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

81–90 of 123 posts

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#81

Post by tjbiddle »

People can say all they want: That self-driving cars will take over, that Uber is over-valued, that Uber shouldn't have bet on China, that the industry won't last, that people don't want xyz.

Things aren't so black and white - and the market is different in different parts of the world, for better or worse.

I've been living in Indonesia (I'm an American citizen) for the past year and GO-Jek is the big runner here. It's huge, all of my friends use it, and it's damn well the most convenient thing I've used in a while - and it offers even more than Uber: Motorbike rides, car rides, cleaning services, massages, food delivery, item shipment, etc. It definitely has some kinks - but it's growing, and fast.

Now Uber came in last year and I've watched it's growth - they're subsidizing drivers by 50%; what would cost me normally $20 from a taxi driver on the street costs me $8-10 with Uber, and the drivers get paid the same. But there are also issues they have to deal with - such as restricted zones for pickups.

The idea as a whole is here to stay; it will be improved on continuously, features will be added and removed, run-ins with governments and failed investments will be a part of the process - but peer-to-peer transportation and delivery will increase 10-fold.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#82

Post by rhino369 »

mc32 wrote: post #18

This is gold... "So, yeah, it’s great: you hit the app, and the car shows up now in 10 minutes instead of a 35-minute wait. But now the traffic congestion is so bad that you’re sitting in that car for 20 minutes longer to get anywhere... cities now are starting to discuss and deal with: traffic congestion. The traffic congestion is so much worse. Now, is it all because of Uber? Not it’s not...you suddenly have a new…

>This is total stream of consciousness. Is Uber multiplying the taxi fleet? How can one put so many competing statements together like that and think it's coherent?

It might actually be multiplying the taxi fleet. I personally use uber to go to work every day and before I'd just use the subway.

This graph on reddit, suggests uber creates a lot of demand rather than just converting it from taxis. https://i.redd.it/1s8w5uqjkvnx.png

This explains why Uber is valued so much more than the taxi industry. Because it's growing the industry.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#83

Post by jrockway »

hkmurakami wrote: post #22
jrockway wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 sal…

I don't ask anymore (for exactly these reasons; why would anyone trust me with this information), but you can kind of get a picture of how much the person likes their job by the general interaction.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#84

Post by bambax »

WalterBright wrote: post #47
mc32 wrote: post #18

This is gold... "So, yeah, it’s great: you hit the app, and the car shows up now in 10 minutes instead of a 35-minute wait. But now the traffic congestion is so bad that you’re sitting in that car for 20 minutes longer to get anywhere... cities now are starting to discuss and deal with: traffic congestion. The traffic congestion is so much worse. Now, is it all because of Uber? Not it’s not...you suddenly have a new…

I won't believe cities are serious about reducing congestion until they fix the traffic lights to dynamically maximize flow. No, it isn't done already. Too often, I am in a platoon of 20 cars that has to slam to a stop so one car can cross the intersection on the cross street, and then there's yet another minute of red with nobody in the intersection. You'd think with cameras already installed on the lights that this…

In Paris the idea is to make the city more hostile to cars (any car, your private car, taxis, ubers) by reducing the number of roads they are allowed onto.

The city voted yesterday to close the main road through the city ("quais rive droite") after the equivalent road in the other way ("quais rive gauche") had been closed 3 years ago.

I think London is thinking of doing the same (plans to close Oxford Street?)

How it will end is a mystery to me; not everyone is comfortable using public transportation (esp. the elderly). In London the subway is kind of okay... in Paris it's horrible.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#85

Post by jimminy »

prostoalex wrote: post #73
jimminy wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Facebook, that is absolutely false. Their last known valuation prior to IPO based on a raise was $65B (March 2011), they IPO'd at $104B. And Box had a small downward valuation shift (-36%, -$0.9B), between last raised valuation and IPO. Uber's numbers even giving them liberal growth potential of 500% places them at around $33.75B (-50% current value, -$34B).

Well, you're right, FB initial IPO price on day 1 was above the pricing in the last private round. However, shortly after, and by "shortly" I mean within 3-4 months after the IPO when most of the insiders were still under lock-up, a single share of FB could've been bought for high teens, which was at a significant discount to the last round.

That discussion isn't that relevant, when you're trying to figure out this kind of valuation though. The reason for that dip was largely 90 and 180 day lock-ups increasing supply of shares traded as employees sold stock. Also there were economic fears helping pressure the stock down.

FB's valuation at IPO was still smaller than it's primary domestic market's (ad spending) size ($165B in 2012).

Uber's primary domestic market (taxis) is only valued at ($20B), so if they captured all of the US taxi, their current valuation requires them to capture over 300% of the market.^

Now obviously that's not a perfect barometer. There are other variables and adjustments to make, but it makes it very clear that there is limited upside potential. Without claiming another market (ownership), it's actually damn near impossible. They've also ceded competition in the Chinese market to DiDi, so they can't make it up via global expansion either.

