# Can Uber Ever Deliver? Annual Uber Losses Now Approaching $5 Billion



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

The P&L data illustrates why Uber cannot go public

Under Travis Kalanick, Uber had no interest in an IPO because he fully understood that the full financial disclosures required-including historical cash flows, balance sheets and much greater operational P&L detail-would expose Uber's abysmal economics, and destroy its PR narrative where powerful efficiencies would inevitably lead to success. Dara Khosrowshahi, under pressure from certain Board factions when he was first hired to replace Kalanick, promised an IPO by the end of 2019. This could be a disaster unless Uber somehow finds convincing evidence of profitable economics that it can put in the prospectus.

If Uber had accounting data that could demonstrate billions in efficiencies and a clear path to profits, they have ample incentive to share that data with reporters. Since they have not done that, it is reasonable to assume that evidence does not exist, and the additional data that would emerge during an IPO would actually strengthen the case that (in the absence of significant anti-competitive market power) Uber's business model can never produce sustainable profits.

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/201...al-uber-losses-now-approaching-5-billion.html

The all previous 10 articles in the series at - https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/deliver...5074086003077117115087005084065005126&EXT=pdf


----------



## K girl 213 (Aug 20, 2015)

jocker12 said:


> The P&L data illustrates why Uber cannot go public
> 
> Under Travis Kalanick, Uber had no interest in an IPO because he fully understood that the full financial disclosures required-including historical cash flows, balance sheets and much greater operational P&L detail-would expose Uber's abysmal economics, and destroy its PR narrative where powerful efficiencies would inevitably lead to success. Dara Khosrowshahi, under pressure from certain Board factions when he was first hired to replace Kalanick, promised an IPO by the end of 2019. This could be a disaster unless Uber somehow finds convincing evidence of profitable economics that it can put in the prospectus.
> 
> ...


I have been praying for softbank deal goes up in the smoke.


----------



## STMNine (May 11, 2015)

This trend so far certainly shows no signs of reversing... "Uber lost $2.5 billion in 2015, probably lost $4 billion in 2016, and is on track to lose $5 billion in 2017." Heck, at this rate, "180 Days of Liquidation" might be closer than what most most of us here had been anticipating!


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

K girl 213 said:


> I have been praying for softbank deal goes up in the smoke.


Softbank wants shares. Those are not money Uber could burn at their discretion. That will be a bad move on Softbank side.



STMNine said:


> This trend so far certainly shows no signs of reversing... "Uber lost $2.5 billion in 2015, probably lost $4 billion in 2016, and is on track to lose $5 billion in 2017." Heck, at this rate, "180 Days of Liquidation" might be closer than what most most of us here had been anticipating!


It is like they need to spend 3 billion to make one. And they think fleet management (through self driving cars technology) will turn their luck. Oh, boy!


----------



## sss (Jul 12, 2015)

STMNine said:


> This trend so far certainly shows no signs of reversing... "Uber lost $2.5 billion in 2015, probably lost $4 billion in 2016, and is on track to lose $5 billion in 2017." Heck, at this rate, "180 Days of Liquidation" might be closer than what most most of us here had been anticipating!


lol. hopefully.


----------



## outface (Oct 15, 2017)

There is no justice if Uber won't fail.


----------



## Skorpio (Oct 17, 2017)

How the softbank deal will help Uber? Most shares they will buy are from employees and investors. The money will not go toward Uber. Maybe $1B will go to their capital. Will this help Uber? Nope.

I only see a bigger company gonna buy Uber or replace it, maybe didi?

The company will never make profits. Unless the drivers are willing to work for peanuts and nuts.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

5 billion?

Maybe i can get an angel investor to throw me $1,000,000 to buy 20-30 taxis and get them permitted/insured.

I guarantee i'd lose less than 1 million in the first year. I might even be able to break even...


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

Skorpio said:


> How the softbank deal will help Uber? Most shares they will buy are from employees and investors. The money will not go toward Uber. Maybe $1B will go to their capital. Will this help Uber? Nope.
> 
> I only see a bigger company gonna buy Uber or replace it, maybe didi?
> 
> The company will never make profits. Unless the drivers are willing to work for peanuts and nuts.


$1 billion would go a long way if they would cut their spending. Not too hard, they just don't want to make those hard decisions.

As far as drivers working for peanuts ... it's already happening.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

Mista T said:


> $1 billion would go a long way if they would cut their spending. Not too hard, they just don't want to make those hard decisions.
> 
> As far as drivers working for peanuts ... it's already happening.


I'm curious to see what will happen when uber does run out of money.

It would be really fascinating if uber managed to fix it's problems by stopping it's stupid spending.

no more money for incentives/bonuses?

fewer drivers on the road,

more surges

more money per driver

end of the churn...

But i think it's more likely they just up and shut the doors one day because they lose too many lawsuits


----------



## dirtylee (Sep 2, 2015)

Cash out daily. 
When they take instapay away, then is near.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> I'm curious to see what will happen when uber does run out of money.
> 
> It would be really fascinating if uber managed to fix it's problems by stopping it's stupid spending.
> 
> ...


Uber spends because it has too.

To make money Uber actually has to multiply it's prices by 4. For Uber to make money they actually have to become a taxi company and have the regulations and protection the taxi industry had. Softbank will put 1 billion in and that lasts a month. The legal issues are stalled as long as they can be. Uber simply runs out of money this time next year.


----------



## sss (Jul 12, 2015)

Why would they ever want to raise rates when there is an excess of drivers even at these low rates ? Here in Houston no matter what time no matter where I am if I open the Uber passenger app I see 7-8 cars around me. Why raise rates when there are people wanting to work at these low rates ?


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

sss said:


> Why would they ever want to raise rates when there is an excess of drivers even at these low rates ? Here in Houston no matter what time no matter where I am if I open the Uber passenger app I see 7-8 cars around me. Why raise rates when there are people wanting to work at these low rates ?


Ubers driver churn rate is 96% per annum. Not one driver out there makes the minimum wage. The cost of replacing drivers is 80 percent of Ubers losses.


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

everythingsuber said:


> Ubers driver churn rate is 96% per annum. Not one driver out there makes the minimum wage. The cost of replacing drivers is 80 percent of Ubers losses.


Lol

I dunno about 80%, but you are correct. If they would simply pay just a little more per ride then the turnover would be less and they wouldn't need to constantly incentivize new drivers. It would balance out, or perhaps even be a profitable move.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

Mista T said:


> Lol
> 
> I dunno about 80%, but you are correct. If they would simply pay just a little more per ride then the turnover would be less and they wouldn't need to constantly incentivize new drivers. It would balance out, or perhaps even be a profitable move.


You up prices you are undercut by opposition. That's how this whole mess got started. Travis being afraid Lyft would undercut them and take market share. If Ubers problems were as simple as raising price a little it would have happened several billion dollars ago.


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

They could:

* give us 100% of the cancel fee
* give us a % of the Booking Fee
* reattach driver pay to pax payments, for rides that are not on promos

None of these things would raise rates to pax.


----------



## sss (Jul 12, 2015)

everythingsuber said:


> Ubers driver churn rate is 96% per annum. Not one driver out there makes the minimum wage. The cost of replacing drivers is 80 percent of Ubers losses.


Good point.


----------



## MoreTips (Feb 13, 2017)

If you've really paid attention the past year there are definite signs Uber is starting to realize it will run out of drivers eventually. I know there are still way too many eager drivers out there but at some point word of mouth, media exposure, and public attitude will stop the flow of newbies.

Rideshare will survive but what ever will be left of Uber will be a lot different than today.


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

I'm sure I'm not the only driver who badmouths boober to every passenger that asks how I like driving for them.

Word of mouth is very powerful. 

The other factor is Boober cannot lie the same way they used to be able to a few years ago when they could post craigslist ads claiming $35 an hour . 

Any other drivers remember the days when passengers would ask you if you make $90,000 a year ? The gullible stupid public was under that impression for quite some time. I don't think they are under that impression anymore whatsoever . 

Also, without their predatory leasing program they won't be able to take advantage of people near the lower end of the Socio economic ladder.


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

heynow321 said:


> The other factor is Boober cannot lie the same way they used to be able to a few years ago when they could post craigslist ads claiming $35 an hour


Just took this screenshot, the advertising lies are still flowing.


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

Wow didn't they just lose a lawsuit over that shit?


----------



## Uberyouber (Jan 16, 2017)

MoreTips said:


> If you've really paid attention the past year there are definite signs Uber is starting to realize it will run out of drivers eventually. I know there are still way too many eager drivers out there but at some point word of mouth, media exposure, and public attitude will stop the flow of newbies.
> 
> Rideshare will survive but what ever will be left of Uber will be a lot different than today.


