4 ms·
The article also omits regional protectionism, local laws, and severe financial penalties that were being levied against Uber. Uber basically had a choice betw
by matchagaucho 7y ago
The article also omits regional protectionism, local laws, and severe financial penalties that were being levied against Uber.
Uber basically had a choice between a 27.5% stake in Grab or 0% in the entire Asian rideshare market.
There's no second guessing this decision IMO. It was the right decision at the time.
- stcredzero 7y agoThe article also omits regional protectionism, local laws, and severe financial penalties that were being levied against Uber. Uber was basically pioneering a new model of doing business. You can't really patent a new business model. (Though companies try.) One can only try to compete in it.
- barry-cotter 7y agoSouth East Asia isn’t a country and ASEAN has less political fellow feeling than Europe does in the EU. I sincerely doubt the Thai or Malaysian government much care whether a Singaporean or an American company is the dominant player in their local ride hailing industry.
- inawarminister 7y agoIndeed, for example, the Indonesian Go-Jek expansion to Vietnam and Philippines are hitting up quite big moat/barrier of the respective governance. Even with the much-lauded ASEAN, I think Southeast Asia is much less integrated than, say, South America. Or even Africa(n Union). Might be because all the diversity in language, religion, and culture here. [There's push to make Malay a working language of ASEAN, if the non-Austronesians agree this would make much sense than using English which is only spoken by the elite few of each countries (minus Singlish and perhaps Malaysian... Or Filipinos.)]