You’re both right. It’s totally subjective which is better, in which circumstances and at what price. That’s the real benefit Uber et al brought to the market, and why they should obviously stay there: more choice.
Everyone wins. Even if you prefer black cabs in all circumstances, as there’s now less competition in flagging one ;-)
The losers are the black cab drivers, and arguably the Uber drivers who might have been black cab drivers. They have been com-modified - bye bye a half shot at a middle class life style for those folk.
> the Uber drivers who might have been black cab drivers
The barrier to entry for becoming a black cab driver far exceeds that required to be an Uber driver.
Drive for Uber: get a PCO license (about £400-600); own an appropriate car; have appropriate insurance.
Drive a black cab: do the knowledge (2-4 years); get a black cab license (in excess of £1k); get a black cab (likely at least twice the price of a Prius); have appropriate insurance.
Pretty sure the number of Uber drivers who might have been black cab drivers is very, very small.
I think we have to accept now that 'The Knowledge' is now completely pointless. The uber driver has Waze, and that is probably at least as good 99% of the time and occasionally better since they'll know in advance about traffic accidents that close roads. Black cabs/drivers do not need to exist anymore in their current form.
We will probably end up arguing about definitions here, but I think that the hackney cab isn't a commodity because it's highly regulated and managed for both supply and quality. Yes - it's an interchangeable item (so you win on the semantics) but it can't be glutted out or somehow produced more cheaply.
Everyone wins. Even if you prefer black cabs in all circumstances, as there’s now less competition in flagging one ;-)