industryterm:transportation network

  • Do transportation network companies decrease or increase congestion ?
    https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/5/eaau2670

    Transportation network companies (TNCs) have grown rapidly in recent years. In 2016, TNCs were 15% of all intra-San Francisco vehicle trips, which is 12 times the number of taxi trips (1), while in New York in 2016, TNC ridership equaled that of yellow cab and doubled annually between 2014 and 2016 (2). TNCs are on-demand ride services where rides are arranged through a mobile app to connect the passenger with a driver, often a private individual driving their personal vehicle (3). The (...)

    #Lyft #Uber #urbanisme

  • Taxi 2.0: The Bumpy Road to the Future of Cabs - Motherboard
    https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/gvy5dy/taxi-20-the-bumpy-road-to-the-future-of-cabs-video

    https://vimeo.com/94803083

    After a typical honeymoon period of unquestioning and often oblivious tech culture praise, Uber and its taxi app brethren are getting some real, overdue scrutiny. Thank cabbies in part, for highlighting the fact that much of Uber’s business model success has to do with bypassing basic taxi regulations, safety checks, and continuous commercial insurance coverage, in a monoplistic bid for all sides of the taxi market. Protests and lawsuits and injunctions now follow close behind these companies into nearly every new city they zoom into, with the requisite lawyers and lobbyists in the backseat.

    At the same time, anyone who’s experienced a city knows that licensed taxi companies are due for an upgrade, and maybe some of these apps’ success has to do with the old industry’s disinterest in adaptation. Shutting out the Uber model—and its rather edgier “rideshare” kin, like Lyft and SideCar and UberX—from the ride-for-hire ecosystem is as poor an answer as allowing it to persist without the institution of new checks and rules.

    In the short documentary “Taxi 2.0,” filmmaker Max Maddox attacks the issue from street-level in San Francisco by talking to taxi and Uber and Lyft drivers and the people that use each. No one comes away looking great. Everyone’s trying to figure out what it all means. (Where, exactly, is the sharing in this sharing economy? And how are these taxis called “rideshares” when there’s no real ride-sharing going on?) Apart from concerns about unfair competition, says Maddox, “taxi proponents say these rideshares are unsafe for the public. In the midst of this drama, drivers on both sides of the playing field struggle just to put bread on the table.”

    Here we see the specter not only of a new labor war in the taxi industry, between established hacks and amateur upstarts armed with GPS maps, but a of a stratified ride-for-hire future, in which taxis are left carrying the unconnected lower classes, while Uber and the like carry the relative big money. Technology has a way of dividing us like that.

    I usually feel half-guilty when I get in a TNC, but the cab system is far from perfect at the same time.

    Maddox, a broadcasting student at San Francisco State University whose interest was piqued after seeing “so many mustached cars drive by,” came away from the months-long project with mixed feelings about the future of cabs.

    “After interviewing all these guys, I’m still on the fence about transportation network companies, or rideshares, whatever you want to call them,” Maddox says. “I usually feel half-guilty when I get in a TNC, but the cab system is far from perfect at the same time. I can’t endorse one platform over the other. I just hope something changes so they can coexist.”

    ’Taxi 2.0’ Credits: Producer: Max Maddox; Editor: Jarod Taber; Photographer: Asger Ladefoged; Writer: Ben Mitchell; Sound: Gabe Romero Associate Producer: Jason Garcia

    #Taxi #Uber #USA #San_Francisco

  • Lyft and Uber Won’t Be Happy Until They’re Your One-Stop Transit Guide - The New York Times
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/03/business/dealbook/lyft-uber-bike-sharing.html

    Uber will nicht nur den Taximarkt. Uber will den ÖPNV. Uber will alle Verkehrsarten. Neuere Äußerungen seiner Verantwortlichen und seines Konkrurrenten Lyft belegen diese Ambitionen. Die letzten Übernahmen von Fahrrad- und Motorrollerverleihfirmen sind weitere Schritte auf dem Weg zur totalen Verkehrskontrolle. Niemand soll mehr einen Zentimeter zurückegen, ohne dabei von den Megakonzernen unterstützt und überwacht zu werden.

