Прогноз погоды

People

John Smith

John Smith, 47

Joined: 28 January 2014

Interests: No data

Jonnathan Coleman

Jonnathan Coleman, 31

Joined: 18 June 2014

About myself: You may say I'm a dreamer

Interests: Snowboarding, Cycling, Beer

Andrey II

Andrey II, 40

Joined: 08 January 2014

Interests: No data

David

David

Joined: 05 August 2014

Interests: No data

David Markham

David Markham, 64

Joined: 13 November 2014

Interests: No data

Michelle Li

Michelle Li, 40

Joined: 13 August 2014

Interests: No data

Max Almenas

Max Almenas, 51

Joined: 10 August 2014

Interests: No data

29Jan

29Jan, 30

Joined: 29 January 2014

Interests: No data

s82 s82

s82 s82, 25

Joined: 16 April 2014

Interests: No data

Wicca

Wicca, 35

Joined: 18 June 2014

Interests: No data

Phebe Paul

Phebe Paul, 25

Joined: 08 September 2014

Interests: No data

Артем 007

Артем 007, 40

Joined: 29 January 2014

About myself: Таки да!

Interests: Норвегия и Исландия

Alexey Geno

Alexey Geno, 7

Joined: 25 June 2015

About myself: Хай

Interests: Интерес1daasdfasf

Verg Matthews

Verg Matthews, 67

Joined: 25 June 2015

Interests: No data

CHEMICALS 4 WORLD DEVEN DHELARIYA

CHEMICALS 4 WORLD…, 32

Joined: 22 December 2014

Interests: No data



Main article: Ride-sharing

<< Back Forward >>
Topics from 1 to 10 | in all: 67

Ola raises $50M at a $4.3B valuation from two Chinese funds

08:05 | 18 September

Ola, the arch-rival of Uber in India, has raised $50 million at a valuation of about $4.3 billion from Sailing Capital, a Hong Kong-based private equity firm, and the China-Eurasian Economic Cooperation Fund (CEECF), a state-backed Chinese fund. The funding was disclosed in regulatory documents sourced by Paper.vc and reviewed by Indian financial publication Mint.

According to Mint, Sailing Capital and CEECF will hold a combined stake of more than 1% in Ola . An Ola spokesperson said the company has no comment.

Ola’s last funding announcement was in October, when it raised $1.1 billion (its largest funding round to date) from Tencent and returning investor SoftBank Group. Ola also said it planned to raise an additional $1 billion from other investors that would take the round’s final amount to about $2.1 billion.

At the time, a source with knowledge of the deal told TechCrunch that Ola was headed toward a post-money valuation of $7 billion once the $2.1 bllion raise was finalized. So while the funding from Sailing Capital and CEECF brings it closer to its funding goal, the latest valuation of $4.3 billion is still lower than the projected amount.

Ola needs plenty of cash to fuel its ambitious expansion both within and outside of India. In addition to ride hailing, Ola got back into the food delivery game at the end of last year by acquiring Foodpanda’s Indian operations to compete with UberEats, Swiggy, Zomato and Google’s Areo. It was a bold move to make as India’s food delivery industry consolidated, especially since Ola had previously launched a food delivery service that shut down after less than one year. To ensure the survival of Foodpanda, Ola poured $200 million into its new acquisition.

A few months later after buying Foodpanda, Ola announced the acquisition of public transportation ticketing startup Ridlr in an all-stock deal. Outside of India, Ola has been focused on a series of international launches. It announced today that it will begin operating in New Zealand, fast on the heels of launches in the United Kingdom and Australia (its first country outside of India) this year.

 


0

Uber appoints Coca-Cola veteran Rebecca Messina as its chief marketing officer

19:00 | 10 September

Uber announced today that it has hired Coca-Cola veteran Rebecca Messina to serve as its chief marketing officer. Messina is the first person to hold that title at Uber and will work with its international marketing teams on Uber’s branding and marketing strategies.

