See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318959598

An Exploratory Study on Uber, GrabCar, and

Conventional Taxis in Metro Manila

Conference Paper · September 2017

CITATIONS READS

0 4,044

1 author:

Arden Glenn Paronda

University of the Philippines
3 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Arden Glenn Paronda on 07 August 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 An Exploratory Study on Uber, GrabCar, and
Conventional Taxis in Metro Manila
Arden Glenn A. Paronda
Institute of Civil Engineering,
College of Engineering
University of the Philippines
Diliman, Quezon City
ardenglennp@gmail.com
Abstract — Uber and GrabCar are popular modes of
transportation conceptualized and developed abroad and later
introduced to Filipino commuters. The service is classified by the
Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC)
under what they defined as Transportation Network Company
(TNC). The rise of these transport modes has a direct impact to a
segment once dominated by conventional taxis as these two
became popular in the market in terms of the premium services
they provide to riders. The main objectives of this study are the
following: a) to determine the characteristics of TNC users as
well as the attributes of TNC operators in Metro Manila; b) to
determine the perception of commuters and operators on Uber
and GrabCar; c) to determine the role of Uber & GrabCar in our
transportation sector and sustainable transport in Metro Manila;
and d) to formulate recommendations for TNCs as well as for
improving conventional taxi services.
The surveys were conducted online using social media in
which respondents were asked to summarize their total
experience using existing taxi services compared to Uber and
GrabCar. The surveys revealed common complaints about
existing taxi services. Furthermore, the relative ratio of users of
Uber, GrabCar, and Conventional Taxi were also estimated
based from the survey respondents. The characteristics of TNC
users such as demographics & trip purposes were also noted as
well as the attributions of TNC operators in Metro Manila.
User’s and Operator’s Perception regarding Uber and GrabCar
were also determined in this study. The surveys conducted in this
exploratory study showed that the Transportation Network
Company (TNC) is an innovation in the transportation industry
in the Philippines that gives everyone not just safer and faster
trips but also business opportunities. Now, private car owners
can have an option not to use their car as often as before and still
enjoy the same convenience and safety like riding their own car.
TNC’s role in Metro Manila is to have another mobility
option for commuters that is safe, convenient and reliable. TNCs
however compete with the service provided by taxis and this
healthy competition is said to eliminate the taxi operators’
monopoly in the transport market creating a benchmark that
UP National Center for Transportation Studies Foundation, Inc.
Jose Regin F. Regidor
Institute of Civil Engineering
College of Engineering;
University of the Philippines
Diliman, Quezon City
Ma. Sheilah Gaabucayan-Napalang
School of Urban and Regional Planning
University of the Philippines
Diliman, Quezon City
challenges the taxi operators to improve the quality of their
service. Also, the TNCs in Metro Manila deviate from the true
concept of car-sharing because most cars were bought brand new
instead of using the existing vehicle for the purpose of becoming a
TNC partner. We can still experience the same positive impacts
of car-sharing if private car users will shift to using TNC instead.
TNCs in order to contribute to a sustainable transport should
consider the concept of ride-sharing by maximizing the
occupancy of the vehicle, and by encouraging the people to share
their ride. TNCs should highly discourage its members to buy
new vehicles but instead utilize the existing units in good
condition and qualified to the age requirement set by LTFRB.
Keywords—TNC; Uber; GrabCar; Conventional Taxi; Metro
Manila
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
Uber and GrabCar are classified as new modes of
transportation under the Transport Network Company (TNC)
here developed by other countries and been introduced
recently in the Philippines which primarily competes on taxi
services.
Throughout the past years, taxi monopolizes the use of
private cars as public transport. The government never fails to
regulate their service, but taxi operators often have poor
initiative in improving the quality of their service.
Having a direct competitor for taxis will give alternative
and options for commuters.
B. Uber
Uber is a German word which means: ultimate, above all,
the best, top, something that nothing is better than. Uber
Technologies Inc. was founded on March 2009 as “UberCab”
by Travis Kalanick, and Garrett Camp as an American
company headquartered in San Francisco, California.
After the beta launched in the summer of 2010, it was
officially launched in San Francisco in 2011. They also
changed its named from UberCab to Uber that year. Each
month after, it expanded into different cities.
As of August 2015, service was available in 60 countries
(321 cities).
C. GrabTaxi/Grabcar
GrabTaxi, also known as MyTeksi, was established in
Malaysia by Harvard Business School graduates Anthony Tan
and Tan Hooi Ling in 2011;
The idea started because of how hard to hail a cab in
Malaysia. They developed and Uber like app that assigns
available cabs nearby to commuters using mapping and
location sharing;
It is available 6 languages—English, Thai, Vietnamese,
Chinese, Bahasa Malaysia and Bahasa Indonesia and uses the
same app for each country;
This e-hailing application is available in six countries in
Southeast Asia, namely: Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand,
Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines (20 cities).
D. GrabTaxi/GrabCar in the Philippines
GrabTaxi / MyTeksi was officially launched in the public
last June 2012. It started in the Philippines on August 2013;
Cebu, Philippines on July 2014; Davao City, Philippines in
October 2014 and; Iloilo City, Philippines last March 2015.
In May 2014, GrabCar an Uber like service was launched
in Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines.
GrabCar+ was launched in February 2015 in the
Philippines and it uses higher-end cars like Uber Black
service.
In July 3, 2015 GrabCar became the first accredited TNC
by LTFRB
II. RESEARCH PROBLEM
Uber, GrabCar and Other TNCs were introduced here in
our country recently and became controversial because of its
offer of a chauffeur service. The rise of this mode has direct
impact to the once dominated segment of the taxi industry as
these two became popular in the market in terms of the
premium services it provides to its riders. We need to know
the positive impacts of Uber & GrabCar to our transportation
sector.
III. OBJECTIVES
This study has the following objectives:
a) To explore the role of Uber & GrabCar in our
transportation sector and sustainable transport in Metro
Manila, through the use of online surveys;
b) To determine the characteristics of TNC users as well as
the attributes of TNC operators in Metro Manila;
c) To determine the perception of commuters and
operators on Uber and GrabCar.