    Betreiber und Kontrolleure öffentlicher Angebote für Personenbeförderung, städtische, nationale und internationale Einrichtungen sollen zugunsten privater Konzerne entmachtet werden.

    Uns alle wollen die Kapitalmaschinen um erschwingliche, demokratisch kontrollierte Verkehrsmittel bringen und die Preise diktieren. Politiker und Verwaltungen haben leider noch nicht begriffen: Die Konzerne wollen ihnen an den Kragen.

    Uber and Lyft came to prominence with their ride-hailing services. But increasingly they’re betting on other modes of transportation — with the aim of becoming the only service people need to get around cities.

    Lyft on Monday struck a deal to buy the core parts of Motivate, the parent company of CitiBike in New York and seven other bike-sharing programs around the United States. At first, that acquisition may seem puzzling — why would a ride-hailing giant want to get into the far smaller market for bicycles? — but there’s a bigger idea at work here.

    While Uber and Lyft have raised tens of billions of dollars to change the way people travel in cars, the future of urban transport doesn’t revolve just around automobiles. Bike-share programs have been popular in cities around the world for years. Shared electric scooters have become huge business, as providers like Bird and Lime have gained in popularity. And millions of people still take buses or trains. (Some even still walk.)

    Lyft and Uber are well aware that one doesn’t need to summon a driver to travel 10 blocks. Lyft’s deal for Motivate follows Uber’s takeover of Jump, a company that rents dockless electric bikes in six American cities, including San Francisco and Chicago. And both companies are experimenting with their own scooter-sharing programs.

    But they have bigger ambitions than just filling in gaps in their transportation networks. They want people to use their apps for navigating around cities, period. Uber’s C.E.O., Dara Khosrowshahi, explicitly spelled this idea out earlier this year:

    “Whether it’s taking a car, whether it’s taking a pooled car, whether it’s taking a bike, whether you should walk or even now we want to build out the capability for you to take a bus or subway. We want to be the A-to-B platform for transportation.”

    There are already apps like Citymapper that help commuters figure out the best way to navigate between two points in a city. But Lyft and Uber have the advantage of actually running some of the transport networks that can be used to make those trips happen, and would like users to never leave their platforms.

    One of the keys to making that dream a reality is linking their privately run businesses to public transit — something that both companies are working on.

    Uber struck a partnership with the start-up Masabi earlier this year to let users buy public-transit tickets through its app. That means that if the fastest way across town involves a car and a train, Uber could earn money from both parts of the trip.

    It isn’t clear what Lyft’s plans with Motivate are yet. But the acquisition buys it relationships with eight U.S. cities that could prove helpful. And while many in Silicon Valley tout the benefits of the dockless bikes and scooters that Jump and Bird offer, Motivate’s bike docks are also useful real estate, providing central locations for bikes or scooters that tend to be around public transit hubs. That could make it easier for users to take public transportation and then switch over to a bike, all while staying in the Lyft system.

    Of course, both companies face plenty of barriers. For one, while Lyft says that it expects Motivate’s contracts with cities to roll over, that may not be guaranteed. And while Uber has worked to recast itself as a friendly partner to local governments, many may remain wary because of the past frictions with municipal regulators.

    But becoming what Mr. Khosrowshahi has called the “Amazon for transportation” could be incredibly lucrative. That could keep a fight between Uber and Lyft going for years

    #Verkehr #Uber #Lyft #ÖPNV #Politik #Disruption

  • Uber State Interference: How Transportation Network Companies Buy, Bully, and Bamboozle Their Way To Deregulation | The Partnership For Working Families
    http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/resources/publications/uber-state-interference-how-transportation-network-companies-buy

    Author:
    The Partnership for Working Families
    Over the past four years, transportation network companies (TNCs), primarily Uber and Lyft, have convinced legislators in the vast majority of states to overrule and preempt local regulations and strip drivers of rights. The speed and sweeping effectiveness of the industry’s use of this strategy, known as state interference (or preemption), is unprecedented. 

