Taxi Driver Online

hehe TDO, I make a statement and you write a book to reply, thanks for the thought and consideration, its certainly more thought than the LA put into it in 1995.



A failure in the terms it was supposed to improve the service to the customer. There are still queues of people on ranks and at certain periods it is practically impossible to even pre book a PH.



In 1995, there were approximately 250 licensed vehicles, in 2004 there are just over 200. I think it really should go without saying we are busier now than in 1995, so if were busier and making more money, why are there less licensed vehicles?

Whilst the economic climate now is better than in 1995, there was following 1995 a shift from PH to HC, more money has been spent upgrading vehicles than before 1995, so in terms of investment, immediately after delimitation there was a decent enough economic climate for people to spend money on new cars.

I know its contridictory, its supposed to be, but its a fair account of whats happened in 10 years.

regards

Captain cab

Hi all

I have been in this industry for almost 10 years to the day, I have to say my earnings have not increased at all in that period, in fact if you take into account the massive investment I have made in vehicles over the past three years in particular the actual bottom line profit has declined.

Yes of course fares have gone up byt hey so has fuel. which is apart for our actual vehicles the biggest cost we face.

Regards

Eric

I think that's a reasonable assumption Cgull.

There is nothing new in the reasoning behind the logic that de limiting numbers ultimately increases the number of Hackneys Carriages, I think this forum has visited this debate many times before.

However, there is an alternative argument being articulated by some forum members who suggest that the majority of this increase comes from the private hire sector. They also state that the migration from private hire to Hackney carriage has a detrimental effect on P/H operators and the public who use private hire firms.

It would be nice to get a consensus on this subject because it really should be put to bed.

Most will agree from past experiences that the main contributing factor to the increase in Hackney Carriage numbers is by virtue of the migration of P/H to H/C.

That's one chestnut firmly put to bed.

The argument that more equals less is neither here or there. Nigel and Cgull have already stated that "more really does equal more" they say that because they probably know it from experience. Logic would also dictate that more equals more. To articulate that more equals less is akin to suggesting that the people you are debating with are lemmings.

Captain told us of his experience from 1995 to present day where the number of cabs have declined from 250 to 200, I find that very interesting but perhaps it is not widely echoed throughout the country.

In the past, in most places that have de limited numbers there has been a rapid increase over a short period. Eventually in most cases, the numbers will find their own level.

Perhaps in Captains experience the initial surge of numbers in 1995 has now found its own level in 2004. This is to be expected as aprox 50 owners have moved on to other things or perhaps taken to share a cab instead of owning one outright.

It would be interesting to have at hand other data from the same period which showed the number of licensed drivers in both P/H and H/C so they could be compared, perhaps that would shed a little more light on the situation.

However, we can safely assume that eventually there is an initial increase, which finds its own level after a period of time. I suspect that's another point we can all agree on.

It has been suggested by some that de restriction should not take place because they are of the opinion that the public suffers because "some" private hire companies cannot supply an adequate service.

I think this is the only issue that is dislocated from this debate. Everything else I have mentioned is a logical conclusion that most should be able to grasp and probably agree with.

I suspect the outstanding point above is unlikely to be put to bed or have a consensus because it is a major point put forward by those who wish to exclude others from having their own plate.

I suspect in a court of law the argument wouldn't find any credibility but it serves a purpose for those who wish to stop others from obtaining as I have already stated their own Hackney carriage proprietors license.

It would appear I am suggesting that the persons who articulate this particular train of thought are disguising their true intentions. If that is the case, one has to examine their motives?

Could it be they have a vested interest? Is that vested interest financial or moral? Does the vested interest effect a majority or a minority? Does the vested interest impinge on the equal right of others to freely acquire a stake in this vested interest?

We might also question the ulterior motives of why some in the private hire sector don't want to see the migration of P/H drivers to the H/C sector. Perhaps their ulterior motives have nothing whatsoever to do with supplying a service to the public but has everything to do with lost revenue.

The question that needs addressing is this,

Do the minority of private hire companies in the remaining 35% of those Authorities that still restrict numbers have a genuine concern for the public or do they have a genuine concern for their pocket?

Why is it that in 65% of unrestricted Authorities throughout England and Wales, most P/H companies have never before complained about a shortage of drivers and is there a point in suggesting that in most districts it is drivers who usually complained about a shortage of work?

Best wishes

JD

I think that in recessionary times you will get more people coming into the trade, given the lack of job opportunities elsewhere, but in the cab trade there are effectively an unlimited number of job opportunities, but earnings drop as a result of greater entry.

So in better economic times you should expect less people in the trade and to be busier as as consequence, as the labour market generally is tighter.

The overall number of vehicles that you quote does seem a bigger drop than mightbe expected though, especially as the market in general seems to have been growing.

Didn't you say that taxis had to be saloons before but are now PBs? Might that have something to do with it?

By 'licensed vehicles' do you mean the total of taxis and PH?

I was having a look at the DfT stats and they show:

1999 HC 151 PH 43

2001 HC 165 PH 50

2003 HC 190 PH 49

the figures are perhaps a little misleading, the ph numbers include a good number of limousines and ph minibuses.

As stated the numbers in 1995 were nearer 250 vehicles, in almost 10 years the licensed trade has not grown.

regards

Captain cab

The HC numbers have certainly grown quite steeply in the last few dozen years or so.

But you know that old saying, el Capitano: There are lies, damned lies, and taxi statistics