Taxi Driver Online

I've heard a lot of tosh in my time but this takes the biscuit.

Aren't we forgetting that one of the companies is owned by shareholders, the other two by members?

One company pays a dividend, the other two don't.

Two companies have committees comprised from the membership, two teams of egos to be satisfied.

Then there is any financial imbalance between the three companies to consider.

No, how can there be a marriage of three disparate firms? Isn't takeover more likely? Who would win and who would lose?

But what business model would the new organisation operate to? Shareholders or membership?

If anything should have been learned by now, the membership model just doesn't work. There is no real accountability in the model once the membership increases beyond around 150. At that level these companies were all ticking along nicely.

Expansion has brought real problems in controlling the business model. It just doesn't work as it is. How could it work with a membership amalgam of the three companies?

Wouldn't all that would be created just be a bigger, more complicated mess?

Doesn't it seem that those driving the trade are at best naive, at worst serially incompetent?

I see the real threat of an ever increasing private hire fleet. As the work is leeched away from the existing taxi companies, PH will be adding more cars while blacks' drivers are sitting on ranks accessing the internet.

I suspect you will all say that I would say this anyway, but the only way to beat PH, the ONLY way, is to increase the fleet to the level where PH are incapable of making real profit, any desire to expand unattractive. It is certain they would retrench back to their core business level.

The alternative is them undercutting taxis and taking all of our market from us. Any work we do get will be so low in value a triple swallow with tuck off the North Bridge truly will beckon.

BTW Isn't it extraordinary that the council is limiting taxis which allows PH, with their potential for dubious financial backing, to expand. Don't Cardownie, Deputy council leader - leader of the SNP group and PH owner - and Keir - RC Convener, bus driver and follower of Cardownie - have a lot of explaining to do?

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

[quote="Jasbar"]I've heard a lot of tosh in my time but this takes the biscuit.

Aren't we forgetting that one of the companies is owned by shareholders, the other two by members?

One company pays a dividend, the other two don't.

Two companies have committees comprised from the membership, two teams of egos to be satisfied.

Then there is any financial imbalance between the three companies to consider.

No, how can there be a marriage of three disparate firms? Isn't takeover more likely? Who would win and who would lose?

But what business model would the new organisation operate to? Shareholders or membership?

If anything should have been learned by now, the membership model just doesn't work. There is no real accountability in the model once the membership increases beyond around 150. At that level these companies were all ticking along nicely.

Expansion has brought real problems in controlling the business model. It just doesn't work as it is. How could it work with a membership amalgam of the three companies?

Wouldn't all that would be created just be a bigger, more complicated mess?

Doesn't it seem that those driving the trade are at best naive, at worst serially incompetent?

I see the real threat of an ever increasing private hire fleet. As the work is leeched away from the existing taxi companies, PH will be adding more cars while blacks' drivers are sitting on ranks accessing the internet.

I suspect you will all say that I would say this anyway, but the only way to beat PH, the ONLY way, is to increase the fleet to the level where PH are incapable of making real profit, any desire to expand unattractive. It is certain they would retrench back to their core business level.

The alternative is them undercutting taxis and taking all of our market from us. Any work we do get will be so low in value a triple swallow with tuck off the North Bridge truly will beckon.

BTW Isn't it extraordinary that the council is limiting taxis which allows PH, with their potential for dubious financial backing, to expand. Don't Cardownie, Deputy council leader - leader of the SNP group and PH owner - and Keir - RC Convener, bus driver and follower of Cardownie - have a lot of explaining to do



All this drivel from a driver that No radio company in edinburgh will allow to drive,T.D.O. IS WELCOME TO THE POSTINGS OF THIS ERSHOLE

Well it got you looking.

