28 ms·
Lyft Files for IPO
- ArtWomb 8y agoI see tremendous upside getting into either $LYFT below $20B or $UBER at $120B, which recently announced operational air taxi service by 2023.
- spiderPig 8y agoI would rather wait for the Magic carpet service due by 2025.
- sigfubar 8y agoAnd the home teleportation portal announced for 2027. I just hope it doesn't have too many privacy implications.
- ghaff 8y agoSee Larry Niven for SF speculation around the implication of transfer booths.
- sunsetMurk 8y agoPersonally, I'm more worried about the potential for a foreign object(eg. a fly) being present in the booth and becoming merged with myself as part of the teleportation process. scary stuff!
- kochikame 8y agoBig Magic Carpet will shut the whole teleportation industry down before it even gets going
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- whttheuuu 8y agoRide hailing is a commodity.
- rbowlby83 8y agoI'm not sure it's a commodity. Riders are not necessarily willing to wait indefinitely for the driver. Economies of scale is a factor in ride hailing. Perhaps a ride hailing company with fewer drivers can out perform a larger peer through predictive analysis, putting drivers in the right areas ahead of time. That likely amounts to a neat trick when you think about the scale of Uber and Lyft. Uber has had to close down operations in several countries as well as several cities here in U.S.. Each time losing investors hard earned dollars. Lyft is most definitely, as others mentioned, in the slipstream; benefiting from Ubers successes and failures. Lyft is a brand people respect and love and Uber not so much; at least not here in the U.S. Lyft also has partnered with Google's Waymo. I think that partnership is limited to testing autonomous ride share but Google is also an investor in Lyft. A future acquisition or partnership doesn't seem out of the question. I see room for a few players to own the market and if I were an investor I'd go with Lyft.
- a13n 8y agoI see tremendous upside potential in one of those investments :P
- ghaff 8y agoQuestion that's somewhere between rhetorical and semi-serious. At what point do one of these companies increase their pricing to the point where they can operate profitably and just let volumes end up wherever they end up (making whatever cost cuts they need to on the way down)? Presumably there's some point where you can make money--but maybe not if you have a basically equivalent competitor who is willing to lose money indefinitely.
- kerng 8y agoIt seems like Lyft makes about the same loss as Uber overall percentage wise. So, if both IPO they will have to increase prices accordingly. At this point it might be better for one to back off from IPO, that would allow to further diversify business and find other more profitable ventures long term.
- maxxxxx 8y agoThey want to cash out. They know that they have no real long term plan.
- Scoundreller 8y agoHow about claiming to actually be a camera company?
- _hardwaregeek 8y agoSeriously, what's Uber/Lyft's long term goal? If I had to guess, destroy all local taxi services, then fix prices with their competitors and worry about anti-competitive lawsuits later. Waiting for self driving cars feels like a fool's errand.
- ghaff 8y agoWhen Kalanick was booted, I actually did expect the board to call a timeout and take a hard look at the business model while admitting that self-driving, especially in places that actually have enough density to make taxi-type services generally of interest, is a red herring. It's too far out and it's not clear what the implications are anyway. It's not like Uber and Lyft aren't still a useful service at 1.5x to 2x current pricing (or whatever is needed to achieve profitability). Traditional taxi services suck in a lot of places. And, OK, at that point the users who only take Uber because of the VC subsidies end up going back to taking the bus. But who cares. >destroy all local taxi services Except they haven't. There are still taxis where they make sense as well as private car services. It's hard to see giving it a few more years is going to make much of a difference.
- fjabre 8y agoIs there any upside to staying private if you're profitable?
- ForHackernews 8y agoYou can throw lots of money at kooky, far out bets without having to answer to shareholders?
- rayvd 8y agoNo SOX!
- ghaff 8y agoSure. You're not nearly as beholden to shareholders with short-term investment horizons. See e.g. Dell going private.
- nwhatt 8y agoAt some level an IPO is just like another raise. Any article or advice about not taking VC money applies.
