23 ms·

Uber president Jeff Jones is quitting

372 points by fluxic 10y ago

thedarkginger 10y ago
"That was not the reason for Jones’ departure, sources said, even though it meant that Kalanick was bringing in a new exec who could outrank him. Instead, these sources said, Jones determined that the situation at the company was more problematic than he realized."
- notyourwork 10y ago
  Why did you quote the article and not add a comment? I read that in the article so adding it here doesn't add any value to the discussion.
  - hyperbovine 10y ago
    I appreciate somebody extracting the money quote. I don't even remotely have time to read everything posted here.
    - itchyjunk 10y ago
      Same, I scan trough comments way more than I scan through articles.
      - notyourwork 10y ago
        So we might as well paste the articles in the comments section?
        thedarkginger 10y ago
        Thought it was useful to give the reason he was quitting, as indicated by the text. Guess it didn't help here. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
        notyourwork 10y ago
        A regurgitation of what I read in the article is supposed to be helpful? It appears from reading the rest of the comments more than I come to discuss not just re-read what we already read in an article. I guess if we throw a cute face in its supposed to be innocently acceptable too right? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    - Kinnard 10y ago
      The loss of context can be dangerous and misleading.
      - notyourwork 10y ago
        I am glad someone understands my concern with pasting a single quote from an article without context. Here it may be valuable, other articles perhaps not.
      - hyperbovine 10y ago
        I'll be the judge of that.
        Kinnard 10y ago
        Without the context?
        hyperbovine 10y ago
        If the summary is truly eyebrow-raising then yes, I'd move the little pointer to the top of the screen and click the link. Whatever point you are trying to make here seems way overblown.
        notyourwork 10y ago
        The reason I commented was the part he quoted could have been the title for the submission. It wasn't adding value to any discussion so I felt it wasn't needed. You and some others disagree with my point of view but judging by the amount of discussion on this post, I suspect majority agrees with me. And by that I mean pasting a quote without any additional context or comments isn't adding valuable discussion to hackernews threads. I come here for the discussion so the OP was off putting to me.
chaser7016 10y ago
Umm the CEO and co-founder needs to step down! But alas with Travis Kala!ick none of the rightfully terrible things happening is his fault rather he's firing his staff to make it seem like he's trying to improve. Lame!
- spraak 10y ago
  Your tone reminds me of @realDonaldTrump. Not good or bad..
was_boring 10y ago
While this is big for the company, I am curious what it means for recruitment of future executives at the company. My understanding is at this level it's about personal connections and grooming an image. With that in mind, does it become harder to attract great executives on a go-forward basis for Uber?
- mc32 10y ago
  I don't think so. Within some circles that may be true, but if they cast a wide net, I don't think it should be an issue. Just as sinking ship companies are able to attract people who think they can rescue them, or prove themselves capable, I think Uber can find the same kinds of executives if they reach outside "tech".
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  > With that in mind, does it become harder to attract great executives A good analogy would be attracting candidates for coaching positions in sports. If you're a team in a bad situation, you'll have to settle for candidates that don't have the experience usually required for the position, or people who've done it before who haven't had huge success. Also most great execs are already in a great position - why would they step into a bad situation unless you gave them a higher title or more power? Basically you get either a placeholder or an unknown quantity. The unknown quantity is just that. They might be awesome (everybody has to have had a first head coaching job) or completely overwhelmed.
  - dharmon 10y ago
    There's an important difference: compensation. If a losing team wants a winning coach, they will either have to settle for someone inexperienced, or pay up to get someone experienced in turnaround situations. Same with companies, except with turnarounds the most substantial part of compensation is the company's stock. If the turnaround is successful, the executive will get wildly rich as the stock appreciates (and rightly so). With Uber, the stock is greatly overvalued, which means anybody coming in is trying to turnaround the company, but only to maintain the current imaginary valuation. Where's the upside?
nananonymous 10y ago
Meta: how can you write an article about Uber's president leaving and leave out the massive lawsuit from Google's parent company?
- spectre 10y ago
  The lawsuit is from Waymo which is technically a sibling company to Google.
- daenney 10y ago
  Because they're unrelated? Mixing in the Waymo suit does nothing to clarify the situation around Jones. Sure it's juicy, but it's a different story.
  - jonathankoren 10y ago
    Not necessarily. It broke within six months. It's believable that he didn't know anything about the parentage of Otto, and when the lawsuit hit, he realized just how screwed up of a situation he found himself in and bailed. We can't say it is related, but we can't say it's not related either.
    - phailhaus 10y ago
      > We can't say it is related, but we can't say it's not related either. ...and that's why you should leave it out of the headline.
    - daenney 10y ago
      That's a fair point, I hadn't considered that. I still think leaving it out of the article is fair though. Since we don't know one way or another and there isn't anything pointing in that direction just yet.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - hwillis 10y ago
CydeWeys 10y ago
Uber doesn't have a prayer of rehabilitation until Kalanick himself goes. The rot goes straight up to him. Jeff Jones was a much more recent acquisition who came from staid corporate America (Target) -- I don't think he was the problem.
- tyingq 10y ago
  The short tenure, job description, and his history makes this bit believable: "Jones determined that the situation at the company was more problematic than he realized."
  - TorKlingberg 10y ago
    Yes, this clearly looks like Jones getting out before his reputation is sullied by further association with Uber's leadership.
    - jacquesm 10y ago
      The most likely thing that happened was that Jones said 'you go or I go' and that that ended with him going. Without inside knowledge that's speculative but this is how these things usually play out when founders dig in against a new outsider. The letter feels like spin to reduce the feeling of a fractured company towards the rest of the cadre. Not that they will be fooled (for long, anyway). Anyway, it's Travis Kalanick's ship to sink if he so desires so Jones is right to leave, but if I were him I would not wait too long before coming to my senses. The Uber brand is starting to look damaged beyond repair and they still have not begun with the salvaging operation, things are only getting worse.
