Thursday, June 23, 2011
Pity the Passengers
The Times has an op-ed about police searches of livery cab passengers. The NYCLU is on the case. But for years the routine civil rights violations of livery cab passengers has gone unremarked.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
2 cents on the outer borough livery plan
I have no dog in this fight, but...
Mayor Bloomberg's plan to license a new class of taxis that would be permitted-- for the first time-- to accept street hails in the outer boroughs and northern Manhattan has passed in the state assembly. Predictably the medallion and fleet owners are scrambling. The Senate has yet to act.
Medallion owners are predicting the destruction of their industry. That may be overstating it, but they are right to attempt to protect their investments in medallions which they purchased under the existing rules for as much as $750K.
I think they have a point: When the OB liveries take a fare from Brooklyn to say 34th Street, do you think they will then head back to Brooklyn? I think they will more likely poach a Manhattan fare (something many liveries do already). To do so may be illegal. But who will stop them, especially when customers become accustomed to hailing these OB cabs?
That's the real issue as I see it. If they OB cabs were truly confined to the OBs, then it might not hurt the yellows. But even now livery cabs take illegal Manhattan street hails. Under the new plan, this could get a lot worse. And the yellow cab drivers' earnings will be undermined, with the value of the yellow medallions withing in the wake.
Also, the TLC is also building its empire here. The 30,000 OB street-hail cabs is big new opportunity for regulation.
Mayor Bloomberg's plan to license a new class of taxis that would be permitted-- for the first time-- to accept street hails in the outer boroughs and northern Manhattan has passed in the state assembly. Predictably the medallion and fleet owners are scrambling. The Senate has yet to act.
Medallion owners are predicting the destruction of their industry. That may be overstating it, but they are right to attempt to protect their investments in medallions which they purchased under the existing rules for as much as $750K.
I think they have a point: When the OB liveries take a fare from Brooklyn to say 34th Street, do you think they will then head back to Brooklyn? I think they will more likely poach a Manhattan fare (something many liveries do already). To do so may be illegal. But who will stop them, especially when customers become accustomed to hailing these OB cabs?
That's the real issue as I see it. If they OB cabs were truly confined to the OBs, then it might not hurt the yellows. But even now livery cabs take illegal Manhattan street hails. Under the new plan, this could get a lot worse. And the yellow cab drivers' earnings will be undermined, with the value of the yellow medallions withing in the wake.
Also, the TLC is also building its empire here. The 30,000 OB street-hail cabs is big new opportunity for regulation.
My Outer-borough taxi solution
I wrote this as an op-ed about a month back. But it went unpublished:
In recent months, Mayor Bloomberg has proposed allowing livery cabs to accept street hails in New York City’s outer boroughs—an idea that has been broached an rejected several times over the decades. Just this week, the City Council passed a plan to increase the fines on cab drivers who refuse outer borough fares.
Both plans are designed, it is said, to improve taxi service outside of Manhattan. But both ignore the realities of the taxi industry. Any real solution must acknowledge how the taxi business works in New York: It’s a three-tier system, and yellow cabs are just one part.
The city’s 13,000 yellow taxis tend to go where the money is: Manhattan south of 96th Street and the airports. This is old hat.
Complaints about refusals are likewise commonplace. Even as someone who has defended taxi drivers accused of refusing service, I concede that it’s a real problem, though one that tends to be wildly overstated.
But the key fact is that in addition to yellow cabs there are livery cabs and black cabs. Black cabs are taxis that service employees of (mostly large) businesses through expense accounts. Livery cabs mostly service the outer boroughs. They are required to accept passengers by pre-arrangement only and may not accept street hails—though in fact many do. Given the existence of liveries—which outnumber yellow cabs—the idea that the outer boroughs have no taxi service is simply false.
The reason yellow cab drivers can be reluctant to take fares to Brooklyn or the Bronx is two-fold. Cabbies have concerns for their safety. Some of these concerns are imaginary, but some are very real: Taxi drivers are more likely to be killed on the job than police or firefighters. The second concern is economic: When a taxi does travel to an outer borough, it is likely to have to return to Manhattan empty.
Neither concern permits a cab driver to refuse, of course. But while beating up on taxi drivers may be good politics and favorite sport, it does not really address the problem.
Taxi drivers—mostly immigrants, all independent contractors—have never had much voice in corridors of power. But taxi fleet owners do. They will yell loud and long against any plan to allow livery cabs on their turf.
And the taxi owners have a point. The mayor’s plan to let liveries accept street hails would permit the dilution of their monopoly—a monopoly not granted for free, but bought and paid for. It is represented by taxi medallions, which are licenses that sell for as much as $750,000. People buy them based on what they represent: An exclusive on street hails in New York City. The medallions are leased in turn to taxi drivers for as much as $129 per shift.
