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

Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 110 posts

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#101

Post by zoomzippity »

matt4077 wrote: post #71
malandrew wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. So much this. Diversity of workplaces is something we should celebrate, yet the media and activists are keen on converting every workplace into their ideal. Not everyone desires to work at the same company. Some people want to work at an Apple, some want to work at a s Google, some just want to work on a hippie commune/coop, and some want to work at a high pace, high states, only the toughest, most productive,…

As it turns out, "employment at will" isn't "the end of the day". And "people on the outside" won't "stay out of it". Because if they did, we'd still have slavery, 8-year-olds in coal mines, and women in the kitchen. So I'll continue to make my opinion known, as a consumer no longer using Uber, as a citizen supporting laws mandating sane employment law, as a software engineer discouraging everyone from taking a job a…

> rely exclusively on white bros in their 30s with identical experiences.

According to Uber's diversity report, the racial composition of its workforce approximately matches the racial composition of San Francisco, Santa Clara and Alemeda counties, and its gender composition is roughly in line with the industry average in the Bay Area and is really no different than the gender composition at companies like Google or Facebook.

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#102

Post by zoomzippity »

wideem wrote: post #96
zoomzippity wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zuckerberg didn't need a break and Facebook turned out fine. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2165566/Mark-Zuckerb... All the company needs is some pressure to shore up some long overdue culture debt. This is the fastest growing company in history after all. Not every aspect of the company was going to come out of the over perfectly baked when you grow that quickly. Uber isn't the first successful startup with…

Well, companies are not religious cults. And ceos are way overrated in the US. I feel like Travis is way to egocentric and that's bad for company http://www.managementtoday.co.uk/its-time-end-cult-ceo/leade...

It's kind of ironic that that article uses Elon Musk as his example, especially in light of this first hand account of an accomplish rocket scientist explaining how impressed he was with Elon Musk learning rocket science by himself.

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-elon-musk-learned-rocket-...

I generally agree with the sentiment that we should end the cult of the CEO, but that doesn't negate the fact that some CEOs might actually deserve the praise and respect they get.

Until you've actually worked directly for the Elon Musks, Mark Zuckerbergs, Travis Kalanicks and Steve Jobses of the world, you shouldn't dismiss that they might have actually earned cults they've created.

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#103

Post by adrianmonk »

product50 wrote: post #5
dboreham wrote: post #2

Something wrong about this: someone in power being held accoutable for their incompetence and bad behavior. Or did he just loose some rich people too much money?

What incompetence? This guy built $70B company from scratch in markets which had regulations and very active taxi unions lobbying against the very existence of the company. More importantly, Uber has helped improve the lives of hundreds of millions of commuters across the globe. What have you done lately which is anything close to what Travis built vs. just commenting on a tech forum at his incompetence? Also, it is…

They're now losing market share to Lyft. A lot of it coincides with stuff he has done to bring the company bad PR.

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#104

Post by zoomzippity »

jo909 wrote: post #79
fullshark wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the problem was overpaying several hundred thousand people?

Or undercharging several hundred thousand customers? (Not earning enough)

Demand would drop if they charged more. This would have the following potential results:

- all driver earn more per trip, but may not make more per hour since there would be fewer trips to accept

- drivers who see a drop in the number of trips will be earning less or will have to exit the market if they don't earn enough.

- only when some drivers choose to exit the market would the remaining drivers be able to earn more per trip and and accept the same number of rides per hour.

Any company following Uber's loss leading strategy at the end of the day is fomenting more liquidity in order to gauge how much more demand there is at a lower price point. That gives them a profitability target to work towards by becoming more efficient.

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#105

Post by spraak »

zoomzippity wrote: post #81
kunaalarya wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They prob cant fire him but they can say that hes a big punching bag right now and bringing extra negative attention and he needs a break.

Zuckerberg didn't need a break and Facebook turned out fine. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2165566/Mark-Zuckerb... All the company needs is some pressure to shore up some long overdue culture debt. This is the fastest growing company in history after all. Not every aspect of the company was going to come out of the over perfectly baked when you grow that quickly. Uber isn't the first successful startup with…

I think redemption is definitely important space to allow for, however it probably shouldn't mean keeping everything as it is. Or rather, Kalanick can still redeem themself not as the CEO of Uber

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#106

Post by uhnuhnuhn »

furioussloth wrote: post #80

Well CEO's mother passed away and father is still in hospital. I feel his absence is totally normal IMO. Most of Uber news on this board are total click baits. I agree with many people who feel the anti-Uber lazy reporting is out of control.

You misunderstood. This is not about a current absence of the CEO, this is about the board debating to potentially force the CEO to take leave of absence.

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#107

Post by dang »

thrwitaway11 wrote: post #95
dang wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've banned this account. Commenting like this will eventually get your main account banned as well.

Pardon was not inferring anything devious ... just pondering its a tragedy and that is an odd thing to occur present day amidst all the terrible things/bad behavior that has been in the press lately about Uber. It's like a story out of Shakespeare.

OK, sorry for misreading your intent. We've unbanned you.

It would be a good idea to include an elaboration like this one when you originally post on an inflammatory topic—otherwise it tends to produce flames whether you meant to or not.

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#108

Post by prostoalex »

kolbe wrote: post #56
frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uber is going to burn billions of dollars and what change have they affected with it? That taxi companies now have phone apps?

You mean that we can now relaibly summon them to our location? That we can share rides via similar routes? We can cut out the medallion scam, where capital owners can rent seek off of driver's labor? Optimize routes to more efficienly move people and save energy?

You're describing corrupt US markets with somewhat passive operators, but in the rest or the world the story is different. In Scandinavian countries each taxi company has an app, is fairly efficient, and it's just the matter of downloading a bunch of apps. In some Asian and Eastern European markets unlicensed cheaper gypsy taxis are an everyday thing, with a host of problems of their own, so arrival of yet another competitor is not really a game changer.

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#109

Post by product50 »

DavidFlint wrote: post #15
product50 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What incompetence? This guy built $70B company from scratch in markets which had regulations and very active taxi unions lobbying against the very existence of the company. More importantly, Uber has helped improve the lives of hundreds of millions of commuters across the globe. What have you done lately which is anything close to what Travis built vs. just commenting on a tech forum at his incompetence? Also, it is…

While yes, he achieved a lot, I cannot agree on praising him. This reminds me of all the marketing gurus from 5 years ago that were selling rich quick schemes. They sold a product, they got rich, but in the end they were scamming regular people. While Travis is not scamming anyone, the methods are similar. Get rich by exploiting barely legal methods, unethical ways and ride to the fame using someone else money.

I'd argue to build a company like Uber, he needed to stay on the edge of law given the archaic regulations and active lobbying by incumbents. Eventually, the improvement in the quality of life of 100s of millions of users who use Uber regularly vindicates his efforts.

Re: Uber Board to Discuss CEO Absence, Policy Changes: Source

#110

Post by thanksgiving »

SimbaOnSteroids wrote: post #100
rtx wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you share some numbers, what did your friend make.

I don't remember specifics but it was less than federal minimum wage, partially because the area was over saturated with drivers and partly because the biggest cab route in the city is off limits to Uber.

A driver friend showed me his phone. His best was about $1800 a week. He said he has met people who have had over $2.5k weeks. The hours are horrible though.

I'd say the goal is not to maximize driver earning but rather to minimize rider pain. If drivers make more in the process that's great. If not, it is not our concern.

Post reply on HN