Uber lost $2.8 billion last year

JEDI

Lifer
Sep 25, 2001
29,391
2,738
126
(Didn't see a thread about this on the 1st page)

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/14/technology/uber-financials/index.html

Uber's gross bookings for 2016 hit $20 billion, more than doubling from the year prior, according to financial figures the company provided to Bloomberg. Its net revenue, after drivers took their cut, totaled $6.5 billion for the year.
But that rapid growth came at a cost. Uber says it lost $2.8 billion in 2016


too bad the article didn't say how much $ uber had so we can estimate how much longer they can operate.
I'm assuming they still have $Billions$ and can last at least a couple more years at this loss pace.
 

GagHalfrunt

Lifer
Apr 19, 2001
25,284
1,998
126
See, this is why I'll never be successful. Not matter how hard I try I can't lose more than $100 million a year.
 

Ns1

No Lifer
Jun 17, 2001
55,420
1,600
126
They may be losing money on every sale but they're making up for it in volume!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skel

Sonikku

Lifer
Jun 23, 2005
15,908
4,940
136
Pay yourself a huge salary while operating at a loss and duck out when you have enough to retire. Fuck the business.
 

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
13,341
4,102
136
As PottedMeat said, the outcome of the Waymo lawsuit could ultimately be a death blow for Uber.

I read the CNNMoney article and it actually doesn't seem that bad. They doubled gross revenue YoY at this stage of the game? I'm not saying it's anywhere near a good business model, but the article states that quarterly losses are steady while the business continues to grow. That's at least mildly encouraging compared to all the other Uber news in the last 2 months. :p
 

desura

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2013
4,627
129
101
Related to something I said earlier in the stock market thread, yeah, if Uber were only funded by domestic USA investors, it would be done pretty fast. But they also attract foreign money. They will probably attract more foreign money in the future.

They'll be fine.

I do think that their self-driving initiative is really stupid and fundamentally cannot work for them.
 

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
13,341
4,102
136
Related to something I said earlier in the stock market thread, yeah, if Uber were only funded by domestic USA investors, it would be done pretty fast. But they also attract foreign money. They will probably attract more foreign money in the future.
to
They'll be fine.

I do think that their self-driving initiative is really stupid and fundamentally cannot work for them.
I don't know much about capital markets, but can they really raise a lot more money? Are you thinking of Tesla or Uber? If you're a sovereign wealth fund or rich multinational, you can now invest in Uber at a total valuation of about $60B. What's the upside to that?

As for self-driving, it's now widely considered that Uber needs autonomous cars to survive long-term. Based on their sustained losses, a 30/70 split with drivers only gives them runway to pivot to a driverless business model. For most of the other companies developing autonomous driving, it's more of a long-term goal. I think it'll take over 10 years to become commercially successful but others think it's just a few years away. IMO Uber doesn't have 10 years. Neither does Lyft but I think their end game is to be acquired by a large automaker.

As far as execution goes, do you mean that their trial cars suck? Or do you mean allegedly colluding with a high-level Waymo exec to lift Google's IP won't work? The former can possibly be fixed in time, the latter offense is virtually a death sentence if Waymo wins the lawsuit.
 

ponyo

Lifer
Feb 14, 2002
19,688
2,811
126
Losing money worked for Amazon. Now Bozo the Clown is second richest man in the world. And Tesla is pretty good at losing money too. So good in fact they passed Ford and GM in market cap.
 

desura

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2013
4,627
129
101
I don't know much about capital markets, but can they really raise a lot more money? Are you thinking of Tesla or Uber? If you're a sovereign wealth fund or rich multinational, you can now invest in Uber at a total valuation of about $60B. What's the upside to that?

As for self-driving, it's now widely considered that Uber needs autonomous cars to survive long-term. Based on their sustained losses, a 30/70 split with drivers only gives them runway to pivot to a driverless business model. For most of the other companies developing autonomous driving, it's more of a long-term goal. I think it'll take over 10 years to become commercially successful but others think it's just a few years away. IMO Uber doesn't have 10 years. Neither does Lyft but I think their end game is to be acquired by a large automaker.

