5 ms·
Here's the problem for uber: (1) In many places they are breaking the law and/or want the law changed so they can expand without breaking it. (2) This means t
by 001sky 12y ago
Here's the problem for uber:
(1) In many places they are breaking the law and/or want the law changed so they can expand without breaking it.
(2) This means they need the moral high ground. They need to have people believe they are acting in good faith when operating outside or in the grey areas of existing legislation and policy.
(3) Winning at all costs mentality means operating in ethical grey areas.
(4) You can exloit grey areas but you cannot at the same time occupy moral high ground.
Without a coherent strategy "winning at all costs" (to hell with being ethical) will almost surely lose the war, even if it wins a few battles.
That means, their future as a brand and as a company could be greatly impacted if they continue to have public PR meltdowns that involve dis-proportionate and underhanded approaches to solving their problems.
Things are always going to be messy in their line of work, but they need people's trust and political support outside of pure-business. The specifics can always be debated (and the nuances sometimes are critical), but they need to demonstrate proportionatly and good faith are core values to their firm.
- alexqgb 12y agoThis is exactly correct. As Bob Dylan so succinctly noted, "To live outside the law you must be honest."
- thrush 12y agoI think you've misinterpreted what Thiel meant about Uber's ethical problem. It seems like Thiel was actually talking about the competition between Uber and Lyft rather than Taxis. The points you bring up are actually no longer huge problems for Uber. Some airports legally allow Uber to stop by. Uber is incredibly better than the previous Taxi service for both the employee (read about Healthcare), and for the consumer (this is obvious). Congress people use Uber all the time. Ordering and canceling rides is just one example how Uber might be overly aggressive (read more http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/26/6067663/this-is-ubers-playbook-for-sabotaging-lyft http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/26/6067663/this-is-ubers-play...).
- 001sky 12y agoThe points you bring up are actually no longer huge problems for Uber <Uber VP: we could spend $1M to take revenge on journalists> That was yesterday, right?
- thrush 12y agoIt really seems like your points were towards legislation that prevents Uber from operating as business where Taxis are the main competition, not other similar services like Lyft. Journalists cover lots of stories, and I think the one that I linked in the Verge is a great example of something Uber would not want released. $1M is also nothing compared to what they pay their lawyers to fight legal battles against Taxi incumbents.
- 001sky 12y agoThey have to operate in a policy grey area. They don't need to operate in an ethical grey area. Mixing the two is bad for business.
- thrush 12y agoI agree. The policy issue is between Taxis and existing legislation. The ethics issue is between Lyft. Taking a step back, this is one of the craziest market competitions that can exist, and it's going to be interesting to see how it plays out. Remember, Taxis didn't have nearly as fierce competition between themselves it reminds me of cable companies. Perhaps they'll eventually have to settle for different territories to manage.
- thrush 12y agoI'd like to completely retract my statement! Reading the Senator's letter (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8633683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8633683) put things in perspective for me. Forget bad for business, it's bad for human rights. Ethical grey area is an understatement.