# Op Ed Piece Concerning Uber IPO



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

*"Another Reason to Avoid the Uber IPO" - Lawrence Meyers*

*http://investorplace.com/ipo-playbook/another-reason-to-avoid-the-uber-ipo/#.VdP0wK79VOR*


----------



## ubershiza (Jan 19, 2015)

Lawrence Meyers is 100% correct. The big institutions that invested pre ipo shares are the ones who will make out. Goldman Sachs has their muppets lined up to buy as they sell.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Lawrence Meyers has a vested interest in Medallion Financial Corp. (symbol TAXI), a company that finances taxi medallions. He knows his facts about cabs and medallions... but only thinks he understands Uber. Take anything he says from the perspective that his interests lie in the value of taxi medallions.


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

I will check him out. Just sharing a link, curious how people respond more than anything.


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

LMeyers said:


> Michael, I understand the FHV and taxi industries quite well, thank you. If you have specific issues with the article, then address those issues. Interests I may or may not have should be irrelevant to the value of the arguments made. If you can't address those directly, you have no legs to stand on.


From your perspective, how accurate is it to describe Uber as a kind of Ponzi scheme? Uber is one of the eternal startups. Five years and counting, they are still a startup.

From your understanding, id Uber itself likely to be the central focus of Kalanicks attention or is Uber more of a mechanism to raise capital and develop other technologies?

I personally tend to believe Kalanick sees Uber as a tool to leverage investment capital. He is now a venture capitalist himself. I don't see him as truly emotionally committed to any one thing such as a particular business. I do believe Uber gives Travis access to millions of people's personal information, they can track patterned behavior too, all through their little ubiquitous cell phone app.

I could be wrong about that. How central to Kalanick's enterprises are Uber's operations? What else is this guy doing that we don't know about?


----------



## D000505 (Aug 7, 2015)

Huberis, I think TK Enterprises entire plan is to hoard cash and run when the bottom falls out.

I don't understand how a company with losses of this magnitude 6 years in, and NO signs of profitavility, is still getting investor cash. http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-reportedly-operating-at-a-470-million-loss-2015-6

Imagine Google circa 2005 or Facebook circa 2012 burning this kinda cash. My prediction is that we'll remember Uber as Enron 3.0


----------



## UberNorthStar (Jul 7, 2015)

Hi,D000505.

Welcome to the forum!

Please read your Partnership Agreement.

New Drivers have 30 Days to Opt-out of *Binding Arbitration.*


----------



## D000505 (Aug 7, 2015)

Thanks UberNorthStar star. I've been driving too long to opt out. But I did feel out an arbitration form with the firm handlind the class action. They'll bring individual cases in arbitration.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Send in your OPT OUT request anyway so that's it's on file. In light of the recent federal court ruling in the 9th circuit, a court may agree that the terms of the agreement are too one sided to be enforceable.


----------



## UberNorthStar (Jul 7, 2015)

Email: [email protected]. This is the paralegal. She will send you a form via email for you to return filled out. It is my understanding those who r e turn the forms would be represented on an individual basis. Click on "binding arbitration" for information for newbies.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher (Dec 7, 2014)

Huberis said:


> *"Another Reason to Avoid the Uber IPO" - Lawrence Meyers*
> 
> *http://investorplace.com/ipo-playbook/another-reason-to-avoid-the-uber-ipo/#.VdP0wK79VOR*


POST # 1/Huberis: Bostonian Bison Thanks You for this
Hyperlinked Article of Importance to
ALL UPNFers, especially those Drivers
undergoing a Waitlisting/Layoff in the LA/OC "Market".

I find it Curious that Well-Known
Michael - Cleveland 's Caveat about
LMeyers has brought the Author "out
of the Woodwork". With HIS Curiculum Vitae, You'd think he'd have a 1001 OTHER MATTERS to attend to besides bullying a Valued Contributor to UPNF, that pointed out a CRUCIAL Investment detail, whichwas conveniently left out of the Postscript to the InvestorPlace.com. article.

TO NOT mention his vested interest in Medall-
ion Financial Corp. seems like Gross Disingenu-
ousness to this Reader. Maybe he read T.K.'s
White Paper on "Disruptive Duplicity".

More important, Huberis , is Your Follow-
ing in the "NewsMeister" Tradition that
was initiated almost 16 months ago by
Our # 1 Notable chi1cabby, whose Altru-istic Efforts have made UPNF the World's Leading A-B TNC Resource and
Community.

Mentoring Bison Schools Bigwig.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Casuale Haberdasher said:


> POST # 1/HuberisMore important, Michael, is Your Follow-
> ing in the "NewsMeister" Tradition that was initiated almost 16 months ago by Our # 1 Notable chi1cabby,


chi1cabby set the standard I try to follow... but mention also must be made of the very smart 'rules' for posting in NEWS established by the UPNF Grand Wizard which serve the forum and its readers so well.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

LMeyers said:


> Michael, I understand the FHV and taxi industries quite well, thank you. If you have specific issues with the article, then address those issues. Interests I may or may not have should be irrelevant to the value of the arguments made. If you can't address those directly, you have no legs to stand on.


