Draft Policy Recommendations for Application Based Cab Aggregators (ABCA)

in India Authors Prof. M. P. Jaiswal Professor & Dean (Research & Accreditations) MDI, Gurgaon Prof. Parul Gupta Assistant Professor Public Policy & Governance MDI, Gurgaon Prof. Prageet Aeron Assistant Professor Information Technology MDI, Gurgaon Mr. Rajeev Gupta Managing Director Resource Development International (India) Pvt. Ltd. Sr. Advisor – European Business Group

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................ iii

1. BACKGROUND & RECOMMENDATIONS .....................................................................4

2. SHARING ECONOMY – THE CONCEPT ........................................................................6

3. ECONOMICS OF SHARING ECONOMY .........................................................................9

4. GLOBAL LANDSCAPE OF SHARING ECONOMY ................................................... 11

5. EVOLUTION OF SHARING ECONOMY IN INDIA – SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON TRANSPORT INDUSTRY ...................................................................................................... 15

6. APPLICATION BASED CAB AGGREGATORS (ABCA) IN INDIA ........................ 17

7. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................ 19

8. SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT OF ABCAs ON MAJOR STAKEHOLDERS ......... 20

9. CONCERNS OF ABCA AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS – TAKE AWAY POINTS FROM ROUND TABLE .......................................................................................................... 27

10. KEY FINDINGS FROM ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION AND PERSONAL INTERVIEWS ........................................................................................................................... 29

11. HEAT FACED BY ABCA IN INDIA .............................................................................. 30

12. GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES ...................................................................................... 32

13. CHALLENGES OF REGULATORS ON A NEW FRONTIER ................................. 36

EXHIBIT ONE

ANNEXURE I

ANNEXURE II

iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Sharing economy is an umbrella term often describing economic and social activity involving online transactions. Originally growing out of the open-source community to refer to peer-to-peer based sharing of access to goods and services. The leading businesses that are advancing the concept of the “sharing economy” are in many respects no longer insurgents and newcomers. The size and scale of Uber, Ola and several other firms now rival, or even surpass, those of some of the world’s largest businesses in transportation, hospitality and other sectors. As the economic power of these technology-driven firms grow, there commences debate on social and economic impact of these firms. In India, Application Based Cab aggregators (ABCA), using one of the models of sharing economy, have taken the market by storm in the past three years. Aggressive marketing, huge signup campaigns for driver-entrepreneurs and funding rounds got them the attention of the city’s travelling population. If we rewind time by five years, no one in India knew about Ola, but today, the app is being used to complete over 7,50,000 rides every day with more than 2,50,000 cars on the road. Its US based counterpart, Uber came to India later and is currently locked in head-on battle with Ola for the leadership of cab transportation market in India. In September, 2016, Management Development Institute, (MDI), Gurgaon in collaboration with Research Development International (RDI) undertook a research project to study the sustainability of sharing economy business model adopted by ABCAs, their social and economic impact on key stakeholders that included taxi drivers and customers. Since this is a kind of service which is affecting the life of public at large and will have significant long term impact on labour market as well, a key part of the study was aimed at researching policy concerns and provide some insights about thrust areas to regulators from a public policy perspective. Starting with a summary of various policy concerns that emerged during the study, the report details policy recommendations derived from various stakeholders in the transportation ecosystem. The report goes on into a detailed discussion on concept and economics of sharing economy and summarizes the research findings of the survey conducted in metro cities of the country, a round table discussion held at MDI, Gurgaon, attended by key stakeholders and one to one interviews conducted with various stakeholders in India. The concluding part of the report analyses the advisories issued by central government to regulate business operations of ABCAs in the counties and the response of different state Governments on the same.

iv

1. BACKGROUND & RECOMMENDATIONS

It has been a trend in traditional rental markets that owners hold assets to rent them out. However, in recent years, technology startup firms have created a new kind of rental market, in which owners of the assets sometimes use their assets for personal consumption and sometimes rent them out. Such markets are referred to as peer-to-peer (P2P) or "sharing economy" markets. Some renting by consumer-owners has long existed, but it was largely confined to expensive, infrequently used goods, such as vacation homes and pleasure boats, usually with longer duration rental periods. Traditionally, consumer-owner goods or assets were shared among family and friends, commonly without explicit payment. Unlike this practice, these peer-to-peer (P2P) rental markets are open markets, and the goods or assets are "shared" in exchange for payment.

Companies based on the sharing economy concept, such as Uber and Airbnb have shown spectacular growth over the last couple of years and have generated an ongoing debate about how to regulate them. This has drawn the attention of regulators to businesses that are using Internet and mobile technology to create marketplaces or assignment mechanisms that match up disparate buyers and sellers. These businesses can be witnessed across a broad swath of industries —transportation (e.g. Uber, Lyft, Blablacar, Didi Kuaidi), accommodation (Airbnb, Kozaza, Couchsurfing), household services (TaskRabbit, Care.com), deliveries (Postmates, I nstacart), retail commerce (eBay, Etsy, Taobao), consumer loans (Lending Club, Prosper), currency exchange (TransferWise, Currency Fair), project finance (Kickstarter), computer programming (oDesk, Freelancer) etc. In this study, we focus on Application Based Cab Aggregators (ABCA) such as Uber and Ola, which connect drivers with passengers for trips.

While recommending a regulatory framework for ABCAs in India, we argue that top-down, government-imposed regulations are only one choice in a suite of alternatives. Light regulations in the interest of the public good, the sustainability of the industry and the economic future of the country are to be encouraged. However, by approaching the policy concerns with a heavy handed approach, the government may destroy a huge number of potentially mutually beneficial exchanges metabolizing in emerging innovative business models under sharing economy concept. New technologies and software platforms have made previously unrealizable exchange possible. The main threat to the further emergence of these new technologies is crowding out of beneficial exchanges with stringent government regulation. Thus we strongly advocate that business operations of ABCAs must be regulated in a manner that does not stifle innovation. The recommendations made herein are derived from socio-economic research, round table discussions and interviews with individual stakeholders in order to provide a holistic perspective. They include multiple view points in order to stay fair and balanced to all parties.

2

i. Appropriate Regulation for ABCAs Concern: As per the advisories issued by the central govt., ABCAs are required to adhere to regulations modeled on the traditional transport sector such as minimum fleet of vehicles, CCTVs in vehicles and inordinate permit fees for all taxis. Such regulations may create entry barriers for new potential players in the sharing economy marketplace, thus discouraging the growth of the market and also competition. Since ABCAs are proponents of an entirely new business model, the regulatory framework must be adapted appropriately to fit new realities.

Recommendation: Regulators should balance regulations in a manner that regulations do not discourage innovations in business models and encourage competition in the market place. Regulations such as cap on the fleet sizes of vehicles or conditions imposed on the fleet composition may hamper the growth of ABCAs and may discourage the new entrants to ABCA marketplace. It is recommended that such regulations should be reconsidered so that it does not stifle the growth and competition in the ABCA's marketplace.

ii. Legal definitions of ABCA and other business models of sharing economy like ride sharing model Concern: In August 2016, the Union Cabinet chaired by the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi gave its approval for Motor Vehicle (Amendment) Bill 2016. Among many other changes proposed in the Bill, the bill defines an aggregator as a digital intermediary or market place whose services may be used by a passenger to connect with a driver for transportation purposes. The Bill requires these aggregators to obtain appropriate licenses. The aggregators will also be required to comply with the Information Technology Act, 2000. However, the bill does not extend the definition and does not differentiate aggregators from other models of sharing economy like ride sharing. The difference between taxi companies and aggregators is still not clearly defined. The legal definition of different business models adopted by players of taxi market in India, are required to elaborate on the criteria for the coverage of the same under respective definition.

Recommendation: The policy makers should provide a legal definition of all the existing business models operating under sharing economy concept. The definitions have to provide for criteria for inclusion and must also have scope of covering emerging innovative business models under the same. There may be separate definitions and treatments for innovative business models, however an exhaustive definition with a similar treatment to all such models may also be considered.

3

iii. Leveraging Capital from abroad to create Monopoly Concerns: Any platform business is based on one side subsidizing the other, thereby bringing enough critical mass to ensure overall profits. However, in the case of ABCAs the likelihood of sustainability of this business in its current form is miniscule given that they are spending on both sides, giving incentives to drivers and discounts to consumers. This deficit is being funded by private equity based capital, and in certain cases, by global players channeling their profits from foreign markets. However, one could question the intentions of such players, as this spending does not seem logical unless they have a plan of creating a monopoly. This does not augur well in the long run for the Indian taxi industry and the consumers alike as monopoly in such an essential market could lead to irrational price hikes after the competition is wiped out.

Recommendations: In the benefit of ABCAs, incumbents, drivers, consumers and taxi industry as a whole, it would be prudent if the capital flowing from abroad in this sector is regulated so as to stop companies from competing on price alone. We are not in favour of removal of dynamic pricing completely but as we said before both upper and lower caps will automatically prevent over-discounting of consumers. There must also be measures to check over-incentivizing of drivers. The companies need to compete on parameters other than prices such as innovation, localization, service quality, reliability etc. One option is that ABCAs should not be allowed to price their services below the cost. Government regulations should also be broad in order to ensure that they do not create alternate channels to subsidize and incentivize in excess of the revenues collected from customers. This will help the industry in promoting healthy competition amongst players and removing entry barriers for more entrepreneurs to enter the industry. Other possible options such as ride sharing and driver sharing also need to be explored.

iv. Pricing strategy adopted by ABCA Concern: The advisory issued by central government states that state governments can notify the maximum fares which can be charged by ABCAs according to the Motor Vehicle Act to provide a level playing field with taxi service providers. However ABCAs use surge-pricing strategy in which demand and supply dynamics decide the fare at any given time. Surge pricing is a system where rates to be charged are dynamically adjusted upwards when the demand for taxis exceeds supply. The taxi aggregators say that this system uses simple economics to meet the increased demand — the increase in prices will attract more drivers to the area, and as a result, the increased demand can be met. The surge pricing system leads to higher charges during certain times, such as peak hours, holidays, events, etc. In India, Karnataka and Delhi are the states to have specifically prohibited surge pricing. Lack of regulatory oversight (until recently) gave such aggregators an advantage over traditional taxi services in terms of pricing.

4

Recommendation: Many economists strongly advocate the surge pricing system. They claim that this system itself is a perfect method to deal with a supply-demand imbalance. Research even suggests that the system was highly effective in dealing with increased demand during peak times. The surge pricing strategy provides a competitive advantage to ABCAs and makes this market attractive for new entrants. Thus restricting surge pricing completely may stifle the innovative strategies adopted by these emerging business models. We recommend that surge pricing may be permitted, subject to certain restrictions, such as a limit on the multiplier (say a maximum of 3), prohibiting surge pricing during emergencies, etc.

v. Inclusion of Existing Mobility Solutions

Concern: One of the findings of our socio-economic research (referenced in Sec 8.A.iii.b) is that traditional mobility solutions such as Black & Yellow Cabs, Auto-Rickshaws and Private Taxis are facing loss of business due to the advent of ABCAs. While this can be seen as a natural progression due to disruptive innovation by ABCAs, the traditional mobility players still provide a valuable service to customers ensuring access to transportation for all price points and walks of life. Further, the loss of livelihoods for these players could lead to unrest and economic consequences. Recommendation: It is recommended that government should take into account the inclusion and continuation of existing mobility solutions such as Black & Yellow taxis and Auto Rickshaws. Any regulations imposed should create a level playing field for all players and prevent practices such as subsidization of passenger fares that could create entry barriers for them to enter the Application Based transport services aggregation platform.

vi. Clarity on contractual relationship between ABCA, taxi drivers and passengers Concern: The ABCAs claim not to be taxi operating companies but to be service providers who provide services to platform users like taxi drivers and passengers by bringing them in contact. ABCA claim they can not be legally responsible to the passengers (customer) for any misbehaviour or criminal offence committed by the drivers with the customer as the taxi drivers are merely the platform users not their employees. In simple words ABCA denies of any contractual obligation between them and customer for a wrongful act of taxi driver identified by them to serve the customer.

Recommendation: The advisory issued by central govt mandates that the aggregator must verify the licence and criminal record of driver before registering them on their platform, yet a number of cases of offence by the drivers against the passengers have been recorded in near past. This indicates that accountability of aggregators for the acts of drivers needs attention of the policy makers.

5

vii. Equality before law

Concern: This concern closely relates to definitional issues that we had raised in Point 1 of this section. We have All India Tourist Permits, (AITP), black and yellow cabs, radio taxis, etc. But we could have a situation wherein a black and yellow cab operates on an ABCA platform, or a radio taxi moving to a ABCA platform. This inter-operability of permit types is as of today unclear. Similarly, we have issues among the bus service aggregators that would need to be either resolved or made inter-operable.

Recommendation: Similar to mobile number portability among telecom service providers possibility of inter-operability of permits and licenses should be considered and completely online processes for enabling such portability would go a long way in ensuring success of sharing economy and at the same time solving public problem of transportation in this case.

viii. Accountability of ABCA towards customer security and quality of service Concern: As discussed before, ABCAs claim not to be responsible for any misconduct or wrongful act done by the driver, as they are merely platforms bringing both the parties in contact. The central government has clearly stated in their advisory that aggregators must have a 24x7 call centre and it is okay to brand the vehicles. They must also provide web or mobile app based customer service and grievance redressal centre with a phone and email ID. Our survey shows that, out of the two major ABCAs operating in India, while Ola has functional call centers for both customers as well as drivers, Uber offers no such facility. There is an email address provided by the ABCAs to register complains of customer but this does not provide the level of service expected.

Recommendation: The accountability of ABCA towards the safety and quality of service offered to the customer must be explained and enhanced. The policy makers should clearly define the role of each party and their accountability towards one another. We recommend the policy makers to expressly mention the rights and duties of ABCA towards drivers and customers, which is completely missing at present.

ix. Clarity on legal treatment of privately owned assets for commercial purpose Concern: Besides ABCA, another popular business model under sharing economy concept is sharing idle or surplus assets with others. BlaBla Cars, for example offers the ridesharing services by bringing two entities in contact, those are, the private car owner driving with vacant seats and commuters in search of seat to travel from one city to another. Similar is the case of Airbnb who aggregates the owners of vacant rooms or house for the people who hire these rooms or home for a limited period for money. In

6

such cases the privately owned assets like cars or rooms or homes are being used for commercial purpose without having the licence for commercial use. Existing legal framework does not provide any clarity on these issues; platform owners and users of the platform are sometimes guilty of violating the provisions of some Act or the other.

Recommendations: Since sharing brings with it economic, environmental and social benefits, such practices must be encouraged and business models facilitating such practices must be protected. At the same time, various protections for all parties involved in the transaction must be put into place. A multipurpose licence may be introduced for all such big ticket assets those may be used for sharing purpose by the owners. This may help the regulators to earn the revenue by commercial usage of private assets and on the other hand facilitating sharing of idle assets by the owners by permitting them to do so within reasonable guidelines.

x. Monitoring of driving patterns and health of drivers engaged by ABCA Concerns: Some ABCA and radio taxi drivers have been driving as high as 16-18 hours per day, and thereby putting their own health and the safety of passengers at risk. This despite the Motor Vehicle Act, clearly specifying the maximum number of hours drivers can work. This is a violation of the law and at the same time a practice which should be avoided. The problem is especially severe as drivers are incentivized to increase the number of hours driven/rides taken by ABCAs. Further, driver often work on multiple platforms switching between the platforms, making monitoring of exact times for which they are operating impossible.

Recommendations: Since technology platform has created this problem we have to look at technology for solving this as well. It is recommended that ABCA and others explore ways of preventing the same driver from operating a car for extended periods. Further, the biggest step ABCAs can take in this regard would be to halt incentivization of drivers to drive longer hours and more trips as this would be the primary reason for drivers to overwork. This would need guidelines from Government so as to explore various options on limiting driver hours. This will lead to a better lifestyle for drivers by removing the compulsion to overwork for incentives while also enhancing passenger safety, customer experience and reduce incidents of rash driving.