IV. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
• This will help us know the role of Uber & GrabCar in our
transportation sector;
• This will determine the characteristics of TNC users such
as demographics & trip purposes were also noted as well as
the attributions of TNC operators in Metro Manila;
• This will help us know the perception of people on Uber
and GrabCar.
V. SCOPE AND LIMITATION:
The scope of the study includes the following:
a) The study is limited to TNC like Uber & GrabCar, and
Conventional Taxi in Metro Manila
b) Study area is limited to Metro Manila
c) Actual benefits to the public and community rather than
the operator
VI. METHODOLOGY OF THE RESEARCH
A. Survey Methodology
In this study, the researcher requested data to LTFRB
namely: (1) Total Number Units of Taxi Operating in Metro
Manila; (2) Total Number Units of UberX, UberBlack,
GrabCar and GrabCar+; (3) Number of Approved and Pending
Partners/Operators (Taxi & TNC’s); (4) Number of Taxi Units
per Operator; (5) Process of Affiliation and Operation (Taxi,
and TNC’s); (6) Fare Computation for Taxi; (7) Taxi Meter
Calibration; (8) Vehicle (Taxi) Requirements by LTFRB; (9)
Limitations of Taxi (Area); (10) Franchise Fee (Taxi); and
(11) Other relevant data regarding Taxi, &TNC’s.
Also, the researcher requested some data to Uber and Grab
to support the study. Some of the data requested were: (1)
Total Number Units of UberX and UberBlack Available; (2)
Number of Approved and Pending Partners/Operators, (3)
Number of Units per Operator; (4) Process of Affiliation and
Operation; (5) Fare Computation; (6) Surge Computation (For
Rush Hour); (7) Average Number of Customers On Weekday
and Weekend Basis; (8) Promotions and Marketing; (9)
Limitations of UberX and UberBlack (Area); (10) Target
Market; (11) Origin – Destination (OD) Data of Trips Data (if
available); and (12) Other relevant data regarding Uber &
GrabCar.
As the data from LTRFB, Uber and Grab is useful to the
study, the researcher will not only rely on them. An online
survey for the riders of Uber/GrabCar and an online survey for
the operators of Uber/GrabCar will be conducted. This data
from online survey will be important as the actual insight of
the respondent (riders and operators) will be captured and
won’t be bias. The methodology used in gathering data on
Car-sharing; Where and How It Succeeds, 2005 by the Transit
Cooperative Research Program (TRCP) was found to be
useful and related to this survey.
An online survey was sent via email, text, and Facebook to
the known users of Uber and GrabCar. A Facebook page with
sponsor was created to easily disseminate the online survey for
other users to answer the survey.
B. The Respondents
The respondents will be regular users of Uber, GrabCar
and Conventional Taxi. As much as possible, the researcher
wants to have as many respondents for the Online Survey for
the riders of Uber and GrabCar but due to some constrains the
number of TNC users is unknown, relative percent of TNC
users is sufficient in the performance of the survey.
In the case of the Online Survey for Operators, the number
of operators is given by the LTFRB. The researcher will use
sampling for the right number of respondents.
C. Procedure in Gathering Data (Online Survey)
1) Commuters & Private Car Users Survey (Web-Based
Survey)
An online survey on google docs was disseminated online
in social media as the primary users of Uber and GrabCar are
online based.
This will determine the ratio of possible users between the
modes of transportation: Conventional Taxi, Uber, and
GrabCar. Demographics of respondents, ride experience,
problems encountered, trip purpose, quality of service,
perception on Uber & GrabCar and etc. There will be an
option for the riders to participate in my Travel Diary
Performance Indicator Survey. One gift card as the raffle was
used to attract respondents.
2) Partners/Peers Survey (Web-based Survey)
The researcher conducted an online survey on the
operators of TNCs. An online survey was disseminated on the
Facebook groups of Uber and GrabCar and the Facebook page
created. If possible and allowed, paper survey questionnaires
with control number will be left in the offices of TNCs. The
purpose of the survey is to know the reason for joining the
TNC; to know the number of operators, or operator/drivers
and their corresponding number of units; demographics of
operators; what is their other work aside from TNC; benefits
of Uber/GrabCar to them; to know if they have a garage for
their vehicles; to know if their vehicle is existing or brought
brand new and other information related to their operation.
Also in this survey, a gift card was raffled to attract the
respondents to answer.
D. Statistical Treatment of the Study
1) Sampling Size for Commuters & Private Car Users
Survey (Riders)
As the number of users of Uber and GrabCar is unknown
and hard to determine for now, the researcher tries to have as
many as possible respondents online through the help of the
Facebook page created.
2) Sampling Size for Partners/Peers Survey (Operators)
Based from the number of TNC operators from LTFRB
which is 9,735 for Uber and GrabCar, the sampling size
should be 99 samples at 95% confidence level and 10%
reliability. The researcher tried to obtain data from as many
operator respondents as possible, but some were hesitant to
answer and share information because of the thinking that it
might be used against them. Others thought at first that the
study was under the LTFRB but soon realized that it was not
after clarification from the researcher. Table I shows a
summary of survey respondents for this study.
TABLE I. SUMMARY OF SURVEY RESPONDENTS
(AS OF MARCH 1, 2016)
TYPE OF SURVEY Number of
Respondents
Exploratory Survey of Uber, GrabCar, and 119 respondents
Conventional Taxi (RIDERS)
Uber and GrabCar Partner/Peers Survey 102 respondents
(OPERATORS)
E. The Study Area
The study area is limited to cities in Metro Manila as the
Uber & GrabCar is only allowed in Metro Manila. It is a
driver/operator’s discretion if he/she will transport passengers
outside Metro Manila.
VII. PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF
DATA
A. LTFRB Data
LTFRB was willing to help and share some data which is
useful in the success of study. On the other hand, Uber and
GrabCar did not want to participate and share their data. They
said the data requested is confidential and they are a private
company. The researcher will utilize the data from the online
survey conducted instead.
As you can see in Fig. 1, the Number of Transportation
Vehicle Network Service (TNVS) Vehicles is 9735 as of Dec.
4, 2015 compared to registered taxis which is 3628.
Unregistered taxis “colorum” were not included in the count
because they are not in registered in LTFRB. The rise of these
modes can say that we have problems with the once
dominated by conventional taxis.
Fig. 1. Number of Vehicles (TNVS and Conventional Taxi) as of Dec. 4,
2015
 In Figure 2, we can see the number of operators and the
number of units, while in Figure 3 we can see the comparison
of number of operator & units between Uber and GrabCar. TABLE III. STATUS OF RIDERS RESPONDENTS
Uber being the first to start to operate here is well known
compared to the latter GrabCar as seen in Figure 3. Category No. %
Employed 91 76
Student 4 3
Unemployed 24 20
Grand Total 119 100

