Live data from Hacker News

Mary Meeker’s 2019 internet trends report [pdf]

bondcap.com

41–50 of 119 posts

Re: Mary Meeker’s 2019 internet trends report [pdf]

#41
Dear Mary,

Social Security is not an entitlement in anything but the strictest sense of the word. Every year you put it in your report and group it in like it's some sort of handout by the federal government, but it's not. And every year, you put up a few slides pushing your politically-motivated world view of cutting "expenses", but never bother to note what USA Inc. could do to increase revenues like raising taxes on the insanely wealthy back to 1950's levels: 91 percent top marginal tax rate would go a long way to balancing USA Inc's books.

Also, it's amazing how many slides you dedicated to the national debt during Obama's presidency, and yet now it barely gets a mention, and definitely no dire predictions of ruin and destruction for all. I wonder why?

Every year I point this stuff out in HN, because I want to make sure the bias is well and truly noted in case others missed it. It makes me question how much irrational partiality infects the rest of the report - quite a lot I suspect.

Re: Mary Meeker’s 2019 internet trends report [pdf]

#42
post #27
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> will spell the doom of Uber and Lyft Car sharing isn't going anywhere. It's too convenient. The prices will rise, the number of drivers and passengers will fall and the companies will shrink, but they'll still be around. I have trouble seeing suddenly seeing a day when there's no car share service because they all finally went belly up.

I don't think car sharing will go extinct either, but be careful with your analyses. Uber and Lyft are precariously balanced on a system of ( substantial ) low-income demand, high-income demand, and subsidy. If prices rise, low-income demand plummets, ending subsidies. High-income pricing could rise significantly higher than you might expect, at which point you no longer have "ride sharing" so much as you have privat…

I think your point downthread about how this could impact the truly "on-demand" nature of the services is apt. As you said, the value prop is you get a guaranteed car in about 15 minutes (and often it is much less), whereas the old systems required calling, being routed to a nearby car service and having someone dispatched or a on-the-road driver routed to you.

In heavily urban areas, the average user might not see much of a difference (with few exceptions for weather, getting a cab in Manhattan pre and post Uber was basically the same and I've frequently canceled an Uber when I was able to hail a cab faster), but if you expand that just a smudge, say Brooklyn, which doesn't have yellow cabs unless they happen to be on the way back from a drop-off -- (and don't get me started on the uselessness of the green cabs) and as such was one of Uber's first really strong markets (I signed up for Uber the month it launched in NYC, back when it was livery only -- and used it almost exclusively in Brooklyn). The subsidized price (even though it has only decreased for drivers) has allowed cars to circle neighborhoods in Brooklyn -- but if that goes away and prices increase, drivers aren't necessarily going to sit or drive around each of those neighborhoods and will instead migrate to the most dense parts of town.

This is even worse for cities with historically little or no cab ecosystems (Atlanta -- and Atlanta is at an even worse advantage because of the terrible stage of its public transit, which only exists in the city proper), where Uber/Lyft effectively have become the cab system. I certainly don't think that market will leave those cities, but it costs rise (which seems likely), that will impact demand and will also in turn, impact how long it takes someone to get a ride.

(That said, I do not expect us to return to a pre-Uber in Atlanta world where it would cost $100 to get a cab from the airport to Dunwoody)

I do think the combination of increased demand (or at least awareness/ease of access to call a car) and logistical improvements (to me, this has always been Uber's greatest strength) will prevent things from turning into NYC in the 90s in most larger cities. But it is an open question in smaller cities that didn't have that infrastructure to begin with or are much more spread out.

Re: Mary Meeker’s 2019 internet trends report [pdf]

#43
post #35
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems pretty reasonable to assume that equilibrium looks like taxis and private cars with app hailing. Personally, it wouldn't affect my usage much; I just use these services when I'm traveling because they're better experiences for the most part than taking a cab. But, anecdotally, a fair number of urbanites regularly use Uber/Lyft instead of public transit or just because they don't want to drive. Presumably, si…

I for one have already switched from Uber to Jump (which Uber now owns anyway) for casual use where I’m not in a hurry. A bicycle is more pleasant to use, I don’t have to wait for pickup, it’s way cheaper, and I get a little exercise. The electric motor helps me not get sweaty. During rush-ish hour it’s also faster than a car due to lane splitting and such. The math goes like this: $15 for a car that takes 15min + 5m…

I think it's important to point out though the number of cities where biking is impractical (and can even be unsafe). In many parts of Europe, this is probably a good model. In San Francisco, this could work. In Seattle, where now live, I've seen an uptick in rented bikes (though plenty of regular bikers too) -- but it really depends on what type of commute you're making. In New York, it depends on area -- but if you're really concerned about time/money you'll take the subway. But in Atlanta or Los Angeles, this isn't going to be a solution for most people that use Uber now.