^edit (Obviously, this is a 1x multiple, as you increase to more reasonable values it drops the share required, but you have to push it pretty hard to reduce market share to a decent level.)

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#86

Post by collyw »

bambax wrote: post #84
WalterBright wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't believe cities are serious about reducing congestion until they fix the traffic lights to dynamically maximize flow. No, it isn't done already. Too often, I am in a platoon of 20 cars that has to slam to a stop so one car can cross the intersection on the cross street, and then there's yet another minute of red with nobody in the intersection. You'd think with cameras already installed on the lights that this…

In Paris the idea is to make the city more hostile to cars (any car, your private car, taxis, ubers) by reducing the number of roads they are allowed onto. The city voted yesterday to close the main road through the city ("quais rive droite") after the equivalent road in the other way ("quais rive gauche") had been closed 3 years ago. I think London is thinking of doing the same (plans to close Oxford Street?) How it…

I was in Rome recently and they seem to do something similar. It makes for a lot more pleasant city when you have so much less traffic and the associated noise.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#87

Post by CamperBob2 »

WalterBright wrote: post #47
mc32 wrote: post #18

This is gold... "So, yeah, it’s great: you hit the app, and the car shows up now in 10 minutes instead of a 35-minute wait. But now the traffic congestion is so bad that you’re sitting in that car for 20 minutes longer to get anywhere... cities now are starting to discuss and deal with: traffic congestion. The traffic congestion is so much worse. Now, is it all because of Uber? Not it’s not...you suddenly have a new…

I won't believe cities are serious about reducing congestion until they fix the traffic lights to dynamically maximize flow. No, it isn't done already. Too often, I am in a platoon of 20 cars that has to slam to a stop so one car can cross the intersection on the cross street, and then there's yet another minute of red with nobody in the intersection. You'd think with cameras already installed on the lights that this…

Unfortunately, I wouldn't hold my breath. Even Bill Gates couldn't fix this problem (literally -- who remembers TrafOData?)

Apparently, cities don't want smooth traffic flow. It's bad for their public transit agenda.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#88

Post by lyle_nel »

WalterBright wrote: post #47
mc32 wrote: post #18

This is gold... "So, yeah, it’s great: you hit the app, and the car shows up now in 10 minutes instead of a 35-minute wait. But now the traffic congestion is so bad that you’re sitting in that car for 20 minutes longer to get anywhere... cities now are starting to discuss and deal with: traffic congestion. The traffic congestion is so much worse. Now, is it all because of Uber? Not it’s not...you suddenly have a new…

I won't believe cities are serious about reducing congestion until they fix the traffic lights to dynamically maximize flow. No, it isn't done already. Too often, I am in a platoon of 20 cars that has to slam to a stop so one car can cross the intersection on the cross street, and then there's yet another minute of red with nobody in the intersection. You'd think with cameras already installed on the lights that this…

London does it. http://abstracts.aetransport.org/paper/index/id/2041/confid/... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4oeMB0tYII

The video is a bit cheesy, but it gets the point across.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#89

Post by Animats »

linkregister wrote: post #64
Animats wrote: post #57

As criticism of Uber goes, this is kind of weak. Uber's big problem is simply that they lose money. They still have to use investor capital to buy market share. That shouldn't be necessary at their present size. Also, Uber has run out of investor financing and is now using leveraged loans.[1] Those have to be paid back. Their 2015 financing was a six year convertible bond. The bondholders get the right to participate…

Ironically, Amazon has resurrected Webvan with several of its former higher-ups [1]. Maybe Amazon will wait for the Uber/Lyft flameout and hire the nascent companies' experts to make its own profitable service. [1] http://www.reuters.com/article/net-us-amazon-webvan-idUSBRE9...

Not quite the top "higher-ups". Amazon had no use for George Shaheen, Webvan's CEO. The people Amazon got were the operations people and the Kiva robotics guys.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#90

Post by linkregister »

summarite wrote: post #8

Headline grabber, but not much more. That the 'sharing economy' will not continue as today should be obvious though. Governments have to react to avoid a breakdown of regular services like taxis, assuming that they want to save them. More importantly, governments won't tolerate the tax evasion and externalisation of costs - like unemployment benefits, health care, etc. That's the main reason uber is cheaper, and it's…

Lyft and Uber primarily market driving as a part-time way to get extra cash, not as a full-time job. Lyft has targeted typical, otherwise-employed drivers since its inception. Uber pivoted from a black car service to catch up with Lyft and its pooling service, Lyft Line.

Though both services offer generous incentives to full-time drivers (extra cash per 1000 rides in a month), I would expect this to recede after enough part-time drivers can take over.

When it's a side job, the lack of benefits don't matter.

Many governments offer centralized health care that companies don't contribute to. I think you should limit your scope to the United States.

Post reply on HN