4 ms·

It seems divorced from reality to me, though I claim no real special expertise. They seem to have no more ability to be a monopoly than any other logistics or t

by CPLX 10y ago

It seems divorced from reality to me, though I claim no real special expertise. They seem to have no more ability to be a monopoly than any other logistics or transportation powerhouse. The market cap of UPS is ~$90bn, and FedEx ~$40bn. And those companies have a lot of real actual assets* and (arguably) much stronger network effects than a local taxi replacement company. It's not that it's so implausible it couldn't happen, it just seems to insert some very serious risk for a large swath of the equity holders, and makes me wonder why the company is so keen to assume that risk. [* UPS has over $40bn worth of stuff like airplanes, trucks, land, and buildings on their books.]

SilasX 10y ago
Wow, you're right, hadn't thought of that. When you account for the (large) risk of Uber not reaching that stage, that should put them at $20 billion optimistically. In fairness, though, neither FedEx nor UPS count as a near-monopoly either, but the probability of a real one is correspondingly less probable anyway.
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  > In fairness, though, neither FedEx nor UPS count as a near-monopoly either True, but look through their annual reports to see their capital spending to compete against them. There simply is no other way then spending that money. For example, Amazon leased a fleet of cargo planes: http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/amazon-to-lease-20-boeing-767s-for-its-own-air-cargo-network/ http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/amazon...
gist 10y ago
One thing I'd like to know (and I am sure someone has answered this somewhere) is the amount of people using Uber in their own town vs. people who travel and use Uber. If in their own town, it seems entirely possible for a local strong competitor to offer a better product or service. For travelers that is less of a risk since you go with the brand you know (which traditionally has been a taxi cab). In particular some markets are so large that it would be a juicy target to attack just the one geographic area regardless of whether you planned to compete elsewhere (NYC for example). Now of course someone could argue that this could have happened to opentable and it hasn't. But that is a much harder thing to knock off with the tie in to reservation systems.
- CPLX 10y ago
  In my experience this is actually happening. For example many of my friends are now using Dial-7 to get to and from the airport these days for business trips. It's just more predictable than wondering if there will be surge pricing when you need to leave, they actually are slightly cheaper, and you know what you're going to get. Uber's user experience has a lot going for it but it's very, very far from flawless or unbeatable as a product.
  - nilkn 10y ago
    For getting to/from the airport in my own city, I still use the old limo driver that I was using before Uber took off. Literally the same guy, not just the same service/company. When friends or family members fly down to visit I sometimes book him for them as well. It's about the same price as Uber (I voluntarily pay more because I tip him generously), but it's a 100% guaranteed fantastic experience. With Uber, you never know who your driver is going to be. I've had some pretty bad ones and some pretty unfriendly ones who made me or someone with me feel uncomfortable.
    - morgante 10y ago
      Normal people don't take limos to the airport.
      - _acme 10y ago
        "limo" may be a reference to what is sometimes called a black car -- a scheduled livery service -- and not what we generally think of as a large limousine. Still, though, most people don't use those either.
      - paulcole 10y ago
        Limo can just mean black Town Car.
      - nilkn 10y ago
        They do. A "limo" is just a towncar. It's no different from something like UberBlack. Go to any major airport and you'll see a bunch of them lined up waiting for passengers nearby the taxis. I started using this service before Uber because taxis were extraordinarily unreliable and this service was always spot on. And as time has went on I see no reason to switch to Uber for this particular well-defined and scheduled-in-advance ride.
golergka 10y ago
You're talking about current market size, but world markets of such goods and services are growing, especially in developing countries.

by CPLX 10y ago

SilasX 10y ago

Wow, you're right, hadn't thought of that. When you account for the (large) risk of Uber not reaching that stage, that should put them at $20 billion optimistically. In fairness, though, neither FedEx nor UPS count as a near-monopoly either, but the probability of a real one is correspondingly less probable anyway.

toomuchtodo 10y ago
> In fairness, though, neither FedEx nor UPS count as a near-monopoly either True, but look through their annual reports to see their capital spending to compete against them. There simply is no other way then spending that money. For example, Amazon leased a fleet of cargo planes: http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/amazon-to-lease-20-boeing-767s-for-its-own-air-cargo-network/ http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/amazon...

gist 10y ago

One thing I'd like to know (and I am sure someone has answered this somewhere) is the amount of people using Uber in their own town vs. people who travel and use Uber. If in their own town, it seems entirely possible for a local strong competitor to offer a better product or service. For travelers that is less of a risk since you go with the brand you know (which traditionally has been a taxi cab). In particular some markets are so large that it would be a juicy target to attack just the one geographic area regardless of whether you planned to compete elsewhere (NYC for example). Now of course someone could argue that this could have happened to opentable and it hasn't. But that is a much harder thing to knock off with the tie in to reservation systems.

CPLX 10y ago
In my experience this is actually happening. For example many of my friends are now using Dial-7 to get to and from the airport these days for business trips. It's just more predictable than wondering if there will be surge pricing when you need to leave, they actually are slightly cheaper, and you know what you're going to get. Uber's user experience has a lot going for it but it's very, very far from flawless or unbeatable as a product.
- nilkn 10y ago
  For getting to/from the airport in my own city, I still use the old limo driver that I was using before Uber took off. Literally the same guy, not just the same service/company. When friends or family members fly down to visit I sometimes book him for them as well. It's about the same price as Uber (I voluntarily pay more because I tip him generously), but it's a 100% guaranteed fantastic experience. With Uber, you never know who your driver is going to be. I've had some pretty bad ones and some pretty unfriendly ones who made me or someone with me feel uncomfortable.
  - morgante 10y ago
    Normal people don't take limos to the airport.
    - _acme 10y ago
      "limo" may be a reference to what is sometimes called a black car -- a scheduled livery service -- and not what we generally think of as a large limousine. Still, though, most people don't use those either.
    - paulcole 10y ago
      Limo can just mean black Town Car.
    - nilkn 10y ago
      They do. A "limo" is just a towncar. It's no different from something like UberBlack. Go to any major airport and you'll see a bunch of them lined up waiting for passengers nearby the taxis. I started using this service before Uber because taxis were extraordinarily unreliable and this service was always spot on. And as time has went on I see no reason to switch to Uber for this particular well-defined and scheduled-in-advance ride.

golergka 10y ago

You're talking about current market size, but world markets of such goods and services are growing, especially in developing countries.