- thisisit 8y agoIt depends on the situation. Being private means the company doesn't have to follow compliance rules strictly. A good example of that is accounting rules. There are tons of companies out there which show non-GAAP profitability. But non-GAAP actually means companies can ignore stuff like ESOPs etc to create their balance sheets. When it comes to creating GAAP reports these same companies tend to be unprofitable by a large margin. Then there is the flip side too. Even if the company is profitable but not profitable enough. Let's say a hypothetical $1 in profit. And then company needs more than $1 to keep it afloat but no investor is interested. Then they have two options - raise debt or go public and raise money. Out of the two going public is slightly better.
- nicoburns 8y agoThe only upside to going public if you're profitable is to get a quick injection. The IMO massive downside is that you've just lost control of your company.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- PhasmaFelis 8y agoFunny that Uber/Lyft get categorized as "ride-hailing" when they specifically don't allow you to hail a cab, only request one in advance. But the alternative seems to be "ride-sharing", which is utter feel-good bullshit outside of the small percentage who use Uber Pool or Lyft Line, so I suppose it's the best we've got.
- enobrev 8y agoI believe the full term is "ride-hailing app[lication]", which does fit these services, specifically because they can't be used without the apps. I agree that the shortened version doesn't fit.
- SilasX 8y agoHm, I had always heard "street hail" to refer to what (I think) you mean, when you request it by line-of-sight, not "hail" by itself.
- shoshino 8y ago>they specifically don't allow you to hail a cab Don't they? The app experience certainly feels like hailing. The app provides a virtual line of sight that shows me a map of my surroundings with nearby available vehicles, when I make a booking I can track the vehicle as it approaches my location.
- spaceflunky 8y agoDid anyone here buy $lyft on the secondary markets?
- lbacaj 8y agoI see a lot of comments on here about the efficiency of Lyft/Uber's and lots of comments about their overspending. The new book by Reid Hoffman, Blitzscaling, was an eye-opener for me as to how these companies operate and what seems as incredibly inefficient now will all be but forgotten tomorrow when they have complete monopolies over all transportation... The nature of technology makes it winner take all almost always, it's only a matter of time until they can offer other forms of transportation to people. Perhaps people someday won't even own any cars at all especially if it's cheaper to call an autonomous one from your device whenever you need it. These are interesting times we are living in and these business models are completely counterintuitive to traditional norms of taking small risks and that much is obvious from seeing the business models of Uber/Lyft, WeWork, Airbnb, etc.
- RandallBrown 8y agoWhy would ridesharing be winner take all? There's almost no network effect (beyond splitting the cost, but Venmo has largely solved that) and the drivers all drive for all of them. In NYC I think there's at least 4 ridesharing companies and I usually choose which one based on which one has given me a promo.
- lewis500 8y agoThere is a network effect. Imagine if you made a ridesharing app with only one driver. No one would use the app due to high wait times. That's an edge case but it gets the point across: too few drivers and no one will use your app, and if no one uses the app no drivers will enlist in your service.
- toomuchtodo 8y agoUsers already have to make arrangements with traditional car services for early AM airport runs because there is no Uber of Lyft supply in most areas (outside of NYC, SF, LA).
- lalaithion 8y agoBut drivers aren't locked in to a single service, and there's little to no cost for drivers to be on both Uber and MyStartup, so the network effect is diminshed.
- docker_up 8y agoFrom a purely investment point of view, why would anyone invest in Lyft over Uber? Lyft has a smaller footprint and only operates in the US (except Toronto). They are more susceptible to economic conditions in a single country, the US, and every point of marketshare they get is a zero-sum game against Uber and presumably expensive because Uber won't give it up for free. Uber has a global operations, is in multiple streams of business and has diversity across business lines and countries so even if there's a recession in one country, it might be made up for in other countries. So what's the investment story then for Lyft?
- empath75 8y agoWhy would anyone invest in Pepsi over Coca-Cola? Why invest in Apple over Microsoft? Why invest in Tesla over GM? There can be more than one successful company in a segment. Also, well, you can't invest in Uber.
- jonthepirate 8y agoFormer Lyft eng here of 2.5 yrs.. Lyft is kicking major a. Don't mean to hype it. Even if they weren't IPO'ing I can tell you they are firing on all pistons. I'm pretty sure the financials are in good shape too. Haven't worked there in 2 years though. Fingers crossed.
