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

Uber revolution will not last

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 123 posts

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#21

Post by xg15 »

prostoalex wrote: post #4

The "labor-exploiting" argument seems a bit disingenious to me. It's not like someone sees an ad for Uber and tells their boss to shove it, as they're quitting their full-time job, forfeiting all the benefits and 401(k) matching to start a brand new career as an Uber driver. The alternative for many drivers is simply unemployment. While there's zero possibility of labor exploitation, it reminds me of Flight of the Co…

Except they're "disrupting" the taxi industry to get to that point. So they're destroying jobs and replacing them with less secure, less paid ones.

(Wether or not that disruption has a positive effect for society in the big picture is another debate - but in terms of labor you can't ignore it)

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#22

Post by hkmurakami »

jrockway wrote: post #9
prostoalex wrote: post #4

The "labor-exploiting" argument seems a bit disingenious to me. It's not like someone sees an ad for Uber and tells their boss to shove it, as they're quitting their full-time job, forfeiting all the benefits and 401(k) matching to start a brand new career as an Uber driver. The alternative for many drivers is simply unemployment. While there's zero possibility of labor exploitation, it reminds me of Flight of the Co…

One wonders if driving for Uber could compete with basic income. The Internet keeps telling me that all Uber drivers are unhappy. I use Uber from time to time, and about 90% of the time, the driver seems super happy to be driving for Uber. They seem happy with their compensation. Maybe all the drivers are new, this is their first week, and it all sounds good on paper. But maybe they actually like the job. I don't kno…

I'd be afraid of a bad review if I told a passenger I'm not happy driving for Uber.

What do I have to gain from sharing this info? At best I'm where I was before and at worst maybe an Uber employee is testing me for fidelity and I could be punished. The truth is somewhere in between, and a non zero number of passengers would rate me a non-5 star if I complained about my condition.

So take the info with a grain of salt.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#23

Post by nawtacawp »

mmackh wrote: post #7
nawtacawp wrote: post #2

GM invested $500 million in Lyft earlier this year. I guess, they have a different view on where the market is headed. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-gm-lyft-investment-idUSKBN...

Direct quote from the article "Hill believes ride-sharing may be here to stay, but Uber is not"

I wish he would have expanded on that. Why would one fail and another not, when the companies have the exact same model?

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#24

Post by jimminy »

nawtacawp wrote: post #2

GM invested $500 million in Lyft earlier this year. I guess, they have a different view on where the market is headed. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-gm-lyft-investment-idUSKBN...

The valuations and conditions between Lyft and Uber are drastically different.

Lyft with the funding from GM has only raised $2B over it's lifespan which is comparable to that of Uber. Uber has raised nearly $13B and blown through most of it.

At their last round, Lyft is valued at about $6B and Uber is valued at $68B. One of these is reasonable based on the taxi market size (domestic $20B), the other is about 2x over the assumed value with decent market share and margins it could attain.

The only way for Uber to express the value on the books is to replace car ownership, which is unlikely with the turnover rate of individuals replacing their cars, they'll need about a decade or more runway to justify the current valuation.

Lyft and GM have an advantage in the race to replace ownership, with their partnership. Lyft gets a partner that can reduce cost of vehicle supply costs and maintenance, while GM gets a hedge against a possible headwind to their current business model.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#25

Post by barney54 »

From the title I hoped it the article would make an interesting argument, but most of it was the same complaints about Uber that we have heard for years including that Uber evades livery laws. Well, livery laws are terrible and unjust, as are taxi medallions. Complaining about Iner drivers not being professional also misses the mark because they are much better than regular taxi drivers in my experience. Has this guy actually tried Uber?

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#26

Post by jimminy »

nawtacawp wrote: post #23
mmackh wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Direct quote from the article "Hill believes ride-sharing may be here to stay, but Uber is not"

I wish he would have expanded on that. Why would one fail and another not, when the companies have the exact same model?

I explained above, but Uber is way over-valued to the point that they cannot have a reasonable IPO and acquisitions are off the table to all but a few companies that don't need that business and can acquire a direct competitor at a more reasonable expense.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#27

Post by nawtacawp »

jimminy wrote: post #24
nawtacawp wrote: post #2

GM invested $500 million in Lyft earlier this year. I guess, they have a different view on where the market is headed. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-gm-lyft-investment-idUSKBN...

The valuations and conditions between Lyft and Uber are drastically different. Lyft with the funding from GM has only raised $2B over it's lifespan which is comparable to that of Uber. Uber has raised nearly $13B and blown through most of it. At their last round, Lyft is valued at about $6B and Uber is valued at $68B. One of these is reasonable based on the taxi market size (domestic $20B), the other is about 2x over…

Thanks for the answer, makes perfect sense.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#28

Post by prostoalex »

xg15 wrote: post #21
prostoalex wrote: post #4

The "labor-exploiting" argument seems a bit disingenious to me. It's not like someone sees an ad for Uber and tells their boss to shove it, as they're quitting their full-time job, forfeiting all the benefits and 401(k) matching to start a brand new career as an Uber driver. The alternative for many drivers is simply unemployment. While there's zero possibility of labor exploitation, it reminds me of Flight of the Co…

Except they're "disrupting" the taxi industry to get to that point. So they're destroying jobs and replacing them with less secure, less paid ones. (Wether or not that disruption has a positive effect for society in the big picture is another debate - but in terms of labor you can't ignore it)

> replacing them with less secure, less paid ones

My understanding is that people got in deep debt to the medallion owner, which they slowly repaid from taxi revenues. Are taxi jobs at the lowest rung that secure and well-paid?

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#30

Post by kfe »

As others have already noted, uber is not about replacing human drivers with human drivers, but about going driverless.

To me a more interesting question is the whole sharing economy and it's relation to traditional regulation.

Restaurants, hotels, taxies, etc have long been heavily regulated to ensure that so you don't get salmonellosis, don't have to deal with cockroaches or die in a car crash because of an incompetent driver.

As the whole "sharing economy thing" is about information - the question is - can better movement of information replace the need for traditional government regulation in those fields (in the form of ratings, web of trust, etc)?

Post reply on HN