3 ms·
This isn't about something new happening in the fight itself- it's about the economy lately (imho). This was a fight they could have drawn out. They could have
by mabbo 9y ago
This isn't about something new happening in the fight itself- it's about the economy lately (imho).
This was a fight they could have drawn out. They could have claimed it wasn't their fault, they could have paid enough legal fees to win the day. But it was always going to be a waste of time, in a literal sense. Years could have gone by before any decision, holding back Uber the entire time.
Uber is still a black hole for money but VCs see it's potential and keep throwing money at it. So long as that money kept coming, Uber could do anything they want really.
But then the market started crashing. The last week has been a wake up call that things are a-changin'. In another six months, there may not be VC money being thrown around anymore. And then you'd have Uber actually in a crunch. What then?
By settling today, Uber may have the time it needs to get their self-driving fleet in the road before the money runs out for good. That's all that matters to keep the company alive, and Khosrowshahi knows it.
But if he'd been smart, he'd have settled six months ago instead.
- encoderer 9y agoLawyers don’t work fast enough for this to have anything to do with stock market pullback.
- mabbo 9y agoThey can if you pay them enough. Or if this contingency plan was written 3 months ago just in case the economy finally faltered.
- eclipxe 9y agoYeah, no. That's not how this works.
- mabbo 9y agoSeriously though- beyond a dismissive snarky reply, what is your view on it? Why now? Why not six months ago and why not fight to the end? It's fine to disagree, but don't just tell me I'm wrong, convince me I'm wrong!
- encoderer 9y agoI think this is probably the product of months of negotiation. First on the big parts, then on every damn detail down to the color of the ink. It's called professional lawyering. That said, total speculation on my part and maybe obviously IANAL.
- eclipxe 9y agoApologies, you're right. My reply was pretty dismissive and snarky (hey, it's HN, that's what we do, right?) but I should have been more thoughtful in my response!
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- rayiner 9y agoNo, but business folks can hammer out a settlement "in principle" in hours, and everyone can go "pencils down" on a dime. Papering things up can take longer, but courts love to get cases off their docket and will happily oblige by staying schedules in the meantime. Press releases can go out long before the motions to dismiss are filed. This happens all the time.
- pathseeker 9y agostock market != economy. People have been used to easy constant gains but this bull market has had the benefit of low interest tailwinds the entire time. Before the 2009 crisis, potential interest rate hikes would always act as a stock headwind. An economy getting hot leads to higher interest rates which makes stocks less tempting due to risk-free alternatives getting better. So it's very easy to have scenarios where stock market declines are occurring while the the economy is doing very well. That's what appears to be happening now, there are no economic indicators that show the economy is faltering at all.