3 ms·
It's astounding to me that they can't make it work based on the convenience of the service. I understand the strategy of wanting to buy market share quickly, an
by pjmorris 9y ago
It's astounding to me that they can't make it work based on the convenience of the service. I understand the strategy of wanting to buy market share quickly, and to bet on self-driving cars. That they can't compete on the convenience of the service at a fair price and playing by the rules of the districts they operate in is just astonishingly bad management.
- potatolicious 9y agoI'd argue they did - I was around San Francisco when Uber was getting off the ground, and the initial service is exactly that: convenient, high-quality, provided professional drivers with commercial insurance. It was also expensive, and nowadays known as UberBlack, and is a market many times smaller than Uber's ambitions. UberBlack was a great product with unit economics that would allow for a high-quality product that was a win-win for both drivers and Uber. But it was not a big enough product to justify Uber's stratospheric valuation - hence UberX. I think we're running into the fundamental truth here that providing high-quality taxi rides at such cut-rate prices is not possible, at least not when a human is at the wheel. Cutting corners and playing dirty are IMO a manifestation of this fundamental problem.
- dullgiulio 9y agoAbsolutely agree. Another part of the problem is the need to become a unicorn at any cost. Why prefer having a huge valuation (based on thin air) when you can have a more modest but totally profit generating business? This is a question that many in the Valley should answer honestly.