Uber Revenue Slows as Quarterly Loss Surges to $1.1B • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber Revenue Slows as Quarterly Loss Surges to $1.1B

#241

Post by itronitron » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 2:03 AM UTC

HenryBemis wrote: post #150

121789 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had a slightly different experience. My Lyft drivers have definitely been happier and nicer, but most of them say that there is no real difference between the two services from a driver's point of view. I'm not sure how that could be the case.

Sexual harassment cases were on the HQ, not the drivers. Also, most drivers drive for multiple companies. All they need is 'one more app' on their phones, and they're off to go. Since Lyft/Uber/everyone is monitoring their competitors' s prices, they make sure they adapt pricing to make themselves antagonistic. Thus the drivers won't care which app is running, since they will be making (more or less) the same $$$$$.…

doesn't that negatively impact drivers by forcing prices down?

Re: Uber Revenue Slows as Quarterly Loss Surges to $1.1B

#242

Post by itronitron » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 2:09 AM UTC

Barrin92 wrote: post #189

Androider wrote: post #30

Uber doesn't have much of a moat or lock-in effect. I just switched one day from being a frequent Uber rider to 100% using Lyft, simply because I don't like Uber's behavior as a company. The prices are so close it doesn't make any practical difference to me. Anecdotally, among my friends I also see Lyft becoming the default, and sometimes price-checking with Uber. If Waymo or whoever came out tomorrow with a cheaper/…

To this day I don't even really understand the value that Uber et al are supposedly adding that justifies the size and evaluation of their companies. At the end of the day they're a layer on top of a taxi business. Sure this is useful in some way but like Airbnb or weworks or all these other companies that just throw one layer of service over the actual business I don't understand why they are treated like high tech…

presumably the VC investors readily pay a lot for drivers so they assume that the rest of humanity will as well, and they want a piece of that action

Re: Uber Revenue Slows as Quarterly Loss Surges to $1.1B

#243

Post by PakG1 » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 2:09 AM UTC

manigandham wrote: post #237

PakG1 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you have preferred it if parent wrote that sometimes people are nice? I didn't read into parent's statement as much as you did. Sometimes communication is messy.

I have no preference on other's comments. Changing that word doesn't change the implication that some people are good/nice because they did it for free, in the context of a discussion about fees. Can you describe what other meaning there would be in that statement?

The word nice doesn't have as much a moral implication as the word good, which is why I asked.

As for the original sentence, I didn't think it was saying that some people are good/nice because they did it for free. I thought it was saying that some people dit it for free because they are good. That has no implication on whether a person is good based on whether they do it for free. But even if it did, the logic doesn't fall apart if you do an If A Then B analysis. I see no problem with someone doing something for free being a signal that someone is good, especially because I do not say it's an if and only if situation either.

Re: Uber Revenue Slows as Quarterly Loss Surges to $1.1B

#244

Post by nemo44x » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 2:16 AM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #145

nemo44x wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not defending yellow cabs here. There's a reason ride-share has taken so much of their market. I'm just pointing out how ridiculous Uber is by trying to charge me significantly more than a yellow cab to get somewhere when I can ballpark the cost pretty easily. It's just a very poor longterm business decision. Only now do I try other services because I am suspicious that Uber is trying to rip me off.

> I'm just pointing out how ridiculous Uber is by trying to charge me significantly more than a yellow cab They charge more... for a better service. It's not some kind of con or scheme or a rip-off.

They charge 2 different prices at the same time for the same ride to 2 different people. And they aren’t clear about this.

I didn’t say it’s a con and sometimes they charge less. But it’s certainly a practice that makes me skeptical and check out other services.

Re: Uber Revenue Slows as Quarterly Loss Surges to $1.1B

#245

Post by TylerE » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 2:23 AM UTC

moocow01 wrote: post #96

alaskamiller wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of those no-shit responses, parroted over and over again. At the end of the day, Pepsi and Coca-Cola sells you sugar water. McDonald's and Burger King get the same meat form the same vendor trucks. You charge a credit card whether Visa or MasterCard. The point isn't who brings you the convenience, it's that you have convenience at all. Uber/Lyft has commoditized driving to a product sold at ~$2/mile. That…

I think the problem really is profit. Pepsi and Coca-Cola both sell sugar water, a commodity, at a profit. Lyft and Uber have made rides a commodity but at this point it looks like commoditization of rides is not able to be sold at a profit. I think they both are touting that scale and technology will lead them to profitable rides but its not obvious that this is going to ever come true in a way that justifies their…

To nitpick: Neither Coke nor Pepsi actually sells sugar water. They sell syrup. It's the independent local bottlers that actually add water.

