Not really disagreeing with the rest of this comment, but a couple of points: > given they'll be freely available for purchase from Tesla, GM, etc when created

Not really disagreeing with the rest of this comment, but a couple of points: > given they'll be freely available for purchase from Tesla, GM, etc when created Tesla has a built-in "feature" in their cars, to make OTA updates to the software running the car. One part of the vision of buying a Tesla, is supposed to be the day when customers let their autonomous car "work" for them while they are not using it. I don't think it's a huge stretch of imagination for Tesla to come out with it's own version of the ride sharing parts of Uber when autonomous driving becomes a full reality with their cars. They could eat Uber at this point. > Thats a plan that gives Uber a very long runway to achieve full profitability, even without an IPO. Points 3, 4 & 5 of the plan are likely going to be very difficult! Why? > 3) Focus everyone left on ride-sharing, improving the brand, and efficiently expanding internationally. I'm fairly certain there are very smart, well-paid people already trying to do each of things at Uber, not sure how reducing headcount will magically improve the state of affairs here. Mythical man month like arguments come to mind. > 4) Clean house in the HR department and of every remaining harasser. If the company was built on a foundation of sexist and abrasive culture, rooting every one out will take a long time, not to mention disruptive as it involves disentangling the fiefdoms built by these people (who may even be doing a "good job", causing damage to raw business metrics in removing them). I'm not saying this shouldn't be done, I'm just saying "birds of a feather flock together", so if I may dare say, wholesale pest removal might unfortunately be low on the priority of any new exec. They would be more focussed on other matters and just treat the symptoms. Human nature. > 5) Raise another round to ensure Uber's long term financial stability. If Points 1 & 2 are followed, without the silver-talk of "constant innovation" and projections of "taking over global transportation with our technology" - raising private funds might get extremely challenging and may not have the expected results. At that point, an IPO might provide better success as public investors are interested in "business that execute" as well, as opposed to the private investment folks who look for returns in the Order(s) of Magnitude scale.