3 ms·

So does this mean it's going to begin to become cheaper to use the services of old taxi organizations, who arguably aren't going to have the shareholders to app

by loceng 4y ago

So does this mean it's going to begin to become cheaper to use the services of old taxi organizations, who arguably aren't going to have the shareholders to appease to to pad revenues with profits? I really think, in all cases of online platforms, that laws requiring the platform to be transparent with all costs - including how much they keep as a platform, how much they give the actual driver, how much the restaurant gets (if doing delivery) etc. would be highly beneficial, if not necessary, to not only society but also to potential investors. E.g. How sustainable are their prices, and are the billions invested simply subsidizing lower fares to outcompete based on price for a temporary time while fighting over to capture as much of a market (artificially and temporarily?) until the shareholders come knocking asking for the profit tap to get turned on?

scarface74 4y ago
Why? It was “transparent” from the day that Uber and Lyft went public that they weren’t profitable and losing billions . They were always Ponzi schemes and retail investors who naively believed the hype were the “biggest fools”.
- loceng 4y ago
  It's the VC-finance industrial complex, where the incentives aren't aligned with the sources of the money. Arguably being transparent at the per-transaction level which allow everyone and their mother to then do simple math to understand that such a business model isn't sustainable - but they're not currently paying enough attention, just in a very shallow way - they see Uber or Lyft on the news plenty, maybe use the services themself - until it's too late. All of this should be educating people giving their money to institutions or stockbrokers to make sure their money and whomever they're giving the power to dictate where it goes is aligned with long-term results, and arguably not at all on per-transaction buy/sell actions. I think a lot of our problems today stem from there being such an abundance of wealth/riches that enough people could become lazy and relatively inattentive with their money, blindly trusting others without understanding the underlying mechanisms enough - and perhaps blindly believing government institutions like the SEC would protect them - instead perhaps trusting long-time existing brand names as some sort of measure of trust. Bitcoin et al are the next evolution the VC-finance industrial complex has latched onto quite successfully, so far.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    For the most part, unsophisticated investors aren’t buying individual stocks. They are buying mutual funds and most of them are buying index funds. Neither Uber or Lyft are part of the S&P. Only “qualified investors” are allowed to buy pre-IPO stock and they should know what they are doing. If they lost money, it’s on them. Even if you did what you suggested, how should a company allocate fixed expenses? Allocate per mile?
- Spooky23 4y ago
  Wait a minute! That was just temporary while the service hyperscaled. I read on HN that Elon Musk’s fully self aware self-driving would take over from drivers starting in 2019 and cost like $9,000!
Finnucane 4y ago
Uber cratered the value of the taxi medallion. The main benefit the medallion gave you was the right to pick people up on the street, unlike other kinds of car services that you had to call for. Since anyone using a taxi could probably afford a cell phone and a credit card, taxis were vulnerable. Does this mean that the cost of entry into the taxi business is lower? Sure. Will it matter? WHo knows.
- loceng 4y ago
  These industries usually get captured via regulation imposed by lobbyists of the biggest players, to make the barrier of entry more costly to keep out potentially new entrants. I know a few taxi drivers who are medallion holders - which are now worthless - they of course have been put in a shit position, and the Cities don't particularly care anymore because whatever lobby structure that got the medallions in place to begin with basically no longer exists - they're not necessary to get today's lobbyist funded politicians into play, positions of power.

by loceng 4y ago

scarface74 4y ago

Why? It was “transparent” from the day that Uber and Lyft went public that they weren’t profitable and losing billions . They were always Ponzi schemes and retail investors who naively believed the hype were the “biggest fools”.

loceng 4y ago
It's the VC-finance industrial complex, where the incentives aren't aligned with the sources of the money. Arguably being transparent at the per-transaction level which allow everyone and their mother to then do simple math to understand that such a business model isn't sustainable - but they're not currently paying enough attention, just in a very shallow way - they see Uber or Lyft on the news plenty, maybe use the services themself - until it's too late. All of this should be educating people giving their money to institutions or stockbrokers to make sure their money and whomever they're giving the power to dictate where it goes is aligned with long-term results, and arguably not at all on per-transaction buy/sell actions. I think a lot of our problems today stem from there being such an abundance of wealth/riches that enough people could become lazy and relatively inattentive with their money, blindly trusting others without understanding the underlying mechanisms enough - and perhaps blindly believing government institutions like the SEC would protect them - instead perhaps trusting long-time existing brand names as some sort of measure of trust. Bitcoin et al are the next evolution the VC-finance industrial complex has latched onto quite successfully, so far.
- scarface74 4y ago
  For the most part, unsophisticated investors aren’t buying individual stocks. They are buying mutual funds and most of them are buying index funds. Neither Uber or Lyft are part of the S&P. Only “qualified investors” are allowed to buy pre-IPO stock and they should know what they are doing. If they lost money, it’s on them. Even if you did what you suggested, how should a company allocate fixed expenses? Allocate per mile?
Spooky23 4y ago
Wait a minute! That was just temporary while the service hyperscaled. I read on HN that Elon Musk’s fully self aware self-driving would take over from drivers starting in 2019 and cost like $9,000!

Finnucane 4y ago

Uber cratered the value of the taxi medallion. The main benefit the medallion gave you was the right to pick people up on the street, unlike other kinds of car services that you had to call for. Since anyone using a taxi could probably afford a cell phone and a credit card, taxis were vulnerable. Does this mean that the cost of entry into the taxi business is lower? Sure. Will it matter? WHo knows.

loceng 4y ago
These industries usually get captured via regulation imposed by lobbyists of the biggest players, to make the barrier of entry more costly to keep out potentially new entrants. I know a few taxi drivers who are medallion holders - which are now worthless - they of course have been put in a shit position, and the Cities don't particularly care anymore because whatever lobby structure that got the medallions in place to begin with basically no longer exists - they're not necessary to get today's lobbyist funded politicians into play, positions of power.