Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

FrodosNewPet

(495 posts)
Sun Apr 9, 2017, 01:37 AM Apr 2017

Uber isn't sure if it can 'remain a viable business' without building self-driving cars

Uber isn't sure if it can 'remain a viable business' without building self-driving cars

http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-questions-future-of-being-a-viable-business-without-self-driving-cars-2017-4

Biz Carson | April 8, 2017


If you're to believe Uber's lawyers, the fate of the $69 billion company is tied up in one bid from an opponent trying to stop its work on self-driving cars.

Waymo, a subsidiary of Google-parent company Alphabet, sued Uber in February claiming it stole trade secrets. Weeks later, it filed a preliminary injunction to try to stop Uber's work on self-driving cars until the case resolves.

~ snip ~

Of course, many people question whether a company that's believed to be losing billions of dollars a year is a "viable" business to begin with. The six-year-old company hasn't yet figured out how to make humans in the drivers seat work as a profitable business, and it's also tackling everything from food delivery to vertical take off planes.

Discussions about the current viability aside, Uber continues to repeat that self-driving cars are "existential" to its future even though internally the company crowned 2017 the year of the driver (the human kind).

~ snip ~

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Uber isn't sure if it can 'remain a viable business' without building self-driving cars (Original Post) FrodosNewPet Apr 2017 OP
Yeah, well it was supposed to be a ride marybourg Apr 2017 #1
They want to kill taxis and public transit FrodosNewPet Apr 2017 #3
And diddling people out of work with shaky technology Warpy Apr 2017 #4
WalMart unsure if it can remain viable unless driverless cars start to need groceries, Binkie The Clown Apr 2017 #2
If they can't make money now DeminPennswoods Apr 2017 #5
Uber deserves to fail anyway Spider Jerusalem Apr 2017 #6
Let's see what does this mean? duncang Apr 2017 #7

marybourg

(12,620 posts)
1. Yeah, well it was supposed to be a ride
Sun Apr 9, 2017, 01:49 AM
Apr 2017
sharing business , matching people who were going someplace anyway with people who needed a ride there and would help pay the freight. It wasn't supposed to become a job for any body and an informal taxi business. So, yeah, there's something fundamentally wrong with the business model - it's a Frankenstein monster.

FrodosNewPet

(495 posts)
3. They want to kill taxis and public transit
Sun Apr 9, 2017, 01:55 AM
Apr 2017

But it is turning into a murder-suicide.

Travis Kalanick's ego is his worst enemy.

Warpy

(111,245 posts)
4. And diddling people out of work with shaky technology
Sun Apr 9, 2017, 02:39 AM
Apr 2017

is only part of the problem with that company. It looks like they've been raking off extra money from drivers and passengers, alike.

And never mind the raging sexism in the company, itself.

My guess is that it's not going to last very long, period. They'll go under and then pop up as something else nonviable.

Binkie The Clown

(7,911 posts)
2. WalMart unsure if it can remain viable unless driverless cars start to need groceries,
Sun Apr 9, 2017, 01:53 AM
Apr 2017

household goods, pharmaceuticals, and garden supplies.

With human customers left jobless, their only customer base will be the robots.

DeminPennswoods

(15,278 posts)
5. If they can't make money now
Sun Apr 9, 2017, 03:52 AM
Apr 2017

with this model, they never will. They own no equipment (fleet of cars) and therefore have no maintence or replacement costs. They have few employees (drivers are independent contractors) so as to pay them no salary or benefits. All they basically have is an app and rating system along with the ability to set rules, prices and take a cut of driver fares.

If they use self-driving cars, their costs will increase as now they will own and be responsibile for keeping a large fleet of vehicles on the street.

 

Spider Jerusalem

(21,786 posts)
6. Uber deserves to fail anyway
Sun Apr 9, 2017, 03:59 AM
Apr 2017

their whole business model is based on stealth deregulation and union busting. And they already aren't a viable business; they operate at a loss that their venture-capital backers are eating to undercut licensed, regulated, unionised taxi drivers.

duncang

(1,907 posts)
7. Let's see what does this mean?
Sun Apr 9, 2017, 06:03 AM
Apr 2017

He can't make a company with very little overhead work. Maybe means he overpays/over extened his self to pay off mansions, planes and cars.

He has no clue as to what kind of a pain self driving cars would be. Having to clean up when the rider says to pull over because they are going to puke but the car doesn't. Not being able to offer the service unless he has a full service bay to gas and clean the cars out. Having to worry about graffiti and other abuse to the cars. Probably be worse then a men's public restroom. Having to worry about goofy gps programs that run the car on to roads that are in passable. (Flooding. Or like what happened to me. 2 gps units a phone and a stand alone unit sent me down a road which was pretty much just passable by a pick up or 4 wheeler.)

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Uber isn't sure if it can...