4 ms·

The size of the hole is irrelevant. What matters it the size of the shovel they are using (their expenses and subsidies) and the force of the wind that's refil

The size of the hole is irrelevant. What matters it the size of the shovel they are using (their expenses and subsidies) and the force of the wind that's refilling the hole with nearby dust (the customer revenues). They can reduce their shovel without impacting the wind too much.

tyingq 10y ago
Amazon was fine throwing money into making a moat, and they have a tangible one. I don't see what Uber's moat is once self driving cars are common. It seems they will be fighting off competition (car companies, Waymo, etc) that didn't have to spend money on lobbying, lawsuits, subsidies, and so forth.
- user5994461 10y ago
  That's your problem there! :D Self driving cars are just hype that won't be any significant for another decade. You should forget about self driving cars. What Uber has right now is real, a massive customer base and network of taxi, that is bringing billions of dollars. They could totally focus on that and have a strong and sustainable business.
  - tyingq 10y ago
    Sans self driving cars, Uber loses cash. You seem to think shedding employees is enough to fix that. Closing a $2 to $3bn/yr loss with just layoffs seems hard. Eliminating subsidies puts competitors on a level playing field. I can sell dollar bills for 90 cents and be incredibly popular too. I just don't have the panache to sell that plan to Saudis.
    - user5994461 10y ago
      Think of competitors as friends. They bring you business. Yes, it helps you that the taxi can have a phone with lyft in the same car. It gives the illusion of choice and it gives an alternative to the driver. In the end, your business has 90% market share. It's not going away overnight. Market share is actually self sustaining and it's giving you a strong edge for the future. Competitors don't have 1/10th of the cash. If they get try to compete on subsidies, they'll get a peak of traffic and run out.
    - yawaworht12 10y ago
      Sans self driving cars, Uber's competitors are also losing cash, and they are losing cash faster than Uber https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13772168 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13772168
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - tyingq 10y ago
        Yes, that seems logical. I'd mentioned competition in my comment as Waymo and car companies. "Sell at a loss but make it up in volume" probably doesn't work well for many :)
        yawaworht12 10y ago
        I read your comment twice. You only mention Uber and not "Waymo and car companies" unless your referring to a different comment of yours than the one I replied to here.
        tyingq 10y ago
        This was the only spot where I said anything about specific competitors: It seems they will be fighting off competition (car companies, Waymo, etc) that didn't have to spend money on lobbying The bigger thing, though, is that you keep implying that I said Lyft was somehow in a better spot. Now you're noting I never mentioned Lyft. Nothing I'm saying is affected one way or other by Lyft. Pointing out that they have the same problem doesn't change the rationale.

tyingq 10y ago

Amazon was fine throwing money into making a moat, and they have a tangible one. I don't see what Uber's moat is once self driving cars are common. It seems they will be fighting off competition (car companies, Waymo, etc) that didn't have to spend money on lobbying, lawsuits, subsidies, and so forth.

user5994461 10y ago
That's your problem there! :D Self driving cars are just hype that won't be any significant for another decade. You should forget about self driving cars. What Uber has right now is real, a massive customer base and network of taxi, that is bringing billions of dollars. They could totally focus on that and have a strong and sustainable business.
- tyingq 10y ago
  Sans self driving cars, Uber loses cash. You seem to think shedding employees is enough to fix that. Closing a $2 to $3bn/yr loss with just layoffs seems hard. Eliminating subsidies puts competitors on a level playing field. I can sell dollar bills for 90 cents and be incredibly popular too. I just don't have the panache to sell that plan to Saudis.
  - user5994461 10y ago
    Think of competitors as friends. They bring you business. Yes, it helps you that the taxi can have a phone with lyft in the same car. It gives the illusion of choice and it gives an alternative to the driver. In the end, your business has 90% market share. It's not going away overnight. Market share is actually self sustaining and it's giving you a strong edge for the future. Competitors don't have 1/10th of the cash. If they get try to compete on subsidies, they'll get a peak of traffic and run out.
  - yawaworht12 10y ago
    Sans self driving cars, Uber's competitors are also losing cash, and they are losing cash faster than Uber https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13772168 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13772168
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - tyingq 10y ago
      Yes, that seems logical. I'd mentioned competition in my comment as Waymo and car companies. "Sell at a loss but make it up in volume" probably doesn't work well for many :)
      - yawaworht12 10y ago
        I read your comment twice. You only mention Uber and not "Waymo and car companies" unless your referring to a different comment of yours than the one I replied to here.
        tyingq 10y ago
        This was the only spot where I said anything about specific competitors: It seems they will be fighting off competition (car companies, Waymo, etc) that didn't have to spend money on lobbying The bigger thing, though, is that you keep implying that I said Lyft was somehow in a better spot. Now you're noting I never mentioned Lyft. Nothing I'm saying is affected one way or other by Lyft. Pointing out that they have the same problem doesn't change the rationale.