Lyft Announces NYC Launch, Taxi Commission Declares It Illegal Hours Later
from the don't-mess-with-our-taxi-medallions dept
While Uber gets much of the attention in the ride-sharing space, many people I know in San Francisco swear by Lyft instead. Lyft has the reputation of being the more laid back, friendlier version of Uber. Rather than Uber's infamous "surge pricing," Lyft has happy hour discounts. Rather than the sleek corporate feel of Uber, Lyft is famous for drivers putting giant pink mustaches on their cars, encouraging passengers to sit up front... and to give drivers a good old fashioned fist bump. While Uber has been available in New York City for some time, Lyft took its time, finally announcing plans to open up in NYC on Friday (well, Brooklyn and Queens, initially, staying away from taxi central Manhattan).Not surprisingly, the NYC Taxi and Limousine Commission was not pleased with this. While Lyft says it's tried to work with the TLC, the TLC disagrees, noting that Lyft agreed to a single meeting that just happened this week.
So, of course, it's not surprising that, within a day, the TLC officially declared Lyft an "unauthorized service" in NYC, meaning that it may start cracking down -- something NYC did last year to the other top competitor in the space, Sidecar. Lyft says it's still planning to launch, insisting that it doesn't believe the rules the TLC are citing apply to it. Basically "come at us, TLC!"
The TLC insists that it wants Lyft to be able to operate in New York City, even saying that it's willing to change some of its rules, but bureaucracies -- especially those with close ties to highly regulated industries that have a history of keeping out competition -- don't tend to move very fast. As we've noted before, cities that quickly ban these kinds of services are basically advertising themselves as places not friendly to innovation and/or run by corrupt officials.
For all the arguments about how these services don't meet the "stringent" requirements for existing taxi regulations, almost everyone I know prefers using services like Lyft and Uber over traditional cab services. They're much more convenient and personally I've found the service to be significantly better overall. Part of the problem is that the regulations were built for a different time, when there was significant information asymmetry between a rider and a driver, allowing drivers to take advantage of riders. But, these kinds of services actually flip that equation: they provide much greater information to the rider, and even give them a big say in passing on similar information to others, in the form of ratings. Thus, there are natural incentives to provide a better overall service, making many of the purposes of existing regulations stale and obsolete.
But, of course, as often happens in highly regulated industries, those who already made it through the hurdles like those regulations because they limit competition, and allow prices to be higher due to scarcity. It also gives them less incentive to provide better services. Thus, you get into a world of regulatory capture, where things are worse for everyone. While, yes, the "intentions" of these regulations may be good, the reality is that the information exchange enabled by technology makes many of the regulations obsolete. A slow-moving bureaucracy (especially one dealing with regulatory capture) isn't going to move very fast, but that's harmful for overall innovation in the space and setting up the best conditions for citizens of NYC, who probably prefer a better overall experience in getting around.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: new york, nyc, ride sharing, tlc
Companies: lyft, uber
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And, actually, more to the point, most of those "Extremely Bad Things" happen only when there's information asymmetry -- when companies can get away with it. Both Lyft and Uber have been pretty upfront about the background checks/safety precautions and how they quickly kick out bad drivers. The regulations were put in place because there weren't independent incentives to keep those offerings safe -- but with those guys there are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's just for Lyft, Uber has even more stringent requirements and they both meet or usually exceed any regulated requirements.
https://www.lyft.com/safety
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Srsly, wtf. Won't drive with a company that uses such old cars. Ridiculous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Also, it's clear from the website that what lyft is advertising isn't a "limo service" nor a "taxi service". Based on the "stories" it's more about community / drivers helping those in need.
They aren't a "taxi / car service" similarly to Uber. They're merely a PR firm that tries to be another middle man in the car industry it feels.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Whereas I, personally, couldn't care less. What's important is how well the car is maintained, not how old it is. I know people with antique cars that are more reliable than new cars.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Non-monolithic networks require different regulations. And maybe some of those current regulations on taxi/limo services should be changed if it benefits everyone. But what you have here is a regulatory body acting as a monopoly/oligopoly-enforcement organization. The regulated frequently co-opt the regulation to their own ends, even if they have to bow to some regulation as well (or not, as the case may be).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I declare the old musty cab services to be inferior and therefore irrelevant. The people will decide what they use not some corrupt organization. We will let you know if your needed TLC until then get bent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike, remind me why you hate libertarians again?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike, remind me why you hate libertarians again?
Not everyone makes their views thinking about if it is something a political party would support.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Taxi Services
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Taxi Services
They're certainly different, but not in that manner
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Medicaid Cabs
This shows that there are problems with cabs being insured.
One of the search results is titled the following:
"Taxpayer-funded cab rides draw 100s of complaints"
Some of the transportation companies used for medicaid runs are limos. Why are taxpayers paying for limos to take people to the doctor?
...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fix an information assymmetry for us
Just a friendly thought: What are some of those ridiculous, but now obsoleter TLC regulations???
Oh, and to anyone thinking of being a libertarian: The absence of government works as long as everyone is equal. Throw a Microsoft into the mix, and you get a nice dystopia with an effective, unelected government...which is why some rich people support it. And yes, quis quotidies ipsos quotidies? I don't know, but I think required sharing of information might be the right answer. That wasn't available when the aphorism was first written down!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fix an information assymmetry for us
Look, Ebay functions perfectly fine without government. In fact, large companies are weaker without government. They can't bend regulators to stop startups. And consumers voting with their wallets is in fact much more democratic than political elections, where you change the head on a huge machine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Fix an information assymmetry for us
Which is a government.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fix an information assymmetry for us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
An old idea, but still worth thinking about
But we still seem to need that official imprimatur to relax off the paranoia -- we won't leave it to amateurs!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ultimate hypocrisy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]