Taxi Driver Online

Thank the Lord for that.

Very interesting this report has come out at this time.

The increase in competition among drivers at a time of decreasing demand for services resulted in losses in 2008-09 and 2009-10, with margins expected to be scant in 2012-13.

Taxi Operation in the UK Industry Market Research Report Now Updated by IBISWorld


Fierce competition between taxis and hire cars for passengers has marked the Taxi Operation in the UK industry in the five years through 2012-13. Revenue is forecast to decline an annualised 0.1% to reach £8.85 billion in 2012-13. Things are looking up though, as the industry is projected to grow by 2.5% in 2012-13. The Taxi Operation industry is made up of the operators of taxis, private hire vehicles (PHV) and organisations that connect drivers with customers and facilitate the provision of industry services. On the volume side of the equation, the recession caused demand for services to falter. The lack of a clear economic recovery has suppressed demand for industry services. The increase in competition among drivers at a time of decreasing demand for services resulted in losses in 2008-09 and 2009-10, with margins expected to be scant in 2012-13. The outlook over the next five years to 2017-18 for industry revenue is moderate. Notably, London will host the 2012 Olympic Games, resulting in tens of thousands of tourists flocking to the city to participate and spectate. This will result in a surge in demand for industry services and stronger revenue growth than has been experienced in the past five years. For these reasons, industry research firm IBISWorld has updated its report on the Taxi Operation industry.

So are they trying to say that the Olympics has increased their forecast of trade revenue from £1.4 billion to nearly £9 billion? And all this despite "suppressed demand" generally because of the recession?

Some 'interesting' statements in the rest of the text as well. Somehow I don't think I'll be shelling out hundreds to IBIS expecting an authoritative report on the state of the trade

Well it depends what one classes as 'major players'.

There are (according to the stats in the LC report) 155,000 licensed PH vehicles in England and Wales. The largest PH operator has about 3,000 vehicles on their fleet. Which equates to 2%.

I'm not sure that makes them major players in economical terms.

Now in ten or twenty years time things may be different, but as of today I think the comments from IBIS can be treated as fair.

I dont think I'll be shelling out either.....but strangely enough thats what the Law Commission expected us all to do the first time they come up with figures.

Its a fact the law commission accepted the first set of figures in their original assessment, these figures seem to prove the LC were 5 times out, now that is one hell of an error.

Well I think they'll just blame IBIS, and rightly so.

The revised IA shows the difficulties involved in coming up with 'robust' figures.

Would be interesting to see how IBIS quantified their revenue figures. There's clearly a lot of uncertainty with the LC's own revised figures, but at least the narrative they've supplied provides some insight into the problems involved.

Of course, I suspect the likes of the unions will use the lack of clarity to rubbish the LC generally. But whether they succeed in that regard is another matter.

Personally I don't really see the figures as being of much relevance; what's more important are the substantive proposals.

Well I suspect it basically comes down to a cost-benefit analysis - the amount of work involved in computing really robust figures wouldn't be worth the effort.

Reading the limited amount of stuff from IBIS that we have access to I suspect their problem is that they're using market analysis techniques that they use for the mainstream economy but which don't really transfer too well as regards analysing the taxi and PH trades.

And the LC's initial problem in that regard was that they relied on the IBIS figures without much in the way of critique, and of course the stats weren't even in the correct ball park.

To what extent it's reasonable for the likes of the LC to rely on the likes of IBIS I don't know, but from the spiel provided by IBIS they're obviously regarded as an authoritative source more generally, so to that extent the LC can just shift the blame if anyone tries to make a meal out of it all.

You have your opinion and I have mine, they're not the same, but there's little change there.

I cant see how they can do an accurate assessment when they could be out by billions.

So how do you suggest they collect more robust data, oh wise one?

So who do we actually believe, the Lc originally stated £1.4 Billion, this was revised to £2.4 Billion, now we have these people saying £8.85 Billion.

Description and scale of key monetised benefits by ‘main affected groups’
On-going benefit: Taxi users - Reduced waiting time, £1,987,960 (best estimate); Taxi trade - Reduced regulatory burden, £25,000,000 per year (best estimate); Removal of unmet demand survey, £620,000 per year (best estimate); Reduced assaults on taxi drivers.

HTF can this project of changing the legislation 'Reduce assaults on taxi drivers'?

Or does the new, revised Impact Assessment now firmly place this 'Reforming the law of taxi and private hire services' in the land of the cuckoo?