Lyft losing as much as $50M a month, president confirms • Hacker News Board

Re: Lyft losing as much as $50M a month, president confirms

#111

Post by dredmorbius » Wed, Jul 13, 2016, 11:17 PM UTC

graeham wrote: post #59

liquidise wrote: post #7

What shocks me about both Lyft and Uber's enormous burn rates are that they suggest the companies are heavily subsidizing their drivers. This subsidy is in part to spur penetration in new markets (as all marketplace apps must do), but also suggests that they have reason to believe customers will simply not pay a rate that makes the business profitable. Assuming the latter is the case, i'm not sure if they have reason…

Reminds me a bit of Groupon etc - its easy to get revenue when you're selling dimes for dollars. Fixed costs are presumably low, so it can't be scale that would lead to profitability. Utilisation rates? I've not heard a lot on if rates could come down to compensate for more passenger-miles. But of course a fair bit of the cost must be tied to passenger-miles. Intentional avoidance of profit by acquiring or R&D? I sup…

Selling dollars for dimes, no?

Re: Lyft losing as much as $50M a month, president confirms

#112

Post by puranjay » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 6:58 AM UTC

Noseshine wrote: post #70

puranjay wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel that the hype for self-driving cars is the same as it was for VR in the 90s We had to wait another 15-20 years for those feverished VR dreams to become a reality I reckon it'll be the same for self-driving. We are 20-25 years away, not 5-10

In addition, only a few days (one or two weeks) ago we had a much commented story linked here on HN that VR is way too hyped. Supprted by quotes from actual executives and/or investors in that business if I recall correctly, so not just the usual negativism that can always be found for any topic if you choose your source well.

I don't think VR will ever be mainstream unless hardware costs come down drastically and they can figure out a way to make VR headsets look less dorky

Re: Lyft losing as much as $50M a month, president confirms

#113

Post by mikeash » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 7:21 PM UTC

msandford wrote: post #109

mikeash wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some airplane autopilots are very advanced. Others are extremely simple. Tesla's system is analogous to something near the simpler end. I keep talking about the simple end of what "autopilot" covers and you keep countering me by pointing out the advanced ones. I'm not denying the advanced ones exist, I'm just pointing out that the simple ones exist too, so using the word "autopilot" for simple systems is entirely app…

I can call a bicycle an gyroscopically-stabilized carbon-neutral human transportation device but that doesn't somehow make it fancier. It just sounds fancier. I have argued that when people hear the word "autopilot" they think that it's very advanced. You argue that technically, something that just keeps the wings level is also an autopilot. I agree! I just disagree that the average person would know enough about the…

That CNBC article seems to be supporting my position, not yours. It's quite clear that autopilot is an aid, not an autonomous pilot substitute, and that the pilot still handles certain parts of the flight and must be ready to take over if something happens. Unless your point is that everyone thinks autopilot means more, and this article is correcting that notion?

I fully agree that if just about everyone thinks a word means something, then it means something. I'm not trying to argue based on some technicality. What I am arguing is:

1. I'm not at all sure that this understanding of "autopilot" is as ubiquitous as you say it is.

2. Even if that understanding is nearly ubiquitous, I can hardly fault someone for using "autopilot" to mean something simpler if they are doing so because they are familiar with actual autopilot systems and are naming by analogy to the systems, not to popular understanding of the term.

3. If people really do all think that "autopilot" means a fully autonomous system, the fact that no such thing is found on real airplanes means that they're a bunch of idiots, and I'd really like to know where that idea came from.

Re: Lyft losing as much as $50M a month, president confirms

#114

Post by tptacek » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 9:40 PM UTC

brianwawok wrote: post #74

ForHackernews wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> customers will see value in the better product that keeps them in. How is Uber a "better product" than a taxi? As far as I can tell, it's competing on price, and that's it. If cabs were the same price as Uber, I would take a taxi every time.

Apaprently you have never taken a taxi in Chicago? Rusty car. Driver doesnt speak english. Smoking out the window and talking on cell phone in another language. Floors it and slams on the brakes. Seatbelts broken. Credit card machine broken. Hum why would I take a lyft.

Most Uber drivers I've had have used their phone... and gasp often in another language.