LAX becomes largest U.S. airport to allow Uber, Lyft pickups | Hacker News Reader

LAX becomes largest U.S. airport to allow Uber, Lyft pickups

latimes.com

173 pointsdenzil_correa122 comments

I used to live in Playa del Rey, which is maybe 10 minutes from LAX. There's a minimum fare for cabs of something like $17, which I was forced to pay. But the worst part was that every freaking time the cab driver would give me attitude for the short fare (ostensibly because they have to wait in that long line). What do you want me to do? Walk an hour home carrying my luggage? Uber and Lyft are a complete blessing.

Despite all these taxi regulations which are supposedly there to protect the consumer, all they did was create an entrenched oligopoly, where taxi companies were complacent because they basically lacked competition and didn't have to increase the quality of their service. But now that people have an alternative and are eschewing cab services in droves, they are crying bloody murder. Stop blaming the consumer, lobby to get rid of the medallion/regulatory model, and get ready to finally compete (or perish)!

I live in Playa del Rey now and absolutely detest thinking about taking a cab home. I almost have to ensure I mention a nice tip so the cabbie doesn't roll his eyes.

Usually I just say that I'll give turn by turn directions instead of just saying where I'm going.

So is Uber less expensive than the taxi 17usd? Or just polite about it? Or coming in from out of the city to get you ?

I don't get why 17 bucks to an uber driver is worse or better than 17 to taxi? Uber has to wait for their next to surely ?

a ten minute drive on uber near me was around 7 bucks.

Have you ever used uber? There's no tipping, no "credit card isn't working" bs, cars are generally nicer/have water, drivers more polite (because there are ratings)... I'd pay more to use an uber to be honest.

Uber shouldn't have to wait in line with the other taxis, since they're there to pick up a specific individual, and not any random person looking for a taxi.

Uber is acting more like a friend/relative picking you up than anything else, and as such, the $17 fare represents a $17 fare (or whatever the amount happens to be), and not "a 15 minute wait for a measly $17 fare".

Like airplanes, taxis are only making money when they're in transit with a fare. So, because they're losing money waiting in line, it discourages them taking short fares because it doesn't give them the opportunity to make as much money, lowering their overall hourly rate.

It isn't about the money, it is all about attitude.

I have bags, it is too far to walk, and I just need to get to the hotel. I don't want to feel like an ass for asking for help getting there.

Being in a car where the driver does not want you in it is uncomfortable. Having to pay for that feeling is just as bad. I have had situations where I have been at an airport or a hotel and the cab driver doesn't want to drive me to the location, and there is a doorman or someone else yelling at the driver that they will take me.

Charge me more. I just want to get to my hotel or to the airport.

Related, I hate the uncertainty of tipping. I go out of my way to not take cabs because I never know if I tipped enough or overpaid. Just tell me how much to pay and no attitude.

The Uber fare is cheaper for sure. However, even the taxi fare was only about $10 at the time. The point is that they have a minimum fare from the airport, and part of the drivers' discontent probably comes from the fact that they have to explain this policy to customers (who predictably don't like being forced to pay it).

Uber drivers are civil because there are actually consequences for them if they are not.

You ever call up a cab company to complain about one of their drivers being rude? They laugh and hang up. There is zero accountability for a rude cab driver.

> Despite all these taxi regulations which are supposedly there to protect the consumer, all they did was create an entrenched oligopoly

Economists call this phenomenon "Regulatory Capture". It is one of the most important things to be aware of if you want to understand modern society.

Brief intro: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/regulatory-capture.asp

My dad is in Westchester so I fly in to LAX and have the exact same problem! It was so ridiculous the way cab drivers would give me so much attitude for a short fare that I was being hugely overcharged for. I eventually gave up and started walking 20 minutes to In N Out, and getting an Uber from there. Glad to see the tides are changing!

Try Wingz.me or Blacklane.com for pickup alternatives. Both are scheduled, not on-demand, and in both cases the driver actually wanted that fare (they can see your destination and optimize their schedule based on that, which partially explains lower prices than UberX or UberBlack).