I addressed those issues in the comments section of your article - and you replied by sidestepping them. Oh, and for the record, Larry - I don't necessarily disagree with your assessment of the taxi-cab industry or even the future of medallion values (as so many hacks seem to). And I defer to your obvious knowledge and experience in matters of medallion financing. It's the details of 'rideshare' - Uber specifically, where you are on shaky ground. Again - I agree with you when you point out to NYC medallion owners that while it may be raining at the moment, in fact the sky is not falling.

My comment above was not made to deride you in any way. It was to inform the readers here who do not know who you are about your vested interest in the medallion industry - and to remind them to read your views with that understanding.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher (Dec 7, 2014)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> chi1cabby set the standard I try to follow... but mention also must be made of the very smart 'rules' for posting in NEWS established by the UPNF Grand Wizard which serve the forum and its readers so well.


POST # 13/Michael - Cleveland: Props to
YOU, "Great Great-Laker",
for knowing that KEY TIDBIT about our Newest "Hollywood" UPNFer. Two hours
of my Research did NOT reveal what
YOU knew already!

I guess he'll be having a New Set of
Legs #[F]Ubered over to his Office, next.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Casuale Haberdasher said:


> POST # 13/Michael - Cleveland: Props to
> YOU, "Great Great-Laker",
> for knowing that KEY TIDBIT about our Newest "Hollywood" UPNFer. Two hours
> of my Research did NOT reveal what
> YOU knew already!


It wasn't due to any great research I did... 
I only knew of Mr. Meyers because he writes articles for an investment website I follow and one of his pieces popped up in an 'alert' I had set for "UBER".
But that's the great thing about a forum like this, isn't it? COLLECTIVE KNOWLEDGE.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Oh... and one more shout-out is due: Another Uber Driver has shared a lot of his experience with and insight into the taxi industry... which has sparked my interest in learning more about it (something all Uber drivers really should do if they have time).


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Oh... and one more shout-out is due: Another Uber Driver has shared a lot of his experience with and insight into the taxi industry...


Thank you, Sirrah, for your kind words. I have not read your comments in the comment section of the article, so I must go back to read them.

One thing that I will question in the article, though, and it is tangent to his points, is his statement about how UberXmobiles are distinguished from "unkempt" cabs. His use of the future tense there is incorrect; the present progressive would be more appropriate. I used to think that it would take three, or so years for UberXmobiles to turn into hoopties, but, to hear both UberX and Uber Taxi passengers tell it, it *is* happening, already. Further, I tend to disagree with anyone who makes blanket statements about unkempt, decrepit taxicabs.

The author of the article does not address Uber's paper losses. While I am no professional investor, I would shy from investing anything in a company that is posting all of those losses. In fact, history is littered with the wreckage of companies whose public stockholders bought in which allowed its private stockholders to rake in the cash, jump and watch the publicly held shares turn to ashes. All of those dotcoms that went dot*bomb* are merely recent illustrations of this.

While his oblique arguments about the turnover of drivers are sound, I suspect that he is drinking the same kool-aid that many of the anti-Uber posters on these boards have drunk. There is still a large supply of drivers out there. Further, as Uber has lowered standards for UberX in the past, there is nothing to indicate that it will not resort to that once more if a sufficient dent in the supply of drivers to service the demands appears. To be sure, the supply of drivers is finite, but Uber is not yet close to the bottom of the proverbial barrel. Yes, driver retention problems could prove the ruin of UberX, but it is not going to be its ruin anytime soon. Do keep in mind that the retention of quality drivers might pose problems, but, as long as the cost is kept low, or, as the author of the article seems to think, as long as the cost goes down, still there will be demand for the service.

Anyhow, I will read your comments. *EDITORIAL NOTE:* I went back to the article, but did not see your comments to it.


----------



## glados (May 23, 2015)

LMeyers said:


> Michael, I understand the FHV and taxi industries quite well, thank you. If you have specific issues with the article, then address those issues. Interests I may or may not have should be irrelevant to the value of the arguments made. If you can't address those directly, you have no legs to stand on.


It is generally accepted to disclose any potential conflicts of interest, as it can bias the arguments you make and what arguments you leave out.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

glados said:


> It is generally accepted to disclose any potential conflicts of interest, as it can bias the arguments you make and what arguments you leave out.


Have you yourself disclosed any potential conflicts of interest in your presence on the Forum? You're either a designated or a self appointed Uber Representative on the Forum. You've also failed to answer the question if you are an Uber Driver.


