# Uber case study - A failure of leadership



## Gary Singh (Mar 6, 2018)

Only an idiot of a company like Uber Australia which prices the transport service of a Uber SUV vehicle the same as Uber sedan vehicle. Not only is a SUV vehicle running costs higher than a sedan vehicle, a SUV normally have more space ie leg space, luggage space and is more comfortable. 

Why create problems with the customer (rider) experience by removing the price tier for Uber SUV vehicles ? There was a price difference (tier) for a standard SUV vehicle (4 seats) vs a sedan vehicle previously ? That option for riders was removed. Why ? Uber's stupidity not only created poor rider experiences (lack of choice, comfort, inconvenience), it also created poor outcomes for their "partner-drivers". 

Uber Australia - A total failure in leadership !


----------



## RoboRider (Aug 26, 2018)

Only thing I remember is UberX and UberXL but I have only been driving for a few months ... you sure you not confusing with Ola?


----------



## Jack Malarkey (Jan 11, 2016)

RoboRider said:


> Only thing I remember is UberX and UberXL but I have only been driving for a few months ... you sure you not confusing with Ola?


Uber in Sydney previously had an option of UberSUV for a standard SUV (4 seats) rather than a sedan.


----------



## Nigel L (Sep 22, 2017)

This is what happens when you have confused company executives. Looks like they have been confused and delusional for years. From the very start actually. Still believe Uber is a technology company. The revenue or sales they book certainly doesn't show that they are a technology company.

Uber a total failure in leadership is certainly correct. They don't even know who they are ?


----------



## Uber Expert (Oct 31, 2018)

UberSUV is still available. It is UberBLACK's version of UberXL. It is and has always been for luxury 4wds with Hire Car (HC) or Tourist Vehicle (TV) license plates.

If a vehicle on UberX has 7 or 8 seats it gets UberXL. Some SUVs get Uber SELECT but only if they are higher end. 

In the end people aren't going to pay more for a standard SUV with no extra seats. They will just get SELECT of XL


----------



## BuckleUp (Jan 18, 2018)

Gary Singh said:


> Only an idiot of a company like Uber Australia which prices the transport service of a Uber SUV vehicle the same as Uber sedan vehicle. Not only is a SUV vehicle running costs higher than a sedan vehicle, a SUV normally have more space ie leg space, luggage space and is more comfortable.
> 
> Why create problems with the customer (rider) experience by removing the price tier for Uber SUV vehicles ? There was a price difference (tier) for a standard SUV vehicle (4 seats) vs a sedan vehicle previously ? That option for riders was removed. Why ? Uber's stupidity not only created poor rider experiences (lack of choice, comfort, inconvenience), it also created poor outcomes for their "partner-drivers".
> 
> Uber Australia - A total failure in leadership !


Uber is the model of an ideal company. It exists to maximize its profits. Both drivers and riders are replaceable. There is an endless supply if each. There will always be drivers as long as pay is higher than Centrelink. There will always be riders as long as it's cheap and cabs are smelly. It's the perfect business model.


----------



## Who is John Galt? (Sep 28, 2016)

BuckleUp said:


> Uber is the model of an ideal company.
> ===/===
> It's the perfect business model.


I find it interesting that you, the self proclaimed online business expert, hold Über and its MO in such high esteem.

This is the same Über that has never made a profit in its nearly 10 years of operation, and which continues to burn through investors' capital at an ever increasing rate.

The perfect business model, huh?

.


----------



## RoboRider (Aug 26, 2018)

Who is John Galt? said:


> I find it interesting that you, the self proclaimed online business expert, hold Über and its MO in such high esteem.
> 
> This is the same Über that has never made a profit in its nearly 10 years of operation, and which continues to burn through investors' capital at an ever increasing rate.
> 
> ...


Their ride share business makes money .. they just piss it down the drain on their next generation driverless and flying drone developments 

Uber in Australia reported a profit on revenues of a bit over $150m in FY 2017 (https://www.afr.com/technology/uber-australia-makes-profit-where-parent-cant-20180503-h0zmht ) ... and that would be after they hid as much as they could through their off-shore structuring!


----------



## Who is John Galt? (Sep 28, 2016)

RoboRider said:


> *Their ride share business makes money* .. they just piss it down the drain on their next generation driverless and flying drone developments


Below, is the heading and first paragraph quoted directly from the article you reference: -



Financial Review said:


> *Uber Australia makes profit where parent can't*
> 
> Uber Australia *has done what its parent could not*, *making a $4.4 million profit* after tax in calendar 2017 *as the ridersharing giant crashed to a $6 billion loss globally.*


It seems pretty clear to me.

I'm not going to argue for the sake of arguing, but a couple of things jump off the page as far as I'm concerned.

Über is a 'global' company
Über Australia made a profit of the princely sum of $4.4 M. Whacko! On what investment?
Über Global crashed to a *$6 billion loss* overall in 2017. Yes, that is just one year.
Über Global did not piss that $6 Billion down the drain solely from driverless and flying drone developments. Their ride sharing business (in its entirety) is unprofitable. It never will be profitable. Every ride loses money.

I have a pretty good imagination, but to say "*Their ride share business makes money* .." is just nonsense.

.


----------



## Ubereater (Dec 25, 2015)

$151.6M in 2017 *after* paying the drivers..so, the drivers cut is $151.6M x 3 = $454,8M ! Wow.. that's massive!
And the driver would need about $50K slice of that pie to turn a profit somewhere in between the dole and minimum wage..
Let's say the pie is shared amongst the drivers equally: $454.8M ÷ $50K = 9096.. that's how many drivers Uber needs Australia wide: nine effing thousand ninty six


----------



## Gary Singh (Mar 6, 2018)

Uber Australia - From market leader to now having to defend their market share. As with any business, it is ultimately the consumer or rider who decides who get their money. Drivers need to understand Uber's real motivation behind the fri and sat promotions. Can they really afford to pay each and every driver the promotion (bonus) ? Many drivers will never achieve the set numbers of trips to get the bonus (Uber can blacklist your phone number at anytime). Many drivers will be expected to pick up "dangerous", unruly, disorderly and lowly rated riders and their friends just to achieve the targets.

What an absolute shambles it has become for Uber Australia. Simply poor management and lack of leadership from the start. You have executives who were more interested to preserve their pay packets, perks and hang on to their jobs then to do the right thing for stakeholders (investors, drivers, riders, the community) in the jurisdictions they operated in.

Ola and Didi have certainly made in roads and stolen market share (Uber Australia have lost trips to them). The numbers showed it. Otherwise why would Uber Australia allow riders to open multiple accounts and change ratings drivers leave for troublesome riders. The "enhanced support" for drivers is not so much for the benefit of drivers but to protect Uber Australia from legal action due to their failure of duty of care (changing riders ratings upwards, allowing the opening of multiple rider accounts, allowing the app to be used for stalking purposes, allowing unauthorized staff access to their internal systems).


----------