Wingz.me is great, I've used it twice and had no trouble.

I entered my house to SFO in blacklane and wingz to see their prices, and they seem to be a little bit higher than taking uber would be. Getting an uber from SFO is usually just 4 minutes of waiting.

So it seems like these guys are basically surge / traffic insurance?

Good point, my departure point is usually LAX where the words "surge / traffic insurance" should not be spoken lightly.

I got the cab attitude at SJC once for the same reason. I had to go to work, which was literally next door (property abutted the airport). Unfortunately there is no easy way to walk and I had luggage anyway.

When I told the cabbie where I was going, he got out of the car and started yelling at the dispatcher. They almost got into a fight until the dispatcher informed the driver that he is required to take me to keep his medallion.

He refused to talk to me for the entire 5 minute trip.

I felt bad because I knew he had waited in the long line, so I gave him $20 for the $9 fare.

Wow, I wish I could get all pissy and yell at my customers when they ask me to do things that are mildly inconvenient for me, but I am required by law to do. Your situation is why Uber exists.

But where's the law that ensures that Uber will take this fare over other (more profitable) fares?

Uber drivers don't see the destination until they start the trip. According to the drivers in London.

So Uber stops drivers (for now), but what guarantees exist that Uber will keep doing that if they feel they can make more money that way? Or adding a 20x surge charge? This is why regulation exists that bans discrimination.

If they start refusing trips or jack the price I will take my business to lyft. Competition dissuades companies from engaging in that type of behavior far better than legislation ever would.

No guarantees. Why do you need guarantees? What's the cost of downloading the competitor's app? Even make your own non-discriminatory rideshare service, but if it's not sustainable, don't force the cost on others.

Regulations that attempt to guarantee total security while favoring entrenched interests are exactly why the current horrible taxi cab situation exists.

Freedom to compete is like bleach to the pathologies of entrenched lazy players.

He drove you next door, I think $9 was probably generous to begin with.

I think it's reasonable if you consider the opportunity cost of waiting in the queue for airport customers, instead of searching elsewhere.

Maybe if they didn't have a queue and instead used an on demand app...

...then what?

I'm not sure what problem you think you're solving here: the existence of a queue suggests that they're slightly over capacity in cars, and thus something like Uber would still have to rotate the fares between the drivers.

Of course, there are perfectly sensible reasons that you need to have extra capacity available at an airport as a metro area, and thus we have the question of how best to provide surge capacity to the airport.

All the answers I can think of, including an "on demand app", involve waiting in some kind of queue managed by someone.

So could you please finish your sentence?

... then they could take fares around the airport and get matched for an actual ride at the airport without having to wait in line idly. The difference here is that they can make better use of their time while still possibly getting an airport fare, if that's what they desire for some reason.

Was that so difficult?

That's what airport cabbies near where i live in India now do. The queue is really long (such that they may only get 1 or 2 rides the whole day), but now they take Uber/Olacab rides while waiting for their slot.

Often the airport is in the middle of nowhere that really doesn't need frequent local cab service.

..then when they make their drop off, they'll have another fare request waiting for them and their downtime will be absolutely minimal.

If increased demand exists at the airport, pricing increases until capacity is met. This is a much more natural governor than simply creating a queue at projected in demand areas.

I paid a huge fare once for a long drive home from the airport (in Chicago) because I didn't feel like taking the L as planned. Of course, the taxi driver also had attitude about that, because apparently they are acustomed to quickly flipping back and forth from the nearby hotels, not driving all the way into the city to drop people off. I have avoided taking taxis as much as possible because I hate the attitudes that many of the drivers have. I actually find I'm more willing to pay for an Uber/Lyft because the drivers are usually pleasant, or at least not actively hostile.

It's $15 minimum fare from SJC. Strange that the meter would read $9. Check the posted fare card.

This was many years ago. Also I was looking before we stopped. It's possible that it ticked up when he hit the "finish" button.

I wouldn't have tipped him a single fucking cent. What does he expect people to do, move further away from the airport just for him?

