3 ms·

The market seems to have thought it was worth more than twice that not very long ago. Maybe the market isn't super great at valuing things in the short term, es

The market seems to have thought it was worth more than twice that not very long ago. Maybe the market isn't super great at valuing things in the short term, especially things that lose money.

standardUser 4y ago
However we evaluate Uber, we're going to be way off the mark if we don't appreciate the immense value of brands.
- actionablefiber 4y ago
  Whatever value we assign to the brand name "Uber", how do we appreciate the immense negative value in aggressively losing money with no end in sight? Surely that should figure into their valuation somehow. I'm not sure their brand recognition can possibly get any better. It's been top-notch for years. All that's left is to make the unit economics work out. So, where are they on that?
  - standardUser 4y ago
    The thing is, they don't have to live up to your expectations of what a valuable company should be because they are a valuable company. It's also the case with many "successful" startups that if they decided to stop expanding and make profitability their sole prerogative, it may be in reach. We don't know because they never tried, and they have no incentive to try. Their incentives are all geared towards continued massive growth.
    - actionablefiber 4y ago
      I don't dispute that they have a market cap above zero and therefore are a 'valuable' company. But ultimately that "value" comes from a bunch of people making guesses about future cash flows. Suppose that the unit economics for Uber do not work out, especially in a recession with high borrowing costs. It would not take long for that "value" to become zero.
- Someone 4y ago
  Like we did those of Atari, Blockbuster, Commodore, Compaq, PanAm or Westinghouse, to mention a few? I think that a large component of a brand’s value is the low-pass filtered value of the underlying company.
  - standardUser 4y ago
    You made a list of spectacularly successful companies than any one of us would have been ecstatic to have founded or been a part of early on (also, we'd be rich). You're augment seems to hinge on the fact that not all companies last forever, which is true, but hardly relevant.

The market seems to have thought it was worth more than twice that not very long ago. Maybe the market isn't super great at valuing things in the short term, especially things that lose money.

standardUser 4y ago

However we evaluate Uber, we're going to be way off the mark if we don't appreciate the immense value of brands.

actionablefiber 4y ago
Whatever value we assign to the brand name "Uber", how do we appreciate the immense negative value in aggressively losing money with no end in sight? Surely that should figure into their valuation somehow. I'm not sure their brand recognition can possibly get any better. It's been top-notch for years. All that's left is to make the unit economics work out. So, where are they on that?
- standardUser 4y ago
  The thing is, they don't have to live up to your expectations of what a valuable company should be because they are a valuable company. It's also the case with many "successful" startups that if they decided to stop expanding and make profitability their sole prerogative, it may be in reach. We don't know because they never tried, and they have no incentive to try. Their incentives are all geared towards continued massive growth.
  - actionablefiber 4y ago
    I don't dispute that they have a market cap above zero and therefore are a 'valuable' company. But ultimately that "value" comes from a bunch of people making guesses about future cash flows. Suppose that the unit economics for Uber do not work out, especially in a recession with high borrowing costs. It would not take long for that "value" to become zero.
Someone 4y ago
Like we did those of Atari, Blockbuster, Commodore, Compaq, PanAm or Westinghouse, to mention a few? I think that a large component of a brand’s value is the low-pass filtered value of the underlying company.
- standardUser 4y ago
  You made a list of spectacularly successful companies than any one of us would have been ecstatic to have founded or been a part of early on (also, we'd be rich). You're augment seems to hinge on the fact that not all companies last forever, which is true, but hardly relevant.