Look, I know HN loves to hate on Uber, but much of what you say feels more like FUD than a rational explanation. Let's break it down: > Uber cannot support it

Look, I know HN loves to hate on Uber, but much of what you say feels more like FUD than a rational explanation. Let's break it down: > Uber cannot support its operational business without massive VC subsidies (without drastically raising prices and losing their primary competitive advantage) As they're not yet public, we have mostly speculation. We don't know this for sure. > It's too easy for small, local competitors to enter the market I completely agree, but are the small, local competitors not subsidized by investors like Uber? I don't understand how a competitor without backing could compete against an established super corp. > Uber has been trounced in two of the largest non-US markets From an investor's perspective, they came out ahead. > Waymo legal mess We'll have to wait and see, but I think everyone needs to take this with a grain of salt. Many, many large companies are in constant lawsuits with each other. Read the Amazon Investor's report, for example -- there are three pages of lawsuits, some of which have been ongoing for over a decade. > The sheer volume/scale of scandal engulfing the company may be impossible to recover from I think this is magnified by the Valley -- peers and friends outside of California seem to either not know, or not care deeply. I honestly don't think Uber's bottom line has been harmed. > Current valuation makes an IPO under less than perfect conditions very challenging. I think this was always the case. I don't see what's new now versus two years ago. I think Uber has just as hard a time as, say, AirBNB. > If this was a well organized, planned round of funding, Benchmark wouldn't have gone behind the backs of the other board members to try and strike some shady deal. At least in my circle, it's widely understood that Bill Gurley burned all his bridges to get Travis out. It's even been suggested he's been the leaker Mike Isaac of the New York Times has been getting his information from. I think Benchmark has destroyed their confidence with the rest of the board (which Travis is still on) and wants to rinse their hands -- I'm sure the feeling is mutual. What does it say if Softbank takes the deal? Softbank is a huge, successful megacorp. They bought ARM! I would think that if Softbank buys shares in Uber, it's because they see future profits -- which is different than Benchmark's games. Not to mention that Softbank may be a great addition to Uber's board. If Benchmark exits at even 60% of the current valuation, they're out waaaay ahead. This really seems like a win-win-win for all parties involved.