_________________
IDFIMH

Nice one coming from the auld yin. Perhaps he should understand that I have long chosen NEVER to drive with a radio company. You see Mr Yin, I am self employed. I work for me and mine. The radio company set up is the only one in commerce where the customer pays to be told what to do. Owners are customers of the radio company bureaucracy, yet they are dictated to. They are disciplined by them for not doing what they're told by the bureaucracy. Fined. Put off the air. Expelled from the company, their livelihoods placed in jeopardy. They live under the yolk of a fascist control. They live in fear. Know of any other "customers" who would accept this? That's why the current system is a scumbag one. Auld yin is thick enough to put up with this. Real sensible people see it for what it is and deplore it. The street car section of the trade is full of former radio company owners who saw them for what they were and voted with their feet. I have compiled a dossier of former CRT owners who have left the company. It's appalling evidence and makes interesting reading. The sad thing is that this is the very reason why the trade is fecked. Because that servile, take it up the choccy meek acceptance spreads throughout the trade, and allows the council to stick it up us whenever it wants. Fairways, dress codes, stop and search, huge licence fees, increased council transport competition, council discrimination in favour of PH - all while conducting trade business in secret, that's why the trade is fecked. That's why I resist authority here. I've been proved right on all these matters. It's time for the tail to stop wagging the dog. For those who do the work to regain control. That's why power needs to return to the drivers. Workers rights! That's why auld yin is afraid. Because he represents greed, corruption and naked self interest, with absolutely NO consideration for the fare paying public. The current radio company set up is an anachronism. It's a flawed business concept. It is failing now, it will be catastrophic should any merger happen. I have been continually right in my premises about the trade, I am right here again. I hope a merger does happen. Because I know that those who are managing the trade now are incompetent and incapable of driving the concept further. It is doomed to disaster. Perhaps after the collapse the new order may allow some sanity to prevail and a workable model to come forward. In the meantime, I despise Auld Yin, and I wouldn't work with or for him supposing it was the last opportunity. I decided long ago not to work with scum. Self employed means just that. That's where loyalty lies.

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

Shouldn't this be over the border in the Scottish section

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

Well I'm quite happy for it to be here as the location maybe Scotland, but the issue is UK wide.

Drivers being treated as scum by operators is not just a Scottish issue.

Drivers being treated as scum by councils is not just a Scottish issue.

That said, thankfully it's not a Mr Sussex issue.

_________________
IDFIMH

It was intended to be on the Scottish section. I posted it in general issues by mistake.

Perhaps admin could shift it.

Although Sussex is right. I would welcome the input from the whole of TDO.

If I've got it wrong, tell me.

However, Auld Yin's attitude just confirms it for me.


He's not about fairness. He's about servility.

That's not me. But then, I guess you all knew that anyway.

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

The HC here joined the PH thus taking both work, but, for different reasons then above. There are alternatives to everything it's just a shame that there is seldom compromise over anything

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

We should understand that there is only a need to "defeat" PH because there does not exist a level playing field.

PH can expand according to market needs, hackneys can't.

This means that there is only one possibility, and that's the steady erosion of our market.

We are arriving at the point where the public now thinks that PH ARE taxis. They now have the critical mass which makes hacks bit part players.

This means the public are increasingly automatically thinking PH for their travel needs.

With increased access to them through technology, internet, mobiles as well as fones, it wouldn't matter what the taxi companies do in regard to joining together, they are still on the road to perdition. PH stealing their market hardly suggests that a bigger faiuling model is going to protect members' investment.

Bigger isn't necessarily better, just bigger - harder to fall.

I was right to arguefor wider vehicle choice. I am right to argue for a single licensing system.

The secret to defeating PH, and the crime based interests generally associated with some of them, is the taxi owner driver scenario, where the critical mass renders it unattrafctive to build huge fleets of saloon cars.

And, when will councils realise that saloons behaving like taxis ARE effectively taxis.

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

We should understand that there is only a need to "defeat" PH because there does not exist a level playing field.

PH can expand according to market needs, hackneys can't.

This means that there is only one possibility, and that's the steady erosion of our market.

We are arriving at the point where the public now thinks that PH ARE taxis. They now have the critical mass which makes hacks bit part players.

This means the public are increasingly automatically thinking PH for their travel needs.

With increased access to them through technology, internet, mobiles as well as fones, it wouldn't matter what the taxi companies do in regard to joining together, they are still on the road to perdition. PH stealing their market hardly suggests that a bigger faiuling model is going to protect members' investment.

Bigger isn't necessarily better, just bigger - harder to fall.

I was right to arguefor wider vehicle choice. I am right to argue for a single licensing system.

