Uber loses London licence

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks
User avatar
Geezee
Posts: 11931
Joined: 24 Jul 2003, 10:14
Location: Where joy divides into vision

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby Geezee » 29 Sep 2017, 11:31

Robert wrote:
Geezee wrote:
Robert wrote:

Air BnB is not that much in competition with Hilton, Mariott and the likes but rather with small hotels and B&B's. The latter's compliance with laws/regulations/health safety may be questioned as much as Air BnB's. We may scream blue murder over this but it hasn't been a problem untill AirBnB arrived at the scene. The only thing they did was develop a tool through which it is much easier to find a place to sleep and in the process encouraged lots of people to start their own B&B.


Of course they are in competition with Hilton, Marriott, Starwood etc! - in fact Marriott's unheard of acquisition of Starwood can be seen almost entirely through the lens of dealing with the competition from Airbnb. And that may not shed any tears, but I really don't understand this unwillingness to put Airbnb in the same bucket as Uber. You are either overestimating Uber's "evil", or underestimating Airbnb's.

And of course Uber's main competitor is not the cab firms - it is car ownership.


If Air BnB is in competition with Hilton, it doesn't have a material impact on Hilton. Far from that actually. These are the pre tax income figures of Hilton International:

2016:1.26B

2015:1.5B

2014:1.15B

2013: 698M

2012: 573M

In 2015, Air BnB shifted more rooms than Hilton International. Contrary to Hilton however, in that year Air BnB posted a loss of $3 B.

It may be true that private owership of transport may be Uber's competiton, in a sort of way, but that goes for all taxi firms and public transport. People without access to their own means of transport ( because they simply don't have it, or are abroad or have other reasons not to use it ) are simply 'the market' for taxi firms and public transport. Competition is not people that have their own means of transport but other transport companies trying to win over the same 'market'.


Yes, but Uber's ultimate goal is to remove the need for car ownership through self-driving cars - that has never been the case of taxi firms.

So a drop of "only" 16% in 2016 for Hilton - yeah no, the statistics really reinforce your story! But either way, I'm sure you'll find similar results in GM, Ford, etc - these are enormous, diversified companies and it will take a long time before the competition eats into their revenues - it doesn't change the fact that the competition is biting, and they recognise it as such. And even if Airbnb is not "destroying" the hotel industry - what does it matter? Are they less evil because they are less successful? They have precisely the same moral weaknesses as Uber, as far as I can tell, with reports of assaults on their customers (with the accompanying lack of accountability), and avoidance of basic taxes.
Smilies are ON
Flash is OFF
Url is ON

User avatar
Robert
Posts: 722
Joined: 27 Dec 2013, 13:24

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby Robert » 29 Sep 2017, 13:02

Geezee wrote:
Robert wrote:
Geezee wrote:
Of course they are in competition with Hilton, Marriott, Starwood etc! - in fact Marriott's unheard of acquisition of Starwood can be seen almost entirely through the lens of dealing with the competition from Airbnb. And that may not shed any tears, but I really don't understand this unwillingness to put Airbnb in the same bucket as Uber. You are either overestimating Uber's "evil", or underestimating Airbnb's.

And of course Uber's main competitor is not the cab firms - it is car ownership.


If Air BnB is in competition with Hilton, it doesn't have a material impact on Hilton. Far from that actually. These are the pre tax income figures of Hilton International:

2016:1.26B

2015:1.5B

2014:1.15B

2013: 698M

2012: 573M

In 2015, Air BnB shifted more rooms than Hilton International. Contrary to Hilton however, in that year Air BnB posted a loss of $3 B.

It may be true that private owership of transport may be Uber's competiton, in a sort of way, but that goes for all taxi firms and public transport. People without access to their own means of transport ( because they simply don't have it, or are abroad or have other reasons not to use it ) are simply 'the market' for taxi firms and public transport. Competition is not people that have their own means of transport but other transport companies trying to win over the same 'market'.


Yes, but Uber's ultimate goal is to remove the need for car ownership through self-driving cars - that has never been the case of taxi firms.

