“This means you are unlikely to wait longer or get a different car or driver if you use Bolt or Didi – fair chance it’ll be exactly the same service.

“The reason you should switch is to be kind to your driver. They all prefer Bolt and Didi because the tax rates are lower. Uber takes 28% of the fare, against 20% for Bolt and Didi.

“Tell your friends.”

Small’s post, made on Monday, had 475 reactions and 59 comments by yesterday morning.

Many weighed in with their opinions on Uber’s service, but a few also questioned whether Small should be dissuading people from using Uber and encouraging them to try its rivals.

“Strange that an independent chairman would punt one business over another,” commented Warren Van Rooyen, a general counsel currently working as Foodstuffs North Island’s regulatory compliance lead, who later told the Herald he was posting in a personal capacity.

“Exactly my initial reaction,” replied University of Otago emeritus Law Professor Rex Ahdar.

Small defends comments

But Small told the Herald his LinkedIn post was intended to highlight how competition works in practice – in this case, how multi-homing by drivers enables new entrants to compete with established platforms.

“The reference to fare percentages was based on public information. The post has sparked robust discussion, including how competition can benefit both consumers and workers.”

Some LinkedIn posters defended Small.

Grant Foster, a productivity tools team leader at Xero, posted, “Their [the Commerce Commission’s] job is to ensure healthy and fair competition in NZ. This is in line with that by informing consumers of their options.”

Investment adviser Ed Porter countered, “Information is one thing, an outright recommendation is quite another. Feels like shaky ground.”

One senior business person, who did not want to be named, told the Herald, “To avoid any claims of bias or apparent bias, a judge, chief executive or chairperson should never ‘descend into the arena’.

“Once they do the perception of bias is raised. It appeared to me that the post at first glance was inappropriate on this basis.”

Veteran competition lawyer Andy Matthews was sympathetic to Small.

“It is obviously within the ambit of the commission to promote competition, including identifying competing options, and often the pros and cons of different offerings, he told the Herald.

“We often see the commission trying to ensure that consumers are sufficiently informed to make informed choices.”

Uber did not respond to specific questions, including whether it had contacted the Commerce Commission with any concerns over Small’s post.

A spokeswoman sent the following comment: “At Uber, we welcome competition – which means more choices for Kiwis to get from A to B, and driver partners have greater flexibility and access to earn across multiple platforms, on their terms.

“Independent research by Public First found Uber contributed $1.5 billion to New Zealand’s economy last year. This reflects the value Kiwis place on the convenience and accessibility of rideshare and delivery services.”

Uber was in the Supreme Court last week, fighting to overturn a 2022 Court of Appeal ruling that classified four drivers as employees.

Chris Keall is an Auckland-based member of the Herald’s business team. He joined the Herald in 2018 and is the technology editor and a senior business writer.