As far as execution goes, do you mean that their trial cars suck? Or do you mean allegedly colluding with a high-level Waymo exec to lift Google's IP won't work? The former can possibly be fixed in time, the latter offense is virtually a death sentence if Waymo wins the lawsuit.

I mean, fundamentally, ignoring Waymo or whatever, self-driving makes no sense for Uber.

To make it work, they would need to have garages in every city, they'd have to buy the cars themselves, maintain them. That's a lot of CAPEX. And driving passengers around with a computerized car is much more risky. The technology has to be perfect. And people screw up their directions, want to stop early, try to overload cars, it would be ripe for abuse by passengers. And furthermore, mapping software is often wrong, or off by enough that would cause problems.

Fundamentally, it makes no business sense, regardless of how Uber implements it.
 

Ns1

No Lifer
Jun 17, 2001
55,420
1,600
126
Maybe the goal is to sell the technology in the same way that Amazon web services does for Amazon.

That's the only reasonable end game I can think of.
 

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
13,341
4,102
136
I mean, fundamentally, ignoring Waymo or whatever, self-driving makes no sense for Uber.

To make it work, they would need to have garages in every city, they'd have to buy the cars themselves, maintain them. That's a lot of CAPEX. And driving passengers around with a computerized car is much more risky. The technology has to be perfect. And people screw up their directions, want to stop early, try to overload cars, it would be ripe for abuse by passengers. And furthermore, mapping software is often wrong, or off by enough that would cause problems.

Fundamentally, it makes no business sense, regardless of how Uber implements it.
I used to have similar concerns, but if you do a back of the envelope analysis, I think a driverless model is clearly better. How much does a full-time driver make before taxes? Very conservatively, let's say $30k if he drives 8-10 hours a day.

So the question becomes can Uber replace the driver for less than $30k a year? Right now autonomous driving simply isn't there, but assuming that hurdle is not insurmountable, Uber can retain substantially more revenue if they don't have to pay drivers. You raise a lot of good points about user experience but that's more a question of how good can autonomous driving become. I don't believe it's an intractable problem, or one that's fundamentally too expensive to deliver.

A driverless car can probably be active for 15-16 hours a day, so the economics are very much in Uber's favor even if I totally lowball what a full-time driver makes from the company on an annual basis. I'm not a bean counter, but the capex looks a lot less to me.
 

chowderhead

Platinum Member
Dec 7, 1999
2,633
263
126
(Didn't see a thread about this on the 1st page)

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/14/technology/uber-financials/index.html

Uber's gross bookings for 2016 hit $20 billion, more than doubling from the year prior, according to financial figures the company provided to Bloomberg. Its net revenue, after drivers took their cut, totaled $6.5 billion for the year.
But that rapid growth came at a cost. Uber says it lost $2.8 billion in 2016


too bad the article didn't say how much $ uber had so we can estimate how much longer they can operate.
I'm assuming they still have $Billions$ and can last at least a couple more years at this loss pace.
Uber apparently has 7 billion in cash and probably the ability to raise more money. It seems like they can draw this out more. There appears to be endless supply of people willing to drive for them.
 

Jon-T

Senior member
Jun 5, 2011
538
346
136
I used to have similar concerns, but if you do a back of the envelope analysis, I think a driverless model is clearly better. How much does a full-time driver make before taxes? Very conservatively, let's say $30k if he drives 8-10 hours a day.

So the question becomes can Uber replace the driver for less than $30k a year? --- snip ----

Not only do they have to replace the driver for $30k they also have to replace the car, eat depreciation on the car, do maintenance and keep it clean. As it is now the car owner gives them all this for free.

One of the things that ride share users love is that the cars are so much nicer than a taxi. Once you remove the owner from being in the car and turn it into an anonymous box wont it get trashed out more than any taxi on the street.
 

desura

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2013
4,627
129
101
Not only do they have to replace the driver for $30k they also have to replace the car, eat depreciation on the car, do maintenance and keep it clean. As it is now the car owner gives them all this for free.

