What Makes Uber Run
fastcompany.com
fastcompany.com
This reminds me when I asked a person who is now a "worlds youngest self made billionaire" club member how they possibly built paid their bills while in the early phases of their startup, that time when you're too small to even consider funding, but big enough to warrant a couple hires to help lay a foundation. The reply, "Ha! [founder's name]'s family is loaded...".
That's when I realized I had worked on the underlying skills, I had ideas, but I missed the most important part... money and/or rich friends.
Travis doesn't fall in this category though. He got his 3 bedroom house with his own money
Of course there's ten times more people who inherit a million or two of seed capital instead...
People buy things which make their life better than it was before they bought the product or service. The magnitude is not important. You now know 'money', if you have the dev knowledge GO BUILD SOMETHING OF VALUE!
I would much rather work on something with desktop publishing and business intelligence for 10 years and look back knowing I helped people solve an actual problem they had than look back knowing I worked on the shiniest new toy before anyone else.
Hay--GG bridge district members. I have a feeling you are missing out of a lot of toll form casual bridge users? Some of us would pay your tolls with our spare physical currency, and spend the day in that city--buying stuff?
yes--it's off topic, and I don't think a traditional startup had anything to do with the the elimination of toll takers.
I just hope technology solves real problems, and isn't used to make the rich richer, or only provides good tech jobs in good unusual economic boom times? I know right now I could live without 75% of this new technology. Kind of a weird confession--huh? And no--I'm not a Luddite? Well, I hope I'm not? I know, I do miss hanging out in Book stores? Starbucks doesn't cut it? And, I haven't been to a movie theater in years? And I honestly don't like meeting people over the Internet? I do like the immediacy of this tool though?
Skype?
Well, not unless their house is at the end of a runway :)
Travis deserves all the success.
Oh no big deal, only enough to have complete financial security at the age of 30.
No defense for him or Uber - I'm not a customer and have no plans to be one.
My issue isn't with him specifically, more the sense of entitlement of the industry and the press.
> Kalanick came away from the experience with a profound sense of relief and also a bit of a problem with authority
...and a huge amount of money. For most people in the developed world, buying a home and having enough money left over to even think about angel investing (or other expensive pastimes) at a young age is an absolute dream.
Many people see personal wealth as a pre-requisite for being able to found a startup. A little more focus on this side of a founder's story would be welcome.
His second startup got somewhere.
His third one became Uber.
Still for the first decade for his working life, he was less wealthy than the typical software engineer. He had the advantage of having his parents house to live at and a middle class upbringing, but millions of kids have that in the USA today.
Also a 3 bedroom house was probably way more affordable when he purchased it. In the SFBA the unaffordability really only started several years ago, not counting the general real estate bubble.
People have voted with their wallets - they'd rather take an Uber than an outdated taxi with bad customer service.
Uber is clearly a better service than your average taxi experience. But we also don't know the true price, since most drivers are skirting insurance requirements and the like.
It is difficult for me to imagine how a service like taxis can integrate a middle man like Uber, which everyone assumes will be massively profitable, compensate the drivers fairly and be cheaper than the current system. The math doesn't add up.
Pure hubris. Do you really think companies like DHL, which operates a logistics network in 220 countries, can't "dream of" the scale at which Uber is operating?
This implies that there are some taxi companies out there that are worth a massive amount of money, since they are capturing all the profit. Can you point to a single company worth even one tenth of what Uber is worth? I'm sure some companies do very well, but I don't think there are any taxi billionaires out there.
But it matters little anyway. The pie is divvied up so many ways. You pay the fare, some goes to the driver, some goes to the middle man. When you pay a smaller fare, there is less for the driver, middle man, or both.
How much of Uber's valuation is based on that pie (the number of people desiring taxis) growing?
That's simply because taxi companies are regional and Uber is global.
Taxi companies rent out the car and medallion so drivers are $100 in the hole before they've even started work. It's practically indentured servitude.
This is a misleading way of looking at things. Uber serves many more markets than taxi companies, so they can be much bigger while being more efficient per ride.
Uber isn't doing anything like civil disobedience here, they're just making a new quick buck violating employment laws.
Aaand, in cases like this, it's always useful to ask: the laws we're breaking, who are they intended to benefit or protect? People without a lot of economic or political power to begin with? Yeah, maybe we should leave those laws alone--by definition, the people we're hurting are the ones least able to do anything about it anyway.
False. Uber is losing hundreds of millions of dollars.
>Aaand, in cases like this, it's always useful to ask: the laws we're breaking, who are they intended to benefit or protect? People without a lot of economic or political power to begin with? Yeah, maybe we should leave those laws alone--by definition, the people we're hurting are the ones least able to do anything about it anyway.
Intentions are irrelevant. It's end results that matter. People vote with their wallets. There is only one reason why Uber has created $51bn of market value, many people find it superior to the alternatives they have at their disposal. Uber _helps_ those with low economic or political power, more transportation options at a cheaper price.
Also, Uber doesn't help people with low economic or political power. Those people still have feature phones and walk or take the bus.
Isn't it actually spending hundreds of millions of VC dollars building a global monopoly?
As the article described, this is a network effects platform that gets better as it grows. This also gives them the ability to offer a better product at a lower price, squeezing out competitors.
The thing that amazes me the most about Uber is the flagrant disregard of local laws, and the lack of repercussions.
Uber is using / exploiting the regulator's method of enforcement, which tends to be persuading people to comply with the law and taking them to cour as a matter of last resort or for flagrant breaches.
We see this with companies who avoid (but not evade) taxes - the tax authorities tighten the rules, arrange for a partial payback, and continue scrutiny.
Sometimes this makes sense. Court cases are expensive and not guaranteed. At least this way some of the money is gathered.
But it does leave space for companies like Uber to operate in grey areas of law that's written in statute and the way the courts have interpreted it and the way the regulators enforce it.
The insurance is most worrying.
Amazes me as well. The extent to which corruption was rampant all around the world in the same industry.
This has no effect on founders or early investors; they'll get rich anyway. This is Silicon Valley, where empires are built losing hundreds of millions of dollars.
People have voted with their wallets
Companies like Uber and AirBnB (and countless others) simply pretend that those complexities don't exist -- the market to be disrupted only because they're willing to completely circumvent laws and standards -- and money starts falling on their heads.
This is entirely false. Uber's legal and political staff is _huge_. I'd assume the same for Airbnb.
No one is "pretending" they don't exist. They're building a product, allowing consumers to use better alternatives and challenging local authorities on their backwards ways.
Stop talking and start doing.
allowing consumers to use better alternatives and challenging local authorities on their backwards ways
This is a profoundly naive way of viewing what they're doing.
Please, explain.
>They entered markets and gained a foothold
By providing a better product at a better price.
People like eating at the park. There are no current food options there. I can "disrupt" the park food business by wheeling my bbq down there and selling burgers (ignore the countless food safety, tax and regulatory issues, or the zoning/garbage/park use policies that led to the park not having food options). Disruption!
EDIT: Actually, why bother having the capital costs of BBQs, fuel logistics and safety liability, etc. Instead I'll just make an app ("Ubbq") and allow providers to register as park hamburger sellers, taking my skim off the top. Disruption!
If that's all their moat is, they don't have much of a moat.
It's generally a bad sign when you meet an actual human being who refers to himself as "The Wolf."
(great book btw)