Seattle decides in favor of Uber, Lyft and Sidecar.

Back in March, Seattle city council voted to heavily regulate ride-sharing apps like Uber and Lyft by capping the number of active vehicles to 150 each. Considering Uber claims to have around 1,000 drivers in the city, this initiative would have severely limited each company's capacity to meet demand.  Yet by mid-April these regulations were suspended due to more than 36,000 signatures on a repeal petition (double the 16,510 required to force a public vote).

Now, after more than a year of debate, Seattle Mayor Ed Murray announced an agreement between the taxi industry and ride-share apps. App-based transportation platforms such as Lyft, Uber and Sidecar can continue to operate without any limit of drivers. The key terms of the deal include:

• Transportation network companies and their drivers will be licensed and required to meet specific insurance requirements.
• The City will work with the industry to clarify or change state insurance law to account for recent changes in the industry, similar to recent actions in Colorado.
• There will be no cap on the number of transportation network company drivers.
• The City will provide 200 new taxi licenses over the next four years.
• Taxi and for-hire licenses will transition to a property right that is similar to a medallion in other cities.
• For-hire drivers will have hailing rights.
• An accessibility fund will be created through a $0.10 per ride surcharge for drivers and owners to offset higher trip and vehicle costs for riders who require accessibility services.

This is a huge change from the March decision not only because of the unlimited drivers, but also because you can now hail for-hire drivers, a right originally reserved for taxi's only. 

“I believe Seattle once again will lead the nation in showing how what appears to be conflicting interests can actually come together,” Murray said after announcing the agreement. “We have deregulated a highly regulated monopoly, allowing taxis and for-hires to become far more competitive than they are in the current situation. We are recognizing that a technology exists that is rapidly changing the marketplace.”

GreenCab Taxi General Manager Chris Van Dyk, talked with Geekwire about the decision:

“The experience in Seattle in years past, in San Francisco and in Ireland now, is that if you have unlimited entry, if you have no limit on the number of taxi and for-hire vehicles, operators simply cannot make a living wage, and the industry goes to hell in a handbasket, and in a relatively short time,” Van Dyk told GeekWire. “The economics of the industry are counter-intuitive, because of the low threshold of entry. Apps do not change this.”

We have yet to hear if the taxi industry will choose to fight the decision or not. 

Seattle joins a small handful of cities allowing ride-sharing apps including Chicago. It seems like every city has a different attitude when it comes to the sharing economy, Miami police are impounding Lyft drivers while Uber is banned in Brussels and in high court in London. We're curious to see if this decision holds in Seattle and if will influence other cities still in debate. Regardless, it's becoming more and more obvious that the sharing economy is here to stay.

Check out the complete article by Geekwire and let us know what you think.

European Commission VP Neelie Kroes on the Shared Economy

This week Dutch politician and European Commission vice-president Neelie Kroes gave us her perspective on the sharing economy and recent taxi protests. She believes that there is a 'valley' start-up culture in Europe and it needs greater support. On her blog she responds to widespread strikes and attempts to ban or limit taxi app services across Europe.

“The debate about taxi apps is really a debate about the wider sharing economy. That debate forces us to think about the disruptive effects of digital technology and the need for entrepreneurs in our society”

She recognizes that this is a fearful time for cab drivers stating "it is right that we feel sympathy for people who face big changes in their lives" but "we cannot run away from these debates either". 

“We cannot address these challenges by ignoring them, by going on strike, or by trying to ban these innovations out of existence. That is why a strike won’t work: rather than “downing tools” what we need is a real dialogue where we talk about these disruptions caused by technology.”

Kroes believes that Europe needs more entrepreneurs to create jobs and growth. These entrepreneurs understand that services can no longer be designed around the producers, but need to empower the consumers. She is concerned that if Europe does not embrace entrepreneurship Europe will be know as "the place that used to be the future, but instead has become the world's tourism playground and nursing home". Kroes states that the disruptive force of technology is a good thing. "It eliminates some jobs and it changes others. But it improves most jobs and creates new ones as well".

She also warns that sharing entrepreneurs need to follow the rules and pay taxes but also sheds some interesting light on the role of regulators:

“The job of the law is not to lie to you and tell you that everything will always be comfortable or that tomorrow will be the same as today. It won’t. Not only that, it will be worse for you and your children if we pretend we don’t have to change. If we don’t think together about how to benefit from these changes and these new technologies, we will all suffer.”