2. SHARING ECONOMY – THE CONCEPT The Sharing Economy is a socio-economic ecosystem built around the sharing of human, physical and intellectual resources. It includes the shared creation, production, distribution, trade and consumption of goods and services by different people and organisations. The Sharing Economy is currently in its infancy, known most notably as a series of services and start-ups which enable P2P exchanges through technology. However this is only the

7

beginning, in its entirety and potential sharing economy is a new and alternative socio-economic system which embeds sharing and collaboration at its heart – across all aspects of social and economic life. A Sharing Economy enables different forms of value exchange and is a hybrid economy. It encompasses many aspects, such as swapping, exchanging, collective purchasing, collaborative consumption, shared ownership, shared value, co-operatives, co-creation, recycling, upcycling, re-distribution, trading used goods, renting, borrowing, lending, subscription based models, peer-to-peer, collaborative economy, circular economy, on-demand economy, gig economy, crowd economy, pay-as-you-use economy, peer-to-peer lending, micro financing, micro-entrepreneurship, social media, the Mesh, social enterprise, futurology, crowdfunding, crowdsourcing, cradle-to-cradle, open source, open data, user generated content (UGC) and public services. In some cases, sharing economy based companies are trying to create more efficient or lower cost versions of consumer products such as taxi service or small loans. In other cases, businesses are trying to create services that many people did not have access to, such as on-demand delivery service, or startup business financing. There has been partial success, to find a label that describes what these new businesses are doing. For instance, the term “sharing economy” captures the idea that people can sometimes have a spare asset (a seat in their car, a room in their home, an unused lawn mower) and sometimes be in need of that same asset. It is an apt description for companies such as Blablacar, Couchsurfing and Peerby that are trying to create communities where people exchange rides or overnight stays or household goods. On the other hand, sharing economy seems less apt when applied to marketplaces such as Uber and OLA in India, where these Application Based Cab Aggregators (ABCA) connect the drivers with the passengers for a price, Etsy, where small producers sell craft goods, Prosper, where individuals can make consumer loans, or Care.com, where nannies or caretakers offer their services. The participants’ roles in these markets are more clearly defined, and new goods, money and time are less obviously viewed as spare assets to be shared. Instead, these businesses sometimes refer to themselves as peer-to-peer to capture the idea that both buyers and sellers tend to be individuals or small firms, even if their roles are more clearly defined. Some important building blocks of Sharing Economy are discussed below;

● People: Something that is at the heart of a Sharing Economy; is the people. It is a People’s Economy, meaning that people are active citizens and participants of their communities and the wider society. In simple words, the participants of a Sharing Economy are individuals, communities, companies, organisations and associations, all of whom are deeply embedded in a highly efficient sharing system, to which all contribute and benefit from. In a business based on Sharing Economy concept, people create, collaborate, produce and distribute peer-to-peer, person-to-person (P2P).

● Production: In a Sharing Economy, people, organisations and communities as active

participants, produce or co-produce goods and services collectively or co-operatively. Production is open and accessible to those who wish to produce. Internet technologies

8

and networks are the enablers for the development of products and services in a collective manner, transcending geographical boundaries. Local production with positive (or minimal) environmental impacts is celebrated.

● Value & Systems of Exchange: Being a hybrid economy, in sharing economy, there

are a variety of forms of exchange, incentives and value creation. Value is seen not purely as financial value, but wider economic, environmental and social values are equally important, accounted for and sought after. This concept is based on both material and non-material or social rewards and encourages the most efficient use of resources. This hybrid incentive system enables and motivates people to engage in productive activities. In a Sharing Economy, waste or spare has value, it is viewed as resource in the wrong place. A Sharing Economy enables ‘waste’ or ‘spare’ is to be reallocated where it is needed and valued. Idle resources are re-allocated or traded with those who want or need them to create an efficient, equitable, closed loop or circular system.

● Distribution: in a Sharing Economy, resources are distributed and redistributed via a

system that is cost effective, efficient and equitable on a local, regional, national and global scale. Shared ownership models such as cooperatives, collective purchasing and collaborative consumption are features of a Sharing Economy, promoting a fair distribution of assets that benefits society as a whole.

Access is promoted and preferred over ownership and seen as distributed or shared ownership. Being a member of a car club, for example, and paying for what you use, is seen as preferable and smarter than bearing the cost, burden, resource wastage and idling capacity of ownership.

● Planet: Another important building block of sharing economy is its concern for

planet. Sharing Economy puts both people and planet at the heart of the economic system. Goods and services within a Sharing Economy are designed for sustainability rather than obsolescence, promoting not only the re-use of resources, but also models that have a positive impact on the planet. Promoting the flourishing of human life within environmental limits, value creation, production and distribution operate in synergy with the available natural resources, not at the expense of the planet. Environmental responsibility, including the burdens of environmental damage, are shared; among people, organisations, and national governments.

● Power: a Sharing Economy both empowers its citizens economically and socially and

enables the economic and social redistribution of power. Both facets hinge on an open, shared, distributed, democratic decision-making process and governance systems, at the local, national and global level. Power is shared or distributed and the infrastructure enables citizens to access power and decision-making.

● Technology enabled communications: communications are central to the flow,

efficiency and sustainability of this economic system. Sharing Economy facilitates the sharing and accessibility of information and knowledge A fundamental tenant of the

9

Sharing Economy is that communications are distributed, knowledge and intelligence are widely accessible, easily obtained and can be used by different individuals, communities or organisations and used in a variety of different ways for a myriad of purposes. Technology and social networks enable the flow of communications and support the sharing of information.

3. ECONOMICS OF SHARING ECONOMY Cost Reductions Through Decentralization Recently, disruptive technologies have significantly reduced the transaction costs of exchange. The reducing transaction costs arising from new technologies have had a deep impact on the way individuals undertake economic exchange. It is achieved by making dispersed knowledge cheap and ubiquitous. Combining this with innovative software platforms, business firms have vastly extended the ability to coordinate economic exchanges. Transaction cost economics focus on making the transaction– rather than commodities, which are the basic unit of analysis and by assessing governance structures, of which firms and markets are the leading alternative, in terms of their capacities to economize on transaction costs. A workable concept of transaction costs can be divided into three main parts:

i. Search and information costs ii. Bargaining and decision costs

iii. Governance and enforcement costs

As economies grow, the number of potentially, mutually beneficial trades also grows. However all of them cannot be accessed. When transaction costs are too high, many of these exchanges are rendered “unprofitable” and will not take place. Sharing economy business models are better able to satisfy the needs and wants of consumers. Decentralisation allows some goods to be exchanged at a lower cost. The sharing economy often makes it cheaper to exchange through decentralised markets, compared to production and consumption through large corporations. It is expensive to run large hotel chains, taxi companies, production lines, and banks. Uber, for example, offers a ridesharing service that is up to 50 per cent cheaper than a taxi.1 The level of flexibility in the provision of goods and services is a particular strength of decentralised institutions in the sharing economy. Consumers have a set of preferences for the goods or services they want to buy or avail. Consumers derive some level of utility (or value) from buying and consuming those goods or services. More utility will be derived from goods or services that more closely match their preferences. Thus sharing economy offers great potential for preference-matching through the decentralisation of production and distribution of goods and services. The more decentralised transactions become, the more the conditions

1 Katie, ‘Uber’s Impact in Australia’, Uber Blog, October 28 2014, http://blog.uber.com/Australia-Impact

10

and characteristics of the exchange can be personalized to more closely match the needs of the individual. Better Matching Through Dynamic Pricing or Surge Pricing As we know that markets coordinate knowledge to match supply and demand. The sharing economy is able to implement several novel models for this purpose. With cheaper and deeper information, sharing economy business models can more accurately leverage market mechanisms and match dynamic supply and demand. Markets coordinate knowledge to match supply and demand. It aims to maximize supply and ensure that service providers are available to address service requests and hence, appropriately meet consumer demands. When we talk about Application Based Cab Aggregators’ (ABCA) pricing models, “dynamic” or “surge” pricing model deserves an explanation here. Dynamic pricing models are not limited to ABCA. Traditionally, the airline and hotel industries have used supply and demand metrics to raise and lower prices accordingly for revenue management and optimization. This is only one of the many examples emerging in sharing economy platforms. ABCA may charge peak-time variable fares in order to ensure that people get around reliably. Dynamic pricing does not depend on the time of the day, but rather on the conditions at the point of origin. Price variations under the dynamic pricing model are determined by an algorithm, which analyzes multiple factors to equalize demand and supply to arrive at a rate that incentivizes driver users to provide services at a time where no other service provider is willing to do so. Dynamic pricing is applied on a location-specific basis depending on the supply-demand ratio at a particular point in time. The moment that the supply and demand ratio equalizes and steadies, dynamic pricing ends and the base model of pricing resumes. More often than not, consumers are always notified of an increase in price and are fully informed of the quantum of such dynamic change. Another recent example is Airbnb. Early in their development, one of the leading global accommodation aggregators discovered that listing a “space” was a relatively easy process until the potential hosts had to pick a price. This company set out to fix this problem through a series of algorithms. It now provides price recommendations to hosts on a model based on location, likeness and an idea that it describe as “recency”. These price recommendations also include temperature as a proxy for seasonal patterns of booking behavior. Solutions to market-based issues of dynamic pricing are currently being tested in sharing economy platforms across the world. These models are all possible due to ubiquitous information and necessary knowledge available to the buyers and sellers at the right time. Gross Development Product (GDP) GDP measurement now considers the value-added share of domestically produced goods and services, public administration, unpaid household work and parts of the shadow economy. Sharing activities that replace or add to existing economic activities should also be included as sharing spreads. Besides other indicators, the economic performance of business firm can be measured by its value added, i.e. its production value minus the value of intermediate

11

inputs. To be more precise, value added by a business firm, includes employee compensation, tax payments, interest payments, rental payments as well as owner profits (i.e. national income). It is a pure output measure which excludes factors such as a consumer’s satisfaction with a product. To measure the economic performance of a country, we have to sum up the value added of all domestic enterprises. To calculate a country’s gross domestic product (GDP), one takes only domestically produced goods and services into account, subtracting subsidies and adding taxes. The European System of Accounts (ESA) 2010 considers more than just businesses to measure GDP, other productive sectors, such as public administration, unpaid household production (housework, child care, etc.) and parts of the shadow economy, are incorporated as well. The value added of these sectors normally is estimated either because activities are not observed, or there is no production value. Including non-business sectors and shadow markets when measuring GDP makes perfect sense. Sharing activities are more difficult to be measured for the purpose of GDP. Purely socially motivated components of sharing, such as spending time with someone (e.g. via rentafriend.com) to increase quality of life, are necessarily not included in GDP. However, sharing for money, or sharing activities that are similar to business-to-consumer activities are relevant to economic performance, though only some of them are already measured by today’s GDP. For example, Internet platforms such as freelancer.com match workers and enterprises for project-based cooperation. In this case, these projects’ value added is measured by GDP. The booking commission that Blablacar takes for car sharing is a part of employee compensation and owner profit. These components of car-sharing activities also find their way into GDP. 4. GLOBAL LANDSCAPE OF SHARING ECONOMY The highest adoption rates of sharing economy worldwide are seen in three industries, those are transportation, hospitality and food & beverages. On the other hand, new sectors like health care, groceries, handyman services, commercial trucks aggregation etc have members joining the sharing economy. Compared to “traditional” markets’, the on-demand sharing economy, facilitated by technology platforms, offers following unique attributes:

• More sustainable use of idle and under-utilized resources • De-centralized exchange, leading to cost reductions • Alternative pricing models such as dynamic pricing

If we closely examine global landscape of sharing economy, following industries deserve a discussion here;

● Transportation: The most prominent examples in the transportation sector are Application Based Cab Aggregators (ABCA) such as Uber and Ola. These services allow consumers to connect with a verified nearby driver users willing to drive them to their destination for rates set by the service. The sharing economy may also change

12

other aspects of the transportation market. Emerging car-pooling platforms such as BlaBla, have emerged as an alternate to both car ownership and car rentals, by offering convenience and flexibility. Similarly this concept is being adopted for inter/intra-city logistics and movement of goods, thereby, organizing a highly fragmented transportation sector and ensuring customers enjoy a swift, simple and smarter on-demand service. Under the sharing economy business model, owners/drivers of traditional assets such as trucks and tempos drivers now enjoy increased, more predictable and sustainable earnings.

● Hospitality (peer to peer accommodation): Sharing economy business model in

hospitality is allowing travellers to forgo traditional hotels in favour of renting new options like spare rooms and homes. Airbnb, Stayzilla and OYO rooms are among some of the platforms for accommodation currently present in India.

● Food and beverage (F&B): The F&B business is taking advantage of Application

based technology platforms by cementing the gap between restaurant- goers and facilitating accelerated delivery. These businesses are making food delivery and payment more efficient. Success in these models is enabled on its user friendly interface, comprehensive and verified listings, updated information and analytics to more effectively match supply with demand. Companies active in this sector include Swiggy, Food Panda, Tiny Owl and Zomato.

Global Trends of Sharing Economy with Special Emphasis on Peer–to-Peer (P2P) Model The sharing economy has exploded globally over the last couple of years with big businesses like Hyatt and GM getting into the game, and pioneers of the movement like Uber and Airbnb achieving valuations in the billions. It is even more interesting to know that sharing is not just driving commerce but also culture. This can be witnessed everywhere from the co-creation of products by companies and consumers, to the new platform driven ecosystems that are driving tomorrow’s innovation, like GE’s Industrial Internet model Predix. Over the past decade, the world has experienced the rise of a new sharing economy – one where people use Internet and mobile technologies to access goods and resources provided by their peers, rather than a traditional corporate vendor. As of 2013, the five main sectors (peer-to-peer lending and crowd-funding, online staffing, peer-to-peer accommodation, car sharing, and music and video streaming) of the sharing economy comprised a market of about US$ 15 Billion globally, according to a research conducted by PwC. The report states that by 2025, this market will grow to US$ 335 Billion, more than 20 times its current size and equal to the traditional rental market (Refer figure 2).

Figure2: Size of Sharing Economy (based on 5 Primary Sectors) vs. Traditional Rental

Market over Time (In US$ Billion, 2013 and 2025).

13

Source: “The Sharing Economy: Sizing the Revenue Opportunity”, PwC, 2014

Peer- to Peer Model of sharing economy: Sharing economy businesses using “peer-to-peer” models are growing faster than other models in influence, with top performers attracting subscribers and funding at exponential rates and taking business from traditional players. Researchers believe that traditional rental industries are unlikely to disappear anytime soon, facing sluggish growth in the years to come. For example, while the car rental market is projected to grow at a CAGR of 2% through 2025, the car sharing market will grow more than 11 times faster (refer figure 3). Figure 3: Projected Compound Annual Growth Rate for Key Sharing Economy Sectors

(In % 2013-2025)

14

Source: “The Sharing Economy: Sizing the Revenue Opportunity”, PwC, 2014 The deeper analysis of peer-to-peer (P2P) model reveals that even in P2P accommodation, car sharing and taxi services have been among the fastest-growing sectors. By 2016, Airbnb is expected to surpass the number of rooms booked per night by the world’s largest hotel chain, and it already accounts for 10% of overnight stays in London. As of March 2015, drivers driving for Uber, globally were providing more than twice the number of rides per day as all the taxis in New York City. The car sharing industry grew by a factor of more than 15 between 2006 and 2014 (Refer figure 4).

Figure 4: Growth of the Global Car Sharing Market (In US$ Billion, 2006-2014)

15

Sources: “Strategic Insights of the Global Carsharing Market”, Frost & Sullivan, 2014;

2014 New York City Taxicab Fact Book; Uber 5. EVOLUTION OF SHARING ECONOMY IN INDIA – SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON TRANSPORT INDUSTRY The proliferation of digital platforms and mobile applications in recent years has been the primary driver for the momentum in collaborative consumption in recent years. Although it is a relatively new concept in India, it is prevalent across the globe in the form of peer-to-peer ride-sharing (BlaBlaCar), accommodation-sharing and renting household items. The sharing economy as a concept gained popularity in India with on-demand transportation platforms. Application Based Cab Aggregators (ABCA) operating from these platforms, allowed consumers to connect with a verified nearby driver users willing to drive them to their destination for rates set by the service. The sharing economy is also changing other aspects of the transportation market, for example rise of car-pooling platforms. The trend is now being followed by other sectors including hospitality and food & beverages. New business models are allowing travellers to forgo traditional hotels in favor of renting new options like spare rooms and homes. Airbnb, Stayzilla and OYO rooms are among some of the platforms based on sharing economy concept for accommodation currently present in India. The F&B business is taking advantage of on-demand technology platforms by bridging the gap between

16

restaurant- goers and facilitating accelerated delivery. Companies such as Swiggy, Food Panda, and Zomato are making food delivery and payment more efficient. An Assessment of Indian Sharing Economy Market The sharing economy trend in India is gaining traction as more consumers, particularly urban millennials, are finding it convenient and cost effective. Although it is a relatively new concept in India, it is prevalent across the globe in various forms including peer-to-peer ride-sharing, accommodation-sharing and renting household items. Globally, the sharing economy is estimated to grow at a CAGR of 139% to reach US$115 billion by 2016 from US$3.5 billion in 20122. In India, sharing personal products such as one’s home or car that are currently not in use by the owner is still to be seen. However, the opportunities it presents are substantial, given the demographics, market demand and shift in consumer preferences. One of the primary drivers for the momentum in sharing economy is the proliferation of digital platforms and mobile applications in recent years and India is no exception to this. Although, internet penetration in India is just 19.2% (Refer figure5), there is significant opportunity for the companies in the sharing economy to grow. Mobile proliferation has been another driver for the sharing economy companies in all countries including India. The number of mobile subscribers is expected to grow at a much faster rate due to decreasing costs of smartphones and affordable connectivity costs. 4G roll-out and increase in 3G penetration has boosted speeds to many folds. Since most of the sharing economy companies leverage mobiles as a medium to reach out to customers, rapidly growing mobile industry in India, offers a lot of opportunities to these companies.