- samstave 8y agoWere you able to keep options?
- bagacrap 8y agoEven if you invest purely cynically you might reasonably believe that Uber's toxic culture will eventually catch up with them.
- squish78 8y agoHow would you see that playing out?
- mpweiher 8y agoShrewd move to get it done before Uber. As many others here have noted (and other disputed) there doesn't seem to be an actual viable business model here. So there would be a distinct first mover advantage for getting in your IPO in, lest the other one tank the market for you as it starts to hit reality, such as actually having to have a sustainable business no longer fueled almost exclusively by investor money.
- yellow_postit 8y agoFirst mover has to operate in the open while the private company can continue with increased flexibility that comes from a lack of disclosure. A question I have for Lyft is why now given the, seeming, lack of a viable biz model?
- ghaff 8y agoI think you basically answered your own question. If you assume there really is no viable business model--and isn't going to be one--why wouldn't you take what you can while the taking is good before the suckers, excuse me investors, realize it is all smoke and mirrors? Waiting presupposes either a better exit in some other form (i.e. acquisition) or improving financials/other business metrics that let you price higher for an IPO. ADDED: And as maxxxxx wrote, it seems as if there are a lot of risks for the general economic picture and I'd expect both Lyft and Uber to be hit pretty hard in any significant downturn as they're luxury goods to at least some degree.
- maxxxxx 8y ago" A question I have for Lyft is why now given the, seeming, lack of a viable biz model?" The stock market is at a high and looking pretty shaky. Time to cash out before things go downhill.
- mpweiher 8y agoAnd...drumroll...Uber also just filed. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18633211 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18633211
- khazhou 8y agoThey filed a draft/confidential S-1, so don't bother yet searching for the document.
- Tiktaalik 8y agoI'm not very bullish on these ride sharing companies in the long term. More and more data is coming out that suggests that these ride sharing companies impact transportation and congestion metrics in a negative way that is counter productive to cities' long term transportation goals. Accordingly cities are layering on more regulations that will limit what has made these companies different from traditional taxi companies.
- whoisjuan 8y ago"Ride sharing" is not an accurate representation of these companies anymore. Uber and Lyft are trying to become major mobility and transportation platforms. The core of their business right now relies on ride-sharing, but if they want to become sustainable long-term companies they need to evolve their business. Sadly, drivers are just an input to generate cash flow. They're definitely not indispensable, especially with new short distance tranportation solutions like scooters.
- rococode 8y agoAt this point Uber and Lyft are really just taxi companies with nice apps. Add the driver reviews, GPS locations, and requesting a ride via an app to a traditional taxi system and it's the same. The only major advantage they have right now is that Uber/Lyft are standardized throughout cities and suburbs, whereas taxi companies are mostly local to one city.
- tomp 8y agoThe other significant advantage is that they're cheaper. Either because they're actually cheaper (e.g. in London, black cab drivers have to train to know every street by heart, whereas Uber drivers can just rely on technology (Google Maps)), or because Uber subsidizes the passengers, but regardless, they're significantly cheaper (speaking for London).
- whoisjuan 8y agoWhat is limiting a black cab driver from using Google Maps or Apple Maps or whatever?
- umeshunni 8y agoIs there a link to the actual S-1? edit: No, it looks like they filed confidentially.
- rajacombinator 8y agoReminder this is a direct transfer from your 401k into the pockets of wealthy VCs.
- medius 8y agoI feel that the time to file for IPO for Lyft and Uber is running out. If Waymo One starts getting popular and gets more and more into news cycle, valuations of both of these companies will be considered based on the progress of self driving cars.
- Animats 8y agoLooking forward to reading the prospectus. Let's see the audited numbers. A confidential filing with the SEC of an offering is a new thing. Until 2017, you couldn't do that. It's limiting in some ways. Lyft now can't say anything more about an IPO. If they do, the confidentiality can disappear.[1] [1] https://www.sec.gov/corpfin/voluntary-submission-draft-registration-statements-faqs https://www.sec.gov/corpfin/voluntary-submission-draft-regis...
- partingshots 8y agoScramble scramble! Quick, before people realize ridesharing is completely unsustainable without self driving to take out the cost of human drivers, except that Lyft is so far behind in the self driving race that they basically have no way to ever catch up.
