5 ms·

I don't understand why this is legal? I thought there were laws about operating at a loss to drive competitors out of business.

ggg9990 9y ago
Read "Chickenshit" and "The Divide." Starting with the Obama administration and definitely continuing there is effectively no law for the sufficiently rich. It makes no sense for Uber to worry about laws.
- workthrowaway27 9y ago
  I haven't read those, but just skimming their amazon pages they look to be about why wealthy individuals are less likely to be prosecuted, which doesn't really apply to large corporations. Plus Uber is in the middle of a court case right now, so I'm sure both Uber and its lawyers have very good reasons to worry about laws.
- IncRnd 9y ago
  > there is effectively no law for the sufficiently rich. It makes no sense for Uber to worry about laws. That's clearly false. Uber is currently in a court case and was just reprimanded by the judge for appearing to intentionally destroy business records.
kjksf 9y ago
It would be hard to come up with definition of "operating at a loss to drive competition out" that applies to Uber but doesn't kill YCombinator and all other VC businesses. Dropbox has competitors and for years operated at a loss thanks to investment from YC and other VC firms. So did Twitter, Airbnb and countless other. If that was illegal, there would be no-one for VCs to invest and you wouldn't be here reading Hacker News, because this website would not exist.
- workthrowaway27 9y ago
  It appears to be covered under antitrust laws and so is only applicable when the creation of a monopoly is likely, but there are situations in which it is illegal. See [1]. I disagree with your claim that there would be no one for VCs to invest in if the law were enforced more broadly/frequently. The important part is that the law isn't applicable to all unprofitable businesses. Only those that are unprofitable because they are pricing below cost. [1]: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/predatory-or-below-cost https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...
- IncRnd 9y ago
  You're comparing apples and oranges. "Operating at a loss to drive competition out" is different from "operating at a loss".

ggg9990 9y ago

Read "Chickenshit" and "The Divide." Starting with the Obama administration and definitely continuing there is effectively no law for the sufficiently rich. It makes no sense for Uber to worry about laws.

workthrowaway27 9y ago
I haven't read those, but just skimming their amazon pages they look to be about why wealthy individuals are less likely to be prosecuted, which doesn't really apply to large corporations. Plus Uber is in the middle of a court case right now, so I'm sure both Uber and its lawyers have very good reasons to worry about laws.
IncRnd 9y ago
> there is effectively no law for the sufficiently rich. It makes no sense for Uber to worry about laws. That's clearly false. Uber is currently in a court case and was just reprimanded by the judge for appearing to intentionally destroy business records.

kjksf 9y ago

It would be hard to come up with definition of "operating at a loss to drive competition out" that applies to Uber but doesn't kill YCombinator and all other VC businesses. Dropbox has competitors and for years operated at a loss thanks to investment from YC and other VC firms. So did Twitter, Airbnb and countless other. If that was illegal, there would be no-one for VCs to invest and you wouldn't be here reading Hacker News, because this website would not exist.

workthrowaway27 9y ago
It appears to be covered under antitrust laws and so is only applicable when the creation of a monopoly is likely, but there are situations in which it is illegal. See [1]. I disagree with your claim that there would be no one for VCs to invest in if the law were enforced more broadly/frequently. The important part is that the law isn't applicable to all unprofitable businesses. Only those that are unprofitable because they are pricing below cost. [1]: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/predatory-or-below-cost https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...
IncRnd 9y ago
You're comparing apples and oranges. "Operating at a loss to drive competition out" is different from "operating at a loss".