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

Uber, DoorDash and similar firms can’t defy the laws of capitalism after all

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 158 posts

Re: Uber, DoorDash and similar firms can’t defy the laws of capitalism after all

#61

Post by lhorie »

bostonsre wrote: post #49
roystonvassey wrote: post #38

If there was any time to be skeptical of Uber's longevity, it is now (at least for me). My experience is anecdotal but I visit my home country every year for a few months and I can clearly notice the declining quality of Uber's services: 1. Vehicles, on average, take at least 10-15 mins longer to get 2. Even if you find a vehicle, 60% of these rides are canceled (either by the driver because they call me and find out…

Do they still lose money on every ride they give? I've been skeptical for a while now, it's a ponzi scheme.

No, according to the latest report, rides have been profitable[0] (@ +544M in the last quarter). Deliveries are still in the red, but only barely (@ -12M, up from -183M from previous quarter). "Losses" largely come from G&A/R&D.

[0] https://techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Screen-Sho...

Re: Uber, DoorDash and similar firms can’t defy the laws of capitalism after all

#62

Post by klaaz0r »

carabiner wrote: post #40

I just know that when Uber was charging $60 for a ride to the airport (a couple years ago it was half that), my sister found a way to take transit for $3. This was in Seattle.

Exactly same here, I just started using taxi's for longer trips they don't cost more and I have a price upfront. Most people I know use uber in the city for short trips (but I am from Europe)

Re: Uber, DoorDash and similar firms can’t defy the laws of capitalism after all

#63

Post by selectodude »

mstipetic wrote: post #18
JulianMorrison wrote: post #13

If you are dumping to own the market as a monopoly, and so is your competitor, and both of you are buoyed up by seemingly limitless investor finance, then all that happens is that investors' money moves into the customers' pockets.

And previous well functioning economies get destroyed in the process

I would hesitate to consider the flag hail taxi market, at least in my (semi extensive) experience, to be at all we’ll functioning.

I couldn’t get a taxi in Chicago with a full beard. Period.

Re: Uber, DoorDash and similar firms can’t defy the laws of capitalism after all

#64

Post by tw04 »

batshit_beaver wrote: post #28
mstipetic wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And previous well functioning economies get destroyed in the process

If pervious economies were so well functioning, why couldn't I easily order pretty much any food from any restaurant within a 50 mile radius with a click of a button before Uber and DoorDash came along?

Because most people weren’t willing to pay more for the delivery than their meal, so nobody bothered.

Re: Uber, DoorDash and similar firms can’t defy the laws of capitalism after all

#65

Post by lordentropy »

mstipetic wrote: post #18
JulianMorrison wrote: post #13

If you are dumping to own the market as a monopoly, and so is your competitor, and both of you are buoyed up by seemingly limitless investor finance, then all that happens is that investors' money moves into the customers' pockets.

And previous well functioning economies get destroyed in the process

I don't know what fantasy well-functioning economy you are taking about. You had to manually call a taxi company, and wait for an hour for a taxi that might now even show up.

Re: Uber, DoorDash and similar firms can’t defy the laws of capitalism after all

#66

Post by selectodude »

ska wrote: post #47
bdcravens wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla is profitable. The profit is propped up a bit by subsidies, but it seems strange to include the company in a discussion about service providers that are battling in a war of attrition.

> The profit is propped up a bit by subsidies, b Does this mean that Tesla would have a smaller profit margin without subsidies, or that Tesla would not be profitable in real terms without the subsidies?

Both. People would purchase fewer teslas without the tax credit and Tesla would have less income without the ability to trade their tax credits to “dirtier” manufacturers.

Re: Uber, DoorDash and similar firms can’t defy the laws of capitalism after all

#67

Post by bogota »

moolcool wrote: post #8

This may be a hot take, but I think the gig economy is one thing which could be a pretty solid use of the blockchain. Uber/DoorDash/Lyft are all pretty simple CRUD apps at their core, and the companies themselves do very little actual work. Unfortunately, due to the Silicon Valley cult of growth, they are still either unprofitable or barely profitable while also taking a pretty massive cut away from actual workers on…

“Are all pretty simple crud application at their core”. No. Really no. Your understanding of the complexity of these applications and what they do invalidate everything else you try to pitch.

Re: Uber, DoorDash and similar firms can’t defy the laws of capitalism after all

#68

Post by cryptoz »

roystonvassey wrote: post #38

If there was any time to be skeptical of Uber's longevity, it is now (at least for me). My experience is anecdotal but I visit my home country every year for a few months and I can clearly notice the declining quality of Uber's services: 1. Vehicles, on average, take at least 10-15 mins longer to get 2. Even if you find a vehicle, 60% of these rides are canceled (either by the driver because they call me and find out…

It's like this in Tacoma, WA right now. An Uber or Lyft may never arrive. 5-10 cancelled drivers before the car arrives is normal. A notice saying "No cars available" is shown 70-80% of the time for XL size cars. Often it takes 1h or so to get a ride. Sometimes it will come in 4 minutes, sometimes it will say 4 minutes but then 5+ drivers cancel and it takes an hour of real time, while the app just says 4 minutes.

I have come to depend on Lyft and Uber and they are failing me and have been for a long time now. So long that I now plan to get a driver's license and a car. I don't know how else to make it in this world. If you're at a business and it's closing soon, and raining outside, you are likely to be outside in the cold and rain for 30 minutes waiting for a car.

It's ridiculous. I'm giving up and have already booked my written drivers test for WA.

Re: Uber, DoorDash and similar firms can’t defy the laws of capitalism after all

#69

Post by cmckn »

jjulius wrote: post #48
moolcool wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would serve as a neutral platform on which clients could be built though. Like instead of a restaurant listing on the existing apps, they'd list their menus on the blockchain and third party clients could exist and race-for-the-bottom in terms of fees. It's like the difference between Twitter and Email

> Like instead of a restaurant listing on the existing apps, they'd list their menus on the blockchain... ... or just a database?

Well you wouldn’t want any ~~~centralized~~~ entity having control of the appetizers, would you???

Much better to store every menu of every restaurant on thousands of computers and use menu updates to decimate coral reefs.

Re: Uber, DoorDash and similar firms can’t defy the laws of capitalism after all

#70

Post by Ekaros »

xoa wrote: post #19

A core aspect seems to come at the end as a tossed in aside but gets disappointingly little consideration: > Real business flywheels do exist. Software makers have managed to lock users in and thus generate gross margins typically above 70%. No, it's not just "lock in" it's the magic of minimal to zero marginal cost, near zero "stocking" cost, instantaneous reaction to demand, etc. Software and digital services firms…

Real software or even content have minimal marginal costs...

But these gig-economies clearly aren't software or content. And they have very real minimum price. And not even robotaxis will fix that. Just because you make software doesn't mean you are such tech company, see WeWork...

Post reply on HN