Messina will oversee marketing for Uber as it gets ready for an initial public offering that is expected to take place next year. Messina’s appointment is another sign that Uber is building its roster for a stock market debut. Last month, it announced that Nelson J. Chai, former CEO of Warranty Group, will be its new chief financial officer after a long search.

Messina’s tasks include helping to repair Uber’s reputation, which is still smarting from last year’s upheaval, including the resignation of co-founder Travis Kalanick and accusations of a toxic work culture.

While Messina is the first person to hold the CMO title at Uber, Bozoma Saint John previously served as Uber’s first chief brand officer for about a year after joining in June 2017. At that point, Uber was in the midst of a crisis, including numerous reports about sexual harassment, that contributed to the resignation of co-founder Travis Kalanick as CEO. Saint John left Uber in June 2018 after being offered the chief marketing officer position at entertainment industry giant Endeavor.

Prior to joining Uber, Messina was global chief marketing officer at spirits company Beam Suntory, a position she had held since 2014. Before that, she spent 22 years at the Coca-Cola Company, where her last role was senior vice president of marketing and innovation for ventures and emerging brands.

In Uber’s announcement, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said “I’m thrilled to welcome Rebecca to Uber. She’s exactly the right leader to build our marketing efforts globally and to showcase the ways Uber is igniting opportunities for our customers around the world.”

In her own statement, Messina said “Joining Uber is a once in a lifetime opportunity and a true privilege. My focus has always been on three things: people, growth and brands. Uber checks all three boxes: a rapidly growing global business, with the opportunity to build an iconic brand alongside a team that’s committed to transforming the future of mobility. I couldn’t be more excited about what lies ahead.”

 


0

Ride-share companies offered New York $100M to drop proposed regulations

22:33 | 1 August

Lyft, Uber and Via yesterday made an offer to succor New York City’s beleaguered taxi medallion owners: a $100M relief fund paid over five years to cover the plight of these poor souls. But the city, in its arrogance, refused this generosity! How could they? Perhaps because it was because the money was contingent on New York dropping its proposed regulations of the ride-sharing industry. In this light it’s hard to perceive it as much more than city officials rejecting a bribe.

The proposal, as detailed in documents provided to TechCrunch by Lyft, would have the three companies contributing $20 million per year into a “hardship fund” that would be used to bail out taxi drivers who bought into the old system at great cost and are unlikely to recoup their investment.

All that would be required of the city would be for it to drop its proposed wage floors and driver limits for ride-sharing companies.

It’s far from “baffling,” as Lyft put it, that the city rejected this offer immediately. This cadre of companies notorious for ignoring and circumventing regulations offering cash for the city to abandon laws governing them must have come across as a brazen attempt to buy their way out of trouble. That the money would theoretically go to New Yorkers in need only makes it look worse when the city rejects the offer.

The effects of these proposed rules are certainly up for debate, and there’s merit to the arguments by ride share companies that caps would disproportionately affect the outer boroughs and relatively remote areas. And the city really should do something for medallion holders, many of who have been left hanging by a shifting and uncertain car hire market that has arguably been inadequately and inequitably regulated.

More importantly to the companies, however, must be that the regulations could very easily take more than $100M off their collective bottom lines.

That’s why this offer is being made now, in the middle of the PR push to align people against the proposals with scare stories of longer wait times and higher prices. Some of these stories may even prove to be true, and the City Council should definitely be considering such factors as driver turnover on ride share services and how to accommodate that in caps, or how to intelligently craft fee structures and wage minimums.

Make no mistake, these are not underdogs fighting an uphill battle but enormous corporations unloading nine figures on very public lobbying efforts.

 


0

Bus-sharing app Shuttl gets $11M Series B from investors including Amazon India

14:54 | 30 July

Shuttl, a service that lets Indian city dwellers find seats on multiple bus routes through one app, announced today that it has raised a $11 million Series B led by Amazon India, Amazon Alexa Fund and Dentsu Ventures. Returning investors Sequoia Capital, Times Internet and Lightspeed Ventures also participated.

The Gurgaon-based startup’s last round of funding was a $20 million Series A announced in December 2015, just eight months after it launched.

