Why I don't believe in Uber's Success • Hacker News Board

Re: Why I don't believe in Uber's Success

#291

Post by 1_2__3 » Fri, Jan 20, 2017, 1:48 AM UTC

btilly wrote: post #201

LordHumungous wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The commercial airline industry has lost money over the whole of its existence. Wait, what? How can that be possible? Wouldn't the airlines cease to exist if they never generated profits?

This is possible thanks to Chapter 11 bankruptcy. In most countries when you go bankrupt, you go out of business. In the US you usually go into Chapter 11. This lets you default on some of your debt, renegotiate contracts, and then come out of bankruptcy stronger than before. The problem with this is shown with airlines. They would all make a profit if they could just lose some of them. Unfortunately whenever that lo…

That... Doesn't match history at all. Mergers have been far more dominant in recent years than bankruptcies, but you ignore them completely.

Re: Why I don't believe in Uber's Success

#292

Post by 1_2__3 » Fri, Jan 20, 2017, 1:51 AM UTC

falloutx wrote: post #25

In my opinion, giving large scale subsidies to customers seems like a business anti-pattern, and is surely gonna kill a lot of startups in near future. I have been sold to the Idea that Investors are killing any Internet "Business" by advising Founders against simple & straight-forward business plans. They constantly ask founders not to monetize earlier and wait until founders have no choice but to trash out the comp…

Put snarkily: Paid subscription models don't lead to hockey sticks. And investors are only interested in hockey sticks.

There's so much in our world we could do if we only demanded profit, rather than 20+% profit YoY from every corner of our existence.

Re: Why I don't believe in Uber's Success

#293

Post by aianus » Fri, Jan 20, 2017, 1:52 AM UTC

GVIrish wrote: post #177

metaphorm wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they don't have to beat those companies, they have to negotiate good rates for vendor services with those companies.

What does Uber have that would not be feasible for any of those companies to build? Uber doesn't lock in customers or create any switching pain whatsoever so their current customer base doesn't given them much of an advantage. Their software is slick and robust but it's not so technically advanced that a competitor couldn't create their own ride-calling and dispatch system (as evidenced by Lyft).

Have you seen how bad and outdated the software is in even high end, expensive cars?

I wouldn't hold my breath that any auto maker besides Tesla could compete with Uber.

Re: Why I don't believe in Uber's Success

#294

Post by ghaff » Fri, Jan 20, 2017, 1:53 AM UTC

ctpide wrote: post #288

ghaff wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>uber offers a better product than taxi services do. Sometimes. I like not handling credit cards and cash. They're faster and more available in areas where taxi services are not great. On the other hand, I had an Uber-X driver just today drive right past a clearly marked airport terminal entrance because his GPS didn't direct him there and "he hadn't been out to the airport in a while." It's unlikely that would happe…

Yes, but it's also not uncommon that cab drivers use their knowledge of the local streets in their advantage, which is a lot less likely when your average Uber driver relies on GPS navigation. I particularly remember taking a cab in Las Vegas many years ago trying to get from one end of the strip to the other. I was an obvious tourist - so he took the "faster router" around the city - just to "realise" that the exit…

That's fair. The GPS nav does tend to eliminate obviously scammy behavior which historically has been a significant issue with cabs. (Never personally had an issue in Vegas but have elsewhere.) But it also eliminates local knowledge optimization as well.

Re: Why I don't believe in Uber's Success

#295

Post by hedora » Fri, Jan 20, 2017, 2:00 AM UTC

wrsh07 wrote: post #237

notahacker wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What about when your commute, without any concern for parking, is 10 minutes, max? I doubt it would be that expensive If you want a car at the precise time everybody else happens to be commuting and commuters are the principal users of on-demand car services, it doesn't really matter whether your commute is shorter than some of the others. It's one extra car needed to be available every day at the time when all the…

In a self driving world, peak traffic will be served by buses. (Or subways in cities that can handle it) Like everything - high bandwidth vehicles will do the bulk of the work, and seamlessly trade off to "last mile" self driving small vehicles.

