Uber Sinks to New Record Low as IPO Share Lockup Expires • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber Sinks to New Record Low as IPO Share Lockup Expires

#181

Post by Domenic_S » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 6:12 PM UTC

dragontamer wrote: post #170

cik wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there is. You can short, it's pretty profitable.

You can only short if you can find someone willing to lend you shares. Shorts can "run out of shares to borrow" in practice. Similarly, you can buy put-options (or sell call options) on the shares, but only if you can find a counterparty to accept the "other side" (that is, a short-put or a long-call) of your bet. Run out of counterparties, and it becomes impossible to trade. Reality becomes evident at times like thi…

I'm not sure what value your comment is adding - look at uber's option chain, there's plenty of volume everywhere: https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/uber/option-ch...

Re: Uber Sinks to New Record Low as IPO Share Lockup Expires

#182

Post by Marsymars » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 6:21 PM UTC

RantyDave wrote: post #168

dreamcompiler wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't need Travis. They need an adult in charge who will shed about 80% of their payroll. Managing a cloud-based mobile logistics service for taxis shouldn't require 22,000 people.

I think they have kinda giant customer service requirements. They must get a lot of complaints in a day.

For many purposes they seem to have automated/script-based customer service that requires little manpower.

I reported a bug in their app in a review I left on the Play Store. Uber responded saying to report it on their website instead. I did so, they told me it wasn't valid because I didn't include screenshots. (Even though there was a clear description of repro and expected/observed behaviour). After a few days I got around to sending them screenshots, and received an auto-reply that the issue had been closed and my reply rejected.

Re: Uber Sinks to New Record Low as IPO Share Lockup Expires

#183

Post by buboard » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 6:23 PM UTC

lm28469 wrote: post #145

buboard wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like?

Any company supporting what you truly believe is good for this world instead of dumping $$$ with the sole purpose of making $$$ no matter the external costs. Sustainability, energy, education, medicine, the small business at the corner of your street &c. the world isn't running out of good companies.

i actually agree to that but companies are not available in the public market. Uber does provide some value for people but it's mostly a gambling game pumped by a temporary wave in economies. i think it s time for some serious work in biotech.

Re: Uber Sinks to New Record Low as IPO Share Lockup Expires

#184

Post by marcosdumay » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 6:24 PM UTC

papito wrote: post #143

bloomer wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird that this is being downvoted because Uber has shown no interest in acquiring and managing assets (self-driving cars or even their own cars) which is a completely different business than being a marketer for independent taxis. If self-driving cars become a business it seems like rental car companies would be ideally positioned to take advantage of them.

Once a VC-funded tech company starts maintaining inventory , actually assets, then things get real pretty quick. The only reason these companies become unicorns is because they don't have the overhead of owning stuff. Then you are just any other company.

It's very reasonable for a small company to avoid owning assets and focus on markets where the flexibility of not owning them is an advantage. They don't have money anyway, nor enough people to manage those assets.

It is completely crazy to expect large companies that are burning money to grow not to go after the largest markets just because it needs investment... Yet, that's what you described, and AFAIK you are completely correct.

Re: Uber Sinks to New Record Low as IPO Share Lockup Expires

#185

Post by ghaff » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 6:26 PM UTC

Konnstann wrote: post #144

tzs wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We knew that their future was purely dependent on a self-driving car fleet where they could ditch drivers (and their pay) completely. I've never really understood this. Their drivers do more than just drive, don't they? They also supply the cars, and deal with maintenance of those cars. If Uber switches to a self-driving fleet and ditches human drivers, who will own the cars? If Uber owns or leases the cars, Uber w…

The maintenance cost of 1000 cars owned by one company are most likely going to be less than those of 1000 cars owned by 1000 owners, just through negotiation and bulk maintenance pricing. Uber is banking on people not switching to whatever other self-driving service comes out, due to being a household name. I don't think very many people outside of SV know what Waymo even is, everyone has taken an Uber though.

>everyone has taken an Uber though

I think you'd be surprised at Uber's profile outside of some relative bubbles. Pew Research last year said the number of Americans who have never taken an Uber has gone down but it's still something like 36%.

I live 40 miles outside of a major city and near a couple of smaller cities and Uber barely works for me during daytime hours. I couldn't begin to use it for an early morning airport run.

Re: Uber Sinks to New Record Low as IPO Share Lockup Expires

#186

Post by marcosdumay » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 6:27 PM UTC

hodder wrote: post #35

ProAm wrote: post #15

Is anyone really surprised? Years before the IPO we knew they were not profitable in the least. We knew VC cash was subsidizing rides. We knew that their future was purely dependent on a self-driving car fleet where they could ditch drivers (and their pay) completely. This on top of a horrible culture with pretty lousy ethics and morality. This is how this was supposed to play out and everyone here (on HN) knew that.…

Sure, but the same could be said of Tesla. Horrible employer, constant exec churn, unbelievable cash burn, what appears to be structural losses.... But Tesla still has a 56B mcap today. Uber is 46B. These VC/equity issue cash furnaces can go on longer than most can fathom if a subset of investors believe in the long term vision.

Don't Tesla earn some profit on each sale, while Uber loses money?

Both are losing money overall, but this detail makes a lot of difference.

Re: Uber Sinks to New Record Low as IPO Share Lockup Expires

#187

Post by rongenre » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 6:34 PM UTC

whatok wrote: post #140

scurvy wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While yours is an economics textbook answer, any trader will tell you, "it doesn't matter until it matters."

Yes. A lot of discussion here seems to be very academic vs how things play out.

Trader proverb: "Markets can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent"

Re: Uber Sinks to New Record Low as IPO Share Lockup Expires

#188

Post by bhupy » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 6:39 PM UTC

deminature wrote: post #109

semiotagonal wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised it isn't much lower. Maybe people holding the stock are too "pot-committed" to sell at this point?

Price targets from almost every analyst after Q3 earnings is $>40. If you believe that, you'd be making a mistake selling.

Do you have a link to these analyses?

Re: Uber Sinks to New Record Low as IPO Share Lockup Expires

#189

Post by goobynight » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 6:42 PM UTC

rb808 wrote: post #28

What surprises me is that so many tech companies issue huge amounts of RSUs and their stock price hasn't tanked. Do people actually keep their RSUs in their employer? I sell asap, I'm not going to be Enron'd. One day this whole house of cards will collapse. Would be great if anyone had some figures on how many employees sell vs keep their RSUs.

Which specific companies surprise you? Employees selling their RSUs is a drop in the bucket vs the market cap.

Re: Uber Sinks to New Record Low as IPO Share Lockup Expires

#190

Post by philjohn » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 7:06 PM UTC

x0x0 wrote: post #125

dehrmann wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reads like the usual Uber criticism and doesn't touch on the lockup. The market knew the lockup was ending, so it should have been priced in. Dropping when the lockup ends should mean that markets underestimated how many insiders wanted to cash out, and employee sentiment is worse than market sentiment.

I dunno, but I wouldn't read too much about employee sentiment into this. Say you have $150k in savings and $x million in Uber stock. Any competent financial advisor is going to get you to diversify out of Uber. You'll miss upside, but prevent that $x million from potentially going to zero based on the actions of just one company. Also... goodbye sf housing market :(

This. I sell any stocks as soon as I can after vesting (trading window permitting) and then diversify into other holdings. I still have RSU's that have not vested that I get to enjoy any upside on.