Yep. I said this when in Dallas. They dropped rate to $1.47 to $ 1 per mile. They have been robbing Peter to pay Paul ever since. And drivers have been getting screwed and the quality has gone down..


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

jocker12 said:


> The P&L data illustrates why Uber cannot go public
> 
> Under Travis Kalanick, Uber had no interest in an IPO because he fully understood that the full financial disclosures required-including historical cash flows, balance sheets and much greater operational P&L detail-would expose Uber's abysmal economics, and destroy its PR narrative where powerful efficiencies would inevitably lead to success. Dara Khosrowshahi, under pressure from certain Board factions when he was first hired to replace Kalanick, promised an IPO by the end of 2019. This could be a disaster unless Uber somehow finds convincing evidence of profitable economics that it can put in the prospectus.
> 
> ...


Ever heard of Tiny URL ( website, shrinks the URL for you )? 
Anyway.....
Time to buy a taxi medallion. In San Diego, they used to be in the 100K vicinity, now you can buy one for $3k, city price. they will probably go up if Uber goes belly up. I don't see how they can continue to sustain those losses until they perfect SDCs, and there is no proof they will bring uber to the promised land, anyway. I think Lyft will be on top, in a few years, and Uber will sink.


----------



## Brooklyn (Jul 29, 2014)

Oscar Levant said:


> Ever heard of Tiny URL ( website, shrinks the URL for you )?
> Anyway.....
> Time to buy a taxi medallion. In San Diego, they used to be in the 100K vicinity, now you can buy one for $3k, city price. they will probably go up if Uber goes belly up. I don't see how they can continue to sustain those losses until they perfect SDCs, and there is no proof they will bring uber to the promised land, anyway. I think Lyft will be on top, in a few years, and Uber will sink.


SDC? Self Driving Cars? man you're so 2017... Uber is talking about flying cars bro... FLYING CARS lmao.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> But i think it's more likely they just up and shut the doors one day because they lose too many lawsuits


No way. Many riders love Uber. It has too much value to shut down.


----------



## BurgerTiime (Jun 22, 2015)

If Uber was public now, their stock would be tanking....hard!


----------



## Dontmakemepullauonyou (Oct 13, 2015)

STMNine said:


> This trend so far certainly shows no signs of reversing... "Uber lost $2.5 billion in 2015, probably lost $4 billion in 2016, and is on track to lose $5 billion in 2017." Heck, at this rate, "180 Days of Liquidation" might be closer than what most most of us here had been anticipating!


Liquidate what exactly? A few office chairs and computers in San Francisco? Uber doesn't own anything but the minds of their slave drivers.


----------



## BurgerTiime (Jun 22, 2015)

Uber 


Dontmakemepullauonyou said:


> Liquidate what exactly? A few office chairs and computers in San Francisco? Uber doesn't own anything but the minds of their slave drivers.


Uber doesn't even own the patent on the push to order a car. GM does now from the purchase of Sidecar. Travis stole everything from the idea to Waymos tech. All Travis did was raise a lot of capital which they are burning at alarming rate. Uber needs to be bought out or they'll crash and burn very soon.

SoftBank should run in the opposite direction and never look back. Heck I'd be pissed if I was a sofback shareholder! I'd be like what the "f" are you guys doing with OUR vested cash? Not Uber, heeeeeeeellll NO!


----------



## Trunkcorpse (Oct 27, 2017)

If they can hold out 2 more years, SDC's will be reality. Uber will be fine. I'll bet anyone on this forum their job on it.


----------



## Yuri Lygotme (Jul 27, 2014)

Despite the fact that they put many taxi companies out of business, even with a decimated competition they are still losing money. Unbelievable!



Trunkcorpse said:


> If they can hold out 2 more years, SDC's will be reality. Uber will be fine. I'll bet anyone on this forum their job on it.


LFMAO! Do you have any idea what is the cost of maintaining a fleet? It's way way more than what they are paying human drivers.


----------



## Ken S (Dec 19, 2017)

jocker12 said:


> The P&L data illustrates why Uber cannot go public
> 
> Under Travis Kalanick, Uber had no interest in an IPO because he fully understood that the full financial disclosures required-including historical cash flows, balance sheets and much greater operational P&L detail-would expose Uber's abysmal economics, and destroy its PR narrative where powerful efficiencies would inevitably lead to success. Dara Khosrowshahi, under pressure from certain Board factions when he was first hired to replace Kalanick, promised an IPO by the end of 2019. This could be a disaster unless Uber somehow finds convincing evidence of profitable economics that it can put in the prospectus.
> 
> ...


The current situation is progressing to dire.



uberis80percentslavery said:


> View attachment 186923
> notice the strike fliers get censored & they never pin it.
> 
> share everywhere this site refers competition & profits off your misery they want high churn more referal fees theyll never front page a strike
> ...


----------



## GasHealthTimeCosts (Jul 24, 2017)

You people assume they’re losing money, don’t believe everything you hear. 

Drivers are putting in so much energy into this company. It will only fail if Lyft grabs a bigger market share and even then Uber should be fine.


----------



## Trunkcorpse (Oct 27, 2017)

Yuri Lygotme said:


> LFMAO! Do you have any idea what is the cost of maintaining a fleet? It's way way more than what they are paying human drivers.


And, yet, rental car companies are doing just fine. With SDC's, Uber will have a very similar cost structure with less overhead. I'm excited about hearing the mental gymnastics you'll go through to argue this.


----------



## 1.5xorbust (Nov 22, 2017)

$5 billion just isn’t what it used to be.


----------



## Mad Medic (Aug 17, 2017)

Mista T said:


> Lol
> 
> I dunno about 80%, but you are correct. If they would simply pay just a little more per ride then the turnover would be less and they wouldn't need to constantly incentivize new drivers. It would balance out, or perhaps even be a profitable move.


Yeah but then they'd have to cut have of their CSRs working for them being paid benefits, etc. They'd also only need half as many Greenlight hubs in larger cities.

Plus, for each 1 CSR they'd have to lay off, they'd also have to eliminate the 8 supervisors to each 1 CSR and 4 of the Supervisors "Supervisors". They'd also have to cut those actual employess Free daily Uber rides to and from work, cut out the daily lunches that get catered in, lose lots of signage that gets created under the pretense of a "great idea", lose a few computers versus upgrades for all, eliminiate 50 % of paper waste because of 50 % less garbage printed by 50 % less supervisors.

Look beyond the drivers and look into all the waste that Uber spends on their in place people that actually work within offices. You've everything from Taco Tuesdays to Massage Mondays and everything in between.

Wish us drivers had Free gym memberships like Every actual Uber employee has.

So much waste. Those on the inside MUST think it's an awesome place to work for, as long as not as a Driver Partner.


----------



## Jo3030 (Jan 2, 2016)

A billion here
A billion there
Soon enough, we'll be talking real money


----------



## Mad Medic (Aug 17, 2017)

But you are right. Just a little more per ride and stop always looking to invest in new drivers.

There's plenty out there willing to work hard, work all the areas, work all shifts, simply by being paid just a little better per ride.

1st - Give a driver a min fare rate that is higher than a $2.97 trip 2 blocks away. A driver should never receive less than $5.00 period!

2nd - Cancelation Fees, let the driver keep the entire Cancelation fee OR raise that fee so the driver actually receives a min of $5.00. A driver should never receive less than $5.00 period.

3rd - Uber Eats meals for 3 to 4 bucks unless driving a very long distance after pick up. An Eats order should be a min $5.00 to driver. A driver should nevet receive less than $5.00

4th Airport or Special Venue Runs there should be a driver surcharge applied just like every other applied surcharge such as "airport fee" TSA fee, city of ____fee. Any airport run should automatically add $5.00 beyond time/ distance to a driver fee.

5th -Shift Fees - I'm all about giving 3rd shift workers a shift differential payment like most other industries do. For Uber, just make it an extra 0.25 per pick up or something.

6th Pool Fares - Eliminate what everyone knows is crappy pool runs that have an almost zero chance of a passenger added. Plus, often it's not worth a dollar because anothet pax was added. Pool is ok I guess, for busy busy city locations along very specific routes at very specific times such as 9 to 5 but let's face it, nobody requesting a ride home at 2am from some bar should ever have an option of choosing Pool. Not city and not burb. That's just ridiculous. Pool only makes sense during work hours in major cities along bus routes in which passengers would take a bus versus Uber, unless Uber was the more attractive option. Drivers should also receive a set minimum for any pool ride. Pool cancelation fee should also be a min of $5.00 to the driver. No Driver should ever earn less tha $5.00 a fare /cancelation.

