There's also the consideration of market maturity. There's an Amazon type story (you reference wrt hiding profits) where the new markets lose money as they are scaling up but the older established markets are (potentially wildly) profitable and the growth of the business is governed by the rate of expansion supported by existing profits. In that story, the unit economics look great in the long term (barring some disruption like self driving fleets) and an investor might wish the firm to operate at breakeven in order to grow as quickly as possible while there are still attractive opportunities for investment.
This could extend beyond geographic markets to businesses like eats, freight, etc. Though presumably it would be easier to break out the financials of new business units.
I wonder if moving towards an auction-type model for driver rates could lower costs. Drivers submit their per-mile rate for the day, and in addition to proximity, a job is rewarded to the lowest bidding driver.
That's why I don't like MBAs. They love talking and publishing copious amounts of research with such baseless claims and comparisons. Comparing Uber with the airline industry and calling the software worthless tells me more about the author than Uber. Ever heard of a marketplace on the web?
You don't include the costs of the car in the cost of the trip. Cars are 2nd biggest cost next to drivers. The cost of operating those cars are paid by drivers, not Uber. This is probably why the 41% figure from 2016 is closer to reality. Your graphs also show to gradual losses due to Uber in the taxi industry since 2014, with your Uber stats starting at 2018. Now go get some Uber stock I guess while you take Uber slave driver rides.
There's also the consideration of market maturity. There's an Amazon type story (you reference wrt hiding profits) where the new markets lose money as they are scaling up but the older established markets are (potentially wildly) profitable and the growth of the business is governed by the rate of expansion supported by existing profits. In that story, the unit economics look great in the long term (barring some disruption like self driving fleets) and an investor might wish the firm to operate at breakeven in order to grow as quickly as possible while there are still attractive opportunities for investment.
This could extend beyond geographic markets to businesses like eats, freight, etc. Though presumably it would be easier to break out the financials of new business units.
I wonder if moving towards an auction-type model for driver rates could lower costs. Drivers submit their per-mile rate for the day, and in addition to proximity, a job is rewarded to the lowest bidding driver.
That's why I don't like MBAs. They love talking and publishing copious amounts of research with such baseless claims and comparisons. Comparing Uber with the airline industry and calling the software worthless tells me more about the author than Uber. Ever heard of a marketplace on the web?
You don't include the costs of the car in the cost of the trip. Cars are 2nd biggest cost next to drivers. The cost of operating those cars are paid by drivers, not Uber. This is probably why the 41% figure from 2016 is closer to reality. Your graphs also show to gradual losses due to Uber in the taxi industry since 2014, with your Uber stats starting at 2018. Now go get some Uber stock I guess while you take Uber slave driver rides.