5 ms·
First of all predicting a crash is a fool’s errand. It as much about emotions as it is about fundamentals. There’s a perfectly valid explanation for the valuati
by 8ytecoder 7y ago
First of all predicting a crash is a fool’s errand. It as much about emotions as it is about fundamentals. There’s a perfectly valid explanation for the valuation of Startups and the availability of capital for startups in the last 9 or so years. After 2008 crash, markets were stagnant until 2012. At the same time capital was being eased by govts worldwide. This capital has to flow somewhere. Tech startups were ripe at this crucial juncture for investments - we had seen enough successes with the likes of Facebook, Amazon and Google - and tech had a major point in its favour in terms of being able to scale easily. Now, in hindsight (personally i never thought it could work as claimed) this is emphatically not true for the sharing economy.
Plenty of articles have been written about it 2-3 years ago. We all have short term memory and are forgetting this. Every major tech publication predicted a crash in the startup economy. It never came about.
None of this related to the macro environment we are at. Trade wars wreak havoc on the sentiment of business than the actual supply chains themselves. Which is what seems to be happening now.
- refurb 7y agoThis is an insightful comment. The reason why tech has done so well in the past 10 years is partially due to luck. While investment dollars continued to pile up post-2008, tech was one industry who had recently shown really impressive returns. As such, that's where the dollars flowed. My concern is what happens when a few of those unicorns fail (e.g. Uber)? If sentiment shifts enough, you might see tech suddenly become the ugly duckling. Companies that in reality are doing reasonably well will be painted with the same brush. When people start to see Uber failing and other unicorns struggling, it just become a self-fulfilling prophecy - "I knew a recession was coming". People get risk adverse, company's stop hiring and it spreads to the economy as a whole.
- hindsightbias 7y agoHow many employees does Uber need to operate? They could probably lay off 80% of their staff, keep the lights on, and the stock price will soar.
- pro-duct 7y agoUntil every competitor leap frogs them. Everyone's running up a down escalator. If uber just keeps the lights on, they will not maintain their stronghold on ridesharing, let alone be the last to market for the next generation of mobility that will replace their current product. Even Facebook goes out of fashion - that's why they bought Instagram and WhatsApp.
- hindsightbias 7y agoIMO, we’ve reached the diffusion limit of innovation in ridesharing. Autonomous is a pipe dream and in a recession, human drivers will be cheap. Uber and Lyft lose money because they’re over-hiring talent and they’re consolidating their monopolies via marketing/market share wars. When the bubble pops, people are going to stick to MS and Apple - they’re not going to jump to Amiga or BeOS.
- opportune 7y agoI am pretty sure recessions will at least be good for ridesharing companies, since they will get more drivers, which will lower driver pay. Since they can treat the prices consumers are willing to pay as sticky, this could help them solve profitability issues. I am not sure how much a recession would affect demand or consumers' willingness to spend on ridesharing though, but I think overall a recession is actually good for ridesharing For Airbnb, it's a bit harder to say. More people will probably try to airbnb their places out, which will bring average costs down but increase the supply a lot. Demand may also increase as people unfortunately may turn to short term housing due to being in financially precarious situations. Since it's theorized that the American dollar will strengthen in the recession, this could also boost Airbnb's presence in international markets Wework will probably gain too. More unemployment probably means more people trying to work out of weworks in startups or as freelancers. For the buildings they rent from non-executives, they could see a lower rent which would also help profitability. So in summary I think the sharing economy is actually going to do ok. What do people do when they're unemployed? They try to make ends meet, and that means participating in the sharing economy
- malandrew 7y agoThis is exactly what has happened in Brazil.
- mdorazio 7y agoI'm not convinced a recession would be good for ridesharing companies. In a lot of places today, using Uber or Lyft is significantly more expensive than driving yourself on a per-mile basis, and way more expensive than alternatives like public transit. In a recession scenario where people are losing jobs and tightening personal budgets, it's pretty easy to envision a lot of people taking a hard look at their rideshare expenditures and either deciding to use an alternative or just not go out places nearly as often.
- opportune 7y agoIt depends a lot on how much ridesharing companies pass on any labor cost decreases to consumers, and consumers' demand curves. Personally, my ridesharing use is a mix of relatively inelastic demand and elastic demand. Inelastically I am almost always going to use ridesharing to get to/from the airport, go places in other cities where I don't have a car and public transportation is too complex to figure out. I will usually use ridesharing if it is significantly faster and only $10 or so more expensive compared to public transportation that I can figure out. The only thing I would really reduce is using ridesharing to go out drinking - but if that becomes significantly cheaper, maybe not
- jjwhitaker 7y agoThe bond yield curve inversion mentioned in the article has led every recession in the last 70 years by 12-24 months. It's an indicator, because we don't know the future, but it's historically accurate to a T. On some level it is self fulfilling but the evidence of past crashes is there too. Auto loan defaults are at a high, as is student and household debt (higher than 2007). Those auto loans are often bundled almost exactly like junk mortgages in 2007 leading to a similar investment risk. More americans live paycheck to paycheck than ever before possibly increasing the number needing support should unemployment jump back up to 12%, where it was when Obama took over in 2009. It won't be as bad but the federal government under Trump/GOP has cut taxes and drastically pumped up the deficit putting us in a worse position to weather a recession of any length. Cuts to social programs will also extend a recession or at least increase it's effects as people will still need food and affordable housing. The number on social security will increase while less will be employed to pay in and as SS was used as a piggy bank for GOP spending decades ago that system could go from failing in a few decades to gone. It could be 6-12 months of job losses and stock market falls like the .com bubble but it could quickly complicate as the government may be slow or unable to respond in traditional ways due to lack of funding, lack of staffing (an existing issue in the current admin), lack of experience of the current staffing, and continued conservative/GOP attacks on social programs and minority groups most likely to be hit hard by any recession. It's like Jenga. In 2007 a core lower block was pulled and a lot of pieces went with it but we had the leverage federally to hold some in place or put back others like auto manufacturers. This time, the piece may be much higher up but automakers are already suffering under tariffs and the federal government won't have the funding capacity or push by the GOP led government to react in time and, like midwest farmers, that could be the end of an era for some industries.