WeWork Gets a Visit from Financial Reality

Post by pjc50 » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 5:56 PM UTC

scandox wrote: post #5

Traster wrote: post #4

>The Gulf investors backing the Vision Fund seem to have decided that WeWork is not a tech bet but simply an aggressive punt on real estate. This is the bogey man of a huge number of current 'tech startups' - What if it turns out Tesla really are a car company! Or if We Work are actually an office rental company! OR gasp Uber is a cab company! (1) We now have a glut of companies operating in traditional markets that…

In 1999 there was an email going round about how ridiculous dotcom valuations were. Taking Amazon, I think, as an example it said it would have to earn more than Kodak, Boeing, Caterpillar etc to ever be worth it's valuation. There was a general sense of "it's just a bookstore". Now I know everything is more mature and the situation is different, but I also remember feeling very confident that Amazon was waaay overva…

Post by reaperducer » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 6:03 PM UTC

mcguire wrote: post #72

projectramo wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right on Tesla and WeWork, but not on Uber. Uber doesn't buy and own the car, which means it requires much less capital. This small change has many implications, and the tech helps solves many of the problems that come up. I am not saying it is properly valued (over or under or whatever). Just that given the choice between an Uber (or Lyft or yourlocalapp.com) or a cab company with the same fleet, customers, a…

Is Uber still using capital to pay operating expenses? [Edit] Doesn't Uber subsidize vehicle leases for drivers?

Post by bryanlarsen » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 6:10 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #112

bryanlarsen wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it obviously would have been a major component of any "Internet" basket at any date after its IPO in 1997. But 20% major? Perhaps not.

Keep in mind, too, that $1 in January 1999 would buy what $1.53 does today [1]. Saying you’d be 20% Amazon in 1999 is the same as saying you’d have bought the stock then. Yes, of course—with that prescience you’d overperform. [1] https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=1&year1=199901...

Post by rajacombinator » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 6:14 PM UTC

kgwgk wrote: post #93

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-01-08/wework... "In addition to the corporate finance weirdness: “Going forward, the company will no longer be called WeWork but rather The We Company.” (“The switch is not a legal name change,” okay.) And: “Rather than just renting desks, the company aims to encompass all aspects of people’s lives, in both physical and digital worlds,” which is—and I have spent years w…

Post by reaperducer » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 6:18 PM UTC

addajones wrote: post #33

sachinprism wrote: post #9

I feel like WeWork would be one of the first companies to go under in case a recession hits the US market. Everyone who works there is probably going to decide en masse that they can do the same things from home or a Starbucks

Sounds about right. Spent a couple years at a WeWork in Los Angeles. It's a luxury, a glorified co-working community. People enjoy the beer. One shake of the economy and everybody will cut WeWork and go back home or somewhere considerably more affordable.