My guess is it's more about politics than actual service. Basically saying "hey, taxis are so much different we can even offer them as a completely separate service. UberX / Uber are not taxis." This may come useful if/when TfL changes their mind, or some court forces this discussion.
To me, it sends the opposite message actually that Uber pretty much is the same as a taxi; they can incorporate taxis into uber in a way that works pretty much the same for the end-user (but with regulated rates).
With legal threats to their attempts to make an end-run around taxi regulation, it makes sense they are trying to diversify and have an income stream via regulated taxis as well.
Comments
My guess is it's more about politics than actual service. Basically saying "hey, taxis are so much different we can even offer them as a completely separate service. UberX / Uber are not taxis." This may come useful if/when TfL changes their mind, or some court forces this discussion.
To me, it sends the opposite message actually that Uber pretty much is the same as a taxi; they can incorporate taxis into uber in a way that works pretty much the same for the end-user (but with regulated rates).
With legal threats to their attempts to make an end-run around taxi regulation, it makes sense they are trying to diversify and have an income stream via regulated taxis as well.