地产博客 > 脱苦海・梁隼 返回
浏览人次:36814    回应:26
脱苦海・梁隼
脱苦海・梁隼
人人都想搬龙门
脱苦海
2015年8月18日

  警方高调拘捕Uber的司机及职员,甚至连办公室都搜查一翻,相信都和世界其他地方那样,官司要慢慢打。而同一时间,连一些本地的客货车App的司机,也被警方放蛇而被捕。

  坊间一些同情的声音,认为法例都系人定的,以前的法例不一定适合现在,所以政府有责任修例,好令到Uber的车辆可以买到保险,甚至可以获得法律的认可。

  换一个角度,如果有人认为,网上从事物业和股票经纪,可以豁免牌照,以利创新科技发展,可能吗?所谓网上世界,仍然是现实世界的一部份,自然要受到现实世界的法例监管。

  事实上,营业车辆可以申请牌照,虽然业界谓很难申请,要符合诸多要求,更要受到遴选委员会的批准。若果申请牌照的要求过份苛刻,遴选制度欠透明度之类,是可以有改善空间的,若Uber能协助属下的司机申请营业执照,不就解决了业务的合法性疑点吗?而不是干脆不承认制度的存在。明明有合法渠道,试也不试,却又想走法律罅无牌经营去走捷径,既然暗合香港某些人骨子里的脾性,自然就有些人出口助威。

  回顾当年当局千辛万苦,才将地产经纪行业纳入监管,真正保护了消费者的权益。现时却有些人硬要说,的士业内局部害群之马的行为,只有引入Uber的竞争才会改善。就一如硬要说无牌的经纪,服务比有牌经纪好一样。

  根据法例,没有营业执照而载客的话,第三者保险自动失效,乘客只因贪一时方便或车资差矩而冒险,到时又会有人要求,保险业界应该修例,好使坐Uber车也可以获得保险赔偿。大家都按自己的喜好和利益,去搬龙门,最终的结果必然是天下大乱,受害的不只是业界,还包括消费者在内。

 
 
我要回应
我的称呼
回应 / 意见
验证文字
 
会员登入
登入ID 或 网名
密码
1. 引刀一快 2015-08-18 16:40:03
世界潮流不可逆,面对才是最合理嘅态度。

法例系人定嘅,Uber呢类专车,节省能源消耗、环保、加大汽车同路面使用效率,方便,咁多个理由,想用保险一条金钱条件去挡住佢,有点不切实际。

香港的士系咪做得晒所有生意?亦唔系!顺应潮流,适当改变妥协,系必须嘅。做多D公衆咨询,各方做多D磋商就得架喇。

以前打仔合法,点解依家又话虐儿,要拉要锁先?世界日日都变紧嘛。
2. 路人甲 2015-08-18 17:13:32

既得利益者出嚟嘈系必然的.
法国也好, 香港也好, 很多地方的的士司机, 的士牌牌主(车主),都系会出来嘈.
净系讲HK, 的士牌最高峰725万左右, 大概跌到680-690 左近, 话唔损失就系假啦.

不过UBER 长远嚟讲, 可能真系WORKk架.
共享现有资源的概念去经营吧. 世界在变, 自从有了互联网之后, 
整个地球都出现了剧变了!

怎么发展下去? WHO KNOWS
是好是坏, 大家拭目以待吧~
3. 脱苦海的读者 2015-08-18 17:28:38
非常之混淆视听. 地产经纪要监管, 因为买卖楼动辄百万计. 硬要同撘一程车相提并论. 唔似之前脱苦海的理性分析. 苦海有的士牌系手?