----------



## glados (May 23, 2015)

chi1cabby said:


> Have you yourself disclosed any potential conflicts of interest in your presence on the Forum? You're either a designated or a self appointed Uber Representative on the Forum. You've also failed to answer the question if you are an Uber Driver.


I am not a journalist writing op ed pieces.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

LMeyers welcome to the forum!

I've compiled your Uber articles that I've come across in this thread:

*Lawrence Meyers' Articles on Uber*


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

glados said:


> I am not a journalist writing op ed pieces.


You mean like Ernie Csiszar failed to disclose that he was being paid to write Op-Eds on Insurance on Uber's behalf?
*UberETHICS | Uber Lobbying To Not Close The "Insurance Gap" in OklahomaTNC Legislation.*

And in your own case, you are a Forum Member. But you do not care to share your bona fides with other forum members, and thus have Zero Credibility. That's sort of self defeating, imo.

*Edit:* You can keep on posting Uber's dictates on the Forum. But you won't achieve anything unless other members find you credible and your posts somewhat helpful, sympathetic to their POV & take into consideration their Operational Reality.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> Yes, driver retention problems could prove the ruin of UberX, but it is not going to be its ruin anytime soon.


I disagree. I believe that if you carefully consider the UberX business model, you come to understand that it is based not insignificantly on shifting the cost of transportation and depreciation of vehicles entirely to the driver. Knowing that, Uber also knows that the longer an Uber driver is engaged as a driver, the less attractive that driver's vehicle becomes - and the less satisfied a driver becomes. The only way Uber can overcome those 'challenges' is to either increase fares to enable drivers to earn enough money to maintain and replace vehicles as necessary (which is in contradiction to the business plan as it indirectly moves the operating costs back to Uber) or to 'churn' drivers... using them until the are no longer of benefit to Uber and then replacing them with new drivers with newer vehicles.

It is my opinion that drivers in general ought to wake up tot he realities of the Uber business model and stop thinking that Uber is 'stupid' for not being more concerned about driver retention. Uber knows exactly what it is doing... whether we agree with them or not.


> * NOTE:* I went back to the article, but did not see your comments to it.


Sorry about that... it was a misleading comment to Larry on my part. My comments that he sidestepped were on a different article he published (on the SEEKING ALPHA investment website). Since he sidestepped my comments (and those of others) there, I didn't bother commenting on the article referenced. (Sorry Larry!)

Again, I enjoy reading Mr. Meyers articles as he gives voice to a perspective rarely heard in the general public (that of the medallion investor) - and I think much of what he has to say is spot on. I just don't think he has a fully accurate picture of the Uber/Lyft/ride-source sharing economy side of things... yet.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I disagree.


With what do you disagree? ......that driver retention problems could prove the ruin of UberX?..........that said ruination from said cause is not going to happen any time soon? ........or both?

Do note my use of the subjunctive in the main clause.

Your posts in the past seem to point to agreement with the subordinate clause. In fact, judging from your past comments on things, I would suspect that you would find "not any time soon" lacking in force.

The supply of drivers and vehicles to ruin is finite. While I have seen nothing that indicates that Uber is close to the edge, at some point , they will run out---unless they lower their standards further; something that I would not put past them.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> With what do you disagree? ......that driver retention problems could prove the ruin of UberX?..........that said ruination from said cause is not going to happen any time soon? ........or both?
> 
> Do note my use of the subjunctive in the main clause.
> ...The supply of drivers and vehicles to ruin is finite. While I have seen nothing that indicates that Uber is close to the edge, at some point , they will run out---unless they lower their standards further...


I think that any suggestion that the number of drivers and cars is finite is a naive notion:

Based on US population figures from 5 years ago, "average life span and birth rate, it is estimated that 125,000 people [in the US] turn 21 every day."
And...
"Census data show nearly 80 million baby boomers, born over a span of 19 years. They will turn 65 [...] at a rate of 11,478 per day. 
In fact, as of May 3 [2011] an estimated 1.4 million people have turned 65 this year."

Now look at the both the labor market (under-employed workers, stagnant wages) and the number of seniors without adequate savings to support retirement.

The Uber promise of additional income is a wet-dream for folks of all ages.

Just my opinion.


----------



## UberNorthStar (Jul 7, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I think that any suggestion that the number of drivers and cars is finite is a naive notion:


And sooner or later ( hopefully sooner) ppl will realize what a ripoff Uber is.

JM2¢W


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I think that any suggestion that the number of drivers and cars is finite is a naive notion:


Ah, but do remember that when you assign a number, be it large or be it small, you put a limit on it, _*dipso facto, QED:*_ you make it finite.

