4 ms·

> Like gp, I also think Uber is pursuing the more ambitious goal of generalized logistics rather than just replacing taxis in cities. I don't deny that. My que

by adwn 10y ago

> Like gp, I also think Uber is pursuing the more ambitious goal of generalized logistics rather than just replacing taxis in cities. I don't deny that. My question was, why would one be so sure that Uber will be successful with that? So far, they haven't demonstrated their expertise in this task (taxi matching is trivial compared with a general peer-to-peer delivery mesh), and putting a lot of investor-backed manpower behind it is not a guarantee. Consider Google or Microsoft, two hugely successful companies, which failed at entering important new markets (social networks resp. mobile devices), and Uber is far from being "hugely successful".

jasode 10y ago
>My question was, why would one be so sure that Uber will be successful with that? I can't predict the future so I won't claim they will be successful. You previously wrote: >why you assume that they'll have an edge in the transition to a very different business model? I responding to whether or not they had an "edge" in comparison to other companies which is a much weaker claim than "success". Industry analysts like to play the "guess-the-next-product" from Apple by working backwards from + Apple patents filed + open job listings (what competencies) + type of companies acquired + supply chain contracts signed, broken + etc, All the above leads people to speculate about the coming "Apple TV" or "Apple self-driving car", and so on. Applying that game to decipher Uber's hidden master plan by factoring in their army of 1200 programmers, their $15 billion of raised cash, the acquisition of deCarta (logistics mapping), etc... it seems like they have an "edge" over the other competitors to pursue bigger goals other than crowdsourced taxis. (Lyft hasn't raised the amount of money that Uber has and Amazon's new fleet of Amazon branded delivery trucks seems to an extension of their warehouse logistics rather than generalized non-Amazon logistics.) Like you said, it doesn't mean they'll succeed.
- adwn 10y ago
  > I responding to whether or not they had an "edge" in comparison to other companies which is a much weaker claim than "success". Fair enough. You raise some good points. I guess I just assign lower values of advantage to their investments and acquisitions than you or nl seem to do, mainly because existing companies tend to have a bad track record for breaking into established markets.

by adwn 10y ago

jasode 10y ago

>My question was, why would one be so sure that Uber will be successful with that? I can't predict the future so I won't claim they will be successful. You previously wrote: >why you assume that they'll have an edge in the transition to a very different business model? I responding to whether or not they had an "edge" in comparison to other companies which is a much weaker claim than "success". Industry analysts like to play the "guess-the-next-product" from Apple by working backwards from + Apple patents filed + open job listings (what competencies) + type of companies acquired + supply chain contracts signed, broken + etc, All the above leads people to speculate about the coming "Apple TV" or "Apple self-driving car", and so on. Applying that game to decipher Uber's hidden master plan by factoring in their army of 1200 programmers, their $15 billion of raised cash, the acquisition of deCarta (logistics mapping), etc... it seems like they have an "edge" over the other competitors to pursue bigger goals other than crowdsourced taxis. (Lyft hasn't raised the amount of money that Uber has and Amazon's new fleet of Amazon branded delivery trucks seems to an extension of their warehouse logistics rather than generalized non-Amazon logistics.) Like you said, it doesn't mean they'll succeed.

adwn 10y ago
> I responding to whether or not they had an "edge" in comparison to other companies which is a much weaker claim than "success". Fair enough. You raise some good points. I guess I just assign lower values of advantage to their investments and acquisitions than you or nl seem to do, mainly because existing companies tend to have a bad track record for breaking into established markets.