The Amazon Alexa Fund was created in 2016 to fund new voice technology. One of Shuttl’s most interesting features is “Chirp,” which verifies passengers by sending a sound from their mobile phones to the driver’s version of its app. The idea is that “chirping” is quicker than using tickets or passes and can therefore decrease delays on bus routes.

Shuttl, which is owned by Super Highway Labs, was created with the goal of reducing pollution and traffic in major cities like Delhi by encouraging people to take public transportation. In order to compete with Uber and Ola, its tech platform optimizes routes and capacity, while its app enables users to track the location of their bus, giving them similar convenience and reliability to on-demand ride services (as long as they remember to book their seat a day in advance).

Shuttl’s platform now includes 800 buses and it claims to have 60,000 monthly active users and provide 45,000 rides per day in five cities. Its new funding will be used to expand into two new cities.

 


0

Didi will resume late night Hitch rides, but only allow drivers to pick up passengers of the same sex

10:19 | 14 June

Didi Chuxing’s inter-city carpooling service will resume night operations on a limited basis about a month after a female passenger was allegedly murdered by an unregistered driver who accessed the platform using his father’s account. Called Didi Hitch, the service will return on June 15 with new safety measures, including one that only allows drivers to serve passengers of the same sex during late night hours. Didi Hitch will also began piloting a new feature later this month called “guardian mode” (not “escort mode” as reported by some publications) that automatically shares ride details with a passenger’s emergency contacts.

The company says Didi Hitch will resume partial nighttime service between the hours of 10PM to 12AM and 5AM to 6AM on June 15, but with what Didi says is a “tentative safety measure.” During those times, drivers will only be able to accept ride requests made by passengers of the same sex. In other words, male drivers can only accept male passengers, while female drivers can only accept female passengers.

Guardian mode will launch on June 22 as a smale-scale pilot. When a passenger turns it on, their route is automatically shared with their emergency contacts. Didi also says its platform can monitor routes in real time and “intervene in case of any unusual activity.” Another new feature, called the shared information card, will launch on the same day and display photos of both the driver and passenger and vehicle information, with the aim of allowing both parties to verify each other’s identities.

DiDi also said it will start trialing a voice recording feature for its other services, including Express, Select, ExpressPool and Minibus, in some cities.

One of the most highly-valued startups in the world, Didi now claims about 30 million daily rides and 21 million driver partners. For some passengers, however, these new safety measures may not be enough to reassure them. For one thing, last month’s murder meant that the alleged perpetrator was able to overcome several safety measures. First, he used his father’s verified driver account to access the platform. Secondly, Didi Chuxing’s facial recognition technology, which it has used since 2016 to verify drivers when they first sign up and then when they log in to start shifts, failed. Didi also said that the account had received a sexual harassment complaint before the murder, though it was unclear if that was while the father or son was using it. Didi apparently failed to contact the account despite making five efforts, but the platform nevertheless continued to allow it to accept rides.

While the new safeguards might placate some users, they don’t address the core issues brought up by the murder: making sure potentially dangerous people aren’t allowed on the platform in the first place, or are dealt with promptly when complaints surface. This is not the first time a murder has been linked to a Didi driver. Two years ago a driver allegedly confessed to robbing and killing a female passenger in Shenzhen.

In a statement emailed to TechCrunch, a DiDi spokesperson said:

“After revamping our core safety functions (including enhanced facial recognition, upgraded in-app emergency buttons, and many more), we are taking cautious steps to gradually extend DiDi Hitch’s service hours in response to demands from users. This recent update will increase the range of mobility options available to passengers during these hours.

As we do so, DiDi Hitch is trialing with a number of safety initiatives based on feedback and advice from riders, drivers and other members of the public in China. We understand some of the tentative initiatives that have attracted a lot of public support in this round of consultation might have never been tried before. We will closely monitor and review the results from such experiments with the public, and make continuous adjustments. Our focus is on ensuring the Hitch service is brought back in a safe and responsible way; and that users understand–and join us as we work through–the challenges involved in providing sustainable, fair and safe mobility services. The Hitch and other teams will continue to work around the clock for ever more satisfactory solutions. We will keep you posted.”