回顾当年当局千辛万苦,才将地产经纪行业纳入监管,真正保护了消费者的权益。现时却有些人硬要说,的士业内局部害群之马的行为,只有引入Uber的竞争才会改善。就一如硬要说无牌的经纪,服务比有牌经纪好一样。
4. 引刀一快 2015-08-18 17:35:38
以前原油两蚊筒嘅时代,D车唔系向节油嘅方向设计,油贵咗,咁就造就悭油日本车,唔跟住潮流走嘅底特律,由美国前五变成依家咁。
香港当然系中国前五无疑,估计亦唔会变底特律,但系我地应该有既定嘅方向,看得远,正是香港过去嘅优势。
5. 遗稳 2015-08-18 18:06:53
脱苦海最好还是写楼市杂务的文章,老实说,他的维稳文字功力很弱,只可缩在一个封闭论坛,不能留言既新闻网和其他思想闭塞的人互相取䁔。
其实系飞机发明之前,地主有权唔比其他人系土地上空飞过,之前发觉唔系办法,先改为120米。
拿,呢D咪系"搬龙门"
佢都系唔好撘飞机,因为都系搬龙门既结果!
6. 好多事 2015-08-19 01:39:43
香港当年好多人做白牌车,利字当头治安存在稳患,市面一片混乱,终於政府立法要有出租车许可证先可收钱载客。家下又话创新科技白牌车环保节能方便高效率,多多理由增取合法化咁唔系又回头行番条旧路,成街白牌。有人话唔同,哩啲系高级尊贵便捷交通工具,科技发展下之必然産物。都啱就发出营运牌照啦,发三千个够唔够?咁咪又系的士牌!不过就系用欧洲高级车嘅贵收费电召计程车,睇你的士商投唔投牌做罗。而唔系低成本无牌抢生意,仲话你做得晒咩?正如你啲钱用唔晒,人家抢啲用可以吗?合法吗?
7. 加息 2015-08-19 06:54:24
的士不发牌是保护消费者的权益吗?

营业车辆可以申请牌照很难申请, 保护谁的利益呢?

龙门


8. Alan Pepper 2015-08-19 10:55:58
这是一个只指出问题,不提出解决方案的文章。现在每个人都知道 UBER 是现有法例的灰色地带。但现实是香港人很需要优质服务宁愿俾多啲钱都要多啲享受,是受惠者。而业界分两种,牌主及从业员。从业员应该是得益者,因为从此唔驶再打一个老板工(牌主),工作时间也可以更灵活。而牌主是受害者,因为牌价将受到威胁。但这种科技唔理你喜唔喜欢,今日有 UBER,明日亦有 XBER。香港七百万人区区咁细小的地方系无法阻挡全球性科技发展的。只要我哋好好把握呢一个机会,应该每一位既得利益者都有着数,包括牌主在内。

牌主亦应该积极面对这一个现实,单去示威系冇用的。枱面示威,枱底应该积极同政府商讨可持续合作模式。例如的士招车的牌照包括 UBER 在内,只是 UBER 可以用比较灵活的运作模式,牌是跟 USER,唔系跟车。UBER 有 1000 个牌,就只可同时间有1000个司机接单。用一个排筹形式做生意。攞唔筹到嘅就冇得载客。虽然这有可能令到道路上更多车,但我觉得这是荒谬的。有很多人原本搭的士改用 UBER,但亦有很多本来揸车的改用。这些人选择用的士或者UBER的时候系唔会搭巴士的。道路使用应该唔会恶化。UBER 亦会减少很多空车行驶,呢个唔使我解释,上网搵下就得。

现在的士牌主的利益又怎样保障呢?首先,买车牌系一种投资,冇话一定赚嘅,广告都日日唱喇。政府只系保障买卖双方同意下交易,没有欺诈成份,冇包生仔嘅。不过,并不代表冇弯转。我想问,假设现在有30000个的士牌,而 UBER 参加之后,的士牌可以转让或出租给 UBER ,但系唔会增加俾 UBER 又怎样?的士牌(或者应该叫营运牌)数量不变为 30000。咁样的士牌的市场价钱及收入来源无变,咁就已经保障到的士牌主。当然法例上及具体上需要调整,但系呢啲技术上嘅问题一定可以解决。

牌主亦应该当作这是商机,不是危机。UBER 在美国已经令到本来揸车的人选择唔揸车。这些全部都系生意。香港有很多人唔喜欢搭巴士/的士,又唔想请司机。被逼自己揸车的(你估租个车位排队泊车再行十五分钟先返到公司好过瘾呀?)。只要法例上好好规管,业界整合,系可以做大个饼的。我觉得反而最大受害者系停车场业主先啱!

