4 ms·

It's a great business. It's like Uber (which is worth $150 billion), but with 3x less costs. Taxi services are network effects that are extremely difficult to

It's a great business. It's like Uber (which is worth $150 billion), but with 3x less costs. Taxi services are network effects that are extremely difficult to compete with, which is why the taxi industry is basically a duopoly now.

morkalork 2y ago
How does it compare to a car sharing company? It has all the same costs for the vehicle and the driver/pilot is free in both models, in one it is AI and the other it is just the user.
- ghxst 2y ago
  You don't need a driver's license.
TheAlchemist 2y ago
Uber barely makes any money actually, how is it a great business ? Valuations are completely meaningless currently.
- __sy__ 2y ago
  FYI Uber reported a net income of $2.6B in Q3-2024 and $1.9B for 2023. That's no Google but that's also no "barely makes any money" territory, no? Source: https://www.google.com/finance/quote/UBER:NYSE?hl=en https://www.google.com/finance/quote/UBER:NYSE?hl=en
  - TheAlchemist 2y ago
    Yeah, and also a loss of $8.5B in 2019, loss $6.7B in 2020 and loss of $9.14B in 2022. Hell of a business they got there.
    - __sy__ 2y ago
      So? I can make the exact same point about Google and other tech companies that endured years—decades sometimes—of eye-watering losses, only to eventually build enormously valuable businesses.
      - TheAlchemist 2y ago
        Of course. But it's a bit premature to say it's a good business and making money. It may or may not become a good business. Let's say Tesla does manage to launch a cheap Robotaxi, fully autonomous, next year ? (Of course they won't, they are decades away from that) Uber would be pretty much dead, and all it would have done in it's lifetime is massive losses.
  - jqpabc123 2y ago
    That's no Google but that's also no "barely makes any money" territory, no? Yes. Income and profit are not the same. Uber spends all their income and then some --- which actually leaves them in "makes less than no money territory". Imagine winning $100 at a casino. You tell your buddies about the big win but you conveniently neglect to mention the fact that you lost $200 first. Your income was $100 but your expenses were $200 which leaves you with a net loss of $100.
    - __sy__ 2y ago
      eh... I'm pretty sure I mentioned net income (which i think is pretty close to profit in some circles) but if we care about debt servicing, buybacks...etc, let's just look at cash flow. And there too, in Q3, they posted $1B+ for quarter. I'm not sure I understand the point of your analogy with respect to wining/losing at a casino. If I follow it, you are effectively saying something akin to, when Google first became profitable, its achievements should have been completely dismissed because of a decade of prior losses. That's not how tech companies work. Most of the value creation is 5-10-20 years out. You bear enormous losses with the knowledge that returns compound and eventually render irrelevant prior years' losses.
    - enslavedrobot 2y ago
      Income is profit. Uber made $2.6 billion. What you are talking about is revenue.Uber generated $11.2 billion in revenue. Their profit margin was 23%. Up from 2.3% a year ago. Business terminology is precise. Any founder that makes this mistake in front of an investor will lose their trust. Know the difference.
- wenc 2y ago
  Uber is profitable with strong FCF. https://investor.uber.com/news-events/news/press-release-details/2024/Uber-Announces-Results-for-Third-Quarter-2024/default.aspx https://investor.uber.com/news-events/news/press-release-det...
beAbU 2y ago
How will operating cost be 3x less compared to Uber? Uber drivers are already low-wage earners in many instances, moving them all to a tele operator centre in a 3rd world country will not make that much of a difference I think. I also suspect the cars will be significantly more expensive compared to the typical Corrola or similar shitbox that Uber drivers prefer. And this cost won't be foisted on the driver, and will be a direct capex for Robotaxi. Charging, charging infra, maintenance and all that will also be a running cost that Uber does not have deal with.
piva00 2y ago
How exactly is it 3x less costs? Uber drivers' margin is extremely low, it varies a bit between countries but after energy costs, maintenance/upkeep costs, vehicle acquisition cost and depreciation, etc. their take home pay is low. Pluck the driver out and you still have a car that needs maintenance and energy to run and savings are on the labour cost which Uber already pushed down as much as possible. I don't see anywhere a way to get 3x less costs in this equation.
olabyne 2y ago
you just spit numbers from your ass don't you
rwmj 2y ago
It's much higher cost. Currently drivers own the cars and therefore taxi companies get that capital for free. Self-driving taxi companies will have huge capital costs because they'll have to buy (or lease) the cars.

morkalork 2y ago

How does it compare to a car sharing company? It has all the same costs for the vehicle and the driver/pilot is free in both models, in one it is AI and the other it is just the user.

ghxst 2y ago
You don't need a driver's license.

