Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O. • Hacker News Board

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

#591

Post by noway421 » Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 1:36 PM UTC

downandout wrote: post #237

bigtones wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I hadn't heard that. When did he state this, and is it still accurate as of today? It's possible he sold shares in the last few weeks during the run-up to this decision. Or maybe he hasn't sold shares, but there are other ways that he could have profited handsomely from Uber already. Cash bonuses, private sale of options (has he said he hasn't sold an option?) etc. I'm just saying if he has enough in the bank, he may…

http://video.vanityfair.com/watch/the-new-establishment-summ... 33:45

It's actually would be a major news point I think. Whether or not Travis sells his shares is what's gonna be decisive of his position in the company and possible future ambitions.

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

#592

Post by _delirium » Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 1:36 PM UTC

hueving wrote: post #430

naskwo wrote: post #352

A few weeks ago, I posted on HN about my experience in Hamburg (no Uber in Germany. The local taxi authority has its own app which works equally well, if not better). Last weekend, I was in Budapest. There is no Uber in Hungary (anymore), but the main taxi company (Fötaxi) has its own app which works brilliantly. I honestly see no "moat" around Uber in markets where (large) taxi dispatchers have the insight to build…

Paying the driver directly still sucks. In the US you constantly deal with the "I don't take cards" bullshit and lack of simple feedback for when they take you on a scenic tour. I would be fine with taxis if I didn't have to interact with the driver at all when it came to payment and could provide feedback right in the app.

This is true in some US markets, not true in others. In NYC it's very easy to pay by CC and requires no interaction with the driver, because they installed CC readers in the back seat of every cab years ago. And if the reader is broken, they're required to tell you before the ride starts.

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

#593

Post by shoo » Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 1:37 PM UTC

api_or_ipa wrote: post #215

hkmurakami wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pardon me for being somewhat rude, but your perspective suggests that you're perhaps relatively young? IBM's recent demise, Lehman Brothers going down under, Enron, Arthur Anderson / Worldcom, the dismantling of Japanese mega conglomerates by the GHQ, Apple's 90's turnaround, the death of workstation companies, deregulation of US airlines, are all orders of magnitude more impactful than if Uber dies and Lyft prevails…

Excellent examples. To push the point farther, the Dow Jones Industrial Index tracks a basket of 'best in breed' companies. With the exception of General Electric, every company listen in 1896 is no longer listed. That speaks nothing to the many that were listed and removed over the years. Big companies rise and fall, and we often forget the companies that fail all around us.

indeed, some of the companies listed on the dow jones index managed to run at a profit for one or more years.

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

#594

Post by amyjess » Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 1:37 PM UTC

Animats wrote: post #107

epistasis wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Uber has less than a year of runway left at their current burn rate. If true, this seems far more likely to be a cause of Uber's death than Kalanick resigning. That, and the valuation being as insane as it is, which is also Kalanick's fault, which as you point out, makes it hard to find greater and greater suckers. Perhaps they'll be better off all around without Kalanick, assuming they can get the business side on…

Uber bought market share by subsidizing rides. That can't go on forever. Or much longer, without more capital. They're already borrowing heavily, having run out of equity sources. The business model hype is supposed to be that they push taxis out of business, then raise rates. Or self-driving cars will somehow save them. Both are unlikely. [1] http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/growth-vs-profits...

> Uber bought market share by subsidizing rides.

Sounds like a '90s startup. Companies acting like this en masse was what caused the 2000 crash. Uber isn't going to make it out of this alive, and they're going to take the rest of the industry with them. I think the whole culture of VCs looking for "unicorn startups" is going to go away when the unicorns all die.

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

#595

Post by acjohnson55 » Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 1:38 PM UTC

amaks wrote: post #162

Somebody in Lyft must be opening a champaigne right now.

That makes no sense. If anything, they're probably shitting themselves. They've been able to brand themselves as the anti-Uber this whole time.

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

#596

Post by sanbor » Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 1:38 PM UTC

Cheesegrits wrote: post #378

kevinburke wrote: post #3

According to the article 5 different VC firms representing 40% of the voting shares asked him to resign today. Kalanick still controls the majority of voting shares and a board seat. Most of Kalanick's trouble started with Susan Fowler speaking out. Please believe women when they report harassment in the workplace. Many of their reports may not be as clear cut as Mrs. Fowler's.

Uber's business model reminds me of Zapp Brannigan. Fry: "I heard one time you single-handedly defeated a horde of rampaging somethings in the something something system" Brannigan: "Killbots? A trifle. It was simply a matter of outsmarting them." Fry: "Wow, I never would've thought of that." Brannigan: "You see, killbots have a preset kill limit. Knowing their weakness, I sent wave after wave of my own men at them u…

Here is the clip https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eowPka21BNc

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

#597

Post by cdevs » Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 1:39 PM UTC

Like watching Silicon Valley

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

#598

Post by kevinburke » Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 1:39 PM UTC

dixie_land wrote: post #152

kevinburke wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people that report harassment are taking a big career risk (and if they go public like Mrs. Fowler did, inviting abuse from Internet mobs) by doing so, so yes, I'm going to default to believing people that report harassment unless I can find credible evidence it didn't happen.

I'm going to default to believing people that report harassment unless I can find credible evidence it didn't happen. I hope to God you don't show up for jury duties.

Different standards should and do apply in criminal trials ("innocent until proven guilty", "beyond a reasonable doubt"), civil trials ("preponderance of the evidence"), and the workplace, where anything goes.

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

#599

Post by bobjordan » Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 1:40 PM UTC

There are a lot of lessons to be learned here but I think one of the biggest to remember is - don't send any emails to anyone (even Mom) that you wouldn't want to be published on the front page of the NYT. Let alone to thousands of employees. For example, the yearly event emails that Travis sent from the frat-boy CEO frame of view. The employees probably received it well ahead of the event and likely even an uptick in morale, but in the long term, it is not an email he is proud of sending.

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

#600

Post by _delirium » Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 1:40 PM UTC

GeneralMayhem wrote: post #323

goseeastarwar wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Camp, Graves, Gurley, Wei, al-Rumayyan, and Huffington all wanted Travis gone, explain the mechanism he can stop that for me please.

He owns more than 50% of the voting stock. Boards don't operate on one-man-one-vote, they operate on one-share-one-vote. If he had really wanted to stay no matter the consequences, he could simply have voted against his own firing.

That's not usually the case. Boards normally operate on one-person-one-vote. A majority of the current sitting board members can therefore fire the CEO.

Shareholder meetings operate on one-(voting)-share-one-vote, so a majority shareholder ultimately controls the composition of the board. But if one of "his" directors, who his shares elected, breaks ranks and votes to fire him, simply owning the shares doesn't allow him to immediately override that vote. Kalanick could have voted out the board members opposed to him at the next shareholder meeting, and voted in sympathetic ones, who then might rehire him as CEO. But that's a different question than whether he could win any board vote simply by virtue of owning a majority of voting shares. Shares don't directly have board votes, they just elect directors who have board votes, who usually vote with the interests of the shares that elected them, but might not always. Besides exercising their personal judgment, directors also have independent legal responsibilities that may in some cases make it prudent for them to vote to fire even the person who put them on the board.