      - rodgerd 10y ago
        > The most likely thing that happened was that Jones said 'you go or I go' and that that ended with him going. It's entirely possible (and more likely) that he said "these people need to go" and got told "no, they're high performers we can't do without."
redm 10y ago
The "echo chamber" works both ways. When there is excitement and buzz, it drives startups to success like no where else. Apparently it works in reverse too and people love to see the big kid on the block take hits.
- Analemma_ 10y ago
  Kalanick forgot that proverb we're taught as kids: "Be nice to the people you pass on the way up, because you'll be seeing them again on the way back down."
  - Anderkent 10y ago
    More like he forgot the proverb we're not taught yet, but probably will be soon: "The viral circlejerk can get on you for no reason at any point, and you can pretty much do nothing about that".
- ivraatiems 10y ago
  Sorry, this is not just or mainly what's happening here. Every time an anti-Uber article comes up, someone pops in and says something to the effect of your comment, but it simply isn't true. Uber is evil. They do evil things. They should not be supported. Yes, people like to see the titans fall, but people also like to see those who behave poorly get what they deserve for that behavior. That's what's happening here. For reference, here is a list I compiled a while ago of all the scummy things Uber does that would make one glad to see it go.[1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13793923 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13793923
  - Anderkent 10y ago
    Many items on that list aren't actually bad things, they're just described using language with negative connotations. For example >Uber breaks laws all around the world to enrich itself, including allegedly trying to deceive government officials across the world.[4] Detecting malicious users and protecting drivers by shadowbanning malicious users is neither illegal nor wrong. Uber has no legal nor moral obligation to help the governments entrap its drivers, or perform sting operations. [1] > It refuses to treat its drivers as true employees, even though legally they are considered such in many jurisdictions, and only complies when faced with court orders.[6][20] Stupid jurisdiction should not be complied with above direct legal necessity. Treating uber drivers as full time employees hurts both the drivers and the company (why do you think uber driver pay got lower the more 'benefits' uber is required to provide them?). People shitting on uber always seem to ignore how much public utility it provides in every town it enters. I remember ~10 years ago when I was in Warsaw, coming back from a new years eve party, and I had to walk ~4 hours to get back home because there was no night public transport in that area, and no taxies were available at all. I was in wasaw again 2 years ago, and in the meantime uber has moved in. Getting a drive back on NYE was trivial - maybe we had to wait 20 minutes, and pay ~4 times more than a taxi would have been (but of course there were no taxis available); but split 4 ways it was still a great deal. There's a reason people choose to use uber; and there's a reason people choose to be uber drivers. And yes, it sucks to be a taxi driver who has bought his way into a monopoly by buying a permit, and now cannot recoup the cost that easily. I wish there was a way to compensate them at a cost of the people who benefited from bringing in license requirements in the first place. But I don't see one, and in the end I believe it's more important to dismantle the broken system. [1] http://www.valuewalk.com/2017/03/greyball-uber-app/ http://www.valuewalk.com/2017/03/greyball-uber-app/
aphextron 10y ago
I really hope that Uber serves as a warning to companies who think they can ignore customer complaints. I've never dealt with such an opaque company in my entire life, in terms of getting any actual human support whatsoever regarding anything.
- alex_anglin 10y ago
  In the cases where I've had a sub-par experience with Uber in the past, I've had the opposite experience. Giving a poor rating for the trip triggered a response from a Uber employee who resolved the complaint. This was quite a while ago, so things may have changed and YMMV.
- Jare 10y ago
  Google wants to have a word with you. Or rather, they don't want to, and won't let you if you do.
  - JumpCrisscross 10y ago
    I pay for Google Apps. Their phone support is excellent. They literally built a feature for me (compliance-related tags in Vault) within a few days of my call.
- perlgeek 10y ago
  Have you had a positive experience getting in contact with any human customer support person at Google?
  - ucaetano 10y ago
    When I'm paying for a product, sure.
    - icelancer 10y ago
      I pay for Google Voice International Calls and my account was banned for a full 24 hours, meaning no VoIP calls out or in. No reason was given, no support available. It's hardly a standard across paid Google apps.
HeavenBanned 10y ago
"Recode.net"? What kind of site is this? What kind of journalism are they peddling? Seems rather suspicious. Some odd-colored terminology they used in the article: * "is directly related to the multiple controversies there" What proof do they have of this? What source that isn't Jeff Jone's PR-team said this? Where are they getting that from? * "determined that this was not the situation he signed on for" What kind of fluffy, bull-shit, non-statement is that? Give me a break, this sound like a personal puff piece for Jones. * "to help him right the very troubled ship" Excuse me? This is a multi-billion dollar company that's making a lot of money for a lot of investors and is going into self-driving cars. And somehow it is a "very troubled ship" because of one sexual harassment blog? Give me a goddamn break. Sensationalist and wrong. * "when drivers began flooding Jones' Facebook page with angry comments and complaints" Oh no! People on the _internet_ commenting shit on a Facebook page...you know what? Shut the whole Uber operation down, it's not worth going further any more. Give me a fucking break. * "that favored what board member Arianna Huffington called 'brilliant jerks.' " As opposed to what? Brilliant angels? Right. Because we know every single fucking board-room member in capitalist corporations in America is a fucking Ghandi/Marx hybrid. Get the fuck over yourself and your stupid bullshit clickbait article. What a pathetic piece of journalism. Gross. * Jerks indeed, as what has happened since then has made clear. Okay. 7K employees. 2 were fired because of misconduct. I'm sure everyone is at fault here. Does anyone remember Kelly Ellis? Should we burn Google's hierarchy/org to the ground for what she claims in a few tweets? This type of sensationalism is absolutely maddening and I cannot believe it's not buried/dead yet.
Fricken 10y ago
I think Uber's biggest problem is the broken relationships it has with so many of it's drivers. Their abuse of their labour force is the reason unions exist.
- nomnombunty 10y ago
  It is a broken relationship that would be hard to fix. Uber doesn't even try to hide its intention to get rid of the drivers once it has its self driving cars fully deployed
  - tomcam 10y ago
    At current burn rate they won't survive long enough for that to happen.
- tomcam 10y ago