Figure 5: Proliferation of Digital Platforms in India3

Sources: Internet live stats, IAMAI, eMarketer, Statista and Internet retailer

2 www.forbesindia.com/ article/chgsb/share.-don’t-own-the-sharing-economy-takesoff/ 39241/0, accessed 30 September 2015 3 All data as of 2014

17

In India, till now, the sharing economy has been more impactful in the consumer markets e.g. transportation and retail where physical assets are consumed as services. However, as the brave new world of commerce is being unfolded, sharing economy models will make rapid inroads to include a whole range of intangible services such as on-demand cleaning services and delivery services. 6. APPLICATION BASED CAB AGGREGATORS (ABCA) IN INDIA An aggregator is an individual or entity that gathers, organizes, and classifies things into groups that have similar characteristics. Application Based Cab Aggregators (ABCA) are thus the entities aggregating cabs for the customers willing to drive them to their destination for rates set by the service. By offering a combination of an innovative blend of technology, transportation, and low-cost convenience, ABCA appeal to the interests of all people with a smartphone. ABCAs utilize three major technologies: GPS navigation, smartphones, and social networks, each serving a distinct purpose. GPS navigation systems provide ride efficiency in both distance and time, smartphones allow for convenience and accessibility, and social networks build trust and accountability for both the drivers and the riders. Taxi Space in India The taxi space in India is heating up and has been witnessing a phenomenal growth in the past 6-7 years. Over $400 Mn (INR 2400 crores) of Venture Capitalists’ (VC) money has been pumped in into these companies in the past 4 years itself. The Indian radio taxi market alone is pegged anywhere between $6-$9 billion dollars by different estimates, and is forecasted to grow at 17-20% annually. It is to be noted here that organised taxi market is still minuscule as compared to rest of the taxi market in India; it constitutes only 4-5% of the market in terms of sheer number of vehicles. Rest of it, is by operators who own fleets of 2-50 cars and typically have a presence in 1 or 2 cities. Although ABCAs operate similar to a taxi service, yet they differentiate in that ABCAs use online-enabled platforms to connect riders to drivers using their own personal vehicle. ABCA by providing a service called ‘real-time ridesharing,’ not only locates the potential rider, but also the density of drivers nearby and the wait time for the closest driver. Driver information and a method of contact in order to arrange the one-time shared rides are also provided. Convenient and fast, these applications remove stress from both the driver and the rider, providing strong incentives for riders to switch from taxi service to ridesharing. Mega Cabs and Fast Track Taxi started out in 2001 itself with small fleets. The market, however, started seeing traction only from 2006 onwards when the likes of Meru Cabs, Easy Cabs and Savaari marked their way to Indian market. In the initial phase of evolution of taxi market in India, the taxi companies owned the complete fleet with the drivers as salaried employees. This phase witnessed high capital costs to the company – car loan EMI’s, high maintenance costs. While this model facilitated rapid expansion, it also came at a huge cost. Caused high stress levels in drivers and there were driver strikes that affected the service to a

18

larger extend. During this phase, bookings were mainly done via telephone calls and cash payment was the dominant model. The second phase witnessed the introduction of fleet aggregation model in taxi industry. Companies like TaxiForSure and Ola started this model where small fleet owners or single car owners can put the company brand on the car, and get registered with them. Cars are free to take up non-company rides, but for every company-initiated ride, they pay the company a fixed percentage as commission from their service to connect them with potential customers. This model had low capital expenditure and lower maintenance costs. In this model, booking was done via telephone calls as well as through their websites. While cash was still the dominant payment form, in-cab POS terminal for credit / debit cards started being used as well in this phase. The third which is in progress, is experiencing the adoption of the hybrid model in the taxi industry in India. In this model part of the fleet is owned by the company and part of the fleet is from an aggregation model. Thus this model combines best of both worlds hence – better control on cab availability and service quality while keeping costs low. This model provides booking via telephone, website as well as mobile apps and the payments via cash, card and wallets. Although ABCAs like Ola and Uber stared their operations in India many years after the traditional radio taxis like Meru & Mega Cabs, they’ve already started to eclipse them in terms of city coverage, fleet size, offerings and pricing. Indian cab startups are on the growth path, with Ola leading the pack. In the company of rising cab services like Meru and Carzonrent, who create new flow every day to keep their service alive. New startups now face a huge competition and the cab industry is getting crowded by day. Following are some details of some major players of organised taxi industry in India;

● OLA Cabs: Ola Cabs a Bengaluru based ABCA, was founded on 3rd December 2010 by Bhavish Aggarwal (CEO) and Ankit Bhati. It is among the fastest growing taxi hiring firms in India. It offers taxi booking facility through a mobile app, website or through calls. By 2014, the company has expanded to a network of more than 18,000 cars across more than 65 cities. Today, Ola has more than 1,50,000 plus cabs registered on its platform and is present in more than 100 cities across the country . OLA claims to clock an average of more than 150,000 bookings per day and commands 60 percent of the taxi market share in India. Taking a strategic move, on 1st March 2015 OlaCabs bought TaxiForSure for about $200 million.

● UBER: Uber is an American company headquartered in San Francisco, California. It

was founded as “UberCab” by Travis Kalanick and Garrett Camp in 2009 and the app was released the following June. It develops, markets and operates the mobile-app-based transportation network also called Uber. The Uber app offers consumers to submit a trip request, which is routed to crowd-sourced taxi drivers. Beginning in 2012, Uber expanded internationally and in 2014, it experimented with carpooling features and made other updates. It is estimated that Uber is worth about US$41

19

billion. Uber is competing heads on with Ola in India and many other ABCAs, worldwide. Though in India, it is still struggling to clinch the peak.

● MERU CABS: Meru Cabs is a radio taxi operator based in Mumbai, founded by

Neeraj Gupta and India Value Fund (IVF) in April 2007. IVF is a private equity fund that took an equity stake in the company. Today it operates across major Indian tier-1 and metro cities. Meru accepts cab booking requests through calls, website or through their mobile application and payment through cash, card or wallet christened Cab Wallet. Meru Cabs have integrated their cab service with Google Now which can send passengers remainders for cab pickups, alerting them if they wish to book a cab based on their location and other information through Now Cards within the Google app.

● CARZONRENT: Carzonrent (India) Private Limited (CIPL) is an Indian car rental

company, founded by Rajeev K. Vij in year 2000. It is headquartered in New Delhi. Carzonrent operates a fleet of over 6500 cars in India covering New Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, Hyderabad, Ahmedabad, Chennai, Gurgaon, Jaipur, Kolkata, Noida, Pune, Ghaziabad and Faridabad. The company caters to over 6,000,000 customers annually. Offering a wide fleet of cars the company provides corporate and personal car leasing and rental services 24X7 across major cities throughout the country. EasyCabs and COR- Car Rentals are also radio taxi service units from Carzonrent. The company also has a corporate leasing program along with airport transportation services. Apart from outstation and local car rental services, the company also offers self-drive services, called MYLES and international services through tie ups with other countries.

In India, the proven success of the ABCA has huge potential to be replicated across industries such as healthcare and education. Various factors make these industries “sharing economy-ready”. Intense competition and inherent inefficiencies in delivering education and care are driving providers’ relentless focus on economies of scale, and digital technologies (cloud, mobility, social media and analytics) are laying strong groundwork for making seamless sharing possible in these industries too. Similarly, applying sharing model to education is a major step to make educational resources accessible and readily available. A knowledge marketplace can provide a powerful supplement to the traditional learning experience. 7. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The questions raised regarding various socio-economic aspects and sustainability of the ABCA operators had no ready answers. Given the newness of such business models across the world scholars are still to completely assess the long term implications of such businesses. This context called for an exploratory work on this paradigm of business to understand it better. We decided to develop our understanding about this business in three distinct stages.

i. Stage One

20

Stage one, this involved secondary data collection and development of a larger picture of the context together with familiarity with similar work across the countries especially with regard to public policy. Stage two, brought together an august panel of experts from various domains who were stakeholders in the cab ecosystem as a whole, this included not just ABCA players and drivers but also consumer forum members, health experts, traffic experts, public transportation and policy experts along with experts from academia.

ii. Stage Two

Stage two together with stage one helped in improved comprehension of research context and questions and enabled us to develop a relevant questionnaire to be administered to most critical stakeholders. This stage also helped in documenting the larger concerns and evolving appropriate constructs that could be ultimately connected/mapped to existing theoretical research on these aspects. Finally in stage three, questionnaire was administered to the specific respondents (about 1100 drivers and 300 customers) and was subjected to analysis.

iii. Stage Three

The break-up of the drivers across the metros and across the various ABCA operators, radio-taxi operators, black and yellow operators, private taxi operators, auto-rickshaw operators and even bike taxi operators was ensured to enable us to get a fairly wide sample with no specific bias of any nature post hoc. To close the loop of investigation, bring about coordination between findings from the field and expert views and also to answer any unexplained patterns, we also resorted to one-on-one interviews of selected domain experts. This process has enabled us to triangulate many open issues and derive useful insights for the regulators for whom this part of the study is intended.

8. SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT OF ABCAs ON MAJOR STAKEHOLDERS In this section we bring out insights based on the survey conducted across five cities in India (Bengaluru, Delhi-NCR, Hyderabad, Kolkata and Mumbai). This survey included more than 1100 drivers from ABCA platforms like Ola, Uber, Radio taxi players like Meru, Private taxi players, Black-yellow drivers, Auto Rickshaw drivers and even bike taxi drivers. To the best of our knowledge this is the first and most comprehensive such survey conducted in India. Below we discuss the fine print as brought out by the survey for different driver stakeholders (refer Appendix I, for details). A. Taxi Drivers

i. Financial Aspects

21

a) The taxi drivers have overwhelmingly agreed that the primary reason of driving for ABCA was better income (63%) and better standard of living (31%). As a testament to this; overall 42% drivers agreed that they collected less than INR 2000 on a daily basis, whereas the same number for ABCA and radio taxi drivers stood at about 33-34%. Similarly, for brackets 2001-3000 we see that ABCA and radio taxi drivers score marginally higher at about 56% as compared to 50% for all the drivers and finally for the income bracket 3001 and above on daily basis again ABCA drivers (10%) score better than the overall figure for other drivers (7%). The numbers mentioned above include only the passenger fare earnings of driver and do not include the driver incentive component

b) Only 20% of non ABCA drivers have reported incomes above 2500 on a daily basis

as compared to almost 40% for ABCA drivers. Interestingly, 70% of private drivers (as compared to 40% of ABCA drivers) have reported that their net earnings (after fuel and EMI etc) are between 15-25%..

c) It should also be pointed out here that (predictably) on asking about the impact of ABCA entry to their individual earnings, ABCA drivers have overwhelmingly (79%)

22

agreed that it has gone up from previous days, while the private drivers (61%), black and yellow cab drivers (54%) and auto rickshaw drivers (52%) have reported a negative impact on their incomes. Further to this, as per our survey results 75% of drivers across all categories agree that ABCA entry has led to ABCA drivers having a better standard of living.

d) Our survey presents a very interesting picture regarding the number of trips undertaken by the various drivers. A large proportion of black and yellow cab drivers (42%) and a majority (52%) auto drivers have agreed that they are looking to conduct less than 4 trips per day. Private taxi owners come next with largest proportion (48%) among them satisfied with 5-6 trips per day. 64% of private taxi drivers, 70% of black and yellow cab drivers and 81% of auto rickshaw drivers are not interested in more than 6 trips per day. This is in stark contrast to ABCA and radio taxi drivers, with 76% of them looking at making more than 6 trips per day. Further breaking this up 17% of ABCA and radio taxi drivers are interested in 7-9 trips, 40% interested in as much as 9-12 trips and about 19% even interested in conducting 12+ trips per day. As a whole this data points to two aspects, ABCA drivers are possibly overworking themselves but at the same time the claim from private players and others that their business is being hit seems incorrect as they are conducting the requisite trips per day. Advent of ABCAs has created greater availability of trips for commuters and greater efficiencies due to optimal utilization of previously under-utilized assets. However, the concerns of driver fatigue due to overwork and the corresponding effects on passenger safety must be taken into account.

e) This is further confirmed by looking at the kilometers travelled by the various players.

Only 6% of ABCA and radio taxi drivers say that they drive less than 100 kms per day as compared to 37% of private players and black yellow cabs put together. Similarly, 92% of ABCA and radio taxi drivers drive between 100-300 kms per day compared to 62% of other drivers. This is an important point especially if we consider that majority of ABCA and radio taxi trips are intra-city as compared to some private

23

taxi drivers who often have inter-city customers. Clearly, the ABCA and radio taxi driver drive more and conduct higher number of trips as compared to other drivers.

e) Another issue of interest has been incentives being earned by drivers driving for ABCA. Driver incentives are those paid to drivers by ABCAs over and above passenger fares in order to encourage them to take more trips on the respective ABCA platform. As per our survey nearly 40% of ABCA drivers say they earn less than 1000 rupees per day in incentives alone, another 40% say they earn between 1000 to 3000 rupees of incentives per day whereas 20% of ABCA drivers have admitted to earning more than INR 3000 per day in incentives only. On comparing this with the earnings figures reported by ABCA drivers, it would seem that ~50 – 60% of driver earnings are solely from incentives which is not sustainable in the long term and therefore, a matter of concern to be addressed.

f) As far as the role of incentives go, as per our survey, only about 14% of ABCA

drivers say they would continue to work for the aggregators if the incentives stop, a whopping 54-56% say they will start working for another private cab company and another 30% say they will run their own cabs independently. From a timeline perspective 36% drivers believe the incentives would end in a 2-3 year period. So, they do understand this is a short term phenomena and a majority consider themselves prepared for the contingency. However, further research into this aspect shows that most drivers underestimate their dependency on incentives due to lifestyle inflation and financial commitments as can be seen in the upcoming section

ii. Personal and Health Aspects a) On questioned about the change in spending patterns post ABCA, about 41% drivers

associated with ABCA have taken loans or made financial commitments based on incentives.

24

b) Most drivers across all categories have taken taxi loans as the primary financial commitment. Only the private taxi drivers seem to have a lower proportion of taxi loans as compared to others but they seem to have a higher proportion of home loans as compared to others.

c) On an overall basis, the majority of taxis are either leased or rented (45%) with

another 39% owned by drivers but financed through loans out of which 12% loans have been facilitated by the taxi companies. The incidence of taxi purchase on loans is much higher among ABCA drivers and radio taxi drivers as compared to others. In fact among the ABCA drivers and radio taxi drivers the ratio of ownership through loan is almost similar to rented or leased vehicles. This creates concerns that ABCAs may promote subprime lending in order to rapidly scale up their fleets. The drivers may not be able to service the loans without the aid of the driver incentives offered by ABCAs.

d) It needs to be noted here that among the private drivers, personal loans from money

lenders has been availed by around 16% people which is higher as compared to others. Possibly, the private drivers still do not rely on formal financial institutions such as banks and NBFCs for loans.

e) About 46% of ABCA drivers have accepted the fact that they have rented better

homes as compared to ones they were living in prior to working for ABCAs. This is a signal of lifestyle inflation.

f) From a social health perspective, again a majority about 59% of ABCA drivers agree

that their respect in society has gone up after they have started to earn better as a result of being employed with ABCAs, but 32% of drivers not working for ABCAs disagree with this aspect of increase in societal respect.

g) After ABCAs entry in cab business, a large proportion of drivers have reported (46%)

that their personal health has suffered as they have started working more (75%). ABCA drivers are working more to earn more incentive offered by their parent companies and private and others are fighting to survive and compete with them. Though, this should be noted that as per our survey, there is only slight difference between the ABCA drivers and others in their driving habits across day and night it is probable that driver fatigue will lead to higher number of accidents

h) Only black and yellow cab drivers have shown greater propensity for only day

working hours.

i) Another point to note is that when asked about number of hours of sleep, majority of drivers (55%) have acknowledged 4-8 hours of sleep. The only outliers in this regard were the radio taxi operators (40%) who reported less than 4 hour sleep.

25

j) Interestingly an overwhelming 70% of ABCA and Radio taxi players say they do not

go for any regular check-ups as compared to other private drivers and black and yellow cab drivers.

k) From a family life perspective a whopping 70% players across the spectrum say that

they are spending lesser time with their families since ABCAs started operating and the corresponding numbers for ABCA drivers are about 80%.

iii. Working Conditions a) All the drivers across the board apart from private taxi players have reported

harassment by Traffic Police as the number one issue.

b) The private taxi players have reported low business volume as the primary issue, possibly due to impact on their market share by ABCA. Black and yellow cab operators too have reported low business volumes as the second most important issue.

c) On the question of facing problems from black-yellow taxi associations and private

operators, ABCA drivers and radio taxi operators like Meru have shown predictable patterns. While 39% new age operators have reported problems (this is especially serious among Radio taxi operators at 53 %) only about 30-31% private operators and black yellow cab drivers acknowledge this as a problem.

d) Bringing the auto rickshaw drivers into the landscape, about 60% of all drivers,

including ABCA drivers and 80% of auto rickshaw drivers agree that the business of Auto rickshaw drivers has been negatively impacted by the ABCAs.

e) While 52% of new age cab drivers believe that auto rickshaw drivers should shift to

cab driving, only about 33% other drivers and a paltry 6% of auto rickshaw drivers agree to this proposition. This is a stark difference between market perception of ABCA drivers and the others.

f) Additionally, about 60% of all drivers agree that the minimum fare charged by

ABCAs should be higher than the minimum fare charged by auto rickshaw players.

iv. Interventions Sought from Regulators a) On questions of Governmental intervention and regulation 70% of all drivers agree

that intervention is required.

b) On asked about nature of intervention, the survey participants across the board (47%) believe regulation of price is the most important intervention followed by regulation of number of taxis (25%) and third most important intervention as suggested by

26

participants is regulation of working hours (14%). There seems to be no significant variation in the answers of the ABCA drivers versus the other drivers in this context.

c) 65% of all drivers believe that ABCAs should seek some kind of national level or

state level or city level permits to be able to ply their taxis. The number of drivers who agree to this proposition among independent players and other drivers is above 70% and about 80% and above radio taxi drivers and the auto drivers agree with the the same.

d) Similarly the views of the various non ABCA driver groups towards an upper cap on

discounting varies from 90% agreement from auto rickshaw players, 87% among independent and black and yellow cab players, 75% among radio taxi players and 61% among ABCA drivers.

iv. Other issues Our survey also brings out that as against general perception private driver driven vehicles had a greater share of diesel vehicles (62%) as compared to ABCA vehicles (46%).