TechCrunch has asked for further information about the sex ratio of drivers on Didi’s platform, since that may impact how many female passengers are able to get a late-night ride using Hitch, and will update this article if we hear back.

DiDi also confirmed today that it has placed RMB 1 million (about $150,000 ) into a fiduciary account of the Beijing Global Law Office to reward informants who are able to give information that can help police solve the case. if no information or evidence has been confirmed by police by September 1, then Didi says the money will be donated to the China Foundation for Justice and Courage, which is overseen by the Ministry of Public Security.

 


0

Uber applies for patent that would detect drunk passengers

15:45 | 11 June

While Uber has changed the way that many think about transportation, it’s also changed the way that many drunk people find their way home at night. Rather than haphazardly hailing a cab or driving home under the influence, Uber provides a relatively safer way to get from point A to B on an indulgent evening.

The company has been curious about its drunk users, applying for a patent with the United States Patent and Trademark Office for a system that would use machine learning to determine the ‘state’ of a passenger.

While the patent limits itself to a dry discussion of ‘user state,’ it seems that what Uber is really interested in is detecting the difference between users of sound mind and users who are under the influence.

CNN first spotted the patent, which describes a method of measuring the user’s behavior on their phone against their usual behavior, using information like location, data input accuracy, data input speed, interface interaction behavior, the angle at which the user is holding their device, or even the speed at which they’re walking.

The patent also describes a system that would notify drivers of the passenger’s ‘state’, theoretically letting them prepare for the adventure ahead.

The patent says that riders in a particularly unusual state may be matched with drivers who have special training or expertise, or may not be provided service at all.

In the vast majority of cases, hailing an Uber is one of the safest ways for a drunk person to get home. On the other hand, Uber has run into issues with drivers who have sexually assaulted passengers. CNN reports that at least 103 Uber drivers in the US have been accused of sexually assaulting or abusing passengers in the last four years, with many of the police reports noting that the passengers were inebriated or had been drinking before getting into the car.

Notifying drivers when a passenger is drunk could save those drivers the headache of hauling around an out-of-control passenger, or prevent drivers from dealing with passengers who puke in their car, which may lead to disputed charges. But the system described in this patent could also allow for predatory behavior by malicious drivers.

There is also the broader implications of Uber knowing when you’re drunk. The company has not been a beacon of trust with regards to user data, having to pay $20,000 for using “God View” to spy on users and reportedly paying to cover up a massive data breach.

Of course, only a fraction of a company’s patents ever make it into the final product. Only time will tell if Uber’s idea to monitor the state of passengers will end up in the app.

 


0

MIT to revisit ride-sharing study after Uber rebuttal

17:39 | 6 March

The lead academic behind an MIT CEEPR research paper which casts doubt on the sustainability of driving for Uber or Lyft has accepted Uber’s criticism of how driver income data was gathered and said he will revise the research using more generous income calculations.

“Uber’s Chief Economist Jonathan Hall wrote a thoughtful response expressing his concern with one aspect of our paper,” wrote lead author Stephen Zoepf in a response statement yesterday to the company’s critique of the research. “Hall’s specific criticism is valid; in retrospect the survey questions could and should have been worded more clearly.”

Last week Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi‏ appeared to be channeling the spirit of former chief exec and Uber founder, Travis Kalanick, when he tweeted out a clumsy insult — writing that “MIT = Mathematically Incompetent Theories” — in his initial response to the research.

MIT = Mathematically Incompetent Theories (at least as it pertains to ride-sharing). @techreview report differs markedly from other academic studies and @TheRideshareGuy recent survey. Our analysis: https://t.co/S2aAqCuDR0

— dara khosrowshahi (@dkhos) March 3, 2018

It was an unfortunate shift away from an otherwise contrite and even humble tone the new Uber CEO has sought to strike since taking the driver’s seat last year (and inheriting a trunk stuffed full of legacy baggage and operational skeletons — from security scandals and legal challenges to culture problems, federal investigations and regulatory sanction, to name a few of Uber’s problems).