  [Modern] Union disliker here--that is hella true. Uber has earned it
bsg75 10y ago
> He is leaving after apparently deciding the current controversies are too much to handle. Not exactly leadership material. Edit: Apparently an unpopular opinion. Do those here think otherwise given he joined the company less than a year ago (and is thus not part of the original culture), but instead could try to repair the damage done by the uber-bro culture instead of looking for an easier paycheck?
- untilHellbanned 10y ago
  Don't you think he tried?
  - bsg75 10y ago
    Maybe not hard enough: http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/16/14643634/uber-public-facebook-qa-drivers-angry http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/16/14643634/uber-public-faceb... "the session did not go over all that smoothly. In total, Jones answered only 12 questions on his public Facebook post"
- Anderkent 10y ago
  > Apparently an unpopular opinion. Do those here think otherwise given he joined the company less than a year ago (and is thus not part of the original culture), but instead could try to repair the damage done by the uber-bro culture instead of looking for an easier paycheck? Maybe 'uber-bro culture' is not actually a thing, and he doesn't see a possible solution for the PR problems? It's really hard to stop the hatetrain.
  - bsg75 10y ago
    That depends on where the train is directed: At the company as a whole, or at another set of company heads who ignore serious or hard problems? I doubt the entire company is tainted, but it does have issues that need to be led by people who will address in something other a Facebook AMA.
- daenney 10y ago
  > but instead could try to repair the damage done by the uber-bro culture instead of looking for an easier paycheck? You seem to assume that b/c he left after half a year he didn't try and just wants to get easy money somewhere else. I wouldn't be so quick to that assumption and that's probably what makes your opinion unpopular. If I'd feel that after half a year I hadn't gotten anywhere, I'd get out too. Regardless of the pay check since one way or another I'm not able to have any meaningful impact on the organisation and its mission. I don't know if that's the case, but that's an equally reasonable assumption given what we know about Uber's culture. However, since we don't know one way or another it might be nice to assume good faith over cop-out or incompetence.
israrkhan 10y ago
Given that he quit just in six months, probably he did not even wait for his RSU grants to mature (1 year cliff for stock grants). The situation might be much worse that what appears.
- onion2k 10y ago
  I'd guess the real problem is that Jones can't change things without other upper management agreeing to his proposals, and they're not agreeing.
- jonathankoren 10y ago
  I really don't think he needs the money after being CMO at Target. This is what having fuck-you-money gets you: The ability to walk away not care about the financial consequences.
  - xapata 10y ago
    Target CMO gets you 10s of millions ($7 million comp last year), or a bit over 100 million after a decade or so. People are funny. Millionaires get billionaire-envy and are sometimes willing to risk jail to add the extra zeros. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajat_Gupta https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajat_Gupta
    - sumedh 10y ago
      I just read his wiki page, obviously a brilliant man, its a shame that he went down this path.
- xyzzy4 10y ago
  Or maybe he thinks his current mansions, sports cars, and retirement funds are good enough?
- trevyn 10y ago
  Leadership compensation does not work in the same way as rank and file compensation.
MichaelBurge 10y ago
I wonder if it's a good idea to apply to Uber. With all the controversy, you could argue for a pretty good salary bump or signing bonus to compensate. Though, if executives are quitting after 6 months even before their stock vests, maybe it's more than just the outrage machine news clamoring for clicks and views.
- CydeWeys 10y ago
  There's lots of other companies out there that are paying good salaries that don't have these problems. It doesn't make sense to me to seek out a ship that's taking on water to sign up for. I know some Uber employees and none of them are happy with the situation.
  - MichaelBurge 10y ago
    You're probably right. The self-driving car stuff sounded like fun too, but not if you're being sued over it.
  - aianus 10y ago
    Of course it makes sense, they would be more desperate to hire and you would have less competition from others who have ethical problems with Uber.
    - CydeWeys 10y ago
      How are you so blase about jumping into a toxic work environment? A little bit more money isn't worth those conditions, assuming you could even get it. And keep in mind that a lot of the compensation is going to be in Uber equity -- which is affected by this scandal.
      - aianus 10y ago
        The people I know at Uber don't think it's a toxic work environment and I have no reason to distrust them in favor of a couple of accusatory blog posts from disgruntled ex-employees that I've never met.
scottmcleod 10y ago
Uber's board is failing the company and the public right now.
scottmcleod 10y ago
Uber's board is failing right now.
fluxic 10y ago
Update 1: >Travis Kalanick just sent out a company-wide email. It essentially says after Uber said it was naming a COO, Jones decided to leave. [0] https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843586902817099777 https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843586902817099777 Update 2: Ex-president Jones makes statement >"I joined Uber because of its Mission [sic], and the challenge to build global capabilities that would help the company mature and thrive long-term. "It is now clear, however, that the beliefs and approach to leadership that have guided my career are inconsistent with what I saw and experienced at Uber, and I can no longer continue as president of the ride sharing business. "There are thousands of amazing people at the company, and I truly wish everyone well." [1] https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843620240961368065 https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843620240961368065
- elvinyung 10y ago
  Haha, from the follow-up tweets[1]: > one or two back-handed compliments in there. but alas. > (one imagines taking the high road would have been a better decision here. but hey, im not an exec) [1]: https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843587293428375553 https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843587293428375553
  - nomnombunty 10y ago
    More from the follow up tweets in regards to John's statement to Recode[1]: > one imagines that the above statement wouldn't have come if the below email didn't include the passive aggression [1]: https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843620898967969793 https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843620898967969793
- tyingq 10y ago
  The content of that internal email is at the bottom of this article: http://www.businessinsider.com/report-ubers-president-jeff-jones-quits-amid-company-turmoil-2017-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/report-ubers-president-jeff-j... Kalanick certainly wanted to put his spin on the reason for leaving. "After we announced our intention to hire a COO, Jeff came to the tough decision that he doesn't see his future at Uber."
