Live data from Hacker News

Uber Lays Off 400

nytimes.com

291–300 of 310 posts

Re: Uber Lays Off 400

#291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not profitable because every single restaurant does it for itself only.A post office service would never make a dime if it was only covering a small town.Scale it up to the entire city and it becomes very interesting

Back in frontier west, outside US territory (and therefore not served by the Post Office Department or the Pony Express), people would set up highly profitable transportation companies. These companies would make deliveries for local shops but also carry mail, bringing stuff to somewhere served by the Post Office Department or the Pony Express or the Wells Fargo freight routes. I read all this in a book ages ago but…

I mean this was how Wells Fargo started.

Re: Uber Lays Off 400

#292
post #74
post #39

Love to revisit this piece every few years. Why food delivery will never be profitable: "The Food Delivery Death Star" https://medium.com/@review/the-food-delivery-death-star-85f9...

Pizza delivery is profitable. Pizza comes in a shape easy for transportation, the size and value of the delivery is economical for a delivery business and there's an established culture around ordering pizza for delivery. The food delivery companies just need to figure out these problems, which a hard, for non-pizza foods.

Lol but what about the person who makes the pizza? Taking 30% is steep.

Re: Uber Lays Off 400

#293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best way to understand this is to look at their financial statements: https://investor.uber.com/news-events/news/press-release-det... Generally, you would go to the 10-K to get a quick snap shot. I direct you to look at the "CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS" You can see that they made about 1.4B (in Q1) after paying the drivers but then they spent 2.2B on: Operations and support, Sales and marketin…

Agreed, but like others have pointed out “marketing” includes marketing to drivers with incentives to drive. They’re not running advertisements they’re subsidizing rides on the driver and passenger side and calling it part of their marketing spend. The problem with Uber is that their technology isn’t that innovative and their platform isn’t that sticky.

The technology only seems "not that innovative" because they've been around for a decade. The whole concept wouldn't be possible without widespread smartphone adoption which occurred in that time. The real problem with the business is the economics don't work. Riders use Uber because it's cheap and driver use it because they get paid enough to make it worth their while (or at least they believe that to be the case). These two things are only the case because they're blowing billions of dollars on subsidies.

Re: Uber Lays Off 400

#294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the theory, but I have no idea what this "moat" is supposed to be. Apps to hail a cab are interchangeable commodities as far as I can tell.

There's a network effect component for shared/pooled rides. Upstarts will lose a lot if they offer shared prices without matched riders.

The network exists for non-pooled rides as well. Riders don't have to wait as long if there are more drivers, and drivers don't have to drive as far to pick up a ride if there are more passengers. The increased efficiencies allow prices to be lower as well.

Re: Uber Lays Off 400

#295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens when the consumer realizes this drug dealer has jacked up prices because they're giving product away? They go to the corner and find a cheaper alternative.

Uber wants to be the only dealer in town.

The barriers to entry aren't high enough.

Re: Uber Lays Off 400

#296
post #118
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You literally cannot profitably transport people at the prices they're offering. Uber is just one big bet that the price point of transportation will fall significantly with the advent of self driving and they'll be there to make the money off that margin.

>You literally cannot profitably transport people at the prices they're offering That's not my understanding of the figures, which say that they're charging plenty enough to cover the costs associated with the ride, but are blowing lots of money on aggressive marketing. The transportation costs (i.e. driver pay and customer service) are not what's killing them.

I was in an empty pool ride for 45 minutes taking me from inner Boston to the suburbs and I paid $5. Unless I'm wrong, that's below minimum wage so someone somewhere is subsidizing the difference

Re: Uber Lays Off 400

#297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100 percent of their income goes to the car until its paid off for that month, and the interest rate they charge to lease the car is downright usury. $200/wk to rent a Hyundai Elantra that Hyundai leases out at under $200/mo.

Not exactly true. If you drive full-time for Lyft or Uber you MUST change the oil of your car EVERY MONTH. Leased Hyundai's don't see that kind of stress until a year goes by so the Lyft/Uber car is getting destroyed at least 4x more quickly.

Depreciation curves aren’t linear. At $20,000 which is the list price of the car (which is almost certainly overstating it) you’re depreciating the car to zero after two years. Even a beat to shit two year old car isn’t worth zero.

Re: Uber Lays Off 400

#299
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a network effect component for shared/pooled rides. Upstarts will lose a lot if they offer shared prices without matched riders.

Do that many people share rides with strangers in Uber? I never have.

[deleted]

Re: Uber Lays Off 400

#300
post #39

Love to revisit this piece every few years. Why food delivery will never be profitable: "The Food Delivery Death Star" https://medium.com/@review/the-food-delivery-death-star-85f9...

Grubhub has been profitable literally since the late 90s. This article is terribly researched.
Post reply on HN