Perhaps he realized the error of letting the mask slip as his angry tweet was quickly followed by a tweet of thanks to MIT for “listening and revisiting”.

The MIT research paper compared the earnings and costs of 1,100+ drivers on the two ride-sharing platforms, with the original version of the study concluding that the median profit was just $3.37 per hour — with 74% of the drivers earning less than the minimum wage in the state where they operate.

The researchers also found that a median driver generates $0.59 per mile of driving but incurs costs of $0.30 per mile; and almost a third (30 per cent) of drivers were found to incur expenses exceeding their revenue or to be losing money for every mile they drive.

It’s the driver earnings figures that Uber took issue with, rather than the costs. Lyft also told us its initial impression of the study was it “shows some questionable assumptions”.

Harry Campbell, founder of The Ride Share Guy blog, which hosted the driver survey where MIT gathered data for its study, also queried MIT’s driver earnings calculations. Though his business is full time blogging about the ride-sharing industry which inevitably connects him to its interests — if not literally as directly as Uber and Lyft.

“The expense side of things seems right on to me but $7/hr in gross earnings seems too low based off my experience,” Campbell told us of MIT’s original study. “I think there was some ambiguity around the question about driver’s monthly income where as I directly asked drivers this year how much they made per hour and the average was $16.93 per hour before expenses.”

While Zoepf has said a “thorough” revision of the research will take “a few weeks” he has published an initial assessment of the net hourly ride-hailing driver profit distribution using two new methods — both of which bump up driver median profits (to $8.55 per hour; and $10p/h, respectively). Though only one puts a majority of drivers over the 2016 minimum wage in their state.

Here’s how he describes the two methods:

Using data in this survey there are two ways to calculate hourly revenue and net profit numbers. Method 1: use monthly revenue numbers when available (Question 14) and calculate hourly numbers using the working schedule reported in Question 11. Method 2: Use reported $/hour revenue numbers when available (Questions 19 & 22). In both cases the profit from driving is higher than we initially reported.

Using Method 1, and following Hall’s advice not to adjust income, Median profit rises to $8.55/hour from the $3.37 initially reported. For 54% of drivers, profit per hour is less than 2016 minimum wage in their state. 8% of drivers lose money. Using Method 2, median profit rises to $10/hour. For 41% of drivers, profit per hour is less than 2016 minimum wage in their state. 4% of drivers lose money. I’m happy to review these numbers with Hall and his team to address any remaining questions with the analysis as I release the next draft of the paper.

Zoepf goes on to call for Uber to provide better access to data to enable robust and independent analysis of the economics of the ride-sharing model, pointing out there is “no public ride-hailing data and a paucity of independent studies outside Uber’s own analyses”.

“In the spirit of collaboration, I ask the following from Uber, in keeping with the original objectives of this paper,” he continues. “(1) Help make an open, honest and public assessment of the range of ride-hailing driver profit after the cost of acquiring, operating and maintaining a vehicle. (2) Transparently present the difference between actual and tax-reportable vehicle expenses used in the business.

“In support of these goals I am happy to share existing cost data from this working paper with Uber or Lyft, or to incorporate full and accurate revenue data from Uber in this analysis should they decide to share such data.”

You can read his full response statement here.

One telling facet of the US ride-sharing market is that for most drivers Uber or Lyft is not their full time job. According to Campbell’s data, “about 65 per cent of ride-share drivers are part-timers — “so definitely a majority of drivers are doing this on the side or have other jobs”, he says.

That undermines the simplistic notion that drivers would simply not be driving for ride-sharing platforms if it was not economical for them to do so.

The reality is that most ride-sharing drivers are juggling multiple jobs — and are therefore having to make their own complex calculations to try to determine their individual costs and earnings. And having to do so without the benefit of public data to help them.