loudin 10y ago
Serious question - why hasn't the Uber board replaced Kalanick yet? While it is indisputable he successfully brought Uber to where it is now, it doesn't seem like he has the good judgement to be leading Uber at this stage of the company's lifecycle. Wouldn't the best thing for the company at this point be a complete overhaul of leadership?
- whalesalad 10y ago
  You say that -- and externally the place looks like a catastrophe -- but we don't know what's going on under the covers. If they saw him as a true risk he'd be gone by now.
  - Gargoyle 10y ago
    The question is when does he become a liability for the IPO aka VC exit?
    - taneq 10y ago
      Do you really think the Uber board is going to risk bursting that bubble with an IPO? I'd expect them to keep doing funding rounds on the basis of "it's an XX billion dollar company and its valuation is growing at YY billion/year" and try to keep the Ponzi scheme running until they get their self-driving tech working (since that's their only realistic chance of actually becoming revenue-positive).
      - Gargoyle 10y ago
        Sure, they'll keep that going as long as they can. The point is, though, that narrative is slipping away from them. They need to make a convincing case that it's real, and do so soon.
  - throwaway2048 10y ago
    Not if he controls the company (which by all appearences, he does)
- 10y ago
bogomipz 10y ago
What is the role of "President" of the company? Where does that title fit in to an org chart or relate to the C-level execs? I am not familiar with this title in tech companies.
- icelancer 10y ago
  I am the President of my company, and the founder. I gave up the CEO title to someone who bought a piece of my business. The way we split it is: President (me): Head of corporate strategy, networking, and vision. (I also am the acting CTO but that's kind of not relevant here) CEO (him): Fiscal policy, hiring planning, org chart projections, etc. He is the main executor of plans and also somewhat the Chief Revenue Officer. He's also the COO and his work is more meaningful in being the ops director, actually. I loved giving up the CEO title. I don't want it back. Ever. EDIT: Essentially the President title is flexible. In my company's case, I am the head of the entity and the buck stops with me for 85-90% of use cases across 30+ employees. But that's not always the case.
  - bogomipz 10y ago
    Thanks, interesting division of duties. I think as a title it's certainly more common in non-tech companies. Oddly though the VP title seems to be a dime a dozen. I have worked at many places where there was department with one or two people and one of them was the VP.
    - icelancer 10y ago
      Hmm. We don't have any VPs. Maybe we need to add some. Also should be noted that I guess the company I run isn't really a tech company. We do sports science stuff.
- thrill 10y ago
  In many states there is no requirement (or legal recognition) of the CxO titles - to be incorporated there you need to name only a Secretary. All other titles are for business focus reasons.
throwaway3332 10y ago
This Uber story, where scandals just kept dropping struck me as very suspicious. Like Google just randomly got CCed by a supplier? You want me to believe that? I was suspicious but who could be behind it, and why? Who is telling people to air the dirt that's undoubtedly very real, but that they have been just sitting on for a long time, at this particular moment? I recently learned that Kalanick is very close to Trump, and given that this started just after the election that would seem the likeliest explanation.
- fred_is_fred 10y ago
  Are you claiming that Jeff Jones applied for a took a job with Uber just so he could resign 6 months later to create a controversy?
  - throwaway3331 10y ago
    No, I didn't mean to imply that. I'd say either he is not part of the shadiness at all, or he left because someone applied pressure on him recently. But this is just my guesswork. (Switching account because I didn't store the old password... Wrote this password down)
- toast0 10y ago
  People in general send attachments to the wrong people, add the wrong person on a thread fairly often, or add someone to a thread on purpose without thinking about what was in all the quoted stuff that shouldn't be shared with that person. It's totally believable that it happened on accident. It also could have been a plausible accident on purpose by the person at the supplier. Even if the supplier disclosed on purpose though, it doesn't excuse the apparent conduct that was discovered because of the disclosure.
Overtonwindow 10y ago
Jones saw the writing on the wall...
rexreed 10y ago
I don't understand the obsession by the press, VCs, and even consumers for Uber. I know it has changed the dynamic of transportation for many people. I know it has changed the dynamic of self-employment for many people. I know it has changed the dynamic of regulation for many cities. Oh wait. Ok I get it now. All that said, it's remarkable that ride sharing is the pinnacle of startup valuation in this latest wave of startups.
yalogin 10y ago
If you are living in the Bay Area you would think Uber is a bad company. But I just met someone outside of the Bay and realized people love Uber. They have a lot of problems and a lot to do but they are still the market leader.
- adjkant 10y ago
  Coming from LA and Boston, plenty of people think Uber is a bad company but still use them for lack of better prices. Most people check Lyft and will go with it if cheaper/the same cost.
- akinalci 10y ago
  Unfortunately for them, their reputation in the Bay Area will make it harder for them to attract and retain talent and stay competitive in the long run.
- cyberferret 10y ago
  Cities that still don't have ride sharing services still see Uber as the shining Messiah coming to save them. Current shenanigans within the company are really not that well known outside of tech circles. At present, in our city in North Australia, ride sharing services are still technically illegal, but Uber is campaigning hard against local government to get it overturned and the general population are behind them because the local taxi service stinks. Uber are even placing targeted ads on Facebook for local residents, and have a special page on their website just for our city residents to get information on the progress of the fight with our state govt. and local council.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- blntechie 10y ago
  I live outside the US. I'm a vocal critique of Uber - the company but I love Uber - the service. Evaluating their competitors where I live, it's pretty obvious Uber is a much more seamless and better customer oriented taxi experience than anything else in the market.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
dkarapetyan 10y ago
Hypergrowth is a lot like cancer. Either they take swift action to excise all the toxic elements or it is going to be a slow and steady decline.
NicoJuicy 10y ago
In the assumption that any news is better then no news. Has the bad publicity contributed in a decline or increase of installations / usage for Uber?
brooksbp 10y ago
I love this thread. TK is loving this. GaryV is loving this too. Go build an Uber. Do it. Please. I wish you all the successes of this world. Worry about yourself, not Uber.