B. Customers - An Analysis of Survey Apart from the drivers the survey also took into account the opinion of consumers (approx 350) of taxi services from the five cities. To the best of our knowledge this is the first and most comprehensive such survey conducted in India. Below we discuss the fine print as brought out by the survey (refer Appendix II for details).

i. Market position Based on our customer survey, the ABCA are undoubtedly the most preferred (55% ranking it as first option) way to commute on an overall basis and also across Delhi, Kolkata and Hyderabad. ABCA is also the second most preferred mode of taxi among Bengaluru and Mumbai with private taxis and black and yellow cabs occupying the top slot by a very small margin in the two metros respectively.

27

ii. Reliability ABCA services have also been found to be most reliable by the customers (57%) with second position going to private taxis (15%), joint third position going to black and yellow cabs and the auto rickshaws (9%) and subsequently fourth position going to radio taxis (8%). This aspect especially becomes important as about 44% of our respondents have agreed that if the driver does not turn in on time they would be sceptical during the next time usage. This is especially true for the respondents of Hyderabad and Bengaluru. iii. Overall preference a) ABCA services again top the charts as the most preferred option (60%) on an overall

basis, followed by private taxi services (14%) and radio taxi services (10%). Consumers also agree that ABCA operated vehicles are the cleanest followed by private taxis and radio taxis respectively.

b) From the perspective of driver behaviour too most consumers (59%) prefer ABCAs, followed by private taxis (16%) and then radio taxis (9%). However, on the flip side, ABCAs also figure as the number one in terms of complaints as suggested by the customer survey (25%),followed by 17% for yellow black cabs and 12 % for radio taxi operators. Private operators have accounted for only 11% of the total complaints. This could also be the reflection of the fact that the ABCAs have the maximum market share of the total number of rides therefore proportionately higher complaints.

iv. Pricing With respect to surge pricing the consumer behavior is fairly equivocal. On an overall basis 48% people are supportive of surge pricing; with consumers from Bengaluru (89%) and Kolkata (73%) being most in favour followed by Mumbai (49%) and Delhi (36%) respectively. The consumers in Hyderabad seem most vocal against surge pricing with 86% opposing it. Customers also believe that ABCA offer the fairest billing of all services present across the board.

9. CONCERNS OF ABCA AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS – TAKE AWAY POINTS FROM ROUND TABLE ABCAs brought out the point that the overall utilization of their cabs is much higher as compared to black and yellow cabs (strongly verified by our survey data) thereby possibly bringing down the total number of vehicles on road. Radio taxi and ABCAs further expressed that the transportation infrastructure and options for the commuters in the country were fairly limited and this is an area in which Government has failed to deliver. Besides this is an area which requires disruptive solutions which ABCAs have possibly unravelled. However, incumbent radio taxi players feel that external capital funding is creating an unequal market

28

with discounts and incentives that are difficult to match and possibly only 2-3 players might survive at the end, effectively monopolizing the industry and finally raising prices unjustifiably. Though they also acknowledge that this would take time and gives enough opportunity to Government also to create a parallel mass transportation infrastructure if they intend to address the issue they fear that any measures may be too little too late and the government needs to act immediately keeping the long term view in mind. A section of stakeholders were of the view that the utilization of the black and yellow may increase if they are brought on a similar platform like Ola or Uber. It was also brought out by some members that some drivers driving 18-20 hours was putting the passenger at risk and needs to be looked into. Though, as per our survey majority drivers are not driving more than 12 hours, the drivers who are working longer hours put not just themselves but the people around them on the roads also at great risk Some views were in support of surge pricing as it makes vehicles available even in crunch situations for people who are ready to pay higher prices. But the counter-view was a surge without lower and upper capping is unjustifiable especially if there is an emergency like situation. But how we draw a boundary between when a service is essential and when it is not is fairly subjective. Besides, in India where aggregators are not just add-on transport services but possibly becoming the primary mode of transport for a majority of people clarity on surge pricing is very important. Various consumer forums also want a greater clarity on roles and responsibility of aggregators towards passengers both from safety and service point of view. They also mooted the idea of compulsorily running call centers just in case Internet service is down or some other similar emergency can be tackled; also it was felt that a comprehensive grievance redressal mechanism should be put in place. Stakeholders from other transportation aggregators like bus aggregators and bike aggregators point out that the price point of cab aggregators even if at INR 12 cannot be the preferred mode of transport for bulk of Indian population. Bulk of Indian populace is looking at travelling in a range of 2-5 rupees per kilometer and this is where buses for longer distances and bikes for shorter distances come in and provide very efficient means of travelling. But these newer aggregators too would need a greater clarity from regulator. All driver partners from ABCAs have been unequivocal in accepting the positive role of aggregators in improving their incomes and standard of living and this has also been confirmed by our survey. The black and yellow cab operators did express their thoughts about reduction in business, as well as difficulty in getting new drivers attached to them. However our survey data does not support the first part of the argument, the black yellow players mostly operate at a lower utilization by choice. Sustainability of the Business Model of ABCAs in India The ABCAs are helping in resolving a real problem at the local level, where commuting within the city has been a problem since many years. The ABCAs enable better utilization of the vehicle as well as enable higher incomes for the drivers and lower prices for the

29

customers. Having said so, one needs to look at the model in a greater detail before deciding that the sharing economy as leading to mass well-being. Most platforms rely on one side to subsidize the other side, for example, Acrobat reader is freely available but editor is priced at a premium. Many such examples abound, however, in the transportation platform situation; both the sides, consumers of rides and drivers are being benefitted and this is a violation of the basic economics of the platforms. This is at best a temporary solution and cannot sustain in the long run unless the firms stop subsidizing both the sides and start making profits from one side, which are sufficiently large so as to manage their platform cost and the subsidization of the other side if required. With the existing price structure the ABCAs are not sustainable from a pure economic and financial feasibility point of view. This holds true for as long as ABCAs provide drivers with incentives over and above passenger fares. In fact in places in India where competition is minimal, the ABCAs are running profitable businesses without artificial market support measures, but unless there is a regulatory intervention, the landscape will change even in such places as competition gets more intensive. There are multiple avenues that ABCAs can take to reach sustainability in their business models.

a) There is a need to look at other sources of revenues within the existing business models as well such as advertisements etc. so that this can be made more viable.

b) Ridesharing offers a possible way out of the subsidization because if 2-3 customers bear appropriate trip cost (say 5033% each), the need for subsidy will no longer be present.

c) At the same time, the same vehicle could be manned by two drivers who could then run the vehicle for 24 hours in shifts thereby furthering the utilization of the asset..

d) Regulatory intervention by the government on driver incentives would go a long way to bring sustainability to the industry as this is a major component of the subsidies by ABCAs currently

10. KEY FINDINGS FROM ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION AND PERSONAL INTERVIEWS Various challenges identified as a result of research survey, one to one interview and interaction at MDI roundtable are as follows:

1. The existing public transport system in India is not adequately developed to meet the existing demand. Taxi industry in India is a vital part of this industry and would need disruption/s for serving a huge unmet demand for mass commuting in India

2. The existing definitions of taxi service providers in Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 does

not cover ABCA nor there is a separate definition provided for ABCA in the Act. It is very important to define the term and further differentiate it from other models of sharing economy such as ridesharing model

3. There is no clarification provided by law on the treatment of private assets (vehicles,

home etc.) when used for commercial purpose under sharing business models.

30

4. The problem is further exacerbated for players providing point to point service

through buses and bikes as both stage and contract carriage provisions would need further clarification. This is important to accommodate aggregators of bike taxis and buses too in the legal framework.

5. A majority of ABCA drivers’ income is through incentives. This creates an artificial

glut of supply in the market, driving down passenger fares. However, this situation is not sustainable and there must be thought given on how to phase out incentives gradually to create a soft landing for drivers.

6. Surge pricing needs to be brought within the framework of existing pricing laws. Besides, this needs to be ascertained if the discounted pricing of ABCAs falls in the unfair trade practices under Competition Act. In nutshell, pricing strategies adopted by ABCAs are to be scanned and its impact on competition needs a comment from lawmakers.

7. In taxi industry in India, a level play field for all type of service providers is missing.

For example, multi national players are able to channel funds from profitable markets abroad in order to buy market share in india through subsidies to drivers and customers. Local companies which do not have this luxury are at a competitive disadvantage.

11. HEAT FACED BY ABCA IN INDIA Protest by Hyderabad Taxi Drivers against ABCAs On Dec 30, 2016, a wave of protests by ABCA taxi drivers spread across the city of Hyderabad led by a number of drivers’ associations, including Telangana State Cabs and Bus Operators Association (TSCBOA), Telangana State Cab Owners and Drivers Association (TSCODA) and Telangana Cabs Association (TCA). Under the lead of these organisations, a vast majority of cab drivers belonging to Ola and Uber called for a five-day strike against declining earnings and fewer bookings. The cause behind this unrest was, allegedly, a drastic reduction in driver incomes in recent months, as the number of cabs attached with the ABCAs continued to increase and driver incentives were rationalized. Nearly 80,000 taxis were idle over a period of 5 days including New Year’s Eve, which has traditionally been one of the busiest days of the year for taxis.4 4 http://techcircle.vccircle.com/2017/01/03/ola-uber-drivers-in-hyderabad-strike-against-falling-earnings/

31

Protest by Mumbai Taxi Drivers Against Ola, Uber Cabs Nearly 4,000 taxi and auto drivers in Mumbai, staged protest against cab aggregators on grounds that their business was being impacted and there was a threat to healthy competition in taxi industry in the city. The protestors demanded to stop the services of Ola and Uber within and threatened to go on strike if their demands were not met. The Taxi Union in Mumbai alleged the cab aggregators for practicing unfair trade practices by adopting predatory pricing policy to kill competition from market. The protestors further claimed that ABCAs sometime charge exorbitant rates from commuters in the name of surge price. As alleged by the protestors, many of the drivers driving for cab aggregators don’t even have authorized permits to run vehicles. The protestors demanded the State Transport authorities to come down heavily on the cab aggregators at the earliest.”5 Class Action Suits by Customers6 In September, 2016, some non-government organizations and individuals filed a class action suit before the national consumer forum against Ola and Uber. The complainants asked for a refund of Rs.9,239 crore from Ola and Uber for the surge-prices charged by them, being the excess amount collected by the two companies in the past three years. The group of complainants, arrived at the figure of Rs 9,239 crore across India by calculating the following, based on data available through media and other sources;

● Excess amount charged per vehicle per trip due to surge ● Average number of rides per day per vehicle with surge pricing ● Average fleet size India over the 3-year period

In August 2016, the Delhi High Court directed all app-based cab aggregators (ABCA) like Ola and Uber not to resort to surge pricing and abide by Delhi government’s notified rates in the National Capital Region. The aforementioned class action suit, filed on behalf of citizens, alleged that the two companies - Ola and Uber were still overpricing and charging money towards State or Municipal Corporation Development taxes that were not payable to the state governments. Ola & Uber had argued in Delhi High Court that they were neither in violation of any norms, nor in a position to cap fares as they did not employ the drivers or own the cabs. Striking down these arguments, the high court directed both to abide by Delhi government’s notification on fares. It was further alleged that consumers were being forced to pay more than the amount notified under Section 67 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by various state governments. The NGOs urged the Consumer Forum to direct both companies to deposit 20 percent of the amount with the NCDRC till final orders.

5 http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/mumbai-taxi-drivers-protest-against-ola-uber-cabs-2867789/ 6 http://www.livemint.com/Companies/kVl08BihneMJiWdFOcRSYI/Consumer-complaints-against-OlaUber-Are-class-action-suits.html

32

Allegations of Unfair Practices Against Ola and Uber The competitors Mega Cabs and Meru had filed the complaints against Ola and Uber, alleging that these two cab aggregators were indulged in unfair practices such as predatory pricing, which was weakening their businesses and thus a threat to healthy competition in the taxi industry in the country. In addition, it was assumed that Ola and Uber had hoisted a huge amount of funding in several rounds, which is helping them to unleash the anti-competitive practices. For both cases, the market for 'radio taxi services in Delhi-NCR', was taken as the relevant one by the regulator. The complaints pertained to violation of Section 3 and 4 of the Competition Act. While, Section 3 of the Act relates to cartelisation, Section 4 is for abuse of dominant position. In February, 2016, the Competition Commission rejected the allegations of unfair business ways against ABCA, Ola and Uber after finding no evidence of anti-competitive practices by them in the national capital. The order dated February 9, 2016 stated, "Inability of the existing players or new entrants to match the innovative technology or app developed by any player or the model created for operating in a particular industry cannot be said to be creating entry barriers in itself,". CCI further clarified in its order that the Commission was of the view that the radio taxi services market in Delhi was competitive in nature and UBER did not appear to be holding a dominant position in the relevant market. Hence there was no need to go into the examination of its conduct in such relevant market. Rape Charges Against The Drivers Driving for Ola & Uber On December 5 2015, a woman, who worked for a finance firm in Gurgaon, took an Uber cab to go home. The driver driving for Uber, took her to an isolated area and raped her. The women dragged him to the court and more than 10 months after she was raped and sexually assaulted, a fast-track court in Delhi convicted the cab driver, holding him guilty on charges of rape and endangering the life of the victim. In another incident of similar nature, Ola fired a driver in Bhopal for reportedly raping a woman in January 2016. At the time, Ola also issued a statement that the driver was not on the company’s platform when the incident occurred. In another incident, a woman travelling in an Ola Auto was reportedly assaulted by the driver in April, 2016 as indicated by a OneIndia report. Huffington Post reported that in July, an Ola driver was caught filming a female passenger surreptitiously. Ola apologized and told her that the driver’s was terminated and he won’t be driving for them anymore. 12. GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES ABCAs in India have gotten into trouble with the authorities the last couple of years due to their new business model. Both major players of this industry, Ola and Uber claim to be technology platforms and not taxi operators, something that current policies don’t cover. Responding to the changes taking place in the taxi space in India by the entry of ABCAs, in

33

October, 2015, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways issued an advisory for the licensing, compliance and liability of on demand IT based transportation aggregators in India. According to the advisory all on demand transportation technology aggregators or their subsidiaries in India must obtain a license under Section 93 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 from the state transport authority (STA) area where they’re operating. In April, 2015 the Indian government had ruled out banning cab-hailing apps like Uber and Ola (ABCA), but imposed conditions to make their operations safer. The transport ministry was to issue an advisory, in the same month, to all state governments to regulate these services under the Motor Vehicles Act. According to the Ministry, the Government wanted to promote ABCAs and not ban them. Following are important highlights of the aforementioned advisory issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways;

● ABCAs to be only service providers: The advisory states that the Aggregators must not own or lease any vehicle or employ any drivers or represent themselves as a taxi service, unless also registered as a taxi operator.

● Valid registered vehicle, service info on website: The aggregator must be a legally registered entity providing a digital intermediary or marketplace soliciting the connection of a passenger to a driver who has a valid registered vehicle. The aggregator is required to also publish its policy on taxi fare, taxi and driver registration, fare sharing with taxi owners and drivers, passenger safety, grievance redressal for passengers on its website.

● 24×7 call centre for customer service and grievance redressal: The advisory stated

that Aggregators must have a 24×7 call centre and it is okay to brand the vehicles. They must also provide web or mobile app based customer service and grievance redressal centre with a phone and email ID. They are required to train drivers on an ongoing basis with familiarisation with law, road safety, Motor Transport Workers Act, 1962 and gender sensitisation among others in a program.

● Commercial insurance, first aid kit: The aggregators must ensure that all vehicles

booked under aggregators have a valid legal registration, commercial insurance covering 3rd party risks, permit to ply, comply with safety requirements (including location tracking systems),. All vehicles must be equipped with safety equipment (including a first aid kit), emergency safety buttons, meet emission standards and a PUC certificate.

● Dos and don’ts for Drivers: The advisory mentioned that the drivers are allowed to

login and log off at their discretion and they must be allowed to list on multiple platforms at the same time. It further mentioned that drivers are not required to drive for a minimum number of hours and not solicit or accept street hailing persons. Drivers are also required to be compliant when it comes to, to have a commercial driver’s license, a police verification report, among other documents.

34

The advisory directed that a person who has been convicted within the past 7 years of driving under drug/alcohol influence, under the Criminal Code of Procedure Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, including fraud, sexual offence, use of motor vehicle to commit a cognisable offence, property damage and/or acts of violence or acts of terror must not be allowed to use the platform.

