Thousands of New Millionaires Are About to Eat San Francisco Alive

[BrownTown]

Originally Posted by Sun Belt

Are you referring to the chatter about breaking up Google, or FaceBook's woes, or Amazon's Jeff Bezos divorce, HQ2 - LIC - fiasco, political pushback etc...?

For me it's more the issue of insane valuations. Especially all the companies that lose money ever year but are supposedly worth billions.

[tdawg]

No, just a feeling that there are way too many over-valued startups with shaky business models.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by tdawg

I'm no expert but it just feels like there's another tech/.com crash on the horizon.

I think there will be a shake-out of certain business models, some of which resemble the ones that crashed in 2000. One example is all the home delivery/service companies. No one has really figured out how to actually make money delivering food to peoples' homes and yet there are now quite a few companies in this business (Doordash, Grubhub, Instacart, Caviar etc etc). Most, if not all of them probably won't make it long term (anybody else remember Webvan?).

There may be consolidation of some more solid models like streaming music. On the other hand, we seem to be about to get more competition for Netflix in the streaming video space.

Compared to 2000, most of today's crop of tech IPOs are more mature and most of them make money so I don't think you'll see wholesale failures like in 2000 - 2002.

[DePaul Bunyan]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

I think there will be a shake-out of certain business models, some of which resemble the ones that crashed in 2000. One example is all the home delivery/service companies. No one has really figured out how to actually make money delivering food to peoples' homes and yet there are now quite a few companies in this business (Doordash, Grubhub, Instacart, Caviar etc etc). Most, if not all of them probably won't make it long term (anybody else remember Webvan?).

There may be consolidation of some more solid models like streaming music. On the other hand, we seem to be about to get more competition for Netflix in the streaming video space.

Compared to 2000, most of today's crop of tech IPOs are more mature and most of them make money so I don't think you'll see wholesale failures like in 2000 - 2002.

I think of Uber and Lyft when it comes to these insane valuations. The domestic taxi/limousine industry is $36 billion, ($108 billion global value). Yet the number I hear bandied about in terms of future valuations for the global ride share market is $285 billion by 2030. Uber and Lyft are going to absorb the entire tax/limo market and then nearly triple it in ten years? I feel like these forecasts are peddled by people who stand to profit mightily from an IPO and sell high. Their business model is based off of screwing over the majority of their drivers.

[mt_climber13]

Originally Posted by DePaul Bunyan

Uber and Lyft are going to absorb the entire tax/limo market and then nearly triple it in ten years?

Yes. Maybe even more so. They will no longer be "Sharing economy" companies by then as their fleet will be automated with the ability to hail a car-pod from your mac-phone. It's gonna be a huge transformation of the entire transportation system.

[DePaul Bunyan]

Originally Posted by mt_climber13

Yes. Maybe even more so. They will no longer be "Sharing economy" companies by then as their fleet will be automated with the ability to hail a car-pod from your mac-phone. It's gonna be a huge transformation of the entire transportation system.

I'm sorry I don't see full vehicular automation by 2030, maybe in certain markets, but it's still very early and cars that are capable of this technology are still really expensive.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by DePaul Bunyan

I think of Uber and Lyft when it comes to these insane valuations. The domestic taxi/limousine industry is $36 billion, ($108 billion global value). Yet the number I hear bandied about in terms of future valuations for the global ride share market is $285 billion by 2030. Uber and Lyft are going to absorb the entire tax/limo market and then nearly triple it in ten years? I feel like these forecasts are peddled by people who stand to profit mightily from an IPO and sell high. Their business model is based off of screwing over the majority of their drivers.