To be sure, the number that you assign is large. That is one reason why I have stated more than once that 
_*Uber ain't-a gonna' run outta' no drivers no time soon.*_ It will, however, run out at some point. Other factors will come into play, as well, including, but not limited to, increased regulation. Thus far, the TNCs have managed to "arrange" their way around regulation, in m ost markets. There are, however, some markets where there is some regulation. Add to that the possibility of something's going south with the wrong TNC ride and there will be clamours for more regulation. A large enough number of angry voters will send "arrangements" right out the window,


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> Ah, but do remember that when you assign a number, be it large or be it small, you put a limit on it, _*dipso facto, QED:*_ you make it finite.
> 
> To be sure, the number that you assign is large.


I haven't put a number on the quantity of drivers available. Citing demographic numbers is hardly the same as defining a finite number of drivers available. In fact it's quite the opposite. Population turnover is not a finite number, it is infinite.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

glados said:


> I am not a journalist writing op ed pieces.


Are you an employee of Uber or any of it's subsidiary or partner companies?


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I haven't put a number on the quantity of drivers available. Citing demographic numbers is hardly the same as defining a finite number of drivers available. In fact it's quite the opposite. Population turnover is not a finite number, it is infinite.


That is an oversimplification that gets it backwards. A demographic has only so many members. There are only so many demographics. Self-replacement can not be assured. History is littered with population fluxes.

If you fast forward to an available pool of TNC drivers, there are only so many in a given demographic who can qualify as TNC drivers. Those who can not clear a background check, those with poor driving records, those who can not acquire access to an acceptable vehicle, those who will not take the job shrink that pool further. Thus, there is hardly an "infinite" pool of drivers if for no other reason than the population of the planet is finite. At some point, the pool dries up.

The population of a given locality is finite. The subset of that population that might qualify as a TNC driver is even smaller. It is finite, as well.

The real question is how quickly will the TNCs exhaust their pool of potential drivers. Not soon, but eventually. The TNCs can implement all sorts of measures to extend the life of an available pool, but it can not keep it going in perpetuity.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> That is an oversimplification that gets it backwards.


It's not an oversimplification.
A demographic by definition is dynamic, not static.
Those specific people in the demographic will age-in/out and move socio-economically in and out of the group.
The 18 year olds today will be 21 year olds in 3 years, with college debt, looking for ways to earn income while trying to start careers.
The 57 year olds today will be retiring over the next ten years, creating a new school of fish in the pool of the 'senior demographic'.
It's the same with any demographic group: single moms, divorced dads, the under-employed, the unemployed.
Same demographics... different people.

An infinite supply of new drivers.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Are you an employee of Uber or any of it's subsidiary or partner companies?


glados - It's been 24 hours and you haven't answered my question. 
Do you have Sunday's off work from Uber?


----------



## ubershiza (Jan 19, 2015)

IPO headline will read: this year's crowned prince will be next year's school dunce.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> It's not an oversimplification.
> A demographic by definition is dynamic, not static.
> Those specific people in the demographic will age-in/out and move socio-economically in and out of the group.


I beginning to suspect that we are on different pages.

By definition, something that is infinite can not be assigned a number. The mere assigning of a number limits it. The root definition of "finite" is "bounded" or "limited", as the Latin root of it, _*finis*_, originally meant "boundary" or "limit".

The numbers are still limited, whether there are turnovers, or not. Put a number on it, you limit it, by definition.

Another thing to consider is the turnover of the "TNC driver" demographic. A question then arises "does the turnover in 'potential TNC driver' demographic provide sufficient numbers to sustain the 'already TNC driver demographic'? ". 
I do lack statistics on this, and am unsure even if such statistics exist or if they do, that they could be sifted in a manner to provide answers. Thus, I am reduced to making an edge-uh-mah-kaytidd guess that given the increasingly aggressive recruitment tactics of the TNCs and increased financial incentives that the answer is "no".

While at this point, there are still potential drivers, even the TNCs are realising that the pool is shrinking and will continue to do so.

No one can assume that everyone entering the "potential TNC" demographic will seek onboarding or that the TNCs will continue to onboard. The former is too broad an assumption while the latter really is different matter for discussion. Then, there are other factors that come into play that further limit the demographic of "potential (or would "recruitable" be a better word?) TNC drivers". Calling the "potential TNC driver" demographic "unlimited" is too general a statement that fails to take into account any number of factors that do, or could, come into play. Finally, on the latter, it should be noted that at one point, Uber did stop onboarding Uber Taxi drivers, here. A narrow demographic, to be sure, but it did happen.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> glados - It's been 24 hours and you haven't answered my question.
> Do you have Sunday's off work from Uber?


glados ... it's been another day with no response from you to a direct question...
what's up?


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Definitely not an infinite pool of Uber drivers.
Unless venture capital holds out for multiple generations. 

THIS generation of retirees/college part timers is getting burnt out now.


----------



## ocbob2 (Aug 18, 2015)

glados said:


> It is generally accepted to disclose any potential conflicts of interest, as it can bias the arguments you make and what arguments you leave out.