● Validity period for aggregator licenses: Licensees will be issued with licenses,

subject to satisfactory performance, if they comply with all the directions from the state transport department. Licenses will remain valid for 3-5 years, and the licensing authority will keep and refer to consumer complaints when a licensee is applying for license renewal.

● Driver and car description: It is expected from the aggregators that he verifies the

criminal background of every driver through police verification and other driver details like home address, PAN card, fitness certificate etc. To ensure passenger safety, the aggregator must provide a picture of the driver, a description of the vehicle and the number plate information. The platform must ensure that passengers have the ability to share their location with minimum 2 persons, contact local police in case of an emergency, share vehicle location and driver data to the government when asked for it.

● Zero tolerance for discrimination: The advisory conveys zero tolerance for

discrimination or discriminatory conduct (like refusing service, using derogatory or harassing language at passenger, rating a passenger on the basis of sex, caste, race, creed, religion or nationality) of the driver while on the platform.

● Driver to be suspended and in case of a complaint: On receiving a complaint from

a passenger, the licensee (aggregators) must suspend a driver, during the period of its investigation. It further states that the driver cannot refuse service to individuals with disability, or drink alcohol and use drugs, following which if they do, the licensee has to suspend the driver and cut off their access to the platform until its investigation is on.

● Fares & Receipt: The advisory empowers the state government to notify the

maximum fares which can be charged according to the Motor Vehicle Act to provide a level playing field with taxi service providers. Passengers must receive the distance and time travelled in an email receipt or hard copy. The communication must include the origin and destination, total amount paid and to whom. They should also be able to submit grievances through web, mobile app or customer service number.

● Suspension or cancellation of licence: The authority can suspend or cancel

aggregator licenses in case the licensee fails to comply with terms & conditions and has not remedied a situation within 60 days of receiving a written non-compliance notice. Licensees will be allowed to apply for a new license 6 months from the date of license cancellation, as deemed fit by the state government.

35

Earlier this year, the Central government issued guidelines authorising various States to draft their own laws for regulating taxi services. The restructured rules are currently under scrutiny by State governments, and should be implemented before the year is out. The Central Government’s new guidelines on online taxi aggregators came as a relief to ABCAs. However, as discussed above, the state govt.s are empowered to come up with their own policies that could be contrary to these guidelines and that could complicate matters for these taxi platforms. While major players of application based taxi platforms like Ola and Uber are already taking steps to comply with some of the new guidelines, concerns remain. Some of the states like Karnataka, Maharashtra, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Delhi, responded very quickly to the requirement of bringing regulatory framework for ABCAs. Ola and Uber drivers could pretty soon see their licenses getting suspended in Karnataka if they resort to peak-time charges or surge pricing. In Delhi and Tamil Nadu, among other States, ABCAs will need to get operators’ license to run their service, and in Kerala the police wants to monitor their fleet-on-the-ground constantly. These are just some of the policies that various States in India are set to introduce, most likely in the next couple of months (Refer Exhibit 1 for highlights of some of these policies) Indian Judiciary’s Call on ABCAs ABCA to be a licensee: The common argument put forward by State governments is that ABCAs must take license under Section 93 of the Indian Motor Vehicle Act, which states that without an operator license, ‘no person shall engage himself—as an agent or a canvasser, in the sale of tickets for travel by public service vehicles or in otherwise soliciting customers for such vehicles.’ This essentially means that Ola and Uber will have to take the operators’ license. Ola already has this license in Bengaluru, according to Karnataka Transport Department officials. However, the Delhi High Court again rejected Uber’s plea for an operating license in the capital city on the grounds of not complying with the ban which was imposed on it last year, and for not meeting requirements such as installation of digital meters, GPS, and government-approved fares. Ola does not have a license in Delhi either so far. Despite this, both Uber and Ola are operating in Delhi. Ola has over 30,000 cabs in Delhi-NCR running on capital roads. Only CNG driven public service vehicles in Delhi & NCR: The Supreme Court, in 2001, mandated that public service vehicles in Delhi must be only CNG-run. Although the High Court had ordered them to file an affidavit not to ply diesel vehicles in Delhi, the ABCAs have not been obeying it. The Delhi government is taking enforcement action against those who are plying without license in the city, which itself is violation of law. It is also observed that ABCAs are not complying with norms on drivers’ background verification, panic button, CNG cabs, GPS tracking system, government-declared fares, and public service badge for the drivers etc. to get the license.

36

13. CHALLENGES OF REGULATORS ON A NEW FRONTIER The expansion of the ‘regulatory state’ has significant impact on the sharing economy. By definition, sharing economy models are disruptive – emerging, innovative industries and platforms. By disruptive, we mean that such business models are likely to force some more inefficient, incumbent industries out of business. This is Joseph Schumpeter’s gale of creative destruction – the economy is under a continual ‘process of industrial mutation that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one.’7 Creative destruction is the basis of a capitalist, free market economy, yet it poses a number of regulatory challenges. On one hand, there may be calls for some light level of regulation in the genuine public interest. On the other, there are calls for government entry barriers from incumbent industries. As discussed above, regulatory and legal decisions drop a considerable impact on the innovative business models. Platforms that use independent contractors to provide services are not responsible for providing employment benefits such as health or disability insurance. The independent contractor model also means that platforms do not have to purchase and maintain equipment (although in cases when lower unit costs are achieved with scale, this might be the efficient solution), and potentially shields them from some liability when transactions go wrong. ABCAs also offer a similar platform where they claim to provide services of connecting cab drivers with passengers and are not do not take the responsibility for providing employment benefits such as health or disability insurance. From a worker perspective, having variable hours and perhaps higher pay can compensate for less stable and secure income. However, recent court rulings in different parts of the world have classified certain Uber drivers as employees. A current class action lawsuit in California may ultimately force ride-sharing services into a more traditional employment model attracting the applications of employment laws on them. The entry of peer-to-peer businesses into markets such as hotels and taxis also has opened a heated debate over local regulation. The current debate hinges partly on competing views of what purpose local regulations serve. On one side, many regulations aim to protect consumers from bad experiences, such as a dangerous driver or an unsafe hotel room. One can question whether the feedback mechanisms used by businesses such as Ola, Uber or Airbnb will be sufficient to protect consumers relative to the licensing requirements imposed by cities on taxi and hotel operators. On the other side, local regulatory restrictions can serve the interests of incumbent firms by limiting competition. From this perspective, peer-to-peer entry stands to benefit consumers through lower prices and higher service quality. Thus one of the criticisms peer-to-peer platforms used by ABCAs receive is that they gain a competitive advantage by avoiding local restrictions on entry or licensing requirements. For instance, local regulations in a state may limit the number of taxis and the way in which taxi companies can set prices. Traditional taxi companies are also subject to licensing requirements, taxes and fees, as well as health and 7 Schumpeter, Joseph A. Capitalism, Socialism and democracy. (Harper and Brothers, 1942).

37

safety checks to ensure quality and trust. ABCAs are usually not abided by such rules. More recently in different countries, local authorities have responded by setting standards for peer-to-peer platforms (e.g. New York and San Francisco for peer-to-peer apartment rental businesses) or by banning them altogether (e.g. the Italian ban on unlicensed car-sharing services). Regulations or No Regulations The fact cannot be denied that sharing economy platforms as a market yields widespread benefits over traditional markets and excessive regulation holds back the sharing economy As discussed in the previous sections of this report, the sharing economy faces numerous regulatory burdens, particularly in the areas of consumer protection, taxation, safety, employment practices, contracting legitimacy, liability, insurance, not to mention the already existing industry specific law and regulation. The Indian economy is heavily burdened by regulatory controls and India a long and poor history of stifling innovation through regulation. The argument for regulation is well known. Using regulatory tools, government seeks to impose regulations to maximise social welfare where it is assumed that leaving transactions up to the market would fail to do so. This is the idea that the market left to its own devices would produce some sort of suboptimal outcome. However, regulations do not always guarantee to maximise social welfare. Some popular public choice schools of economics teach us that regulation is highly susceptible to being introduced and implemented in a manner that furthers the private interest rather than the public interest. The economist George Stigler has described regulation as being ‘acquired’ by firms for their own benefit.8 For instance, incumbent firms in a market may be seen welcoming new regulations and sometimes even costly new regulations because they present entry barriers for new competitors. REFERENCES

● Coase, Ronald, ‘The Problem of Social Cost’ Journal of Law and Economics 3 (1960).

● Williamson, Oliver, ‘The Economics of Organization: The Transaction Cost Approach’ The American Journal of Sociology 87(3) (1981).

● Dahlman, Carl J, ‘The problem of externality’ Journal of Law and Economics (1979). ● Coase, Ronald, ‘The Nature of the Firm’ Economica 4(16), (1937). ● Hayek, Friedrich, ‘Open Air: Algorithmic Pricing’, Airbnb Tech Talks, May 7 2014,

www.nerds.airbnb.com/openairalgorithmic-pricing.

8 Stigler, George J. ‘The theory of economic regulation,’ The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, (1971): 3-21.

38

● Allsop, Richard, ‘How Government Holds Back Technological Change,’ IPA Review, Vol. 66 No. 2 (2014).

● Buchanan, James M. ‘Rent Seeking and Profit Seeking’, The Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy (Liberty Fund, Indianapolis, 1999)

● Schumpeter, Joseph A. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. (Harper and Brothers, 1942).

● NASSCOM_E&Y_The_Sharing_Economy-The_Indian_Landscape_Executive_Summary (1).pdf

39

EXHIBIT I

Highlights of Policy Initiatives on ABCAs in India

ANNEXURE I

Survey Report – Taxi Drivers

[AUTHOR NAME] 1

In our research conducted in 5 metropolitans of India we tried addressing and assessing the preference and trends of drivers associated with recent cab aggregators operating in India and interviewed 27% people who are associated with OLA being the first app based modern cab aggregator in India.

We interacted with around 30% drivers who were associated with Uber being the on the largest cab aggregators worldwide

3% interviews had been conducted among Easy Cab/Meru associates

8% samples has been collected among Auto Driver

Around 18% samples were collected from Self / Private cab aggregators and the around same number of samples were collected by interacting with other type of transport drivers

A few samples has been collected from a very recent and most advanced way of commuting Bike Taxies such as Baxi, Rapido etc.

Ola, 27%

Uber, 31%

Auto, 8%

Easy Cab/ Meru, 3%

Self/Personal, 11%

Other, 18%

Bike Taxi, 2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

1. Which cab company you are associated with

[AUTHOR NAME] 2

An interesting trend has been generated as a response to the question where we asked our very first question to our driver why they are associated with Ola/Uber or any other cab transport aggregators

A majority of around 63% drivers gave a very obvious response that the Better Income is the most important objective for being associated with any cab aggregators

Around 31% people preferred second option of Improved Life-Style which indicates that these segments of drivers might have chosen to be associated with these cab aggregators to make their life less complicated as compared to their other or previous chosen profession while the preference of around 6% drivers were not clear

Better Income,

63%

Improved Life Style,

31%

Any Other Reason,

6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

2. Why do you work for OLA/Uber

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Better Income 63% 70% 63% 79% 64% 38% 48% 60% Improved Life

Style 31% 28% 33% 17% 27% 44% 19% 40% Any Other

Reason 6% 3% 3% 3% 9% 18% 33% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 3

As we all know that any business requires capital and so does the cab drivers to start their cab business therefore we tried to know whether their cab companies assisted them in buying a car and we find that only around 12% drivers has been assisted by their cab aggregators in buying their cars and starting their business

As the analysis graph indicates a majority of 45% people have taken their cars on either on rent or on lease

Personal Car Loan has been preferred by around 27% people in getting their cars

While around 16% people have bought cars on their own and has not taken any loan

We cannot find any remarkable correlation among any cab aggregators

Rent/Lease, 45%

Personal car Loan,

27%

Loan through

Taxi Company

, 12% No loan, self, 16%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

3. Could you please let us know whether you have taken taxi on “lease from Ola/Uber”, Taxi loan assisted by ola/uber, or personal

car loan?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Rent/Lease 45% 41% 43% 53% 38% 54% 56% 5% Personal car Loan 27% 37% 41% 25% 10% 6% 5% 5% Loan through Taxi

Company 12% 16% 8% 6% 8% 15% 10% 5% No loan, self 16% 6% 7% 16% 44% 25% 29% 84%

[AUTHOR NAME] 4

On the basis of “Per day trips” drivers can be divided in two segments

Segment 1( Less than 6 Trips ):

An average of 40% driver are satisfied by achieving their set target of up to 6 trips per day and does not bother much about their earning

Ola drivers are leading from this segment as compared to Uber

Segment 2 ( More than 9 trips ):

The other segment of around 45% driver makes more than 9 trips per day and tries to earn more money on per day basis which must be

Uber drivers are leading from this segment as compared to Ola

We can observe almost similar trend among the responses of both Ola and Uber drivers (ref. table below)

Less than 4 trips,

19%

5-6 trips, 21%

7-9 trips, 15%

9-12 trips, 31%

12+ trips, 14%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

4. What is your target to achieve in terms of number of trips per

day?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Less than 4 trips 19% 14% 6% 8% 16% 42% 52% 0% 5-6 trips 21% 16% 12% 8% 48% 27% 29% 0% 7-9 trips 15% 19% 16% 8% 15% 9% 16% 0%

9-12 trips 31% 34% 44% 61% 14% 15% 1% 100% 12+ trips 14% 17% 22% 16% 8% 8% 1% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 5

Response of “How Many KM's you have to drive on a daily basis to achieve the target on per day basis?” can be divided among three following segments

Segment 1 (Less than 100 Km):

From this driver segment 19% drivers drives less than 100 kms on an average on a daily basis

Segment 2 (Between 100 km to 200 km)

It can be observed easily that the majority of around 49% drivers drives somewhere between 100 to 200 km / day in order to complete per day trips

Both Ola and Uber shares same pattern in our analysis

EasyCab/Meru is leading from this segment with 80% response

Segment 3 (200-300+ Km):

Around 28 % drivers drives 200-300 kms/day

Less than 100 Km,

19%

100-200 Km, 50%

200-300 Km, 29%

More than 300 km, 2%

Don’t know, 1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

5. How Many KM's you have to drive on a daily basis to achieve

the target on per day basis?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Less than 100 Km 19% 8% 5% 3% 20% 48% 63% 0%

100-200 Km 50% 51% 50% 75% 54% 44% 23% 85% 200-300 Km 29% 39% 43% 19% 19% 7% 10% 15%

More than 300 km 2% 3% 1% 3% 2% 0% 3% 0%

Don’t know 1% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 3% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 6

The response of “How much is your average daily collection from serving passengers” can be analyzed in three main segment

Segment 1(Daily collection less than Rs.2500 )

Around 67% drivers collects less than Rs.2500 on daily basis and around Rs.75,000 monthly basis

Uber is leading from this segment

Segment 2 ( Daily Collection>Rs. 2600 and < 3000)

Around a sum of 26% drivers collects between Rs.2600 to Rs.3000 on daily basis

OLA leads from this driver segment

Segment 3 ( Daily Collection >3600)

Only around 4% people collects more than Rs.4000 on daily basis

Ola is leading from this segment

Less than Rs.2000,

42%

Rs.2100-2500, 24%

Rs.2600-3000, 26%

Rs.3100-3500, 3%

Rs.3600-4000, 3%

Rs 4100-4500, 1%

Rs.4600+, 0%

6. How much is your average daily collection from serving

passengers?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Less than Rs.2000 42% 29% 39% 33% 37% 66% 61% 100%

Rs.2100-2500 24% 25% 26% 47% 43% 9% 15% 0% Rs.2600-3000 26% 35% 26% 11% 20% 23% 15% 0% Rs.3100-3500 3% 5% 4% 6% 0% 1% 5% 0% Rs.3600-4000 3% 4% 3% 3% 0% 1% 0% 0% Rs 4100-4500 1% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0%

Rs.4600+ 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 7

The response of “How much is your average daily Incentive” can be analyzed in three main segment

Segment 1(Incentive less than Rs.1000 )

Around 44% drivers collects less than Rs.1000 as daily incentive on daily basis and around Rs.30,000 on monthly basis

Ola is leading from this segment with around 6% margin than Uber

Segment 2 ( Incentive Collection>Rs. 1000 and < 3000)

Around 39% drivers receive between Rs.1000 to Rs.3000 incentives on daily basis

Both OLA and Uber shares same trend for this segment

Segment 3 ( Daily Collection >3000)

Around 23% people gets more than Rs.3000 incentive on daily basis

Less than Rs.1000,

44%Rs.1000-

3000, 39%

Rs.3001-4000, 11%

Rs.4001-5000, 4%

Rs.5001-6000, 2%

More than 6000,

0%0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

7. How much is your average daily Incentive (if you work for aggregators like Ola/Uber)?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Less than Rs.1000 44% 43% 37% 14% 52% 62% 57% 95%

Rs.1000-3000 39% 39% 42% 48% 46% 33% 29% 5% Rs.3001-4000 11% 13% 13% 21% 2% 4% 9% 0% Rs.4001-5000 4% 3% 5% 17% 0% 1% 0% 0% Rs.5001-6000 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0%

More than 6000 0% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 8

The response of “How much is your average daily revenue” can be analyzed in three main segment

Segment 1(Incentive less than Rs.1000 )

Around 45% drivers collects less than Rs.1000 as daily incentive on daily basis and around Rs.30,000 on monthly basis

Ola is leading from this segment with around 9% margin than Uber

Segment 2 ( Incentive Collection>Rs. 1000 and < 3000)

Around 39% drivers receive between Rs.1000 to Rs.3000 incentives on daily basis

Both OLA and Uber shares same trend for this segment

Segment 3 ( Daily Collection >3000)

Around 15% people gets more than Rs.3000 incentive on daily basis

Less than Rs.1000,

45%

Rs.1000-3000, 39%

Rs.3001-5000, 11%

Rs.5001-7000, 3%

Rs.7000+, 1%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

8. How much is your average daily revenue

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Less than Rs.1000 45% 35% 25% 17% 52% 74% 81% 100%

Rs.1000-3000 39% 45% 46% 69% 44% 24% 16% 0% Rs.3001-5000 11% 15% 20% 14% 5% 1% 1% 0% Rs.5001-7000 3% 5% 7% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0%

Rs.7000+ 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 9

Around 24% people manages

to save around 15-20% income

from their total earning after

the deduction of EMI, Fuels

etc.