     

    http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/sites/pwf/files/publications/Uber%20State%20Interference%20Jan%202018.pdf
    http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/sites/pwf/files/publications/Uber%20State%20Interference%20Jan%202018%20Exec.%20Summary.pdf
    Campaign: State Interference
    http://www.forworkingfamilies.org/campaigns/state-interference

    #Uber #USA

  • Fare Choices Survey of Ride-Hailing Passengers in Metro Boston – MAPC
    https://www.mapc.org/farechoices


    Annual household income of surveyed riders who substituted transit use, walking, or cycling.

    Wie de privaten Fahrtenvermittlern dem öffentlichen Nahverkehr schaden
    cf. https://seenthis.net/messages/673637

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
    The ride-hailing industry, led by Uber and Lyft, has seen explosive growth in recent years. As more and more travelers choose these on-demand mobility services, they have the potential to transform regional travel patterns. These transformations may become even more profound if widespread adoption of autonomous vehicles makes on-demand mobility even less expensive and more efficient. Either way, it is likely that the use of ride-hailing today is but the tip of the iceberg, with an even greater expansion of these services to come.

    This transformation in personal mobility is likely to bring a host of changes: some positive, others less so. For public agencies, planning for that transformation is made difficult by the paucity of information about ride-hailing trips. Conventional transportation surveys have been slow to measure the change in behavior; and transportation network companies see their data as a valuable commodity and are unwilling to provide it to transportation planners.

    Public sector access to these data is essential. Only with a better understanding of this new mode of transportation can analysts develop better forecasts of travel behavior and infrastructure needs, measure the region’s progress toward a more sustainable future, and establish more efficient operations and management practices for existing roadways.

    In an effort to begin filling those gaps in our understanding of the ride-hailing industry and its users, MAPC surveyed nearly 1,000 ride-hailing passengers in late 2017 and asked about their demographics, the nature of their trip, and why they chose ride-hailing over other modes of transportation.

    Photo via Lyft
    The results confirmed many common assumptions about ride-hailing users; they also provided striking new insight into the ways that the services are changing travel behavior and affecting our existing transportation system. Not surprisingly, the survey found that most ride-hailing users are under the age of 35, that most of them use the service on a weekly basis, and that most don’t own a car. Less predictably, we found that reported rider incomes are similar to the region overall, and a substantial number of trips are made by people from households earning less than $38,000 per year. (And no, they’re not all students; most of those lower-income riders are in the workforce.)

    The survey results also provide some hard data about the types of trips made via ride-hailing. Most trips start or end at home, but nearly one-third (31%) are from one non-home location to another. Ride-hailing usage is distributed throughout the day; the evening hours from 7:00 P.M. to midnight see the greatest frequency of trips, but about 40% of weekday trips take place during the morning or afternoon commute periods. People also like to travel by themselves: only one-fifth of customers opt for a truly shared ride (e.g., UberPOOL), and the majority of travel is for a single passenger. Riders are willing to pay a substantial premium for the convenience and predictability of ride-hailing. Nearly two thirds of trips cost more than $10, and one in five costs more than $20.

    While the services are justifiably popular, their growing use may result in negative outcomes for traffic congestion, transit use, and active transportation. When asked how they would have made their current trip if ride-hailing hadn’t been an option, 12% said they would have walked or biked, and over two-fifths (42%) of respondents said they would have otherwise taken transit. Some of this “transit substitution” takes place during rush hours. Indeed, we estimate that 12% of all ride-hailing trips are substituting for a transit trip during the morning or afternoon commute periods; an additional 3% of riders during these times would have otherwise walked or biked. Overall, 15% of ride-hailing trips are adding cars to the region’s roadways during the morning or afternoon rush hours.

    Notably, we found that this “transit substitution” is more frequent among riders with a weekly or monthly transit pass. Those who ride transit more often are more likely to drop it for ride hailing, even while doing so at a huge cost differential, and even when they have already paid for the transit.

