Great country to live, awful country to start/host any kind of company. Unfriendly tax climate, lack of startup infrastructure, lots and lots of bureaucracy.
Their (national association of road transport) next step is trying to get Uber to pay up for missed income - or as they state it "compensation for damages to the industry" [1].
Things are better on the company/bureaucracy front. Not as good as US/UK where you can do everything online, but it is 90% there. As for the tax climate, corporate tax has come down quite a bit (and is quite low compared to rest of Europe) but personal tax is a pain.
I think the main issue with Portugal, startup wise, is the people. We (as a nation) are very risk adverse and scared. There are many logical reasons for that that I won't get into the details here, but on the technical level, our graduates are quite good and salaries/cost of living are low. A typical YC investment on a Portuguese company would probably give them about one year of runway without any further investment.
Well, Uber has issues here in The Netherlands as well. Here it's also illegal to run your own taxi company. It's a very regulated business.
I don't think legislators would have a problem with Uber per se, it's just that they cheerfully ignore the existing legislation (and pay the fines incurred by the drivers) and basically just try to force themselves onto the market. If they would take the time to get proper legislation passed it could end up fine.
But why would governments that explicitly forbid illegal taxi services start making an exception for Uber?
This is much due to the fact that in some european countries the government gives monopoly status to some business areas if they are willing to work how the government want them to work. This usually has a negative impact on the winnings of the local company.
For example taxis are supposed to work and be reachable all around the country with the same prices, not just in high volume areas. If there is a new company that steps on the prices of the high volume areas, the older local company won't be able to offer the service in low volume areas.
People get angry if they don't have good services in their living areas.
When I was there last year, we were given a list of 5 taxi phone numbers. When you needed a taxi, you'd cycle through the numbers until you found one that 1) answered the phone 2) was available 3) managed to understand where you wanted to be picked up. When we were leaving and needed to catch a bus, I made 15 fruitless phone calls, then asked somebody for a ride.
At least it's cheap-ish (last time I was in Porto, at least).
If there's a country it's France. An airport ride to my place, 16 km (10 miles), no more than 20 minutes, goes for a whooping 60EUR/66USD, more than the roundtrip flight to London. Nope.
And when I needed a ride at 4-5AM I called only to be hung up because "I didn't book it 24h in advance".
This can of course be solved without Uber; in London, Ubicab manages this seamlessly, while using local taxi companies. They seem to coexist well with Uber, Addison Lee, Hailo, and the rest.
The "next thing" (as opposed to "status quo") is not always better. It's not even "most of the time better", more like a coin toss.
Why should politicians make it easy for a foreign company to destroy a local, tax-paying, profession that gives jobs to people and follows certain obligations and rules voted for public safety?
Short sighted for protecting the income of the vulnerable taxi drivers and small time taxi companies? Since the introduction in London, waves of Minicab offices have closed down. Hats off to them to resist this. Not everything in life is automation and money saving. I'm sure the Portuguese have a decent taxi service as is.
The "free market" is not something supported by our political parties, not even as propaganda. We have a great diversity of parties, from the Reorganized Movement of the Party of the Proletariat to the Nationalist Renovator Party, but they're all statists.
I agree that it's sheer insanity to prevent people from interacting consensually. It's ironic, considering drugs are decriminalized in Portugal. Free markets can't effectively exist as long as corporations as we know it exist. It's not as if there was a "free market" prior to this.
[+] [-] jobvandervoort|11 years ago|reply
Their (national association of road transport) next step is trying to get Uber to pay up for missed income - or as they state it "compensation for damages to the industry" [1].
[1]: http://www.publico.pt/sociedade/noticia/uber-proibida-de-ope...
[+] [-] BSousa|11 years ago|reply
I think the main issue with Portugal, startup wise, is the people. We (as a nation) are very risk adverse and scared. There are many logical reasons for that that I won't get into the details here, but on the technical level, our graduates are quite good and salaries/cost of living are low. A typical YC investment on a Portuguese company would probably give them about one year of runway without any further investment.
[+] [-] royjacobs|11 years ago|reply
I don't think legislators would have a problem with Uber per se, it's just that they cheerfully ignore the existing legislation (and pay the fines incurred by the drivers) and basically just try to force themselves onto the market. If they would take the time to get proper legislation passed it could end up fine.
But why would governments that explicitly forbid illegal taxi services start making an exception for Uber?
[+] [-] neuronic|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cpursley|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Lennu|11 years ago|reply
For example taxis are supposed to work and be reachable all around the country with the same prices, not just in high volume areas. If there is a new company that steps on the prices of the high volume areas, the older local company won't be able to offer the service in low volume areas.
People get angry if they don't have good services in their living areas.
[+] [-] mdemare|11 years ago|reply
When I was there last year, we were given a list of 5 taxi phone numbers. When you needed a taxi, you'd cycle through the numbers until you found one that 1) answered the phone 2) was available 3) managed to understand where you wanted to be picked up. When we were leaving and needed to catch a bus, I made 15 fruitless phone calls, then asked somebody for a ride.
[+] [-] Uberphallus|11 years ago|reply
If there's a country it's France. An airport ride to my place, 16 km (10 miles), no more than 20 minutes, goes for a whooping 60EUR/66USD, more than the roundtrip flight to London. Nope.
And when I needed a ride at 4-5AM I called only to be hung up because "I didn't book it 24h in advance".
[+] [-] peteretep|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Idiocracy|11 years ago|reply
These two reasons are why Uber (a crappy company anyway, do use their competitors, don't reward their anticompetitive policies) are banned.
> by the Court of Lisbon which accepted an injunction filed by Antral, the road carriers association.
Incorrect
> Politicians are too short sighted, always protecting the status quo.
Incorrect.
[+] [-] dylanjermiah|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lessthunk|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] coldtea|11 years ago|reply
Why should politicians make it easy for a foreign company to destroy a local, tax-paying, profession that gives jobs to people and follows certain obligations and rules voted for public safety?
[+] [-] mavdi|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kjjw|11 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] elcct|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] icebraining|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aric|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] makeitsuckless|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|11 years ago|reply
[deleted]