7th - Added passenger fee. Just like the taxis, Uber should get extra for having extra passengers in the car. How many times have 4 people slipped into your car to only go a couple of blocks for an Uber driver pay out of $2.96? These pax often laugh anx giggle how the Uber ride only xozt them a togal of about a buck each psrson. Again, should he $5.00 driver minimum.

8th. - higher pay for mileage. Uber drivers all across the nation need a higher pay for mile. This shouldnt be a buck a mile in one place and only 0.68 somewhere else.

9th - Uber Eats should ALWAYS be min $5.00 regadless what town or city rates may be posted for tour cify.

Again, no driver should ever have to face less fhan women's rates.


----------



## pomegranite112 (May 14, 2017)

sss said:


> Why would they ever want to raise rates when there is an excess of drivers even at these low rates ? Here in Houston no matter what time no matter where I am if I open the Uber passenger app I see 7-8 cars around me. Why raise rates when there are people wanting to work at these low rates ?


Because riders are willing to pay more than what they pay currently. I sometimes get a "its so cheap i feel so bad sometimes"


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

Trunkcorpse said:


> And, yet, rental car companies are doing just fine. With SDC's, Uber will have a very similar cost structure with less overhead. I'm excited about hearing the mental gymnastics you'll go through to argue this.


The average rental car probably gets less than one hundred miles a day put on it- and you know not every single car gets rented every single day.

A typical rideshare car puts 200-300 miles a day on it and with a robot driver it can do more because it doesn't have to stop to take naps.

Wear and tear on a robot rideshare car will be much harder than what a rental car goes through.... and there go your costs.

Oh, and did I mention with a rental car you have 1-4 people inside the car per day vs 40-60+ on a rideshare car.

You tell me which one has a higher risk for messes/things breaking


----------



## 1.5xorbust (Nov 22, 2017)

pomegranite112 said:


> Because riders are willing to pay more than what they pay currently. I sometimes get a "its so cheap i feel so bad sometimes"


Yeah and they think drivers are getting paid 90% of the total fare.


----------



## sss (Jul 12, 2015)

Would people ever even want to sit in a self driving car operated by a company so shady as Uber ? If there is an accident Uber will probably program the car to dump your body in a nearby ditch.


----------



## dirtylee (Sep 2, 2015)

sss said:


> Would people ever even want to sit in a self driving car operated by a company so shady as Uber ? If there is an accident Uber will probably program the car to dump your body in a nearby ditch.


LMAO.


----------



## Side Hustle (Mar 2, 2017)

1.5xorbust said:


> $5 billion just isn't what it used to be.


LOL!


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

everythingsuber said:


> Uber spends because it has too.
> 
> To make money Uber actually has to multiply it's prices by 4. For Uber to make money they actually have to become a taxi company and have the regulations and protection the taxi industry had. Softbank will put 1 billion in and that lasts a month. The legal issues are stalled as long as they can be. Uber simply runs out of money this time next year.


Actually 1 billion will last 3 months..


----------



## I_Like_Spam (May 10, 2015)

jocker12 said:


> The P&L data illustrates why Uber cannot go public


Amazon lost money for many years before it turned the corner, and it was a public company during much of that time. The fact that Uber is hemorrhaging money is actually a motivation to do the IPO, to raise funds if investors have confidence in them.


----------



## pomegranite112 (May 14, 2017)

I_Like_Spam said:


> Amazon lost money for many years before it turned the corner, and it was a public company during much of that time. The fact that Uber is hemorrhaging money is actually a motivation to do the IPO, to raise funds if investors have confidence in them.


They never lost at the rate uber is losing

And their plans weren't outragiously out of reach


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

I_Like_Spam said:


> Amazon lost money for many years before it turned the corner, and it was a public company during much of that time. The fact that Uber is hemorrhaging money is actually a motivation to do the IPO, to raise funds if investors have confidence in them.


Unlike Uber, Amazon Proactively Publicized Its Many Legitimate Competitive Advantages

It is useful to compare the public claims and perceptions about Uber's growth with the case of Amazon, which like Uber, was seeking to drive a massive set of incumbent competitors out of business in order to achieve long-term industry dominance.

"Amazon's business model was focused on "disrupting" a book retailing industry that had high prices, high margins and high costs. By contrast, Uber cannot explain how it will realize billions in profit from an industry selling a commodity product with razor-thin margins that had already cut costs to the bone. Unlike Uber, Amazon proactively provided outsiders with compelling, verifiable evidence of the sources of its (potential) efficiency and scale advantages. These included the huge savings from eliminating "brick-and-mortar" retail locations, enormous scale economies in warehousing and distribution, sophisticated software that not only processed customer orders but dramatically simplified product search and identified customer-tailored buying suggestions, increased leverage with publishers and other suppliers, and huge scale economies that allowed it to expand geographically and into new markets at negligible marginal cost once its basic selling and warehousing/distribution infrastructure was in place.

The huge scale economies meant it could rapidly drive down unit costs as it grew, building strong loyalty through rock-bottom prices, and making it virtually impossible for existing (or new) entrants to ever match its efficiency levels. Amazon's efficiency claims could be readily verified by objective outsiders who were expert in the relevant retailing, warehousing and ecommerce fields.

Amazon's digital platform meant it could expand into other lower-margin businesses but did not invest heavily in these new businesses until it had secured a sustainable position in its core business. Unlike Uber, Amazon encouraged an active public discussion of its business model in order to build credibility and support in the financial community. While many observers were uncertain about Amazon's long term profit potential, and questioned specific practices, there was universal agreement that its ability to rapidly capture share from industry incumbents was based on legitimate competitive advantages.[1]"

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/201...rs-innovation-and-competitive-advantages.html


----------



## Brobaly (Oct 31, 2016)

What if Dara Khosrowshahi just needed a side hustle between jobs and gave board members that 2019 deadline because he would have a real job with a real employer before then?


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

I refuse to let this unsettling news dampen my holiday cheer.

I was hoping they lost 7 billion this year.


----------



## Hogg (Feb 7, 2016)

Just raise the ****ing price already. it would fix 90% of the problems overnight.


----------



## 1.5xorbust (Nov 22, 2017)

Gung-Ho said:


> I refuse to let this unsettling news dampen my holiday cheer.
> 
> I was hoping they lost 7 billion this year.


There's still twelve days left.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Here's an interview with an early investor in Uber.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2017/12/04/tusk-ventures-softbank-uber

The economics of the company are really strong and really bright, so I don't know that at $33 a share, they'll be able to fill their $8 billion [worth of Uber shares from existing investors]. I think they're going have to come up, and if I had to guess, it ends up somewhere in the low $50s. I'll take advantage of this tender offer at the right price.


----------



## Brooklyn (Jul 29, 2014)

Trunkcorpse said:


> If they can hold out 2 more years, SDC's will be reality. Uber will be fine. I'll bet anyone on this forum their job on it.


Wanna bet money?


----------



## sss (Jul 12, 2015)

goneubering said:


> Here's an interview with an early investor in Uber.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2017/12/04/tusk-ventures-softbank-uber
> 
> The economics of the company are really strong and really bright, so I don't know that at $33 a share, they'll be able to fill their $8 billion [worth of Uber shares from existing investors]. I think they're going have to come up, and if I had to guess, it ends up somewhere in the low $50s. I'll take advantage of this tender offer at the right price.


Of course the early investor will think the $33 is low.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

jocker12 said:


> The P&L data illustrates why Uber cannot go public
> 
> Under Travis Kalanick, Uber had no interest in an IPO because he fully understood that the full financial disclosures required-including historical cash flows, balance sheets and much greater operational P&L detail-would expose Uber's abysmal economics, and destroy its PR narrative where powerful efficiencies would inevitably lead to success. Dara Khosrowshahi, under pressure from certain Board factions when he was first hired to replace Kalanick, promised an IPO by the end of 2019. This could be a disaster unless Uber somehow finds convincing evidence of profitable economics that it can put in the prospectus.
> 
> ...


UNSUTAINABLE !



MoreTips said:


> If you've really paid attention the past year there are definite signs Uber is starting to realize it will run out of drivers eventually. I know there are still way too many eager drivers out there but at some point word of mouth, media exposure, and public attitude will stop the flow of newbies.
> 
> Rideshare will survive but what ever will be left of Uber will be a lot different than today.


