If you’ve followed Uber’s rise from Silicon Valley to what is now essentially world-wide, you’ve certainly noticed a few bumps in the road.
Uber has battled what seems to be the same complaints in France, DC, New York, Boston, Chicago, and even San Francisco. These complaints are largely based around the unjustness of Uber’s business model. Uber requires a bare minimum of its drivers in the US, but even less in China.
Other complaints stem from consumer rights’ advocates. It has already been seen that China is ready to defend its citizens against unjust business practices, as several Chinese cities have taken stands against the likes of Kuaidi Dache and Didi Dache for using a tipping system to create a competitive atmosphere that incentivizes taxi drivers to bypass those without the money to tip.
Although Uber works hard to distinguish itself as a “request tool” and not a “transportation carrier,” according to China’s Anti-Unfair Competition Law, Uber may already be in violation of the law. The law states that it is illegal to make pushing out competition your primary goal.
Certainly, Uber’s position as a luxury cab does not necessarily interfere with the entire taxi market, although following the lowering of base prices from 60 RMB to 30 RMB, local cabbies may become more worried.
Assuming that Uber follows the same path of development in China as it has in all other markets, where it first establishes itself as a luxury brand, then expands to incorporate the entire market, I would not place a bet on Uber lasting long in the Chinese market.
Whereas Uber has thus far been able to bully American politicians into accepting its new business model, China’s leaders do not have to listen to its citizens as closely as the elected officials in Washington. Also, China’s courts and officials have always tended to protect homegrown firms rather than foreign firms, and I don’t see local governments throwing Kuaidi Dache and Didi Dache under the bus to protect American Uber.