Add to that, some drivers may also be facing an imminent bill, such as a lease on a car, which means they feel they have to drive to earn income in the short term to cover an imminent cost.

For drivers who own the vehicle they are using for ride-sharing, over the longer term vehicle depreciation is also be being racked up in the background — saddling them with the burden of negative equity on their cars. A cost that Uber and Lyft’s businesses offload onto drivers — hence the criticism that gig economy business models are inherently exploitative.

Safe to say, the complex considerations and calculations that surround ride-hailing mean external and robust investigation of its economics is sorely needed. As is access to high quality data to enable vigorous research.

What’s really not called for are insults to academic efforts that seek, in good faith, to quantify the pros and cons of ride-sharing.

Featured Image: NurPhoto/Getty Images

 


0

Chariot co-founder and CEO Ali Vahabzadeh left Ford at the beginning of February

17:24 | 20 February

As automakers continue to work on their strategies for the next generation of transportation, one of the biggies is making a change to its leadership structure. Ali Vahabzadeh, the CEO and co-founder of ride-sharing startup Chariot, which Ford acquired Chariot in September 2016, has left the company.

“We thank Ali for his passion and dedication to building Chariot into the growing mobility business it is today,” the company told TechCrunch in a statement. “We are glad he will continue to serve Chariot as a director on the Chariot board, and all wish him well in his next adventure.”

He has been replaced in the interim by Dan Grossman, who leads Microtransit for Ford Smart Mobility, while the company looks for a permanent person to lead Chariot.

It seems that Ali himself had quietly announced his departure two weeks ago, to no one’s notice — writing that he wanted to step away to pursue his next entrepreneurial venture.

But this may not be the full story. The person who originally provided the tip to TechCrunch alleges that Vahabzadeh was actually fired in early February after employees co-signed a letter to Ford’s CEO James Hackett complaining about toxic work culture and poor employee retention. Ford declined to comment on this. (We are also following up on this allegation. If you know something, you can send it anonymously to us via our tips page.)

Ford acquired Chariot in September 2016 as part of its efforts to build alternative transport services for people moving away from fully owning and driving their own vehicles.

It bases its service around a fleet of transit vans whose routes are aimed at commuters, and where what routes are offered is based on a “crowdsourced” vote.

The startup was launched at Y Combinator and had only raised around $3 million before Ford acquired it, reportedly for $65 million plus earn-outs.

Chariot started in San Francisco but has had its eye on growing. In January 2017 it announced plans to expand to another eight cities (it’s currently active in five in the US, including New York, Columbus, Austin-San Antonio and Seattle). As of this month it is now also in London with plans to expand elsewhere in Europe.

“We’re going to be super aggressive in expanding to multiple markets over the next year,” said Vahabzadeh in an interview with TechCrunch at the time of the acquisition. “It became very clear very early on that Chariot would be able to leverage Ford’s expertise in logistics and vehicle and operations to take Chariot and make this a global service, beyond just the Bay area.”

But growth has not been without hiccups. In October, Chariot had to halt service for a period in San Francisco after failing to pass a series of California Highway Patrol inspections.

In terms of competition, there are a number of other services looking to fill in the gap between private cars; taxis and other single-destination ride-hailing services; buses; trains; and your own legs. They include services like Uber Pool, startups like Via, and new services that appear to be emerging by the week, such as this new Smart Bus effort from Citymapper in London.

 


0

London sets out safety-first plan for regulating ride-sharing

16:02 | 15 February

After London sent ripple’s of shock through Silicon Valley last year, by denying Uber a renewal of its private hire vehicle license, the city’s transport regulator is doubling down on its scrutiny of the impact of app-based ride operators.

Today it’s published a policy statement setting out its intentions for adapting transport regulations to fit the fast-changing sector. And chief among its stated priorities is the safety and welfare of passengers and drivers.

“Safety will be a particular focus in new or novel areas where there is little existing evidence of what happens in practice,” TfL writes in its policy document. “Maintaining high standards of safety is the top priority and operators should clearly demonstrate this.