372 points by fluxic 10y ago

"That was not the reason for Jones’ departure, sources said, even though it meant that Kalanick was bringing in a new exec who could outrank him. Instead, these sources said, Jones determined that the situation at the company was more problematic than he realized."

notyourwork 10y ago
Why did you quote the article and not add a comment? I read that in the article so adding it here doesn't add any value to the discussion.
- hyperbovine 10y ago
  I appreciate somebody extracting the money quote. I don't even remotely have time to read everything posted here.
  - itchyjunk 10y ago
    Same, I scan trough comments way more than I scan through articles.
    - notyourwork 10y ago
      So we might as well paste the articles in the comments section?
      - thedarkginger 10y ago
        Thought it was useful to give the reason he was quitting, as indicated by the text. Guess it didn't help here. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
        notyourwork 10y ago
        A regurgitation of what I read in the article is supposed to be helpful? It appears from reading the rest of the comments more than I come to discuss not just re-read what we already read in an article. I guess if we throw a cute face in its supposed to be innocently acceptable too right? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  - Kinnard 10y ago
    The loss of context can be dangerous and misleading.
    - notyourwork 10y ago
      I am glad someone understands my concern with pasting a single quote from an article without context. Here it may be valuable, other articles perhaps not.
    - hyperbovine 10y ago
      I'll be the judge of that.
      - Kinnard 10y ago
        Without the context?
        hyperbovine 10y ago
        If the summary is truly eyebrow-raising then yes, I'd move the little pointer to the top of the screen and click the link. Whatever point you are trying to make here seems way overblown.
        notyourwork 10y ago
        The reason I commented was the part he quoted could have been the title for the submission. It wasn't adding value to any discussion so I felt it wasn't needed. You and some others disagree with my point of view but judging by the amount of discussion on this post, I suspect majority agrees with me. And by that I mean pasting a quote without any additional context or comments isn't adding valuable discussion to hackernews threads. I come here for the discussion so the OP was off putting to me.

chaser7016 10y ago

Umm the CEO and co-founder needs to step down! But alas with Travis Kala!ick none of the rightfully terrible things happening is his fault rather he's firing his staff to make it seem like he's trying to improve. Lame!

spraak 10y ago
Your tone reminds me of @realDonaldTrump. Not good or bad..

was_boring 10y ago

While this is big for the company, I am curious what it means for recruitment of future executives at the company. My understanding is at this level it's about personal connections and grooming an image. With that in mind, does it become harder to attract great executives on a go-forward basis for Uber?

mc32 10y ago
I don't think so. Within some circles that may be true, but if they cast a wide net, I don't think it should be an issue. Just as sinking ship companies are able to attract people who think they can rescue them, or prove themselves capable, I think Uber can find the same kinds of executives if they reach outside "tech".
jimmywanger 10y ago
> With that in mind, does it become harder to attract great executives A good analogy would be attracting candidates for coaching positions in sports. If you're a team in a bad situation, you'll have to settle for candidates that don't have the experience usually required for the position, or people who've done it before who haven't had huge success. Also most great execs are already in a great position - why would they step into a bad situation unless you gave them a higher title or more power? Basically you get either a placeholder or an unknown quantity. The unknown quantity is just that. They might be awesome (everybody has to have had a first head coaching job) or completely overwhelmed.
- dharmon 10y ago
  There's an important difference: compensation. If a losing team wants a winning coach, they will either have to settle for someone inexperienced, or pay up to get someone experienced in turnaround situations. Same with companies, except with turnarounds the most substantial part of compensation is the company's stock. If the turnaround is successful, the executive will get wildly rich as the stock appreciates (and rightly so). With Uber, the stock is greatly overvalued, which means anybody coming in is trying to turnaround the company, but only to maintain the current imaginary valuation. Where's the upside?

nananonymous 10y ago

Meta: how can you write an article about Uber's president leaving and leave out the massive lawsuit from Google's parent company?

spectre 10y ago
The lawsuit is from Waymo which is technically a sibling company to Google.
daenney 10y ago
Because they're unrelated? Mixing in the Waymo suit does nothing to clarify the situation around Jones. Sure it's juicy, but it's a different story.
- jonathankoren 10y ago
  Not necessarily. It broke within six months. It's believable that he didn't know anything about the parentage of Otto, and when the lawsuit hit, he realized just how screwed up of a situation he found himself in and bailed. We can't say it is related, but we can't say it's not related either.
  - phailhaus 10y ago
    > We can't say it is related, but we can't say it's not related either. ...and that's why you should leave it out of the headline.
  - daenney 10y ago
    That's a fair point, I hadn't considered that. I still think leaving it out of the article is fair though. Since we don't know one way or another and there isn't anything pointing in that direction just yet.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- hwillis 10y ago

CydeWeys 10y ago

Uber doesn't have a prayer of rehabilitation until Kalanick himself goes. The rot goes straight up to him. Jeff Jones was a much more recent acquisition who came from staid corporate America (Target) -- I don't think he was the problem.

tyingq 10y ago
The short tenure, job description, and his history makes this bit believable: "Jones determined that the situation at the company was more problematic than he realized."
- TorKlingberg 10y ago
  Yes, this clearly looks like Jones getting out before his reputation is sullied by further association with Uber's leadership.
  - jacquesm 10y ago
    The most likely thing that happened was that Jones said 'you go or I go' and that that ended with him going. Without inside knowledge that's speculative but this is how these things usually play out when founders dig in against a new outsider. The letter feels like spin to reduce the feeling of a fractured company towards the rest of the cadre. Not that they will be fooled (for long, anyway). Anyway, it's Travis Kalanick's ship to sink if he so desires so Jones is right to leave, but if I were him I would not wait too long before coming to my senses. The Uber brand is starting to look damaged beyond repair and they still have not begun with the salvaging operation, things are only getting worse.
    - rodgerd 10y ago
      > The most likely thing that happened was that Jones said 'you go or I go' and that that ended with him going. It's entirely possible (and more likely) that he said "these people need to go" and got told "no, they're high performers we can't do without."

redm 10y ago

The "echo chamber" works both ways. When there is excitement and buzz, it drives startups to success like no where else. Apparently it works in reverse too and people love to see the big kid on the block take hits.