So a drop of "only" 16% in 2016 for Hilton - yeah no, the statistics really reinforce your story! But either way, I'm sure you'll find similar results in GM, Ford, etc - these are enormous, diversified companies and it will take a long time before the competition eats into their revenues - it doesn't change the fact that the competition is biting, and they recognise it as such. And even if Airbnb is not "destroying" the hotel industry - what does it matter? Are they less evil because they are less successful? They have precisely the same moral weaknesses as Uber, as far as I can tell, with reports of assaults on their customers (with the accompanying lack of accountability), and avoidance of basic taxes.


A drop in 2016 of 16% indeed, following an increase in 2014 of 65% and 30% in 2015. Air BnB was already well underway back then.
I mentioned it before, in Amsterdam taxes are paid the same as other hotels and B&B's do.

Yes, but Uber's ultimate goal is to remove the need for car ownership through self-driving cars - that has never been the case of taxi firms.

What is the problem with that then ? Drivers loosing their jobs ? Probably and not good but we have seen before that jobs become obsolete. If you want to stop that from happening you're basically rewarding inefficiency.

I make my living in Dairy consultancy and dairy market analysis. If someone does it better or even the same but at a lower cost then it's tough luck for me. That goes for practically all jobs.

User avatar
Geezee
Posts: 11931
Joined: 24 Jul 2003, 10:14
Location: Where joy divides into vision

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby Geezee » 29 Sep 2017, 14:01

Robert wrote:
Geezee wrote:
Robert wrote:
If Air BnB is in competition with Hilton, it doesn't have a material impact on Hilton. Far from that actually. These are the pre tax income figures of Hilton International:

2016:1.26B

2015:1.5B

2014:1.15B

2013: 698M

2012: 573M

In 2015, Air BnB shifted more rooms than Hilton International. Contrary to Hilton however, in that year Air BnB posted a loss of $3 B.

It may be true that private owership of transport may be Uber's competiton, in a sort of way, but that goes for all taxi firms and public transport. People without access to their own means of transport ( because they simply don't have it, or are abroad or have other reasons not to use it ) are simply 'the market' for taxi firms and public transport. Competition is not people that have their own means of transport but other transport companies trying to win over the same 'market'.


Yes, but Uber's ultimate goal is to remove the need for car ownership through self-driving cars - that has never been the case of taxi firms.

So a drop of "only" 16% in 2016 for Hilton - yeah no, the statistics really reinforce your story! But either way, I'm sure you'll find similar results in GM, Ford, etc - these are enormous, diversified companies and it will take a long time before the competition eats into their revenues - it doesn't change the fact that the competition is biting, and they recognise it as such. And even if Airbnb is not "destroying" the hotel industry - what does it matter? Are they less evil because they are less successful? They have precisely the same moral weaknesses as Uber, as far as I can tell, with reports of assaults on their customers (with the accompanying lack of accountability), and avoidance of basic taxes.


A drop in 2016 of 16% indeed, following an increase in 2014 of 65% and 30% in 2015. Air BnB was already well underway back then.
I mentioned it before, in Amsterdam taxes are paid the same as other hotels and B&B's do.

Yes, but Uber's ultimate goal is to remove the need for car ownership through self-driving cars - that has never been the case of taxi firms.

What is the problem with that then ? Drivers loosing their jobs ? Probably and not good but we have seen before that jobs become obsolete. If you want to stop that from happening you're basically rewarding inefficiency.

I make my living in Dairy consultancy and dairy market analysis. If someone does it better or even the same but at a lower cost then it's tough luck for me. That goes for practically all jobs.


I've never said that Uber need to be in any way stopped - quite the opposite - from the beginning of this thread I have generally defended them in the context that if we want to be so high and mighty over Uber, then one presumably must have a similarly principled stance against Airbnb, Spotify, Google, Amazon and other tech firms. Clearly that is not the case.