亦唔使理 UBER 肯唔肯俾牌费,佢要响我地头做生意,就要 follow our rules. 条数佢自己识计,有钱赚佢一定做。佢想唔俾钱做生意?冇咁易,送埋张大床俾你好唔好。当然唔可以俾佢乱来,一定要规管。不过唔好再好似以前咁样,买奶粉?坐监!这是不思进取的做法。

我哋亦无须担心 UBER 出千,明明得1000个牌比1200个司机运作。技术上电脑可以解决。行为上,佢想继续做生意,就唔会冒呢个险。正正经经有钱搵,点会打烂自己个饭碗咁戆居?

至於保险你唔使同佢担心,有钱赚嘅生意佢亦一定会做,佢哋自己懂得点计。

如果香港今次可以快过星加坡解决呢个问题,总算威番次。我觉得星加坡政府已经同 UBER 坐低倾紧啦,只系睇下我哋香港点衰,揿住个嘴笑之后再作出决定。香港人,醒下啦!
9. Alan Pepper 2015-08-19 11:22:22
再讲,的士牌主亦可买新豪华车或VAN,上 UBER 赚取高消费群的钱。这在 Economics 上叫 Two Part Pricing. 是一种产品上收取两个价钱。这今天不解释,我冇时间。

这是商机,不是危机啊!请把握!
10. Alan Pepper 2015-08-19 11:30:56
这是 UBER 在新加坡的新闻,比较香港的。WAKE UP HK PEOPLE!!!

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/life-as-an-uber-driver-a/1979836.html

Life as an Uber driver: A fast road to easy money? 

With private car services like Uber gaining popularity in Singapore, more people are trying their luck at becoming a driver. But what are the realities of life behind the wheel? 938LIVE reporter Lee Gim Siong went on the road to find out.

Behind the wheel of an Uber car. (Photo: Lee Gim Siong)
  •  1827
  •  
  •  22
  •  
  •  20
  •  
  •  Email
  •  More

SINGAPORE: "You shouldn't have taken this exit! I haven't met a driver who would take this route to Pasir Panjang!  It's not about the money, I'm already running late."

My second passenger on my first day as an Uber driver was furious about my lack of route knowledge.

Just an hour into my 12-hour shift and I was already questioning whether doing this full-time would be worth the hassle.

It was the day after last week’s massive MRT disruption, and there were plenty of people trying to book me as an Uber driver rather than risk trying to get to their destination by train.  And with the previous night’s disruption in mind, some people seemed to be on edge.

Uber, a ride-matching app from California, works by having a passenger key in their location and destination. Available drivers then take the booking if they want.

"ALWAYS AVAILABLE"

My day began in relaxed style in the wee hours of the morning in a dimly-lit carpark in Serangoon. I was there to collect the keys to a Nissan Latio sedan from 32-year-old Jay, a fellow Uber driver.

As part of our agreement, I was to be her relief driver for a day and would use her car, which was covered under a commercial insurance scheme.

With that, I found myself cutting my teeth as a chauffeur to a myriad of clients.

My first booking came 15 minutes after I hit the road. Punggol resident San needed a lift to Paya Lebar Air Base.

I tried to get the conversation flowing during the 20-minute journey by asking if she was taking an Uber service because of the MRT disruption. She said that she’s a regular user.

"I stay in Punggol and during rush hours, like 7am to 9am, it's really difficult to get a taxi. My worst experience was when I waited for one hour on the road and there was no taxi. I tried to call but there was no cab. It was a really bad experience," she said.

She added that Uber was "always available", hence her preference for it. 

"CREAMING OFF PROFITS"

While ride-matching apps seem to work for passengers, taxi drivers are unhappy about their popularity.

There have been calls for greater regulation of the industry to prevent such apps from "creaming off profits", as National Taxi Association advisor Ang Hin Kee put it.

Ranking high among their grievances are the cheaper rental rates - daily taxi rents range from S$75 to S$100 a day, whereas a car for Uber use can be had for as little as S$50 per day (although I paid S$150 as this was a one-off experiment rather than a regular arrangement).

There are also concerns that these newcomers are not required to obtain a vocational licence, unlike taxi drivers.

In response, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) has said it is studying further measures to ensure commuter interests are preserved when using these services. These include making it compulsory for such drivers to obtain a vocational license, and imposing stricter penalties for the improper use of private cars.

I asked San if she had any concerns over the perceived lower entry barriers for Uber drivers.

