Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 347 posts

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#71

Post by godembodied »

jd3 wrote: post #43
godembodied wrote: post #32

So what if they execute people for what they think are crimes? Who are you to judge what people should or should not do? What you label as evil someone will label as good. There is no absolute evil/good, as you're trying to portray it. It only your opinion vs. their opinion.

While this is somewhat true, it's a somewhat ridiculous argument to bring up when talking about saudi arabia. I think the west has come to the general consensus that women have rights, and that people should not be beheaded in the streets for denouncing their state religious authority. This hermeneutical matter-of-interpretation crap is no defense for the crimes against humanity that saudi arabia commits regularly.

All of the things you mentioned are relative to a culture. Since you were born in the West, you think of all these things as bad. The indoctrination is so strong that you feel that your opinion is an objective fact. But, the same seriousness and objectivity you attach to your opinions they attach to their. Morality is kinda religion - everyone thinks their God or prophet is the TRUE one, when in fact they've been indoctrinated from early childhood to belive some magical stories.

   This hermeneutical matter-of-interpretation crap is no defense
Do you think you can invalidate something by labeling it as 'crap'? I guess schools today don't teach people how to respond with arguments, instead of insults.

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#72

Post by toomuchtodo »

SilasX wrote: post #61
CPLX wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems divorced from reality to me, though I claim no real special expertise. They seem to have no more ability to be a monopoly than any other logistics or transportation powerhouse. The market cap of UPS is ~$90bn, and FedEx ~$40bn. And those companies have a lot of real actual assets* and (arguably) much stronger network effects than a local taxi replacement company. It's not that it's so implausible it couldn't…

Wow, you're right, hadn't thought of that. When you account for the (large) risk of Uber not reaching that stage, that should put them at $20 billion optimistically. In fairness, though, neither FedEx nor UPS count as a near-monopoly either, but the probability of a real one is correspondingly less probable anyway.

> In fairness, though, neither FedEx nor UPS count as a near-monopoly either

True, but look through their annual reports to see their capital spending to compete against them. There simply is no other way then spending that money.

For example, Amazon leased a fleet of cargo planes:

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/amazon...

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#73

Post by dragonwriter »

rock57 wrote: post #53

according e.g. to the stories linked below and many previous reports, Uber actively aims to reduce the number of cars on the road, and its efforts, especially Uber Pool will reduce the oil consumption and, as a result, oil prices... And now they get the largest investment yet from a party that is NOT interested in falling oil prices... What am I missing here? https://newsroom.uber.com/us-new-york/taking-1-million-car…

> And now they get the largest investment yet from a party that is NOT interested in falling oil prices... What am I missing here?

Saudi Arabia (and even moreso prior to the 1990-1991 war, Kuwait, which was among the sources of the tensions leading to that war) invest quite heavily in diverse investments with a focus both on growth and avoiding having fortunes too closely tied to oil.

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#75

Post by godembodied »

nemedse wrote: post #52
godembodied wrote: post #32

So what if they execute people for what they think are crimes? Who are you to judge what people should or should not do? What you label as evil someone will label as good. There is no absolute evil/good, as you're trying to portray it. It only your opinion vs. their opinion.

How can you seriously think that? Do you think that crucifying someone for taking part in pro-democratic protests is not universally bad? Why not let our government do it? If they label it as good, who are we to judge ...

How can it be universally bad? Gravity is universal, but morals are relative to individual and groups of individuals(societies).

You grew up in the environment where action X is labeled as bad and then you take that so seriously and think it's an objective fact about the world(a universal law), when it's just your point of view.

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#76

Post by semi-extrinsic »

nugget wrote: post #38
rexreed wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only Fat city if there's an exit at that valuation. We're talking Theranos style valuations here that can disappear at any time. They better find an exit scenario before the music stops or it's a world of hurt, especially for the later stage investors.

The only thing that can ''take out'' Uber is widespread adoption of autonomous vehicles, whereupon ride sharing becomes a physical-capital intensive business (cars) rather than the current human-capital intensive business (drivers/their driver network). Autonomous vehicles (and the infrastructure to support them) significantly reduce the amazing network efforts that Uber has enjoyed to date. An investment into Uber a…

There is also a definite risk that legislation will hit them hard. I'd say that's much bigger than the risk posed by autonomous cars.

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#78

Post by CPLX »

gist wrote: post #69
CPLX wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems divorced from reality to me, though I claim no real special expertise. They seem to have no more ability to be a monopoly than any other logistics or transportation powerhouse. The market cap of UPS is ~$90bn, and FedEx ~$40bn. And those companies have a lot of real actual assets* and (arguably) much stronger network effects than a local taxi replacement company. It's not that it's so implausible it couldn't…

One thing I'd like to know (and I am sure someone has answered this somewhere) is the amount of people using Uber in their own town vs. people who travel and use Uber. If in their own town, it seems entirely possible for a local strong competitor to offer a better product or service. For travelers that is less of a risk since you go with the brand you know (which traditionally has been a taxi cab). In particular some…

In my experience this is actually happening. For example many of my friends are now using Dial-7 to get to and from the airport these days for business trips. It's just more predictable than wondering if there will be surge pricing when you need to leave, they actually are slightly cheaper, and you know what you're going to get.

Uber's user experience has a lot going for it but it's very, very far from flawless or unbeatable as a product.

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#79

Post by petra »

nugget wrote: post #38
rexreed wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only Fat city if there's an exit at that valuation. We're talking Theranos style valuations here that can disappear at any time. They better find an exit scenario before the music stops or it's a world of hurt, especially for the later stage investors.

The only thing that can ''take out'' Uber is widespread adoption of autonomous vehicles, whereupon ride sharing becomes a physical-capital intensive business (cars) rather than the current human-capital intensive business (drivers/their driver network). Autonomous vehicles (and the infrastructure to support them) significantly reduce the amazing network efforts that Uber has enjoyed to date. An investment into Uber a…

>> Autonomous vehicles (and the infrastructure to support them) significantly reduce the amazing network efforts that Uber has enjoyed to date.

Still there might be a political play(using million of drivers, etc) to delay the entrance of self-driving-cars until 2 competitors are about equal, and than it might be better for one company to cooperate with UBER and get some advantage than to try to go alone.

Post reply on HN