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

491–500 of 559 posts

Re: Uber S-1

#491

Post by lordnacho »

ManishR wrote: post #355

People here seem to think that Uber/Lyft do not have any competitive moat. I disagree. What we seem to forget is that just because a VC can burn boatloads of money to capture ridesharing market from Uber/Lyft doesn't mean that they would. From a game theoretic POV, Uber and Lyft have signaled that they're ready to fight for survival in markets they are established in. Unless as a startup founder you can demonstrate t…

They don't have to be outcompeted by another similar entity, though. Their pie could get eaten by lots of small local operators, or by someone like Google with a fleet of self-driving cars.

Re: Uber S-1

#492

Post by semi-extrinsic »

virgilp wrote: post #481
semi-extrinsic wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. The other day I was driving and thinking about this, and I started noticing "how many times during this drive have I looked another human (driver or pedestrian) in the eyes in order to determine their intentions?" It was a significant number even in a 15 minute drive. I was still thinking about it during my bike ride later in the day, and I noticed that more than a dozen times I exchanged looks and nods with…

I got bear-ish on self-driving cars when I realized that, in order to be able to drive in Bucharest, you _have to_ break the (letter of the) law fairly often[1]. Knowing when to do so requires "common sense" which is a notoriously difficult nut to crack - computer vision may be advanced enough, but it's simply not enough. I still think it will evolve in time and reach mass-market, it's just that it will take lots of…

This is another good point. There's a hardware store near to where I live where it's literally illegal (if you observe the signs) to enter or exit the parking lot of said store. Everyone just understands that someone forgot to remove a road sign saying "buses only, cars forbidden" for the lane where you enter this parking lot. But how would a computer understand this?

Re: Uber S-1

#493

Post by djakjxnanjak »

lsc wrote: post #466
djakjxnanjak wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m skeptical about a non-profit service competing with Uber and Lyft. It would take a lot of money-losing ride subsidies to get the substantial market share required to get the necessary network effects.

I'm... not sure you'd need a lot of network effects? I mean, you need a critical mass of drivers and riders, but they can be all in a small area and you can still provide a service. I mean, for the occasional user, sure, brand recognition matters; If I'm going from a strange airport to a hotel, I'm probably going to use the brand i know. But usually? I switch from uber to lyft on my daily commute based on saving a fe…

Sounds like Uber and Lyft are both subsidizing your rides - but for a new service to get off the ground would require even more subsidies. There’s a cost to idling and waiting for someone to come along and pay you for a ride. The higher the density of riders and drivers, the lower this cost and the less subsidy required for a given price level.

Re: Uber S-1

#494

Post by datdata »

Wow those are some heavy risk disclosures:

We have incurred significant losses since inception, including in the United States and other major markets. We expect our operating expenses to increase significantly in the foreseeable future, and we may not achieve profitability.

Our business would be adversely affected if Drivers were classified as employees instead of independent contractors.

If we are unable to attract or maintain a critical mass of Drivers, consumers, restaurants, shippers, and carriers, whether as a result of competition or other factors, our platform will become less appealing to platform users.

We may fail to develop and successfully commercialize autonomous vehicle technologies and expect that our competitors will develop such technologies before us, and such technologies may fail to perform as expected, or may be inferior to those developed by our competitors.

Re: Uber S-1

#495

Post by foobar1962 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #416
freewilly1040 wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that a counterexample when they started when Uber and Lyft couldn't operate? Are there examples of local services that sprouted up and had to compete with Uber and Lyft and got off the ground?

You are implying an argument I did not make. I was replying to the statement "The cost of entry into this space is much greater than I think most people realize. It's not "building an app". It's building a balanced, efficient marketplace." My point is that building a balanced, efficient marketplace is actually not that difficult. The fact that Uber and Lyft can kill the competition now by burning through multiple bil…

Most of the "cost of entry" - building the marketplace, approval from government etc - has already been paid by the earlier players.

