Part of the problem of basing decisions on facts is that facts ain't what they used to be. Facts today are twisted, shaded and repurposed. The internet is the new arbiter of facts. And, as Abraham Lincoln famously said, you can't trust everything you read on the internet.
Sadly, I don't have the time to verify many of them. But, when they come from a trusted source...we tend to take them at face value.
So...here's the deal. I recently came out strongly against Uber and Lyft in my monthly e-newsletter (feel free to sign up here). I was roundly toasted by many of my friends for trying to stem the tide of the new economy.
But, it's not disruption that I oppose. Hell, I disrupted the DMO consultancy world 19 years ago. I preach disruption. Just not when it compromises the needs of the many.
And, that was my fear. That Uber, providing a much better experience than traditional cabs, could negatively impact taxi service to the sketchier parts of town if it caused a cab company or two to fail.
Here was my conceit: I was operating from the position that most cab companies were required to service their entire community 24/7. Every street. Every neighborhood. Like it is here in Madison.
I recently sat down with one of my City Council members to discuss his efforts to allow Uber to co-exist with the licensed cab companies. And his research shows that there are only 9 cities in America that require cabs to service every neighborhood 24/7.
True? I don't know...but I have no reason to question someone that has done way more research and spent considerably more time on this issue than I.
So, if Scott is right...my concern is considerably tempered.
But, it begs another concern. What the hell are the rest of your cities thinking? Not requiring 24/7 to every neighborhood as a requirement of your cab companies to be licensed?
Then, why (outside of a revenue stream) are you licensing them?