Cab drivers like him are shitheads, and are the reason that Uber is doing so well.

Taxi driver's attitude problems are the main reason why I wish uber would take over. I was in Vegas recently and got a taxi to take me ~0.8 miles. He was so sarcastic about how he was happy for me that it's such a short trip. I don't need any of that attitude when I hop in a a car. I have almost always had pleasant conversations with my uber drivers. Customer service is so important and it seems like uber got it right.

My pet peeve is when drivers try to tell me that their machine to process credit cards is broken and I need to pay in cash (so that they can avoid a payment processing fee). When I respond that I don't have any cash and that they're just going to have to give me the ride for free, miraculously they are able to resolve the problem and take my card...

Also when you need change, all of a sudden they have $0 on them.

I'm sympathetic to the medallion cost/lock-in situation, but in my experience in the US, taxis have always provided a vastly inferior experience to something like Uber. You get attitude for anything bar a giant tip, you get trashy cars, etc. With every Uber I used, the drivers were friendly and enthusiastic, the cars were excellent and the app/setup is obviously a huge improvement over anything taxis do.

What gets me is that there is nothing stopping taxis improving their customer service, ditching their attitude, not filling their cars with advertising or pushing for big tips, or creating a decent app that everyone wants. That is all within their control. And they didn't do it when there wasn't competition and they've failed to do it since.

What stops them is the lack of incentive. Because fares are regulated and customers have very little control over who their next driver will be, there's literally no incentive to do anything more than the minimum necessary -- they won't earn any more. Quite the contrary, if they don't push for big tips or fill their cars with ads, they'll earn less!

Uber coming at them should be incentive enough. People speaking favourably of Uber and less so of taxis should be incentive enough.

The entrenched always spend more on a gradually weakening defence of their turf than they do on improving or going on the attack. Mainstream news (newspapers, etc) are the same.

I feel for the guys who bought the medallions but are somehow pinned under a brand or group that won't innovate. The investment in the medallion prevents them from just driving for Uber, but the actions of those up the chain doesn't improve their situation at all.

Stupid thing is that so many of the things they could/should have done wouldn't have been obscenely expensive.

I think what the parent is saying is that you need to watch what you mean when you say "them" in the context of incentive.

If a single cab driver or small company stops doing these things he takes 100% of the downside (loses the extra ad and tip revenue) and 1 millionth of the upside (making people like taxis more in general so that the industry can compete with Uber). They don't have repeat business. Customers choose/are sent taxis randomly. Prices are fixed. Hence, there is no way for "signals" to travel up and down rewarding and punishing better and worse operators.

But they have the possibility of exit, right? They generally don't own the car or medallion, but only rent them, so it's pretty easy for them to jump ship and use their personal car for UberX/Lyft. That in turn should bid down medallion/car rental fees and thus the driver take-home gross, even with constant taxi rates for passengers.

"but in my experience in the US, taxis have always provided a vastly inferior experience to something like Uber"

Agreed. But also, taxis in the US have always provided a vastly inferior experience to taxis in other countries. I live in the UK and have zero complaints about cabs here. I've never had a good experience in the USA.

I think the UK is heavily dependent on where you're ordering the taxi. Some cities are truly awful. Nottingham is the worst I've personally seen for taxis, but always had good service in Leeds.

Taxis in Australia (where I live) are fine. The ordering experience is a bit annoying, but they're pleasant drivers, decent cars, etc. If you're hailing on the street (outside a pub, for example), it's fine.

I seriously dislike taxis in the US primarily because of the tipping pressure. Seems to make the drivers miserable somehow.

In Asia, I have walked huge distances just to avoid having to haggle with a driver or have them reject a fare they don't like. The experience there is pretty poor as a tourist where there is a large incentive for them to hold out for someone naive.

Similar problem in Melbourne, Australia.

The taxi lobby groups have stopped a train line being built from the city to the airport (20 miles) so cabs are the only realistic way to get home with a 25 minutes journey costing $70.

