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

Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 595 posts

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#171

Post by stephencoyner »

roosterdawn wrote: post #123
netcan wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a great time for Amazon or Google to buy Lyft ...What would they do with it? The business model (also uber) as-is makes a loss. Uber/Lyft's initial proposition was that once ride sharing incumbents were established, they'd have a software-ish monopoly and margins. This did not work out. Now the proposition is "When driverless cars get invented..." If google had a car that can drive itself, they can figure out an app.…

Yes, it probably would be a valuable to Amazon. So valuable, in fact, that it already[1] exists. [1] https://flex.amazon.com/

Yes, this exists today, but what Amazon would be buying is faster time to expansion. If they need drivers now (which is an assumption, I don't know this to be a fact) Lyft gives them an established network incredibly fast.

So obviously the price would have to be right and of course Amazon wouldn't be paying a large premium.

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#172

Post by wonderwonder »

eropple wrote: post #167
empath75 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the civil war.

The federal government was attacked to touch off the Civil War. Like, by men with guns. That's a rather critical distinction.

Sure, but look at the recent protests. Armed men protesting state level governments openly egged on by the whitehouse and organized by rich political dark money.

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#173

Post by corporateslave5 »

herdodoodo wrote: post #146
corporateslave5 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it’s not. The fed printed so much money and dropped rates so low, there’s a massive excess of capital looking for business opportunities. Monetary policy is what is driving the economy, and it’s making this bubble bigger than ever. You can’t ignore economics and cheap money. We will have ten more we work like companies.

>The fed printed so much money and dropped rates so low, there’s a massive excess of capital looking for business opportunities Learn about monetary policy is and how the Federal Reserve controls the money supply before you make opinions on the matter.

Educate me then, why am I wrong?

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#174

Post by panzagl »

varjag wrote: post #143
animalgonzales wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

love that this is the top comment on HN and not the fact that 1k people just lost their ability to pay their rent/mortgages, take care of their families, deal with medical costs.

Business value (or lack thereof) of Lyft now is an unknown, worthy of discussion. The things you mentioned are basic facts everyone is acutely aware about, hard to see what does it help restating them.

That way they'd know "We're in this Together" (cue dramatic piano)

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#175

Post by hnhg »

adaisadais wrote: post #170

In the long term I think this will be a solid move for both Uber & Lyft. The apparent economics of both businesses are relatively dire but the long term value prop is still as important as ever: they are generating the consumer data that will ultimately be used for self driving vehicles. This will allow both companies to trim the fat and (hopefully) regain the move fast mentality that is necessary for a startup. This…

Do they fully instrument their drivers vehicles? I'd imagine a lot of sensor data is needed for self-driving cars.

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#176

Post by cpursley »

Loughla wrote: post #157
wonderwonder wrote: post #121

Layoffs are mounting, alternative work is limited, and the unemployment systems in many states are either broken or running out of funding. Add the federal governments indicated desire to let blue states go bankrupt and we are looking at a good combination to enter a depression. Its a pretty sobering time.

Real questions. I'm not a history buff. Has there ever been a time in US history that the federal government has been so openly antagonistic and overtly willing to attack opposite-party state governments? If so, what were the outcomes? If not, is there anything even close? Current question - what is the endgame for those who what blue states to go bankrupt? What do they get if that happens, outside of talking points?…

> overtly willing to attack opposite-party state governments

It might be straight-up politics. But there is a real situation where state governments have been financially mismanaged. Should the "working class" person in Alabama without any retirement prospects be forced to bail out (via the Federal Gov't) the state of California's very generous pensions that were not fiscally sustainable in the first place?

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#177

Post by moneywoes »

silentsea90 wrote: post #91
ar_lan wrote: post #42

I recall Lyft being the highest paying company with respect to rank, according to levels.fyi. I guess I'm glad I don't work there right now.

Lyft SWE here. Can confirm. My Lyft offer was significantly greater than Google, Uber etc. That said, with 20/20 hindsight, Google would have been a safer choice.

Are you aware how many engineers have been affected by the layoffs?

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#178

Post by chrisseaton »

wonderwonder wrote: post #168
Loughla wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real questions. I'm not a history buff. Has there ever been a time in US history that the federal government has been so openly antagonistic and overtly willing to attack opposite-party state governments? If so, what were the outcomes? If not, is there anything even close? Current question - what is the endgame for those who what blue states to go bankrupt? What do they get if that happens, outside of talking points?…

End game for people like McConnell is that it puts downwards pressure on unions. A bankruptcy if a law is passed actually allowing states to go bankrupt would be a process overseen by federal courts, many of which are chaired by Trump appointed judges now. The judge gets to decide which debts are paid, meaning that pensions are very likely going to be chopped, hurting union members. There are other reasons. Bottom li…

> The judge gets to decide which debts are paid, meaning that pensions are very likely going to be chopped, hurting union members.

I don't understand this. What is the connection between pensions and union members?

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#179

Post by nightsd01 »

cpursley wrote: post #176
Loughla wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real questions. I'm not a history buff. Has there ever been a time in US history that the federal government has been so openly antagonistic and overtly willing to attack opposite-party state governments? If so, what were the outcomes? If not, is there anything even close? Current question - what is the endgame for those who what blue states to go bankrupt? What do they get if that happens, outside of talking points?…

> overtly willing to attack opposite-party state governments It might be straight-up politics. But there is a real situation where state governments have been financially mismanaged. Should the "working class" person in Alabama without any retirement prospects be forced to bail out (via the Federal Gov't) the state of California's very generous pensions that were not fiscally sustainable in the first place?

The state of California is actually in a pretty decent financial position. In fact, the blue states are net contributors to the federal budget while red states are net negative (they take more resources than they provide back in federal taxes)

If there weren’t any blue states around to sign the red state welfare checks, they’d be in a pretty poor position.

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#180

Post by thehazard »

cpursley wrote: post #176
Loughla wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real questions. I'm not a history buff. Has there ever been a time in US history that the federal government has been so openly antagonistic and overtly willing to attack opposite-party state governments? If so, what were the outcomes? If not, is there anything even close? Current question - what is the endgame for those who what blue states to go bankrupt? What do they get if that happens, outside of talking points?…

> overtly willing to attack opposite-party state governments It might be straight-up politics. But there is a real situation where state governments have been financially mismanaged. Should the "working class" person in Alabama without any retirement prospects be forced to bail out (via the Federal Gov't) the state of California's very generous pensions that were not fiscally sustainable in the first place?

You know that California bails out the majority of the rust belt indirectly via State taxes, right? Curious how you consider that in the equation.
Post reply on HN