A majority of around 35%

driver manages to save 10 to

15% earning from their total

collection after deducting all

expanses

Only around 7% driver

manages to save over 26%

income from total and Uber is

leading from this particular

analysis criteria

Less than 10%, 17%

10-15 %, 36%

15-20 %, 24%

20-25 %, 16%

26%+, 7%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

9. If your income share is in percentage then how much % you take away after deduction

of commission (if applicable) and emi and fuel (monthly)?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20

Options All OLA Uber Easy Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Less than 10% 17% 20% 12% 17% 8% 19% 49% 0%

10-15 % 36% 36% 34% 38% 19% 48% 37% 5%

15-20 % 24% 24% 24% 31% 43% 18% 11% 55%

20-25 % 16% 14% 19% 14% 27% 12% 3% 40%

26%+ 7% 5% 12% 0% 3% 3% 0% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 10

Hatchback is undoubtedly the

highest running car model which

are associated with cab

aggregators clearly due to the

less fuel consumption and is

being used by about 44% cab

drivers

Second on chart is Sedan model

due to its luxurious appearance

and high passenger comfort level

Both OLA & Uber shares the same

trend for this question

Hatchback, 46% Sedan,

44%

SUV, 7%

Other, 3%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

10. Which car model you drive?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20

Options All OLA Uber Easy Cab/Meru

Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Hatchback 46% 51% 49% 50% 27% 47% 0% NaN

Sedan 44% 43% 43% 50% 67% 45% 0% NaN

SUV 7% 6% 9% 0% 6% 8% 0% NaN

Other 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% NaN

[AUTHOR NAME] 11

As per statistics collected in our

research indicates that 42% car

runs on Diesel

CNG being the cheapest fuel

resource to automobile it being

used in 42% vehicle

While Petrol is being used by 12%

vehicle

Uber has only 3% cars running of

Petrol which indicates a positive

trend towards fuel consumption

Diesel and CNG has almost equal

percentage of vehicle running

Petrol, 12%

Diesel, 42% CNG, 42%

Other, 3%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

11. Which fuel does your car consume

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Petrol 12% 10% 3% 8% 9% 13% 36% 100% Diesel 42% 42% 50% 31% 62% 31% 28% 0%

CNG 42% 48% 47% 61% 16% 48% 35% 0% Other 3% 0% 0% 0% 13% 9% 1% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 12

In our survey we tried calculating the average spend on fuel being consumed by car in achieving targeted daily trips

We got that a majority of around 58% driver spends somewhere between Rs.500 to Rs.1000 fuel

Sedan model is the most common model belonging from this fuel consumption category

Around 35% driver spend less than Rs.500 on a daily basis on fuel

64% Uber cars consume fuels between Rs.500-1000 while only 58% Ola spend this amount on fuel

Less than 500, 35%

500-1000, 58%

1000-1500, 7%

1500+, 0%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

12. How much money on an average you spend on fuel on a

daily basis

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Less than 500 35% 25% 19% 3% 35% 57% 85% 100%

500-1000 58% 64% 72% 86% 55% 43% 15% 0%

1000-1500 7% 10% 9% 11% 10% 0% 0% 0%

1500+ 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 13

The use of technology has

been spreading cab sectors

since the arrival of App based

cab aggregators as presently

a majority of 71% drivers uses

smartphone for Customer

dealing and client handling

While 29% drivers/cab

aggregators such as Easy

Cab/Meru etc. is still preferring

old school method of

communicating and customer

dealing

71%

29%

13. Do you use Smartphone/mobile app for

taking bookings and customer dealing

Yes No

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Yes 71% 100% 100% 64% 20% 21% 34% 100% No 29% 0% 0% 36% 80% 79% 66% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 14

In our research, we tried assessing

the subjective impact on income

and financial level of drivers after

OLA/ Uber being introduced in

India

A majority of around 63% driver

believes that their income has

increased since the introduction

of OLA and Uber which consists

the response of 80% Ola driver,

76% Uber drivers

While 61% Self / Private, 54%

Other, 52% Auto driver disagree

with this statement

While an overall of 10% people

does not feels that it has made

any impact on income

Strongly agree,

42%

Agree, 21%

No changes,

10%

Disagree, 22%

Strongly Disagree,

5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

14. Has your income increased after the companies like

ola,uber started their cab services?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 42% 51% 56% 59% 10% 18% 29% 70% Agree 21% 30% 20% 19% 9% 18% 14% 0%

No changes 10% 13% 6% 16% 20% 10% 4% 5% Disagree 22% 6% 15% 3% 53% 44% 27% 25% Strongly Disagree 5% 0% 2% 3% 8% 10% 26% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 15

In our research, we tried assessing the subjective impact on daily labor and human effort level of drivers after OLA/ Uber being introduced in India

A majority of around 74% driver believes that their labour and work load has increased since the introduction of OLA and Uber which consists the response of 77% Ola driver, 86% Uber drivers and 84% Easy Cab/ Meru like companies

Only a average of around 6% Ola and Uber driver thinks that that their daily labour has been decreased

While an overall of 15% drivers does not feels that it has made any impact on their labor or work load as compared to earlier

Strongly agree,

54%

Agree, 21%

No changes,

15%

Disagree, 9%

Strongly disagree,

1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

15. Has your daily labour increased after the companies like ola,uber started their cab

services?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 54% 56% 66% 63% 55% 32% 39% 58%

Agree 21% 22% 20% 22% 23% 23% 16% 5%

No changes 15% 10% 8% 13% 17% 30% 24% 21%

Disagree 9% 11% 6% 0% 5% 13% 10% 16%

Stronglydisagree 1% 1% 0% 3% 0% 1% 11% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 16

One of the most important question to assess the level of responsibility and tension level of driver due to the financial commitments made by them relying upon the income and incentive being given by Ola / Uber to them

As a response to this question it can be implied that this issue is not much of a concern for drivers as a majority of around 56% driver is either showed neutral or disagree response for this question

While on the other hand only 45% driver agrees with this statement

Even though the percentage of concerned drivers are lesser than other segment but still it could be a point of concern for Cab aggregators

Strongly agree,

31%

Agree, 14% No

changes, 9%

Disagree, 38%

Strongly disagree,

9%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

16. Have you taken any loan / bought properties or made any

other significant financial commitments relying only over

incentives given by OLA/Uber (if applicable)

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 31% 28% 30% 4% 47% 44% 62% 0% Agree 14% 16% 9% 11% 12% 13% 33% 0%

No changes 9% 11% 6% 7% 29% 10% 2% 0% Disagree 38% 35% 44% 63% 12% 31% 2% 100% Strongly disagree 9% 10% 11% 15% 0% 1% 0% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 17

As the income of aggregators

drivers has gone up, so we

tried to find out whether they

have taken any loan, we

found that 51% drivers have

taken taxi loan, 11% have

taken home loan, 9% have

taken bike loan and 7% have

taken Seth/ Sahukars, and rest

21 have either no debt or

other form of debt.So we can

see that across the spectrum

people have opted for

somekind of loan to sustain

their livelihood.

Taxi Loan, 51%

Home Loan, 11%

Bike Loan, 9%Loan from

Seth / Sahukaar,

7% Property Investmen

t, 1%

Others, 22%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Axi

s Tit

le

17. What kind of loan have you taken in last 5 years based on

earning more through incentives

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Taxi Loan 51% 51% 59% 25% 42% 58% 47% 0% Home Loan 11% 11% 7% 13% 26% 10% 31% 0%

Bike Loan 9% 9% 4% 25% 11% 11% 22% 5% Loan from Seth /

Sahukaar 7% 8% 5% 13% 16% 8% 0% 0% Property Investment 1% 2% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Others 22% 19% 24% 25% 5% 14% 0% 95%

[AUTHOR NAME] 18

Around 18% of the

respondents suggested that

they have 1-2 people

dependent, 41% has 3-4 family

members dependent on their

income, and almost one third

drivers said that they 5-6

person dependent and only

7% of them suggested that

they have more than 6 person

dependent in their family. It is

a huge risk if Ola/ Uber like

company shut down due to

any reason. So it is the duty of

the govt to see that there

should be sustainability of all

kind of taxi as it is a good

source of employment.

1-2 3-4 5-6 6+Series1 18% 41% 35% 7%

18%

41%

35%

7%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

18. How many family members are dependent on you and your

income?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

1-2 18% 16% 20% 22% 9% 22% 21% 0% 3-4 41% 45% 43% 22% 25% 45% 38% 55% 5-6 35% 35% 33% 56% 49% 28% 27% 40% 6+ 7% 4% 4% 0% 17% 5% 14% 5%

[AUTHOR NAME] 19

It is very satisfactory to observe

that the driver associated with

OLA and Uber is has been able

to spend time with their

families and loved ones

despite of heavy bookings

and increased physical labor

But if we observe the table

below a bit more clearly we

can observe that Auto and

Other drivers are not able to

spend much time with their

families as compared to App

Based cab aggregators

Yes85%

No15%

19. Do you live with your family?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Yes 85% 87% 87% 89% 90% 81% 74% 90% No 15% 13% 13% 11% 10% 19% 26% 10%

[AUTHOR NAME] 20

As a response to this question

we received a pattern that

around 77% drivers are not

able to spend time with their

family as the way they used to

earlier when cab companies

such as Ola Uber did not exist

Whereas 23% drivers thinks

otherwise and believes that it

has either not affected their

lives or it has a neutral impact

over their family life as their

living standards has also

increased as a result to the

introduction of app based

cab aggregators as it has

pushed and invoked the

customers to use app based

cab services

Strongly agree,

33%

Agree, 44%

No change,

14%

Disagree, 7%

Strongly Disagree,

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

20. Are you not able to spend more time with your family since companies like Ola/Uber started

their services?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 33% 40% 25% 16% 18% 42% 38% 50% Agree 44% 43% 50% 53% 43% 34% 36% 50%

No change 14% 11% 13% 9% 16% 22% 19% 0% Disagree 7% 5% 9% 13% 21% 1% 6% 0% Strongly Disagree 2% 1% 2% 9% 2% 1% 0% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 21

Around 37% people

interviewed feel that their

living standard has improved,

38% feel that it has gone

down, 11% drivers opined that

their life standard is same but

family standard has gone up,

another 13% feel that there is

no change. Mostly Ola/uber

drivers feel that their income

has increased so the life

standard. But we can see the

adverse affect of it in private

taxi, and other drivers as life

standard has gone down.

Auto wallas are most affected

as 71% of them said that life

has become hell and no we

don't earn sufficient to live

happily.

37%

38%

11%13%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

21. How has the change in income due to Ola/Uber based services impacted your life-style

Living Standerdhas improved

Living standerd hascome down

My living standardis same but myfamily's standardhas improvedNo such significantimpact

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Living Standerd has improved 37% 50% 46% 46% 10% 12% 29% 20%

Living standerd has come down 38% 28% 30% 49% 69% 49% 60% 5%

My living standard is same but my family's

standard has improved 11% 14% 12% 6% 7% 9% 3% 50% No such significant

impact 13% 8% 12% 0% 13% 31% 8% 25%

[AUTHOR NAME] 22

Around 34% said that they

have taken better room after

Ola/Uber entry in the market,

17% have also agreed for the

same but 15% are neutral. 33%

disagreed that they have

taken better room for them to

live as their residence.

Strongly agree,

34%

Agree, 17% Neutral,

15%

Disagree, 30%

Strongly disagree,

3%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

22. Have you taken better room on rent than previous one, after

joining taxi aggregator like Ola/Uber

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 34% 33% 32% 48% 31% 37% 51% 10% Agree 17% 20% 14% 14% 19% 21% 21% 0%

Neutral 15% 13% 14% 7% 38% 13% 28% 15% Disagree 30% 30% 35% 31% 12% 29% 0% 70% Strongly disagree 3% 3% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5%

[AUTHOR NAME] 23

When we enquired regarding

getting respect from their

family and friends after their

income increased, we found

that 34% feel that they have

started getting better more

respect from the society,

another 16% also agreed but

27% are neutral with this view.

Around 20% respondents

have disagreed that they are

getting better response from

the society in terms of respect

and 3% are strongly disagreed.

Strongly agree34%

Agree16%

Neutral27%

Disagree20%

Strongly disagree

3%

23. Do you think that people started respecting you more

since your income has increased?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 34% 42% 39% 56% 16% 14% 33% 95% Agree 16% 22% 15% 19% 9% 12% 11% 0%

Neutral 27% 22% 22% 22% 33% 49% 20% 0% Disagree 19% 12% 21% 3% 43% 23% 16% 5% Strongly disagree 3% 2% 3% 0% 0% 1% 19% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 24

When we enquired regarding

regular health checkup we

found that 51% of the go to

regular checkup, where as

49% suggested that they don't

go for regular health

checkup.

51%

49%

24. Do you regularly undergo tests to understand your health

status?Yes No

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20

Options All OLA Uber Easy Cab/Meru

Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Yes 51% 45% 47% 22% 61% 55% 67% 100%

No 49% 55% 53% 78% 39% 45% 33% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 25

After Ola and Uber entry in

cab business, drivers have

started working more, Ola

Uber driver are doing it to

make more incentive offered

by them and private and

other are fighting to survive

and compete with them.

Around 46% of the drivers said

that their health condition has

deteriorated, 15% said that

health condition has improved

and 40% said that no such

significant impact.

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Health has improved 15% 20% 12% 25% 4% 5% 29% 55% Health has descended 46% 44% 45% 58% 52% 41% 53% 27%

No such significant impact 40% 37% 43% 17% 44% 54% 18% 18%

[AUTHOR NAME] 26

28% of the drivers said that

they are suffering from serious

illness due to improper sleep

and no proper time table for

food and water which is a big

number. Around 72% said that

they alright and not suffering

from any illness due hard work

they are putting to earn their

livelihood

Yes28%

No72%

26. Did you ever suffer serious illness caused due to improper sleep, no proper time table for taking food and water etc.?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Yes 28% 34% 26% 14% 7% 32% 41% 0% No 72% 66% 74% 86% 93% 68% 59% 100%

[AUTHOR NAME] 27

When we enquired regarding

which shift they are working,

64% respondents said that

they work in the day time, and

8% said that they only work in

night time but 28% said that

they work both day and night

which is the problem and can

create a problem in safety of

both the drivers as well as

passenger.

We can clearly see the trend

that more than 68% people of

private taxi drivers work during

the day time whereas Ola and

Uber drivers are at 59% and

54% respectively. Due to

greediness to earn more they

might be playing with their

health

Mostly Day, 64%

Mostly Night, 8%

Both Day & Night,

28%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

27. In which shift you work most

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Mostly Day 64% 59% 54% 42% 68% 79% 78% 100% Mostly Night 8% 11% 12% 11% 2% 3% 10% 0%

Both Day & Night 28% 30% 35% 47% 30% 18% 11% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 28

Drivers of Taxi aggregators and

Meru/Easy cabs are taking lesser

sleep than other taxi drivers as it

can be observed from the table.

Overall, around 18% drivers are

taking less than 4 hours’ sleep, 55%

respondents said that they are

take sleep of 4-8 hours, which is

okay and may not harm their

health. around 23% said that they

sleep between the range of 8

hours. It seems that Meru and

easy cab drivers are more prone

to ill health as 40% are taking very

less sleep of less than 4 hours.

Less than 4 Hours,

18%

4-8 Hours, 55%

8-12 Hours, 23%

12+ Hours, 4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

28. How many hours you sleep on daily basis?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Less than 4 Hours 18% 19% 23% 40% 2% 13% 24% 0%

4-8 Hours 55% 58% 44% 43% 71% 58% 62% 60% 8-12 Hours 23% 19% 24% 17% 26% 29% 13% 40% 12+ Hours 4% 4% 10% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 29

When we enquired with the

drivers that during your work

what are the problems they

face mainly, 35% respondents

said that harassment by the

police, 24% said that low

business volume, 8% said that

high EMI is a big problem, 15%

said that uneven working

hours and 16% there are other

issues like health, family etc

Harassment by Traffic Police,

35%

Low Business Volume,

24%

High EMi, 10%

Uneven Working

Hour, 15%

Any Other

Issue, 16%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

29. What are the primary problems being faced by you in your taxi related business (more

than one may be possible)?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Harassment by Traffic Police 35% 34% 37% 41% 13% 50% 72% 9%

Low Business Volume 24% 16% 22% 15% 39% 25% 20% 55% High EMi 10% 12% 10% 11% 12% 5% 0% 0%

Uneven Working Hour 15% 19% 13% 22% 18% 11% 2% 36% Any Other Issue 16% 18% 18% 11% 18% 10% 7% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 30

Whether Taxi aggregators and

Meru/ Easy cab drivers are

getting problem due to union

of Yellow Black taxis, 21% said

that they strongly agree, 5%

are mildly agreed, where as

18% neutral, 37% are

disagreed with this and 5% are

strongly disagree. We can

conclude that due to business

loss of Yellow Black taxi drivers,

they create trouble as

suggested by around 31% who

are agreed and strongly

agreed in this question.