Re: Uber Revenue Slows as Quarterly Loss Surges to $1.1B

#246

Post by sithadmin » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 2:24 AM UTC

thrav wrote: post #222

agrippanux wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have found that the drivers for Lyft are much happier than the drivers for Uber. This holds true even when a driver drives for both services. I asked several drivers why this is and the universal response was that Lyft treats them better, so they are happier to pick up Lyft customers. I switched over to only using Lyft, but like the OP states, if Waymo came out tomorrow I'd probably switch to that.

I do feel like they usually have rougher cars though. Not always, but on average.

While this is true, I feel like there are more 'average' folks looking to pick up extra income on the Lyft platform, as opposed to Uber. In US cities like SF, NYC, LA, Seattle, Chicago, it seems like most of the Uber drivers I encounter these days are former taxi or livery drivers -- Uber is clearly their profession. It's apparent in their approaches to discussing the destination (particular landmarks, hotel names, business names, cross streets), and in sometimes in their driving style. And they're usually driving a car that optimizes for rideshare/taxi service type driving: Accords, Corollas, Camrys, Prius, etc. The conversation tends to be all business with a few pleasantries.

On Lyft in the same cities, I always get a much more oddball mix of vehicles, with much more diverse conversation from the driver. I've had biotech founders looking to recruit and make beer money pick me up on Lyft rides going from the South Bay to the SF in the Bay Area, real estate agents and recruiters drive me in many cities, and many others that are clearly doing Lyft as a side gig rather than a profession. On the downside, this usually means that they're less aggressive drivers in terms of optimizing for speed and route efficiency, but it can make for a more interesting ride and better chitchat along the way.

As a result, I almost always default to Lyft unless there's a huge price spread in Uber's favor.

Re: Uber Revenue Slows as Quarterly Loss Surges to $1.1B

#247

Post by wyattpeak » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 2:24 AM UTC

manigandham wrote: post #236

wyattpeak wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels like you're only acknowledging the part of the story which is comparatively easy to argue against. If my driver is a block away but can't contact me until ops gets back to them and they're miles away, that's an indisputable failure.

Failure in what exactly? It's a standard process with a standard fee. This comment thread shows just how much contention there would be otherwise, which is probably what encouraged these changes.

Failure in turning a process that could have taken two minutes into one that took a week.

Re: Uber Revenue Slows as Quarterly Loss Surges to $1.1B

#248

Post by kamaal » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 2:32 AM UTC

Not least surprised. In a country like India, these people are now facing infinite competition. Their original strategy of bankrupting their competition by offering deep discounts just isn't working, because in a country like India you kill one set, and give the overall scale of competition/population the next comes like up weeds.

The same problem is being faced by amazon/flipkart/walmart. Everytime you think that you are going to eliminate competition by offering discounts in say two years. Come two years and you see there is a whole new set of competition and you face a new task to burning $3 - $4 billions to the ground without the hope of seeing a dollar worth profit in return.

The fact that customer loyalty is totally absent and largely shifts based on prices isn't helping either.

Re: Uber Revenue Slows as Quarterly Loss Surges to $1.1B

#249

Post by tompetry » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 2:34 AM UTC

There is always an "Uber is dead" sentiment floating around when losses come out, but I don't buy it. The long term on-demand transportation opportunity is absolutely massive. Uber has tried to win the land grab and "outlast" everybody with obviously unsustainable subsidies, and maybe that didn't exactly work out. But if the economics don't work for Uber, they won't work for anybody else at scale either. Consumers are benefitting as the industry is subsidized, but it won't last. As with most mature industries, there will eventually be 2-3 players that stay alive, and eventually become profitable. Uber, Lyft, Waymo, Tesla? I don't know, it will be interesting to see. But just because the economics are bad today doesn't mean they always will be. I wouldn't count them out.

Re: Uber Revenue Slows as Quarterly Loss Surges to $1.1B

#250

Post by paulddraper » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 2:39 AM UTC

gjreda wrote: post #67

paulddraper wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The extent of their lock-in is that of any C2C company: the marketplace. Can one side be confident there are enough on the other side? And then it becomes about brand recognition and marketing. (And in this particular case, the Uber brand has some issues....) No different than, say, consumer rental companies like Airbnb.

Does this change when the two options are perfect substitutes? As a rider, there's no "cost" to having both apps, so I'll just check both. Similarly, as a driver, I'll just sit with both apps open and see which one I get a rider on.

Sure. If a competitor has managed to get good consumer market share, then switching is easy. The marketplaces are not exclusive.

If, for example, HomeAway got a similar number of rentals to Airbnb (though in this particular case, it hasn't), then both markets could easily co-exist.

Creating C2C marketplaces, however, is not an easy task.