    Riders without a transit pass opting for ride-hailing, on the other hand, means less fare revenue for the MBTA. After accounting for transit pass availability and substitution options, we estimate that the average ride-hailing trip represents 35 cents of lost fare revenue for the MBTA. This lost revenue exceeds the amount of the legislatively mandated 20 cent surcharge on each ride. That surcharge itself represents a remarkably small fraction of trip costs. When compared to reported fares, the surcharge amounts to less than 2% of the cost for most rides. Because it is a fixed fee, long and expensive rides that may have the greatest impact on traffic congestion and air quality pay 1% or less.

    Photo by Anty Diluvian
    These findings begin to provide a better understanding of this evolving mobility option that will undoubtedly continue to change the way people travel around the region. Our results raise concerns about how users are becoming accustomed to on-demand mobility, and what that means for the future of the region’s transportation system. Even if future ride-hailing vehicles were fully electric and autonomous, the region’s roadways could not accommodate unchecked growth in single-occupant vehicle travel. It is essential to ensure that the region has a reliable and effective transit system that—from the rider’s perspective—is competitive with and complementary to on-demand mobility services. For transit to thrive, it must change, perhaps by incorporating the types of on-demand response and real-time information that riders value.

    Meanwhile, there is a great need to understand the effects of ride hailing and to ensure a balance of benefits and costs resulting from these commercial services. Ride hailing is already having substantial impacts on congestion and transit revenue, the costs of which are not recouped by the small surcharge. A higher fee would provide more resources to mitigate the negative effects of ride hailing without substantially affecting rider costs. Even more preferable would be a fee structure proportional to the impacts of each ride on the transportation system. To the extent possible, such fees should also be structured to incentivize shared trips, thereby reducing overall impacts on the transportation system while also accommodating ride-hailing preferences. Of course, effective policy requires better data about when, where, and why ride-hailing trips are taking place. Only by understanding the current adoption of ride-hailing and on-demand mobility can we plan for its successful and sustainable future.

    #Uber #ÖPNV

  • A global map of travel time to cities to assess inequalities in accessibility in 2015 | Nature

    https://www.nature.com/articles/nature25181

    https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/c1c5ac0a5d4bf1940cad232c08456843c1d26ade/0_0_1702_1579/master/1702.png?w=1010&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=5e627ac9ace4cae18f6d9662

    The economic and man-made resources that sustain human
    wellbeing are not distributed evenly across the world, but are
    instead heavily concentrated in cities. Poor access to opportunities
    and services offered by urban centres (a function of distance,
    transport infrastructure, and the spatial distribution of cities) is
    a major barrier to improved livelihoods and overall development.
    Advancing accessibility worldwide underpins the equity agenda of
    ‘leaving no one behind’ established by the Sustainable Development
    Goals of the United Nations.

    This has renewed international efforts to accurately measure accessibility and generate a metric
    that can inform the design and implementation of development
    policies. The only previous attempt to reliably map accessibility
    worldwide, which was published nearly a decade ago, predated the
    baseline for the Sustainable Development Goals and excluded the
    recent expansion in infrastructure networks, particularly in lower-
    resource settings. In parallel, new data sources provided by Open
    Street Map and Google now capture transportation networks with
    unprecedented detail and precision. Here we develop and validate
    a map that quantifies travel time to cities for 2015 at a spatial
    resolution of approximately one by one kilometre by integrating
    ten global-scale surfaces that characterize factors affecting human
    movement rates and 13,840 high-density urban centres within an
    established geospatial-modelling framework. Our results highlight
    disparities in accessibility relative to wealth as 50.9% of individuals
    living in low-income settings (concentrated in sub-Saharan Africa)
    reside within an hour of a city compared to 90.7% of individuals
    in high-income settings. By further triangulating this map against
    socioeconomic datasets, we demonstrate how access to urban centres stratifies the economic, educational, and health status of humanity.

    aussi :

    https://www.theguardian.com/cities/gallery/2018/jan/10/daily-commute-travel-times-cities-world-pictures-maps-uk-china-mali

    https://map.ox.ac.uk/accessibility_to_cities_news

    https://boingboing.net/2018/01/10/a-map-of-how-long-it-takes-to.html

    #accessibilité #villes #agglomérations #urban_matter

  • Uber fined $8.9 million by Colorado for allowing drivers with felony convictions, other drivers license issues
    http://www.denverpost.com/2017/11/20/uber-colorado-fine

    Colorado regulators slapped Uber with an $8.9 million penalty for allowing 57 people with past criminal or motor vehicle offenses to drive for the company, the state’s Public Utilities Commission announced Monday.

