5 ms·

They are a logistics and pricing company. If they would license this tech they'd be rich beyond belief. They companies could really be Uber-for-X.

• boh 6y ago
  Most companies prefer logistics/pricing models to be profitable. Being a pump-and-dump for VCs isn't something they can license out.
  • ProAm 6y ago
    Isn't that just tuning compared to the race as a loss leader for market share?
    • boh 6y ago
      No. This isn't a software company.
      • ProAm 6y ago
        Uber isnt a software company?
• umeshunni 6y ago
  That's an interesting thought experiment. At the high level, Amazon is also primarily a logistics and pricing company. They could also license their tech (or white label it a la Shopify) and make a lot of money, but they realized at some point that owning the user relationship was key to unlocking more value than just owning the tech.
  • ProAm 6y ago
    I think Amazon is licensing that tech to all 3rd party sellers now right?
• cercatrova 6y ago
  I'm not sure they'd make as much as owning the network end to end. Vertical integration is hot right now, see Apple. Uber already has delivery via freight as well as getting into air delivery, so why would they need to license it? It just makes more sense to keep the tech proprietary and use it for their various enterprises.
  • ProAm 6y ago
    It's tough to say, I think profitability would come faster than being a taxi company with an app (disregarding freight and air for now). But I think there is a much wider prospective customer base and recurring revenue licensing the tech stack as a SaaS. And that's not to say they have to give up Uber as a taxi company while they do both. It's a much more reasonable moonshot than the autonomous driving experiment they did that killed someone moving fast and breaking things. I see a lot of value there.