Competition and innovation

Mark Perry is an Uber fan.  He loves to chronicle the desperate fight of the taxi cartels to protect themselves from competition, and the innovations that Uber keeps introducing to delight its growing customer base.  In a local fight, the taxi cartels often seem to have the upper hand, with their crony-capitalist lock on protectionism.  What happens when Uber ignores all that and exploits two big advantages:  the willingness to innovate in the areas that are important to their customers, rather than to the entrenched taxi/city power bases, and the ability to coordinate over large geographical areas rather than to tighten their maniacal grip on a local monopoly?

Update:  an oddly absorbing site that shows a New York taxi's typical workday, mostly centered on Manhattan trips.

4 comments:

Ymar Sakar said...

They'll find their offices on fire, that's what.

E Hines said...

Interesting site. The cab that came up for me had one interesting trip around 1700 that was just "drive around the block, cabbie."

And 24 hours to generate less than $60 in tips--divided two (three?) ways. I don't know their base salary, but that's not a lot of extra. I can see why they fear Uber so much.

On the other hand, this cab had 3 or so hour long periods of just cruising, looking for a fare. Seems likely to me that if the cabbies embraced the techniques of the Ubers of the world, they'd work more efficiently and make more money.

Eric Hines

Gringo said...

And 24 hours to generate less than $60 in tips--divided two (three?) ways. I don't know their base salary, but that's not a lot of extra. I can see why they fear Uber so much.

The money in taxis go to the owners of the medallions, not to the taxi drivers. It is no accident that so many immigrants drive taxis. No, the immigrants are not the medallion owners.

Ymar Sakar said...

Reminds me of the Scalzis of the sci fi publishing world. Holding the fort against Change and Progress, as usual.

Generally the oligarchs and robber barons are the ones that own settled and controlled parts of the economy with little to no mobility. Thus greater efficiency is looked down on, as that upsets their money laundering schemes.