Hacker News Reader

Comment by rjmunro | Hacker News Reader

As soon as I read "In 2019, Uber claimed $4.5 billion in global operating losses ... in reality, it brought in $5.8 billion in operating revenue." I think either whoever wrote this has no idea what they are talking about, or they are trying to trick readers.

"in reality" implies there is a contradiction or fraud, when it's totally possible to have $5.8 billion in operating revenue and still make a $4.5 loss. All this actually says is that Uber spent $10.3 billion in costs (or thereabouts, depending on how they account for other things).

Don't get me wrong. Uber probably are doing something dodgy, with all these shell companies, but this opening remark just shouts "Don't trust this source - they don't know what they are talking about".

View on HN

> Uber probably are doing something dodgy, with all these shell companies, but this opening remark just shouts "Don't trust this source - they don't know what they are talking about".

Uber, like all massive companies, are always doing dodgy tax avoidance things. But, even if they're doing tax avoidance, it's still legal as long as it's not blatant fraud.

Like all media companies, Business Insider has manipulated the content to cause outrage with their target markets for readers.

Though, on the topic of wording data, it's always interesting to see how media organizations & companies as a whole swing things, for example:

"Uber claimed $4.5 billion in global operating losses ... in reality, it brought in $5.8 billion in operating revenue" could've been written as:

"Uber brought in $5.8 billion in operating revenue, however, declared a loss of $4.5 billion"

"In a 2019 filing, Uber declared a $4.5 billion loss, despite earning $5.8 billion in operating revenue."

>Don't trust this source - they don't know what they are talking about".

or at least, outrage of uninformed readers is potentially larger than outrage of the informed.

Business Insider either does not understand the difference between revenue and profit or they would like to manufacture outrage among their readers

Corporate taxes are paid on profit, not revenue.

As a consolation for those begrudging their tax accounting scheme, operating Cashflow is still negative, meaning they are bleeding cash. How would you turn a profit while losing money from operations?

If that does not improve, Uber in the end may not be a viable business.

https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/UBER/cash-flow/

I earn 300k, pay the rent at 50k, then my right hand pays 450k to my left hand and I claim a 200k loss.

Not that I disapprove of that, I just wish I could pull the same trick with HMRC - I'm just not rich enough or in friendly terms with governments overseas to do that.

Is this equality?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com