The secret to defeating PH, and the crime based interests generally associated with some of them, is the taxi owner driver scenario, where the critical mass renders it unattrafctive to build huge fleets of saloon cars.

And, when will councils realise that saloons behaving like taxis ARE effectively taxis.

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

HC can expand in de-regulated areas but de-regulation ain't all it's cracked up to be. TBH I don't understand why HC would want to expand. I mean it should be one man one plate as far as I'm concerned. If deregulated you are just making HC the same as PH. Flooded ranks so they then join PH companies to get work.

You make it sound like it's the drivers that choose to expand the companies when it's not, it's just the greed of PH operator companies that expand with the desire to increase their own income with no regard for the drivers they take settle from. Take Delta for example 1700 drivers and they will not stop taking on drivers just cos there's no increase of work. The drivers are working longer and longer hours to survive. They don't even have the decency to reduce the settle in the hard times like now. It's pure greed and the desire to be bigger than anybody else.

When it comes to taxis IMO I think the value should be on the driver and not the vehicle. How you achieve this is anybody's guess

If companies merge and leave no alternative supplier for the customers out there then it is my belief there is an opening in the market for somebody to fill. It may be a smaller company that is more personal, more reliable and more friendly that can build up a good customer base, but, that is all that is needed to make a decent living for drivers.

HC and PH drivers should not be at each other, the fault is with the greedy few that run the companies and not the drivers that work for them

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

WE're talikng de-limitation here not de-regulation. We're talking same drivers, same shifts, just different vehicles.

Yeah, merger would open the door from those disaffected with the merger and others to set up new enterprise.

However, the old adage is still true. If you want to beat a competition then the only way is to render their expansion plans not worthwhile.

Taxis in Edinburgh have developed a culture of private hire, ie they have to be foned.

And even then, the fones ring out during peak periods and rather than wait punters fone private hire who then offer the customer deal for their next trip.

Increasing the fleet can stifle this. Remember, taxi company drivers can survive this because they can also pick up off the street, PH would suffocate from lack of work. It's the trade's only weapon.

But it's a weapon substantially denied because of the actions of the rat. he was arguing limitation, while negotiating his deal with the competition. So, whose interests was he really looking after?

Anyone doubt the rat was only looking after his own interests?

He goes to PH. The deputy leader of the council, the top SNP man, has links with the PH. Keir is there to do the bidding on committee and restriction is maintained, PH flourish. The taxi trade watches as its market share declines. Drivers earnings are savaged.

Now tell me this wasn't deliberately designed?

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

You call it de-limtation we call de-regulation. Same horse different jockey.



They surely don't have to be phoned they have chosen to be which gives them the option of both work.



This is the problem with taxis they only use the phone systems when it's quiet. They don't want to cover that work when the streets are busy which is quite understandable



Do you have concrete proof of this or is it just a summation of what you think will happen. From experience you just find more taxis on private hire systems. There will be no increase in demand as such



I don't think this is right and as indicated it smells of corruption. I have said previously in other posts efforts should be made by the trade to rectify this situation. Nobody with interests in the taxi trade should be on the committee for the same thing.

I do not believe de-limitation will solve your problems but you go for it if you believe you're right. Just observe other areas where de-limitation has already taken place and see what happens there.

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

I refer to a previous post: All PH's All HC's should be black with a roof light saying either TAXI or TACSI depending were you are from. Vehicle can be TX or van or saloon any [drivers] choice no restriction of plates from any area and ply for hire in any area and do telephone work etc from any area. Gov. Plate by VOSA. MOT/taxi test done by VOSA. Council out of a job......job done! Sorted. Can be phased in over 5 years to allow drivers to obtain relevant vehicle colour etc. The minister of transport will read this and think it’s a great idea; they can keep all of the plate money, straight into the government coffers. Toots thinks it wont work so it should be obvious to all that it is the simple solution that is best. Skip has a black saloon so he is prepared he knows there is gonna be one Taxi colour for all!

Excuse me I never said it wouldn't work, I just raised questions. You weren't here when I first joined TDO and said a very similar thing to yourself. Single tier taxis was the way forward

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!