The drivers Quit Faster now


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

sss said:


> Of course the early investor will think the $33 is low.


The price will be whatever the new investors are willing to pay and what previous investors are willing to sell their shares for. I'm vastly more interested in what he said here because he has inside info.

*The economics of the company are really strong and really bright,*


----------



## RideStreets (Jun 2, 2016)

jocker12 said:


> The P&L data illustrates why Uber cannot go public
> 
> Under Travis Kalanick, Uber had no interest in an IPO because he fully understood that the full financial disclosures required-including historical cash flows, balance sheets and much greater operational P&L detail-would expose Uber's abysmal economics, and destroy its PR narrative where powerful efficiencies would inevitably lead to success. Dara Khosrowshahi, under pressure from certain Board factions when he was first hired to replace Kalanick, promised an IPO by the end of 2019. This could be a disaster unless Uber somehow finds convincing evidence of profitable economics that it can put in the prospectus.
> 
> ...


Yes!!! I've been up on this. Every driver should be familiar with this series. This is temporary. The rideshare industry will be gone or drastically different in 2-3 years because it's not a sustainable business model. Get ready for that change.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

RideStreets said:


> Yes!!! I've been up on this. Every driver should be familiar with this series. This is temporary. The rideshare industry will be gone or drastically different in 2-3 years because it's not a sustainable business model. Get ready for that change.


Of course it's sustainable. Now that TK is not in charge Uber should be fine.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

goneubering said:


> Of course it's sustainable. Now that TK is not in charge Uber should be fine.


Of course Dara is still accountable to Travis and nothing at Uber has changed.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

everythingsuber said:


> Of course Dara is still accountable to Travis and nothing at Uber has changed.


You don't seem to be paying attention to what's happening.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

goneubering said:


> You don't seem to be paying attention to what's happening.


I'm very aware of what is happening. 

Dora was going to turn finances around 180 days of change we're a different company all the problems were old management etc. Nothing has changed just the spin and I don't believe for one minute Travis is actually gone.


----------



## Yam Digger (Sep 12, 2016)

Mista T said:


> As far as drivers working for peanuts ... it's already happening.


It's just that we'll be driving for even less peanuts


Gung-Ho said:


> I refuse to let this unsettling news dampen my holiday cheer.
> I was hoping they lost 7 billion this year.


Cheer up, Comrade: Dara will soon be announcing Uber bankruptcy 


goneubering said:


> Of course it's sustainable. Now that TK is not in charge Uber should be fine.


Even if Travis was completely out of the picture, he's already done allot of damage that might be next to impossible to reverse.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

Yam Digger said:


> It's just that we'll be driving for even less peanuts
> 
> Cheer up, Comrade: Dara will soon be announcing Uber bankruptcy
> 
> Even if Travis was completely out of the picture, he's already done allot of damage that might be next to impossible to reverse.


Considering they keep digging more skeletons out of every closet they open...

Dara should just turn over all the servers to the FBI close up shop, and stop paying salaries to everyone but legal.

They would stop losing 400 million a month... and there might be some change left to pay out all the people uber owes money to in lawsuits...


----------



## Primeonly27 (Oct 18, 2016)

Mista T said:


> Lol
> 
> I dunno about 80%, but you are correct. If they would simply pay just a little more per ride then the turnover would be less and they wouldn't need to constantly incentivize new drivers. It would balance out, or perhaps even be a profitable move.


If Uber paid 50 cents a mile more than Lyft all the Lyft drivers would quit driving for Lyft and Lyft would have to raise their price or be crushed and left in the dust as they wouldn't have any drivers.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

everythingsuber said:


> I'm very aware of what is happening.
> 
> Dora was going to turn finances around 180 days of change we're a different company all the problems were old management etc. Nothing has changed just the spin and I don't believe for one minute Travis is actually gone.


It takes time to turn around a multi billion dollar company.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Mista T said:


> Just took this screenshot, the advertising lies are still flowing.


Saddest part is the "plus tips,"



dirtylee said:


> Cash out daily.
> When they take instapay away, then is near.


I'm in Houston. We used to have two newspapers. In 1995 the Houston Post closed. The employees found out when they showed up to work and the doors were locked. The contractors, of which I was one, were told and got nothing. There was no notice whatsoever. I imagine that Uber will be the same way. You'll turn on your app, or try to, and there will be nothing there.

It will be bad for the drivers who really need it but quite honestly I hope they do it on Saturday night and all the drunk millennials are stuck outside the bars trying to figure out how to use a bus, and why don't the buses run at night?, and how much does a cab cost these days anyway?, and why is it taking so long to get to them?

And why are the Uber drivers who just figured out what happened, and are sitting in their nice warm cars with locked doors, telling them the ONLY way to get a ride now is $100 up front, preferably cash?

Isn't that disruptive and illegal?


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> I'm in Houston. We used to have two newspapers. In 1995 the Houston Post closed. The employees found out when they showed up to work and the doors were locked. The contractors, of which I was one, were told and got nothing. There was no notice whatsoever. I imagine that Uber will be the same way. You'll turn on your app, or try to, and there will be nothing there.
> 
> It will be bad for the drivers who really need it but quite honestly I hope they do it on Saturday night and all the drunk millennials are stuck outside the bars trying to figure out how to use a bus, and why don't the buses run at night?, and how much does a cab cost these days anyway?, and why is it taking so long to get to them?
> 
> ...


Sorry to hear what happened to you but that has no relation to Uber.


----------



## somedriverguy (Sep 6, 2016)

STMNine said:


> This trend so far certainly shows no signs of reversing... "Uber lost $2.5 billion in 2015, probably lost $4 billion in 2016, and is on track to lose $5 billion in 2017." Heck, at this rate, "180 Days of Liquidation" might be closer than what most most of us here had been anticipating!


The problem being, of course, they have nothing to sell. WE own the cars.



Trunkcorpse said:


> If they can hold out 2 more years, SDC's will be reality. Uber will be fine. I'll bet anyone on this forum their job on it.


Making a viable SDC and making enough viable SDC to replace every single UBER driver are two vastly different things.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

somedriverguy said:


> The problem being, of course, they have nothing to sell. WE own the cars.
> 
> Making a viable SDC and making enough viable SDC to replace every single UBER driver are two vastly different things.


What's more believable?

Uber is 2 years from SDCs

Uber is lying to the world for the sake of getting more investors. (and lying to their current investors)


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

goneubering said:


> Sorry to hear what happened to you but that has no relation to Uber.


I think you're missing my point.


----------



## Trunkcorpse (Oct 27, 2017)

somedriverguy said:


> Making a viable SDC and making enough viable SDC to replace every single UBER driver are two vastly different things.


Good point. I just feel like sdc are going to happen sooner rather than later than we anticipate. There will be a transition period where we'll see more and more sdc being used by businesses (and private individuals) and Uber will simply be one of many many many businesses using the tech. It's going to happen, and it's just a question of if Uber can weather whatever happens between now and that transition. I think that's always been their long term plan.



Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> What's more believable?
> 
> Uber is 2 years from SDCs
> 
> Uber is lying to the world for the sake of getting more investors. (and lying to their current investors)


Ok. That's two questions out of a million we might ask. 
Here's my 2:
What's more believable?
Uber will eventually go out of business so we won't be able to drive Uber anymore.
Or
Uber will eventually begin implementing sdc and we, as drivers, will be phased out.


----------



## JaredJ (Aug 7, 2015)

They need a queue for drivers to log on. Google Uber X Fares Los Angeles 2013. They were losing money at those rates too.

They need to cut their corporate costs. It's already ridiculous half of a $6 ride goes to uber because of the rider fee.


----------



## Ihateyou (May 4, 2017)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> I hope they do it on Saturday night and all the drunk millennials are stuck outside the bars trying to figure out how to use a bus, and why don't the buses run at night?, and how much does a cab cost these days anyway?, and why is it taking so long to get to them?


You sound like an old, bitter guy.

Why would you want Uber to shut down on a Saturday night, so "millennials" are stuck? Other than to see other people miserable.

These "drunk millennials" are paying for your Uber rides, so no reason to be so angry about everything.


----------



## Yam Digger (Sep 12, 2016)

Primeonly27 said:


> If Uber paid 50 cents a mile more than Lyft all the Lyft drivers would quit driving for Lyft and Lyft would have to raise their price or be crushed and left in the dust as they wouldn't have any drivers.


In Lagos Nigeria, Uber cut the rates so low, that drivers abandoned Uber and signed up for Taxify instead. The pax then had no choice but to download and use Taxify too.


