Voting Ended - Motion Passed: Renaming Car Rental Programs/Partners & adding forum
May 1, 2015, 2:12 pm
#61
Moderator: Hilton Honors forums
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Marietta, Georgia, United States
Posts: 24,996
Similarly to SkiAdcock......I was at first in favor of the creation of a new forum; but after reading comments which have been posted, I went from full support to various degrees of partial support — to the point where I became convinced that perhaps this motion needs to be reworked.
May 1, 2015, 2:14 pm
#62
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,548
One good reason for not having a forum for such services is that in some regions the services are operating in a manner that is not legal and passengers can be uninsured.
FT's own TOS http://www.flyertalk.com/help/rules.php#deceptive prohibits "Supporting, encouraging or promoting illegal activity" - so how can a forum that would be supporting illegal activity be in line with this
It would surely need careful control to ensure that only regions where it is operating completely legally
Why a ride-share forum anyway - why are services using taximeters and mini cabs not also included?
FT's own TOS http://www.flyertalk.com/help/rules.php#deceptive prohibits "Supporting, encouraging or promoting illegal activity" - so how can a forum that would be supporting illegal activity be in line with this
It would surely need careful control to ensure that only regions where it is operating completely legally
Why a ride-share forum anyway - why are services using taximeters and mini cabs not also included?
May 1, 2015, 3:38 pm
#63
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: CHI
Programs: UA 1K, MR Titanium, IHG Gold, National Exec
Posts: 3,841
One good reason for not having a forum for such services is that in some regions the services are operating in a manner that is not legal and passengers can be uninsured.
FT's own TOS http://www.flyertalk.com/help/rules.php#deceptive prohibits "Supporting, encouraging or promoting illegal activity" - so how can a forum that would be supporting illegal activity be in line with this
It would surely need careful control to ensure that only regions where it is operating completely legally
Why a ride-share forum anyway - why are services using taximeters and mini cabs not also included?
FT's own TOS http://www.flyertalk.com/help/rules.php#deceptive prohibits "Supporting, encouraging or promoting illegal activity" - so how can a forum that would be supporting illegal activity be in line with this
It would surely need careful control to ensure that only regions where it is operating completely legally
Why a ride-share forum anyway - why are services using taximeters and mini cabs not also included?
May 1, 2015, 10:16 pm
#64
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,187
There is a fundamental difference between renting a vehicle and hiring a service to provide transport. I fear cluttering and degrading rental car discussions.
May 3, 2015, 8:49 am
#65
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 5
America at least, fails in inter-modal transportation for all it's huge accomplishments looses at civil infrastructure services such as this one.
ANYTHING that helps connect reasonable inter-modal trans to air travel.
People are used by inflated taxi "car" and shuttle services that at times in my experience cost as much to use as the airfare. So yes I am open to this venue being a place to ride share or post uber/lyft as well.
ANYTHING that helps connect reasonable inter-modal trans to air travel.
People are used by inflated taxi "car" and shuttle services that at times in my experience cost as much to use as the airfare. So yes I am open to this venue being a place to ride share or post uber/lyft as well.
May 3, 2015, 9:57 am
#66
Moderator: American AAdvantage
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NorCal - SMF area
Programs: AA LT Plat; HH LT Diamond, Maître-plongeur des Muccis
Posts: 62,948
One good reason for not having a forum for such services is that in some regions the services are operating in a manner that is not legal and passengers can be uninsured.
FT's own TOS http://www.flyertalk.com/help/rules.php#deceptive prohibits "Supporting, encouraging or promoting illegal activity" - so how can a forum that would be supporting illegal activity be in line with this
It would surely need careful control to ensure that only regions where it is operating completely legally
Why a ride-share forum anyway - why are services using taximeters and mini cabs not also included?
FT's own TOS http://www.flyertalk.com/help/rules.php#deceptive prohibits "Supporting, encouraging or promoting illegal activity" - so how can a forum that would be supporting illegal activity be in line with this
It would surely need careful control to ensure that only regions where it is operating completely legally
Why a ride-share forum anyway - why are services using taximeters and mini cabs not also included?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32548712 BBC, in part:
Private online car-hire service Uber has had its offices in the southern Chinese city of Guangzhou raided by authorities, reports say.
According to local media, the US company is under investigation for "organising private drivers to provide unlicensed businesses".
The local transport, police and industry bodies are said to have seized equipment including mobile phones.
Guangzhou considers car-hire services that involve private drivers illegal.
"Law enforcement departments have come down hard on such illegal businesses as they disrupt the market and we will not be soft on these activities in the future," the Guangzhou Transport Commission said in a recent statement.
According to local media, the US company is under investigation for "organising private drivers to provide unlicensed businesses".
The local transport, police and industry bodies are said to have seized equipment including mobile phones.
Guangzhou considers car-hire services that involve private drivers illegal.
"Law enforcement departments have come down hard on such illegal businesses as they disrupt the market and we will not be soft on these activities in the future," the Guangzhou Transport Commission said in a recent statement.