Re: Uber S-1

#496

Post by sparkling »

dockd wrote: post #225
yalogin wrote: post #103

Feels more like Uber and Lyft reached a point where they cannot raise private capital anymore and so jumped onto the public markets to fool random investors. If they cannot be profitable now, what makes them think they will be profitable with SDCs? I challenge the fundamental premise that SDCs will make them profitable. There is no stickiness to their business model. Moving on to another ride sharing service is frict…

Aren't most index funds, almost by definition, required to buy their shares? If Vanguard owns a piece of every listed company, they're going to buy Uber at pretty much any price, right?

Index funds are required to buy shares if the index it replicates (e.g. S&P500) includes that stock.

Re: Uber S-1

#497

Post by wastedhours »

rorykoehler wrote: post #409
wskinner wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a thought experiment: how hard is it for a billion dollar company to roll out a simple crud app? Easy, right? Now name a single major bank with an app that is better than "barely usable". Which is easier? A crud app or a ride hailing app?

All my banks have good apps on par with the fintech startup apps I use (and actually I trust them more because they aren't moving fast and breaking things).

Same for me too - my incumbent bank's app is mostly comparable with the latest hot fintech's. The latter has nothing but a slightly more polished visual look, and that's not enough for me to trust them with my paycheck.

Re: Uber S-1

#498

Post by SOLAR_FIELDS »

xiphias2 wrote: post #484
SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had similar experience living in Sweden, where the market is present but ride sharing has not quite penetrated yet. For the most part (90% of the time in my experience) the ride share driver wouldn’t try to pull anything like you describe. About 10% of the time I would have an experience very similar to what you describe. Every time I was able to continue the normal transaction, however, by being firm with the driv…

It's very interesting, I have been feeling this in Dominican Republic, where people are screwing tourists whenever they can, but Sweden is one of the most advanced countries in the world, where I imagine that this isn't that usual behaviour from most people.

Where I stayed there were a lot of poorer people by Sweden standards. This was in Skåne, which is an area well known in Sweden for being a location where a lot of poorer immigrants reside (mostly in Malmö, where I lived). So it actually might be a better parallel to the DR than you would first imagine.

I haven’t been to the DR personally, but am well acquainted with Central America in general, having been to several countries. So I would say that this kind of behavior is not nearly as noxious or obnoxious as you might observe in Central America, but is similar enough to draw a decent parallel.

Re: Uber S-1

#499

Post by turingbook »

cavisne wrote: post #444
sfifs wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no VC will fund their rapid growth (small offerings will still find a niche, assuming they don't get gobbled up And yet Grab and Didi drove Uber out of South East Asia and China, Ola is giving Uber a run for its money in India and now GoJek in turn is challenging Grab. In my recent trip to Tokyo we were mostly advised to take regular cabs Vs Uber in contrast to a year ago. That's literally half the world where they…

They did not get "out competed" in china, a country where competition has nothing to do with success. Likewise in Russia. Grab is the only company to out compete Uber so far.

On the contrary, China is the most competitive country in Internet industry and Uber was beaten badly by Didi.

Actually, the success of Didi,Grab,Ola etc. vs. Uber proves that in the complex e-business, as long as there is enough market space in the local area, and you can organize a good team, you can win in the competition with foreign companies. Just like Alibaba and JD beat Amazon, Meituan beat Goupon in China.

Re: Uber S-1

#500

Post by freyir »

ManishR wrote: post #355

People here seem to think that Uber/Lyft do not have any competitive moat. I disagree. What we seem to forget is that just because a VC can burn boatloads of money to capture ridesharing market from Uber/Lyft doesn't mean that they would. From a game theoretic POV, Uber and Lyft have signaled that they're ready to fight for survival in markets they are established in. Unless as a startup founder you can demonstrate t…

It’s not that Uber can’t be self-sustaining. The problem is that’s not enough to justify their insane valuation.

They titillated investors with tales about autonomous vehicles leading to skyrocketing profits. But now the hype over autonomous vehicles has faded, and it seems unlikely that fully autonomous cars will be mainstream any time soon.

$100B+ for unprofitable ride shares and lukewarm burrito delivery? If you say so.

Post reply on HN