3 ms·

Aren't they chasing those to ultimately generate profits?

by frotaur 1y ago

52-6F-62 1y ago
Power and dominion, if that hasn’t become obvious yet.
troupo 1y ago
Not in the past 10 years or so, no. To the point that Uber said they may never generate profit in their IPO filing
- GenshoTikamura 1y ago
  They may never, but the competitors they killed with being VC funded, will never
  - troupo 1y ago
    Oh, that's a brilliant description
- quesera 1y ago
  > in their IPO filing That's meaningless -- just legal boilerplate. No one wants to be sued for their dog & pony show sales pitch, so they always hedge by including explicit doom & gloom scenarios in the legal paperwork. Similar hedges are present in annual reports for corps of all sizes.
  - troupo 1y ago
    > That's meaningless -- just legal boilerplate. However legal or meaningless, it's their official stated position. And they did lose close to 20 billion in total before turning a meagre profit. > so they always hedge by including explicit doom & gloom scenarios in the legal paperwork. Ah yes, "we may never turn a profit that's why we are a sustainable long-term serious company and you should definitely buy our stock" is a thing that every company writes in their legal boilerplate. > Similar hedges are present in annual reports for corps of all sizes. Uber's annual reports were "we lost a billion dollars this year, like every other year before that for 15 years, but look at our growth go brrr" Same for most of other HN darlings.
    - quesera 1y ago
      Yes, that's absolutely what they write. They will always be explicit that they could be wrong in disastrous ways and they are not misleading you into thinking otherwise. Every public corp's "official stated position" on future profitability is, from a legal perspective, the same: No promises. We might fail because of (long list of endogenous and exogenous reasons). Past performance is no guarantee of future results. We see headwinds here, here, and here. There are headwinds that we cannot see. We can't predict the future. Some hostile actor in some country, foreign or domestic, might screw us all by legal, political, or military means. Also, natural disasters, pandemics, asteroids, and trends. Don't sue us.
      - troupo 1y ago
        There's a difference between "we have never been profitable and don't expect to be" and, say, Google's "we became profitable, and though there are factors that can negatively affect our profitability, here's a path we believe is most profitable". In modern business profitability never enters the equation.
        quesera 1y ago
        But my point is that one of those statements will exist in every filing. If the corp has never been profitable, the first. Otherwise, the second. They mean absolutely nothing about what management expects for the future of the company. They are just legal boilerplate that is always included.
- immibis 1y ago
  How can they take whatever ridiculous percentage of every ride and still not make a profit ...?

Aren't they chasing those to ultimately generate profits?

52-6F-62 1y ago

Power and dominion, if that hasn’t become obvious yet.

troupo 1y ago

Not in the past 10 years or so, no. To the point that Uber said they may never generate profit in their IPO filing

GenshoTikamura 1y ago
They may never, but the competitors they killed with being VC funded, will never
- troupo 1y ago
  Oh, that's a brilliant description
quesera 1y ago
> in their IPO filing That's meaningless -- just legal boilerplate. No one wants to be sued for their dog & pony show sales pitch, so they always hedge by including explicit doom & gloom scenarios in the legal paperwork. Similar hedges are present in annual reports for corps of all sizes.
- troupo 1y ago
  > That's meaningless -- just legal boilerplate. However legal or meaningless, it's their official stated position. And they did lose close to 20 billion in total before turning a meagre profit. > so they always hedge by including explicit doom & gloom scenarios in the legal paperwork. Ah yes, "we may never turn a profit that's why we are a sustainable long-term serious company and you should definitely buy our stock" is a thing that every company writes in their legal boilerplate. > Similar hedges are present in annual reports for corps of all sizes. Uber's annual reports were "we lost a billion dollars this year, like every other year before that for 15 years, but look at our growth go brrr" Same for most of other HN darlings.
  - quesera 1y ago
    Yes, that's absolutely what they write. They will always be explicit that they could be wrong in disastrous ways and they are not misleading you into thinking otherwise. Every public corp's "official stated position" on future profitability is, from a legal perspective, the same: No promises. We might fail because of (long list of endogenous and exogenous reasons). Past performance is no guarantee of future results. We see headwinds here, here, and here. There are headwinds that we cannot see. We can't predict the future. Some hostile actor in some country, foreign or domestic, might screw us all by legal, political, or military means. Also, natural disasters, pandemics, asteroids, and trends. Don't sue us.
    - troupo 1y ago
      There's a difference between "we have never been profitable and don't expect to be" and, say, Google's "we became profitable, and though there are factors that can negatively affect our profitability, here's a path we believe is most profitable". In modern business profitability never enters the equation.
      - quesera 1y ago
        But my point is that one of those statements will exist in every filing. If the corp has never been profitable, the first. Otherwise, the second. They mean absolutely nothing about what management expects for the future of the company. They are just legal boilerplate that is always included.
immibis 1y ago
How can they take whatever ridiculous percentage of every ride and still not make a profit ...?