Uber and Lyft are not just absorbing the taxi/limo market--they are greatly expanding it. They have become an essential fixture of life, at least in San Francisco. Before Uber I took a taxi maybe 5 times a year because I hated calling their dispatcher and then waiting, sometimes 30 minutes, not even knowing if a taxi was coming. Or alternatively, standing on the corner trying to luck into one passing that wasn't occupied. With Uber it's so much easier and quicker and you can see your car coming on the app. And it's cheaper. Makes for a very different experience--much more comfortable and usable and, like most San Franciscans, I do use it a lot now. I've been known to be standing at a bus stop and the bus is taking too long to arrive . . . just call an Uber. I never would have done that with a taxi. The bus would have come and gone and I'd still be waiting for the cab.

By the way, if Uber "screws" the majority of drivers, why does it seemingly have so little trouble finding them? Business is about making money which means, in this case, paying drivers what it needs to to get them to work. It seems to be doing that effectively and if it doesn't, other companies like Lyft or some new one will replace it. It's a business model I, for one, no longer want to do without.

[Pedestrian]

Uber posts $50 billion in annual bookings as profit remains elusive ahead of IPO
Heather Somerville

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Uber Technologies Inc had $50 billion (39 billion pounds) in total bookings for its ride-service and food-delivery businesses last year, a testament to the size and global reach of the company as it prepares to woo investors in one of the biggest public stock listings to date.

But figures released by the company on Friday showed revenue grew just 2 percent in the fourth quarter, a sign that Uber continues to heavily subsidise rides in competitive markets, raising questions about its future growth prospects.

Uber’s full-year revenue for 2018 was $11.3 billion, up 43 percent from the prior year. Its losses before taxes, depreciation and other expenses were $1.8 billion, an improvement over the $2.2 billion loss posted in 2017.

Uber highlighted the annual bookings figure, which was up 45 percent over 2017, in its release on Friday of a smattering of selected figures for its fourth-quarter and full-year results . . . .

. . . gross bookings for the fourth quarter were a record $14.2 billion, up 11 percent from the prior quarter. That marks an improvement after bookings growth slowed to just single-digit percentages throughout much of last year.

Uber’s revenue in the fourth quarter reached $3 billion, up 2 percent from the third quarter and a 24 percent increase over the previous year.

The food-delivery service, Uber Eats, accounts for more than $2.5 billion in bookings quarterly . . . .

Uber has no plans to slow investment in Uber Eats or other costly areas such as autonomous car development to show profit any time soon. The company’s losses before interest, taxes and depreciation spiked in the fourth quarter to $940 million, a 43 percent jump over the previous quarter and 21 percent increase from 2017 . . . .

Uber’s business still represents a fraction of global consumer spending on transportation, and “evidence that Uber is making significant inroads into changing behaviors” is critical to its long-term success.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-ub...-idUKKCN1Q42CD

As I said, I think ultimately they will regret and abandon Uber Eats . . . but we'll see. For now, it seems to account for a lot of their losses. But overall Uber seems to be following the Amazon model of letting profit go by the wind through subsidization of many rides in order to gather market share. The real question for them is probably how eleastic is the price sensitivity of their users. I ask myself if the cost of every ride were, say, $1.50 more, would I still take it? I think mostly I would.

[BrownTown]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

By the way, if Uber "screws" the majority of drivers, why does it seemingly have so little trouble finding them?

Because a lot of people aren't smart enough to consider how the price of gas, depreciation and other risks erode their income.

[sopas ej]

I'm getting more and more annoyed with Uber and Lyft drivers. And I don't even use them.

Is anyone else encountering them, stopping in the dumbest places, like at bus stops, or right at busy intersections, and then they'll just block traffic? It's like, must they meet their rider precisely where the rider is standing? I also kind of blame the rider, too; it's like, can't they stand at a more convenient place and not make the Uber/Lyft driver block traffic? Often I'll be driving and then the car in front of me will just stop, mid-block, and then I realize it's an Uber/Lyft dirver. And then MAYBE they'll put on their hazard lights. It's like, why don't they put on their flashers BEFORE they stop, so that you can go around them/give a heads-up that they'll be stopping?

