4 ms·

I think it's the trend of bringing tech to an existing market. When that stops, we'll probably stop calling it tech companies. Uber is the perfect example of a

I think it's the trend of bringing tech to an existing market. When that stops, we'll probably stop calling it tech companies. Uber is the perfect example of a "tech company" - they brought technology (and in this context "tech", arguably, means "the internet") to an industry that was previously dominated by standing on a street and waving down a cab/taxi. However I think it is rather pithy to just call them a taxi company with an app, right? There's a lot of tech "magic" involved in Uber from the real-time connections on a such a massive scale, to the geo-fencing, price/route estimations, and the massive amounts of infrastructure management and maintenance needed to bring that to however many millions of people use the service.

lotsofpulp 7y ago
In my mind, the main feature of a tech company is the ability to scale due to almost zero marginal costs, compared to other companies which need much more time and resources, which is also why tech companies can have such huge profit per employee numbers.
- ghaff 7y ago
  That's very specific to software that doesn't need much support. I think Intel is probably considered a tech company and they certainly can't scale at near-zero marginal cost.
jcranberry 7y ago
>However I think it is rather pithy to just call them a taxi company with an app, right? Perhaps you mean reductive? A pithy statement would be one which has identified the core of something or is very meaningful despite being terse. It is very positive.
pdonis 7y ago
> There's a lot of tech "magic" involved in Uber I agree this is true of Uber, but is it true of WeWork? It seems like the comparison with Uber just makes WeWork look even less like a tech company.
- autokad 7y ago
  I agree, I don't see how wework is a tech company other then the fact they probably service mostly tech companies. I was stationed at wework for a while, I liked it. But I don't see how tech is involved
  - CydeWeys 7y ago
    WeWork to me seems similar to a chain gym. Both have shared physical facilities and manage a membership database that allows you to get in (and also provide WiFi). Yes, there's computer systems involved, but any company of any reasonable size is using computers these days.
TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
But we don't call, say, banks tech companies. A huge portion of their business requires sophisticated technical infrastructure they create themselves, but we just call them banks. And there are plenty of normal taxi companies with similar systems to Uber's.
- afarrell 7y ago
  People call Monzo a tech company.
  - novok 7y ago
    'fintech' specifically. It's almost a style designator.
- ulfw 7y ago
  There's a ton of tech involved in all kinds of companies: hotels, airlines, hospitals, insurance companies, anything really. None of them are "tech companies". Neither is Uber/Lyft/Grab
- jasode 7y ago
  >But we don't call, say, banks tech companies. A huge portion of their business requires sophisticated technical infrastructure they create themselves, but we just call them banks. I understand your criteria for classification but I'll attempt to explain why others think of Uber as a "tech company". Others' viewpoint: Yes, virtually every company uses technology but not every company is birthed by technology: - the Uber founders (Travis K and Garrett C) were software programmers, not taxicab owners. - the product they worked on was a smartphone app instead of buying a car with a taxi medallion and driving around for fares. - the type of investors that funded them (e.g. Benchmark Capital) were VCs that specialize in the tech sector. - the type of companies Uber has acquired[1] so far are tech focused (e.g. machine learning, geospatial, etc). Yes, 100-year-old banks always have ongoing modernization with evolving technology (e.g. Citi and Chase have developed smartphone apps) but Uber's birth was programmers playing around with smartphones. Another example of the perception difference is eBay vs Sotheby's/Christie's. eBay is typically called a "tech company" but Sotheby's/Christie's are called "auction houses". If eBay brings together buyers & sellers in a marketplace... and Sotheby's/Christie's also has an auctions marketplace... why is "tech company" more often attached to eBay rather than Sotheby's/Christie's? (Both Sotheyby's & Christie's have websites for users to place bids so they develop technology as well.) Probably because eBay was born on the internet by a software programmer named Pierre Omidyar. I'm not saying you have to agree with all that but just trying to explain the "hidden taxonomy" that some of the others (including the news media) use to label certain companies as "tech company". [1] https://acquiredby.co/uber-acquisitions/ https://acquiredby.co/uber-acquisitions/
dcolkitt 7y ago
Definitely agree with you about Uber. Here's one clear way to see that Uber is a tech company. Imagine the senior management was all abducted by aliens tomorrow, and you had to replace them very quickly. Who would you rather bring in. A bunch of senior execs from Google or a bunch of former Taxi company managers? Which group do you think could run Uber better? Well I think the obvious answer makes it pretty clear that Uber is a company with tech at the very foundation of its DNA.

