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

Uber S-1

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 559 posts

Re: Uber S-1

#81

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

panarky wrote: post #35
partingshots wrote: post #18

So... Let me see if I have this straight: 1. Uber is unprofitable and the only way it can become profitable is to get SDC's 2. Uber is significantly (years) behind Waymo in the SDC space. 3. Waymo will launch SDC taxi services first meaning: - When it puts in an order for SDC components no one else is going to be buying in bulk and thus it can have effectively 100% of capacity of these specialized equipment makers -…

> can't imagine how Uber is worth anything If the operation doesn't make an economic profit, and if there isn't sufficient moat to defend the operation until it can become profitable, then I agree with you it's not worth anything. But in fact, Uber does have a massive moat -- its network of drivers and riders in thousands of cities around the world. No competitor is even close. It takes tremendous capital expenditure…

At least on Android, for ~75% of mobile users globally, Google Maps is more important than Uber for getting from place to place. Every Android user has Google Maps. Virtually every Android user uses Google Maps. The same is not true for Uber.

Uber has a shallow moat around an ugly castle.

Re: Uber S-1

#82

Post by darpa_escapee »

panarky wrote: post #35
partingshots wrote: post #18

So... Let me see if I have this straight: 1. Uber is unprofitable and the only way it can become profitable is to get SDC's 2. Uber is significantly (years) behind Waymo in the SDC space. 3. Waymo will launch SDC taxi services first meaning: - When it puts in an order for SDC components no one else is going to be buying in bulk and thus it can have effectively 100% of capacity of these specialized equipment makers -…

> can't imagine how Uber is worth anything If the operation doesn't make an economic profit, and if there isn't sufficient moat to defend the operation until it can become profitable, then I agree with you it's not worth anything. But in fact, Uber does have a massive moat -- its network of drivers and riders in thousands of cities around the world. No competitor is even close. It takes tremendous capital expenditure…

> But in fact, Uber does have a massive moat -- its network of drivers and riders in thousands of cities around the world. No competitor is even close.

Their platform is a commodity to both drivers and riders. I haven't met a driver who only drives for Uber. Uber provides no incentives for loyalty to drivers, like actual employment as employees. As a user, I have no loyalty to Uber, either.

Re: Uber S-1

#83

Post by hobofan »

granzymes wrote: post #30
chollida1 wrote: post #10

Note: - Expected to be teh largest IPO this year in the US. - 10th largest all time - trying to raise around $10B - 2018 Year Ended Revenue $11.27 billion - 2018 Year Ended Net Income $997 million - 2017 Year End lost $4.03 billion. - 10 billion trips in September 2018, up from 5 billion in September 2017 - Gross Bookings From Ridesharing $41.5 billion in 2018 - Revenue From Ridesharing Products $9.2 Billion in 2018…

Lack of dual class stock is also interesting.

That's not really surprising, is it? Dual class stock is usually issued for tech companies where the founders were able to hold onto a lot of shares until the IPO, which I think isn't the case for Uber.

Re: Uber S-1

#84

Post by richardwhiuk »

throwaway743950 wrote: post #52

Would it be better to be hired 1 month before Uber's IPO or 1 month after and why?

One month before, because you get two extra pay checks.

More relevantly, because of vesting cliffs it likely makes roughly no difference, except you get to see a bunch of colleagues celebrating becoming more wealthy.

Re: Uber S-1

#85

Post by simonrobb »

tzakrajs wrote: post #16
Willson50 wrote: post #8

"We do the right thing. Period."

Good thing there isn’t more than one perspective on what is right and wrong. This could’ve been a meaningless platitude otherwise.

There is value in vocalizing a guiding principle, even if it doesn't prescribe the exact way every single situation should be approached.

Re: Uber S-1

#86

Post by [deleted] »

CydeWeys wrote: post #51
cududa wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ive heard from reliable sources 10% of Uber Eats revenue goes to McDonald’s (not promotionally, in revenue)

Wow, that many people are ordering delivery McDonald's? Maybe McDonald's should start delivery services in some markets itself then?

[deleted]

Re: Uber S-1

#87

Post by localhostdotdev »

partingshots wrote: post #18

So... Let me see if I have this straight: 1. Uber is unprofitable and the only way it can become profitable is to get SDC's 2. Uber is significantly (years) behind Waymo in the SDC space. 3. Waymo will launch SDC taxi services first meaning: - When it puts in an order for SDC components no one else is going to be buying in bulk and thus it can have effectively 100% of capacity of these specialized equipment makers -…

you forgot option B: raise prices, reduce costs

Re: Uber S-1

#88

Post by smallgovt »

admax88q wrote: post #65
smallgovt wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't Uber become profitable by raising prices and lowering costs? They have $40B in gross rideshare bookings and $3B in real losses for 2018. Let's assume 20% of their costs are fixed and 80% are variable. What might happen if they raise prices by 10%? Gross bookings drop by 20% / Revenue per booking increase by 10% => $35.2B in gross bookings Variable costs drop by 30% (due to lower driver acquisition costs since t…

If we're just making up numbers why not assume you'll only drop gross bookings by 0%, or increase bookings even! Anything can be made profitable if you just invent numbers.

They aren't pulled out of thin air. They're best estimates. If you disagree, what do you think their unit model would transform into if they acquired lyft for $20B in stock and raised prices by 10%? Why?

Re: Uber S-1

#89

Post by ctlby »

nostrademons wrote: post #47
rory096 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lyft now at $61/share, ouch, there just is no other way to put it. THey pulled a lot of financial engineering tricks to boost their IPO price and well the results speak for themselves:( I don't understand why this is seen as a negative. An IPO is a share issuance — the higher the price per share, the more money they receive in exchange for the same percentage of the company. Post-IPO "pops" represent money left on…

It's a good thing for Lyft-the-corporation but a bad thing for anyone who bought into the IPO. Any sort of financial engineering tricks that goose the accounting numbers without affecting the long-term health of the business are basically a transfer payment from people who buy in at the inflated price to entities who sell at the inflated price. It's rational for the company to try to pull them; it's also rational for…

> It's rational for the company to try to pull them

Aren't there issues with follow-on offerings? By taking the entire IPO pot for itself, the company will probably struggle to find investors if/when it needs to come back to the capital markets--which seems like an eventuality with Lyft.

Re: Uber S-1

#90

Post by Marazan »

panarky wrote: post #35
partingshots wrote: post #18

So... Let me see if I have this straight: 1. Uber is unprofitable and the only way it can become profitable is to get SDC's 2. Uber is significantly (years) behind Waymo in the SDC space. 3. Waymo will launch SDC taxi services first meaning: - When it puts in an order for SDC components no one else is going to be buying in bulk and thus it can have effectively 100% of capacity of these specialized equipment makers -…

> can't imagine how Uber is worth anything If the operation doesn't make an economic profit, and if there isn't sufficient moat to defend the operation until it can become profitable, then I agree with you it's not worth anything. But in fact, Uber does have a massive moat -- its network of drivers and riders in thousands of cities around the world. No competitor is even close. It takes tremendous capital expenditure…

Neither the drivers nor the riders are capital items.
Post reply on HN