And as I said, Hilton's results mean nothing - they neither support nor disprove your point. And you were looking at income, which could mean anything - higher costs, inorganic growth etc etc. Airbnb may very well have been under way when Hilton was still growing, but Napster, Itunes, and Spotify etc were also "well under way" before there was a noticeable impact on revenues of their main competitors. But companies like Hilton and Marriott are frightened to death by Airbnb, because nobody wants to end up the next Kodak or Tower Records. Hence, a merger like Marriott and Starwood. My best friend is revenues manager for Starwood - their main source of income growth? Not bookings, which are down - but events, and even that was struggling as companies tighten their budgets.
Smilies are ON
Flash is OFF
Url is ON

User avatar
German Dave
Utter Cad
Posts: 50145
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby German Dave » 30 Sep 2017, 12:16

Robert wrote:
What is the problem with that then ? Drivers loosing their jobs ? Probably and not good but we have seen before that jobs become obsolete. If you want to stop that from happening you're basically rewarding inefficiency.


:? That's pretty simplistic analysis of a complex issue.
kewl klive wrote:A deluxe Sandinista! was pulled when only one outtake could be found.


User avatar
Robert
Posts: 722
Joined: 27 Dec 2013, 13:24

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby Robert » 30 Sep 2017, 12:54

Geezee wrote:
Robert wrote:
Geezee wrote:
Yes, but Uber's ultimate goal is to remove the need for car ownership through self-driving cars - that has never been the case of taxi firms.

So a drop of "only" 16% in 2016 for Hilton - yeah no, the statistics really reinforce your story! But either way, I'm sure you'll find similar results in GM, Ford, etc - these are enormous, diversified companies and it will take a long time before the competition eats into their revenues - it doesn't change the fact that the competition is biting, and they recognise it as such. And even if Airbnb is not "destroying" the hotel industry - what does it matter? Are they less evil because they are less successful? They have precisely the same moral weaknesses as Uber, as far as I can tell, with reports of assaults on their customers (with the accompanying lack of accountability), and avoidance of basic taxes.


A drop in 2016 of 16% indeed, following an increase in 2014 of 65% and 30% in 2015. Air BnB was already well underway back then.
I mentioned it before, in Amsterdam taxes are paid the same as other hotels and B&B's do.

Yes, but Uber's ultimate goal is to remove the need for car ownership through self-driving cars - that has never been the case of taxi firms.

What is the problem with that then ? Drivers loosing their jobs ? Probably and not good but we have seen before that jobs become obsolete. If you want to stop that from happening you're basically rewarding inefficiency.

I make my living in Dairy consultancy and dairy market analysis. If someone does it better or even the same but at a lower cost then it's tough luck for me. That goes for practically all jobs.


I've never said that Uber need to be in any way stopped - quite the opposite - from the beginning of this thread I have generally defended them in the context that if we want to be so high and mighty over Uber, then one presumably must have a similarly principled stance against Airbnb, Spotify, Google, Amazon and other tech firms. Clearly that is not the case.

And as I said, Hilton's results mean nothing - they neither support nor disprove your point. And you were looking at income, which could mean anything - higher costs, inorganic growth etc etc. Airbnb may very well have been under way when Hilton was still growing, but Napster, Itunes, and Spotify etc were also "well under way" before there was a noticeable impact on revenues of their main competitors. But companies like Hilton and Marriott are frightened to death by Airbnb, because nobody wants to end up the next Kodak or Tower Records. Hence, a merger like Marriott and Starwood. My best friend is revenues manager for Starwood - their main source of income growth? Not bookings, which are down - but events, and even that was struggling as companies tighten their budgets.



I don't quite see how Marriott/Starwood sees BnB as competition
and would counter that by an old school merger to
cut overheads.

It's the same as Kodak responding to digital by making more analogue but at a lower cost.

User avatar
Robert
Posts: 722
Joined: 27 Dec 2013, 13:24

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby Robert » 30 Sep 2017, 12:55

Pat O'Banton wrote:
Robert wrote:
What is the problem with that then ? Drivers loosing their jobs ? Probably and not good but we have seen before that jobs become obsolete. If you want to stop that from happening you're basically rewarding inefficiency.


:? That's pretty simplistic analysis of a complex issue.



By all means, make a more sophisticated analysis and arrive at a totally different outcome.

