Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion • Hacker News Board

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

#211

Post by wavefunction » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 3:19 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #206

Mendenhall wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your statement completely. The thing I notice is he works for the government and I would think he would never be able to say that openly. A competitor could instantly draw that into question and make them defend the point and use it as a propaganda tool. If he says women should be able to drive he goes against the kingdoms laws and those constituents, if he says they shouldnt or stays mute the propaganda…

The KSA had never had exporting Islamic law policy; they aren't al-Qaeda. There would be nothing against the government's policy about Uber having woman drivers in places that aren't KSA.

They just fund radical wahhabi madrassas all over Asia and the Middle East and provide support to terrorist groups like ISIS and Al Quaeda, no biggie...

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

#212

Post by HillaryBriss » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 3:19 AM UTC

martinald wrote: post #108

downandout wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that your assumption of insane driver subsidies is indeed the reason they are sucking down so much money. That is a problem, because the moment that people have to pay the actual costs of an Uber ride, they may go back to taxis or driving their own cars. The only strategy I can see with the absurd amounts they are raising is that they are trying to get enough money to sustain the subsidies until they kill a…

But Standard Oil literally bought the refineries, railroad, long term contracts on crude. That would be like Uber buying every road and every manufacturer. I also don't think Uber's biggest competition is cars or taxis, I imagine it is public transport. The markets with the best scale (esp outside of US) have good public transit. People aren't going to go from paying a £10 uber to a £30 black taxi in London, they'll…

> I also don't think Uber's biggest competition is cars or taxis, I imagine it is public transport.

Also worth noting: Los Angeles is not like London or Paris or NYC where you can very often walk to a nearby mass transit station. In many parts of Los Angeles, Uber can serve as a useful complement to the public transport system. For example, one can quickly take Uber to a rail station which then travels the rest of your route underground -- thus avoiding traffic jams.

If Uber did not exist in LA, one would be more likely to just get in one's car for the entire journey: buses take too long to get you to the underground station, and taxis are too expensive.

It's also important to keep in mind that, in Los Angeles, Uber cars arrive really promptly by comparison to public transport buses. If your time in, say, the office, is really valuable, then the Uber service offers more value than a bus, because buses require a lot more time to transport you than an Uber car does.

I know this sounds like an ad for Uber, but I have no connection to the company, except as an occasional customer.

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

#213

Post by scythe » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 3:20 AM UTC

macspoofing wrote: post #158

loeg wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can split an Uber 4 ways but you can't split a bus fare. So if you go out with a few friends it becomes much more reasonable for short trips. If Uber gets more expensive, some people will go back to public transit.

>You can split an Uber 4 ways but you can't split a bus fare. Like a taxi? Uber will never come close to moving the sheer numbers that public transit does. You can't do it, not enough road to fit all those cars. Especially in downtown cores. So Uber competes with public transit as much as taxis compete with public transit.

That only holds true at peak hours. For off-peak uses, ride-sharing can compete with buses; in an electric car world, cost-effectively as well.

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

#214

Post by nilkn » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 3:35 AM UTC

morgante wrote: post #174

nilkn wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For getting to/from the airport in my own city, I still use the old limo driver that I was using before Uber took off. Literally the same guy, not just the same service/company. When friends or family members fly down to visit I sometimes book him for them as well. It's about the same price as Uber (I voluntarily pay more because I tip him generously), but it's a 100% guaranteed fantastic experience. With Uber, you n…

Normal people don't take limos to the airport.

They do. A "limo" is just a towncar. It's no different from something like UberBlack. Go to any major airport and you'll see a bunch of them lined up waiting for passengers nearby the taxis.

I started using this service before Uber because taxis were extraordinarily unreliable and this service was always spot on. And as time has went on I see no reason to switch to Uber for this particular well-defined and scheduled-in-advance ride.

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

#215

Post by buzzdenver » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 3:35 AM UTC

macspoofing wrote: post #140

Larrikin wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the reprehensible stuff uber has done in the past, has made Lyft my goto app. Talking to Lyft drivers recently I've seen fewer and fewer that are driving for both because of negative experiences with uber. If Lyft can keep it up they might actually end up being on top Edit: Why the downvotes?

>Why the downvotes? I think it's your first sentence. You can't just throw that out there as if everybody knows what you're referring to. I certainly don't. I don't follow the company religiously, but I have no recollection of anything majorly evil done by Uber.

I' not the OP, but he could have referred to this: http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/26/6067663/this-is-ubers-play...