Seventy-six percent (76%) of 119 respondents are

employed, 3% are students and 20% are unemployed or self-
employed as seen in Table III. 57% of my respondents are
female, average age is 31.48 years old while the median is 30
years old, and 47% got a bachelor’s degree. Our poor public
transportation system is the reason why most of women option
to ride a taxi or Uber/GrabCar primarily for their safety and
convenience.

C. Survey on Uber, GrabCar and Conventional Taxi

Fig. 2. TRANSPORTATION NETWORK VEHICLE SERVICE (TNVS)
Number of Operators and Units as of Dec. 4, 2015 Experience
Respondents were asked what made them choose
Uber/GrabCar over Conventional Taxias their mode of
transport in your destination. The top 10 answers why: a)
Convenience, b) Safety, c) Reliability, d) Less hassle, e) Just
like my own car, f) Easy to book a ride, g) Cashless Payment,
h) Drivers have undergone background check, and i) Cars are
new.
Being trapped in a system where transportation modes are
of poor service we opted and prefer to have our private
vehicle. Not all can afford to have a car, another alternative to
a car is a taxi, but some of the taxis today are providing poor
service also because of the aged of the vehicle and poor
maintenance of it. When TNC service like Uber and GrabCar
Fig. 3. TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANY (TNC)
comes out, people opted to try them because of the reliability
Number of Operators and Units as of Dec. 4, 2015 and convenience they provide to commuters, including
cashless payment and safety they provide which is missing in
taxis.
B. Demographics of Respondents (Riders)
In the online survey conducted for riders of Uber, GrabCar As we can see in Fig. 4, 57% of the respondents are
and Conventional Taxi, we can see in Table II that 62% are willing to give up their car for a convenient mode of
both commuter and private car user, 32% are commuters only, transportation. Although 43% don’t want because of the
and 6% are private car user only. This is due to the fact that present situation our transportation sector has, they still trust
some private car user also uses Uber/GrabCar for different and prefer to have a car. From the start, car sales are growing
purpose that they don’t want their car or don’t want to drive. because we don’t have another option to have a convenient
transport. Mass transport like trains and buses here in Metro
Manila are over capacity and having poor maintenance. The
TABLE II. RELATIVE PERCENT OF COMMUTERS, PRIVATE CAR USER, OR respondents were also asked how much are they willing to
BOTH OF RIDER RESPONDENTS
spend for a convenient and reliable ride. As you can see in
Category No. % Table IV, the highest answer is 100 to 150 pesos which 24%
Both 74 62 of the respondent. At this amount they are willing to spend for
a convenient and reliable ride.
Commuter 38 32
Private Car User 7 6
TOTAL 119 100
 In Fig.6, we can see the common complaints commuters
experienced in riding a taxi in Metro Manila. The top three
most common complaints with highest percent of answer are
(1) Overcharging, (2) Rude Driver, and (3) Reckless Driving.
These complaints are more about driver’s attitude.

Fig. 4. Relative Percent of people willing to give up their car for convenient
mode of transportation

TABLE IV. HOW MUCH ARE YOU WILLING TO SPEND FOR A CONVENIENT
AND RELIABLE RIDE?

Category No. %
Less than 50 4 3%
Fig. 6. Common Complaints In Riding A Taxi In Metro Manila
51-99 10 8%
100-150 28 24 % In Fig. 7, respondents were asked their primary purpose of
151-200 25 21 % riding service like Uber and GrabCar. 46% of the respondents
201-250 12 10 % answered “commute to work” while 33% answered “personal
business”. This is due good service Uber and GrabCar provide
251-300 16 13 %
which fills up the gap the other public transport modes doesn’t
301-350 7 6% have.
351-400 2 2%
401-450 1 1%
451-500 7 6%
501 or higher 7 6%
Grand Total 119 100 %

In Fig. 5, we can see that the average amount car users

spent for fuel in their vehicle every week are 1000 pesos. The
results vary depending on the vehicle.

Fig. 7. Primary purpose in riding service like Uber and GrabCar

In Fig. 8, 119 respondents were asked on how many trips

per month do they use Uber or GrabCar. The average trips per
months based on their answer are 12.03 trips per month while
the median is 8 trips per month. As we all know most of the
users of Uber and GrabCar are employed this is why this close
to the average workdays per month, which is 20 days/month or
5 days a week. These shows that TNC is a good alternative for
commuters and plays a role in their daily activities. It also
supplements the lack of available conventional taxis at a
certain time.