    The PUC said the drivers should have been disqualified. They had issues ranging from felony convictions to driving under the influence and reckless driving. In some cases, drivers were working with revoked, suspended or canceled licenses, the state said. A similar investigation of smaller competitor Lyft found no violations.

    “We have determined that Uber had background-check information that should have disqualified these drivers under the law, but they were allowed to drive anyway,” PUC director Doug Dean said in a statement. “These actions put the safety of passengers in extreme jeopardy.”

    Uber spokeswoman Stephanie Sedlak provided this statement on Monday:

    “We recently discovered a process error that was inconsistent with Colorado’s ridesharing regulations and proactively notified the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). This error affected a small number of drivers and we immediately took corrective action. Per Uber safety policies and Colorado state regulations, drivers with access to the Uber app must undergo a nationally accredited third-party background screening. We will continue to work closely with the CPUC to enable access to safe, reliable transportation options for all Coloradans.”

    The PUC’s investigation began after Vail police referred a case to the agency. In that case, which occurred in March, an Uber driver dragged a passenger out of the car and kicked him in the face, according the Vail police report.

    In August, the PUC asked Uber and Lyft for records of all drivers who were accused, arrested or convicted of crimes that would disqualify them from driving for a transportation network company, the term given to ridesharing services under state law.

    “Lyft gave us 15 to 20 (records), but we didn’t find any problems with Lyft,” Dean said.

    Uber handed over 107 records and told the PUC that it had removed those people from its system.

    The PUC cross-checked the Uber drivers with state crime and court databases, finding that many had aliases and other violations. While 63 were found to have issues with their driver’s licenses, the PUC focused on 57 who had additional violations, because of the impact on public safety.

    “What they (Uber) calls proactively reaching out to us was after we had to threaten them with daily civil penalties to get them to provide us with the (records),” said Dean, adding that his prime investigator just told him that some penalized drivers were still on the Uber system. “This is not a data processing error. This is a public safety issue.”

    Uber was welcomed to Colorado in June 2014, when Gov. John Hickenlooper signed Senate Bill 125 to authorize ridesharing services such as Uber and Lyft. The PUC was then charged with creating rules to regulate the services, which went into effect on Jan. 30, 2016.

    The rules gave the companies the choice of either fingerprinting drivers or running a private background check on the potential driver’s criminal history and driving history. Drivers also must have a valid driver’s license.

    Drivers are disqualified if they’ve been convicted of a felony in the past five years. But they can never be a driver if they’ve been convicted of serious felonies including felony assault, fraud, unlawful sexual behavior and violent crimes, according to the statute.

    Taxi drivers, by comparison, are subject to fingerprint background checks by the FBI and Colorado Bureau of Investigation.

    Elsewhere in the U.S., Uber and Lyft have threatened to leave places that force them to fingerprint drivers — including in Chicago, Maryland and Houston.

    Both companies pulled out of Austin last year after the city added rules to fingerprint drivers. But the Texas house passed a bill in April removing such requirements, and Uber and Lyft returned to the city.

    While Maryland caved in its requirements after Uber threatened to leave, the state banned 4,000 ridesharing drivers in April who did not meet state screening requirements despite passing Uber or Lyft’s background checks.That also happened in Massachusetts, which kicked out 8,200 drivers who had passed company checks. Among them were 51 registered sex offenders.

    Uber and Lyft have pushed for private background checks because they say that fingerprints don’t provide the complete source of criminal history that some expect. In a post about its security process, Uber said that when it comes to fingerprints, there are gaps between FBI and state arrest records, which can result in an incomplete background check. Uber, instead, uses state and local criminal history checks plus court records and the U.S. Dept. of Justice’s National Sex Offender site.

    Last month, California regulators nixed any fingerprinting requirement as long as Uber and Lyft conduct their own background checks.