Analemma_ 10y ago
Kalanick forgot that proverb we're taught as kids: "Be nice to the people you pass on the way up, because you'll be seeing them again on the way back down."
- Anderkent 10y ago
  More like he forgot the proverb we're not taught yet, but probably will be soon: "The viral circlejerk can get on you for no reason at any point, and you can pretty much do nothing about that".
ivraatiems 10y ago
Sorry, this is not just or mainly what's happening here. Every time an anti-Uber article comes up, someone pops in and says something to the effect of your comment, but it simply isn't true. Uber is evil. They do evil things. They should not be supported. Yes, people like to see the titans fall, but people also like to see those who behave poorly get what they deserve for that behavior. That's what's happening here. For reference, here is a list I compiled a while ago of all the scummy things Uber does that would make one glad to see it go.[1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13793923 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13793923
- Anderkent 10y ago
  Many items on that list aren't actually bad things, they're just described using language with negative connotations. For example >Uber breaks laws all around the world to enrich itself, including allegedly trying to deceive government officials across the world.[4] Detecting malicious users and protecting drivers by shadowbanning malicious users is neither illegal nor wrong. Uber has no legal nor moral obligation to help the governments entrap its drivers, or perform sting operations. [1] > It refuses to treat its drivers as true employees, even though legally they are considered such in many jurisdictions, and only complies when faced with court orders.[6][20] Stupid jurisdiction should not be complied with above direct legal necessity. Treating uber drivers as full time employees hurts both the drivers and the company (why do you think uber driver pay got lower the more 'benefits' uber is required to provide them?). People shitting on uber always seem to ignore how much public utility it provides in every town it enters. I remember ~10 years ago when I was in Warsaw, coming back from a new years eve party, and I had to walk ~4 hours to get back home because there was no night public transport in that area, and no taxies were available at all. I was in wasaw again 2 years ago, and in the meantime uber has moved in. Getting a drive back on NYE was trivial - maybe we had to wait 20 minutes, and pay ~4 times more than a taxi would have been (but of course there were no taxis available); but split 4 ways it was still a great deal. There's a reason people choose to use uber; and there's a reason people choose to be uber drivers. And yes, it sucks to be a taxi driver who has bought his way into a monopoly by buying a permit, and now cannot recoup the cost that easily. I wish there was a way to compensate them at a cost of the people who benefited from bringing in license requirements in the first place. But I don't see one, and in the end I believe it's more important to dismantle the broken system. [1] http://www.valuewalk.com/2017/03/greyball-uber-app/ http://www.valuewalk.com/2017/03/greyball-uber-app/

aphextron 10y ago

I really hope that Uber serves as a warning to companies who think they can ignore customer complaints. I've never dealt with such an opaque company in my entire life, in terms of getting any actual human support whatsoever regarding anything.

alex_anglin 10y ago
In the cases where I've had a sub-par experience with Uber in the past, I've had the opposite experience. Giving a poor rating for the trip triggered a response from a Uber employee who resolved the complaint. This was quite a while ago, so things may have changed and YMMV.
Jare 10y ago
Google wants to have a word with you. Or rather, they don't want to, and won't let you if you do.
- JumpCrisscross 10y ago
  I pay for Google Apps. Their phone support is excellent. They literally built a feature for me (compliance-related tags in Vault) within a few days of my call.
perlgeek 10y ago
Have you had a positive experience getting in contact with any human customer support person at Google?
- ucaetano 10y ago
  When I'm paying for a product, sure.
  - icelancer 10y ago
    I pay for Google Voice International Calls and my account was banned for a full 24 hours, meaning no VoIP calls out or in. No reason was given, no support available. It's hardly a standard across paid Google apps.

HeavenBanned 10y ago

"Recode.net"? What kind of site is this? What kind of journalism are they peddling? Seems rather suspicious. Some odd-colored terminology they used in the article: * "is directly related to the multiple controversies there" What proof do they have of this? What source that isn't Jeff Jone's PR-team said this? Where are they getting that from? * "determined that this was not the situation he signed on for" What kind of fluffy, bull-shit, non-statement is that? Give me a break, this sound like a personal puff piece for Jones. * "to help him right the very troubled ship" Excuse me? This is a multi-billion dollar company that's making a lot of money for a lot of investors and is going into self-driving cars. And somehow it is a "very troubled ship" because of one sexual harassment blog? Give me a goddamn break. Sensationalist and wrong. * "when drivers began flooding Jones' Facebook page with angry comments and complaints" Oh no! People on the _internet_ commenting shit on a Facebook page...you know what? Shut the whole Uber operation down, it's not worth going further any more. Give me a fucking break. * "that favored what board member Arianna Huffington called 'brilliant jerks.' " As opposed to what? Brilliant angels? Right. Because we know every single fucking board-room member in capitalist corporations in America is a fucking Ghandi/Marx hybrid. Get the fuck over yourself and your stupid bullshit clickbait article. What a pathetic piece of journalism. Gross. * Jerks indeed, as what has happened since then has made clear. Okay. 7K employees. 2 were fired because of misconduct. I'm sure everyone is at fault here. Does anyone remember Kelly Ellis? Should we burn Google's hierarchy/org to the ground for what she claims in a few tweets? This type of sensationalism is absolutely maddening and I cannot believe it's not buried/dead yet.

