne/news-story/200c9101a4f31ec7218507d7bd6b6d4a?= http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/uber-driver-arres... http://metro.co.uk/2015/09/08/uber-driver-dragged-passenger-out-of-car-and-ran-over-her-5381679/ http://metro.co.uk/2015/09/08/uber-driver-dragged-passenger-...

dsymonds 11y ago
None of the particular examples you link to are somehow impossible to occur in existing "legal" taxis. Anecdotally, Uber cars are safer in those regards than taxis, despite regulation there.
tarikjn 11y ago
> Can we not ensure that the cars are professionally insured, professionally driven and kept up to standard and safe to be in? Could the same question not be asked about taxis? A more objective question would be to ask if they are professionally insured, professionally driven and kept up to standard to a level comparable to taxis in the area. Examples of incidents don't mean much without a statistical comparison with comparable incidents with taxis.
- mannykannot 11y ago
  > Examples of incidents don't mean much without a statistical comparison with comparable incidents with taxis. Right; they are only slightly better than rhetorical questions. Fortunately, davewongillies' answer shows that these issues are apparently being addressed in this case. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10755756 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10755756
davewongillies 11y ago

sarne777 11y ago

As an American resident of NSW, I had no idea Uber wasn't legal, I just knew they couldn't pick up from the airport. I've been using the service regularly since moving here. Perhaps this helps explain why locals I've met seem to favor taxis.

dav43 11y ago
I would have to differ on this. I only ride uber in Sydney since I got back from o/s in Jan-2015. I would say, once the locals have ridden uber (i have introduced family and friends on the service), no one that i know prefers taxis.

victorhooi 11y ago

This is awesome news! As a NSW taxpayer, I'm not too sure I agree with the government doling out our taxpayers to compensate a dying/legacy industry, or tacking on $1 per Uber ride to pay them out but I suppose the taxi lobby is strong, and the government needs to pander to them. I'm curious what licensing is required, will be good to hear more details.

cletus 11y ago
The government has sold taxi licensed/medallions for the right to provide this service. If this were real estate eminent domain would apply and the owners would be compensated. It seems consistent to compensate existing license holders.
- victorhooi 11y ago
  Well, not really. It's not like the government took away the rights of taxi drivers to drive people around. It's just that there's a new entrant now, and they actually need to compete. In fact, taxi medallion prices went down post-2011 (before Uber) because the government released more, because consumers (i.e. everyday people) complained about crazy prices. You don't see the government compensating people there. It would be like if the government handed out licenses to build 1000 apartments. Then, they realised, jeez, house prices are crazy, we better issue more licenses. Or we better re-zone to allow super-high density apartments, or allow people to sub-let apartment (cause in this make-believe world, that wasn't possibly before). Would the original 1000 apartment owners be clamoring for government handouts?
  - nsxwolf 11y ago
    Yeah, but the new entrant decided to not play by the same rules as everyone else. They just started breaking the law, and they just get to win for some reason. If you're just going to let that happen, you should compensate the people that played by the rules but got screwed over by your failure to enforce those rules.
  - notatoad 11y ago

dav43 11y ago

Can someone explain what I'm missing? 20,000 in perpetuity at the approx 2.5 rate in oz is PV of 800,000? But the plates hit there highs of 475,000 in 2011?