One of the things that ride share users love is that the cars are so much nicer than a taxi. Once you remove the owner from being in the car and turn it into an anonymous box wont it get trashed out more than any taxi on the street.

Yup. And they also need to have the labor at the central depot as well as to go out and fetch any misbehaving cars, which inevitably will happen.

Look at what happened to all of the bike sharing programs in cities. The bikes all got trashed. Similar would happen with a self driving taxi.

And liability insurance would be insane.
 

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
13,341
4,102
136
Not only do they have to replace the driver for $30k they also have to replace the car, eat depreciation on the car, do maintenance and keep it clean. As it is now the car owner gives them all this for free.

One of the things that ride share users love is that the cars are so much nicer than a taxi. Once you remove the owner from being in the car and turn it into an anonymous box wont it get trashed out more than any taxi on the street.
But I think the actual cost of paying the full-time driver (and for his car) is closer to $50k than to $30k, certainly if you consider that a self-driving car than operate for a lot more than 10 hours a day.

Do you really think the TCO on a car is anywhere close to $40k a year? Like I said, considering all of that, Uber is better off with autonomous cars. It's not an all or nothing proposition on the capex. There will be a long phase-in period as Uber disincentivizes drivers from competing with its growing fleet. I agree that the real question is how do they get from here to there technologically, but the business justification is pretty clear to me.

Look at the financial results quoted by the OP, they went from $10B to $20B gross in all of 2015 to 2016. But they got to keep just $6.5B. They absolutely need to capture as much of the gross receipts as possible, a 30% slice is not going to cut it over the long run.
 

desura

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2013
4,627
129
101
But I think the actual cost of paying the full-time driver (and for his car) is closer to $50k than to $30k, certainly if you consider that a self-driving car than operate for a lot more than 10 hours a day.

Do you really think the TCO on a car is anywhere close to $40k a year? Like I said, considering all of that, Uber is better off with autonomous cars. It's not an all or nothing proposition on the capex. There will be a long phase-in period as Uber disincentivizes drivers from competing with its growing fleet. I agree that the real question is how do they get from here to there technologically, but the business justification is pretty clear to me.

Look at the financial results quoted by the OP, they went from $10B to $20B gross in all of 2015 to 2016. But they got to keep just $6.5B. They absolutely need to capture as much of the gross receipts as possible, a 30% slice is not going to cut it over the long run.

THere might be a possibility of this occurring in areas which have big flat roads like in the Western states. At least in my area I don't see it working, but there is a strong possibility of them doing a hybrid approach with garages in large cities populations over 500k and everywhere else has the old model.

They are losing money because they are in a price war with Lyft. THe thought is that at some point lyft folds and they can raise prices to more sustainable levels.

Let's say they get a fleet of Chevy Bolts. Fleet discount to 30k but 10k in uber technology self-driving gear. 40k to acquire. Spend $5 million on a depot the size of a Walmart for maintenance and storing cars for refilling.

An average non-surged hour it gets 3 rides for $8 on average each ride. $24/hr. It can operate for 12 hours before heading back to the depot for recharge and maintenance. $288 per day, 105k/yr in revenue. The depot carries say 40 cars and employs 6 people paid 60k/yr at all times for maintenance, and for emergencies. $4.2 million revenue.

The cars drive say 20 miles per hour. In a year they are putting on 87k miles (!). At $5 per mpge, and an average mpge of 100, it is costing $4380 in electricity per car per year. New tires yearly are also required, $300. At that level of usage you're probably replacing the cars every three years as they would hit 250k mileage in that time.

In three years time then, you make $10.5 million after taking into account labor and maintenance. You have to replace the entire fleet of 40 cars every 3 years. Can probably sell the used ones for $10k, so that's $30k x40 $1.2 million. $9.3 million.

Insurance is fairly high, given the mileage driven. Likely even higher than commercial taxi insurance given the uncertainty of rotbotic tech. And no more exploiting grey zones of the sharing economy here. $10k per car per year, 400k, 1.2 mil.

$8.1 mil.

Not sure how to amortize the cost of the depot property. Meh, maybe it is viable.