"You're on the road (and this) means you're licensed to drive. That's a minimum pre-requisite. Safety wise, I think it's like taking your friend's car. You're leaving your life in the hands of a friend. It's no different. I am still taking his car and I get to my destination," she said. "It doesn't mean that you have a cab license, you drive safely. I've met cab drivers who drive recklessly!"

EASY MONEY?

In Singapore, Uber runs background checks on potential drivers before approving their application. The rest of the process to get started is very easy: all I had to do was register with my identification card and a driving licence. That was the green light for me to get going.

But is life as an Uber driver financially viable?

My basic fare was S$3.50, with an additional S$0.25 per minute and a S$0.50 per kilometre charge.

At those rates, I made a total of $85 from the 7 passengers I picked up during the day: not enough to cover the cost of renting the car plus petrol.

I was a lazy driver, though, and could have made much more. The app was pinging throughout my shift, and I could have easily reached S$200, which other Uber drivers told me is an average day’s taking for those who are willing to work hard.

And those who want to get behind the wheel can work efficiently, and according to their preferences.  Unlike taxi drivers who have to cruise looking for fares, Uber drivers can only take bookings over the app. That means that they need only hit the road when there’s money to be made.

Once a booking is accepted by a driver, it cannot be cancelled – even though destinations will only be made known after the driver has picked up the passenger. This gives predictability about getting a ride, which many of my passengers said gave Uber an advantage over regular taxis.

"It's just more convenient for me. Taxi drivers choose where they want to go: You see a green sign coming, you get so excited, but they don't want to go where you want to go. It can get very frustrating," said David, who was travelling from Sembawang to Pasir Ris.

But while people seem to like the idea of Uber, they can be just as demanding as regular taxi passengers.

Even though I knew where I was going most of the time, and had a GPS for backup, I was hit by a constant barrage of instructions about what route to take by all my passengers. This added to my stress, and meant that I was happy to hand the car back to Jay at the end of the day.

Becoming a full-time Uber driver isn’t for me.  I’ll stick to reporting. But it does have some appeal, as a way of making some extra money on a part-time basis.

For those with more drive though, the combination of Uber’s popularity and the ease right now of getting started means it could be a reasonably attractive full-time job.

- 938LIVE/vc

11. 不平则鸣 2015-08-19 11:37:33
脱兄讲的是公道说话, 无牌就是无牌, 犯法就是犯法, 点可以"按自己的喜好和利益,去搬龙门" 支持脱兄!
12. 经济人 2015-08-19 11:58:53

时穷仍见节,脱苦海不但对地权历史无知,更加系只爱为利益份子发声,但与市民同扩大司机为敌既人X。

林行止在《信报》专栏表示,自94年开始,政府未发出一个新的的士牌照,无视人口激增及游客蜂拥而至的现实,令牌照价最近的成交纪录为2013年的766万,比2009年暴增八成。但的士牌照价格飞升,不仅职业的士司机无法分享,司机的收入还相应下降。


Uber 绕过法律,打破垄断。如果揸Uber收入较高,由於揸的士的技能与揸Uber车类近,的士司机要转揸Uber车并不困难,自然多人转行,的士牌主必需减牌租,才有人愿意揸的士,最后的士牌租会下降,司机无论揸哪种车种,收入扣除车租油费,都会等於他的边际劳工产出。

因此,如果市场完全开放,因为不需再付垄断租金,市民付出的车费应该比现在低,服务比现在好。加入竞争的长远效果,是增加了司机相对於牌主的议价能力,租贵蚕蚀收入,司机可转行,结果不是司机收入下跌,而是牌租下降。 

13. Yes 2015-08-19 12:27:36
Yes not only to Uber but also to more of this kind of App.(no monopoly). But needs regulations. 
The discount taxi is a similar app. gaining popularity (although illegal).
Interest of taxi industry? 8/F brother explains well enough. We must ride on the tides of 
modernization.


14. 望东楼 2015-08-19 13:39:16
Consider if Uber is going to win these cases, then the next day, you should expect Aber to Zber are emerging from nowhere to compete for 'business'. Things may be getting out of control very soon. 