She concludes with a plea for Europeans to stop running away and face facts: "digital innovations like taxi apps are here to stay. We need to work with them not against them."

Check out the rest of her blog post on her website and let us know what you think. It's certainly one of the more in favor responses to the sharing economy by a regulator thus far. Is she right? Are regulators running from digital technology instead of embracing it's potential? Is there a way for both apps and taxi companies to live in harmony?

Share NY

No taxies at 4pm in NYC? Load up the carriage full of luggage and go! On our way to #sharenyc #shareconomyfilm pic.twitter.com/1IjA5DHY4L

— Shareconomy (@shareconomyfilm) May 30, 2014

Today Greg and Jillian headed to the inaugral Share NYC conference at NYU. Hosted by Arun Sundararajan, Luke Williams, and Cynthia Franklin, #ShareNYC featured speakers and panels discussing current hot topics in the sharing economy. The event joined together "entrepreneurs, government leaders, academics, business executives, VCs and students for a unique day of discussion and thought leadership about the emerging collaborative, peer-to-peer and sharing economies." Unfortunately the event was not live-streamed, however Twitter gave us a pretty decent play by play on the main points of discussion.

.@digitalarun framing #sharenyc and announcing http://t.co/V8E4qW2plj a collective #sharingeconomy research platform pic.twitter.com/9H7Y3QwmBH

— Benjamin Tincq (@btincq) May 30, 2014

So true:"Institutions will always work to preserve the problem to which they are the solution" @cshirky #sharenyc

— Jennifer Bradley (@JBradley_DC) May 30, 2014

The sharing economy is a way to address inequality- it's a way to share wealth via @Sara_Horowitz #sharenyc

— Let's Collaborate! (@letscollabnyc) May 30, 2014

the new collectives: @cshirky chats w/@rasiej @nataliefoster @dkrugman @cshapiro @btincq #sharenyc pic.twitter.com/6FHpGWhLfa

— Arun Sundararajan (@digitalarun) May 30, 2014

Welcome @freelancersu, largest group for freelancers in US. Shifting risk from individuals to a collective. #sharenyc pic.twitter.com/AinapjKPNS

— sydney campos (@sydcampos415) May 30, 2014

Yes! Thrilled to see published. MT @obeniflah Proposed Principles for Peer Economy by Sarah Cannon, Harvard pic.twitter.com/0AxXlkSvi0 #sharenyc

— April Rinne (@aprilrinne) May 30, 2014

.@fredwilson closing at #sharenyc: what will be the role of govt, capitalism when we move to true distributed systems #thoughtprovoking

— sidbhatia (@sidbhatia) May 30, 2014

The first Share NYC conference seemed to be a success and continues to confirm the interest society has in the sharing economy. It's excellent to see such a young economic model hashed out by groups of educators, regulators and enthusiasts while still in development. Did you have an opportunity to attend #ShareNYC? What did you think? Are these conferences developing the sharing economy or not?

a regulator, a lawyer and an economist walk into a bar... #sharenyc

— jen lemen (@jenlemen) May 30, 2014

Seattle Suspends ride sharing regulations one month after passage

Just one month ago, Seattle City Council enacted new regulations on rideshare companies like Uber and Airbnb. Yesterday, Uber, Lyft and Sidecar submitted more than 36,000 signatures on a repeal petition forcing a public vote. An ordinance so challenged is suspended until the public vote.

The suspension — whatever happens in the future — is a major victory for companies offering an alternative to Seattle’s much-criticized taxicab service.

In a wider sense, it is a win for the city’s technology economy, which took to heart the cause of ride sharing, arguing that Seattle must be a 21st century city open to innovation and new ways of providing services.

This is huge news for not only Seattle ridesharing companies, but for the technology driven collaborative economy in general. A public voice this strong is an obvious indicator of the popularity of sharing economy services.

Check out the entire article on the Seattle Pi's Blog and let us know what you think. Is Seattle's response to city regulation only the beginning? 

Does the Government need to Regulate the Sharing Economy?

Economist Arun Sundararajan tells us why he thinks the government should not regulate the sharing economy and that reputation replaces regulation. 

In the sharing economy, reputation serves as the digital institution that protects buyers and prevents market failures.

This is a very controversial topic for the sharing economy, especially since the recent death of a six year old girl who was hit by an Uber contracted driver.  

Check out the rest of Arun's article on Wired and let us know what you think. Should the government be involved in the sharing economy? If so to what extent?