----------



## Elmo Burrito (Feb 3, 2017)

Ubers business model has all the earmarkings of two ideas at either end of the economic spectrum. "Social Economics" or "Crony Capitolism" on steroids. And of course throw in a good dose of "social engineering "
For all of you that support either President Trump's or Bernie Sander's econimic ideas taken to the extreme, it's a perfect cocktail blend of the two ideas always resulting in disastrous consequences. This is what it looks like. Uber.


----------



## UberDiaz (Aug 6, 2016)

sss said:


> Why would they ever want to raise rates when there is an excess of drivers even at these low rates ? Here in Houston no matter what time no matter where I am if I open the Uber passenger app I see 7-8 cars around me. Why raise rates when there are people wanting to work at these low rates ?


I have a feeling there wpuld have to be a cap on drivers at that point, probably depending in what market. Uber capped uberblack drivers and limited how many can be drivers for that platform so i think if rates were high, $2 or more per mile for example, then i think there would be a cap since everyone would want to drive for uber/lyft.


----------



## Arete (Jan 31, 2017)

It's amazing how many smart businessmen and entrepreneurs are driving uber... and posting in this thread...


----------



## ABC123DEF (Jun 9, 2015)

Ihateyou said:


> You sound like an old, bitter guy.
> 
> Why would you want Uber to shut down on a Saturday night, so "millennials" are stuck? Other than to see other people miserable.
> 
> These "drunk millennials" are paying for your Uber rides, so no reason to be so angry about everything.


GRRRRRRRR!!!! *Shakes my fist and tells you to 'GET OFF MY LAWN'!!*


----------



## RickR (Jul 29, 2017)

everythingsuber said:


> You up prices you are undercut by opposition. That's how this whole mess got started. Travis being afraid Lyft would undercut them and take market share. If Ubers problems were as simple as raising price a little it would have happened several billion dollars ago.


How could that be accurate with so many driver on the road? I think a lot of them are just driving less. Maybe 96% turnover of fulltime drivers (many of which still drive part time)?


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

RickR said:


> How could that be accurate with so many driver on the road? I think a lot of them are just driving less. Maybe 96% turnover of fulltime drivers (many of which still drive part time)?


Pax are extremely price sensitive. The majority, anyway. Ask them why they choose one over the other and at least half the time they say money. Even if the price diff is just 50 cents.

That's why they both try so hard to eliminate surge, even tho it makes them more $. Once a pax feels like they were hustled, they jump to the competitor.

As a result, neither company can raise prices significantly unless the other follows immediately. But to organize that is price fixing, which is illegal enough for the feds to notice. Altho, they have 7 DOJ investigations at Uber currently, what's one more gonna hurt?


----------



## RickR (Jul 29, 2017)

outface said:


> There is no justice if Uber won't fail.


Yes, but Travis probably already has 20 to 50+ million in the bank. shrugs


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

RickR said:


> Yes, but Travis probably already has 20 to 50+ million in the bank. shrugs


It's still possible for TK to face Jail time and lose it all in lawsuits from his investors.


If TK is proven to have broken the law he could end up in jail.

If Uber goes completely belly up due to TKs mis-actions and they brought (something that is possible) e could get sued for all that money.

For example if uber loses lawsuit after lawsuit and is bankrupted by TKs misdeeds.. (a billion here a billion there) the stockholders can sue all the lawbreakers personally for driving the company into the ground by illegal means.

This would normally require extreme misdeeds, such as embezzlement, however getting the company sued to death by breaking the law badly enough would also fit the bill.

Normally just being a lousy businessman won't get you sued. But selling meat you KNOW is contaminated and getting your company sued for Billions would.

So give it 5 years TK could be penniless broke and in jail for corporate espionage, invasion of privacy, ect ect.. and be sued in civil court for the millions he has been paid.

Then when he get's out of jail he will be back at the bottom, with nothing but his name, (which will by synonymous with one of his crimes)


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

How about letting the miles drivers drive result in some profit. Base fare needs to increase.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> I think you're missing my point.


If your point is about Uber suddenly shutting down without warning then you're dead wrong.


----------



## somedriverguy (Sep 6, 2016)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> What's more believable?
> 
> Uber is 2 years from SDCs
> 
> Uber is lying to the world for the sake of getting more investors. (and lying to their current investors)


Have you been paying attention to any story involving things UBER has actually done at all in the past 5 years? Odds of UBER lying so far, based on past actions, are 1 in 1.



Arete said:


> It's amazing how many smart businessmen and entrepreneurs are driving uber... and posting in this thread...


You have conflated having correct knowledge with having enough money to do somethong. Last time I checked, just because I learned something money didn't just fall from the sky.


----------



## Chapindc (Mar 22, 2017)

Fuber "partners" is the VIP investor reserved spot for the ultimate side PONZI SCHEME


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

jocker12 said:


> The P&L data illustrates why Uber cannot go public
> 
> Under Travis Kalanick, Uber had no interest in an IPO because he fully understood that the full financial disclosures required-including historical cash flows, balance sheets and much greater operational P&L detail-would expose Uber's abysmal economics, and destroy its PR narrative where powerful efficiencies would inevitably lead to success. Dara Khosrowshahi, under pressure from certain Board factions when he was first hired to replace Kalanick, promised an IPO by the end of 2019. This could be a disaster unless Uber somehow finds convincing evidence of profitable economics that it can put in the prospectus.
> 
> ...


This type of article is good for bringing to us the raw numbers of Uber's difficulties. However, the problem with articles like this is that they take the tidbits of financial information that are available and make assumptions that are wrong or, at best, misleading. The article says:

_In 2016, Uber unilaterally imposed much larger cuts in driver compensation, costing drivers an additional $3 billion.[6] Prior to Uber's market entry, the take home pay of big-city cab drivers in the US was in the $12-17/hour range, and these earnings were possible only if drivers worked 65-75 hours a week.

Since mass driver defections would cause passenger volume growth to collapse completely , *Uber was forced to reverse these cuts in 2017 and increased the driver share from 68% to 80%*.








_

Drivers' percentage share of pax revenue may have increased from 68% to 80%, but interpreting this as Uber having reversed the pay cuts to drivers and having increased our pay is unsound and not supported by the data available above. To go further and claim that the alleged Uber reversal of pay cuts in order to prevent an exodus of drivers is therefore also just guessing.

The reason that it is not possible to deduce that Uber has reversed pay cuts to drivers and actively "increased" driver pay is because there is one piece of data missing, which any decent financial analyst would be able to spot straight away, and that is ride volumes.

It is certainly possible for drivers' share of pax revenue to increase significantly as in the graphic above, yet have driver revenue, in dollars and cents, fall. Given that most of us have experienced declining revenue from Ubering, this is what I suspect has actually happened. Falling driver dollar earnings in the face of higher driver percentage share of pax revenue would be a consequence of Uber lowering its prices to create increases in demand. Let's assume that Uber lowers its fares that it charges pax by introducing, for example, a new low-price service. Let's call it Express Pool. Let's also assume that they lower the price of Pool rides by further expanding the promotions they offer on it (pay up front fee, get all Pools anywhere in the city for one month for $2.99 etc).

The example below models this, taking the revenue data from the article.  I'll add to this, assuming that 2bn rides were given in 2016 and that average pax fare for a ride was therefore $10. I'll also assume that Uber increases its subsidies of pax fares with its new Express Pool service and other pax discounts, which lowers the average fare to $8.20. Pax are delighted with the new lower fares and demand spikes up from 2bn rides in 2016 to 4.5bn rides in 2017. As we see in the data from the article, driver revenue increases from $13.55bn to $29.56bn, and drivers' share of revenue goes up from 68% to 80%. Great! Right? No.










Actual driver revenue in dollar amounts falls from $6.78 per ride to $6.59 per ride. But how can this be? Drivers are getting a larger percentage share of the revenue from pax, but they're making less money per ride. The answer is easy - driver percentage share of pax revenue increased because Uber decreased the fares it charged passengers and revenue increased at a slower rate than ride volume.

The message in this is to not believe everything in every news article you read. I don't like articles like this because they disseminate information which is at best unfounded and at worst, false. This article implies that Uber drivers' earnings have increased since 2016, which is not demonstrated by the numbers offered by the author. I have not yet read an error-free article on Uber in the media, either because the authors base their analyses on incomplete or wrong data or because they are unable to perform correct analyses, as in this case.


