Uber's Loss Exceeds $800M in Q3 on $1.7B in Net Revenue • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber's Loss Exceeds $800M in Q3 on $1.7B in Net Revenue

#151

Post by hizanberg » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 2:32 AM UTC

jpalomaki wrote: post #127

nharada wrote: post #4

Presumably this is intentional -- Uber could raise prices and make more money, but right now they're choosing to keep prices very low in order to undercut Lyft and the cab companies with the assumption that having a monopoly will return more profits in the future. At least anecdotally, here in SF Lyft is almost always more expensive than Uber.

Would the monopoly plan really work? Is there something that would prevent competition from reappearing when prices are raised? At least from customer perspective it would be pretty easy to use couple of apps and shop between different providers. For drivers this might be of course more difficult, since Uber can use contracts and other mechanisms to prevent them from working with other providers.

Yes the network effects of everyone being used to using Uber to get anywhere, the verb "Uber it" and the established brand that comes along with it. Any company in future won't have the drivers, car fleet or coverage to compete, which will become increasingly difficult after Uber becomes established and gets embedded in people's minds.

Re: Uber's Loss Exceeds $800M in Q3 on $1.7B in Net Revenue

#152

Post by alistproducer2 » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 2:33 AM UTC

rubicon33 wrote: post #33

antiviral wrote: post #6

Uber is making the rest of us in SV look terrible. 1. Collect a huge pile of money at sky-high valuations from those who really should know better. 2. Ignore any sensible unit economics and undercut local taxi/transport services until those small businesses go bankrupt since they don't have Uber's money pile. 3. Evade local regulations that everyone else follows in the name of 'innovation' even though the reality is…

Huh? What's the end game? The end game is a company with self driving cars, having SIGNIFICANTLY less overhead than they currently do with human drivers. And, probably a ton of technology patents to boot? Yea, they're definitely a brazen company, but do you really expect anything less from a unicorn company? Very few make it this big without cutting some corners, having some connection, etc.

>The end game is a company with self driving cars,

As it seems that is their only chance at profitability, then they should be plowing a lot more of their capital into driverless R&D.

Re: Uber's Loss Exceeds $800M in Q3 on $1.7B in Net Revenue

#153

Post by Eridrus » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 2:34 AM UTC

astrodust wrote: post #97

Eridrus wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For all the shitiness that Uber has engaged in, at least they've shown that you can get around the antiquated Medalion system.

Where I live they were already working to phase out the medallion system by introducing new permits for cabs that don't require medallions. They're cabs just the same, with the same requirements for insurance and such, but were a way of expanding the number of cabs without expanding the medallion pool. This softens the depreciation in the medallion market. The cab drivers who paid a lot of money for their medallions…

From what I can tell, cities have largely been able to kick Uber out, if they want to, but many residents are not interested in eating shit from taxi companies for another 10-15 years, so it's been hard to kick them out by appealing to their sympathy for the medalion holders.

Re: Uber's Loss Exceeds $800M in Q3 on $1.7B in Net Revenue

#154

Post by mindcrime » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 2:34 AM UTC

Apocryphon wrote: post #149

mindcrime wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strange that you would respond with that, given that I'm arguing exactly against "following dogma". What I'm saying is that, as hackers, we have traditionally taken on a mindset that says "we can use our intellect, reason, science, etc. to figure out better solutions" without regard for dogma. And more and more people seem to be drifting away from that and just punting and saying "fuck it, the State will make everyth…

The very fact that you treat this state as a separate entity from the people is a problem. In a republic, the state is the citizenry. Hackers are part of the state and can influence the state and should work with the state. No one here is agitating for delegating all responsibilities to the state. The point is that private businesses should work with the state and seek to change and reform regulation when necessary,…

In a republic, the state is the citizenry.

In theory. I think we're pretty far removed from that in reality.

Re: Uber's Loss Exceeds $800M in Q3 on $1.7B in Net Revenue

#155

Post by LeoPanthera » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 2:34 AM UTC

realstuff wrote: post #8

LeoPanthera wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lyft may be more expensive on paper but I always use it instead of Uber where it is available and they send me so many discounts and coupons that I almost never pay the full price.

