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

Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 1001 posts

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#451

Post by dsg42 »

beaconstudios wrote: post #418
matt4077 wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't further this narrative that sexually harassing women and his general brohaviour are good for business. They are not. There are ways in which being an asshole ay be good for founders (cf Steve Jobs). Kalanick is just an asshole, and even take-no-prisoner ask-forgiveness-later businesses run much better with a bit of attention to human decency.

has Kalanick himself ever harassed women? I'm genuinely asking, I haven't followed the Uber story closely but I thought the harassment accusations weren't aimed at the CEO. I don't think anyone's suggesting that sexually harassing women is good for business.

Boob-er anyone?

http://www.gq.com/story/uber-cab-confessions?currentPage=1

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#452

Post by qb45 »

beaconstudios wrote: post #418
matt4077 wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't further this narrative that sexually harassing women and his general brohaviour are good for business. They are not. There are ways in which being an asshole ay be good for founders (cf Steve Jobs). Kalanick is just an asshole, and even take-no-prisoner ask-forgiveness-later businesses run much better with a bit of attention to human decency.

has Kalanick himself ever harassed women? I'm genuinely asking, I haven't followed the Uber story closely but I thought the harassment accusations weren't aimed at the CEO. I don't think anyone's suggesting that sexually harassing women is good for business.

I don't think he has been accused of doing it personally.

It also is weird that matt4077 repeatedly contrasts Kalanick with Steve Jobs in this thread, despite Apple having been accused many times of mean culture, sexism, harassment and cover-ups too.

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#453

Post by rsp1984 »

Animats wrote: post #41

This may kill Uber. Kalanick is a jerk, but he created that insane valuation. Uber has less than a year of runway left at their current burn rate. Unless they can find a bigger sucker than the sovereign wealth fund of Saudi Arabia,[1] they're going broke in 2018. (That "undisclosed amount" in 2017 isn't a significant investment on Uber's scale.) IPO? No way. They'd have to publish audited numbers. What's leaked out i…

This may kill Uber.

Highly unlikely. Why? Investors who stomach multi-billion dollar annual losses will probably just shrug off the recent bit of trouble. If the choice is to either write off $15 billion or to give another couple to help the company go through a rough patch (what a buying opportunity!) I think I know what investors are going to do.

Kalanick's head has now rolled (not that it really hurts him much personally though, it's probably even a relief for him) but seriously a whole nother level of crap would have to happen with Uber before investors start getting comfortable with the thought of letting go those $15 billion.

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#454

Post by curun1r »

sgift wrote: post #231
kevinburke wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Innocent until proven guilty is a great standard for criminal trials but probably not for the workplace, where people who report harassment are usually taking an incredible career risk by doing so.

I've never understood this position. We take a risk too by following innocent until proven guilty in criminal trials, but hundreds of years of the opposite (e.g. "A witch!" -> kill the 'offender', "A child molester!" -> kill the 'offender') have shown us that the risks of a fair trial are better than the risks of ruining peoples life over accusations. Why should this be any different in the work place?

There's a middle ground between innocent until proven guilty and condemned by accusation and we've been using it in a courts of law for many, many years. Sexual harassment is primarily a civil issue, not a criminal one. And civil issues are resolved based on the preponderance of the evidence, not innocent until proven guilty.

Anyone accused of sexual harassment should have a chance to give their side of the story and an investigation should be performed, but the company should act based on what HR believes happened, not just what HR can prove happened. Neither the accuser nor the accused has the presumption of being right or the burden of proof.

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#455

Post by Fraterkes »

paganel wrote: post #212
kevinburke wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Innocent until proven guilty is a great standard for criminal trials but probably not for the workplace, where people who report harassment are usually taking an incredible career risk by doing so.

People can also be very manipulative. Following down this path (i.e. "believing that the accuser is right even before the investigation starts") will only lead to less women being hired for relevant positions. Here's a relevant scenario: I'm a man, I hold a managerial position and I have to choose between hiring another man or a woman as a one of my direct-reports. Let's say both contenders have the same qualificatio…

Im sorry, but if you extrapolate that kind of paranoia and self-servedness everything has difficult repercusions. Maybe companies shouldnt have an HR department at all because people might decide the risk of someone complaining about them is so big that they stop hiring anyone.

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#456

Post by [deleted] »

paganel wrote: post #212
kevinburke wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Innocent until proven guilty is a great standard for criminal trials but probably not for the workplace, where people who report harassment are usually taking an incredible career risk by doing so.

People can also be very manipulative. Following down this path (i.e. "believing that the accuser is right even before the investigation starts") will only lead to less women being hired for relevant positions. Here's a relevant scenario: I'm a man, I hold a managerial position and I have to choose between hiring another man or a woman as a one of my direct-reports. Let's say both contenders have the same qualificatio…

[deleted]

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#457

Post by [deleted] »

sgift wrote: post #231
kevinburke wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Innocent until proven guilty is a great standard for criminal trials but probably not for the workplace, where people who report harassment are usually taking an incredible career risk by doing so.

I've never understood this position. We take a risk too by following innocent until proven guilty in criminal trials, but hundreds of years of the opposite (e.g. "A witch!" -> kill the 'offender', "A child molester!" -> kill the 'offender') have shown us that the risks of a fair trial are better than the risks of ruining peoples life over accusations. Why should this be any different in the work place?

[deleted]

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#458

Post by mysterydip »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #435
Retric wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to grow when you sell dollars for 70c each. But, when you suddenly need to sell them for 1.01+$ nobody wants to buy. Uber's problem is taxi companies have lower overhead because among other thing their drivers sometimes get hailed by people at street level. Which means their either taxi prices are lower and people stop using Uber or they pay drivers more and drivers mostly stop working for Uber.

Uber is profitable in certain cities, e.g. New York City [1]. They could turn cash-flow positive if they just gave up useless market share. [1] http://www.businessinsider.com/ubers-revenue-profit-and-loss...

Isn't part of the reason end users use Uber is for its ubiquity? If it was only available in a handful of cities that I won't be visiting, I wouldn't bother with it.

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#459

Post by usrusr »

bigtones wrote: post #190
downandout wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious how much Kalanick has already taken off the table. That may be a motivating factor in his decision. If he has already pocketed hundreds of millions, he may understand that this could well be the death of the company, but just isn't motivated enough to fight these investors and is willing to let them burn the company to the ground. I wouldn't go as far as to say he doesn't care anymore, but being forced ou…

Kalanick has stated publicly that he has not sold a single share - so he has actually taken no money off the table whatsoever.

Surely a company with billions of valuation will pay a decent CEO salary even if said CEO happens to be the founder / main shareholder?

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#460

Post by addicted »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #435
Retric wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to grow when you sell dollars for 70c each. But, when you suddenly need to sell them for 1.01+$ nobody wants to buy. Uber's problem is taxi companies have lower overhead because among other thing their drivers sometimes get hailed by people at street level. Which means their either taxi prices are lower and people stop using Uber or they pay drivers more and drivers mostly stop working for Uber.

Uber is profitable in certain cities, e.g. New York City [1]. They could turn cash-flow positive if they just gave up useless market share. [1] http://www.businessinsider.com/ubers-revenue-profit-and-loss...

Is the profitability in NYC before or after we discovered they were cheating their drivers out of money?

And there aren't too many NYCs in the world.

Post reply on HN