Strongly agree21%

Agree19%

Neutral18%

Disagree37%

Strongly Disagree

5%

30. Do you face any problems from the yellow black taxi union

(if applicable)?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 21% 21% 25% 31% 1% 21% 24% 0% Agree 19% 27% 19% 22% 13% 16% 9% 0%

Neutral 18% 21% 20% 25% 18% 15% 8% 0% Disagree 37% 24% 29% 19% 65% 46% 54% 100% Strongly Disagree 5% 7% 7% 3% 2% 2% 4% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 31

Almost same pattern is being

observed here for the same

reason of business loss. Due to

better service, discounts

offered by these aggregators

to customers, customers prefer

Ola / Uber and Meru/Easy

cabs more than other private

players and thus it is a loss of

private players and therefore

they create problem. Please

see the trends mentioned in

the table

Strongly agree24%

Agree17%

Neutral25%

Disagree30%

Strongly Disagree

4%

31. Do you face any problems from the private transporters (if

applicable)?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 24% 23% 24% 33% 17% 27% 25% 0% Agree 17% 21% 17% 11% 14% 15% 18% 0%

Neutral 26% 26% 26% 31% 31% 33% 6% 0% Disagree 30% 25% 28% 22% 38% 21% 50% 100% Strongly Disagree 4% 5% 6% 3% 0% 4% 1% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 32

when we asked them what

drivers will do if aggregators

will stop making huge

incentives to them, 16% said

that they will continue working

for that company only, 33%

said that they will switch over

to other company, 23%

people said that they switch

private company, 20% opined

that they will run their cab

personally.

I will continue working for that

company on

without lucrative incentive,

16%

I will join another taxi/cab

company, 33%

I will join in private

companies / call

centers, 23%

I will run my cab

personally, 20%

I will protest,

8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

32. What if Uber/Ola or any other company you are associated with, stops

giving lucrative incentives (if applicable)?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

I will continue working for that company on without

lucrative incentive 16% 16% 14% 3% 7% 13% 63% 10% I will join another taxi/cab

company 33% 33% 29% 48% 57% 36% 37% 35% I will join in private

companies / call centers 23% 21% 24% 21% 36% 39% 0% 0% I will run my cab personally 20% 22% 19% 28% 0% 11% 0% 55%

I will protest 8% 7% 13% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 33

We tried to assess about their

preparedness if these

aggregators company

shutdown as they are making

huge losses, So we found that

31% respondents suggested

they will join another can

company, 26% opined to start

driving their own cab, 19% said

that they will join private taxi

players, 9% suggested that

they will quit driving work, and

16% said that they have not

given thought about this.

I will join other Taxi Company

, 31%

I will run my cab

personally, 26%

I will drive for private companie

s / call centers,

19%

I will quit driving & look for

other jobs, 9%

We will see when

time comes,

16%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

33. If, Ola/Uber or any other company which you are

associated with shuts down suddenly then how your life will

be impacted?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

I will join other Taxi Company 31% 31% 30% 47% 19% 13% 71% 9%

I will run my cab personally 26% 32% 25% 37% 33% 13% 14% 0%

I will drive for private companies

/ call centers 19% 21% 20% 10% 43% 16% 3% 0% I will quit driving & look for other jobs 9% 3% 8% 3% 0% 37% 6% 0% We will see when

time comes 16% 13% 16% 3% 5% 22% 6% 91%

[AUTHOR NAME] 34

Almost majority of the drivers as

respondents have suggested that

Ola/Uber has hurt the auto rikshaw

drivers very badly. As 42% strongly

agreed, 26% are agreed that it

has hurt badly impacted their

business due to heavy discounts

offered the customers by

theseVenture capitalist funded

cab companies. So if Govt will not

act soon, they will be out of the

business very soon. Government

should regulate to sustain all of

them in their capacity.

Strongly agree,

42%

Agree, 26%

Neutral, 16% Disagree,

14%

Strongly Disagree,

1%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

34. In your opinion has the Ola/Uber aggregation model impacted the business of auto rickshaw drivers?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 42% 41% 41% 62% 53% 26% 61% 9% Agree 26% 32% 30% 26% 8% 23% 24% 0%

Neutral 16% 15% 14% 12% 16% 26% 13% 9% Disagree 14% 12% 15% 0% 22% 19% 0% 82% Strongly Disagree 1% 0% 1% 0% 0% 6% 1% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 35

When we enquired further

about the fate of Auto

Rikshaw drivers that what they

should do then, 32% and 22%

respondents strongly agreed

and agreed respectively

suggested, that they should

also join these aggregators

and start earning their

livelihood with better income.

only 24% and 5% are

disagreed and strongly

disagreed respectively with

this point of view.

Strongly agree,

32%

Agree, 22%

Neutral, 18%

Disagree, 24%

Strongly Disagree,

5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

35. Do you think it makes sense for auto rickshaw drivers to

make a shift by becoming Cab drivers?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 32% 38% 37% 19% 25% 18% 29% 0% Agree 22% 28% 25% 28% 7% 20% 7% 0%

Neutral 18% 16% 16% 16% 21% 25% 13% 0% Disagree 24% 17% 19% 38% 26% 31% 43% 100% Strongly Disagree 5% 0% 3% 0% 21% 7% 8% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 36

Around 17% think that Ola

Uber will continue offering

discounts for another 2 years,

whereas 17% people feel that

it may last up-to 3 years,

another 11% think that it can

continue for another 5 years.

And rest of them think it can

continue for much longer

time.

2 Years or less17%

3 Years17%

5 Years11%

10 Years11%

Never thought about it

44%

36. How long do you think it is possible for Uber/Ola to

incentivize you like the way they do now?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

2 Years or less 17% 13% 12% 6% 30% 23% 22% 0% 3 Years 17% 22% 14% 21% 12% 20% 13% 0% 5 Years 11% 10% 15% 12% 12% 7% 10% 0%

10 Years 11% 13% 16% 9% 10% 4% 2% 0% Never thought

about it 44% 41% 43% 52% 37% 46% 54% 100%

[AUTHOR NAME] 37

When we enquired regarding

government intervention to

regulate this market, around

55% said that they strongly

agreed that govt should

intervene and regulate this

market, where as 18% are also

agreed, 12% are neutral and

has no opinion whereas only

12% and 3% disagree and

strongly disagreed for the govt

intervention. As we can see

there is strong demand of

government role to regulate

the policies for the welfare of

the driver to sustain for longer

time, Govt should take view of

all the stake holders and must

make a national level policy in

this sector as well.

Strongly agree,

55%

Agree, 18%

Neutral, 12%

Disagree, 12%

Strongly Disagree,

3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

37. Do you think government should intervene in Ola/Uber’s

business?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 55% 50% 55% 66% 71% 39% 66% 100% Agree 18% 23% 16% 11% 14% 24% 12% 0%

Neutral 12% 12% 10% 17% 8% 17% 12% 0% Disagree 12% 10% 16% 6% 2% 16% 9% 0% Strongly Disagree 3% 4% 3% 0% 5% 3% 1% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 38

When we further enquired

what kind of intervention they

need from the govt, we found

that 47% respondents wanted

regulation of fare, another

25% of them wanted number

of taxi should be in a limit to

get sufficient volume, 14% said

that working hours should be

regulated as it can create

safety issues due bad health.

Regulation on EMI suggested

by only 2%, and rest opted

other measures.

Regulation of fares,

47%

Regulation of

number of taxis in

city, 25%

Regulation of

working hours, 14%Regulatio

n of interest rate for vehicle EMI, 2%

Regular free

health governme

nt, 1%

Any other, 11%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

38. If you agree with previous question, what kind of

intervention by government would help you in the best

possible way

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Regulation of fares 47% 44% 47% 53% 45% 39% 58% 90% Regulation of number of taxis in

city 25% 27% 25% 31% 25% 22% 26% 0% Regulation of working hours 14% 13% 14% 13% 23% 12% 15% 10%

Regulation of interest rate for vehicle EMI 2% 4% 1% 3% 2% 2% 0% 0%

Regular free health government 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0%

Any other 11% 11% 12% 0% 5% 23% 0% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 39

When we seek the opinion of

the cab drivers regarding

different permit for Ola and

Uber, 44% said that they are

strongly agreed, 21% are also

agreed, whereas 12% think it

does not matter, and 18%

disagreed and 5% of them are

strongly disagreed for different

kind of permit for city

wide/state wide and

nationwide.

Strongly agree44%

Agree21%

Neutral12%

Disagree18%

Strongly Disagree

5%

39. Do you think Uber/Ola seek a different permit (city-

wide/state-wide/nation-wide) for running their business in

India?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 44% 44% 43% 69% 42% 33% 57% 50% Agree 21% 19% 13% 13% 37% 42% 30% 0%

Neutral 12% 13% 12% 6% 12% 15% 10% 0% Disagree 18% 18% 25% 6% 5% 9% 2% 50% Strongly Disagree 5% 6% 7% 6% 5% 1% 2% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 40

Around 49% drivers strongly

feel that there should be an

upper cap of discounting in

fare by the aggregators, 20%

are somehow agreed to put

an upper cap where 14% are

neutral, 14% disagreed and 3%

drivers as respondents are

strongly disagreed that there

should be any cap. From the

table, we can see that

Easy/Meru cab and private

taxi drivers are most affected

by the discounting of these

funded startup and therefore

64% Meru/Easy, 73 private taxi

drivers, 71% other kind of local

transport drivers are strongly

agreed on putting the upper

cap.

Strongly agree,

49%

Agree, 20%

Neutral, 14%

Disagree, 14%

Strongly Disagree,

3%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

40. Should the government put an upper cap on the extent of

discounting in fares by aggregators like Ola/Uber?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 49% 36% 38% 64% 73% 71% 76% 5% Agree 20% 29% 19% 11% 10% 18% 14% 0%

Neutral 14% 18% 17% 25% 9% 7% 3% 0% Disagree 14% 15% 21% 0% 5% 1% 4% 95% Strongly Disagree 3% 2% 5% 0% 4% 2% 3% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 41

When we drill down more

regarding minimum fare

between aggregators and

auto, We got 43% drivers

interviewed are strongly

agreed that minimum auto

fare should be less than

Ola/Uber, 16% agreed where

as 13% are neutral in this and

23% Disagreed and 5% are

strongly disagreed with the

view.

Strongly agree,

43%

Agree, 16% Neutral,

13%

Disagree, 23%

Strongly Disagree,

5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

41. Should the minimum fare changed by auto rickshaw be less

than minimum fare charged by aggregators like Ola/Uber?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 43% 46% 48% 69% 21% 35% 32% 0% Agree 16% 23% 11% 9% 7% 21% 10% 0%

Neutral 13% 11% 14% 16% 16% 17% 6% 0% Disagree 23% 17% 21% 3% 39% 25% 49% 100% Strongly Disagree 5% 4% 5% 3% 17% 2% 4% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 42

Now we enquired whether

drivers are facing any

difficulties by passengers, we

found that 20% have issues

rude behavior, 14% customers

irritate drivers with the

payment, 12% has language

issue and 38% has no issues

with the customers as such,

16% suggested that there

other issues.

Rude behavior,

20%No

payment, 14%

Language misuse,

12%

No problem,

38%

Any Other,

16%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

42. What grievances you face against the customers?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Rude behavior 20% 20% 21% 28% 14% 20% 24% 0% No payment 14% 18% 14% 17% 7% 11% 14% 0%

Language misuse 12% 10% 9% 28% 11% 21% 15% 0% No problem 38% 35% 36% 6% 51% 33% 43% 100% Any Other 16% 16% 20% 22% 17% 14% 4% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 43

Regarding training of driving

behavior etc. from their

companies, 33% respondents

said that they are getting

good training from their

company and hence strongly

agreed, 37% agreed are also

agreed, where as 12% are

neutral, and 17% disagreed

that they are given any kind of

training. We have observed

this trend of not getting any

training from private taxi

companies.

Strongly agree33%

Agree37%

Neutral12%

Disagree17%

Strongly Disagree

1%

43. Are you getting sufficient training from your company (if

applicable)?

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 33% 39% 35% 38% 6% 30% 26% 0% Agree 37% 41% 39% 41% 25% 38% 19% 0%

Neutral 12% 13% 15% 14% 2% 4% 7% 0% Disagree 17% 6% 10% 3% 67% 25% 44% 100% Strongly Disagree 1% 0% 0% 3% 0% 3% 5% 0%

[AUTHOR NAME] 44

When we enquired regarding

their awareness of termination

policies laid down by their

respective companies, we

found that 48% are very clear,

35% agreed that they

understand the policy of

termination, where as 12% are

neutral are less aware,

whereas only 5% said that they

are not clear about the policy

of termination of their

respective companies.

Strongly agree,

48%

Agree, 35%

Neutral, 12%

Disagree, 5%

Strongly Disagree,

1%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

44. Do you completely understand your terms of

working and termination policies

1125 308 343 36 129 197 90 20 Options All OLA Uber Easy

Cab/Meru Self/Personal Other Auto Bike

Strongly agree 48% 43% 46% 56% 64% 38% 74% 95% Agree 35% 42% 31% 30% 24% 49% 17% 0%

Neutral 12% 9% 18% 7% 9% 7% 2% 0% Disagree 5% 5% 5% 7% 3% 3% 7% 5% Strongly Disagree 1% 0% 1% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0%

ANNEXURE II

Survey Report – Customers

1

Customer first choice regarding

any product and service is the

most important thing to know

the current market demand,

liking and need of the present.

When we conducted the survey

of the customers using different

kind public transport to

commute locally in their cities,

we found that people have

started liking and preferring

app based cab the most as

suggested by 55% of the

respondents, people prefer

private taxis and Yellow black

which are easily available to the

common mass, Radio/Meru

preferred by 8% of the

respondents, 9% prefer Auto

Riksha and only 1% bike taxi

due to lesser presence across

India.

55% 14% 8% 14%9%

1%

69%

8% 3% 0%

20%

0%

38% 43%

17%

2%

0%

0%

62%

15%

0%

18%

5%

0%

32%

9%

13%34%

7%

4%

59%

6%

14% 21%

0% 0%

App Based Normal /Private

Radio Taxi(Meru / Easy

Cab )

Other (Yellow/Black)

Auto Rickshaw Bike Taxi

1.Which cab company do you prefer to travel with, an app based aggregator or normal cab

? (Rank 1)

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

Q1 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad App Based 55% 69% 38% 62% 32% 59%

Normal / Private 14% 8% 43% 15% 9% 6%

Radio Taxi (Meru / Easy Cab ) 8% 3% 17% 0% 13% 14%

Other ( Yellow/Black) 14% 0% 2% 18% 34% 21% Auto Rickshaw 9% 20% 0% 5% 7% 0%

Bike Taxi 1% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0%

2

When asked regarding the

second preference of the same

customers, we found that

private taxis are most preferred

may be due to ease of making

call or due to surety of turning it

up. Radio Taxi are chosen by

21% interviewed people as

their second choice, 19% given

second rank to Yellow-Black

taxis, while 15% prefer app

based, 9% people prefer to go

to auto and rest 1% to bike.

15% 30% 21% 19%9%

1%

6%

36% 29%

6%

17%

2%

22%

14%

47%

16%

0%

0%

29%36%

0%

29%

3%

0%

9% 38%

17%

45%

2%

0%

16%17%

8% 9%

14%

0%

App Based Normal /Private

Radio Taxi(Meru / Easy

Cab )

Other (Yellow/Black)

Auto Rickshaw Bike Taxi

1.1.Which cab company do you prefer to travel with, an app based aggregator or normal cab

?(Rank 2)

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

Q.1.1 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

App Based 15% 6% 22% 29% 9% 16%

Normal / Private 30% 36% 14% 36% 38% 17%

Radio Taxi (Meru / Easy Cab ) 21% 29% 47% 0% 17% 8%

Other ( Yellow/Black) 19% 6% 16% 29% 45% 9%

Auto Rickshaw 9% 17% 0% 3% 2% 14%

Bike Taxi 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0%

3

In trustworthy or reliability index,

around 57% interviewed customers

found that app based cabs are more

trustworthy and reliable, 15%

chosen private taxis as their reliable

cab, 8% are finding radio cabs more

reliable, 9% Yellow-Black, another

9% have shown same trust on Auto

as well, and rest 1% is going with

bike taxi.

