Ihr kostenloser Branchen-Newsletter
Lassen Sie sich von unseren Fachjournalisten einmal wöchentlich über die wichtigsten aktuellen Entwicklungen der Taxi-Branche informieren, bequem direkt in Ihre Mailbox.
Aktueller Termin
Meist gelesen
Pricing simulation as an app campaign: Why 'UberTeuert' misses the core of the debate.
The platform operator, with this app campaign, of course, is by no means providing enlightenment; rather, the campaign is another example of special-interest politics – this time with digital means. For years, not only the taxi associations have pointed out that competition in urban passenger transport does not operate on the same rules. While taxis are bound by tariffs, have to fulfill transportation obligations, and must be available around the clock, many hire-car companies operate with considerably more flexible – and often hard-to-control – structures. The consequence: prices arise not solely through efficiency, but often through systematic underbidding.
The price as a political instrument
Uber speaks of an “artificial price increase.” In reality, it is the other way around: minimum prices correct an artificially depressed market. If trips are today offered at terms that are barely economically viable, the question arises how these prices could possibly come about. Without binding lower limits, price pressure arises that affects not only companies, but also worsens working conditions and undercuts government revenues. Minimum prices are, in this understanding, not a market intervention, but an instrument to restore competition.
Questionable body of evidence
Uber bases its argument, among other things, on calculations by the Institute of the German Economy. The study forecasts declining demand, fewer jobs, and rising private traffic. However, the cited study appears less as a neutral analysis and more as a partisan argument in favor of a questionable business model.
First, because they rely on assumptions that perpetuate the status quo: low prices, high availability, little regulatory impact. Second, because they overlook key differences between taxi and rental-car transport. The platform model only works because costs are externalized or regulatory gaps are exploited; the aforementioned study completely ignores this.
What a minimum price is actually supposed to achieve
The debate is often reduced to the question of whether rides generally become more expensive. That is likely. However, what is crucial is what emerges in return: a market in which providers operate under comparable conditions.
For the taxi industry this means above all planning certainty. Those who drive under fare-regulated rates cannot respond flexibly to dumping prices. Without minimum prices in the rental-car sector, a structural imbalance arises. A minimum charge would slow down this spiral at least. It would not solve all problems, but set a framework in which competition can again be driven by quality, availability and service—not solely by the lowest price.
The Perspective of Users
Uber argues in the interests of the riders. Higher prices, so the thesis goes, would constrain mobility. That is a valid point – but only part of the reality. Mobility is more than short-term availability at the lowest possible cost. In fact, in the discussion one must not overlook that the platform operators can only present the low transportation costs by deliberately circumventing laws and social standards. In reality, the general public pays for the mobility of Uber users.
The taxi performs functions that go beyond the market: nighttime provision, the obligation to transport, integration into public transport. These services cannot be made arbitrarily flexible. They require stable economic foundations. If prices are kept permanently below this threshold, not only does a business model disappear – but a part of the public infrastructure disappears.
A Political Decision
The introduction of minimum prices is ultimately not a technical, but a matter of regulatory policy. It decides whether the state actively shapes competition or largely leaves it to platform logics. Of course, Uber tries to influence this decision with the campaign “UberTeuert” – with a clear thrust. For the taxi industry, the answer is equally clear: Without minimum prices, competition remains distorted. And a distorted competition ultimately benefits neither drivers nor riders.
Content automatically translated.
Taxi-Fahrzeuge (Pkw) , Taxi-Newsletter, Taxameter, Taxi-Fahrer , BZP – Deutscher Taxi- und Mietwagenverband , Straßenverkehrsordnung (StVO) , Krankenbeförderung , Weiterbildung , Taxi-Konzessionen , Verkehrspolitik , Mietwagenbranche , Taxi-Apps , Berufskraftfahrer-Qualifikations-Gesetz BKrFQG) , Taxizentralen , Personal, Gehälter, Arbeitsschutz , Wirtschaftsnachrichten , Werbung , Taxi-Folierung , Taxi-Umrüster , Straßenverkehr , Elektromobilität, Taxifuhrpark und -flottenmanagement , Taxi-Versicherungen , Hybrid, Diesel, Erdgas , Taxi-Magazin