At this stage, Uber is charging a premium over regular taxi fare so its more a complement than competition. But when Aber & co. are coming into the market, god knows.
15. 望东楼 2015-08-19 13:54:27
大家都认为他的服务较好、车子的质素较高,但这是必然的,皆因它们不需付的士牌价,这好比一间餐厅不用付租金一样,当然可以提供更佳的食物和服务。
简而言之,的士牌照拥有者,是经济学上的「寻租」,坐地分享不停升值的道路使用权,而Uber则是另外的一种寻租,大家都是更多地使用道路,却不用额外的收费。只是的士的寻租,是由牌照拥有者独享了,而Uber的寻租,则由司机和乘客一起「打劫」了政府,如此而已 - 周显 
16. Alan Pepper 2015-08-19 14:45:56
To. PN

如果只是钱的问题,那就容易解决吧。请参考 8/F. 如同意,请转贴。希望对化解现有问题有帮助。

科技发展,我们传统生意是不能抵挡的,只有在新时代下寻找生存空间。全世界有几个国家睇死我哋香港,坐以待毙不是一个办法
17. to 6/f 2015-08-19 22:53:31
极端d讲成个世界9成9人口极穷,0.1成人多钱到用黎烧既...

甘真系的确系需要分黎比人用架!
世界资源已经被0.1成既人抢左,你觉得个世界重可以和平吗?唔好天真啦!
18. Alan Pepper 2015-08-20 10:21:03
今早听电台香蛇节目,9:25分提及 UBER 可用现时出租车法例解决,现在有 1500 个牌,只用了700多个,而这是二十多年前的法例,可检讨及参考。

而现有的士牌主亦应积极发展多元化服务,是可以做大个饼,赚取更多利润的。买豪华的士或七人车上 UBER TAXI 已经发生。平有平座,贵有贵座,客户及从业员可选择自己喜欢的老板及服务,牌主又可增值赚取更多利润。三赢啊!

如的士及UBER服务提高,我弟一个唔渣车返工,可以悭返时间车位油费。


19. CD ROM 2015-08-20 16:49:34
将Uber模式放返系的士已经有条件大受欢迎啦!!!  

到时的士佬自己搅个apps飞起埋UBER都仲得, 又合法, 皆大欢喜~~~
20. 好多事 2015-08-21 00:50:52
感谢17楼C兄,未想过会有人忙里偷闲,都回应小弟一编幼嫩嘅文章,确实系有哟惊喜。
亦明白极端谂法系有极端谂法嘅原因而执著,正如有部份人会坚持一如既往嘅信念,和平,守法,有序咁继续天真下去,呢点系无用置疑。
好多谢C兄指教。
21. Eversmann 2015-08-29 15:03:33
经纪的服务在於撮合买卖。在小众市场、偏门范畴,经纪的价值可以很大,反之,在大众市场,经纪可以提供的附加价值有限,无甚存在价值。

地产经纪的生存土壤,在於买卖双方未能作出广泛且直接的资讯交流。如果有有效的住宅买卖配对平台,大部份地产经纪都会被淘汰。
22. to 20/f 2015-08-29 22:54:17
同意,一个专门既平台,免费既Q&A,同埋同一般市民普反既教育.已经可以取代废柴地产佬呢个行业!其实地产佬识既野其少无比!吹水吹到上水呀婆都呃唔到.真系唔明点解可以生存!班友转行做清洁都冇资格啦!
23. 引刀一快 2015-08-30 03:18:35
有本事连网购都ban埋佢吖,好多网商都冇营业执照咯。

我前晚先刚刚坐并车,人家番屋企跑长途,唔争在坐多个人,我就俾的士四成半车费,两家便宜三家着,因爲:

1,如果我坐的士,咁即系同时两部车,三个人去我目的地,去程耗油双倍,两个人到家,另一个人(的士司机)可能要空车回原地,实则耗油系三倍!

2,并车坐多个人唔会增加太多负载,一般嚟讲,车设计负载范围内,坐人越多,油耗效率越高。(每人独立计)

3,夜晚喺大陆坐长途的士,司机经常拒载或讲价,依家唔驶“咁难爲”佢地喇,以后都唔驶呀。
24. 引刀一快 2015-08-30 03:24:48
To 21楼  Eversmann兄

其实经纪有佢地嘅存在价值,佢地

1,可以提高物业转化效率、配对效率。
2,作爲缓冲,促成买卖。
3,作爲第三者公证,代爲处理交易中一般人不熟悉的部份。
还有很多很多..............