Says the moron who won't say what his capacity at Uber, if anything, while posting "facts". What a jerkoff.
mods, we state what platform we drive. Shouldn't Glados have to state what his purpose is for coming to this forum? It would be nice to have "Uber executive" or "CSR" next to the avatar or name.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Definitely not an infinite pool of Uber drivers.
> Unless venture capital holds out for multiple generations.
> 
> THIS generation of retirees/college part timers is getting burnt out now.


THAT is 'wishful thinking'... unfortunately, in contradiction of the facts.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> I beginning to suspect that we are on different pages.
> 
> By definition, something that is infinite can not be assigned a number. The mere assigning of a number limits it. The root definition of "finite" is "bounded" or "limited", as the Latin root of it, _*finis*_, originally meant "boundary" or "limit".
> 
> ...


Please don't lecture... it makes you sound boorish... an you're smarter than that.
The fact is that since you cannot assign a finite number to a demographically defined group of people, the demographic is, by definition, infinite.
Look at it this way:
A FINITE group of people would be, say 100 people. If ten of them die, there are now only 90. That's a finite number of people.
But if the 10 who die are replaced by 15 new people, then the # of people in the group is no longer finite.
A 100' stretch of river may have a particular, finite volume of water in it at any given moment in time, but the number of gallons of water that flow through the 100' stretch is infinite (for all practical purposes).

Uber will die by regulation or new technology or competition long before it exhausts the number of drivers available to sign-up and drive.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> THIS generation of retirees/college part timers is getting burnt out now.


Not a single day of driving goes by without several of my paxs telling me they are going to start driving Uber or asking how they can drive Uber. They have all heard from their 'buddies' and friends how great the money is. Not one of them believe me when I tell them the money sucks.

The UberMYTH is very had to kill.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Please don't lecture... it makes you sound boorish... an you're smarter than that.
> The fact is that since you cannot assign a finite number to a demographically defined group of people, the demographic is, by definition, infinite.
> Look at it this way:
> A FINITE group of people would be, say 100 people. If ten of them die, there are now only 90. That's a finite number of people.
> ...


I was not lecturing. I am at a loss to determine from where you took that impression. If it is the etymological statements, that is no lecture. If it is my use of "by definition", do be aware that you have used the term in this little disagreement yourself.

Please skip the namecalling ("it makes you sound boorish"), even if it is veiled; it demeans you.

The number is still finite even if it shifts. A limit does not have to be hard, it can be soft/flexible/mutable......pick the adjective. If something can be quantified it has a limit. There is nothing that will convince me otherwise.

I disagree with the river analogy. There are too many variables that come into play in nature that precluude my accepting the river as an analogy in this situation.

As for Uber's running out of drivers, consider that Uber is now compelling its Dallas Uber Black drivers to accept UberX trips for UberX rates. Uber is not making up the difference. The first explanation that occurs to me for this is that Uber is running out of drivers to service the demand in Dallas for UberX. I would be interested in an alternative explanation, if there is one.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> I disagree with the river analogy. There are too many variables that come into play in nature that precluude my accepting the river as an analogy in this situation.


hehe... 'people' - as in birth rates, aging, dying - are part of nature. That is what makes the analogy work. 


> As for Uber's running out of drivers, consider that Uber is now compelling its Dallas Uber Black drivers to accept UberX trips for UberX rates. Uber is not making up the difference. The first explanation that occurs to me for this is that Uber is running out of drivers to service the demand in Dallas for UberX. I would be interested in an alternative explanation, if there is one.


The explanation is in Kalanicks's stated 'vision' of driver efficiency.
You can read about it, in his own words, in the cover story of the October issue of Fast Company magazine.
Basically, it was only after Uber started as a black-car dispatch service that Kalanick had an epiphany showing him what the company could be.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Earth has a finite number of humans.
Someone less lazy than me can rule out those to young to drive, let's say 20% of 7 billion, which is 200 million people. Now let's rule out another 50% of humanity which can't afford to buy a car or qualify for financing one.
There are other factors to rule out many many more populations felons..(no wait Uber loves felons), incarcerated, non ambulatory, too insane to pass a license exam, etc.
So let's say you wind up with a third of Earth's 7 billion humans as potential Uber drivers it's still a finite number.

And a mathematician can show variables as to the increasing curve of gaining unpopularity as driver horror stories geometrically increase.

Finite.
Uber has under 2 years to perform a dramatic turnaround.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Earth has a finite number of humans.


Please... it's not that complicated to understand.
There are a finite number of ANYTHING in the world - at any given moment in time.
And that works if your are counting how many of something exist - at a moment in time.

But time itself is infinite and we're not talking about a moment in time.
For all practical purposes, Uber has an infinite number of drivers available to onboard as time goes on.

