3 ms·

I have been told it loses money by Google employees. Not just sensors+compute. R&D and the map-making are substantial costs. Waymo is reported in “Other Bets” w

• JeremyNT 3y ago
  > R&D and the map-making are substantial costs. But that's largely a sunk cost that (in SF anyway) has already been spent, right? It's not like that cost goes up on a per-ride basis. For places where that's already done, you only need to account for the cost of sensors/compute/maintenance of the vehicle themselves, which seem (intuitively) like they would be lower than the expense to users. Which would mean that a ride is net positive. Maybe it's the case that configuring and maintaining the cars is incredibly expensive. That would be the only way I could envision actually losing money on a "per ride" basis.
  • flutas 3y ago
    > But that's largely a sunk cost that (in SF anyway) has already been spent, right? For mapping, no. Waymo maps the city constantly with every car, and they have a mapping team that reviews those changes before they go to the other cars. So ongoing cost of the human side is a thing (for now?). They also have a team of "remote operators" that watch the fleet in real time in case they have a panic attack over something, so more ongoing cost that's not just sensors/cars.
  • TradingPlaces 3y ago
    There are substantial non-cash costs that go into cost-of-revenue. These come from amortizing assets like patents and the maps, and depreciation on all the equipment, including whatever backend servers there are. Share-based compensation is typically also a big one. They are "sunk costs" as far as pure cash accounting goes, but that’s not how GAAP accounting works.