‘We cannot make a living’: SF cabdrivers’ debts mount amid Uber, Lyft battle | Hacker News Reader

‘We cannot make a living’: SF cabdrivers’ debts mount amid Uber, Lyft battle

sfchronicle.com

22 pointsikarandeep16 comments

This is just anecdotal, but I’ve found yellow cabs in SF in the past 4 years to be some of the worst cab experiences I’ve had anywhere. Drivers saying things that make me really uncomfortable, or seeming a little unstable, also driving more recklessly than the typical Uber or Lyft driver. To the point where even if I’m in an area like fisherman’s wharf now where yellow cabs are plentiful, I’d rather walk a couple blocks to a side street and call a rideshare car than take a taxi.

I know Uber and lyft are a bit unpopular on here these days but from my perspective as a rider, even aside from the convenience of hailing a ride anywhere, they are just such a better experience on average than taxis. The rating system seems to be a much stronger incentivizer of good behavior than the old fashioned taxi regulations were.

Agree. Same in most places. Tel Aviv, LA, Boston, ...

When you are a tourist, Uber/Lyft are the only way to get a fair fare.

As a former resident of NYC there is always an angle for them to scam you. Tourist or not. Get loud and crazy and suddenly the driver found change, accepts CCs, etc.

This is why most people take an Uber - the taxi experience did not change much. Smelly car, smoking driver, dangerous/lost navigation, no CC reader,...

Even if Uber were to raise prices or subsidize less, I doubt people would switch back to taxis.

> driving more recklessly than the typical Uber or Lyft driver

A lot of uber/lyft drivers have horrible driving skills. They have no respect for walk signal - keep-on honking while pedestrians are crossing.

The city should not have allowed these medallions to become investment vehicles.

Taxis are unpleasant so I’m not too sad they are dying off, but I’m concerned about other areas where the city creates artificial markets that don’t make sense over time.

I definitely feel bad for them but they're responsible for their own decisions...They took the risk to invest into a medallion with the expectation of a return. But if the end result is crappy, it's part of the expectation.

City should refund costs of medallions with a difference in the expected NPV vs. the current economics of medallions.

Can they pay out every bad investment that someone in SF has made?

City created a monopoly. When they decided to cancel the monopoly or no longer enforce it, this should be a part of any such decision.

If medallions were worth $500k+ back then, how much were these cabdrivers making on their rides to make this profitable?

I have been driven in some quite delapidated cabs in SF. Maybe lack of maintenance or other in-cab monetization such as TV, brochures, or "suggesting" restaurants or clubs to tourists (not sure if this happens in SF, but definitely in other cities).

See https://kfarr.com/2007/11/15/how-much-is-a-san-francisco-tax...

Medallions in SF are capped at 1500 and the holder is allowed to lease the medallion out to others. So the holder gets around $22,000 a year leasing it out, or around $200,000 using NPV discount of 6%. Meanwhile without a medallion a cabdriver makes $24,000 / year after fees etc.

Similar article about NYC: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19955489

oh no that sucks

Reply on news.ycombinator.com