----------



## rickasmith98 (Sep 26, 2016)

I always assumed most of Uber's losses were always related from their constant expansion. The driver's really subsidize a lot of the capital cost that most businesses would be incurring. Suppose Uber had to actually buy all it's fleet of cars and such....the brick and mortar aspect of their business is so minimal. They have only their core home office employees and small real estate for that, plus their IT platform. It's hard to imagine that they can't earn a profit, especially if they stop expanding and trying to take over the world.


----------



## Elmo Burrito (Feb 3, 2017)

iheartuber said:


> The average rental car probably gets less than one hundred miles a day put on it- and you know not every single car gets rented every single day.
> 
> A typical rideshare car puts 200-300 miles a day on it and with a robot driver it can do more because it doesn't have to stop to take naps.
> 
> ...


Once the SDC's get the $hit beat out ofem because they can't miss as many potholes, roadkill, etc. as human drivers and, after they start looking (and smelling) like a NYC taxi, they will probably be disposable just like a Bic Lighter in a year or two.


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

everythingsuber said:


> Ubers driver churn rate is 96% per annum. Not one driver out there makes the minimum wage. The cost of replacing drivers is 80 percent of Ubers losses.


Except NEW drivers don't understand upfront pricing, and they drive the "shortest distance" route which is what makes uber the most money.

Myself I drove shortest distance routes until (thanks to UPnet) I learned how the system really works.

Of course uber could fix this by simply increasing the TIME charge to 50 cents a minute (so we earn 35 cents a minute).


----------



## UberxGTA (Dec 1, 2015)

sss said:


> Why would they ever want to raise rates when there is an excess of drivers even at these low rates ? Here in Houston no matter what time no matter where I am if I open the Uber passenger app I see 7-8 cars around me. Why raise rates when there are people wanting to work at these low rates ?


One word. Bankruptcy.


----------



## Yuri Lygotme (Jul 27, 2014)

Trunkcorpse said:


> And, yet, rental car companies are doing just fine. With SDC's, Uber will have a very similar cost structure with less overhead. I'm excited about hearing the mental gymnastics you'll go through to argue this.


Dumb analogy. Rental car companies don't have their vehicles going through 300 miles per day!


----------



## Trunkcorpse (Oct 27, 2017)

Yuri Lygotme said:


> Dumb analogy. Rental car companies don't have their vehicles going through 300 miles per day!


U totally got me


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

rickasmith98 said:


> I always assumed most of Uber's losses were always related from their constant expansion. The driver's really subsidize a lot of the capital cost that most businesses would be incurring. Suppose Uber had to actually buy all it's fleet of cars and such....the brick and mortar aspect of their business is so minimal. They have only their core home office employees and small real estate for that, plus their IT platform. It's hard to imagine that they can't earn a profit, especially if they stop expanding and trying to take over the world.


I think you're right. It should be a lucrative business in the future which is why big investors keep trying to get into the game.


----------



## somedriverguy (Sep 6, 2016)

The Gift of Fish said:


> This type of article is good for bringing to us the raw numbers of Uber's difficulties. However, the problem with articles like this is that they take the tidbits of financial information that are available and make assumptions that are wrong or, at best, misleading. The article says:
> 
> _In 2016, Uber unilaterally imposed much larger cuts in driver compensation, costing drivers an additional $3 billion.[6] Prior to Uber's market entry, the take home pay of big-city cab drivers in the US was in the $12-17/hour range, and these earnings were possible only if drivers worked 65-75 hours a week.
> 
> ...


Of the three kinds of lies, statistics is generally regarded as the worst.


----------



## freeFromUber (Mar 1, 2016)

K girl 213 said:


> I have been praying for softbank deal goes up in the smoke.


I'm sure it will...one way or another!


----------



## Howie428Uber (Mar 4, 2016)

A comparison between Amazon and Uber is a fun exercise… I’d say that Amazon has used an efficient business model to take over the business positions of other companies. It is accumulating business to itself, but it has generated relatively little new business.

Uber has also taken over business from pre-existing companies, but that’s only a fraction of the business that Uber is now providing. By being simple and efficient, rideshare has massively grown the market. The area that Uber covers and the reliability of it within the busier parts of that area has transformed the way many people get around.

In Manhattan I doubt the difference is that significant, but in a place like Pittsburgh it’s night and day. Also, the transformation is feeding itself… There are now vibrant and varied bars all over the various parts of the city. Uber is a big part of why those are succeeding, and people are getting used to the lifestyle that comes with that.

The biggest challenge for Uber is to stop favoring urban customers and push reliable coverage out into rural areas. That’s a giant largely unserved market. With Long Pick Up Fees it looks like Uber is beginning to try to figure it out. Now they need to find a way to get surge to kick in or perhaps set higher base rates for rural areas to reflect the true value of a middle of nowhere pick up in the middle of the night. If drivers are not all obligated to gather up in city centers then we’d all do better out of it.

As for SDC, Uber is less than two years away from sending their cars out on their own and transporting passengers. Indeed, I’d guess we’ll see that in 6 months or so. However, it will be a very limited service, like the thing Waymo is doing. It’ll begin as a shuttle service taking people up and down a few main roads, most likely in Pittsburgh.

At that point they’ll find out how passengers respond and how awkward the practical elements of it are. It’ll then be a process of adding streets and sending out more cars. Initially those cars will be making massive losses, then they’ll be making big losses, and the crunch will come when they are in direct competition with a dude in his nine-year-old Prius.

Initially it will look like the robo-cars are winning because Uber will steer things their way, but the nine-year-old Prius will stick around and the robo-fleet will get to an optimal cherry-picking size, before they too become cheap and nasty, and the two will co-exist until government is lobbied/bribed to intervene in favor of SDCs. That’s 20 years from now.


----------



## Brooklyn (Jul 29, 2014)

rickasmith98 said:


> I always assumed most of Uber's losses were always related from their constant expansion. The driver's really subsidize a lot of the capital cost that most businesses would be incurring. Suppose Uber had to actually buy all it's fleet of cars and such....the brick and mortar aspect of their business is so minimal. They have only their core home office employees and small real estate for that, plus their IT platform. It's hard to imagine that they can't earn a profit, especially if they stop expanding and trying to take over the world.


Don't forget things like servers, and etc..


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

boober Will not be around in four years


----------



## Kodyhead (May 26, 2015)

Mista T said:


> $1 billion would go a long way if they would cut their spending. Not too hard, they just don't want to make those hard decisions.
> 
> As far as drivers working for peanuts ... it's already happening.


Running commercials every 5 mins on tv, radio and internet to recruit more drivers can't be that expensive


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

Kodyhead said:


> Running commercials every 5 mins on tv, radio and internet to recruit more drivers can't be that expensive


It would be cheaper to not recruit drivers thou...

Do away with over saturation by saving themselves some money. Then when there are drivers making obscene amounts of money, word of mouth will fuel recruiting.

Not even the army spends as much as uber to recruit these days.

The $9000 loss per uber exchange vehicle was all the proof i needed that Boober is completely clueless.

Not one of their corporate officers ever has ever worked for a transportation company. Find me one and prove me wrong.

They are all tech companies... Every single one...

It's a group of techies running a transpiration company and losing ridiculous amounts of money.


----------



## pomegranite112 (May 14, 2017)

Mista T said:


> Pax are extremely price sensitive. The majority, anyway. Ask them why they choose one over the other and at least half the time they say money. Even if the price diff is just 50 cents.
> 
> That's why they both try so hard to eliminate surge, even tho it makes them more $. Once a pax feels like they were hustled, they jump to the competitor.
> 
> As a result, neither company can raise prices significantly unless the other follows immediately. But to organize that is price fixing, which is illegal enough for the feds to notice. Altho, they have 7 DOJ investigations at Uber currently, what's one more gonna hurt?


I think this is the only exception where price fixing should be allowed. Regulate it so there's a price floor for mile and min. Everyones happy


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

Agreed. These clowns have no idea what they're doing


----------



## Yam Digger (Sep 12, 2016)

I used to say that Uber will go belly-up in three years. But if they really are losing 5 bil a year, even that estimate looks quite optimistic.


----------



## Michael1230nj (Jun 23, 2017)

You can't have a fleet of Drivers that Hate you and expect Customers to not pick up on it. Uber is a Ponzi Scheme.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

Michael1230nj said:


> You can't have a fleet of Drivers that Hate you and expect Customers to not pick up on it. Uber is a Ponzi Scheme.


No...

Uber is some twisted version of a Ponzi scheme (them continuously borrowing more money) and a work from home scheme (what the drivers get suckered into.

So yes it's a scam, but it's TWO scams in one.