Fig. 5. Amount Of Money Spent On Gas Spent Every Week For Car Users
Fig. 8. Number Of Trips A Month Via Uber / Grabcar

The reasons for using Uber/GrabCar was asked to the

respondents, multiple responses were allowed as seen in Table
V. Twenty-one percent (21%) from the “Liked having another
mobility options” this is because of the problems commuters
experienced in the current available modes. Nineteen percent
(19%) from the “Just found out about it”, Filipinos are known
to experiment or try something new which is available.
Thirteen percent (13%) goes to “Like Uber/GrabCar
Philosophy”, others liked the way these TNC operate and
became beneficial to some commuters.
TABLE V. REASONS FOR AVAILING OF UBER OR GRABCAR SERVICE
Fig. 9. Car use before and after using Uber/GrabCar
The respondents were asked to choose the most attractive
feature of Uber or GrabCar, 18% of respondents chose
reliability. That is, availability and the estimated time of
arrival in the pick-up point. The second choice is, “easy to
make reservations”, hailing a taxi or falling in line in a taxi
stand is no longer needed. Vehicles are also new so there is a
little chance of having a car breakdown. (Please refer to Table
VI)

Category NO. %
TABLE VI. MOST ATTRACTIVE FEATURES OF UBER/GRABCAR
Liked having another mobility option 66 21%
Category No. %
Just found out about it 57 19%
Reliability - cars are there when I need them 21 18%
Liked Uber or GrabCar philosophy 40 13%
Easy to make reservations 19 16%
Wanted to spend less on transportation 35 11%
The overall philosophy of Uber and GrabCar 17 14%
Eliminates the hassles of owning a car 31 10%
Less costly than owning a car 11 9%
Could not afford to own/maintain/garage my car 23 7%
Easy to use 11 9%
Others 23 7%
Less hassle than owning a car 9 8%
Uber or GrabCar services came to my neighborhood 14 5%
No parking hassles 10 8%
No particular reason 7 2%
Do not have to ask for rides from others 7 6%
My employer pays for membership or other expenses 5 2%
Others 5 4%
Car broke down or needed extensive repairs 4 1%
Helps the environment 4 3%
Changed job 2 1%
Can pay for cars only when used 4 3%
Changed location of my residence 1 0%
More comfortable and faster than public commute 1 1%
TOTAL 308 100%
Others: Better service than cab, comfort; Free Ride Upon Registration; My employer pays for
TOTAL 119 100%
membership or other expenses; No one to drive me to work; No particular reason; Taxi drivers
are choosy on the destination

In Fig. 10, users of Uber and GrabCar were asked if they

Uber or GrabCar riders which are also private car owners
were asked about their car usage (in kilometers) for a year.
The graph in Fig. 9, shows car usage before and after using
Uber or GrabCar (in kilometers). Considering the reduction of
private vehicle use, reduction in the volume of vehicles in
roads can be expected and eventually reduced emissions and
parking use. They can still experience car service anytime of
the day when needed through Uber or GrabCar.
are still going to ride Uber/GrabCar if taxis were efficient and
convenient like Uber and GrabCar. Eighty-three percent
(83%) of the respondents answered “Yes” they will still ride
Uber and GrabCar despite the taxi being efficient and
convenient. We can see in this figure that there’s a loss of trust
in the taxi industry. We need to restructure the policies and
requirement in giving a franchise in our taxi operators to
improve their service and can compete fairly to TNC.
 In Table VII, the respondents were asked on the rating
about Uber/GrabCar they will give. Fifty-four percent (54%)
gave a Very Good rating, 13% gave Good, and 33% gave an
Excellent rating.

TABLE VII. OVERALL UBER OR GRABCAR SERVICE RATING

Category No. %
Excellent 39 33%
Good 16 13%
Fig. 10. Option To Use Uber Or Grabcar Assuming Conventional Taxis Were
Efficient and Convenient Very Good 64 54%
Fair 0 0%
In Fig. 11, we can see that despite the fare cost and mode Bad 0 0%
of payment be the same as taxis, people will still ride Uber and
TOTAL 119 100%
GrabCar. Respondents through their answers believe that
Uber/GrabCar is still more reliable than taxis.
The respondents were asked about how many cars are
owned by their household. The range is 0-5, zero (0) being
none and five (5) being the highest answer. An average of 1.38
cars per household and a median of 1 was determined as you
can see in Fig. 12.

Fig. 11. Option To Use Uber Or Grabcar With Assumption That Cost And
Mode Of Payment Was Equal Across All Modes Of Transport

D. Commuter’s Perception on Uber & GrabCar

In this part of the survey, the researcher looked at the
perception of people on Uber & GrabCar. With or without
these modes, what will be its effect to commuters and what Fig. 12. Number Of Cars Owned Per Household
their rating of the current system. Perception of owning a car
and reason for renting a car rather than riding Uber/GrabCar In Table VIII, respondents were asked about which of their
was also studied. trips do they feel the need to travel by car (either personal,
Some questions were asked on whether with or without rental or TNC), multiple response was allowed. Twenty-two
Uber/GrabCar, how it affects their daily lives. Being involved percent (22%) are from recreation/social trips being the
in using Uber/GrabCar 27.50% strongly disagree that they highest answer. Eighteen percent (18%) are for grocery
were able to sell their household car, and 26.7% also strongly shopping because of the need of compartment for groceries
disagrees that they were able to sell the 2nd household car. and another 18% for personal business. Sixteen percent (16%)
are from journey to or from work.
39.2% agree that they were able to go to places they
couldn’t before Uber/GrabCar came along. 45% agreeing that
TABLE VIII. TRIPS NEEDED TO TRAVEL BY CAR (THIS INCLUDES A
they travel more often now and 44.2% agree that they can now PERSONAL VEHICLE, RENTAL CARS, OR TNC)
make multipurpose trips. 38% agree that they feel more
independent. 38.3% neither agree nor disagree that they Category No. %
postpone buying another car. 32.5% agree on making fewer Recreation / Social trips 90 22%
Grocery shopping 73 18%
trips by auto because of using Uber/GrabCar but, 35% neither Personal business 72 18%
agree or disagree. Lastly, when they asked if they don’t need Journey to or from Work 65 16%
to buy a car, 25.8% agree, but another 25.8% answered neither Work-related trips (e.g. meeting clients) 60 15%
agree or disagree. Based from the answers by the respondents, Other shopping 40 10%
using the service by Uber/GrabCar has no effect on buying a Other 8 2%
new car or selling the household car. Some respondents None of these 2 0.5%
believe that still need their personal car, but doesn’t need to TOTAL 410 100%
buy another car.
 In Table IX, respondents were asked whether a car owner
or not what do they like most about owning a car. Sixty-six
percent (66%) answered “Instant access at any time of day or
night” this is because a car is an instrument for transport.
Other public transportation may not be available at night and
not all places have public transport so some people believe in
needing a car for their household.
In Table XII, the respondents answered 32% for “Rented
car cost less for longer trips”. In renting a car you pay for
daily or hourly rate rather than distance rate that’s what makes
it cheaper for longer trips.
TABLE XII. REASONS FOR RENTING A CAR RATHER THAN USING UBER
OR GRABCAR

