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

Uber’s Losses Widen as SoftBank Launches Bid to Buy Shares

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–256 of 256 posts

Re: Uber’s Losses Widen as SoftBank Launches Bid to Buy Shares

#251

Post by adjkant »

njj023 wrote: post #249
adjkant wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is 1.5B a quarter on-par or worse than 750M per year?

An apples to apples comparison would standardize across: 1. GAAP v.s. non GAAP. Different media sites are reporting between 1.5B and 750B for Uber because of this discrepancy. 2. Timelines - Uber numbers are from Q3. Lyft from H1 3. Size discrepancies - it's better to look at loss per trip given that Uber is far bigger.

You're still mixing different time period sizes in 1. I think even size adjusted per ride, Lyft may still be in a better position. 6B vs 750M (more if using newer numbers) when the market ratio of Lyft is nearing a third means that unless their yearly losses are over 2B, they still have the edge.

Overall I agree somewhat, but when what matters is explicitly runway (who can survive the longest), scaling for size may not make sense. Lyft's smaller current size might actually advantage them in this marathon.

Re: Uber’s Losses Widen as SoftBank Launches Bid to Buy Shares

#252

Post by T2_t2 »

trhway wrote: post #201
T2_t2 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except... Growth. The (buzzword warning) hyper-growth startup model is in essence 2X revenue, 1.5X costs. Repeat until inevitably profitable - and I say inevitably because with enough time, 2X revenue, 1.5X costs gets to profitable. The only variable there is having a long enough runway. Uber seem, from the financial data I have seen, to be sticking to that playbook down to the 3rd decimal place (exaggeration for eff…

>The (buzzword warning) hyper-growth startup model is in essence 2X revenue, 1.5X costs. Repeat until inevitably profitable - and I say inevitably because with enough time, 2X revenue, 1.5X costs gets to profitable. The only variable there is having a long enough runway. it is like gambling with doubling (or even tripling) down each time - with enough time you will inevitably win and as result will reap a huge profit…

Except gambling has the odds stacked in the house's favour. There is no such problem with a startup.

Will revenue double forever? No. Will revenue double for 100 years? No. Will revenue double for 10 years? Hmmm. Will it double for a year? Lets just say yes. Solve for between 1 and 10, and place your bets accordingly.

Re: Uber’s Losses Widen as SoftBank Launches Bid to Buy Shares

#253

Post by wpietri »

malandrew wrote: post #250
wpietri wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just looking at the ones active in Austin, Fasten, Chariot, and InstaRyde were started in 2014; Fare in 2015; Ride Austin in 2016. Ride sharing is essentially a local business with very low barriers to entry. You don't need to replicate what the incumbents have right away. You just need a modest number of drivers (who can also be driving for the incumbents) and a modest number of customers.

Do you have any data to support the position that any of those three are not irrelevant from a market share by rides given or by industry profits?

Some were listed by local news as the leading rideshare companies.

That seems sufficient to me. It's hard to name any company started in the last few years that is a major market player when then have a bunch of competitors. New businesses take time to grow.

The discussion here is about whether Uber has a moat. The point being made is that it's pretty easy to start a rideshare company. Which it is. That one hasn't become major yet isn't proof that one can't become so. As long as there's room for new companies to start and be sustainable at modest scale, then Uber can't extract monopoly rents.

Re: Uber’s Losses Widen as SoftBank Launches Bid to Buy Shares

#254

Post by malandrew »

wpietri wrote: post #253
malandrew wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any data to support the position that any of those three are not irrelevant from a market share by rides given or by industry profits?

Some were listed by local news as the leading rideshare companies. That seems sufficient to me. It's hard to name any company started in the last few years that is a major market player when then have a bunch of competitors. New businesses take time to grow. The discussion here is about whether Uber has a moat. The point being made is that it's pretty easy to start a rideshare company. Which it is. That one hasn't be…

> Some were listed by local news as the leading rideshare companies.

Did the journalist who wrote that story cite any figures to support that assertion?

Re: Uber’s Losses Widen as SoftBank Launches Bid to Buy Shares

#255

Post by wpietri »

malandrew wrote: post #254
wpietri wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some were listed by local news as the leading rideshare companies. That seems sufficient to me. It's hard to name any company started in the last few years that is a major market player when then have a bunch of competitors. New businesses take time to grow. The discussion here is about whether Uber has a moat. The point being made is that it's pretty easy to start a rideshare company. Which it is. That one hasn't be…

> Some were listed by local news as the leading rideshare companies. Did the journalist who wrote that story cite any figures to support that assertion?

Sorry, I'm not interested in playing "bring me a rock" with you. You can do your own research. If you discover something important, let me know. But until then, I stand by my opinion that the rideshare market has low barriers to entry.

Re: Uber’s Losses Widen as SoftBank Launches Bid to Buy Shares

#256

Post by malandrew »

wpietri wrote: post #255
malandrew wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some were listed by local news as the leading rideshare companies. Did the journalist who wrote that story cite any figures to support that assertion?

Sorry, I'm not interested in playing "bring me a rock" with you. You can do your own research. If you discover something important, let me know. But until then, I stand by my opinion that the rideshare market has low barriers to entry.

At least you've admitted that your opinion is handwavvy and unsubstantiated. That's all I wanted.
Post reply on HN