They really should make Uber and Lyft drivers put those big plastic illuminated signs on the roofs of their cars, just like Pizza Hut delivery drivers, so you know exactly who you're driving behind. I really feel that they contribute more to traffic; driving a vehicle to pick a solo person's ass up, multiply this by people who use Uber/Lyft on a regular basis, doesn't ease traffic. Not an efficient way to move people around.

And some people want autonomous vehicles driving around willy-nilly? I don't think so.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I'll be driving and then the car in front of me will just stop, mid-block, and then I realize it's an Uber/Lyft dirver . . . . driving a vehicle to pick a solo person's ass up, multiply this by people who use Uber/Lyft on a regular basis, doesn't ease traffic. Not an efficient way to move people around.

So you driving yourself around is more efficient than someone else being driven by Uber/Lyft?

I'm all for transit. Use it when I can. But if I need to get to an appointment across town or to carry lots of packages or am in a hurry many ways, transit doesn't work for me. I don't have a car in the city. THAT's not efficient for me. Uber/Lyft are. And a lot of people agree.

Maybe it's the difference living in a city as sprawling as LA vs a pretty contained one. Almost all Uber trips in SF are under $10. Given how much I'd drive, owning a car would probably cost more and be less convenient (not efficient in your terms).

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

So you driving yourself around is more efficient than someone else being driven by Uber/Lyft?

Well, that Uber/Lyft driver has to get to his pickup; he's driving solo before he picks up his rider, so, yeah, it contributes to traffic. In my car, I go directly from point A to point B. There's no driving-around-to-pick-up-my-fare time.

And if it's a spontaneous desire for a ride, don't you have to wait a long time, sometimes a half hour, for the driver to arrive?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

And if it's a spontaneous desire for a ride, don't you have to wait a long time, sometimes a half hour, for the driver to arrive?

i've never had to wait more than 5 minutes for an uber driver in chicago. 2-3 minutes is par for the course.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

i've never had to wait more than 5 minutes for an uber driver in chicago. 2-3 minutes is par for the course.

I guess I've heard some people who've arrived at LAX say that Uber/Lyft takes forever to arrive; it's actually faster just to go to a taxi stand. But I guess that's LAX.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

i've never had to wait more than 5 minutes for an uber driver in chicago. 2-3 minutes is par for the course.

Same in SF. Typically there's one less than 3 blocks away.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I guess I've heard some people who've arrived at LAX say that Uber/Lyft takes forever to arrive; it's actually faster just to go to a taxi stand. But I guess that's LAX.

Not in SF. They are swarming like termites:

SFO Uses Discount To Get Uber and Lyft Users To Meet Their Cars In the Domestic Garage

Rideshare companies Uber and Lyft together made 10 million pickups and drop-offs at SFO in 2018, creating more congestion than ever, according to the Chronicle's Phil Matier. Now the airport is trying to manage the chaos.

The two companies are now making a combined 1,200 pickups and drop-offs every hour at SFO. In response, the airport put out a statement last month announcing that it's offering a $3 discount to rideshare customers who opt to meet their rides at a designated area in an adjoining garage. "We’re focused on making SFO easier for travelers to access, and we’ve implemented premium pricing at our curbsides to alleviate traffic congestion around our terminals," said Ivan Satero, SFO's Airport Director, in the statement.

Cars can stay in the garage for free for up to thirty minutes, making it an enticing option for drivers who want to avoid costly tickets for idling outside at the curb. According to the Chronicle, the fees accounted for $45 million of SFO's annual revenue last year, more than all of its stores, bars, and restaurants combined.

If you're arriving at Terminals 1, 2, or 3, you just take the skybridge to the Domestic Garage, and you'll find your Lyft or Uber on the 5th Floor. At the International Terminal, all rideshare pickups happen at the second curb on the departures level.

https://sfist.com/2019/03/11/sfo-fac...ckup-solution/

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I guess I've heard some people who've arrived at LAX say that Uber/Lyft takes forever to arrive; it's actually faster just to go to a taxi stand. But I guess that's LAX.

yeah, i take the el to/from ORD or MDW, so i don't know what the uber airport experience is like in chicago.