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

Uber S-1

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 559 posts

Re: Uber S-1

#221

Post by csomar »

tom-_- wrote: post #142

The cost of entry into this space is much greater than I think most people realize. It's not "building an app". It's building a balanced, efficient marketplace. This means complex matching, pricing and routing algorithms that have been developed for almost a decade. It's also about working with regulations at the city level and building a reliable labor force of contractors to supply the marketplace in every new city…

So is the cost of entry for an airline. Yet, it is a very competitive business.

Re: Uber S-1

#222

Post by mckenna »

jboy55 wrote: post #32

So 44% (4.4 billion) of their 2018 revenue was 'Other'. Gain on divestiture 3,214 Unrealized gain on investments 1,996 If this was pure cash going into their bank account, does it mean they ran out of cash in 2018? Their working capital was 4,900 billion at the end of 2018.

They exited some markets and sold their business. "Other" refers to that, I think. So it's a one-time revenue.

Re: Uber S-1

#223

Post by aiisjustanif »

partingshots wrote: post #18

So... Let me see if I have this straight: 1. Uber is unprofitable and the only way it can become profitable is to get SDC's 2. Uber is significantly (years) behind Waymo in the SDC space. 3. Waymo will launch SDC taxi services first meaning: - When it puts in an order for SDC components no one else is going to be buying in bulk and thus it can have effectively 100% of capacity of these specialized equipment makers -…

I love how we just assume SDC is just fact. No mention of weather issues, privacy issues, governmental legislation slow down, infrastructure that they drive on.

The human driver still has a minute. It's not like we are talking about Semi Trucks that will primarily have to navigate interstates.

Re: Uber S-1

#224

Post by goldcd »

I'm not an Uber-hater - but they don't offer anything unique and the valuation is insane.

Their problem is that if they rack up prices/commission to pay off their investors, then both their drivers and riders will simply switch to the next pre-IPO company that will connect them for less.

Uber in my mind is like all the other social media sites. We appreciate that they're the best thing to connect us at this time - but if something better comes along, both sides have no loyalty and will move on.

Can anybody imagine an Uber provider/rider they've met paying over the odds for an identical service because "they love the Uber brand"?

Re: Uber S-1

#225

Post by dockd »

yalogin wrote: post #103

Feels more like Uber and Lyft reached a point where they cannot raise private capital anymore and so jumped onto the public markets to fool random investors. If they cannot be profitable now, what makes them think they will be profitable with SDCs? I challenge the fundamental premise that SDCs will make them profitable. There is no stickiness to their business model. Moving on to another ride sharing service is frict…

Aren't most index funds, almost by definition, required to buy their shares? If Vanguard owns a piece of every listed company, they're going to buy Uber at pretty much any price, right?

Re: Uber S-1

#226

Post by sytelus »

partingshots wrote: post #18

So... Let me see if I have this straight: 1. Uber is unprofitable and the only way it can become profitable is to get SDC's 2. Uber is significantly (years) behind Waymo in the SDC space. 3. Waymo will launch SDC taxi services first meaning: - When it puts in an order for SDC components no one else is going to be buying in bulk and thus it can have effectively 100% of capacity of these specialized equipment makers -…

> the only way it can become profitable is to get SDC's

Can't they just get out of markets that are loss leaders and continue to operate in profitable markets? Note that they should but that's always an option if profitability becomes an immediate issue.

Re: Uber S-1

#227

Post by a_t48 »

lapinot wrote: post #199
gonehome wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I take Taxis from airports and from hotels for that reason (often faster than waiting for the uber to get through traffic). The exception is SFO where Taxis cost 2x what an UberX costs. The Taxi experience is still bad though - just yesterday in DC I had to listen to my driver 'joke' about why the Taliban should be able to fight for their country while also repeatedly pointing out and talking about women on the stree…

So you prefer being serviced by a machine that records everything you say, do, think, than bearing an interaction with a living human being which may or may not be quite different and interest, question, amuse or revolt you? I must say i don't agree with that, anytime i would prefer a place where people authentically and actually speak their mind and act spontaneously (not considering whether or not i actually think…

Don't worry, many of the taxi\uber drivers record inside their car, too.

Re: Uber S-1

#228

Post by SilasX »

panarky wrote: post #173
SilasX wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But in fact, Uber does have a massive moat -- its network of drivers and riders in thousands of cities around the world. No competitor is even close. Merely being ahead of competitors isn't a moat, it would have to be something that makes "entering into serious competition" difficult for any new entrants. Uber already lacks the monopoly power to raise prices significantly because of competition from Lyft and local p…

> Merely being ahead of competitors isn't a moat No competitor can catch up without heavily subsidizing both drivers and riders. If no competitor is willing to spend billions to steal 20% of the market, then that's a pretty effective moat.

In VC parlance, a "moat" means something much more than just needing money to enter the market, but an insurmountable barrier even with a lot of money.

Re: Uber S-1

#229

Post by ethagknight »

kapurs151 wrote: post #43

While I admit that the losses are staggering, the growth rates are also astounding: Revenue 2016: $3.8bn 2017: $7.9bn 2018: $11.27bn Trips 2016: 1.8bn 2017: 3.7bn 2018: 5.2bn The internet is such a game-changer.

Am I reading that right? they earned $2.16 per trip on average in 2018?

Re: Uber S-1

#230

Post by jboy55 »

gonehome wrote: post #130
jboy55 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always felt SDC is the death of Uber. If you had 5 billion to invest in SDCs for a taxi service, why would you become a small investor in Uber, when you could probably build the app for $10 million and just roll your own? Also uber could become profitable if they charged more. I've actually started taking taxi's again, since they are marginally more expensive than Ubers/Lyfts. However, if you pick them up from an a…

I take Taxis from airports and from hotels for that reason (often faster than waiting for the uber to get through traffic). The exception is SFO where Taxis cost 2x what an UberX costs. The Taxi experience is still bad though - just yesterday in DC I had to listen to my driver 'joke' about why the Taliban should be able to fight for their country while also repeatedly pointing out and talking about women on the stree…

I've had plenty of poor but not shocking Uber/Lyft rides. Its nice you can rate them and get them out of the ecosystem. However, as time goes on, the bar on Uber/Lyft's drivers will lower, the cars will get dirtier and less maintained and the costs will get higher.

The stabilization point is probably close to taxi service. I think that Uber/Lyft really solve for SF's taxi problem mostly.

Post reply on HN