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

Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 347 posts

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#311

Post by codecamper »

linkregister wrote: post #185
wpietri wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think buying up the whole value chain is an effect of monopolies, not the cause. DeBeers, for example, got their start in diamond mining. I suppose they could have stopped there, but when you're the only supplier, it becomes very easy to buy up those of your customers that are making money so you can capture more of the total cash. So I don't think Uber needs to buy roads. All they need to do is have a broad enough…

I think it's unrealistic to think that Lyft will be a sickly competitor. It has less cash to push toward subsidizing rides but I could foresee it sticking around, especially since many drivers use both ride share apps.

I thought that each network will stop giving you rides if you don't take them & you are in the area without a fare.

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#312

Post by codecamper »

em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #282
froo wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably none. By having an open system, prices will invariably get pushed down (better for end users) which will deincentivize drivers (worse for end users) There may be some equilibrium somewhere, but I don't believe it will be in the users best interest having to wait for cars. Just my thoughts. I'm probably wrong.

By having an open system, since there is no longer a corporate middleman entity which takes a cut off a profit, and since anyone can compete, therefore prices will get pushed down. But just like any other perfectly-competitive system ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition ), the price in equilibrium will approach the marginal cost when marginal cost equals marginal revenue, not get pushed down indefinite…

Once robo cars are here, it'll be game over. Google wins.

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#313

Post by GrinningFool »

codecamper wrote: post #306
methehack wrote: post #82

I've always been a little confused about uber's capital needs. When I first heard about uber, the part I thought was super-clever was that you wouldn't _need_ lots of capital because all the drivers would have their own cars. Leveraging the latent capital of one side of the two-sided market was the genius of it. (Airbnb too) Same for the staffing -- hook up both sides of the market. No need to pay anyone out of your…

Folks... How many years was Amazon not profitable? And what is that stock worth?

On the other hand, Amazon continued to improve operating margins and expand offerings which led them to profitability. Every indication is that Uber is selling rides cheaper than they cost - and the things they can do to reduce cost also disincentivize their drivers.

Secondarily, Amazon was public for years - which means they were required to become profitable. Uber doesn't yet have that pressure in place- and a new round of cash delays that requirement even further.

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#314

Post by [deleted] »

tedmiston wrote: post #165
baddox wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is a problem, because the moment that people have to pay the actual costs of an Uber ride, they may go back to taxis or driving their own cars. It depends what you mean by "actual costs," but I would suspect that Uber's will still be lower than cabs' under any reasonable definition.

> I would suspect that Uber's will still be lower than cabs' What people pay for an Uber still varies a lot by city. At home in Ohio, Uber is more expensive than taxis in several cases, for example, to/from the airport, and short trips from the city center to the bars (2-3 miles). Taxis are also generally cheaper here for longer trips (maybe 30+ miles). Similarly taxis can still be cheaper (and are still ubiquitous)…

[deleted]

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#315

Post by codecamper »

Spooky23 wrote: post #171
methehack wrote: post #82

I've always been a little confused about uber's capital needs. When I first heard about uber, the part I thought was super-clever was that you wouldn't _need_ lots of capital because all the drivers would have their own cars. Leveraging the latent capital of one side of the two-sided market was the genius of it. (Airbnb too) Same for the staffing -- hook up both sides of the market. No need to pay anyone out of your…

Über has enchanted the tech people. It's this golden goose that every conversation turns to. Listen to the Ben Thompson podcast -- if he was reacting to an article about ham sandwiches, he would tie it to Uber. There's no reality here. No magic self driving electric taxis, no robot delivering your takeout. 18-24 months this thing will be like Groupon (remember they were magically saving writers by hiring thousands of…

Saudis benefit from our 2 mid eastern wars. Total cost of wars? According to Brown U. just the Iraq war is 4.4 trillion. http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/ That's a cost of $15,000 per person in the US.

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#317

Post by TeMPOraL »

driverdan wrote: post #303
gaius wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2-4 apply to every taxi firm these days too

Not in the US. Taxi companies in US cities are terrible.

A great marketing win for Uber here. It became known worldwide as an "innovative technology company" even though outside US, it's only innovation is funneling SV money to lawyers so that they can maintain their illegal business practices while they conquer the local markets. E.g. in Europe we've already had all the other "innovative" stuff. But people don't notice it, instead naively buying the "Uber = innovation" marketing.

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#318

Post by pborowicz »

DavidWanjiru wrote: post #299
waterhouse wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

philosophically similar to the medallion racket This comparison strikes me as bizarre. The medallion racket is lobbying politicians to use the force of the law to prevent competitors from doing business. What discordorama describes is paying people money to install and sign into your app. This is... either a poorly designed incentive system that was then fixed, or a clever campaign that gets a lot of future drivers t…

My sense of Uber has been a company using technology innovatively to provide a much better user experience, while using currently existing but idle resources (the cars and drivers that serve customers on Uber but otherwise don't for various reasons, reasons Uber has rendered irrelevant, hence the resistance they've seen). But if they need to subsidize their drivers or customers, what does that say about their value p…

Winner, winner, chicken dinner. You are correct.

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#319

Post by gaius »

driverdan wrote: post #303
gaius wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2-4 apply to every taxi firm these days too

Not in the US. Taxi companies in US cities are terrible.

Interesting. In my mid-sized town, the local, independent taxi firm has all of them. The app, text messaging when you book, when the driver is on his way, when he's at your front door along with the make, colour and license plate of the car, etc etc.

Re: Uber Turns to Saudi Arabia for $3.5B Cash Infusion

#320

Post by jcranmer »

rasz_pl wrote: post #254
hyperbovine wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not many barriers to these apps. Two words: network effect. More drivers means more users. More users attracts more drivers. This is precisely why we have eBay and Craigslist despite them both offering, by modern standards, objectively terrible user experiences. Suffice it to say I am extremely bullish on Uber, Airbnb, etc. sticking around for a whole.

Except taxis also experience network effect. There is no central 'hail a taxi' telephone number(at least in my part of the world, might be different in NY), every company has its own numbers, own dispatch, and own rates. They all compete with each other, and while some bigger companies might ride on the too lazy dont care just come and pick me up tail of the market, majority still chooses their ride based on the rate…

The US has 4 major cellular carriers--AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon. Most of the EU has just three carriers.
Post reply on HN