Hmmm, great, so $1 from every uber ride is gifted to the taxi industry because they weren't able to compete. I wonder if there is at least a fixed/finite time frame for this $1, or will it just go on forever, and eventually just get added to the "bottom line"?
I also wonder if Uber will charge this extra $1, and will they submit it, or will the driver submit it, or will the cheating/non gst paying driver just pocket it?

 

Still to be determined. There will also be a point-to-point transport commission with broad-ranging powers to demand records, enforcing DAC etc.

 

Which raises even more questions about what authority this new entity will have to stop random cars which may or may not be currently engaged in ride sharing activities?
A taxi with its light on is obviously working, a vehicle registered with uber or registered to an owner with a dac is not always working, may never get used for Uber, might have stopped 6 months ago etc....
I'm not convinced any of this is going to be a good idea. I thibk Uber needs to jump on this and propose self regulation (which they already do with the ratings and random disabled driver accounts).
On the plus side, it might reduce the number of drivers and therefore the ones left will be busier and more profitable

 

Which raises even more questions about what authority this new entity will have to stop random cars which may or may not be currently engaged in ride sharing activities?
A taxi with its light on is obviously working, a vehicle registered with uber or registered to an owner with a dac is not always working, may never get used for Uber, might have stopped 6 months ago etc....
I'm not convinced any of this is going to be a good idea. I thibk Uber needs to jump on this and propose self regulation (which they already do with the ratings and random disabled driver accounts).
On the plus side, it might reduce the number of drivers and therefore the ones left will be busier and more profitable

It's just another self-serving bureaucracy. It will have the powers to inspect vehicle inspection records, records of trips taken, ensure drivers have proper business registration/CTP etc. You're right, $1 is a hefty tax on an $8 fare...it will be marketed as a necessity to opening up competition blah blah blah. Still, I don't think it will impact passenger demand for either Uber or taxis, so the real problem will be the remittance of the $1 levy - driver or company.

 

Ps, $1 per ride is a pretty high tax rate for those short $8 trips !

 

Yes true but the long or surging trip will average it out

 

Don't forget this whole initiative by the state government is about reducing red-tape and encourages more people to eton the platform to do part time work. I don't think there is intention to make things 'harder'.

 

No it is the taxi industries that is making it harder for uber , they want an even level of playing field

 

No it is the taxi industries that is making it harder for uber , they want an even level of playing field

Except it isn't even when you are cross-subsidising (ie, uber trips are subsidising the taxi industry)...
What did the government do with all that money they got from selling the taxi licenses in the first place? Or did the government just sell them at a fixed nominal price?
Why does the government need to get involved just because joe bloggs invested in taxi plates instead of Telstra shares? Oh wait, the telstra shares had their own fiasco, oh wait, did the government get involved to compensate all the consumers that bought telstra shares and then lost money?
Investing in any "thing" has risks, and the investor should be able to anticipate those risks (eg, devaluation of taxi plates) and wear the cost of their own decisions, instead of blaming "someone else".
Just my opinions, however, I *do* support medicare and free access to medical treatment for everyone, I think that is money much better spent. Same for the public education system (but not private education).
Ooops, please ignore me, we should not mention politics... move along

 

Except it isn't even when you are cross-subsidising (ie, uber trips are subsidising the taxi industry)...
What did the government do with all that money they got from selling the taxi licenses in the first place? Or did the government just sell them at a fixed nominal price?
Why does the government need to get involved just because joe bloggs invested in taxi plates instead of Telstra shares? Oh wait, the telstra shares had their own fiasco, oh wait, did the government get involved to compensate all the consumers that bought telstra shares and then lost money?
Investing in any "thing" has risks, and the investor should be able to anticipate those risks (eg, devaluation of taxi plates) and wear the cost of their own decisions, instead of blaming "someone else".
Just my opinions, however, I *do* support medicare and free access to medical treatment for everyone, I think that is money much better spent. Same for the public education system (but not private education).
Ooops, please ignore me, we should not mention politics... move along

The government didn't give any guarantees about Telstra shares, but the govt restriction of the release of new plates (a guarantee of sorts) is something that is no doubt taken by investors when making a decision to buy plates or not, so I think some compensation should go to plate owners for the govt allowing a new entrant like Uber to muscle in. However! Apparently all the plates in NSW are owned by just 4,000 entities, so mum and dad investors probably have a bit of cash anyway.

The govt itself is actually a loser in all this as well, as the transfer of taxi plates attracts stamp duty, so lower plate values = less stamp duty. They need to make up for that as well, which is probably where the new commission will come in and start sniffing for new revenue streams.

 

I totally agree with you on the taxi plate . They call it mum and dad investor . How it is mum dad investor . The majority of these plate owner are corporation who made million Already by renting it out to taxi drivers . But my opinion on the education and Medicare are different . The education system are nothing but train us to be a slaves to the system nothing useful come out of it . As for the medical . You will find that the big pharmaceutical industries is nothing but a money making industries . The medicines are not to cure you but to keep you using it . Repeat mean more money . A lot of illnes can be avoid if you just watch what you are eating .

