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

891–900 of 1001 posts

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

#891

Post by dnautics »

TheCondor wrote: post #529
sidcool wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But does winning have to come at the cost of basic human dignity and law?

It probably doesn't have to come at that cost, it's just not unusual for it to. If you peal back the layers, probably most rapid growth, hard driving large companies have left a wake of upset and screwed over people behind it. Nobody "gives" you a hundred billion dollar company.. Uber's leadership was just particularly inept at pivoting from "scorched earth" to a slightly less savage strategy. This will be an interes…

Being an asshole (in some senses of the word) is necessary, it's just incredibly difficult to compartmentalize the good aspects of being an asshole (holding people to tough promises and standards, being unflinching in stating the truth to people's faces no matter how impolitic or uncomfortable) from the bad aspects of being an asshole (bullying, abuse of power).

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

#892

Post by kevstev »

chimeracoder wrote: post #875
davidf18 wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Err, the cheaper rates were due to uber subsidising rides with VC money, which was unsustainable. Uber also did start a leasing program for drivers. The cheaper rates in NYC which are extremely high compared with the rest of the USA were because there was no $125 / 12 hour lease fee because there were no medallions. Medallion owners would get mortgages (like houses) for the $1.2 million medallions and the high leas…

> The cheaper rates in NYC which are extremely high compared with the rest of the USA were because there was no $125 / 12 hour lease fee because there were no medallions. As explained elsewhere in the thread, Uber does not and has not ever competed with medallion taxis for their main product (Uber X/Uber Black) in New York City. Uber's direct counterpart would be the for-hire cabs which are also regulated by the TLC,…

You clearly don't live in NYC. Uber absolutely changed how people in NYC get around.

Whether or not they fill the same requirements, they made it so easy to get a car that it was easier than standing on a street corner and hailing a yellow cab.

And aside from that, they added accountability. Yellow cab drivers were rude, the cars were moderately clean at best, and generally took opportunities to rip people off. I remember leaving my phone in a cab around 2008, I immediately called it and the dude picked up, said he was around the corner and to meet him outside. He was more than willing to give me my phone back- for $60 and had a shit eating grin on his face. I had the same thing happen in an Uber about 5 years later- the guy dropped the phone off at my house free of charge with a smile.

There is a reason that NYC taxi medallions have pretty much halved in cost since Uber started here- because they are directly competing with yellow cabs!

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

#893

Post by bighi »

ajhurliman wrote: post #887
soneca wrote: post #764

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why Lyft get none of the protests? I think you are mixing unrelated subjects. Uber final product is good for society. And other companies can provide the same product (in my city, São Paulo, there are other 3 good companies in the same space). Uber practices as a company are toxic for its employees and some of the toxicity leak to society. If such calculation was possible, I believe it would show a net positive im…

The same pushy, aggressive culture that made their some of their employees' lives awful also made it possible to get excellent service that reduces tons of drunk driving and generally improves people's lives. I really don't think they could've broke into the market by asking politely; it took some fire in the belly. However, the side effects are pretty devastating as well.

> The same pushy, aggressive culture that made their some of their employees' lives awful also made it possible to get excellent service that reduces tons of drunk driving and generally improves people's lives.

So you're basically saying that stuff like treating women like shit was NECESSARY to provide a good "taxi" service?

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

#894

Post by skewart »

davidf18 wrote: post #806
driverdan wrote: post #786

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I downvoted you because this has nothing to do with the article. Whether or not Uber is a good thing is not relevant to Kalanick stepping down or the rotten culture he cultivated.

Uber under TK was criticized for breaking laws, but those laws were in place to protect incumbents from market entry. In NYC, were AirBnB does break NYC and NY State laws, Uber does not. It follows the rules of the NYC Taxi & Limousine Commission. Except for the Mayor that tried to restrict Uber/Lyft for political reasons to help the incumbents, we New Yorkers welcome Uber/Lyft.

That's simply not true. Very few people have criticized Uber for breaking absurd incumbent-protecting laws.

The vast majority of people have been criticizing Uber for breaking laws related to fraud, stalking and harassment, and a generally toxic workplace culture.