You can't even begin to suggest that the pool of people available to drive Uber is finite until Uber starts to fail to sign up new drivers - and that ain't happening anytime soon. Why? Because IF that day ever comes (god willing), then Uber will raise fares to attract enough drivers to meet the demand... 
And in case no one has noticed, the demand for Uber drivers continues to increase - dramatically.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> hehe... 'people' - as in birth rates, aging, dying - are part of nature. That is what makes the analogy work.


(***chuckles***)......so are earthquakes and droughts, two, among other, points at which the analogy breaks down.........



"Michael - Cleveland said:


> You can read about it, in his own words, in the cover story of the October issue of Fast Company magazine.
> Basically, it was only after Uber started as a black-car dispatch service that Kalanick had an epiphany showing him what the company could be.


I have some edge-uh-mah-kaytidd guess about what might be in the article, but, until I read it, I can make no intelligent statements about it. I will try to find it. I was not aware that the article existed until you told me that it did.

But anyhow, just for clarification, so I am sure from where you are coming: is it your contention that:

1. a "demographic" is a set with an infinite population?
2. "TNC drivers" is a demographic?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> (***chuckles***)......so are earthquakes and droughts, two, among other, points at which the analogy breaks down.........


It doesn't breakdown... my example and analogy are illustrative of my point.
I'm sorry you don't see what I'm getting at but I'm not sure I can explain it any better.

WARNING:
The rest of this will likely be of no interest to anyone other than Another Uber Driver and me...
if you continue reading, don't blame me if you get bored. You've been warned.



> I was not aware that the article existed until you told me that it did.


I posted the cover and publication date to the NEWS section here a week or so ago. I'd scan it and post the article but for the most part I won't do that with a very long newly published article as (aside from breaking copyright laws) it's just not fair to the author or publisher... I've got to give 'em a reasonable head start before I steal their content.



> But anyhow, just for clarification, so I am sure from where you are coming: is it your contention that:
> 1. a "demographic" is a set with an infinite population?
> 2. "TNC drivers" is a demographic?


1. Nope.

Demography is the use of statistics to study a CHANGING population. The baby-boomer demographic is the group of people born between 1946 and 1964. The number of people within that group changes every moment... (births, deaths) and the total number of people who *could* be in that demographic is finite: determined by the max number of people born in those years. It can't increase beyond that number. It is a finite demographic.

The number of newly graduated college students is another example of a demographic.
But in this case, the number is infinite: it can increase or decrease each year depending on the total population, the % of the population which attends college, the % who drop-out, etc. Of course, in technical terms, it is a finite demographic because it is limited to the entire population of the world - but for marketing purposes (practical purposes) it is an infinite demographic. The demographic is a statistically defined group and the individuals within the demographic change moment to moment, day by day and eventually everyone in the group first ages-in, is part of the group and then ages-out.

There is a continual and infinite number of people who are available to be in the group.

THAT is what uber drivers are. The individuals will come and go until there is no longer an Uber (or Lyft or whatever). But the demographic of 'potential' Uber drivers is infinite (practically speaking).

2. Any group of people that you can define statistically (and, from a marketers perspective, sell something to) can be a demographic group. "Out target demographic is ___________ " (teens, seniors, one armed, one legged, audiophiles, whatever). Yes, if I want to sell something to TNC drivers (say, beaded driver's seat covers), that would be a demographic.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> *A. *It doesn't breakdown... my example and analogy are illustrative of my point.
> 
> *B. *I posted the cover and publication date to the NEWS section here a week or so ago.
> 
> ...


A. A drought has a nasty habit of breaking down the flow of water, but, that is rapidly becoming a tangent to this discussion, if it has not done so, already.

B. I missed that, for whatever reason, but it is not hard to find it, so I will go there to read the topic. I would not expect you to post the article. If for no other reasons, it might be more trouble for you than it might be worth and likely it would consume bandwidth. The reasons that you cite for not posting the article are sound, as well. A clue or two as to where the article could be found should be sufficient for those who are genuinely interested.

C. For the present, at least, I will accept that definition.

D. and E. Is it your contention that there is such a thing as a "finite demographic" as well as an "infinite demographic"? Can a demographic be defined as "infinite" irrespective of the attrition rate's equalling the introduction rate, or failure to do so? Would examples of a "finite demographic", according to your definitions, be "people who voted Republican in the 2008 election", "people who paid for NFL tickets in Week Two of the 2015 season", "Generation Jones" (people who entered High School between 1968 and 1978)? Would examples of an "infinite demographic", again, according to your definitions, be "purchasers of NFL tickets for the 2015-2016 season", "people who vote Democratic" or "volunteers at soup kitchens"?

F. You are contending that "potential" Uber drivers is an "infinite demographic". What about current Uber drivers?........former Uber drivers? ?........"potential" former Uber drivers?

G. Is it your contention that it is necessary that you both be able to define a group of people statistically and sell it (or its members) something for it to be a "demographic"?.........or is one or the other all that is necessary? While you do qualify the "sell something", (at the risk of my being accused of taking a page from W.J. Clinton's playbook) you did use the word "and".