Category No. %
TABLE IX. MOST LIKED FEATURE ABOUT OWNING A CAR
Rented cars cost less for longer trips 56 32%
Category No. Don’t have to worry about mileage charges with rentals 52 29%
Instant access at any time of day or night 66% Have more types of vehicle available with rentals 32 18%
Having a vehicle of my own choice 18% Other 32 18%
I can be sure that the car is well cared for 8% Rentals are closer to my home or work 5 3%
Others 5% Total 177 100%
No opinion 3%
Don’t like (wouldn’t like) anything about owing a car 2%
For the open-ended question “If you were an advisor to a
TOTAL 100%
TNC company, what would your recommendations be for
making Uber and GrabCar more attractive to persons like
In Table X, respondents were asked how do they think that yourself?” the respondents were asked to enumerate their
Uber/GrabCar compares to owning a car. Twenty-eight answers. The researcher then sorted all answers and came up
percent (28%) answered “Cost less”, in Uber/GrabCar you can with 15 most common enumerated responses. The topmost
have the convenience of a car without buying a car. It cost less among all the answers is “Introduced advance booking”
because you will just pay for its service when you need it, followed by “maintain cleanliness of cars” then “improve
compared to buying a car and paying for its maintenance and quality of service”. Other responses were tabulated and
fuel. As seen in Table XI, when Uber/GrabCar service was presented in Table XIII.
stopped, 29% said they will use the transit instead while 24%
will shift to taxis. TABLE XIII. RECOMMENDATIONS TO UBER OR GRABCAR TO
IMPROVE PERCEPTION
TABLE X. UBER OR GRABCAR COMPARED TO OWNING A CAR No. RECOMMENDATIONS
1 Introduce advance booking
Category No. %
2 Maintain cleanliness of cars
Costs less 72 28% 3 Improve quality of service
You get the good parts of car ownership without the hassles 55 22% 4 Reward loyal passengers
5 Reward drivers
Makes me plan my trips in advance 33 13%
6 Roadside assistance to drivers in case of emergency
I can get the kind of vehicle I need for a specific trip 28 11% 7 Apply the "true" car sharing principle. Ridesharing to others closer
Encourages me to use transit more often 17 7% to your home.
8 Introduce carpooling services (Utilize all seats)
A shared car gets used more often during the day 17 7% 9 Do not exaggerate surge pricing. 1.1x up to 1.3x is ok, more than
Encourages me to walk more often 15 6% that is too expensive
10 Expand the service geographically to a wider range catering more
Have to get the car back at a specific time 11 4%
people
Other 5 2% 11 Have a more transparent fare calculation.
TOTAL 253 100% 12 I suggest to all drivers out there not to choose passengers.
13 Increase car sharing supply so that more people can use Uber or
GrabCar and lessen surge prices
TABLE XI. ALTERNATIVE MODE IF UBER OR GRABCAR SERVICE WERE 14 Make it more adaptable to low internet speed in the Philippines.
STOPPED Use Viber or WhatsApp in communicating with drivers rather
calls& text to minimize cost
Category No. %
15 Professional training for drivers. (Safe driving, etiquette, good
Use transit more often 66 29% manners, courtesy, and alike)
Use taxis more often 54 24%
E. Demographics of Respondents (Operators)
Buy a car 43 19%
Walk more often 34 15%
The researcher tried his best to get as many respondents
Get rides from friends 25 11% (operators) as possible, but some didn’t want to share their
Move to another house 7 3% information and didn’t want to contribute to this study. 102
Total 229 100% operators participated to answer the online survey and valued
the importance of this study in our transportation sector.
 As seen in Fig. 13, the average age of the Uber/GrabCar
Operators who answered the survey was 35.8 years old with a
median of 35. Mixed aged ranging from 20 to 60 years old
was observed. Sixty percent (60%) of them are Uber
operators, 25% are GrabCar operators and 15% are both Uber
& GrabCar operators.

