Live data from Hacker News

Lyft Files for IPO

reuters.com

71–80 of 319 posts

Re: Lyft Files for IPO

#71
Shrewd move to get it done before Uber.

As many others here have noted (and other disputed) there doesn't seem to be an actual viable business model here. So there would be a distinct first mover advantage for getting in your IPO in, lest the other one tank the market for you as it starts to hit reality, such as actually having to have a sustainable business no longer fueled almost exclusively by investor money.

Re: Lyft Files for IPO

#72
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A ride hailing service needs to reach a critical density of available cars per km^2 to be useful. When you first install the app there needs to be someone nearby who will pick you up - if there's no car nearby most people will uninstall it. Additionally the more people use your app and the more drivers you have in an area the more effectively you can deal with idling (less variance in demand spikes - making planning…

You'd be surprised. Since switching is so low, you can pay your way to acquiring all the supply and demand to kick something off, hence all the ridesharing companies in NYC: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ubers-competitors-in-nyc-are-... If you subsidize driving and subsidize riding significantly, people will sign up. A $40 bonus covers several rides for a customer so they'll hold onto the app at least until they've…

But Juno is only available in NYC (for now?). I think my points still hold outside of densely populated urban areas.

Re: Lyft Files for IPO

#73

Shrewd move to get it done before Uber. As many others here have noted (and other disputed) there doesn't seem to be an actual viable business model here. So there would be a distinct first mover advantage for getting in your IPO in, lest the other one tank the market for you as it starts to hit reality, such as actually having to have a sustainable business no longer fueled almost exclusively by investor money.

First mover has to operate in the open while the private company can continue with increased flexibility that comes from a lack of disclosure. A question I have for Lyft is why now given the, seeming, lack of a viable biz model?

Re: Lyft Files for IPO

#74

From a purely investment point of view, why would anyone invest in Lyft over Uber? Lyft has a smaller footprint and only operates in the US (except Toronto). They are more susceptible to economic conditions in a single country, the US, and every point of marketshare they get is a zero-sum game against Uber and presumably expensive because Uber won't give it up for free. Uber has a global operations, is in multiple st…

Lower price than Uber, potential for growth if they move outside the US, belief that ride share markets are not a zero-sum game and that two companies can more or less split the market...

Re: Lyft Files for IPO

#75

From a purely investment point of view, why would anyone invest in Lyft over Uber? Lyft has a smaller footprint and only operates in the US (except Toronto). They are more susceptible to economic conditions in a single country, the US, and every point of marketshare they get is a zero-sum game against Uber and presumably expensive because Uber won't give it up for free. Uber has a global operations, is in multiple st…

Buy low = no story Sell high = pr firm creates digestable story masses flock

The story is simple. The second largest ride sharing company. Underdog against evil Uber. Could become number 1 or could grow the market.

Re: Lyft Files for IPO

#76

From a purely investment point of view, why would anyone invest in Lyft over Uber? Lyft has a smaller footprint and only operates in the US (except Toronto). They are more susceptible to economic conditions in a single country, the US, and every point of marketshare they get is a zero-sum game against Uber and presumably expensive because Uber won't give it up for free. Uber has a global operations, is in multiple st…

Even if you invest purely cynically you might reasonably believe that Uber's toxic culture will eventually catch up with them.

How would you see that playing out?

Re: Lyft Files for IPO

#77

From a purely investment point of view, why would anyone invest in Lyft over Uber? Lyft has a smaller footprint and only operates in the US (except Toronto). They are more susceptible to economic conditions in a single country, the US, and every point of marketshare they get is a zero-sum game against Uber and presumably expensive because Uber won't give it up for free. Uber has a global operations, is in multiple st…

They hypothetically treat drivers better and have better relationships with them.

Re: Lyft Files for IPO

#78

From a purely investment point of view, why would anyone invest in Lyft over Uber? Lyft has a smaller footprint and only operates in the US (except Toronto). They are more susceptible to economic conditions in a single country, the US, and every point of marketshare they get is a zero-sum game against Uber and presumably expensive because Uber won't give it up for free. Uber has a global operations, is in multiple st…

I agree that some things make Lyft seem more risky than Uber. But to investors, risky bets can be good if they have opportunities to diversify.

Re: Lyft Files for IPO

#79

From a purely investment point of view, why would anyone invest in Lyft over Uber? Lyft has a smaller footprint and only operates in the US (except Toronto). They are more susceptible to economic conditions in a single country, the US, and every point of marketshare they get is a zero-sum game against Uber and presumably expensive because Uber won't give it up for free. Uber has a global operations, is in multiple st…

> Uber has a global operations, is in multiple streams of business and has diversity across business lines and countries [...]

If you invest in a gold company, do you want them hedging the price of gold?

Some corporations function as diversified quasi-portfolios. But it's often far easier to analyze and model pure plays. Plenty of pure-play securities on public markets.

Re: Lyft Files for IPO

#80
post #57
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't own that market at least the way Uber or Lyft do it. It's so easy for their drivers to switch and it's easy for their customers. In my view they will keep their dominant market positions only while they subsidize rides and lose money. But as soon as they raise prices to be profitable there will be plenty of competition. I think the endgame is to dump the stock on the public market so investors and execs can…

A ride hailing service needs to reach a critical density of available cars per km^2 to be useful. When you first install the app there needs to be someone nearby who will pick you up - if there's no car nearby most people will uninstall it. Additionally the more people use your app and the more drivers you have in an area the more effectively you can deal with idling (less variance in demand spikes - making planning…

Drivers will jump ship if somebody else offers more money. Uber has no investment in their drivers and no loyalty from them. If they can't make money with their current coverage how do they ever want to make money?
Post reply on HN