25. Eversmann 2015-08-30 15:49:18
引刀一快,你好。

做得到你所讲的,当然有价值。可惜,现今大部分地产代理还可以生存,只因物业投资者未被教育及未有更简明的替代品出现。

地产代理被淘汰是必然的:
1. 不专业,在交易过程中没有不可或缺的地位。
2. 双边代理,另一种不专业,完全无视利益冲突。
3. 收费不合理,律师处理几百万的物业交易合约,收一万,地产代理收三万,而且后者需要对交易作出的承担比前者少。
4. 暴利,按成交价约1%收费在大部分情况下都是不合理地高,而丰厚的利润会吸引竞争者加入。

随住科技启动更多可能性,我估十年内地产代理会开始被淘汰,就如以前的股票经纪一样。
27. Marie 2015-09-07 00:48:16
在香港,地产霸权及自由行多年来不断祸害港人生活。君不见现在满街金行药房海味店及所谓"电子免税店",而且全部都是"服务"内地人的奸商骗子!!! 香港真的需要这么多游客店吗? 政府又没有把关执法,导致现在香港旅游业声名狼藉。
 
事实上在香港消费真的是贴钱买难受,租金昂贵令餐厅商店地方异常挤迫,服务态度又恶劣,货品价钱又因租金贵得离谱,满街都是"服务"内地游容的老千骗徒,市容越来越差,计程车司机态度恶劣,车厢就像垃圾房般;去过日本旅游,回到香港一分钱也不想在此消费!! 商户为了交租千术百出,货品价钱每一区都跟游客区一样高昂,商户都要谋取暴利来交租,市民用大部分工资供楼房,根本无力再消费!! 
 
这些所有退步坠落跟民不聊生都是地产霸权跟自由行洐生出来的祸害。香港一年到晚只懂吹嘘自己是购物天堂,目的只是想赚尽内地人金钱,完全将旅客体验跟感受置之不理,连旅游业都因此弄得无耻过人。在地产霸权同自由行这些"容易钱"之下,香港人真的已变得又笨又迟钝……香港过去赚钱太过容易,引致各行各业都落后於人,现在大围环境逆转无力转身,根本完全不值一分可怜!!
 
另一方面,地产商根本没有当过"本地客"是人,好像尿壶一样,不需要时嫌我们臭,现在尿急(生意跌)又要爬过来要本地人救他,,真是厚颜无耻。现在香港自立能力已被地产商和自由行彻底毁灭,现在他们是大得不能倒(too big to fail), 依靠他们就比他们吸干,不靠的话香港人自己现在又已经什么都不懂。如此下去,香港人只会继续世世代代做地产商嘅奴隶。
 
所以大家要用实际行动say NO,坚决拒绝在香港消费。 不要纵容劣质服务/产品及地产霸权继续为害香港。 为了后代,其实身为香港人,无论什么派别都应枪口一致去殊灭此祸!地产霸权一日还在,香港旅业及民生都系死路一条!衣食住行基本需要消费当然不可拒绝,但我们可以选择不要一年换一次手机,拒绝一星期一次昂贵自助餐,不要买一堆自己都用不完的衣服同化妆品,尽量在家造饭,删减一些无谓的冲动消费,这样子已经足够。
 
没有自由行之前香港是否贫穷地区?经济结构同劳动力足会自动调节,正正香港人就系因为自由行跟地产太过赚钱,造成今日产业单一化跟劳动力流动性低,做老板投资地产坐定定年年超高回报,开金行药房海味店保证赚大钱,为什么要做实业慢慢来?人家星加坡产业均衡,互惠互利,他们一样没有资源,更加不像香港有中央支持xx通及什么贸易协定,人家人均GDP早已超越我们香港了,人家没有地产霸权,也没有一年几千万自由行撑住,看看星加坡,大家就知道根本整个剧本就是发展商、大商家这些既得利益者跟港府编出来的大话: 香港一定"需要"高楼价跟自由行去续命。
 
如对香港有心,请将上文用FB或WhatsApp广传出去,利用每分力量救救香港,谢谢!