Fig. 14. Number of Units Per TNC Operator

TABLE XV. REASON FOR JOINING UBER OR GRABCAR

Fig. 13. Age of Respondents (Operators) in Years NO. REASONS

1 Additional income
In Table XIV, we can see that Uber dominates in the 2 Business
number of operators with a relative percent of 51%. Second is 3 Got a new car. To lessen my monthly amortization
4 Incentives
GrabCar with a relative percent of 25%. Others are a
5 You can work anytime u want
combination of both TNC. To earn money and to help commuters in public
6
transport service
TABLE XIV. CLASSIFICATION OF TNC SERVICE OPERATORS PER
CATEGORY TABLE XVI. OTHER WORK ASIDE FROM UBER/GRABCAR

Category No. % No. WORK

UberX 52 51% 1 Businessman
GrabCar 25 25% 2 Buy and Sell
UberX, GrabCar 12 12% 3 Call Center Team Leader
Uber Black 7 7% 4 Computer Shop Operator
UberX, Uber Black 3 3% 5 Private Employee
UberX, Grabcar+ 2 2% 6 Engineer
Uber Black, Grabcar+ 1 1% 7 Government Employee
Grand Total 102 100% 8 OFW
9 Seafarer
10 Taxi Operator
In Fig. 14, we can see the number of units each operator
has for TNC they are member with. The average number of
units is 1.36 units with a median of 1. As shown in Table XVII, 85% of the operators just started
Seventy-two percent (72%) of the respondents have other in less than a year. While Fig. 15, shows that 70% of the
work, 15% resign to their work to be a full time operator, and operators brought their vehicle brand new and 30% of them
60% are employed. use their existing vehicles. Using a brand new vehicle is
against the principle of car-sharing and ridesharing but it has
Most of the operator came from different field before an advantage which is the quality of service for passengers
Uber/GrabCar came along. Fifty-two percent (52%) of them while its disadvantage is the increased of number of vehicles
are both driver and operator, 33% are operator, and 15% are that can contribute to traffic congestion.
driver only. As seen in Table XV, we can see the top reasons
why they join Uber or GrabCar. Most of the answers is
additional income. In Table XVI, we can see the other work of TABLE XVII. DURATION OF BEING PARTNER/PEER OR DRIVER OF UBER
OR GRABCAR
operators besides from Uber/GrabCar.
Category No. %
Between one and two years 12 12%
Less than a year 87 85%
More than 2 years 2 2%
We haven’t started yet 1 1%
TOTAL 102 100%
 between 7 to 8am and 6 to 7pm. The results can be subjective
due to the low number of samplings obtained.

TABLE XVIII. DAY IN A WEEK WITH HIGHEST NUMBER OF BOOKINGS

(PEAK DAY)
Category No. %
Monday 50 26%
Tuesday 13 7%
Wednesday 12 6%
Thursday 14 7%
Friday 79 41%
Saturday 19 10%
Sunday 8 4%
Total 195 100%
Fig. 15. Using An Existing Vehicle Or Brand New For Uber Or Grabcar

TABLE XIX. DAY IN A WEEK WITH LOWEST NUMBER OF BOOKINGS

F. Survey on Uber/GrabCar Operation (OFF-PEAK DAY)

In Fig. 16, the behavior of operators on how many times in Category No. %
a week they operate, results showed that the operators work Monday 20 12%
for an average of 5.35 times a week, or a median of 6 times a Tuesday 21 13%
Wednesday 20 12%
week. This further proves that Uber and GrabCar Operators Thursday 16 10%
perform like a conventional taxi service. A conventional taxi Friday 3 2%
operator typically works 6 to 7x a week. Also, we can clearly Saturday 21 13%
see that 27% of the respondents operates 11 to 12 hours a day Sunday 60 37%
and some are even at 16 hours a day. A conventional taxi with Total 161 100%
a premium service, is how operators of Uber and GrabCar
behaves. (Please refer to Figure 17)

Fig. 18. Time of The Day With Highest Operator Bookings

Fig. 16. How many times in a week do you operate?
In Table XX, based on the experience of the operators,
59% said that Makati City has the highest users of Uber or
GrabCar, while in Table XXI, Navotas City at 23% was said
to have the lowest users of Uber or GrabCar. Again, the results
can be subjective due to the low number of samplings
obtained.

TABLE XX. CITY IN METRO MANILA WITH THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF

USERS OF TNC (UBER OR GRABCAR)

City No. %
Makati 60 59%
Taguig 16 16%
Fig. 17. Operators' Number Of Work Hours In A Day
Quezon City 9 9%
Table XVIII, shows that Friday is the Peak day and said to Mandaluyong 6 6%
have the highest number of bookings, while Sunday is the Off- Manila 5 5%
Peak day which has the lowest number of bookings, as seen in Pasig 3 3%
Table XIX. In Fig. 18, it is said that the peak hours are
 City No. % In Table XXII, 32% answered that Uber and GrabCar
Paranaque “Provides mobility options” other top answers include
1 1%
“Reduces parking demand”, “Reduce vehicle travel” and
Pasay 1 1% “increase transit ridership”. Uber or GrabCar provides another
Valenzuela 1 1% mobility option for commuters however, because of its low
Total 102 100% capacity (1 to 4), it is not considered as mass transit. The most
important goals for the operators is Uber or GrabCar provides
TABLE XXI. CITY IN METRO MANILA WITH THE LEAST NUMBER OF mobility options with 48% respondents, as shown in Table
USERS OF TNC (UBER OR GRABCAR) XXIII.
City No. %
Navotas 23 23% TABLE XXII. BENEFITS OF UBER AND GRABCAR
Malabon 15 15% No. %
Category
Valenzuela 15 15% Provides mobility options 77 32%
Muntinlupa 9 9% Increases transit ridership 46 19%
Caloocan 8 8% Reduces vehicle travel 45 19%
Makati 6 6% Reduces parking demand 42 18%
Pateros 6 6% Improves air quality 11 5%
Las Piñas 5 5% Other 9 4%
Manila 3 3% Do not know/prefer not to say 7 3%
Marikina 3 3% TOTAL 237 100%
Pasay 2 2%
Pasig 2 2% TABLE XXIII. MOST IMPORTANT BENEFIT OR GOAL OF UBER OR
GRABCAR
San Juan 2 2%
Quezon City 1 Category No. %
1%
Taguig 1 1% Provides mobility options 49 48%
Parañaque 1 1% Increases transit ridership 19 19%
Mandaluyong 0 0% Reduces vehicle travel 14 14%
Total 102 100% Do not know/prefer not to say 9 9%
Reduces parking demand 8 8%
Improves air quality 3 3%
G. Operator’s Perception on Uber & GrabCar
TOTAL 102 100%
In Fig. 19, the respondent operators were asked if TNC can
give them good income, 47% said that it is only “break-even”
while 37% said “yes” it gave them good income. Only 16% In Table XXIV, among the five (5) possible category
answered “no”. Based on these data, it can be concluded that answer, 47% of the respondent operators said that they
the operators and drivers cannot vouch for high income due to provide Garage or surface lot with restricted access for their
the monthly amortization they need to pay for their newly vehicles. Same as the requirement in conventional taxis, TNC
bought vehicle. On the other hand, operators with existing operators are needed to have a parking space for their vehicle.
vehicle can appreciate the income they can earn in Uber or Illegal parking on the streets will just limit the road capacity
GrabCar. so a parking a necessary for the operators of taxis and TNCs.