57% 15% 8% 9%9% 1%

72%

6%3%

0%

17%

1%

58%

31% 11%

0%

0%

0%

52%

42%

0%

0%

6%

0%

34%

8%

15%

26%

12%

5%

60%

5%

14%

21%

0% 0%

App Based Normal / Private Radio Taxi(Meru / Easy

Cab )

Other (Yellow/Black)

Auto Rickshaw Bike Taxi

2. Which cab company do you feel more trustworthy or reliable? ( Rank

1)

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

Q.2 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad App Based 57% 72% 58% 52% 34% 60%

Normal / Private 15% 6% 31% 42% 8% 5% Radio Taxi (Meru / Easy Cab ) 8% 3% 11% 0% 15% 14%

Other ( Yellow/Black) 9% 0% 0% 0% 26% 21% Auto Rickshaw 9% 17% 0% 6% 12% 0%

Bike Taxi 1% 1% 0% 0% 5% 0%

4

In second rank of

trustworthiness chosen by the

customers using different

means of local transportation,

we found that 33% said that they

feel private/normal taxis are

their second choice, whereas

radio taxis have been preferred

by almost 29% as their second

choice, 21% suggested app

based, 7% Yellow-Black and 9%

auto Riksha and 1% others.

21% 33% 29% 7%9% 1%

10%28%

40%

3%

17%

2%

18%

22%

55%

4%

0%

0%

48%52%

0%

0%

0%

0%

16%

24%

36%

17%

5%

2%

17%41%

7%

17% 17%

0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

App Based Normal /Private

Radio Taxi(Meru / Easy

Cab )

Other (Yellow/Black)

AutoRickshaw

Bike Taxi

2.1. Which cab company do you feel more trustworthy or reliable? ( Rank 2 )

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

Q.2.1 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad App Based 21% 10% 18% 48% 16% 17%

Normal / Private 33% 28% 22% 52% 24% 41% Radio Taxi (Meru / Easy Cab ) 29% 40% 55% 0% 36% 7%

Other ( Yellow/Black) 7% 3% 4% 0% 17% 17% Auto Rickshaw 9% 17% 0% 0% 5% 17%

Bike Taxi 1% 2% 0% 0% 2% 0%

5

Around 60% prefer app based cab

service as their first choice, where

as 20% of them suggested app

based services as their second

choice.

Private taxis are also achieving

good rank in terms of preference

of the people as suggested by

14%, around 10% suggested their

preference for Radio taxis. Only

7% preferred Yellow-Black as

their first choice and 9% preferred

auto as first choice whereas

second rank for auto has been

given 15% of the total interviewed

customers.

60%

78%

53% 58%

36%

59%

14%

4%

24%

40%

12%

5%

10%2%

22%

0%

18%

14%

7%0%

0% 0%

15%

22%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

3. According to charges which Cab will you prefer more? ( Rank 1 )

Bike Taxi

Auto Rickshaw

Other ( Yellow/Black)

Radio Taxi (Meru / Easy Cab )

Normal / Private

App Based

Q.3 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad App Based 60% 78% 53% 58% 36% 59%

Normal / Private 14% 4% 24% 40% 12% 5% Radio Taxi (Meru / Easy Cab ) 10% 2% 22% 0% 18% 14%

Other ( Yellow/Black) 7% 0% 0% 0% 15% 22% Auto Rickshaw 9% 16% 0% 0% 16% 0%

Bike Taxi 1% 0% 0% 2% 3% 0%

6

In the second rank, 20%

respondents suggested that they

prefer app based cabs in terms of

cost, 29% preferring private taxis,

where as 30% said that they will go

with Radio taxi as their second

choice in terms of charges/cost.

15% also preferred auto wallas.

20%

9%

24%

41%

20% 17%

29%

27%

24%

59%

3%

32%

30%

44%

51%

0%

39%

2%

15% 18%

0% 0%

15%

45%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

3.1. According to charges which Cab will you prefer more? ( Rank 2 )

App Based Normal / Private

Radio Taxi (Meru / Easy Cab ) Other ( Yellow/Black)

Auto Rickshaw Bike Taxi

Q.3.1 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad App Based 20% 9% 24% 41% 20% 17%

Normal / Private 29% 27% 24% 59% 3% 32% Radio Taxi (Meru / Easy Cab ) 30% 44% 51% 0% 39% 2%

Other ( Yellow/Black) 3% 0% 0% 0% 15% 4% Auto Rickshaw 15% 18% 0% 0% 15% 45%

Bike Taxi 2% 2% 0% 0% 7% 0%

7

Around 59% respondents feel that

app based company provides

better drivers, 16% suggested that

private provides better driver

experience, 9% Radio taxi etc. It can

be observed that App based are

giving tough fight to traditional

players for their existence even in

terms of behavior of the drivers.

59%

76%

46%

61%

35%

59%

16%

3%

36%

34%

13%

6%

9%5%

16%

0%

12%

14%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

4. According to the behavior of the drivers which Cab will you prefer? ( Rank 1 )

App Based

Normal / Private

Radio Taxi (Meru / Easy Cab )

Yellow/Black

Other

Auto Rickshaw

Bike Taxi

Q.4 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad App Based 59% 76% 46% 61% 35% 59%

Normal / Private 16% 3% 36% 34% 13% 6% Radio Taxi (Meru / Easy Cab ) 9% 5% 16% 0% 12% 14%

Yellow/Black 4% 0% 2% 0% 20% 0% Other 9% 5% 0% 5% 13% 20%

Auto Rickshaw 4% 10% 0% 0% 7% 0% Bike Taxi 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

8

In the second choice for liking the

drivers behavior, 35% suggested

that normal private taxis are better,

where as 17% app based, and 28%

respondents like the Radio taxi

behavior.

17% 13%18% 19%

14%25%

35%37%

14%

74%

28%

27%

28% 34% 65%

7%

23% 0%

9% 10%

0% 0%

9%

25%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

4.1. According to the behavior of the drivers which Cab will you prefer? ( Rank

2 )

App Based

Normal / Private

Radio Taxi (Meru / Easy Cab )

Yellow/Black

Other

Auto Rickshaw

Bike Taxi

Q.4 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad App Based 17% 13% 18% 19% 14% 25%

Normal / Private 35% 37% 14% 74% 28% 27% Radio Taxi (Meru / Easy Cab ) 28% 34% 65% 7% 23% 0%

Yellow/Black 6% 0% 2% 0% 18% 18% Other 4% 6% 0% 0% 7% 5%

Auto Rickshaw 9% 10% 0% 0% 9% 25% Bike Taxi 1% 1% 0% 0% 2% 0%

9

Around 37% respondents said

that they do not think that surge

is correct where as 48% people

think that it is correct and they do

agree with this surge pricing of

Ola and Uber.

16%22%

16%10%

23%

3%

32%14%

73%

63%

26%

2%

37% 49%

0%

4%

34%

83%

7%2% 0%

21%

11%

3%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

5. Do you think the policy of surge pricing of App based company are correct?

Strongly Agree Agree Doesn’t Matter Much No No, Not at all

Q.5 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad Strongly Agree 16% 22% 16% 10% 23% 3%

Agree 32% 14% 73% 63% 26% 2% Doesn’t Matter Much 9% 14% 10% 3% 5% 9%

No 37% 49% 0% 4% 34% 83% No, Not at all 7% 2% 0% 21% 11% 3%

10

According to the customer’s

opinion, 41% Ola has fair billing

system, Uber come second as

suggested by 23%.

41%

59%

38% 39%

22%27%

23%

11%

30%

39%

19%

31%

6%

4%

21% 0%

12%

0%

9%6%

9%

14%

12%9%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

6. From a billing point of view which cab service is fair? ( Rank 1 )

Ola Uber Easy Cab

Meru Private Yellow/Black

Other Auto Rickshaw Bike Taxi

Q.6 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad Ola 41% 59% 38% 39% 22% 27%

Uber 23% 11% 30% 39% 19% 31% Easy Cab 6% 4% 21% 0% 12% 0%

Meru 9% 6% 9% 14% 12% 9% Private 8% 9% 2% 7% 12% 6%

Yellow/Black 3% 0% 0% 0% 15% 0% Other 6% 0% 0% 0% 7% 27%

Auto Rickshaw 4% 10% 0% 0% 2% 0% Bike Taxi 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

11

In second rank, Uber is topping the

chart as suggest by 36%, Ola has

fair billing system preferred by

23%. Around 10% respondents

also chose Easy cab and Meru.

23%

10%

24%

40%

24%32%

36%

51% 20%

36%

26%

30%

10%14%

20%

0%

9%

5%

9%4%

27%9%

7%

2%

8% 9%

8%

9%

7%9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

6.1 From a billing point of view which cab service is fair? ( Rank 2 )

Ola Uber Easy Cab

Meru Private Yellow/Black

Other Auto Rickshaw Bike Taxi

Q.6.1 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad Ola 23% 10% 24% 40% 24% 32%

Uber 36% 51% 20% 36% 26% 30% Easy Cab 10% 14% 20% 0% 9% 5%

Meru 9% 4% 27% 9% 7% 2% Private 8% 9% 8% 9% 7% 9%

Yellow/Black 6% 0% 0% 5% 12% 18% Other 1% 0% 0% 0% 7% 0%

Auto Rickshaw 7% 13% 0% 0% 9% 5% Bike Taxi 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

12

46%

68%

35%

54%

19%

35%

27%

9%

39%

36%

26%

45%

4% 1% 10%

0%

10%

3%5% 3%

16%0%

10%

0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

7. WHICH PLAYER DO YOU PREFER IN TERMS OF TIMELY

AVAILABILITY OF CABS? ( RANK 1 )

Ola Uber Easy Cab

Meru Private Yellow/Black

Other Auto Rickshaw Bike Taxi

In the rank one table, around 46%

people said that Ola attend the call

on time, whereas 27% people

suggested that Uber attend the call

on time, rest are in one digit as it

can be observed from the table

given.

Q.7 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad Ola 46% 68% 35% 54% 19% 35%

Uber 27% 9% 39% 36% 26% 45% Easy Cab 4% 1% 10% 0% 10% 3%

Meru 5% 3% 16% 0% 10% 0% Private 8% 7% 0% 11% 19% 2%

Yellow/Black 3% 0% 0% 0% 12% 6% Other 2% 0% 0% 0% 2% 8%

Auto Rickshaw 4% 13% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bike Taxi 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0%

13

Second rank for turning up on time

are, 21% Ola, 37% Uber, 10% Easy

Cab and 10% Meru and rest are in

single digit.

21%

9%16%

42%

19%

33%

37% 59%

27%

43%

19%

11%

10%

8%

18%

7%

12%

9%

10%

9% 35%

0%

7% 0%

5% 0%

0% 0%

12% 20%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

7.1 Which player do you prefer in terms of timely availability of cabs? (

Rank 2 )

Ola Uber Easy Cab

Meru Private Yellow/Black

Other Auto Rickshaw Bike Taxi

Q.7.1 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad Ola 21% 9% 16% 42% 19% 33%

Uber 37% 59% 27% 43% 19% 11% Easy Cab 10% 8% 18% 7% 12% 9%

Meru 10% 9% 35% 0% 7% 0% Private 8% 6% 4% 8% 12% 13%

Yellow/Black 5% 0% 0% 0% 12% 20% Other 2% 0% 0% 0% 9% 4%

Auto Rickshaw 6% 10% 0% 0% 9% 9% Bike Taxi 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0%

14

35%

50%

14%

29% 31% 30%

28%

18%

41%

66%

10%5%

7%

5%27%

0%

14%

0%

7%6%

16%

0%

12%

8%

15% 9%

2% 5%

9% 58%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

8. Which player do you prefer in terms cleanliness

Ola Uber Easy Cab

Meru Private Yellow/Black

Other Auto Rickshaw Bike Taxi

Around 35% suggested that Ola is

better in terms of cleanliness,

where as 28% suggested Uber is

better, Easy 7%, Meru 7% Private

15% and rest others. Private taxis

are still doing fairly good and

preferred as well although

according to the trends they may

not able to survive for a very long

time.

Q.8 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad Ola 35% 50% 14% 29% 31% 30%

Uber 28% 18% 41% 66% 10% 5% Easy Cab 7% 5% 27% 0% 14% 0%

Meru 7% 6% 16% 0% 12% 8% Private 15% 9% 2% 5% 9% 58%

Yellow/Black 3% 2% 0% 0% 14% 0% Other 3% 6% 0% 0% 5% 0%

Auto Rickshaw 2% 3% 0% 0% 5% 0% Bike Taxi 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0%

15

From five cities the data has been

collected and we found that 39%

people prefer Ola, around 32%

prefer Uber, 10% suggested Easy

cab, Meru 7%, Private 4%, Yellow-

Black by 3%, and Auto by 6%. We

can see that Yellow-black, private

or all other traditional players are

not being preferred by the

customers after entry of Ola/Uber.

39%

49%

14%

44%

30%

44%

32%

24%

42%

56%

12%

36%

10% 3% 36%

0%

18%

0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

9. Which player do you prefer in terms of types of cars available

Ola Uber Easy Cab

Meru Private Yellow/Black

Other Auto Rickshaw Bike Taxi

Q.9 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad Ola 39% 49% 14% 44% 30% 44%

Uber 32% 24% 42% 56% 12% 36% Easy Cab 10% 3% 36% 0% 18% 0%

Meru 7% 4% 6% 0% 12% 14% Private 4% 3% 2% 0% 7% 6%

Yellow/Black 3% 0% 0% 0% 16% 0% Other 1% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0%

Auto Rickshaw 6% 16% 0% 0% 2% 0% Bike Taxi 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

16

14%10%

31%

0%

27%

9%

11%

5%

21%

16%

12%

5%

8%

2%

27%

0%

17%

2%

17%

23%

0%

21%

15%

18%

23%33%

0%

15%

5%

54%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

10. Have you faced harassment such as no show, rude behaviour, haggling for

fares from cab drivers? ( Rank 1 )

Ola Uber Easy Cab

Meru Private Yellow/Black

Other Auto Rickshaw Bike Taxi

When we enquired regarding

which cab or type of local transport

is most harassing in terms of rude

behavior, haggling for fare with the

driver etc., we found that Other

(magic, Big auto wala) are most

harassing as suggested by 23%

respondents, next is Yellow-Black

opined by 17% and 12% by auto

Riksha. According to 14%

respondents Ola drivers are very

harassing, where as 11%

suggested that Uber is also came in

the same category. Meru and Easy

cabs has least number of

complaints.

Q.10 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad Ola 14% 10% 31% 0% 27% 9%

Uber 11% 5% 21% 16% 12% 5% Easy Cab 8% 2% 27% 0% 17% 2%

Meru 5% 0% 17% 0% 12% 0% Private 11% 23% 4% 2% 12% 4%

Yellow/Black 17% 23% 0% 21% 15% 18% Other 23% 33% 0% 15% 5% 54%

Auto Rickshaw 12% 5% 0% 45% 0% 9% Bike Taxi 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0%

17

As it can be observed from the

table of second rank/choice that

people are really pissed off from

Auto Riksha as stated by21%,

Yellow-Black 16%, and other 19%.

Whereas Ola, Easy cabs and

Private are in the range of 5 to 9%

so it can be easily concluded that

professional taxi services

providers are better as commuters

faces less harassment by the

drivers.

8%4%

19%

0%

12%

0%

9%

9%

17%

0%

10%

0%

19%

20%

0%

49%

9%

0%

21%42%

0%

0%

17%

0%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

10.1. Have you faced harassment such as no show, rude behaviour, haggling for fares from cab drivers? ( Rank 2 )

Ola Uber Easy Cab

Meru Private Yellow/Black

Other Auto Rickshaw Bike Taxi

Q.10.1 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Ola 6% 4% 8% 0% 10%

Uber 8% 4% 19% 0% 12% Easy Cab 5% 0% 11% 0% 12%

Meru 9% 0% 42% 0% 9% Private 9% 9% 17% 0% 10%

Yellow/Black 16% 21% 3% 13% 17% Other 19% 20% 0% 49% 9%

Auto Rickshaw 21% 42% 0% 0% 17% Bike Taxi 8% 0% 0% 38% 3%

18

13%2%

18%

0%7%

49%31%

16%

67%

48%28%

17%17%

18%

14%

9% 37%

5%23%

46%

0%

10%

17% 15%

13% 17%

0%

29%

8%5%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

All Delhi Banglore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

11. If driver doesn’t came on time due to traffic jam or any genuine reason, does that affect your choice of taking the cab service

in the future

Strongly Agree Agree

Doesn’t Matter Much No

No, Not at all

Around 44% people agreed and

strongly agreed that it affects the

decision of hiring cab from same

firm if the driver does not turn after

booking no matter what, even due

to genuine region like traffic jam.

Whereas the rest of 54%

respondents understand the

difficulty faced in the roads by

drivers in reaching on time or not

showing at all. They do not change

the cab service provider. But 44%

is a big number who wanted that if

have booked the service then cab

service provider should make

100% sure that it should turn up and

attend the call on time, otherwise

they will change their preference.

Q.11 All Delhi Bangalore Kolkata Mumbai Hyderabad

Strongly Agree 13% 2% 18% 0% 7% 49%

Agree 31% 16% 67% 48% 28% 17%

Doesn’t Matter Much 17% 18% 14% 9% 37% 5%

No 23% 46% 0% 10% 17% 15%

No, Not at all 13% 17% 0% 29% 8% 5%