“That means setting out clear policies and action for the prevention and reporting of offences and for clear, named accountability at senior management level for safety, reporting and protection of personal data.”

TfL also flags up “broad support” in a recent consultation on private hire vehicle regulations for ensuring clear controls exist to “protect the safety of passengers and drivers”.

“To ensure that these services provide a safe, secure, accessible and sustainable contribution to London’s transport system, we will consider making use of provisions in the Transport Act 1985 and the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998 to set regulations,” it writes. “We will consult on proposals to make changes to private hire legislation as appropriate. Views will be sought from stakeholders, other taxi and private hire regulators and the public in 2018.”

TfL says operators “should ensure that drivers are treated fairly, ensure drivers have appropriate and reasonable working hours including appropriate breaks throughout their shift and have clear policies and procedures to keep drivers safe”.

Gig economy working conditions is also an area of focus for the UK government, following growing concern about safety and welfare in the sector — and earlier this month it announced a package of labor market reforms aimed at responding to changes driven by the rise of app platforms which it billed as a major expansion of workers rights.

Concerns over public safety and a lack of corporate responsibility were the key reasons TfL listed for denying Uber’s license renewal in September.

And while Uber is appealing that decision, and is continuing to operate in London during the appeals process, TfL’s policy statement suggests that whatever the eventual outcome in court its intent is to tighten regulation on the sector, with the aim of enforcing a more responsible approach from all service providers.

Though it also notes that any regulation changes will be subject to a full public consultation.

Among recent regulatory tweaks made by TfL is a formal English language requirement for drivers — a move that Uber opposed. But it’s considering lots more changes for regulating the sector, including an advanced driving test; PHV operator fleet insurance; private hire vehicle signage; and even mechanisms to allow passengers to choose who they share vehicles with.

It’s also conducting an impact assessment of removing London’s Congestion Charge exemption for private hire vehicles — which would clearly have a knock-on impact on fares — and says, depending on the outcome of that work, the measure could be put up for a public consultation too.

Expanding accessibility by requiring a minimum percentage of private hire vehicles to be wheelchair accessible is another change it’s looking at.

The policy statement also advocates for operators to share “travel pattern data” with TfL — “so that travel patterns in London and the overall impact of the services can be understood”. Which perhaps offers a route for service providers that have lots of data to build better relations with the regulator — by providing insights that city planners can benefit from. (We’ve asked Uber if it’s currently sharing any data with TfL and will update this article with any response.)

“The private hire market is unrecognisable from when current legislation was introduced,” said Helen Chapman, interim director of licensing, regulation and charging for TfL, in a statement. “The growth of ride-sharing and other advances mean that regulation has to be fit for the next decade and not the last.

“Our vision sets out clearly how we will manage these new developments that improve convenience for customers, while ensuring safety remains our top priority. The document also makes clear that any new developments in the sector have to fit with the objectives of the mayor’s Transport Strategy.”

Among London mayor Sadiq Khan’s wider transport objectives are reducing Londoner’s dependence on private cars generally, including in order to promote healthier mobility options such as cycling and walking, and also to make more efficient use of the city’s street space. Which makes Uber’s emerging interest in bike-sharing look like a prudent diversification of its urban mobility offering.

Another stated priority for Khan is improving London’s air quality — and the strategy document specifically anticipates dedicating more areas in central London to being entirely “traffic free”. (Last year, for example, the mayor announced that the highly congested and polluted Oxford Street shopping district would transition to being traffic free — with a goal to complete this by the end of 2018.)

Asked whether the transport strategy requires a reduction in the overall number of private hire vehicles on London’s roads to deliver its objectives, a TfL spokesman would not provide a direct answer to our question — saying only that the aim is to “make sure that whatever developments happen in the industry they complement the goals in the mayor’s transport strategy”.

But he also noted those goals do include a principle to “support mode shift away from car travel”.

He reiterated, too, that the regulator continues to support the idea of having a cap on the total number of private hire licenses — but said this would require primary legislation, adding that TfL continues to lobby government on that front. “To date they haven’t been minded to do so but that’s still our position,” he added.