TheAlchemist 2y ago

Uber barely makes any money actually, how is it a great business ? Valuations are completely meaningless currently.

__sy__ 2y ago
FYI Uber reported a net income of $2.6B in Q3-2024 and $1.9B for 2023. That's no Google but that's also no "barely makes any money" territory, no? Source: https://www.google.com/finance/quote/UBER:NYSE?hl=en https://www.google.com/finance/quote/UBER:NYSE?hl=en
- TheAlchemist 2y ago
  Yeah, and also a loss of $8.5B in 2019, loss $6.7B in 2020 and loss of $9.14B in 2022. Hell of a business they got there.
  - __sy__ 2y ago
    So? I can make the exact same point about Google and other tech companies that endured years—decades sometimes—of eye-watering losses, only to eventually build enormously valuable businesses.
    - TheAlchemist 2y ago
      Of course. But it's a bit premature to say it's a good business and making money. It may or may not become a good business. Let's say Tesla does manage to launch a cheap Robotaxi, fully autonomous, next year ? (Of course they won't, they are decades away from that) Uber would be pretty much dead, and all it would have done in it's lifetime is massive losses.
- jqpabc123 2y ago
  That's no Google but that's also no "barely makes any money" territory, no? Yes. Income and profit are not the same. Uber spends all their income and then some --- which actually leaves them in "makes less than no money territory". Imagine winning $100 at a casino. You tell your buddies about the big win but you conveniently neglect to mention the fact that you lost $200 first. Your income was $100 but your expenses were $200 which leaves you with a net loss of $100.
  - __sy__ 2y ago
    eh... I'm pretty sure I mentioned net income (which i think is pretty close to profit in some circles) but if we care about debt servicing, buybacks...etc, let's just look at cash flow. And there too, in Q3, they posted $1B+ for quarter. I'm not sure I understand the point of your analogy with respect to wining/losing at a casino. If I follow it, you are effectively saying something akin to, when Google first became profitable, its achievements should have been completely dismissed because of a decade of prior losses. That's not how tech companies work. Most of the value creation is 5-10-20 years out. You bear enormous losses with the knowledge that returns compound and eventually render irrelevant prior years' losses.
  - enslavedrobot 2y ago
    Income is profit. Uber made $2.6 billion. What you are talking about is revenue.Uber generated $11.2 billion in revenue. Their profit margin was 23%. Up from 2.3% a year ago. Business terminology is precise. Any founder that makes this mistake in front of an investor will lose their trust. Know the difference.
wenc 2y ago
Uber is profitable with strong FCF. https://investor.uber.com/news-events/news/press-release-details/2024/Uber-Announces-Results-for-Third-Quarter-2024/default.aspx https://investor.uber.com/news-events/news/press-release-det...

beAbU 2y ago

How will operating cost be 3x less compared to Uber? Uber drivers are already low-wage earners in many instances, moving them all to a tele operator centre in a 3rd world country will not make that much of a difference I think. I also suspect the cars will be significantly more expensive compared to the typical Corrola or similar shitbox that Uber drivers prefer. And this cost won't be foisted on the driver, and will be a direct capex for Robotaxi. Charging, charging infra, maintenance and all that will also be a running cost that Uber does not have deal with.

piva00 2y ago

How exactly is it 3x less costs? Uber drivers' margin is extremely low, it varies a bit between countries but after energy costs, maintenance/upkeep costs, vehicle acquisition cost and depreciation, etc. their take home pay is low. Pluck the driver out and you still have a car that needs maintenance and energy to run and savings are on the labour cost which Uber already pushed down as much as possible. I don't see anywhere a way to get 3x less costs in this equation.

olabyne 2y ago

you just spit numbers from your ass don't you

rwmj 2y ago

It's much higher cost. Currently drivers own the cars and therefore taxi companies get that capital for free. Self-driving taxi companies will have huge capital costs because they'll have to buy (or lease) the cars.