If a horse and buggy has to follow basic business and safety rules in Charleston, S.C., why not Uber?
Imagine owning a restaurant and being told you must invest in equipment, insurance, staff and sanitary practices that prevent the risk of cockroaches, vermin, salmonella and botulism. But you look at the costs and decide it's just not worth it. So you close down your restaurant.
That's the equivalent to what Uber has implied in Charleston, S.C., because the city wants TNC drivers to get business licenses and insurance. WCIV-TV ABC Channel 4 article and video here. An Uber flack says the transportation network company (not technology!) would have to "rethink" its presence, since drivers are part-time and have other jobs. Well, so do many restaurant and food service workers, to come to think of it.
Uber typically threatens to pull out and leave a city or jurisdiction every time it is confronted with any level of sensible regulation, no matter how light.
What Uber is saying is it cannot afford to operate if it must follow common-sense rules that protect the traveling public. That says a lot. Its defiant pose hides an insecure business model.
So, Uber should go right ahead and "rethink," and leave. Let the true transportation professionals move the public, starting with the horse.
The more casual and coarse society gets, the more chauffeured service can gleam with a counter-couture-culture.
As the dates for autonomous milestones move up, motorists retain a healthy skepticism of self-driving vehicles.
Opposite sides rage against the ride app machine: When do you consider an app legit?
What happens when the big buses are chauffeured, while more sedans to the airport are driven?
I did a test recently of two almost identical limo rides to and from the airport. It's time to talk about rates.