3 ms·

Did we all forget Uber operates at a massive revenue loss every year? This whole thread is filled with virtuous cheering yet not realizing Uber isn’t an endless

Did we all forget Uber operates at a massive revenue loss every year? This whole thread is filled with virtuous cheering yet not realizing Uber isn’t an endless stream of money. This will impact their business severely if it happens in the US. They will basically cease to exist, or become as shitty as regular taxi services where you have to wait an hour for one. I remember when everyone on here cheered that they were disrupting the taxi system and making it better. For some reason we want now hold them to the rules of that legacy industry, and the cost of such will change what made them popular to begin with. All with the virtuous idea of defending the drivers. You aren’t helping the drivers, you’re going to hurt them the most.

anonymousab 6y ago
>They will basically cease to exist If their business is unprofitable even with their exploitation of workers, then it was never a viable business to begin with. There are endless potential businesses that would become equally VC cash-vacuum-viable with specific worker deregulations and affordances. We do not do so simply because we see those values and protections as more important to societal good than those businesses (and their jobs) existing. If Uber ends up joining that set then so be it.
1986 6y ago
My understanding was that Uber is profitable in many of its markets. Furthermore that in those markets where they are not yet profitable, this is largely due to spending on incentives, marketing, etc in order to grow the network (on both sides of the market). That being said, if Uber truly can only be profitable by breaking the law, or by creating its own laws (Prop 22), perhaps it doesn't deserve to do so.
JamesSwift 6y ago
If there is a real demand for what they do then the market will absorb the drivers. If that demand is actually just artificial because of VC subsidized rides, then it will not. This is not a moral dilemma.

anonymousab 6y ago

>They will basically cease to exist If their business is unprofitable even with their exploitation of workers, then it was never a viable business to begin with. There are endless potential businesses that would become equally VC cash-vacuum-viable with specific worker deregulations and affordances. We do not do so simply because we see those values and protections as more important to societal good than those businesses (and their jobs) existing. If Uber ends up joining that set then so be it.

1986 6y ago

My understanding was that Uber is profitable in many of its markets. Furthermore that in those markets where they are not yet profitable, this is largely due to spending on incentives, marketing, etc in order to grow the network (on both sides of the market). That being said, if Uber truly can only be profitable by breaking the law, or by creating its own laws (Prop 22), perhaps it doesn't deserve to do so.

JamesSwift 6y ago

If there is a real demand for what they do then the market will absorb the drivers. If that demand is actually just artificial because of VC subsidized rides, then it will not. This is not a moral dilemma.