----------



## Michael1230nj (Jun 23, 2017)

Uber going Broke will be a Positive for Drivers The Customers are there Uber has shown that Other App Based Car Facilitating Company's will enter the Market Place and Drivers will have Options Local Company's that do not have the unobtainable goal of providing large profits for Debt Holders and Shareholders will Compete for Drivers.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

Brooklyn said:


> SDC? Self Driving Cars? man you're so 2017... Uber is talking about flying cars bro... FLYING CARS lmao.


Well, flying cars can take a flying leap.......without me in them 



STMNine said:


> This trend so far certainly shows no signs of reversing... "Uber lost $2.5 billion in 2015, probably lost $4 billion in 2016, and is on track to lose $5 billion in 2017." Heck, at this rate, "180 Days of Liquidation" might be closer than what most most of us here had been anticipating!


If Uber were smart, they would make me CEO. I could turn this company into a profit making venture. My plan would be:

1. Abandon all funding for SDCs, this idea is not going to bear fruit soon enough that funding now it is a viable idea, for the time being. If and when it becomes the norm, and is perfected, there are bound to be companies that will lease the technology, or ways to obtain it a lot cheaper than funding the R&D now ).

2. Raise rates to 80% of the biggest local taxi company.

3. Adopt the taximeter system, the timer kicks in below 12mph. The "rate" is published and placed in the car, where the rider cna see it. So, $2.50 per mile, $2.50 for the first 1/10 of a mile, and $30 per hour waiting time ( only when the car is slowed or stopped ).

4. Charge drivers a flat rate per week, like taxis do instead of the commission system. ( don't make it too high. I suggest $250 per week in most markets ) this will reward productive drivers, and penalize moonlighters and drivers that are feeding off only the good days from those that work full time ).

5. Abandon the star rating system in favor of live comments about riders. Reducing humans to numbers is demoralizing, and a disturbing trend, and really is not necessary for success in business.

Thing is, Taxi companies might argue that Uber, if doing the above, are behaving so much like a taxi company that they should be subject not to state reg, but city taxi regs, and be subject to all of that. I say no, because Uber cannot accept street hails, a huge difference.

I don't think SDCs are going to be that big of a threat to the traditional hiring a car with a driver. It's a different demographic, just like shuttles and taxis riders are. There will always be people who value the humanity of a live human driving the vehicle.

Anyway, Uber, you have my two cents, or make that four due to inflation.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

Oscar Levant said:


> Well, flying cars can take a flying leap.......without me in them
> 
> If Uber were smart, they would make me CEO. I could turn this company into a profit making venture. My plan would be:
> 
> ...


250 per week is too much money, unless it comes with a car.

I pay $66 for a taxi shift, including getting a taxi.

$100 per week with no car, $400-$500 per week with a car.
Replace rating with a complaint section.

80% of the taxi companies would be good, would come to $2.00 per mile and like... $24 an hour. VS $2.40ish-$2.50ish and $30 an hour.

I have no problem with flying cars,

Cause i KNOW that the FAA will never let them fly in the kind of quantities that uber wants.

So it will be a glorified helicopter tour, nothing more, nothing less.

(OK maybe for the obscenely rich but I'm not going to complain about that)

SDCs are a pipe dream that keeps moving farther back as they discover how hard it is to really do.


----------



## Michael1230nj (Jun 23, 2017)

Those who do not learn from the mistakes of the past are condemned to repeat them. Uber History is important to look at to understand how we have arrived at this point. Travis claims to have come up with the Idea for Uber when he couldn't find a Cab in San Francisco during Shift change hours. So he approached the Problem without Knowing one thing about the Economics of the Industry If Travis couldn't find a Clean Towel in a Men's Room Uber would now have Cornered the Wash Cloth Distribution in most men's rooms throughout the World. The common denominator being both are low wage minimal Skills industry's. Uber will fail it didn't start as a Ponzi Scheme but it Morphed into one when the Numbers became obvious.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

Michael1230nj said:


> Those who do not learn from the mistakes of the past are condemned to repeat them. Uber History is important to look at to understand how we have arrived at this point. Travis claims to have come up with the Idea for Uber when he couldn't find a Cab in San Francisco during Shift change hours. So he approached the Problem without Knowing one thing about the Economics of the Industry If Travis couldn't find a Clean Towel in a Men's Room Uber would now have Cornered the Wash Cloth Distribution in most men's rooms throughout the World. The common denominator being both are low wage minimal Skills industry's. Uber will fail it didn't start as a Ponzi Scheme but it Morphed into one when the Numbers became obvious.


Most ponzi schemes don't start as ponzi schemes either, they start as an investment fund that loses money, then someone managing the fund gets in denial and starts cooking the books.


----------



## 2Cents (Jul 18, 2016)

Mista T said:


> They could:
> 
> * give us 100% of the cancel fee
> * give us a % of the Booking Fee
> ...


If you're a commercial driver with a commercial policy, you receive the booking fee.



jocker12 said:


> Unlike Uber, Amazon Proactively Publicized Its Many Legitimate Competitive Advantages
> 
> It is useful to compare the public claims and perceptions about Uber's growth with the case of Amazon, which like Uber, was seeking to drive a massive set of incumbent competitors out of business in order to achieve long-term industry dominance.
> 
> ...


I'm tired of people bringing up the fact that Amazon lost $ in the beginning....
Amazon did not try to evade laws, and stiff drivers and make passengers pay more with this up front pricing scheme that they contacted. They've had at least 20 driver addendums since they first started and burned through $5Billion investor dollars. If it looks like a ponzy, smells like a ponzy; it might just be a ponzy.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> 250 per week is too much money, unless it comes with a car.
> 
> I pay $66 for a taxi shift, including getting a taxi.
> 
> ...


I suspect it depends on your market where you live. Where I live it's like this:

There is no way any taxi company I know of, in L.A or San Diego, would charge only $100 per week for radio service for owner/operators. Look, I'm talking a $2.50 per mile meter, that will make $250 per day very doable. You'll have your weekly charge in one day, and have the rest of the week to yourself. Most taxi companies, here in San Diego, charge way more than this, and they don't even have any calls any more, do to Uber taking all the business. In my view, with this set up $250 a week I expect would be the calculus. Sure, if you don't want to pay it, don't, but many will, especially taxi drivers who have no radio biz to speak of, they will come over, especially if the meter is close to what they are charging in the cabs now ( $2.80 for yellow in San Diego ).



> 80% of the taxi companies would be good, would come to $2.00 per mile and like... $24 an hour. VS $2.40ish-$2.50ish and $30 an hour.


It's $2.80 - $3.00 per mile in San Diego, has been for nearly 10 years. Prices are higher here. A one bed apartment is $1500, easy, often higher.



> [...]
> 
> SDCs are a pipe dream that keeps moving farther back as they discover how hard it is to really do.


I agree.



jocker12 said:


> The P&L data illustrates why Uber cannot go public
> 
> Under Travis Kalanick, Uber had no interest in an IPO because he fully understood that the full financial disclosures required-including historical cash flows, balance sheets and much greater operational P&L detail-would expose Uber's abysmal economics, and destroy its PR narrative where powerful efficiencies would inevitably lead to success. Dara Khosrowshahi, under pressure from certain Board factions when he was first hired to replace Kalanick, promised an IPO by the end of 2019. This could be a disaster unless Uber somehow finds convincing evidence of profitable economics that it can put in the prospectus.
> 
> ...


Every big taxi and/or limo company I've ever worked for, all of them folded eventually. I suspect the same fate for Uber and lyft.

"Uber cut the driver share of passenger revenue from 83% to 77%. This was an effective $500 million wealth transfer from drivers to Uber's investors." More like 62%.


----------



## RickR (Jul 29, 2017)

Michael1230nj said:


> Uber going Broke will be a Positive for Drivers The Customers are there Uber has shown that Other App Based Car Facilitating Company's will enter the Market Place and Drivers will have Options Local Company's that do not have the unobtainable goal of providing large profits for Debt Holders and Shareholders will Compete for Drivers.


They're going to also lose money unless they increase the rates to taxi rates. No company can make money at the rates Uber charges.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

More and more people doubt Uber and finding more and reason to doubt them.
https://nypost.com/2017/12/25/why-ubers-investors-may-lose-their-lunch/amp/


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

Seeing more and more articles like that warms my heart


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

heynow321 said:


> Seeing more and more articles like that warms my heart


I feel the same way... Maybe just maybe the card Castle is burning to the ground..


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

everythingsuber said:


> More and more people doubt Uber and finding more and reason to doubt them.
> https://nypost.com/2017/12/25/why-ubers-investors-may-lose-their-lunch/amp/


It's more bad press for Uber but it's a very weak article that won't impress investors.

