Hacker News Reader

Comment by behringer | Hacker News Reader

Uber is priced the way it is because rich financiers are subsidizing rides. If Uber were running a profitable business, the rides would be as expensive or more so than taxis. Another problem with taxis is they don't show up when you call them, and you don't know what it will cost until the trip is over.

With Uber/Lyft, I never have to worry about being stuck outside in the cold, drunk, waiting 60 minutes for a $30 taxi.

View on HN

> If Uber were running a profitable business, the rides would be as expensive or more so than taxis.

Might be off topic, but in downtown Chicago before/after work cabs (including tip) are often cheaper than Uber/Lyft (with no additional tip,) although they offer other conveniences (payment, tracking, can be "hailed" to anywhere, etc.) At less busy times ride sharing can still be a bit cheaper than a cab.

Was once a compelling theory, but in the last earnings (Q3 2019), Uber's ride hailing business was "adjusted EBITDA" profitable, with an increase in revenue growth. It's not hard to imagine them being GAAP profitable if they decide to sacrifice a little bit of revenue growth.

You can use fancy terms and fancy accounting to make it seem like Uber isn't subsidizing riders, but it doesn't change the facts.

EBITDA is nonsense disguised to hide costs.

If you need to adjust it to appear profitable, then you are not profitable.

(Yes, I am aware that there are valid use-cases for EBITDA, but in general it is used as a way to avoid accounting for actual costs).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com