The case of Uber vs Transport for London isn't going to end anytime soon. It's going to drag on and on with appeals, and possibly even appeals to those appeals. Well there's a new development, with the London Assembly Tories claiming that Londoners could end up paying an extra £90 million every year (combined, not each) if Uber's licence isn't reinstated.
Part of that comes from the 40,000 drivers who are employed-but-not-employed by Uber, with the LAT claiming they would lose a combined £864 million every year. Their analysis of the situation also claims that, even with surge charges, an Uber is 40 per cent cheaper than taking a black cab. And here I was thinking that black cabs were one of the cheapest ways to travel. Oh what a fool I am.
Because one million Uber journeys take place each week, and with black cabs accounting for 17 per cent of the capital's licenced cars, this report concluded that Londoners would fork out a combines £89.5 million each year if they travelled by black cab instead.
But that's the clincher. All that scaremongering is meaningless, because it assume the only alternative to getting into a stranger's car is getting into an overpriced black box.
Tory Assembly member Andrew Boff has spoken out about the economic damage that will ensue if Uber's appeal should fail (it's allowed to continue operating during the appeals process), as well as criticising London Mayor Sadiq Khan for letting an "attack on consumer choice and value for money" happen "on his watch".
You don't need to get an Uber, and you don't need to get a black cab. There are plenty of private car hire services operating in London, and many of them have apps that let you summon them without having to ring anyone. We've covered some in the past, in case you forgot their names.
Quit the bullshit, because Uber is not the only choice - and acting like it is only gives more authority to a company that has some incredibly sketchy business practices. [London Evening Standard]