lotsofpulp 7y ago

In my mind, the main feature of a tech company is the ability to scale due to almost zero marginal costs, compared to other companies which need much more time and resources, which is also why tech companies can have such huge profit per employee numbers.

ghaff 7y ago
That's very specific to software that doesn't need much support. I think Intel is probably considered a tech company and they certainly can't scale at near-zero marginal cost.

jcranberry 7y ago

>However I think it is rather pithy to just call them a taxi company with an app, right? Perhaps you mean reductive? A pithy statement would be one which has identified the core of something or is very meaningful despite being terse. It is very positive.

pdonis 7y ago

> There's a lot of tech "magic" involved in Uber I agree this is true of Uber, but is it true of WeWork? It seems like the comparison with Uber just makes WeWork look even less like a tech company.

autokad 7y ago
I agree, I don't see how wework is a tech company other then the fact they probably service mostly tech companies. I was stationed at wework for a while, I liked it. But I don't see how tech is involved
- CydeWeys 7y ago
  WeWork to me seems similar to a chain gym. Both have shared physical facilities and manage a membership database that allows you to get in (and also provide WiFi). Yes, there's computer systems involved, but any company of any reasonable size is using computers these days.

TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago

But we don't call, say, banks tech companies. A huge portion of their business requires sophisticated technical infrastructure they create themselves, but we just call them banks. And there are plenty of normal taxi companies with similar systems to Uber's.

afarrell 7y ago
People call Monzo a tech company.
- novok 7y ago
  'fintech' specifically. It's almost a style designator.
ulfw 7y ago
There's a ton of tech involved in all kinds of companies: hotels, airlines, hospitals, insurance companies, anything really. None of them are "tech companies". Neither is Uber/Lyft/Grab
jasode 7y ago
>But we don't call, say, banks tech companies. A huge portion of their business requires sophisticated technical infrastructure they create themselves, but we just call them banks. I understand your criteria for classification but I'll attempt to explain why others think of Uber as a "tech company". Others' viewpoint: Yes, virtually every company uses technology but not every company is birthed by technology: - the Uber founders (Travis K and Garrett C) were software programmers, not taxicab owners. - the product they worked on was a smartphone app instead of buying a car with a taxi medallion and driving around for fares. - the type of investors that funded them (e.g. Benchmark Capital) were VCs that specialize in the tech sector. - the type of companies Uber has acquired[1] so far are tech focused (e.g. machine learning, geospatial, etc). Yes, 100-year-old banks always have ongoing modernization with evolving technology (e.g. Citi and Chase have developed smartphone apps) but Uber's birth was programmers playing around with smartphones. Another example of the perception difference is eBay vs Sotheby's/Christie's. eBay is typically called a "tech company" but Sotheby's/Christie's are called "auction houses". If eBay brings together buyers & sellers in a marketplace... and Sotheby's/Christie's also has an auctions marketplace... why is "tech company" more often attached to eBay rather than Sotheby's/Christie's? (Both Sotheyby's & Christie's have websites for users to place bids so they develop technology as well.) Probably because eBay was born on the internet by a software programmer named Pierre Omidyar. I'm not saying you have to agree with all that but just trying to explain the "hidden taxonomy" that some of the others (including the news media) use to label certain companies as "tech company". [1] https://acquiredby.co/uber-acquisitions/ https://acquiredby.co/uber-acquisitions/

dcolkitt 7y ago

Definitely agree with you about Uber. Here's one clear way to see that Uber is a tech company. Imagine the senior management was all abducted by aliens tomorrow, and you had to replace them very quickly. Who would you rather bring in. A bunch of senior execs from Google or a bunch of former Taxi company managers? Which group do you think could run Uber better? Well I think the obvious answer makes it pretty clear that Uber is a company with tech at the very foundation of its DNA.