3 ms·
Around the issue of this crash? Yes. Around the issue of how much Uber needs self-driving to pan out, now? Not so much. Around the reality that Kalanick is bad
by M_Grey 10y ago
Around the issue of this crash? Yes. Around the issue of how much Uber needs self-driving to pan out, now? Not so much. Around the reality that Kalanick is bad news, and at the same time utterly in control? Not at all.
I see what you're talking about, but overall I see (although not necessarily in this thread) people talking about Uber operating a VC subsidized per-ride loss, and just how much they need self-driving to pan out in a hurry.
- sebastos 10y agoFair points. If I were a VC, I wouldn't be thrilled with Kalanick at the helm, even if I wasn't about to sell sell sell. I get why people might be concerned about the operating losses, at least to first order. But I just don't see the structure of how people think this disintegration is going to happen. To me, it looks like a very solid business model that makes tons of cash and spends tons of cash (like Amazon). I don't see some kind of tower of Babel built entirely on the perception of value that could topple at any moment (Twitter). People love using ride-sharing apps, and there's no way that's going to change in the near future. Even if their self-driving-car play isn't working out, I don't see why it has to pan out _now_. They can always just fall back on their massively successful core business..