Fricken 10y ago

I think Uber's biggest problem is the broken relationships it has with so many of it's drivers. Their abuse of their labour force is the reason unions exist.

nomnombunty 10y ago
It is a broken relationship that would be hard to fix. Uber doesn't even try to hide its intention to get rid of the drivers once it has its self driving cars fully deployed
- tomcam 10y ago
  At current burn rate they won't survive long enough for that to happen.
tomcam 10y ago
[Modern] Union disliker here--that is hella true. Uber has earned it

bsg75 10y ago

> He is leaving after apparently deciding the current controversies are too much to handle. Not exactly leadership material. Edit: Apparently an unpopular opinion. Do those here think otherwise given he joined the company less than a year ago (and is thus not part of the original culture), but instead could try to repair the damage done by the uber-bro culture instead of looking for an easier paycheck?

untilHellbanned 10y ago
Don't you think he tried?
- bsg75 10y ago
  Maybe not hard enough: http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/16/14643634/uber-public-facebook-qa-drivers-angry http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/16/14643634/uber-public-faceb... "the session did not go over all that smoothly. In total, Jones answered only 12 questions on his public Facebook post"
Anderkent 10y ago
> Apparently an unpopular opinion. Do those here think otherwise given he joined the company less than a year ago (and is thus not part of the original culture), but instead could try to repair the damage done by the uber-bro culture instead of looking for an easier paycheck? Maybe 'uber-bro culture' is not actually a thing, and he doesn't see a possible solution for the PR problems? It's really hard to stop the hatetrain.
- bsg75 10y ago
  That depends on where the train is directed: At the company as a whole, or at another set of company heads who ignore serious or hard problems? I doubt the entire company is tainted, but it does have issues that need to be led by people who will address in something other a Facebook AMA.
daenney 10y ago
> but instead could try to repair the damage done by the uber-bro culture instead of looking for an easier paycheck? You seem to assume that b/c he left after half a year he didn't try and just wants to get easy money somewhere else. I wouldn't be so quick to that assumption and that's probably what makes your opinion unpopular. If I'd feel that after half a year I hadn't gotten anywhere, I'd get out too. Regardless of the pay check since one way or another I'm not able to have any meaningful impact on the organisation and its mission. I don't know if that's the case, but that's an equally reasonable assumption given what we know about Uber's culture. However, since we don't know one way or another it might be nice to assume good faith over cop-out or incompetence.

israrkhan 10y ago

Given that he quit just in six months, probably he did not even wait for his RSU grants to mature (1 year cliff for stock grants). The situation might be much worse that what appears.

onion2k 10y ago
I'd guess the real problem is that Jones can't change things without other upper management agreeing to his proposals, and they're not agreeing.
jonathankoren 10y ago
I really don't think he needs the money after being CMO at Target. This is what having fuck-you-money gets you: The ability to walk away not care about the financial consequences.
- xapata 10y ago
  Target CMO gets you 10s of millions ($7 million comp last year), or a bit over 100 million after a decade or so. People are funny. Millionaires get billionaire-envy and are sometimes willing to risk jail to add the extra zeros. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajat_Gupta https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajat_Gupta
  - sumedh 10y ago
    I just read his wiki page, obviously a brilliant man, its a shame that he went down this path.
xyzzy4 10y ago
Or maybe he thinks his current mansions, sports cars, and retirement funds are good enough?
trevyn 10y ago
Leadership compensation does not work in the same way as rank and file compensation.

MichaelBurge 10y ago

I wonder if it's a good idea to apply to Uber. With all the controversy, you could argue for a pretty good salary bump or signing bonus to compensate. Though, if executives are quitting after 6 months even before their stock vests, maybe it's more than just the outrage machine news clamoring for clicks and views.

CydeWeys 10y ago
There's lots of other companies out there that are paying good salaries that don't have these problems. It doesn't make sense to me to seek out a ship that's taking on water to sign up for. I know some Uber employees and none of them are happy with the situation.
- MichaelBurge 10y ago
  You're probably right. The self-driving car stuff sounded like fun too, but not if you're being sued over it.
- aianus 10y ago
  Of course it makes sense, they would be more desperate to hire and you would have less competition from others who have ethical problems with Uber.
  - CydeWeys 10y ago
    How are you so blase about jumping into a toxic work environment? A little bit more money isn't worth those conditions, assuming you could even get it. And keep in mind that a lot of the compensation is going to be in Uber equity -- which is affected by this scandal.
    - aianus 10y ago
      The people I know at Uber don't think it's a toxic work environment and I have no reason to distrust them in favor of a couple of accusatory blog posts from disgruntled ex-employees that I've never met.

scottmcleod 10y ago

Uber's board is failing the company and the public right now.

scottmcleod 10y ago

Uber's board is failing right now.

fluxic 10y ago

Update 1: >Travis Kalanick just sent out a company-wide email. It essentially says after Uber said it was naming a COO, Jones decided to leave. [0] https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843586902817099777 https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843586902817099777 Update 2: Ex-president Jones makes statement >"I joined Uber because of its Mission [sic], and the challenge to build global capabilities that would help the company mature and thrive long-term. "It is now clear, however, that the beliefs and approach to leadership that have guided my career are inconsistent with what I saw and experienced at Uber, and I can no longer continue as president of the ride sharing business. "There are thousands of amazing people at the company, and I truly wish everyone well." [1] https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843620240961368065 https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843620240961368065

elvinyung 10y ago
Haha, from the follow-up tweets[1]: > one or two back-handed compliments in there. but alas. > (one imagines taking the high road would have been a better decision here. but hey, im not an exec) [1]: https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843587293428375553 https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843587293428375553
- nomnombunty 10y ago
  More from the follow up tweets in regards to John's statement to Recode[1]: > one imagines that the above statement wouldn't have come if the below email didn't include the passive aggression [1]: https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843620898967969793 https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843620898967969793
tyingq 10y ago
The content of that internal email is at the bottom of this article: http://www.businessinsider.com/report-ubers-president-jeff-jones-quits-amid-company-turmoil-2017-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/report-ubers-president-jeff-j... Kalanick certainly wanted to put his spin on the reason for leaving. "After we announced our intention to hire a COO, Jeff came to the tough decision that he doesn't see his future at Uber."