May 3, 2015, 12:12 pm
#67
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Atherton, CA
Programs: UA 1K, AA EXP; Owner, Green Bay Packers
Posts: 21,690
An example of that are the recent police raid and equipment confiscation against Uber in Guangzhou.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32548712 BBC, in part:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32548712 BBC, in part:
I suspect that this is a business model that is here to stay, after first thinking powerful taxi lobbies would drive it out.
May 3, 2015, 12:43 pm
#68
Moderator: Hilton Honors forums
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Marietta, Georgia, United States
Posts: 24,996
Just to be clear, I did not vote no on this motion because I am against having a place on FlyerTalk to discuss this business model — in fact, I have supported discussing this business model on FlyerTalk from the beginning and still do support it.
Rather, I am simply not in full agreement with the current motion as to how it should be discussed on FlyerTalk, based on the feedback posted by fellow FlyerTalk members.
May 3, 2015, 3:57 pm
#69
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: LHR- ish
Programs: MUCCI, BA Blue
Posts: 4,295
This might actually argue FOR a specific forum so that potential Über users could know where to look for information about the availability of service where they are headed. Similarly with the changing policies at various airports where Über first is, then isn't, then is again allowed to pickup, or drop off, or both. Hunting for the information now is a bit difficult.
I suspect that this is a business model that is here to stay, after first thinking powerful taxi lobbies would drive it out.
I suspect that this is a business model that is here to stay, after first thinking powerful taxi lobbies would drive it out.
That said, this approach only works if you do have local experts available - the proposed new forum could be used to collect and collate news and information from all over the internet which would go some way to compensating for any lack of local expertise.
I do agree with your last remark though and I certainly think there is room for talkboard to reconsider FT's whole approach to ground travel.
May 3, 2015, 7:48 pm
#70
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2002
Programs: UALifetimePremierGold, Marriott LifetimeTitanium
Posts: 71,095
I agree with this statement.
Just to be clear, I did not vote no on this motion because I am against having a place on FlyerTalk to discuss this business model — in fact, I have supported discussing this business model on FlyerTalk from the beginning and still do support it.
Rather, I am simply not in full agreement with the current motion as to how it should be discussed on FlyerTalk, based on the feedback posted by fellow FlyerTalk members.
Just to be clear, I did not vote no on this motion because I am against having a place on FlyerTalk to discuss this business model — in fact, I have supported discussing this business model on FlyerTalk from the beginning and still do support it.
Rather, I am simply not in full agreement with the current motion as to how it should be discussed on FlyerTalk, based on the feedback posted by fellow FlyerTalk members.
May 4, 2015, 3:48 am
#71
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,548
I agree with this statement.
Just to be clear, I did not vote no on this motion because I am against having a place on FlyerTalk to discuss this business model — in fact, I have supported discussing this business model on FlyerTalk from the beginning and still do support it.
Rather, I am simply not in full agreement with the current motion as to how it should be discussed on FlyerTalk, based on the feedback posted by fellow FlyerTalk members.
Just to be clear, I did not vote no on this motion because I am against having a place on FlyerTalk to discuss this business model — in fact, I have supported discussing this business model on FlyerTalk from the beginning and still do support it.
Rather, I am simply not in full agreement with the current motion as to how it should be discussed on FlyerTalk, based on the feedback posted by fellow FlyerTalk members.
Surely that the forum , if created, would be actively supporting and encouraging the breach of FT's own TOS makes it not something that should exist regardless. Has it been approved to change the TOS to allow the support and encouragement of criminal activity ( and driving passengers without insurance is a crime in several countries at least ) ?
I would say that the creation of any forum to cover such topics should surely be deferred until such time that it is operating legally
Last edited by Dave Noble; May 4, 2015 at 3:59 am
May 4, 2015, 4:06 am
#72
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: LHR- ish
Programs: MUCCI, BA Blue
Posts: 4,295
Getting slightly off topic here, but maybe FT needs a system for making use of people's specialised knowledge - directing people with expertise to threads where it is needed but which they haven't found themselves?
May 4, 2015, 5:24 am
#73
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: LHR
Programs: DL DM 2MM, BA Bronze, Various Hotels
Posts: 10,187
May 4, 2015, 8:18 am
#74
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Miami, Mpls & London
Programs: AA & Marriott Perpetual Platinum; DL & HH Gold
Posts: 48,952
Discussion is not advocacy. Many activities discussed on FlyerTalk are regulated or prohibited somewhere in the world. This is an argument in favor of more discussion so that those who may use ride services better understand the regulations and risks.
May 4, 2015, 9:09 am
#75
Moderator: American AAdvantage
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NorCal - SMF area
Programs: AA LT Plat; HH LT Diamond, Maître-plongeur des Muccis
Posts: 62,948
This might actually argue FOR a specific forum so that potential Über users could know where to look for information about the availability of service where they are headed. Similarly with the changing policies at various airports where Über first is, then isn't, then is again allowed to pickup, or drop off, or both. Hunting for the information now is a bit difficult.
I suspect that this is a business model that is here to stay, after first thinking powerful taxi lobbies would drive it out.
I suspect that this is a business model that is here to stay, after first thinking powerful taxi lobbies would drive it out.