"All this is why Uber lost nearly $1.5 billion last quarter alone, with no indication that it will stop losing money."


----------



## jonhjax (Jun 24, 2016)

Ihateyou said:


> You sound like an old, bitter guy.
> 
> Why would you want Uber to shut down on a Saturday night, so "millennials" are stuck? Other than to see other people miserable.
> 
> These "drunk millennials" are paying for your Uber rides, so no reason to be so angry about everything.


Drunk millennials seem to be a big problem with drivers. Evidently they act bad and don't tip. Just my guess...


----------



## jonhjax (Jun 24, 2016)

Oscar Levant said:


> Well, flying cars can take a flying leap.......without me in them
> 
> If Uber were smart, they would make me CEO. I could turn this company into a profit making venture. My plan would be:
> 
> ...


Oscar, what you just described would make Uber into a taxi company. plain and simple. Good luck on that.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

jonhjax said:


> Oscar, what you just described would make Uber into a taxi company. plain and simple. Good luck on that.


I posed that possibility, and answered it.


----------



## Yam Digger (Sep 12, 2016)

Oscar Levant said:


> If Uber were smart, they would make me CEO. *I could turn this company into a profit making venture. *


And that is exactly why Uber will NOT hire you as it CEO. It is becoming obvious to me that Uber is not interested in becoming a profitable company, surviving for the long term. I don't know what their goals really are, but it's obvious to me that turning a profit or even breaking even for that matter is not of any interest to them.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Yam Digger said:


> It is becoming obvious to me that Uber is not interested in becoming a profitable company, surviving for the long term. I don't know what their goals really are, but it's obvious to me that turning a profit or even breaking even for that matter is not of any interest to them.


I disagree. TK almost sank Uber but with experienced adults running the company now I expect they will do very well in the long run. This is a common problem for startups as they transition into being real companies. Uber gets more press than most because of its high profile and strong valuation.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

Yam Digger said:


> And that is exactly why Uber will NOT hire you as it CEO. It is becoming obvious to me that Uber is not interested in becoming a profitable company, surviving for the long term. I don't know what their goals really are, but it's obvious to me that turning a profit or even breaking even for that matter is not of any interest to them.


Oh, I think they'd love nothing more to make a profit, but they are techies who haven't a clue about the transportation biz. See, they think they are a tech company, not a transportation company, and when you build a house on a false slab, you wind up with a house of cards.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

RideStreets said:


> Yes!!! I've been up on this. Every driver should be familiar with this series. This is temporary. The rideshare industry will be gone or drastically different in 2-3 years because it's not a sustainable business model. Get ready for that change.


UBER IS UNSUSTAINABLE !

Rate War is Unsustainable.
War is Unsustainable.
Drivers are the Casualties.


----------



## Chris1973 (Oct 9, 2017)

https://uberpeople.net/threads/report-ubereats-is-where-growth-profit-is-for-uber.228677/

UberEats *will* be the unlikely savior of Uber. This according to a NY Times article and my own research. UberEats is going beyond food delivery into the restaurant business as well, in the form of "Ghost kitchens". I call it "Triple dipping".

Who could have imagined Uber defeating the likes of Grubhub, Postmates, Doordash within 2 years. 2400% growth from March 2016 to 2017. I am disappointed no one else has seen this obvious trend and wrote Uber off to bankruptcy. All of the intelligent posts in this featured thread, and a high school drop out beat you all to the punch. I will be glad to put it all together for you some more if need be.


----------



## Michael1230nj (Jun 23, 2017)

Word to the Wise----*Short Soft Bank


----------



## Michael1230nj (Jun 23, 2017)

goneubering said:


> I disagree. TK almost sank Uber but with experienced adults running the company now I expect they will do very well in the long run. This is a common problem for startups as they transition into being real companies. Uber gets more press than most because of its high profile and strong valuation.


If Uber survives and Profits they will be the first to extract


Chris1973 said:


> https://uberpeople.net/threads/report-ubereats-is-where-growth-profit-is-for-uber.228677/
> 
> UberEats *will* be the unlikely savior of Uber. This according to a NY Times article and my own research. UberEats is going beyond food delivery into the restaurant business as well, in the form of "Ghost kitchens". I call it "Triple dipping".
> 
> Who could have imagined Uber defeating the likes of Grubhub, Postmates, Doordash within 2 years. 2400% growth from March 2016 to 2017. I am disappointed no one else has seen this obvious trend and wrote Uber off to bankruptcy. All of the intelligent posts in this featured thread, and a high school drop out beat you all to the punch. I will be glad to put it all together for you some more if need be.


oh sure Lay out a Few Billion Dollars to corner the McDonalds Delivery Buisness. Smh.


----------



## UberxGTA (Dec 1, 2015)

Mista T said:


> $1 billion would go a long way if they would cut their spending. Not too hard, they just don't want to make those hard decisions.
> 
> As far as drivers working for peanuts ... it's already happening.


Yea...maybe 6 months.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

UberxGTA said:


> Yea...maybe 6 months.


At 5 Billion a year in burn rate, considering that 9 billion went to investors, and 1 billion to uber as operating capital..

5 billion/365= 13.6986 million per day

1 billion/ 13.6986

73 days or less than 2 1/2 months


----------



## UberxGTA (Dec 1, 2015)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> At 5 Billion a year in burn rate, considering that 9 billion went to investors, and 1 billion to uber as operating capital..
> 
> 5 billion/365= 13.6986 million per day
> 
> ...


I was being very optimistic given some miracle of greatly reduced expenses or even increased rates.


----------



## Mole (Mar 9, 2017)

The only way uber can get in the black is for them to charge what a taxi charges.


----------



## somedriverguy (Sep 6, 2016)

Mole said:


> The only way uber can get in the black is for them to charge what a taxi charges.


They do, they just don't pay is at that rate. And they are still losing money.


----------



## pengduck (Sep 26, 2014)

STMNine said:


> This trend so far certainly shows no signs of reversing... "Uber lost $2.5 billion in 2015, probably lost $4 billion in 2016, and is on track to lose $5 billion in 2017." Heck, at this rate, "180 Days of Liquidation" might be closer than what most most of us here had been anticipating!


And the lower the rates the bigger the losses.



Mole said:


> The only way uber can get in the black is for them to charge what a taxi charges.


Not true! I have already paved a road to profitability for Uber. It's going to cost them though!!!!


----------



## 2Cents (Jul 18, 2016)

RickR said:


> They're going to also lose money unless they increase the rates to taxi rates. No company can make money at the rates Uber charges.


#fubrn


----------



## RickR (Jul 29, 2017)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> At 5 Billion a year in burn rate, considering that 9 billion went to investors, and 1 billion to uber as operating capital..
> 
> 5 billion/365= 13.6986 million per day
> 
> ...


I wonder how much of that 9 billion went to Travis. lol He's most certainly one of the biggest stockholders. He's laughing all the way to the bank.


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

RickR said:


> I wonder how much of that 9 billion went to Travis. lol He's most certainly one of the biggest stockholders. He's laughing all the way to the bank.


If the shareholders sold at $33/share then that's a price equivalent of $48 billion.

TK owned 13% if my memory is correct.

He could sell off a 2% ownership in U and it would net him close to a billion.


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

Mista T said:


> If the shareholders sold at $33/share then that's a price equivalent of $48 billion.
> 
> TK owned 13% if my memory is correct.
> 
> He could sell off a 2% ownership in U and it would net him close to a billion.


god, there's just no justice in this world is there?


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Mista T said:


> If the shareholders sold at $33/share then that's a price equivalent of $48 billion.
> 
> TK owned 13% if my memory is correct.
> 
> He could sell off a 2% ownership in U and it would net him close to a billion.


That's mind boggling!!


----------



## Aztek98 (Jul 23, 2015)

The losses are scaling with the increased revenues that involve seriously screwing drivers with upfront pricing. This model is not sustainable at all.

This ship is sinking like the Titanic. Slowly and methodically.


----------



## somedriverguy (Sep 6, 2016)

Aztek98 said:


> The losses are scaling with the increased revenues that involve seriously screwing drivers with upfront pricing. This model is not sustainable at all.
> 
> This ship is sinking like the Titanic. Slowly and methodically.


I want to add to your analogy.

Its like the sinking of the Titanic if there were boat builders nearby and instead of fixing anything, they just kept adding decks on the top. All the investors keep seeing is that they are buying a bigger and bigger boat. What they don't notice is the more they add the faster it sinks.


----------