    But the Colorado PUC says that by fingerprinting drivers, the ride service would be able to identify drivers with aliases and other identities with felony convictions. The lack of fingerprinting never sat well with Dean, who mentioned his concern in 2014 before Colorado passed the law.

    “They said their private background checks were superior to anything out there,” Dean said. “We can tell you their private background checks were not superior. In some cases, we could not say they even provided a background check.”

    Vail police said that altercations between passengers and drivers are not uncommon. They’re not limited to Uber drivers but include taxi and limo drivers and passengers, said Vail police Detective Sgt. Luke Causey.

    “We’ve had more than one,” Causey said. “Unfortunately, in our winter environment with guests and around bar closing times, we’ve had the driver go after passengers who don’t pay their tab. Sometimes it can go both ways.”

    Uber drivers have made local headlines for bad behavior. In July, a Denver Uber driver pleaded guilty to disturbing the peace after rolling his car on the leg of a city parking attendant at Denver International Airport. Two years ago, a Denver UberX driver was arrested for trying to break into the home of a passenger he’d just dropped off at the airport.

    Monday’s fine is a civil penalty assessment and based on a citation of $2,500 per day for each disqualified driver found to have worked. Among the findings, 12 drivers had felony convictions, 17 had major moving violations, 63 had driver’s license issues and three had interlock driver’s licenses, which is required after a recent drunken driving conviction.

    Uber has 10 days to pay 50 percent of the $8.9 million penalty or request a hearing to contest the violation before an administrative law judge. Afterwards, the PUC will continue making audits to check for compliance. If more violations are found, Uber’s penalty could rise.

    “Uber can fix this tomorrow. The law allows them to have fingerprint background checks. We had found a number of a.k.a.’s and aliases that these drivers were using. That’s the problem with name-based background checks,” Dean said. “We’re very concerned and we hope the company will take steps to correct this.”

    #Uber #USA #Recht

  • World Map Shows What a Hyperloop Future May Look Like | Inverse

    https://www.inverse.com/article/26459-hyperloop-one-map-global-underground-system

    The vacuum-sealed hyperloop train system came one step closer to reality last week, when a company working on bringing the transit system to life announced the next step in a global competition. Los Angeles-based Hyperloop One has selected 35 teams as finalists in its global challenge, who will now present regional proposals at three different showcases starting next month.

    “It’s more than just a train, or a pod in a tube,” Josh Giegel, Hyperloop One’s president of engineering, told Inverse. “We’re taking it to a level of connectivity and really being the high-speed backbone of the future transportation network.”

    #cartographie #futur #imaginire #hyper-loop

    • J’aime assez le fait que le concepteur de cette carte a déjà prévu deux embranchements pour joindre Edimbourg et Glasgow, séparées de 75 km par l’autoroute, tandis que les grandes villes africaines sont reliées par la mention « Under construction ». Déjà ça promet.

      Mais je suppose que l’aspect gag de cette carte apparaît dans le fait que les lignes respectent scrupuleusement les limites de la représentation cartographique centrée sur l’Europe : aucune ligne reliant l’Amérique à l’Asie par exemple ; ni lignes passant par les zones polaires. Genre « ça dépasserait du papier ».

  • Enquête fouillée de The Intercept sur l’ONG H.S.I.G. dirigée par un chrétien évangélique, Kay Hiramine, qui a servi des années 2000 à 2013 de couverture à un programme d’espionnage du Pentagone ciblant notamment la Corée du Nord (mais aussi l’Iran) : https://theintercept.com/2015/10/26/pentagon-missionary-spies-christian-ngo-front-for-north-korea-espionag

    Because American intelligence has so few assets inside North Korea, much of Hiramine’s task was to find transportation routes to move military equipment — and potentially clandestine operatives — in and around the country. The Pentagon would eventually move sensors and small radio beacons through Hiramine’s transportation network, according to another former military official. Much of what Hiramine was doing was what the military refers to as “operational preparation of the environment,” or OPE, a category that encompasses clandestine intelligence gathering and prepositioning equipment inside a country for future conflicts.
    “We needed collection devices, spoofers” — used to disrupt North Korean military devices or radio signals — “and [equipment] to measure nuclear anomalies,” the same former military official told me. The military hardware also included shortwave radios that could be used to help a downed pilot to escape in the event of a future conflict with North Korea.