While the creation of a property right to taxi licenses might not be a perfect system, it has become entrenched over decades. Owners will right fight to protect those rights. Drivers, meanwhile, will protest their loss of business—and ultimately will not be willing to pay as much to lease medallions. Over time, drivers will become less willing to leave Manhattan than ever. In short, by letting liveries take their turf, the city would have changed the deal.
There is, however, a better way: The city should give everyone who owns a medallion another license (or two or three) for free. The second license would apply to a new class of taxi that would be permitted to accept street hails outside Manhattan. This would open up yellow-cab type service in neighborhood where it exists barely or not at all. Perhaps these cabs could be painted a distinctive color of their own, say, lime green.
Permitting green cabs would, of course, dilute the value of the yellow taxi medallions. But since the owners of yellow medallions would be given the green medallions, they would be compensated for their loss. Simply letting current liveries accept street hails, by contrast, would injure the yellow cab owners without compensation.
By attaching a green license to every yellow license, the city could add thousands of cabs if that’s what it wants. And it would do so without causing a loss to those who have borrowed and saved to purchase medallions. The yellow cab industry would be much more likely to accept a plan that protects their rights. And New Yorkers far and wide would have more and better taxi service than they have now.
###
In recent months, Mayor Bloomberg has proposed allowing livery cabs to accept street hails in New York City’s outer boroughs—an idea that has been broached an rejected several times over the decades. Just this week, the City Council passed a plan to increase the fines on cab drivers who refuse outer borough fares.
Both plans are designed, it is said, to improve taxi service outside of Manhattan. But both ignore the realities of the taxi industry. Any real solution must acknowledge how the taxi business works in New York: It’s a three-tier system, and yellow cabs are just one part.
The city’s 13,000 yellow taxis tend to go where the money is: Manhattan south of 96th Street and the airports. This is old hat.
Complaints about refusals are likewise commonplace. Even as someone who has defended taxi drivers accused of refusing service, I concede that it’s a real problem, though one that tends to be wildly overstated.
But the key fact is that in addition to yellow cabs there are livery cabs and black cabs. Black cabs are taxis that service employees of (mostly large) businesses through expense accounts. Livery cabs mostly service the outer boroughs. They are required to accept passengers by pre-arrangement only and may not accept street hails—though in fact many do. Given the existence of liveries—which outnumber yellow cabs—the idea that the outer boroughs have no taxi service is simply false.
The reason yellow cab drivers can be reluctant to take fares to Brooklyn or the Bronx is two-fold. Cabbies have concerns for their safety. Some of these concerns are imaginary, but some are very real: Taxi drivers are more likely to be killed on the job than police or firefighters. The second concern is economic: When a taxi does travel to an outer borough, it is likely to have to return to Manhattan empty.
Neither concern permits a cab driver to refuse, of course. But while beating up on taxi drivers may be good politics and favorite sport, it does not really address the problem.
Taxi drivers—mostly immigrants, all independent contractors—have never had much voice in corridors of power. But taxi fleet owners do. They will yell loud and long against any plan to allow livery cabs on their turf.
And the taxi owners have a point. The mayor’s plan to let liveries accept street hails would permit the dilution of their monopoly—a monopoly not granted for free, but bought and paid for. It is represented by taxi medallions, which are licenses that sell for as much as $750,000. People buy them based on what they represent: An exclusive on street hails in New York City. The medallions are leased in turn to taxi drivers for as much as $129 per shift.
While the creation of a property right to taxi licenses might not be a perfect system, it has become entrenched over decades. Owners will right fight to protect those rights. Drivers, meanwhile, will protest their loss of business—and ultimately will not be willing to pay as much to lease medallions. Over time, drivers will become less willing to leave Manhattan than ever. In short, by letting liveries take their turf, the city would have changed the deal.
There is, however, a better way: The city should give everyone who owns a medallion another license (or two or three) for free. The second license would apply to a new class of taxi that would be permitted to accept street hails outside Manhattan. This would open up yellow-cab type service in neighborhood where it exists barely or not at all. Perhaps these cabs could be painted a distinctive color of their own, say, lime green.
Permitting green cabs would, of course, dilute the value of the yellow taxi medallions. But since the owners of yellow medallions would be given the green medallions, they would be compensated for their loss. Simply letting current liveries accept street hails, by contrast, would injure the yellow cab owners without compensation.
By attaching a green license to every yellow license, the city could add thousands of cabs if that’s what it wants. And it would do so without causing a loss to those who have borrowed and saved to purchase medallions. The yellow cab industry would be much more likely to accept a plan that protects their rights. And New Yorkers far and wide would have more and better taxi service than they have now.
###
Monday, June 20, 2011
Recruiting Rewind - Who Succeeds with Success?
D1CW (http://d1collegewrestling.net) has an interesting feature by Earl Smith comparing recruiting prospects with their results for the high school class of 2006. The feature, called “Recruiting Rewind” and which can be found at http://d1collegewrestling.net/Recruiting_2006.html, reprises a similar report the site did last year for the high school class of 2005 (http://d1collegewrestling.net/Recruiting_2005.html).