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

#216

Post by eru » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 3:37 AM UTC

ValentineC wrote: post #167

methehack wrote: post #82

I've always been a little confused about uber's capital needs. When I first heard about uber, the part I thought was super-clever was that you wouldn't _need_ lots of capital because all the drivers would have their own cars. Leveraging the latent capital of one side of the two-sided market was the genius of it. (Airbnb too) Same for the staffing -- hook up both sides of the market. No need to pay anyone out of your…

> So where's all this cash going? In Singapore, Uber owns and operates a car rental subsidiary that has singlehandedly driven up the total cost of owning a car. [1] I suspect that this has been the case in some other cities that Uber operates in as well. [1] http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/uber-bids-co...

That's an interesting development. Of course, that's how the Certificate of Entitlement system in Singapore is supposed to work: the island's infrastructure can support only so many cars on the road, and they have decided that this shared resources be rationed out by willingness to pay---so that the most economically efficient users get to drive the cars.

Of course, if they are more economically efficient per-car because they drive these cars more, the separate congestion charging might have to go up. Still a net win for the economy of Singapore---since they will be using the national share of capital sunken into the cost of cars more efficiently.

(I am talking about the cost the economy of Singapore has to pay as a whole to import a car. That's net of taxes and CoE which are just transfers within Singapore.)

I hope the government can stay non-populist, and not give in to shortsighted special interests.

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

#217

Post by refulgentis » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 3:38 AM UTC

wavefunction wrote: post #211

dragonwriter wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The KSA had never had exporting Islamic law policy; they aren't al-Qaeda. There would be nothing against the government's policy about Uber having woman drivers in places that aren't KSA.

They just fund radical wahhabi madrassas all over Asia and the Middle East and provide support to terrorist groups like ISIS and Al Quaeda, no biggie...

Nonsequitor. The crown itself has no interest in spreading Wahhabism, but they do have an interest in keeping Wahhabis happy to avoid religion turning into an enemy of the state, or even worse, the state itself.

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

#218

Post by eru » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 3:38 AM UTC

vonklaus wrote: post #188

methehack wrote: post #82

I've always been a little confused about uber's capital needs. When I first heard about uber, the part I thought was super-clever was that you wouldn't _need_ lots of capital because all the drivers would have their own cars. Leveraging the latent capital of one side of the two-sided market was the genius of it. (Airbnb too) Same for the staffing -- hook up both sides of the market. No need to pay anyone out of your…

my thought for the last couple years has been they are an information arbitrage/market maker probably similar to AMZN. I also have to imagine they are working on a self driving car. On top of engineering spend they are basically at war with every single place they move into and refuse to go public. They can't continue to be just ride sharing when self-driving cars come out, so they need to capture that market (or som…

> On top of engineering spend they are basically at war with every single place they move into [...]

You mean with every single jurisdiction they move into? (Customers and drivers seem reasonably happy. At least they are not at war.)

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

#219

Post by morgante » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 3:41 AM UTC

nilkn wrote: post #214

morgante wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normal people don't take limos to the airport.

They do. A "limo" is just a towncar. It's no different from something like UberBlack. Go to any major airport and you'll see a bunch of them lined up waiting for passengers nearby the taxis. I started using this service before Uber because taxis were extraordinarily unreliable and this service was always spot on. And as time has went on I see no reason to switch to Uber for this particular well-defined and scheduled-…

I think you view of the world is rather skewed if you think "normal" people take a town car to the airport.

Even as a well-paid software engineer, I never use UberBlack—only UberX.

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

#220

Post by eru » Thu, Jun 02, 2016, 3:45 AM UTC

Fricken wrote: post #102

hencq wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. They wouldn't even need to be overtaken. It seems that a lot of the valuation is based on the premise that this is a global winner takes all market. If it turns out that's not true and there is in fact space for multiple competitors then the valuation could turn out to be a lot less.

If Uber has a moat of any sort to protect itself from competition, I'm not seeing it. Once Uber has executed a tactical blitzkreig in a new city and incited a pogrom against the cab drivers, and fought the legislative battles with resistant city councils; the door is open for any rideshare company to glide in on Uber's coatails and take advantage of all that costly trailblazing without paying a dime.

Cynically: that's why Uber doesn't want to win that kind of war.

They want to get in, and then work with the locals to establish some `sensible regulation'. Regulation that just happens to be cumbersome enough to deter new small-scale entrants.