TABLE XXIV. PARKING OPTION FOR TNC VEHICLE

Category %
Garage or surface lot with restricted access 47%
Garage or surface lot open to the public 22%
On Street 18%
Don’t know/prefer not to say 7%
Other 6%
TOTAL 100%

Fig. 19. TNC (Uber Or Grabcar) On Giving Good Income


VIII. CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions are made based on the findings
of this study:
• The rise of the TNC transport modes proved that there
are problems in the current conventional taxi service
in Metro Manila. Overcharging, Reckless Driving,
Rude Driver are found to be the most common
complaints people experience in riding a taxi in Metro
Manila.
• From the survey conducted, it was found out that
sixty-two percent (62%) of Uber and GrabCar users
are also private car owners. It is noted that the fifty-
seven percent (57%) are female and 47% of the users
have a Bachelor's Degree. Hence, the seventy-six
percent (76%) of riders are anticipated to be
employed. Furthermore, it is noted that the average
age of Uber and GrabCar users is 31.48 years old, and
the median is at 30 years old.
• The study determined that due to the poor public
transport system, most numbers of women opt to ride
either a conventional taxi or book a ride through Uber
or GrabCar for safety and convenience.
• Convenience, Safety, Reliability, Less hassle, Just like
my own car, Easy to book a ride, Cashless Payment,
Drivers have undergone background check, and Cars
are new are the top reasons why people book a ride
through Uber and GrabCar.
• This study also proved that private car owners now
have the option to use their cars occasionally and still
enjoy the same service through Uber and GrabCar.
Fifty-seven percent (57%) of the respondents are
willing to give up their car for a convenient mode of
transportation. The other 43%, however still prefer to
have a car because of the present condition of our
transportation sector as evident in the growing sales of
cars.
• The primary purpose of riding Uber and GrabCar of
the respondents is to “commute to work”. This is due
to the better service Uber and GrabCar provide which
filled the gap that the other public transport modes
lacked and complements the poor service of some
conventional taxis. Twenty-four (24%) of the
respondents are willing to add 100 to 150 pesos for a
convenient and reliable ride.
• Furthermore, the top reason for using Uber and
GrabCar is to have another mobility option for
commuters that is safe and reliable. It was found out
that reliability is the most attractive feature of Uber
and GrabCar and the convenience of online booking is
better than hailing a taxi on the roadside or falling in
line in a taxi stand.
• The average trips of respondents per month based on
the answers from the survey is 12.03 trips while the
median is 8 trips per month.
• Also, if Uber and GrabCar service is stopped, 29% of
the respondents (riders) answered to use transit more
often, and 24 % answered to use taxis more often.
• The average age of the Uber or GrabCar Operators
who answered the survey is 35.8 years old with a
median of 35. Mixed ages ranging from 20 to 60 years
old are observed. Sixty percent (60%) of the
respondents are Uber operators, 25% are GrabCar
operators and the remaining 15% are both Uber and
GrabCar operators. The average number of units the
operator has is 1.36 with a median of 1.0.
• Most of the respondent operators came from different
fields of work before Uber and GrabCar arise. Fifty-
two percent (52%) are both driver and operator, 33%
are solely operators, while 15% are only drivers. The
top reason why the operators joined Uber or GrabCar
is to have an additional income.
• Based on the online survey conducted, Uber and
GrabCar operators work at an average of 5.35 times a
week, at 11 to 12 hours a day or even at 16 hours and
70% of operators bought their vehicle brand new.
• The reasons why TNCs does not contribute to
sustainable transport are as follows:
o If Uber and GrabCar service is not available, the
44% of the riders will shift to taxi, while 32% will
use public transportation; The use of existing taxi
and public transportation during the unavailability
of Uber and GrabCar promotes to sustainable
urban transport by avoiding car use.
o If Uber and GrabCar service is stopped, the 29%
of the riders will use the transit more often, 24%
will use taxis more often, and 15% will walk more
often; The inexistence of Uber and GrabCar
service makes the commuters shift through the use
of transit more often, use of existing taxis more
often and, will make people walk more often
which in return in favor to sustainable urban
transport.
o Seventy percent (70%) of the operators bought
their vehicle brand new for Uber or GrabCar; The
purchase of new cars for Uber and GrabCar use of
the operators is against the principle of sustainable
urban transport which is car reduction.
o Most of the operators of Uber and GrabCar works
six (6) times a week and at 11 to 12 hours a day
and some are even at 16 hours a day;
Furthermore, the operation of Uber and GrabCar
at six (6) times a week at 11 to 12 hours a day is
also against the principle of sustainable urban
transport which is reduction of car use and
promoting the use public transportation.
• TNC’s role in Metro Manila is to have another
mobility option for commuters that is safe, convenient
and reliable. TNCs however compete with the service
provided by taxis and this healthy competition is said
 to eliminate the taxi operators’ monopoly in the
transport market creating a benchmark that challenges
the taxi operators to improve the quality of their
service.
• From the perspective of supply and demand, TNC
services can be optimized based on the demand of
passengers in a certain area which is missing in taxi
service. The author would like to acknowledge the effort of his co-
• The TNCs in Metro Manila deviate from the true