The product that Uber offers is good (and no one other than taxi medallion owners is really arguing that). But they've gone about delivering it in an unnecessarily bad way.

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

#895

Post by [deleted] »

gregorymichael wrote: post #717
davidf18 wrote: post #701

Much of the resistance to Uber (such as laws that were broken, protests) were from entrenched interests. At least where I live in NYC, Uber was dramatically improving customer value while providing innovations that reduced greenhouse gas. It provided completion for the entrenched Yellow Cab monopoly with its very high rates. Sometimes Uber would have higher rates but then you could take a Yellow Cab instead. The Yell…

The previous market making mechanism for this industry was for a buyer to stand on a street corner, hold their hand up, and hope that a vendor who sold that service drove by. That's insane.

[deleted]

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

#896

Post by curyous »

bighi wrote: post #893
ajhurliman wrote: post #887

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same pushy, aggressive culture that made their some of their employees' lives awful also made it possible to get excellent service that reduces tons of drunk driving and generally improves people's lives. I really don't think they could've broke into the market by asking politely; it took some fire in the belly. However, the side effects are pretty devastating as well.

> The same pushy, aggressive culture that made their some of their employees' lives awful also made it possible to get excellent service that reduces tons of drunk driving and generally improves people's lives. So you're basically saying that stuff like treating women like shit was NECESSARY to provide a good "taxi" service?

Not caring about what other people think is necessary for doing pioneering work.

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

#897

Post by bighi »

temp20160423 wrote: post #121
Animats wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Completely ridiculous. The model was not to raise rates in the future. The whole reason they could raise so much money was that they showed as they reduced rates, they induced more demand. They also had data showing increasing lifetime customer value. I recommend reading Brad Stone's The Upstarts. If they can have higher profits/customer while having lower rates than other companies, then they actually have a moat. I…

If I'm not mistaken, they were losing money on every ride. If they did not intend to raise the rates in the future, they're basically planning to go bankrupt.

And I have a really hard time believing companies plan to fail.

It's a very clear case of dumping, or whatever it's called in English. Unsustainable low prices, suffocate your competitors, raise prices.

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

#898

Post by _delirium »

mcjiggerlog wrote: post #411
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…

This is definitely already starting to happen. Uber was banned for a long time here in Madrid which allowed other apps to gain a lot of traction. I'd say the most popular is myTaxi, which allows you to hail the standard local public taxis. I believe it works the same in most major European cities. No need for private taxis.

myTaxi seems to be emerging as a big European one. It's in every major German city (where it started), and also just recently acquired Hailo, which was the dominant London taxi-hailing app.

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

#899

Post by RealityNow »

CPLX wrote: post #770
davidf18 wrote: post #701

Much of the resistance to Uber (such as laws that were broken, protests) were from entrenched interests. At least where I live in NYC, Uber was dramatically improving customer value while providing innovations that reduced greenhouse gas. It provided completion for the entrenched Yellow Cab monopoly with its very high rates. Sometimes Uber would have higher rates but then you could take a Yellow Cab instead. The Yell…

This is factually incorrect. You're drawing a direct parallel between medallion taxis and Uber/Lyft rides, when they are not in fact the same at all. The outer boroughs, and every neighborhood in the city, has had car service options for decades, where you call a phone number (or often walk to a local storefront stand) to get a ride. This is the exact market segment that Uber has entered. Literally. There wasn't and…

I'll attest to the original comment by davidf18. Uber/Lyft have radically changed NYC for the better. Ride sharing services are significantly cheaper on the order of multiples, easier to use (eg. no more hailing, paying), and a hell of a lot more pleasant to ride in than taxis.

Taxis were notoriously bad. They'd intentionally take slower routes to run up the meter, refuse passengers trying to go to locations the drivers don't want to go (despite this being illegal), etc. Not to mention this is all made more attractive due to our failing decrepit subway system.

The smartphone app innovation you speak of was not inevitable. Taxis indeed had a monopoly, and thus had absolutely zero incentive to developing an app. The competition induced by the ride sharing services destroying them is what incentivized them to finally launch an app, but I don't have it on my phone nor do I know anyone who has, and it's probably inferior to that of its competition.

Post reply on HN