Hacker News Reader

Comment by marcus_holmes | Hacker News Reader

But this was always the plan, wasn't it?

Uber has been losing money since it started, subsiding our travel with VC money, I thought clearly always with the plan of "once we get market dominance we can jack up the prices and make all that money back". I don't think they were ever shy about this plan.

So now we're at that point. Either we put up with the new prices, or move on to another app, or find another transport solution. I don't think whining at Uber about how expensive they are now is a workable response.

View on HN

That part is understandable. What doesn’t make sense is the ratio.

Driver pays for the car, gas and their time. And Uber pockets 50% of the fare? I’ve heard this from at least a few vocal drivers.

Apple App Store’s 30% cut as a software service provider seems like a bargain.

Uber has never considered its drivers to be employees. I think it sees itself as a marketplace - selling driver time to riders. So it makes sense that the plan was always to take more of the pie for itself once it got enough power to do that. Like Amazon with Audible - if you're the only game in town then you can charge whatever you like, so they do.

> if you're the only game in town then you can charge whatever you like

Did I miss Lyft going out of business or something? Or is this more of a duopoly type situation?

Android is around too (with the Apple app store example). So, yeah, I guess?

but what are they supposed to do? there is no more evil tech-bro to blame even, they are now under public pressure to make money and if the current CEO fails to maximize the profits, he will get booted and replaced by the one who will.

Society doesn’t need to accept their profit motive

Then Uber wouldn't exist. It was an exorbitantly expensive and risky plan to disrupt an entrenched taxi industry all funded by investors.

You lack imagination if the only way people can achieve something is through the one specific economic system

> Driver pays for the car, gas and their time. And Uber pockets 50% of the fare? I’ve heard this from at least a few vocal drivers.

It is in Uber's interest to keep exactly as much of the fare as they can to the extent they still have riders and drivers. This was always the endgame.

ZIRP man… I’m looking forward to more articles like this about companies with models that just might not make sense.

They were betting on self-driving cars originally, but it became too long of a waiting game for that.

Nah, they weren't. Their own leaked study (many years ago, I'll try and dig up a link) I recall showed at most a 5% improvement in their margins over time. This makes sense, as soon as one company has self-driving so will others. Any period where they are the exclusive self-driving ride hailing is fleeting at best. In time, it reverts to exactly the same as it's always been.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com