Paywall bypass: https://www.wsj.com/articles/uber-posts-708-million-loss-as-...
Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves
131–140 of 239 posts
Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Australia we only have Uber and taxis. Nobody is switching to taxis because of a 10% price increase. Because most people are using Uber for the fact that they will always come, always pick you up and always drop you off at the right spot. So it's fantastic that Lyft is doing okay in the US. But Uber is playing a whole different game.
This is incorrect. We have had private hire vehicles in Australia for years. Many of them are now also taking rides via Uber, but I've had black sedans to/from the airport for as long as I can remember. The only things Uber add to the service mix is an app and a bad attitude, neither of which create any value for me.
Private hire cars are not a realistic alternative to Uber or taxis in most cases, since they generally have to be booked well in advance. In Australia, they're also significantly more expensive than taxis.
Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves
#133Reuters (non-paywall): https://www.reuters.com/article/us-uber-results-idUSKBN18R3E...
wsj Article Unlock bookmark: javascript:window.location.href='http(s)://m.facebook.com/l.php?u='+encodeURIComponent(window.location.href); remove the '(' and ')' around s in https
Spectacular find!
Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
that's incorrect. $3.4B is their gross revenue (gross bookings) and out of that they probably paid 70% to drivers ($2.4B). i say probably because that assumes a single revenue source, no diffential payments to drivers and no other direct costs (COGS). so indeed, they would need revenues to go up by ~20% to break even. that in turn means a 20% rise in average prices to break even (again assuming a single revenue sourc…
No, you're wrong. 3.4B is their revenue, not their gross bookings.
And 100% of Pool fares.
Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves
#135$708 million loss, narrowed from $991 million last quarter 18% growth from last quarter (note: that's not Y/Y. this is ridiculously fast, given the huge base.) 708mm loss / 3.4 billion in revenue is only about 20% under even. And what most people miss, is that the 3.4 billion is the 30% cut Uber takes from a ride. Prices don't have to rise 20% to break even, prices have to rise 6% (assuming no efficiency improvements…
Perhaps I'm being dense, but I don't understand your math. If $3.4 billion represents the 30% Uber cut, then that means total gross bookings is about $11.3 billion. If they raise prices six percent, and have no loss of volume, then total gross bookings comes to about $12 billion. However, wouldn't you still assume Uber only would get 30% of that extra $700 million in gross bookings? I.e. revenue would only be .3 x $1…
No. What would prevent Uber from taking all 6% raising prices and giving drivers nothing extra?
Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
As long as we're sharing anecdotes, most of the people I know, parents and young kids included, have made the switch to Lyft starting about 8 months ago. They seem to be the less evil company, so people enjoy working for and using them.
Most of my family and friends exclusively use Uber because of Travis and his values.
What values?
Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps I'm being dense, but I don't understand your math. If $3.4 billion represents the 30% Uber cut, then that means total gross bookings is about $11.3 billion. If they raise prices six percent, and have no loss of volume, then total gross bookings comes to about $12 billion. However, wouldn't you still assume Uber only would get 30% of that extra $700 million in gross bookings? I.e. revenue would only be .3 x $1…
No. What would prevent Uber from taking all 6% raising prices and giving drivers nothing extra?
Lyft.
Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves
#138Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps I'm being dense, but I don't understand your math. If $3.4 billion represents the 30% Uber cut, then that means total gross bookings is about $11.3 billion. If they raise prices six percent, and have no loss of volume, then total gross bookings comes to about $12 billion. However, wouldn't you still assume Uber only would get 30% of that extra $700 million in gross bookings? I.e. revenue would only be .3 x $1…
No. What would prevent Uber from taking all 6% raising prices and giving drivers nothing extra?
I would also add that drivers shouldn't be getting extra as right now drivers aren't the ones subsidizing the lower prices.
Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
As long as we're sharing anecdotes, most of the people I know, parents and young kids included, have made the switch to Lyft starting about 8 months ago. They seem to be the less evil company, so people enjoy working for and using them.
Anecdotally, my aged father (72) uses Uber. Uber has spread pretty well to 3rd world countries and is popular in all the vacation spots. Some people I know tried to switch to Lyft when all the bad PR on Uber hit, but the prices were higher so either they switched back to Uber or the more passionate ones are now riding the metro again.
I don't know about other cities but in teh Bay Area prices are pretty evenly matched.