Skybus is $18, which is not great, but it's better than $70 and it does run ridiculously frequently. It's pretty quick in traffic too, since it uses the carpool lane.

Edit: So long as you can deal with the sometime nausea inducing movement.

Yeah the Skybus is actually fine but its the last place you want to be after a 15h flight from LA (and you have to then get a train/tram connection).

I've never got it in peak traffic as always seemed risky in regards to missing your flight. Good to hear it uses the carpool lane.

I've told this story before on HN but I'll tell it again here. On current Google Maps statistics I used lived 18km/24minutes from the airport in Melbourne while the CBD is 23km/22minutes away (faster roads to get to the CBD). Getting a taxi home one time the driver berated me and told me I shouldn't have taken a cab for such a short trip. It wasn't like he was grumpy, he was literally telling me off in the street, after I'd got out and couldn't see his driver ID of course. According to Google maps it takes 3h30m to walk from the airport back to where I was living so I suppose I should have done that.

I think he needed to see a mental health professional.

>Stop blaming the consumer, lobby to get rid of the medallion/regulatory model

That's your advice to working class cabbies? Shut the fuck up and donate more money to politicians?

I'd be a lot more sympathetic if their unions didn't create the regulatory hell-hole that we call the cab market of 2015.

The fact that there's somebody out there who think unions invented medallions so that investors could profit from taxicab drivers blows my mind.

Unions, when invented, were a great thing. That anybody thinks there's still any good unions around proves P.T. Barnum right: There's a sucker born every minute.

The sad thing is that in Europe the employee unions managed to sell many benefits as reasonable for the employer unions, like: - Paid sickleave that doesn't count as vacation - Several weeks of vacation per year - Voluntary and paid overtime for all workers, including salaried - Maternity/paternity leave of several months - Several month notice for layoffs - Minimum wages high enough to support you

Of course it's not all sunshine and rainbows, there are all kinds on smaller stupid things the unions insist keeping alive as they might worsen the benefits of some workers (even if they would benefit some other workers).

They also have managed to make themselves seemingly irrevelevant, as many younger workers believe all those existing benefits are rights that cannot be taken away.

Some of the main benefits of unions are now rights that cannot be taken away. More things are laws that will be hard to change, even if Unions were to suddenly disappear. OSHA rules, workers comp, etc, will not go away easily. Unions have bloated and stagnated in their bargaining power, though, and I do think collective bargaining would work much better with smaller, more nimble groups and better, more modern methods of communication.

Not to mention the absolute lack of _usable_ public transportation. It is laughable what they got there compare to any major city in China for example.

>But the worst part was that every freaking time the cab driver would give me attitude for the short fare (ostensibly because they have to wait in that long line).

Woah. I thought that only happened in India. Didn't know it was the same story elsewhere. But now, lot of the airport cabbies have decided to join 'the enemy' rather than try and beat it. Lot of them do Uber pick-ups while waiting for their turn at the airports (from what they tell me its a very long queue and they usually get only 1 ride per day).

Its a much worse situation in India, except here as far I know there is no difficulty in obtaining badges/medallion (they hand them out like candy). Instead we have to deal with unionism/thuggery, terrible service and exorbitant rates. Tuk-tuks in most cities ignore meter pricing.

I am scared by the prospect of Uber becoming entrenched, but I think that is a risk we have to take, to break the current status quo. Uber really is a life-changer here. This industry needs to be disrupted, and if Uber has to bend/ignore a few rules (which the existing taxis in India ignore anyway), I think that is a worth-while cost.

> Walk an hour home carrying my luggage?

Uh...take the bus?

So what is the insurance situation in the US? In Germany the guests were transported uninsured which made the whole model not only pointless but dangerous for both the driver and the guest.

When I was in LA I went to rent a car with FlightCar, and needed a ride to their parking lot from LAX. When I got into a taxi and told the driver where I wanted to go and for what purpose, he got so mad saying that I should've waited for the rental place bus and I explained to him that this one didn't have one. I had to pay $20 because he said so. Thankfully FlightCar reimbursed me for the value, but god damn I was pissed.