  • NYC’s Taxis Finally Launch an App to Compete With Uber
    http://www.wired.com/2015/08/arrow-ny-taxis-app

    New York is launching the Uber of taxis.

    Insiders of the city’s taxi industry are finally launching an app that lets users hail cabs and pay for rides using a smartphone. It’s such a great idea you have to wonder what took so long.

    The app is called Arro and, as first reported by Crain’s, it’s in beta testing with 7,000 New York City cabs and could launch within weeks. Here’s how it works: A user launches the app, which gives a nearby cabbie the passenger’s name, pickup address, and cross street. The user, meanwhile, gets the driver’s name and ID number. The app saves credit card info, letting passengers pay the metered fare and tip automatically. Another advantage is no surge pricing; the app developers told Crain’s that fares always will be meter-based.

    Once a sure bet, taxi medallions becoming unsellable
    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/05/17/taxi-medallion-values-decline-uber-rideshare/27314735

    Until recently in America’s big cities, purchasing a taxi medallion—the city-issued license to operate cabs —was about as sound of an investment as they come.

    But with the rise of Uber and other ridesharing services, the value of taxi medallions are plummeting, leading cabbies and fleet owners throughout the USA worried that their industry will be decimated if local and state government doesn’t intervene.

    “I have had a pretty successful thing,” said Gary Karczewski, 65, a Chicago cabbie who inherited his medallion from his father 28 years ago and earned enough to purchase two homes and help send his two daughters to college by driving the equivalent of 80 times around the world. “My hope was to wind down soon and give whatever I could sell the medallion for to my mother. But I am not confident there’s a market now.”

    In Chicago, which has the country’s second biggest fleet with roughly 7,000 taxis, the median sale price for a medallion hovered around $70,000 in 2007 before reaching a median sales peak of $357,000 in late 2013.

    Since reaching that high point more than a year ago, the value of medallions in the Windy City have sharply declined and sales have ground to a near halt—with the city recording only seven medallion transfers in the first quarter of 2015—as the median sale price fell to about $270,000.

    The steady slide, which also is on display in New York, Philadelphia, Boston and elsewhere, has left many owner-operators and big fleet managers pessimistic about their once prized assets.

    Cabbies around the country complain that drivers for services like Uber, which use a smartphone app to connect riders with freelancers using their own vehicles, are disrupting the market and playing with an unfair advantage.

    Medallion owners also grumble that rideshare services in many markets aren’t subject to the same rules of the road. Uber’s contract drivers don’t face as stringent vehicle inspections, their drivers aren’t required to obtain a chauffeurs license, and they can adjust their fares based on demand.
    Taxi medallion values are plummeting in big U.S. cities

    The changing landscape has been put into stark relief by the diminishing value of the taxi medallion in once plum markets like New York, where in recent years they proved to offer a better return on investment than gold, oil and real estate.

    As a result of the booming value, the vast majority of medallions in big metros like New York and Chicago were gobbled up over the last several decades by investors and companies that rent the medallions to drivers.

    But times are changing. The upstart Uber, which has a reported valuation of $50 billion, collected more than $750 million in just New York City during its first four years of business there. Investor Carl Icahn announced on Friday that he was making a $100 million investment in Uber rival Lyft, calling the company a “tremendous bargain.”

    “What I think has happened is that competition for consumers has not caused a drop in medallion prices, because medallion values in no way are tied to the riding public,” said Uber global policy director Corey Owens. “What’s happened is that drivers have found they have better opportunities.”

    Earlier this month, the Philadelphia Parking Authority, which regulates the city’s taxi industry, had sold newly-created medallions for wheel-chair accessible taxis for $80,000 each. The bargain price came after the authority put the medallions on the market last fall, with an initial asking price of $475,000, but received no bids.

    In New York, taxi mogul Evgeny Friedman is locked in a court battle with Citibank, to whom he owes some $31 million after some medallion loans matured.