- perlgeek 8y agoHow unusual is a confidential S-1?
- rayshan 8y agoIt's becoming more common now with the 2012 JOBs act, which allows companies to qualify as an Emerging Growth Company (EGC). Companies can then file confidentially and enjoy some other benefits that lower the IPO barrier. Here's info from the SEC about the confidential submission process [1]. $1B revenue is usually the bar to say under to qualify. I built an app to help startups assess their IPO readiness [2]. If you look under Legal & Compliance -> SEC -> EGC qualification tracking, it has a bunch of details. [1] https://www.sec.gov/divisions/corpfin/guidance/cfjumpstartfaq.htm https://www.sec.gov/divisions/corpfin/guidance/cfjumpstartfa... [2] https://ipo-ready.com/#legal-compliance https://ipo-ready.com/#legal-compliance
- the_reformation 8y agoThe most exciting implication here is that we can finally pour over the financials of a major ride-hailing company. Whether these companies have the unit economics to succeed is, remarkably, still an open question.
- dcposch 8y agoSorry to be a grammar right wing populist, but it's "pore over". To pore is to think deeply about to something, to dwell on it. A pour-over is a type of coffee.
- scarface74 8y agoI’m not a grammar nazi either, but I am glad you posted this. I didn’t know this either. This was an insightful correction. The only thing I usually correct is jibe vs jive....
- liquidise 8y agoI'm not sure why you are being down voted. This sounds like it is a surprising revelation for many, myself included.
- pgrote 8y agoI believe it is for "right wing populist" when nazi is usually used with the grammar phrase.
- Waterluvian 8y agoNever knew this. Thanks for sharing.
- Daegalus 8y agoThis makes a lot of sense. I have never seen Pore-Over written right, and pronounced, I always thought it was Pour and as an immigrant (even though i came here when I was 5 years old) it never quite made sense, but I went with it. Now that I know the word "pore" exists with this definition, it makes so much more sense.
- uptownfunk 8y agoExcept Uber still works.. fastest tap to ride time I’ve seen across all the apps.
- sunsetMurk 8y ago>fastest tap to ride time I've never heard that phrase and I like it. I'm sure we'll start to see it more. Then, who has the best self driving route/priority for the fastest tap to destination time :-)
- webninja 8y agoI’ll invest in Lyft when it IPOs if the valuation is fair (unlike Snapchat’s IPO lol) Every dollar Lyft raises in the IPO is an extra dollar it can use against Uber. Sometimes, the one with the biggest warchest wins.
- wturner 8y agoI'm curious what a company like Lyft (or any number of companies that have grown rapidly due to funding but still seem like they have some kind of sustainable business model) how they might look as democratically owned companies (basically a giant coop). Technically their is no reason that the entire thing can't be owned directly by the drivers, software developers and legal people with profit sharing and extreme voting. The social scaffolding is still a radical idea and the cultural assumptions are not crystalized like dictatorial businesses , but as a general idea it's hard for me not to "feel" like the democratically owned equivilent to many of these "VC funded" companies is not the the disruption model to the disruption model. I picture companies like lyft getting off the ground due to huge influx of investor money, experimenting, feng shuing out any uneeded clutter and then some leaner, more organic democratically-owned alternative gradually becoming more of a norm after the previous iteration did all the experimental work. I kind of hope that happens - at least as an experiment. If it were successful it would be funny....and neat. I can dream. :/
- nicetryguy 8y agoI'd love to see you start that company :)
- niyazpk 8y agoIs there a way for retail investors to buy shares in companies pre-IPO?
- iblaine 8y agoIf we learned anything from SNAP, it's that investors are still greedy. APPF is a good example of a recent IPO that has done very well since its IPO date. IMHO, hyped up companies like Lyft have all the value sucked out before the IPO.
- zygotic12 8y agoSELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.SELL.
- delta-neutral 8y agoI made a video about this HN post, where I'm summarizing the 3 most common misconceptions that I have identified from this discussion: https://youtu.be/Wa9uzVYA4K8 https://youtu.be/Wa9uzVYA4K8