User avatar
German Dave
Utter Cad
Posts: 50145
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby German Dave » 30 Sep 2017, 21:50

Robert wrote:By all means, make a more sophisticated analysis and arrive at a totally different outcome.


If I find the time to read the entire thread and then compose a reply, I shall! ;)
kewl klive wrote:A deluxe Sandinista! was pulled when only one outtake could be found.


User avatar
Geezee
Posts: 11931
Joined: 24 Jul 2003, 10:14
Location: Where joy divides into vision

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby Geezee » 01 Oct 2017, 17:22

Robert wrote:
Geezee wrote:
Robert wrote:
A drop in 2016 of 16% indeed, following an increase in 2014 of 65% and 30% in 2015. Air BnB was already well underway back then.
I mentioned it before, in Amsterdam taxes are paid the same as other hotels and B&B's do.

Yes, but Uber's ultimate goal is to remove the need for car ownership through self-driving cars - that has never been the case of taxi firms.

What is the problem with that then ? Drivers loosing their jobs ? Probably and not good but we have seen before that jobs become obsolete. If you want to stop that from happening you're basically rewarding inefficiency.

I make my living in Dairy consultancy and dairy market analysis. If someone does it better or even the same but at a lower cost then it's tough luck for me. That goes for practically all jobs.


I've never said that Uber need to be in any way stopped - quite the opposite - from the beginning of this thread I have generally defended them in the context that if we want to be so high and mighty over Uber, then one presumably must have a similarly principled stance against Airbnb, Spotify, Google, Amazon and other tech firms. Clearly that is not the case.

And as I said, Hilton's results mean nothing - they neither support nor disprove your point. And you were looking at income, which could mean anything - higher costs, inorganic growth etc etc. Airbnb may very well have been under way when Hilton was still growing, but Napster, Itunes, and Spotify etc were also "well under way" before there was a noticeable impact on revenues of their main competitors. But companies like Hilton and Marriott are frightened to death by Airbnb, because nobody wants to end up the next Kodak or Tower Records. Hence, a merger like Marriott and Starwood. My best friend is revenues manager for Starwood - their main source of income growth? Not bookings, which are down - but events, and even that was struggling as companies tighten their budgets.



I don't quite see how Marriott/Starwood sees BnB as competition
and would counter that by an old school merger to
cut overheads.
.


I guess you don't see, because you decided not to read anything about it. Fortunately, people in the business do understand that when another company is taking their clients away from them, they ideally need to respond one way or another.
Smilies are ON
Flash is OFF
Url is ON

User avatar
Robert
Posts: 722
Joined: 27 Dec 2013, 13:24

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby Robert » 01 Oct 2017, 20:40

Geezee wrote:
Robert wrote:
Geezee wrote:
I've never said that Uber need to be in any way stopped - quite the opposite - from the beginning of this thread I have generally defended them in the context that if we want to be so high and mighty over Uber, then one presumably must have a similarly principled stance against Airbnb, Spotify, Google, Amazon and other tech firms. Clearly that is not the case.

And as I said, Hilton's results mean nothing - they neither support nor disprove your point. And you were looking at income, which could mean anything - higher costs, inorganic growth etc etc. Airbnb may very well have been under way when Hilton was still growing, but Napster, Itunes, and Spotify etc were also "well under way" before there was a noticeable impact on revenues of their main competitors. But companies like Hilton and Marriott are frightened to death by Airbnb, because nobody wants to end up the next Kodak or Tower Records. Hence, a merger like Marriott and Starwood. My best friend is revenues manager for Starwood - their main source of income growth? Not bookings, which are down - but events, and even that was struggling as companies tighten their budgets.



I don't quite see how Marriott/Starwood sees BnB as competition
and would counter that by an old school merger to
cut overheads.
.


I guess you don't see, because you decided not to read anything about it. Fortunately, people in the business do understand that when another company is taking their clients away from them, they ideally need to respond one way or another.




As I implied before, this merger as a response to AirBnB'
competition is like Kodak would have merged with another company but would have continued to do what they were
doing before at a slightly lower cost.