loudin 10y ago

Serious question - why hasn't the Uber board replaced Kalanick yet? While it is indisputable he successfully brought Uber to where it is now, it doesn't seem like he has the good judgement to be leading Uber at this stage of the company's lifecycle. Wouldn't the best thing for the company at this point be a complete overhaul of leadership?

whalesalad 10y ago
You say that -- and externally the place looks like a catastrophe -- but we don't know what's going on under the covers. If they saw him as a true risk he'd be gone by now.
- Gargoyle 10y ago
  The question is when does he become a liability for the IPO aka VC exit?
  - taneq 10y ago
    Do you really think the Uber board is going to risk bursting that bubble with an IPO? I'd expect them to keep doing funding rounds on the basis of "it's an XX billion dollar company and its valuation is growing at YY billion/year" and try to keep the Ponzi scheme running until they get their self-driving tech working (since that's their only realistic chance of actually becoming revenue-positive).
    - Gargoyle 10y ago
      Sure, they'll keep that going as long as they can. The point is, though, that narrative is slipping away from them. They need to make a convincing case that it's real, and do so soon.
- throwaway2048 10y ago
  Not if he controls the company (which by all appearences, he does)
10y ago

bogomipz 10y ago

What is the role of "President" of the company? Where does that title fit in to an org chart or relate to the C-level execs? I am not familiar with this title in tech companies.

icelancer 10y ago
I am the President of my company, and the founder. I gave up the CEO title to someone who bought a piece of my business. The way we split it is: President (me): Head of corporate strategy, networking, and vision. (I also am the acting CTO but that's kind of not relevant here) CEO (him): Fiscal policy, hiring planning, org chart projections, etc. He is the main executor of plans and also somewhat the Chief Revenue Officer. He's also the COO and his work is more meaningful in being the ops director, actually. I loved giving up the CEO title. I don't want it back. Ever. EDIT: Essentially the President title is flexible. In my company's case, I am the head of the entity and the buck stops with me for 85-90% of use cases across 30+ employees. But that's not always the case.
- bogomipz 10y ago
  Thanks, interesting division of duties. I think as a title it's certainly more common in non-tech companies. Oddly though the VP title seems to be a dime a dozen. I have worked at many places where there was department with one or two people and one of them was the VP.
  - icelancer 10y ago
    Hmm. We don't have any VPs. Maybe we need to add some. Also should be noted that I guess the company I run isn't really a tech company. We do sports science stuff.
thrill 10y ago
In many states there is no requirement (or legal recognition) of the CxO titles - to be incorporated there you need to name only a Secretary. All other titles are for business focus reasons.

throwaway3332 10y ago

This Uber story, where scandals just kept dropping struck me as very suspicious. Like Google just randomly got CCed by a supplier? You want me to believe that? I was suspicious but who could be behind it, and why? Who is telling people to air the dirt that's undoubtedly very real, but that they have been just sitting on for a long time, at this particular moment? I recently learned that Kalanick is very close to Trump, and given that this started just after the election that would seem the likeliest explanation.

fred_is_fred 10y ago
Are you claiming that Jeff Jones applied for a took a job with Uber just so he could resign 6 months later to create a controversy?
- throwaway3331 10y ago
  No, I didn't mean to imply that. I'd say either he is not part of the shadiness at all, or he left because someone applied pressure on him recently. But this is just my guesswork. (Switching account because I didn't store the old password... Wrote this password down)
toast0 10y ago
People in general send attachments to the wrong people, add the wrong person on a thread fairly often, or add someone to a thread on purpose without thinking about what was in all the quoted stuff that shouldn't be shared with that person. It's totally believable that it happened on accident. It also could have been a plausible accident on purpose by the person at the supplier. Even if the supplier disclosed on purpose though, it doesn't excuse the apparent conduct that was discovered because of the disclosure.

Overtonwindow 10y ago

Jones saw the writing on the wall...

rexreed 10y ago

I don't understand the obsession by the press, VCs, and even consumers for Uber. I know it has changed the dynamic of transportation for many people. I know it has changed the dynamic of self-employment for many people. I know it has changed the dynamic of regulation for many cities. Oh wait. Ok I get it now. All that said, it's remarkable that ride sharing is the pinnacle of startup valuation in this latest wave of startups.

yalogin 10y ago

If you are living in the Bay Area you would think Uber is a bad company. But I just met someone outside of the Bay and realized people love Uber. They have a lot of problems and a lot to do but they are still the market leader.

adjkant 10y ago
Coming from LA and Boston, plenty of people think Uber is a bad company but still use them for lack of better prices. Most people check Lyft and will go with it if cheaper/the same cost.
akinalci 10y ago
Unfortunately for them, their reputation in the Bay Area will make it harder for them to attract and retain talent and stay competitive in the long run.
cyberferret 10y ago
Cities that still don't have ride sharing services still see Uber as the shining Messiah coming to save them. Current shenanigans within the company are really not that well known outside of tech circles. At present, in our city in North Australia, ride sharing services are still technically illegal, but Uber is campaigning hard against local government to get it overturned and the general population are behind them because the local taxi service stinks. Uber are even placing targeted ads on Facebook for local residents, and have a special page on their website just for our city residents to get information on the progress of the fight with our state govt. and local council.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
blntechie 10y ago
I live outside the US. I'm a vocal critique of Uber - the company but I love Uber - the service. Evaluating their competitors where I live, it's pretty obvious Uber is a much more seamless and better customer oriented taxi experience than anything else in the market.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

dkarapetyan 10y ago

Hypergrowth is a lot like cancer. Either they take swift action to excise all the toxic elements or it is going to be a slow and steady decline.

NicoJuicy 10y ago

In the assumption that any news is better then no news. Has the bad publicity contributed in a decline or increase of installations / usage for Uber?

brooksbp 10y ago

I love this thread. TK is loving this. GaryV is loving this too. Go build an Uber. Do it. Please. I wish you all the successes of this world. Worry about yourself, not Uber.