    Citibank is looking to seize 87 of Freidman’s 900 medallions in New York, which has seen medallion prices drop to about $870,000 last fall from a peak of about $1.2 million last spring. Freidman, the biggest medallion owner in the USA, also owns fleets in Boston, Chicago, New Orleans, and Philadelphia.

    In an April letter to creditors, New York taxi commission officials and other stakeholders, Freidman’s attorney, Brett Berman, called on industry regulators and medallion lenders to restructure and extend loans for his client and reform the industry.

    “If you want to ensure that medallion industry nationwide continues to operate, if you want to have services available to riders that don’t have iPhones, if you want to have drivers that are vetted, then there’s going to have to be a major change nationwide and city-by-city in terms of how they’re going about enforcing the rules,” said Ronn Torossian, a spokesman for Freidman.

    Even in Nevada, where the taxi industry has successfully fought off attempts by Uber to establish a beachhead in recent years, there are signs that government resistance to rideshare services is softening. Last week, the Nevada Senate approved legislation that would create regulations that would allow people to hail a ride using a smartphone.

    There are other signs that medallion industry’s vitality is on unsteady footing.

    Earlier this month, Medallion Financial Group—one of the country’s largest creditors to medallion owners—reported in its financial disclosures that nearly 4.1% of its loans were late 31 days or more in the first three months of 2015, up from 2.2% in the previous quarter.

    Charles Goodbar, a Chicago attorney who helps secure loans for medallion owners, said that financing has all but dried up. At the same time, new regulations, as well competition from ridesharing services, has reduced how much fleet owners in Chicago and elsewhere can lease their vehicles to cabbies.

    “There’s zero market,” said Goodbar, who also owns 59 medallions. “In my case, a buyer would have to come to the table with about $220,000 in cash per medallion, because there isn’t any financing available.”
    An UBER application is shown as cars drive by in Washington,

    An UBER application is shown as cars drive by in Washington, DC on March 25, 2015. (Photo: ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS, AFP/Getty Images)

    Ancillary industries are also feeling the pain.

    Carriage News, a New England industry newsletter closed shop in March, as medallion financing agencies slowed issuing loans, making advertising unnecessary.

    “The demise of Carriage News can be laid directly at the feet of the TNCs [transportation network companies] and the do-nothing politicians who allow these ... operations to continue to erode the taxi industry,” publisher Bob Keeley wrote in a front-page editorial announcing the 45-year-old publication’s demise.

    The taxi industry isn’t going out without a fight.

    In New York and Chicago, the industry has backed efforts for a universal hailing app in a bid to compete with rideshare outfits for riders that prefer the convenience of finding a ride with a couple of taps on their smartphone.

    And the trade association Taxicab, Limousine and Paratransit Association (TLPA) has launched a vigorous media nationwide campaign called “Who’s Driving You?” in an attempt to raise questions about Uber and other ridesharing companies safety record. The TLPA maintains a long list of alleged crimes and other embarrassing incidents by Uber drivers and drivers for other ridesharing outfits.

    After the latest high-profile incident last month in Houston, an alleged sexual assault by an Uber driver, the company faced an ultimatum from Mayor Annise Parker to tighten its oversight of drivers or face expulsion from the city. The company quickly responded to the city with a memo detailing how it would it planned to bolster vetting and dismiss drivers that aren’t registered

    In New York, the Taxi and Limousine Commission is weighing a proposal that would create an agency that oversee the implementation of smartphone apps used in the taxi industry.

    Under the proposal, the smartphone app operators would be required to approval before modifying their apps or face fines—a regulation that a powerful coalition of Silicon Valley companies told New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio would stifle innovation.

    “While we do not develop software for transportation providers, we are gravely concerned by the unprecedented decision to subject software available around the world to pre-release review by a city agency,” wrote the Internet Association, the tech coalition that includes Facebook, Google and Twitter.

    While more regulation on ridesharing companies may be inevitable, many medallion owners say that their best days are now in the rearview mirror.

    “It’s now become a race to the bottom,” said Karczewski, the Chicago medallion owner. “I’m at the end of my career, but guys who have a lot of skin in the game...What are they going to do?”

    #taxi #usa #uber #disruption