3 ms·
I think overall this is decently convincing, the problem I have with it though is the Uber example. Uber is bleeding money and clearly subsidizing rides. If peo
by cmurf 10y ago
I think overall this is decently convincing, the problem I have with it though is the Uber example. Uber is bleeding money and clearly subsidizing rides. If people were paying the true cost of what drivers are paid plus some reasonable mark up, I have serious doubts it'd be as popular as it is. And case in point, I don't use Uber in NYC. Friends and colleagues don't either. It's usually easier and cheaper to get a cab. So... if Uber becomes more expensive than it is now, let alone more than a cab, I think broadly speaking most people will vote for the less expensive option rather than the service with the shiny app.
- devishard 10y agoYeah, I think that having a product people would pay for is a prerequisite to success, but it's not a guarantee of success. I definitely think Uber could lose to a competitor in their product space. The distinction I'm making here is that I don't think anyone will ever succeed over the long term in Twitter's product space, because they don't have a product people would pay for. A competitor might knock them out for a little while, but no competitor will have lasting success unless they figure out a way to modify Twitter's product into a product people would pay for. And at it's core, Twitter's product is kind of worthless, so I don't think there's a modification that would make it worthwhile.