5 ms·
Public transport is covered in ads, has a much higher ridership than rideshares (i.e. has many more eyeballs to sell, and much lower per-user costs) and isn't e
by shaoonb 4y ago
Public transport is covered in ads, has a much higher ridership than rideshares (i.e. has many more eyeballs to sell, and much lower per-user costs) and isn't even close to being profitable from ad revenue.
- raverbashing 4y agoWhich is obvious to a lot of people except for SV "tech bros" apparently > Free, ad-supported Uber rides are inevitable, and if Uber doesn’t do them, a different competitor – perhaps Google! – will do it. This doesn't survive 5 min of serious analysis. Not everything that becomes cheap end up free But hey, if they BS hard enough Sequoia might put a lot of money in them
- rippercushions 4y agoThe blog author is a partner at Andreessen Horowitz.
- bobkazamakis 4y ago...cool? does that position come with the ability to defy gravity or math?
- true_religion 4y agoNo, but it does mean that someone (e.g. the authors company) might just put money into the idea. They don’t even need to BS very hard if they are a partner in the firm, and sponsor a “vetted” team that they think can pivot from something stupid to something profitable.
- d3vmax 4y agoAll the more reason to be skeptical. These VC/Crypto boys live in a bubble. https://a16z.com https://a16z.com is hard crypto!
- salgernon 4y agoIt’s Uber for timeshare pitches. You get a ride to the airport instead of a fruit basket for sitting through the pitch. I imagine they would have the driver multitask as the presenter.