How to get around Uber Airport bans: Take a taxi ride just outside the airport and from there get an Uber ride. It's still much cheaper.

Perfect Example: Orlando International Airport, is a jail. It has no sidewalks leading in or out of the airport. It's about 1 mile of 60mph road and ramps leading in and out of the airport with NO shoulders and NO sidewalks. Look it up on Google Maps. It's impossible to leave. After 11pm I arrive and the buses are not working, friend can't pick me up. A 6 mile taxi ride is $55 dollars! Uber ride is about $12. I try to hop on the Parking Spot / Rental car shuttles to get just outside the airport ban radius but they've caught on and no one will let me on. I'm not paying $55.

So I just grabbed a taxi and had him drop me off just outside the airport at a Denny's. Cost: $13 for 1 mile. Grabbed an Uber for the remainder of the trip which was $11. Paid $24 instead of $55.

> How to get around Uber Airport bans: Take a taxi ride just outside the airport and from there get an Uber ride. It's still much cheaper.

Free hotel shuttles work just as well.

Not at LAX. Minimum fare is $17, which is ridiculous if you are going somewhere near the airport. Someone else commented on that.

Good night taxi industry. It hasn't been fun and it wasn't good knowing ya!

Much easier way: Put your pin near the airport, and call the driver saying you're actually at the airport.

I have done this dozens of times. No driver has ever refused.

My wife had a girls trip in Chicago. She made the error of just getting a "cab" and not using her UBER app. It turns out, what she got into was some kind of cab that didn't have a till. The driver was angry she didn't have cash, drove her around to an ATM, demanded $100, refused to let her have her items out of the trunk. Personally, I am no longer comfortable with her getting into cabs or non-uber black cars - it is becoming unsafe. If that driver decided to do something -- he would be off the grid.

What that driver did was illegal. She could have called the police. It sounds like she was taken by some pirate taxi, not one from the taxi stand.

Yes. He probably preys on woman.

Hello, non sequitur logical fallacy.

The cab didn't have a till, it was most definitely illegal but not because of the credit card. It was almost for sure an unlicensed cab...

I've taken a lot of cabs in Chicago. Sometimes I actually read the little "Bill of Rights" thing that they display. One of the things that they say is that you can always pay by credit card.

http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/bacp/supp_info/20...

Doesn't help now but she should have called 311 after taking down the driver info. If something like that ever happens again, she should do so and the driver will get into huge trouble with the city.

Honestly, every time I take a taxi I'm just praying they are talkative. Because the quite ones scare the shit out of me.

It was already allowed. I took an Uber from LAX a few weeks ago.

The catch was that they had to buy a $5 "temporary taxi license" (that Uber paid for) when they came in for each ride, which delayed them 5 minutes. Now they won't have to stop, which is nice.

UberPlus and up are allowed at LAX, just UberX isn't allowed, unless the UberX driver has a TCP sticker -- something most don't have.

Not true, I rode an UberX without a TCP sticker. That's why he had to get the temporary license.

I would just take the Parking Spot shuttle to the one near the In-N-Out and hail an UberX from there. Tip the driver and it's perfectly fine.

Really? They usually check for ur parking permit? If this works for everyone this is a nice hack.

You don't even need to go to a parking structure. Pick up the first hotel shuttle that comes by and then Uber from there. I've done this many times with no issues. Obviously it takes longer than getting picked up at the airport directly, but it still beats taking a cab.

As recently April, uber wouldn't even let you try to call uberX within the airport.

I've run into this at several airports -- seems the standard procedure is to set your pick-up location somewhere near the airport, then call the driver and tell them where you actually are.

I'm assuming that LAX is the largest U.S. airport to allow regular Uber pickups?

You can request an UberTaxi or Uber Black car at ORD [0], which is the second largest airport in terms of traffic in the world [1].

[0] https://www.facebook.com/uber/posts/601574873216135 [1] http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20140924/BLOGS02/1409...