I'd think self driving cars would kill busses. I'd much rather nap / work / watch TV / do hobbies in my car (where I'd keep stuff for doing all that), then in a bus.

If the car is electric, it isn't so bad on the environment, and it can park itself in a no humans allowed garage (so little chance for breakins). As for rush hour, I'd hope swarm scheduling lowers congestion substantially (though this and making longer commutes tolerable really just means I'll live further from work).

Re: Why I don't believe in Uber's Success

#296

Post by 1_2__3 » Fri, Jan 20, 2017, 2:03 AM UTC

cody3222 wrote: post #102

The network effects are pretty obvious actually: as the number of people on the platform increases, the amount of time a driver has to drive to pick you up becomes increasingly shorter, thus enabling the drivers to spend more of their time with a passenger in their car (which is when they are earning money). If drivers are making more money, Uber can pay them less (reduce the subsidy). Old taxi cab companies can't co…

Yes, but it's easy to calculate out the results for everyone (drivers, Uber) if vehicles are x% more utilized, and at no point does it become sustainable for anyone - let alone profitable. As the Naked Capitalism article points out the only way this works is if Uber finds ways to reduce the fixed costs involved in their service, which taxis around the world have thus far been unable to do and Uber shows no evidence of achieving.

Re: Why I don't believe in Uber's Success

#297

Post by 1_2__3 » Fri, Jan 20, 2017, 2:04 AM UTC

Keyframe wrote: post #22

I don't understand his point. Maybe I'm dense (today, ha). If Uber has a (simplified) split cost per drive consisting of vehicle (+maintenance) and/or fuel & driver. If subsidised part is generally covering the driver part. When you replace driver with autonomous vehicle and you remove subsidies, you're left with a sustainable (presumably) model on a certain margin that is already rolling. Rolling in a sense that it…

I love this, self-driving cars are the new magic fairies. Whatever the problem, they're here to fix them - and it'll be any minute now. Aaaaaaaaany minute now.

Re: Why I don't believe in Uber's Success

#298

Post by 1_2__3 » Fri, Jan 20, 2017, 2:07 AM UTC

msoad wrote: post #18

> Uber’s growth is fueled by subsidies A lot of people think if their Uber/Lyft ride is cheaper than their traditional taxi because it's subsidized. The lower fare for the most part is due to extreme efficiency difference between a taxi company and Uber/Lyft. 1. Uber/Lyft don't own the cars. They are leveraging car owners capital 2. Uber/Lyft drivers are more efficient because they don't have to roam around the city…

You cite nothing to back up your arguments. This whole comment thread is filled with significantly better sources that rebut basically your entire comment. I'd recommend reading them.

Re: Why I don't believe in Uber's Success

#299

Post by landryraccoon » Fri, Jan 20, 2017, 2:17 AM UTC

djrogers wrote: post #254

wrsh07 wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a self driving world, peak traffic will be served by buses. (Or subways in cities that can handle it) Like everything - high bandwidth vehicles will do the bulk of the work, and seamlessly trade off to "last mile" self driving small vehicles.

> high bandwidth vehicles will do the bulk of the work, and seamlessly trade off to "last mile" self driving small vehicles. Still doesn't solve the problem - just moves it. If everyone in my office complex needs a ride to the bus around 5pm, and everyone at the other end of the bus line needs a ride home at 5:42pm when the bus arrives in SuburbTown, there will still be unmanageable shortages of self driving small ve…

Space on the road is the limiting factor in this scenario, not number of vehicles. What would the point be of making another vehicle available, if traffic is bumper to bumper all the way?

Re: Why I don't believe in Uber's Success

#300

Post by nerfhammer » Fri, Jan 20, 2017, 2:18 AM UTC

pfarnsworth wrote: post #278

Animats wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For an IPO, Uber would have to publish real audited GAAP financials. Those would look terrible. Uber's over-valuation would not survive.

You're naive if you don't think Uber already has audited financials. Investors wouldn't dump billions in if they didn't.

GAAP : non-GAAP :: post-IPO : pre-IPO