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> A. A drought has a nasty habit of breaking down the flow of water, but, that is rapidly becoming a tangent to this discussion, if it has not done so, already.


A drought supports the analogy of an ever changing quantity... one that can expand or contract - even dry up for a period. But that is not finite (unless it dries forever - a possibility - but not a probability... (demographics are based on statistics - statistics are the root of probabilities)



> B. I missed that, for whatever reason, but it is not hard to find it, so I will go there to read the topic.


It's just a note showing the cover of the October FAST COMPANY magazine, with Kalanick as the cover story.
hehe: "on newsstands everywhere"










> D. and E. Is it your contention that there is such a thing as a "finite demographic" as well as an "infinite demographic"?


A demographic is not a mathematical theorem ... it is an artificial tool, used to name an identified group, so yes it can be finite (as in 'Baby Boomers') or indefinite (as in 'teenagers in the US'). In the former, the specific quantity is limited, in the later, the specific number changes moment to moment, day to day, generation to generation. This is why marketers look for population bubbles and follow them so they can sell shit to them at different stages of their lives. (but you know this!)



> F. You are contending that "potential" Uber drivers is an "infinite demographic". What about current Uber drivers?........former Uber drivers? ?........"potential" former Uber drivers?


All subsets of the identifier 'Uber Drivers'. Back to the original point: Some people are contending (based on nothing more than - I don't know... what they read here?) that the 'pool' of available uber drivers is finite and that uber will run out of drivers. I think that's completely, utterly absurd because it assumes that the number of people available to drive uber is finite... and it is not.



> G. Is it your contention that it is necessary that you both be able to define a group of people statistically and sell it (or its members) something for it to be a "demographic"?.........or is one or the other all that is necessary?


hehe... of course not. Can I assume that's a rhetorical question?


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

*Don't Tell Investors! The Uber IPO Is a $50 Billion Pipe Dream*
*http://investorplace.com/2015/10/uber-ipo-overvalued-pipe-dream/#.VhO2KYEo7qD*


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

chi1cabby said:


> *Don't Tell Investors! The Uber IPO Is a $50 Billion Pipe Dream*
> *http://investorplace.com/2015/10/uber-ipo-overvalued-pipe-dream/#.VhO2KYEo7qD*


Terrific look at the current market climate for an Uber IPO...
While I am pretty hard on Uber's valuation - this analysis is even more harsh than I am... maybe a bit too harsh, listing many of the challenges facing Uber while ignoring all of the positives achieved (brand recognition among an entire generation of young people and professionals - globally, infrastructure and regionalized management teams, a workforce starving for income opportunity (albeit, a fleeting workforce)... and four years of experience and learning and accumulated data... I wouldn't count Uber dead in the water by any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> listing many of the challenges facing Uber


The challenges facing Uber are immense and growing by the day.
*Legal troubles, market realities threaten Uber's global push*
*http://in.mobile.reuters.com/article/idINKCN0RZ09M20151005?irpc=932*


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

*Uber suspends services in Bulgaria*
*http://sofiaglobe.com/2015/10/06/uber-suspends-services-in-bulgaria/*


----------



## berserk42 (Apr 24, 2015)

So, besides UK, where else is UberPOP (or any other X equivalent) still operating in Europe?!


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

berserk42 said:


> So, besides UK, where else is UberPOP (or any other X equivalent) still operating in Europe?!


In UK, there is UberX. It is equivalent to UberX in NYC, with Private Hire Licence & Commercial Insurance purchased by Drivers.

UberPOP was introduced in mainland Europe as the "Rideshare" equivalent of UberX in the U.S. (except NYC) with no special licence or commercial insurance requirement.

Partial list of Markets where UberPOP is banned or facing bans:

France
Germany
Belgium
Italy
Spain (No Uber service except UberEATS in Barcelona).
Portugal
Helsinki, Finland


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Another Uber Driver said:


> A. A drought has a nasty habit of breaking down the flow of water, but, that is rapidly becoming a tangent to this discussion, if it has not done so, already.
> 
> B. I missed that, for whatever reason, but it is not hard to find it, so I will go there to read the topic. I would not expect you to post the article. If for no other reasons, it might be more trouble for you than it might be worth and likely it would consume bandwidth. The reasons that you cite for not posting the article are sound, as well. A clue or two as to where the article could be found should be sufficient for those who are genuinely interested.
> 
> ...





Michael - Cleveland said:


> A drought supports the analogy of an ever changing quantity... one that can expand or contract - even dry up for a period. But that is not finite (unless it dries forever - a possibility - but not a probability... (demographics are based on statistics - statistics are the root of probabilities)
> 
> It's just a note showing the cover of the October FAST COMPANY magazine, with Kalanick as the cover story.
> hehe: "on newsstands everywhere"
> ...


