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

Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 239 posts

Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves

#201

Post by CPLX »

jpatokal wrote: post #130
beager wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that Lyft doesn't have to compete globally with Uber to be a successful business in its own right. I also believe that Uber isn't immune from being crippled by competitors that operate in a very small but key subset of Uber's markets. There is very little network effect with Uber. Sure, you can hop off a plane anywhere in the world and open Uber to get a car, but that is a very small number of people overal…

You're ignoring that businessmen who travel all the time are very heavy users of Uber and similar services. I'm not even a frequent flyer, but I'd estimate that a good 80-90% of my Uber usage is travel-related. At home, I have tons of other options to get around, but on a tight schedule in an unfamiliar city, I basically default to Uber all the time, because I rarely have the time or risk tolerance explore alternativ…

Yeah but frequent flying businessmen are also the kind of people who will do research and pick better options quickly if they are available, it's not plausible for Uber to have a permanent monopoly.

One of Uber's massive problems is lack of predictability. When going to/from the airport I can't fuck around with surge pricing, I need to be able to have a travel budget that doesn't change sharply for situations out of my control. I don't want to miss planes. A service like Blacklane (which by the way is now in the US and is growing very quickly yet seems to rarely make the articles that talk about Uber's competition) neatly solves that problem for you, and generally has better service and more professional drivers.

I am a frequent flier and your idea that there's zero-incentive to have a backup or alternate option to Uber ready to go doesn't resonate with me. Uber isn't reliable enough to forget about other options, and as long as those exist and are viable Uber's supposed "monopoly" strategy will likely be regarded in retrospect as expensive and stupid waste of capital.

Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves

#202

Post by amarka »

dingo_bat wrote: post #86

I know most people hate on uber, but it has impacted my life a lot. I think the model they've demonstrated is a legit model, and the ruthlessness with which they pursue it should not take anything away from the company's value. In fact, it should add. I want companies to show a giant middle finger to monopolistic city laws that harm citizens.

Which monopolistic city laws were hurting your personally before Uber came to the rescue?

Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves

#203

Post by kesselvon »

jpatokal wrote: post #40
dmix wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People were saying the same thing about Twitter forever and turned out to be largely wrong. I have a feeling the company making billions of dollars in revenue has some smart people who figured out how not to mess this up. But who knows maybe Uber will stop being the dominate taxi / self-driving car company globally over the next decade and mess it all up. Or not... but I doubt this large expenditure was done without…

Um, Twitter is still not making a profit and their 2017 business plan seems to consist primarily of layoffs.

To be fair, they have like 4,000 employees. I don't understand how they need that many employees for a product that hasn't changed much since IPO

Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves

#204

Post by kesselvon »

amarka wrote: post #202
dingo_bat wrote: post #86

I know most people hate on uber, but it has impacted my life a lot. I think the model they've demonstrated is a legit model, and the ruthlessness with which they pursue it should not take anything away from the company's value. In fact, it should add. I want companies to show a giant middle finger to monopolistic city laws that harm citizens.

Which monopolistic city laws were hurting your personally before Uber came to the rescue?

The part where taxi drivers could have a living wage

Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves

#205

Post by dingo_bat »

Bakary wrote: post #151
dingo_bat wrote: post #86

I know most people hate on uber, but it has impacted my life a lot. I think the model they've demonstrated is a legit model, and the ruthlessness with which they pursue it should not take anything away from the company's value. In fact, it should add. I want companies to show a giant middle finger to monopolistic city laws that harm citizens.

>I want companies to show a giant middle finger to monopolistic city laws that harm citizens. Just wait until a private company holds a monopoly on an essential service, especially one with a history of unethical conduct like Uber. The city laws will seem like the good old days in comparison.

Why would uber have a monopoly? There are numerous competitors already.

Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves

#206

Post by dingo_bat »

amarka wrote: post #202
dingo_bat wrote: post #86

I know most people hate on uber, but it has impacted my life a lot. I think the model they've demonstrated is a legit model, and the ruthlessness with which they pursue it should not take anything away from the company's value. In fact, it should add. I want companies to show a giant middle finger to monopolistic city laws that harm citizens.

Which monopolistic city laws were hurting your personally before Uber came to the rescue?

The registered taxis had a mandatory price set by the local government. Because of the price being high, I couldn't use them. I had to take shitty autorickshaws, or get jostled in crowded buses.

Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves

#207

Post by dingo_bat »

stephenr wrote: post #129
dingo_bat wrote: post #86

I know most people hate on uber, but it has impacted my life a lot. I think the model they've demonstrated is a legit model, and the ruthlessness with which they pursue it should not take anything away from the company's value. In fact, it should add. I want companies to show a giant middle finger to monopolistic city laws that harm citizens.

When's the last time a mandatory background check to prevent a rapist or child abuser becoming a glorified taxi driver, harmed a citizen?

I didn't say background checks are bad.

Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves

#208

Post by dingo_bat »

matt4077 wrote: post #180
dingo_bat wrote: post #86

I know most people hate on uber, but it has impacted my life a lot. I think the model they've demonstrated is a legit model, and the ruthlessness with which they pursue it should not take anything away from the company's value. In fact, it should add. I want companies to show a giant middle finger to monopolistic city laws that harm citizens.

I've heard of a few women whose life was also "impacted a lot". And I fail to see how casual sexism in the office is an adequate way to fight "monopolistic city laws".

Casual sexism in the office does not invalidate the business model. And is irrelevant when it comes to creating value for customers. What's your point?

Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves

#209

Post by aetherson »

bpodgursky wrote: post #13

$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…

The few numbers that Uber posted look like good news for them, but let's not overstate things.

The reason that people post numbers YoY instead of QoQ most of the time is not to artificially inflate numbers. It's because lots of companies have yearly seasonality. If you looked at Apple's numbers for Q4 (real Q4, Oct-Dec, not Apple's fiscal Q4) quarter over quarter, they'd always look like they were on a massive, incredible growth trend. If you looked at their Q1 numbers quarter over quarter, they'd always look like they're shrinking.

Since Uber is sharing a very limited subset of numbers on a purely voluntary basis, it's pretty reasonable to assume that they're showing the ones that make them look good. If they wanted to show YoY numbers, they certainly could. It stands to reason that YoY numbers aren't going to make them look massively better than QoQ numbers.

And, finally, saying that you could "just" raise revenue by 6% and have it all go to the bottom line with no other effects is fantasy -- and even if they could do that, that would make them non-GAAP break-even, not "the kind of profitable company that justifies a $70B valuation."

Re: Uber Posts $708M Loss as Finance Head Leaves

#210

Post by dingo_bat »

kbart wrote: post #145
dingo_bat wrote: post #86

I know most people hate on uber, but it has impacted my life a lot. I think the model they've demonstrated is a legit model, and the ruthlessness with which they pursue it should not take anything away from the company's value. In fact, it should add. I want companies to show a giant middle finger to monopolistic city laws that harm citizens.

Not sure what "evil" laws you are talking about, but car safety, maintenance, insurance, fare counter requirements, mandatory drivers background check etc. are all beneficial to the user in my book.

> car safety, maintenance, insurance

All those laws exist for all cars, not just taxis.

> fare counter requirements

Classic example of over-regulation, leading to crappy service, low supply, and high prices.

> mandatory drivers background check

If some person is so suspect that you cannot trust them to drive you around in public while being tracked by GPS continuously, why is he not locked up? This is a bullshit made-up requirement and does not prevent anything.

Post reply on HN