> To work at the airport, drivers cannot have convictions for reckless driving, hit and run, driving under the influence, sexual crimes or terrorism

I get that some of these are sort of taxi or driver specific and that the rules are a little odd anyway, but it seems that murder should be on this list too?

Recently released full details on the process Uber uses. Looks like murder is covered:

http://newsroom.uber.com/2015/07/details-on-safety/

What are the main, reasonable arguments for disallowing paid airport pickups? Safety? Traffic? Control?

here is the main argument against uber in general: for taxis to keep their medalions, they must not refuse pickup/drop off on the worst parts of town. or for someone they don't like. and a certain percentage of licenses are given to drivers with vehicles that can accommodate handicapped passengers.

uber is fine when you are a white, able guy living in a good neighborhood.

Sorry if I am missing any sarcasm, but this seems totally backwards! Taxis are famous for racial discrimination while Uber drivers accept fares sight unseen.

Also, taxis are well known (at least in San Francisco) for illegally refusing fares to distant neighborhoods. Uber drivers simply can't refuse.

Finally, flagging a taxi is nearly impossible in a remote location, but calling an Uber driver from the app will work pretty much anywhere.

> Uber drivers simply can't refuse.

Sure they can; I've had an Uber driver call me after accepting the fare to tell me to cancel and re-request.

Yeah, that's a trick drivers play on customers so they don't take a hit to their rating. If Uber catches a driver canceling too often, they'll boot them or freeze them from picking up more fares. (Conversely, if a customer is doing the same thing too often, a similar penalty of fees or the like will happen to them as well.)

So next time they try that, feel free to hold your ground by using Lyft instead or something. You don't have to cancel - they must, by their own rules, either cancel themselves, or pick you up.

And was your response "You cancel and take the hit if you don't want the fare" ?

I had an even sneakier issue on a full fat Uber (not X) fare where the driver called me, asked me where I was going, told me he'd be there soon (location 5 minutes away), and just never came (15 minutes). I didn't know what to do with that as I actually did want to go home so I just cancelled and re-requested.

Let Uber's customer service know. They're very pleasant and they want to make sure you're happy.

You can see exactly where the car is on your phone! I admit, not a great experience but certainly rare and obviously the sort of thing that Uber can minimize and regular taxi companies cannot.

OK, but Uber has mechanisms to abate that which most taxi systems do not.

Taxis everywhere are famous for trying to ask you your destination before letting you in the cab. I always say, "hold on, I can't hear you" and quickly open the door before they can drive away.

Almost the exact opposite is true:

http://fee.org/freeman/detail/uber-against-racial-profiling

Not sure if I understand this, I've had issues with cabs that refused to drop me off at a location that wasn't convenient to them, yet never had problems with uber picking/ dropping me off anywhere, so don't feel like that's a valid argument against uber. I'm not familiar enough with handicapped accommodations/ laws, but are you saying the argument against uber is that they're unable to pickup handicapped passengers?

If an Uber driver did that I would 1 star him. And when Uber contacted me to know why, I would tell them.

When a cab driver is rude... its just normal.

I've had an Uber driver call me and ask about my destination after accepting the ride request and idling on it for 5 minutes. This was very late night, and he probably didn't want to have to drive too much outside of his home base.

I wonder how often taxi drivers do shady things like refuse to pick up or drop off in certain areas, versus how often ridesharing drivers do that. Also, I probably shouldn't even ask, but what does being white have anything to do with this?

I'm black and live in a predominately minority neighborhood, Inglewood, CA in Los Angeles. It's not terrible, but does have some sketchy areas. I've requested rides to and from my home plenty of times with Uber, mostly without problems.

One time I got my request accepted by a driver(to leave my house), and they asked where I was going because they didn't want to go to a bad neighborhood. The driver mentioned I was lucky that they were "passing through" and they only pick up passengers in Beverly Hills, Hollywood, Venice, Santa Monica, etc. The driver also said they turned down a white guy in a gang-infested neighborhood late one night.