The reports list the top recruits coming out of high school and the top college wrestlers five years later when nearly all the recruits would have exhausted their eligibility. There are two results of note. First for the top 20 collegians in the ’06 class, just six were top 25 recruits. Second, of the top 20 recruits, just seven had outstanding college careers. (This total counts Henry Cejudo, who skipped college, but won an Olympic gold medal.) On the other hand, nearly all the top collegians were top 100 recruits, the exceptions being Anthony Robles, who the recruiting touts may have overlooked for obvious reasons, and Stephen Dwyer of Nebraska.
It’s startling that four top-10 recruits flamed out altogether, including two that attended OK State (Jordan Frishkorn of Oklahoma State; Billy Murphy (Iowa); David Rella (Penn State); Ben Ashmore (Oklahoma State)). The number one overall recruit, David Craig of Lehigh, had some success, but the D1C1 formula, which ranks wrestlers based on their NCAA and conference tournament successes, puts him at #41 in his class. Lehigh also attracted the #12 recruit, Pat Flynn, who had little college success.
The good news for Cornell is that their top recruits all performed well, if some not quite up to their recruiting par. Mack Lewnes was ranked #7 as a recruit and he became the third most successful wrestler in his class, behind two-time NCAA champ Jordan Burroughs and Lance Palmer, who was a four-time All American and, like Lewnes, a national runner-up. Lewnes comes out ahead of Jon Readeare and his fellow NCAA champs JP O’Connor and Robles.
Mike Grey was the #3 recruit. He didn’t fare as well in college, but he did rank #16 in his class, juts behind Mike Thorn and Montell Marion.
Justin Kerber was the #22 recruit. Again, he didn’t quite wrestle up to those expectations, but he is listed as #49 in his class.
The year before, Cornell had three top-50 recruits: Troy Nickerson, Adam Frey and Curtis Roddy. Roddy disappeared, but Nickerson won a NCAA championship. Frey, of course, died tragically, but was successful before that.
I suppose the lesson is that a college program absolutely needs top recruits if it plans to succeed. Nearly all the top wrestlers were top-100 recruits, if not top-20. On the other hand, may of the bluest of blue-chippers are long forgotten. Can it be said that some programs squander top talent more than others. Certainly injuries and academic failings play a part. I am not sure whether to be surprised that so many top recruits never succeed. But it would be interesting to make a study of what programs have done most with the least or the least with the most, or which ones have seen their star high-schoolers perform closest to expectations.
The reports list the top recruits coming out of high school and the top college wrestlers five years later when nearly all the recruits would have exhausted their eligibility. There are two results of note. First for the top 20 collegians in the ’06 class, just six were top 25 recruits. Second, of the top 20 recruits, just seven had outstanding college careers. (This total counts Henry Cejudo, who skipped college, but won an Olympic gold medal.) On the other hand, nearly all the top collegians were top 100 recruits, the exceptions being Anthony Robles, who the recruiting touts may have overlooked for obvious reasons, and Stephen Dwyer of Nebraska.
It’s startling that four top-10 recruits flamed out altogether, including two that attended OK State (Jordan Frishkorn of Oklahoma State; Billy Murphy (Iowa); David Rella (Penn State); Ben Ashmore (Oklahoma State)). The number one overall recruit, David Craig of Lehigh, had some success, but the D1C1 formula, which ranks wrestlers based on their NCAA and conference tournament successes, puts him at #41 in his class. Lehigh also attracted the #12 recruit, Pat Flynn, who had little college success.
The good news for Cornell is that their top recruits all performed well, if some not quite up to their recruiting par. Mack Lewnes was ranked #7 as a recruit and he became the third most successful wrestler in his class, behind two-time NCAA champ Jordan Burroughs and Lance Palmer, who was a four-time All American and, like Lewnes, a national runner-up. Lewnes comes out ahead of Jon Readeare and his fellow NCAA champs JP O’Connor and Robles.
Mike Grey was the #3 recruit. He didn’t fare as well in college, but he did rank #16 in his class, juts behind Mike Thorn and Montell Marion.
Justin Kerber was the #22 recruit. Again, he didn’t quite wrestle up to those expectations, but he is listed as #49 in his class.
The year before, Cornell had three top-50 recruits: Troy Nickerson, Adam Frey and Curtis Roddy. Roddy disappeared, but Nickerson won a NCAA championship. Frey, of course, died tragically, but was successful before that.
I suppose the lesson is that a college program absolutely needs top recruits if it plans to succeed. Nearly all the top wrestlers were top-100 recruits, if not top-20. On the other hand, may of the bluest of blue-chippers are long forgotten. Can it be said that some programs squander top talent more than others. Certainly injuries and academic failings play a part. I am not sure whether to be surprised that so many top recruits never succeed. But it would be interesting to make a study of what programs have done most with the least or the least with the most, or which ones have seen their star high-schoolers perform closest to expectations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
