Hacker News Reader

Comment by 1_2__3 | Hacker News Reader

Could we maybe have a sober conversation about Uber that doesn't involve self driving cars? Because I hate to tell you, but whatever reckoning is coming for Uber will come long before self driving cars are viable. I do not understand why so many HN commenters ignore the reality of self driving car tech and regulation and think it's right around the corner. It's so far away that the only relevance it has to this conversation is already in the article (and completely disagrees with your claim): if Uber is planing to rely on self driving cars they're already dead. The tech will not be ready in time for them.

View on HN

I think self-driving cars are going to be viable, very very fast - but uber will implode much faster. When it implodes, it will happen much faster than anyone expects. There will be lots of collateral damage, as the rest of the current incarnation of the SV insanity will be exposed to the deflation of the unicorn narrative.

I think a huge part of it will be when it becomes really really obvious that Uber will never be able to IPO, the employees there will have to leave. The gravitational pull of the sunk cost fallacy (with respect to any exercised options the employees have) will be overwhelmed by the need to 'find other options' faster than their colleagues and it becomes a race to not be the last one off the sinking ship.

1_2__3 - while I agree with your overall thesis, I think it's reasonable to bring up self driving cars since they are in the original article, after all.

Employees are already leaving. I'd wager a few people in here have seen candidates coming through interviews in the past week. It's been kinda scary how many ubers are leaving the ship.

This is the truth. Counting on self driving cars at this point contributes to the conversation as much as counting on spaceships.

I agree that this focus on self-driving cars is very premature, but then you are left with its current business, which so far seems to be hemorrhaging money and with no change of that in sight.

Practical self-driving cars are already not "in sight", assuming your sight is the next ten years.

Probably because my car drives 95% of my commute. Honestly though, that is bias, since complete self-driving is still much harder. However, I don't think it is more than 5 years out which is in the Uber horizon.

    > my car drives 95% of my commute.

In the context of the taxi market, "self driving" means 100%. If I call for a self-driving cab, it needs to reach me on its own.

Getting to 100% looks like it's going to be pretty hard, despite the endless stream of articles insinuating otherwise. A car that drives into oncoming traffic 1% of the time isn't good enough.

Well, if it safely gets wedged or parked 1 in 1000 of the time it might be good enough. Too late for Uber though.

I agree with this. Why does anyone at this point suspect the self-driving cars thing is not a retcon to try and cover up the obvious fact that while a great user experience for summoning rides is a something people like, the model uber landed on to make a business doesn't really work?

It would be really interesting to see the early pitch decks for Uber - especially the series A and B slides. I would be inclined to bet that autonomous vehicles do not make an appearance until much later.

I'd agree with the two facts: 1) that Uber is beleagered and 2) self-driving cars are a long way away.

The third point tying them together is Uber's faith that (2) is false. That is yet another indicator that Uber won't make it - their optimism is not well founded.

>Could we maybe have a sober conversation about Uber that doesn't involve self driving cars?

No. Why?

>if Uber is planing to rely on self driving cars they're already dead.

There's no discussion to be had there.

Why is there no discussion to be had there?

There's tons of discussion to be had about whether Uber can tweak their current business model (i.e. drivers) to be profitable.

Well, the current strategy seems to be Uber as the service for everyone and everything.

Let's take Singapore as an example Core business you need to compete against the home-grown champion Grab, costing money. Basic strategy question: Diversify or Focus since loss leader does not work. Solution: Diversify.

The problem is the moment you start UberEats you are competing with Foodpanda, Deliveroo, etc. Competition costs money. Groceries delivery? You are competing with RedMart et al Document delivery? GogoVan, Zap.

The problem with that strategy is that it takes the focus off the core business -> You lose China to Didi, you lose India to Ola.

Voila, just like this Uber is not dominating the main global growth markets. If they now slow their growth by focusing their investors bail out since the "storyline" is not working anymore.

Seems to me like a lose/lose situation for Uber

Reply on news.ycombinator.com