A merger is not a real response and if it is, it is very questionsble if it is a proper one.

There's a bunch of thirty something out there that have no problem to disrupt existing business models. They are supported financially by people that have no problem with that either.

To cling to the past models with outdated strategies of reducing overheads is no going to cut it.

If ( but I doubt that) these hotel chains are really worried,
They hide it very well. Mergers and acquisitions were taking place before AirBnB came on the scene too.

It's not a response, it's just business as usual.

User avatar
Geezee
Posts: 11931
Joined: 24 Jul 2003, 10:14
Location: Where joy divides into vision

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby Geezee » 02 Oct 2017, 09:58

Robert wrote:
Geezee wrote:
Robert wrote:

I don't quite see how Marriott/Starwood sees BnB as competition
and would counter that by an old school merger to
cut overheads.
.


I guess you don't see, because you decided not to read anything about it. Fortunately, people in the business do understand that when another company is taking their clients away from them, they ideally need to respond one way or another.




As I implied before, this merger as a response to AirBnB'
competition is like Kodak would have merged with another company but would have continued to do what they were
doing before at a slightly lower cost.

A merger is not a real response and if it is, it is very questionsble if it is a proper one.

There's a bunch of thirty something out there that have no problem to disrupt existing business models. They are supported financially by people that have no problem with that either.

To cling to the past models with outdated strategies of reducing overheads is no going to cut it.

If ( but I doubt that) these hotel chains are really worried,
They hide it very well. Mergers and acquisitions were taking place before AirBnB came on the scene too.

It's not a response, it's just business as usual.


Of course M&A were taking place before Airbnb as any business does, entirely pointless thing to bring up - but the nature and type of merger reflects the type of competition that you are facing, whether or not you agree with it as an effective strategy or not. Any analysis that you care to read about Starwood-Marriott will put in the specific context of competition from Airbnb. To pick from anyh one of thousands of examples from business/popular/banking media:

http://uk.businessinsider.com/marriott- ... bnb-2016-9

Of course the biggest way that hotels are fighting back is through pricing- hiking up their prices, counting on a stable supply of business executives who will rarely if ever stray away from the superior comforts/luxury of a hotel vs what airbnb have to offer, in the same way that many corporates will still not include low-cost airlines in their systems (requiring separate approvals etc). But in every other area - family/tourist travel, cheaper business travel etc, it is all-out war between hotels and airbnb.
Smilies are ON
Flash is OFF
Url is ON

User avatar
sloopjohnc
Posts: 60313
Joined: 03 Jun 2004, 20:12
Location: One quake away from beachfront property
Contact:

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby sloopjohnc » 15 Nov 2017, 18:13

I was in Denver the past four days for a Super Computing tradeshow. Interesting exhibitors - lots of universities, Stanford Linear Accelerator, some government agencies - all high end companies that manage/shift/store shitloads of data, ie terabytes.

Anyway. I took Uber from the airport to the hotel and it was $31.75. I heard some guys paid $50 at rush hour. My cab ride back to the airport with the worst cab driver I've ever had was $70 for the same trip. And every Uber car has been unbelievable clean and the drivers all good

Nice bonus: On a Sunday trip to get stuff for the tradeshow, my driver was around my age and drove Uber for four hours a day to make retirement money. He makes anywhere from $250 to $450. He played basketball under Eddie Sutton at Univ or Arkansas and plays pick up hoops with some ex NBA guys (Earl Boykin and Chris Anderson) and we talked basketball the whole trip.
Last edited by sloopjohnc on 15 Nov 2017, 18:42, edited 1 time in total.
Sneelock wrote:You’ll like her better after she dies. Siouxsie won’t ever die. She’s a vampire or some shit.

User avatar
Still Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 42087
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby Still Baron » 15 Nov 2017, 18:16

Isn’t the Denver airport way the fuck out in the boondocks?
take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.

User avatar
German Dave
Utter Cad
Posts: 50145
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby German Dave » 15 Nov 2017, 18:23

Fuck Uber.
kewl klive wrote:A deluxe Sandinista! was pulled when only one outtake could be found.