 

I totally agree with you on the taxi plate . They call it mum and dad investor . How it is mum dad investor . The majority of these plate owner are corporation who made million Already by renting it out to taxi drivers .

this misinformation about big corporations owning all the taxi plates and milking taxi drivers into the ground was first promoted by Uber in the early days when they were trying to get a foothold ... it was a convenient angle to push for their ends but it was, and has been proved, false.... and like all mud, it seems to have stuck .. despite there being a Commission on point to point transport that actually easily assessed the owner statistics from the Dept Transport records and readily developed an ACCURATE profile of ownership ...
for those who are interested in their findings rather than speculation, anecdote and hearsay ... the report found that while a small but significant proportion of plates were owned by the bigger taxi companies like Taxis Combined etc. (who claimed they needed to maintain a significant number to ensure security of service supply .. (but also to regulate lease prices)), the report also confirmed that there were, indeed, very few 'Mum & Dad' investors ... so, in part, Uber spoke the truth ... well, kind of ... of course "mum & Dad" investors would not normally have cash available for the high cab plate prices being asked and, besides, cab plate prices were prone to volatility (but not quite the drastic volatility that occurred in 2015) .. so 'Mum & Dad' investors would lean to real estate for long term capital gain .... Capital Gain was never an attraction for cab plate investors I suspect.
Rather, the report found that the bulk of plate owners were in fact retirees .. usually self-funded .. often ex-blue collar and also commonly originally born overseas. For them, capital gain was less of an issue but rather they needed a regular income from the plate lease to maintain some independence from social security... unfortunately, what they got from the government action was neither. The commission found that the government's conceding to ride sharing has caused a lot of angst amongst these pensioner constituents ...
the review has led to the proposed legislation ... it recognises the dichotomy in the cab plate ownership (taxi companies vs pensioner/super investors) and has tried to discriminate accordingly in the compensation allocation by limiting compensation to owners with less than 2 plates (thereby excluding the "big corporations"??) ..and also making available additional funds for 'hardship' cases... this seems a fair and thoughtful approach ..
The government ( and supported by opposition) wants a fair system for all and is trying to compensate the impacted stakeholders adequately, and then move on with clear conscious, with the new model that incorporates ride sharing and that is obviously supported by the broader community.
The political parties seem united in this approach unlike some of the emotive witch hunts bandied about on social fora .. umm?... like here ...
Uber (and its successors) are here to stay ... we as a community just need to sign off on those that have been trodden over in the stampede .. and evolve together as transport community .... if individuals cant see that then, fortunately, politicians do ...
viva democratica!

 

OK, but in order to really help some of the people on social media (ie, this site, and those that are happy to accept facts), other than your opinion, can you provide actual published data on taxi plate ownership, and any reference to the legislation that is designed to limit the funds for multiple plate holders, and also if there is a limit to the total compensation funds provided to any single recipient, and a limit to the total funds that will be collected.
Consider over the next 5 years, Uber dreams that most people will not own a car, so the number of taxi/uber/etc trips will increase dramatically, this would in turn provide a massive increase in the funds collected.
I'd like to believe that our government is not made up of the worst idiots society can provide, but even best intentions can easily go awry, and socialist based programs like this just smell bad (there are always people who will take advantage of it, either lie, cheat, or find a corner case).

 

OK, but in order to really help some of the people on social media (ie, this site, and those that are happy to accept facts), other than your opinion, can you provide actual published data on taxi plate ownership, .

ooohh? ouch! ... umm, ok, well the ownership research and profile stuff is all in the Sturgess report (that's the Taskforce set up by government to find out the truth rather than the hearsay, and hysteria, in the media and stakeholder groups like taxi industry and Uber)... if you are really interested in the boring facts then look at page 120 .. there's Table 3 which shows the number of plates held by each ownership entity, and Table 4 shows the ownership breakup between companies, individuals and taxi networks .... it's pretty dry reading, much prefer Alan Kohler's sexy graphs ...
Here's a quote from the report... "In NSW, the overwhelming majority of licence holders are small investors owning one or two licences"
http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/sit...iles/b2b/publications/point-to-point-transport-taskforce-report-to-minister.pdf
it would be good if taxi plates were all held by big bad companies too, then we could feel good about the Uber small players .... BUT reality dont work that way ... ironically it is actually Uber who probably more closely equates to the much maligned 'big international multi-million, sorry billion, dollar company'
If the plates were all owned by big bad companies the government wouldnt even be entertaining thoughts of compensation.. it would be delighted ....

anyway, the other questions you ask about the compensation process etc. are all in the legislation just passed..sorry, you'll have to read thru as it doesn't interest me..but there's stuff on how much is in the total package, initial payments, levies to recoup, etc...blah blah ... zzz...zzzz....doesnt help me Ubering but I can see where the government (and opposition) are coming from ...

 

No it is the taxi industries that is making it harder for uber , they want an even level of playing field

They only want a level playing field - that is tilted their way. That is why they will still have the monopoly over taxi ranks, street hails and pre-bookings.

 

Agree with most, just don't know if reducing cabs will solve problems for commuters.

I googled the airport queue, and it could be something of a secret judging by how little there is on it, but this article mentions it (with 25 minutes - maybe to allow for the traffic problems they created last year with the new directions): http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...ort/story-fni0cx4q-1226647912264?nk=bc45f94ea5d8add4e0663859e8aa0c67-1467097916

Short fare Taxi queue is no secret- just the sort of info travellers don't bother to ask or know about.

Uber dispatch, pricing and rider profile information. THAT'S secret