They mentioned it helped that I had a good rider rating. Either way, they definitely considered canceling the ride based on location.

I've never tried to hail a cab from Hollywood or somewhere in LA headed in the direction of a black neighborhood, so I'm not sure if the experience is the same as it seems to be in NYC or other places for some black people. That ride did make me wonder how many Uber drivers actively avoid worser neighborhoods though.

I guess the cabs want customers that don't give them problems and use appearance as a proxy for that in the absence of other information. With rider ratings I guess that's better info than appearance. I chatted to one Uber driver who said he worked for another cab company before and had a problem with iffy customers just running away at the end rather than not paying which also is not an issue with Uber.

I sort of get the argument that cities have an interest in equitable transportation for all of its citizens. But interestingly, my guess is that an Uber-style service probably works even better for the "bad" parts of town. First, it's easy to identify the gap and start driving to fill it. All of the passenger vetting and geo-location reduces risk. Surge pricing helps smooth supply/demand curve. Feedback and monitoring ensure good behavior and that drivers don't skip too many rides. Right?

Some airports, e.g. ORD (or at least it did), have special provisions for medallioned taxis to get priority access to the highly structured taxi line. It isn't just a tax on the special nature of the ride. In the case or ORD, some particular extra fuel-efficient fleet cars got priority on the generally highly lucrative rides.

There are other car services available and such, but in general airports fall under extra special taxi regulations given how much these rides rake in.

Probably the same ones that justify most airport fees and franchising:

"Hey, these airports are really expensive to set up, let's recoup the cost from people who use them, so charge extra fees to any business benefiting from air travel."

Hence why restaurants and everything else at the airport are more expensive, and why they also want a cut from paid taxi rides to/from the airport.

But if you're leasing property to a captive audience, that kinda makes sense.

Traffic control mainly. During busy time, everybody is trying to squeeze to the curb, double- and triple- parking is common. Which is why taxis and hotel shuttles are relegated to their own orderly line.

Somewhat off-topic, it's interesting the article lists LAX as the third busiest airport, when I googled to see what the first two were out of curiosity it was shown right in the search results as the second busiest. That data on google appears to come from the wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_busiest_airports_i... for "Busiest US airports by total passenger boardings". LAX then appears to be listed as fourth busiest in "30 busiest US airports by total passenger traffic". These numbers obviously vary by year and it seems the one google picked up was from preliminary FAA data. No idea why this stuck out to me but for some reason I want to know why the author settled on third busiest here out of the myriad choices.

How can they tell the difference between an Uber driver and a friend I called to pick me up?

You don't normally ride in the backseat when you friend picks you up. Your friend doesn't have an Uber sign in his front windsheld.

Sure, they could hide that sign and request that you sit in the backseat (I've actually had Uber drivers at LAX request this). But then they would be asking drivers to take steps to knowingly break the law.

I don't normally ride in the backseat of an Uber. In fact, I've never done that except when someone else in my party is in the front seat.

I think many people do. I even had an UberX in LA a couple of weeks ago tell me "no, ride in the back", when I opened the front door.

I always ride in the backseat. It gives the driver his or her personal space, lets them use the front seat for their snack or bag or whatever, and feels more professional/businesslike to me.

By subpenaing Uber records and fining them for allowing pick ups at the airport.

I usually Uber to the airport and taxi back. The latter costs almost 50% more. If this policy goes through, it will be a welcome change.

it will be short-lived unless they overturn this ruling: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-uber-suspended-2015071...

That seems to be about failure to file some required reports. I'm sure Uber will comply before they're suspended in California.

> The judge agreed with utility commission staff who said Uber has not filed all required reports, specifically about how often it provided disabled-accessible vehicles when requested, places where drivers tend to turn down ride requests, and the causes of accidents.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/uber-fined-7m-kee...

Why overturn and not just provide the data instead?

What are the chances that somebody would do LAX to Santa Barbara ?

Awesome. Being in LA this is really good news.

LAX is the second largest (by passenger boarding) airport in the country. So until ATL allows Uber, I guess this is true.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com