User avatar
sloopjohnc
Posts: 60313
Joined: 03 Jun 2004, 20:12
Location: One quake away from beachfront property
Contact:

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby sloopjohnc » 15 Nov 2017, 18:41

Still Baron wrote:Isn’t the Denver airport way the fuck out in the boondocks?


About a 35-40 minute trip when traffic is light.
Sneelock wrote:You’ll like her better after she dies. Siouxsie won’t ever die. She’s a vampire or some shit.

User avatar
sloopjohnc
Posts: 60313
Joined: 03 Jun 2004, 20:12
Location: One quake away from beachfront property
Contact:

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby sloopjohnc » 15 Nov 2017, 18:43

Matt Harringay wrote:Fuck Uber.


My driver i had on Monday to do errands loves it. He makes 80% and now Uber allows tips. I tipped my guy $10 on a $35 trip because he knew exactly where I could pick up a VGA to HDMI converter and cables.
Sneelock wrote:You’ll like her better after she dies. Siouxsie won’t ever die. She’s a vampire or some shit.

User avatar
Bride Of Sea Of Tunes
Posts: 17572
Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 14:10
Location: The Nether World

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby Bride Of Sea Of Tunes » 15 Nov 2017, 18:59

Matt Harringay wrote:Fuck Uber.


Yo. I'm totally on your side.

AirBnB, Uber, and their ilk stink filthily, and become filthily lucrative, and they reek of exploitation and shady dealings. Needless to say there are many people who have adopted the new world order thinking: if I benefit from it, it's good! Good for everyone!

I don't buy into that line of thought.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/jia-t ... f-to-death
The invisible and the non-existing very much look alike.

User avatar
sloopjohnc
Posts: 60313
Joined: 03 Jun 2004, 20:12
Location: One quake away from beachfront property
Contact:

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby sloopjohnc » 15 Nov 2017, 21:33

Bride Of Sea Of Tunes wrote:
Matt Harringay wrote:Fuck Uber.


Yo. I'm totally on your side.

AirBnB, Uber, and their ilk stink filthily, and become filthily lucrative, and they reek of exploitation and shady dealings. Needless to say there are many people who have adopted the new world order thinking: if I benefit from it, it's good! Good for everyone!

I don't buy into that line of thought.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/jia-t ... f-to-death


People love to blame Uber and other more notorious gig economy perpetrators, but corporate America is doing this all the time now. I get two or three emails and calls a day from recruiters for contract marcom jobs at Facebook, Google, etc.

My last contract gig was at Blue Shield, one of California's largest health insurers, supposedly non-profit. You'd think a non-profit health insurer would have more integrity. You'd think. Blue Shield is getting sued by the state of California on tax evasion due to faking their non-profit status by the way.

Welcome to the new economy, fellas - and feel lucky that teaching and research jobs probably won't be made temporary/contractual within your working lifetimes.
Sneelock wrote:You’ll like her better after she dies. Siouxsie won’t ever die. She’s a vampire or some shit.

User avatar
German Dave
Utter Cad
Posts: 50145
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby German Dave » 15 Nov 2017, 21:44

Yeah, okay mate.
kewl klive wrote:A deluxe Sandinista! was pulled when only one outtake could be found.


User avatar
yomptepi
BCB thumbscrew of Justice
Posts: 34431
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 17:57
Location: well

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby yomptepi » 15 Nov 2017, 23:14

Matt Harringay wrote:Fuck Uber.


I couldn't have put it better myself.

I'd rather fucking walk.
You don't like me...do you?

User avatar
Rayge
Posts: 11357
Joined: 14 Aug 2013, 11:37
Location: deepest Devon
Contact:

Re: Uber loses London licence

Postby Rayge » 15 Nov 2017, 23:57

yomptepi wrote:
Matt Harringay wrote:Fuck Uber.


I couldn't have put it better myself.

I'd rather fucking walk.

What happened to your bike?
KAT/COYS

You can't play a tune on an absolute

When the ball sleeps it dreams it is a Frisbee

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law. Love is the law, love under will