Interesting conversation between you two, I enjoyed reading the back and forth.

My thinking is that the pool of potential drivers is limited.

Uber was originally able to hire thousands and thousands of drivers because,

1) The pay was great.

2) People were unaware of the consequences of ubering.

Neither of which is true today.

For the most part, everyone is slowly but surely finding out the truth about Uber.


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Not a single day of driving goes by without several of my paxs telling me they are going to start driving Uber or asking how they can drive Uber. They have all heard from their 'buddies' and friends how great the money is. Not one of them believe me when I tell them the money sucks.
> 
> The UberMYTH is very had to kill.


I was have been reading about labor history lately for giggles. One thing I have heard mentioned was that workers pay across the board was often found to be terraced in order to create a kind of stability. That is the case in Uber land without question. Look at the differential between mature markets and those not thought to be saturated with drivers. The difference is profound. There are markets that exist in between those two realities. Rate cuts are introduced incrementally.

If you have a pax who 8 out of 10 times pays $5 for a ride and 2 out of 10 times pays $20 for the same ride, that distorts reality. Neither pax nor driver are likely to know what is up. Such pricing does encourage a pax to assume: some rides are lucrative. That is all they need to see to convince them of the BS Uber puts out there to market itself to potential drivers.

It is very manipulative. They are absolute masters of coercion. Personally, it makes me leery of the very idea of demands and demonstrations for better conditions. Uber is about reducing all options to one - them. They are in the ant-trust realm. As such, drivers might be far better off gathering, forming an association, creating a standard for themselves, a standard which promotes their personal agency as actual independent contractors, collect minimal dues which could go toward providing training or council....... Get that rolling and then sooner rather than later, people are going to be approaching the association with offers of an app that could be worth consideration. It'd be hard. It would weed out most people who are simply casual drivers, which would be a bonus, but that could be done.

Uber needs reform. Kalanick needs to go. Does the idea of terraced rates seem to make sense as a way to continue the illusion of earning potential where in the whole, it isn't really a possibility? Even the surge pricing could be viewed as a kind of terracing. That is not by accident, it is clearly meant to manipulate, it goes beyond simply getting Suzie, Jimmy and Tom out of their pajamas and into their Range Rovers to haul drunks around.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

observer said:


> For the most part, everyone is slowly but surely finding out the truth about Uber.


I think if that were true, we would not still be seeing new drivers arriving here (at UP.Net) with dollar signs in their eyes and stories of how much they are making.


Huberis said:


> I was have been reading about labor history lately for giggles. One thing I have heard mentioned was that workers pay across the board was often found to be terraced in order to create a kind of stability. That is the case in Uber land without question. Look at the differential between mature markets and those not thought to be saturated with drivers. The difference is profound. There are markets that exist in between those two realities. Rate cuts are introduced incrementally.
> 
> If you have a pax who 8 out of 10 times pays $5 for a ride and 2 out of 10 times pays $20 for the same ride, that distorts reality. Neither pax nor driver are likely to know what is up. Such pricing does encourage a pax to assume: some rides are lucrative. That is all they need to see to convince them of the BS Uber puts out there to market itself to potential drivers.
> 
> ...


Sorry - reading forum on twitter now - can you re-state in 140 chars?


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I think if that were true, we would not still be seeing new drivers arriving here (at UP.Net) with dollar signs in their eyes and storied of how mych they are
> 
> Sorry - reading forum on twitter now - can you re-state in 140 chars?


Uber has rates terraced from market to market. Surge is a kind of terracing. It helps distort reality concerning earnings and creates stability for Uber that way.


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland, people look for what they want to believe. Some see Uber is an inexpensive ride - see LA or Detroit, most mature markets 3/4 the time. Others see huge earning potential- point to markets mid honeymoon. The paradox creates apathy and complacency. People like me who believe its a scam, just stay away altogether. That is a kind of stability. Look at the kind of "strike" the system foments - the pricing model can handle it. Terraced for stability.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

observer said:


> Interesting conversation between you two, I enjoyed reading the back and forth.


Thanks. I never did quite finish what I was doing with this conversation. I got distracted and by the time that I had thought about it again, it had gotten too old.



Michael - Cleveland said:


> new drivers arriving here with dollar signs in their eyes and stories of how much they are making.


You do see a few screenshots, but it is funny, the poster of those screenshots rarely states what level of Uber it is. I suspect that most of those stories are just that.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> You do see a few screenshots, but it is funny, the poster of those screenshots rarely states what level of Uber it is. I suspect that most of those stories are just that.


hehe... It's also funny that they are never around long enough to show their killings week after week after week.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> hehe... It's also funny that they are never around long enough to show their killings week after week after week.


I did not consider that, but it is, indeed, a point worth considering and keeping in mind.


----------