Re: Mary Meeker’s 2019 internet trends report [pdf]

#45
slide 94:

nearly 4.2 million people streamed in december 2018 at least once on twitch

that seems incredibly high. I wonder how many of those are streaming games vs. talk/conversation vs. travel/outside social etc.

I also wonder what the cost of all of this is. How many of them will actually be unprofitable for twitch due to not having any viewers. The streaming infrastructure must be more expensive than say a yt vid that no one watches, no?

Re: Mary Meeker’s 2019 internet trends report [pdf]

#46
post #27
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> will spell the doom of Uber and Lyft Car sharing isn't going anywhere. It's too convenient. The prices will rise, the number of drivers and passengers will fall and the companies will shrink, but they'll still be around. I have trouble seeing suddenly seeing a day when there's no car share service because they all finally went belly up.

I don't think car sharing will go extinct either, but be careful with your analyses. Uber and Lyft are precariously balanced on a system of ( substantial ) low-income demand, high-income demand, and subsidy. If prices rise, low-income demand plummets, ending subsidies. High-income pricing could rise significantly higher than you might expect, at which point you no longer have "ride sharing" so much as you have privat…

To your point, I want to know what share of Uber/Lyft customers are converts from public transportation versus taxis (maybe these categories aren’t very distinct). There are so many times when I’ve missed the bus ($2.50) and opted for a $5 shared ride that will deliver me in 10 minutes (same as bus) instead of waiting 15-30 minutes on the next bus. It leads me to wonder how many people almost never took taxis before, but now accept a 2x markup to reclaim their time when public transportation doesn’t fit their schedule constraints.

Re: Mary Meeker’s 2019 internet trends report [pdf]

#47
post #13

From page 29, average customer acquisition cost has risen by ~33% in just the last two years ... they make the point on the next slide that having customer acquisition costs exceed a customer's lifetime value can't really succeed for long. I think this, specifically, is what will spell the doom of Uber and Lyft, and potentially many of the food delivery companies -- they rely on insane growth curves to generate new i…

my understanding is that driver acquisition (and retention) is much more costly for uber and lyft (at least on a unit basis, and probably overall).

in late majority markets like ride-hailing, (1) awareness is not really a problem on either side of the marketplace as most folks have at least heard of uber and lyft, and (2) inertia is mainly due to uncertainty and risk aversion (for both sides of the market).

so then, the primary friction on the user side is downloading the app and then entering a credit card.

on the driver side, it's considering whether to buy/replace a car, entering personal info and answering intrusive questions, getting a background check, getting your car inspected, and being interviewed and trained. more costly and risky than signing up to be a user.

Re: Mary Meeker’s 2019 internet trends report [pdf]

#48

Dear Mary, Social Security is not an entitlement in anything but the strictest sense of the word. Every year you put it in your report and group it in like it's some sort of handout by the federal government, but it's not. And every year, you put up a few slides pushing your politically-motivated world view of cutting "expenses", but never bother to note what USA Inc. could do to increase revenues like raising taxes…

Thank you for noting that.

Re: Mary Meeker’s 2019 internet trends report [pdf]

#49

Correction: Booking is founded by a Dutch guy (slide 260): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Booking.com

I think it's using owning entity's headquarter location (as opposed to founder ethnicity or pre-acquisition roots). Priceline is headquartered in CT.

Re: Mary Meeker’s 2019 internet trends report [pdf]

#50

Dear Mary, Social Security is not an entitlement in anything but the strictest sense of the word. Every year you put it in your report and group it in like it's some sort of handout by the federal government, but it's not. And every year, you put up a few slides pushing your politically-motivated world view of cutting "expenses", but never bother to note what USA Inc. could do to increase revenues like raising taxes…

Why do you believe Social Security isn't an entitlement?
Post reply on HN