concept of car-sharing because most cars were bought
brand new instead of using the existing vehicle for the
purpose of becoming a TNC partner. We can still
experience the same positive impacts of car-sharing if
[1]
private car users will shift to using TNC instead.
IX. RECOMMENDATIONS [2]
The following recommendations are made towards
improving transport services provided by TNCs as well as in [3]
aid of regulations and policy making for these modes:
[4]
1. In order to maximize the utilization of conventional
taxis, dispatching method based on demand of [5]
passengers per city and per time should be used.
Global Positioning System (GPS) and radio [6]
communication can also be used in assigning the taxis
nearby. [7]
2. Other TNCs should immediately process the
accreditation with LTFRB to legalize its operation. [8]
Trade dress with branding logo requirement should be
imposed to TNC vehicles to associate to its operator. [9]
TNC should not perform as a rent a car service or
through hailing. A trip request shall only be done
through online booking via TNC Application. [10]
3. TNCs should comply with all the other requirements [11]
mandated by the Government. Thus, TNCs being part
of our public transportation, should be regulated to
ensure the safety of the public. TNCs in coordination
with LTFRB, should regulate the number of their [12]
partners to prevent traffic congestion caused by the [13]
excessive volume of members. This is essential in
order to retain the basic principle of ride-sharing that [14]
was the original context by which Uber and GrabCar
were established and for which sustainability is [15]
anchored on;
4. Further studies on the fare setting on Uber and
[16]
GrabCar should be conducted to help determine the
amount of fare that shall be regulated. This should
include strict examination of surge fee computation to [17]
address the users' queries and concerns; [18]
5. Number of vehicles per TNC operator should be [19]
limited to give opportunities for other private car
owners to rideshare through TNC;
6. TNCs in order to contribute to a sustainable transport [20]
should consider the concept of ride-sharing by
maximizing the occupancy of the vehicle, and by [21]
encouraging the people to share their ride. TNCs
should highly discourage its members to buy new
vehicles but instead utilize the existing units in good
condition and qualified to the age requirement set by
LTFRB.
Acknowledgment
authors in the conduct of this study.
References
Amey, A. et al. (2011); “Real-Time” Ridesharing – The Opportunities
and Challenges of Utilizing Mobile Phone Technology to Improve
Rideshare Services;
Ball, Adam; Murray, Gail; Schure, Jesicca S, & Fox, Christine,
Transportation Research Board (2005), TCRP Report 108, Car-Sharing:
Where and How It Succeeds;
Cozza, Jeff (2012), The History of Carpooling, from Jitneys to
Ridesharing;
Gurley, Bill (March 12, 2014), A Deeper Look at Uber’s Dynamic
Pricing Model;
Lena, Lewison Lee (1994), Comprehensive Transit Performance
Indicators, Working Paper;
Napalang, Ma. Sheilah Gaabucayan (2015), Lecture on Public Transport
Performance Indicators, Unpublished;
Noulas, Anastasios; Salnikov, Vsevolod; Lambiotte, Renaud; and
Mascolo, Cecilia (August 2015), Mining Open Datasets for
Transparency in Taxi Transport in Metropolitan Environments;
Raktas, Oxford, Harvard, Justin Jenk, (February 2015) “Theory meets
practice in the taxi industry: Coase and Uber”;
Salnikov, Vsevolod; Lambiotte, Renaud; Noulas, Anastasios; and
Mascolo, Cecilia (March 2015), Exploiting Taxi Mobility Patterns in
New York City to Reduce Commuter Costs;
Wallsten, Scott (June 2015), “The Competitive Effects of the Sharing
Economy: How is Uber Changing Taxis?”;
(Online), August 2015, How to be Uber legal: A guide on regulations for
Internet ride-sharing services -
http://www.philstar.com/motoring/2015/08/18/1489576/how-to-be-uber-
legal-a-guide-on-regulations-for-internet-ride-sharing-services--;
(Online), Carpool, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpool;
(Online), Chokkattu, Julia; & Crook, Jordan (Aug. 14, 2014), “A Brief
History of Uber, http://techcrunch.com/gallery/a-brief-history-of-uber;
(Online), Deep, September 24, 2015, How Uber Works: Insights into
Business & Revenue Model, http://nextjuggernaut.com/blog/how-uber-
works-business-model-revenue-uber-insights;
(Online), Evans (2011), Sustainable Transport,
http://www.earthtimes.org/encyclopaedia/environmental-
issues/sustainable-transport;
(Online), Frizell Sam, (Jan. 22, 2015), Uber Just Answered Everything
You Want to Know About Your Driver, http://time.com/3678507/uber-
driver-questions;
(Online), Grab and Other Information, http://www.grab.com/ph;
(Online), GrabTaxi History, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GrabTaxi;
(Online), LTFRB releases rules for accreditation of Uber, ride-sharing
apps, (May 29, 2015), http://www.abs-
cbnnews.com/business/05/29/15/ltfrb-releases-rules-accreditation-uber-
ride-sharing-apps;
(Online), Pullen, November 4, 2015, Everything You Need to Know
About Uber, http://time.com/3556741/uber;
(Online), Sustainable Development Knowledge-United Nations,
Shanghai Manual – Platform A Guide for Sustainable Urban
Development in the 21st Century, http://www.un.org;
[22] (Online), Transportation Network Company; [24] (Online), Apr. 26, 2016, Uber Expands Its Coverage to East of Metro
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_network_company; Manila, http://ubermanilatips.com/uber-expands-coverage-east-metro-
[23] (Online), Dec. 6, 2015, Rider Surcharge in The South, manila;
https://newsroom.uber.com/philippines/rider-surcharge-in-the-south; [25] (Online), Uber History, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uber_(company);
[26] (Online), Uber Services and Other Information, https://www.uber.com

View publication stats