Out of curiosity, why do you prefer Lyft?

I prefer Lyft because every driver I've spoken to who drives for both (which is almost all of them) says that Lyft treats them better.

Also the app is much nicer. The Uber app drives me crazy.

Re: Uber's Loss Exceeds $800M in Q3 on $1.7B in Net Revenue

#156

Post by callahad » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 2:34 AM UTC

realstuff wrote: post #8

LeoPanthera wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lyft may be more expensive on paper but I always use it instead of Uber where it is available and they send me so many discounts and coupons that I almost never pay the full price.

Out of curiosity, why do you prefer Lyft?

Lyft allows for in-app tipping, and has a more humane contract with its drivers, as outlined in this Wired article: https://www.wired.com/2016/01/lyft-drivers-settle-suit-but-s...

Specifically, Lyft can only deactivate drivers for cause, and it has a clear appeals process through binding arbitration, for which Lyft foots the bill.

I'm not fond of clauses that require arbitration or which prohibit class action suits, but at least Lyft allows for and pays the costs of that arbitration.

Re: Uber's Loss Exceeds $800M in Q3 on $1.7B in Net Revenue

#157

Post by objclxt » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 2:35 AM UTC

nharada wrote: post #4

Presumably this is intentional -- Uber could raise prices and make more money, but right now they're choosing to keep prices very low in order to undercut Lyft and the cab companies with the assumption that having a monopoly will return more profits in the future. At least anecdotally, here in SF Lyft is almost always more expensive than Uber.

> At least anecdotally, here in SF Lyft is almost always more expensive than Uber.

Really? I took three trips this weekend, price checked both apps, and Lyft was consistently cheaper. There is definitely a price war going on.

Re: Uber's Loss Exceeds $800M in Q3 on $1.7B in Net Revenue

#158

Post by jartelt » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 2:35 AM UTC

jpalomaki wrote: post #127

nharada wrote: post #4

Presumably this is intentional -- Uber could raise prices and make more money, but right now they're choosing to keep prices very low in order to undercut Lyft and the cab companies with the assumption that having a monopoly will return more profits in the future. At least anecdotally, here in SF Lyft is almost always more expensive than Uber.

Would the monopoly plan really work? Is there something that would prevent competition from reappearing when prices are raised? At least from customer perspective it would be pretty easy to use couple of apps and shop between different providers. For drivers this might be of course more difficult, since Uber can use contracts and other mechanisms to prevent them from working with other providers.

They likely are banking on the network effect of having the most drivers and users. Having a lot of drivers makes pickup times for riders shorter. Having a lot of user makes it easier to pool people together and give lower prices. Plus more users means the drivers spend less time waiting around to get a pickup. Any new startup needs to (1) get people to download their app and (2) build up enough drivers/users to get pickup times down.

Re: Uber's Loss Exceeds $800M in Q3 on $1.7B in Net Revenue

#159

Post by hrrsn » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 2:35 AM UTC

nharada wrote: post #4

Presumably this is intentional -- Uber could raise prices and make more money, but right now they're choosing to keep prices very low in order to undercut Lyft and the cab companies with the assumption that having a monopoly will return more profits in the future. At least anecdotally, here in SF Lyft is almost always more expensive than Uber.

I've noticed the same in LA.

Re: Uber's Loss Exceeds $800M in Q3 on $1.7B in Net Revenue

#160

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 2:35 AM UTC

LeoPanthera wrote: post #5

nharada wrote: post #4

Presumably this is intentional -- Uber could raise prices and make more money, but right now they're choosing to keep prices very low in order to undercut Lyft and the cab companies with the assumption that having a monopoly will return more profits in the future. At least anecdotally, here in SF Lyft is almost always more expensive than Uber.

Lyft may be more expensive on paper but I always use it instead of Uber where it is available and they send me so many discounts and coupons that I almost never pay the full price.

[deleted]