For now there’s no firm timeline for TfL reworking London’s private hire vehicle regulatory framework. The spokesman said only that it will be giving more details on specific timelines for consultations cited in the documents “in the coming months”.

Asked whether Uber’s behavior as a company has fed into formulating the policy document, the spokesman said no one ride-sharing company is driving its thinking. “This is us at TfL saying what we think for the industry as a whole is required,” he told TechCrunch. “We want the regulation to be fit for the next decade, not the last decade.

“This is talking about the industry as a whole. We’ve seen it change a lot in the last few years — we’re expecting it to change a lot again in the next few years, so it’s making sure that we’re setting out our store.”

At the time of writing Uber had not responded to a request for its thoughts on TfL’s policy statement.

 


0

Uber launches a new lower-priced service called Chap Chap in Nairobi

17:06 | 13 February

Uber has launched a new, lower-cost service in Nairobi called Uber Chap Chap. Made possible by using a fleet of fuel-efficient budget sedans, Uber Chap Chap (Swahili slang for “hurry, hurry”) is currently available in several areas of the Kenyan capital, including its central business district.

Uber, which began testing the service at the end of January, may launch it throughout the rest of Nairobi and in the capital cities of Uganda and Tanzania if it proves successful, the company’s East Africa general manager Loic Amado told Reuters.

To make Uber Chap Chap possible, Uber worked out a deal with CMC Motors, a car importer based in Nairobi, to import 300 Suzuki Altos. An unglamorous but inexpensive and fuel-efficient hatchback sedan, the Suzuki Altos were offered to highly-rated Uber drivers with financing by Stanbic, a Kenyan bank, that allows them to own the vehicle in three years.

Since the Suzuki Alto can travel further on less fuel, Uber is able to offer Uber Chap Chap’s lower prices. The minimum cost for a ride on the service is 100 Kenyan shillings (about 99 cents), compared to 150 shillings ($1.48) for UberX.

In Kenya, Uber faces competition from ride-hailing services like Little and Taxify. Uber Chap Chap gives it another way to differentiate, though Uber’s Nairobi drivers have complained that launching lower-priced services undercuts their earnings.

Featured Image: Jacek_Sopotnicki/Getty Images

 


0
<< Back Forward >>
Topics from 1 to 10 | in all: 67

Site search


Last comments

Walmart retreats from its UK Asda business to hone its focus on competing with Amazon
Peter Short
Good luck
Peter Short

Evolve Foundation launches a $100 million fund to find startups working to relieve human suffering
Peter Short
Money will give hope
Peter Short

Boeing will build DARPA’s XS-1 experimental spaceplane
Peter Short
Great
Peter Short

Is a “robot tax” really an “innovation penalty”?
Peter Short
It need to be taxed also any organic substance ie food than is used as a calorie transfer needs tax…
Peter Short

Twitter Is Testing A Dedicated GIF Button On Mobile
Peter Short
Sounds great Facebook got a button a few years ago
Then it disappeared Twitter needs a bottom maybe…
Peter Short

Apple’s Next iPhone Rumored To Debut On September 9th
Peter Short
Looks like a nice cycle of a round year;)
Peter Short

AncestryDNA And Google’s Calico Team Up To Study Genetic Longevity
Peter Short
I'm still fascinated by DNA though I favour pure chemistry what could be
Offered is for future gen…
Peter Short

U.K. Push For Better Broadband For Startups
Verg Matthews
There has to an email option icon to send to the clowns in MTNL ... the govt of India's service pro…
Verg Matthews

CrunchWeek: Apple Makes Music, Oculus Aims For Mainstream, Twitter CEO Shakeup
Peter Short
Noted Google maybe grooming Twitter as a partner in Social Media but with whistle blowing coming to…
Peter Short

CrunchWeek: Apple Makes Music, Oculus Aims For Mainstream, Twitter CEO Shakeup
Peter Short
Noted Google maybe grooming Twitter as a partner in Social Media but with whistle blowing coming to…
Peter Short