I agree with this comment: "But, and this is a huge but. The taxi experience in San Francisco is horrific - easily the worst out of any city I've ever lived in, and by a wide margin to boot."
So how would you envision ripping apart such a system and replacing it with something better? If you are like many people you might say "Oh its freakin' impossible, we've got regulatory capture, crooked politicians, back channel relationships, this will never change." But if you don't just lay down and give up, you do cause changes. That is what Uber started.
But what is interesting is that you start by 'drawing fire' and that exposes these relationships and it forces some of the people in dubious positions to go full criminal or not. One of the weirder things I've learned about large organizations is that there can be 'unwritten rules' which are maintained by people who would rather not be seen as being in control, and so when you start pushing up against them you get this sort of anonymous push back kind of thing. If you do the 'right' thing and ignore the push back then these same people start exhorting their control points to "do something" and that is when the 'drawing fire' part starts.
These companies are handling this exactly right so far, call their bluff. Tell the CPUC "Hey, either give me a rule that I'm violating or go away." and since there aren't any rules really, just people with influence who wish there were rules, the ones that they try to use against these guys don't work well. Time to start watching the bills in congress for some small amendment to some random bill that says "Oh, and if you offer a ridesharing service you are a transportation services company." tacked on to something which gives money to farmers or something. Then suddenly (if you weren't watching for it) you'll get hit with "Well you are violating this Federal Law which just so happens to have been written earlier this week/month/year." But that exposes the congressional rep who is on the playing board, so you go talk to them and figure out how to make supporting this stuff be more useful than opposing it. And then there will be a newspaper report about how some guy offering rides actually has a criminal record about a mile on long and oh my god if you used one of these services instead of a "real" taxi you might be delivering yourself into the arms of a psychopath! And then there will be attempts and DMV regulations that say you can't offer rides in cars that are older than 7 years old. It goes on of course.
It is a symphony of sorts, all the various folks trying to keep the status quo, protect their turf, etc. And this is what it sounds like.
FWIW the noise level indicates success on the part of SideCar, Lyft, and Uber.
So how would you envision ripping apart such a system and replacing it with something better? If you are like many people you might say "Oh its freakin' impossible, we've got regulatory capture, crooked politicians, back channel relationships, this will never change." But if you don't just lay down and give up, you do cause changes. That is what Uber started.
But what is interesting is that you start by 'drawing fire' and that exposes these relationships and it forces some of the people in dubious positions to go full criminal or not. One of the weirder things I've learned about large organizations is that there can be 'unwritten rules' which are maintained by people who would rather not be seen as being in control, and so when you start pushing up against them you get this sort of anonymous push back kind of thing. If you do the 'right' thing and ignore the push back then these same people start exhorting their control points to "do something" and that is when the 'drawing fire' part starts.
These companies are handling this exactly right so far, call their bluff. Tell the CPUC "Hey, either give me a rule that I'm violating or go away." and since there aren't any rules really, just people with influence who wish there were rules, the ones that they try to use against these guys don't work well. Time to start watching the bills in congress for some small amendment to some random bill that says "Oh, and if you offer a ridesharing service you are a transportation services company." tacked on to something which gives money to farmers or something. Then suddenly (if you weren't watching for it) you'll get hit with "Well you are violating this Federal Law which just so happens to have been written earlier this week/month/year." But that exposes the congressional rep who is on the playing board, so you go talk to them and figure out how to make supporting this stuff be more useful than opposing it. And then there will be a newspaper report about how some guy offering rides actually has a criminal record about a mile on long and oh my god if you used one of these services instead of a "real" taxi you might be delivering yourself into the arms of a psychopath! And then there will be attempts and DMV regulations that say you can't offer rides in cars that are older than 7 years old. It goes on of course.
It is a symphony of sorts, all the various folks trying to keep the status quo, protect their turf, etc. And this is what it sounds like.
FWIW the noise level indicates success on the part of SideCar, Lyft, and Uber.