** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** - Page 842 - Computer Technical Help

Two Plus Two Forums Other Topics Computer and Technical Help

** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD **

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 842 of 1603

First

342 642 742 792 822 832 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 852 862 892 942 1042 1342

Last

Page 842 of 1603

First

342 642 742 792 822 832 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 852 862 892 942 1042 1342

Last

11-21-2015 , 10:14 PM

#21026

jjshabado

Carpal Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 22,732

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-1...apchat-valuati

Kind of interesting.

Quote

150% up to $2,000 Welcome Bonus on CoinPoker

Join the action now

Daily Rewards • Splash Pots • CoinRaces

11-22-2015 , 02:14 AM

#21027

RogerKwok

grinder

Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 422

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjshabado

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-1...apchat-valuati

Kind of interesting.

palantir doesn't make profits? thought they'd be rolling in it

Quote

11-22-2015 , 03:06 AM

#21028

e i pi

veteran

Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 2,230

they have secret vaults filled with NSA and CIA funds

Quote

11-22-2015 , 04:29 AM

#21029

suzzer99

Save the Cheerleader, Save the World

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 101,163

snapchat dropping brings me great joy. Also the Tinder CEO meltdown considering I didn't end up working there.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 08:28 AM

#21030

jjshabado

Carpal Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 22,732

Quote:

Originally Posted by RogerKwok

palantir doesn't make profits? thought they'd be rolling in it

Palantir has been growing like crazy.

The profits arguments are dumb on both extremes. Not making a profit is not indicative of not having a super successful business. But it's also not automatically ok.

There's also a big difference between a company like Palantir that can grow in many different segments in many different ways and a lot of the social media companies like Snapchat.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 09:49 AM

#21031

jjshabado

Carpal Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 22,732

It's worth adding that we probably don't know that combined profit is zero. I'm sure a lot of these companies aren't releasing their detailed financial information.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 01:54 PM

#21032

blackize5

old hand

Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 1,358

That article also seems to treat a drop in valuation at IPO as a universally bad thing. Completely ignoring the terms that got those valuations so high in the first place. No consideration given to liquidation preferences or preferred vs common stock. It's almost like they had a conclusion (bubble popping) and warped everything to fit that narrative instead of treating the topic with the appropriate nuance

Quote

11-22-2015 , 02:26 PM

#21033

daveT

S.A.G.E. Master

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 23,955

The "no profit" angle seems a little strange with some of the companies listed. I'd bet that Uber is making a profit in LA, NYC, and other areas, so since said profit is proven and they want to expand quickly, they are taking in money and hiring people across the world. There is a difference between having zero profit entirely and having zero profit with a proven profit model.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 02:51 PM

#21034

jjshabado

Carpal Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 22,732

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackize5

It is a universally bad thing.

It's not necessarily true that the last investors that put money in at the end got screwed by it - but a business dropping in value is bad. Not sure how else to spin that. And somebody lost money (although possibly 'fake' money).

Quote

11-22-2015 , 02:53 PM

#21035

jjshabado

Carpal Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 22,732

Quote:

Originally Posted by daveT

Yeah, this is what I was getting at and is a perfect example of good "no profit".

I think a lot of the social media apps have the bad "no profit". That is if they were to stop expanding its not clear how long their business would succeed.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 02:57 PM

#21036

kerowo

lolcat

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 37,183

I don't think Uber making profits in a few cities can be stretched into being good news if it can't make a profit over all. I also wouldn't count what profits they are making until their lawsuits get settled.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 03:02 PM

#21037

jjshabado

Carpal Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 22,732

Nobody is saying they can't make profits. It's that instead of making profits they can expand to more cities and potentially make more profits later.

At this point they clearly have a successful business model. Whether it will be uber successful depends a lot on how many markets they can operate in with minimal regulation.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 03:06 PM

#21038

jjshabado

Carpal Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 22,732

Maybe a better way of looking at it is that some companies seem to be expanding and it's not obvious they can be a profitable business at all. So the hyper growth is used to hide the inherent weakness (or riskiness) of the business model.

Other companies have what is a proven profitable business model in some places and have decided to risk their profits from those places by expanding rapidly and hoping to have lots more places that eventually make money.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 08:20 PM

#21039

blackize5

old hand

Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 1,358

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjshabado

right but it's two different measures of value. Value determined by what a late stage investor posts for preferred stock with preferential terms is not an apples to apples comparison with a valuation at IPO which is based on common stock.

The kind of naive comparison the article makes is deceptive and seems to be just to spin a narrative.

I do agree that some companies on that list are in trouble though.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 08:25 PM

#21040

maxtower

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 7,996

It's also interesting to me that Lyft is valued at $2.5B while Uber is $50B. Does Uber really have that much more of the market? I frequently use both and see drivers driving for both.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 08:56 PM

#21041

jjshabado

Carpal Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 22,732

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackize5

I think you're overstating the difference and it doesn't seem that important to the point the article is making.

And I think the narrative of 'IPOing at a valuation less than your last raise is bad' is pretty reasonable and not at all deceptive.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 09:05 PM

#21042

daveT

S.A.G.E. Master

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 23,955

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxtower

It's also interesting to me that Lyft is valued at $2.5B while Uber is $50B. Does Uber really have that much more of the market? I frequently use both and see drivers driving for both.

I know it is much harder / slower to get a Lyft than an Uber in Austin. I never tried Lyft in LA. It also helps Uber immensely that Google Maps on Android suggests Uber with a price estimate.

Personally, I don't like using Lyft. Been pretty bad experiences for me over all. I used them during the promotional $10 off each ride and 50% off, but for equal prices, I'd use Uber over Lyft any day of the week.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 09:53 PM

#21043

maxtower

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 7,996

Quote:

Originally Posted by daveT

That's funny. I had the opposite experience in Austin. Lyfts were easier and cheaper. Once I was in the car, the service was about the same and obviously very dependent on the driver.

The biggest problem these companies have to solve is having enough drivers to make getting rides convenient. I was thinking since a lot of drivers drive for both, the valuations shouldn't be too far off. Or put another way... once Uber has solved the problem of getting this virtual cab fleet off the ground, it's easy for lyft to piggy back on that by having drivers drive for both.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 11:02 PM

#21044

daveT

S.A.G.E. Master

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 23,955

I only used Lyft a few times. Two of those times, the driver was given bad directions to where I was, so a 5 minute wait turned to 30 minutes or more. I think that whatever maps API Lyft is using isn't as good.

Been a few times where no match was ever found.

The drivers are about the same (though Uber drivers seem nicer on the whole). To be fair, you have to search pretty hard or short circuit the search and stay at UT to find outright rude and nasty people in Austin, IME so far.

Lyft has an easier to use app though. Uber's app is a UI nightmare. I just use it from GMaps.

Quote

11-22-2015 , 11:42 PM

#21045

Roonil Wazlib

veteran

Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 3,333

so, these apps use an address instead of gps data?

wtf is this, the 1950s?

Quote

11-23-2015 , 12:11 AM

#21046

daveT

S.A.G.E. Master

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 23,955

GPS can be spotty. I obviously don't know the technical details, but I guess something goes wrong with the information sent to the driver even though it shows exactly where I am.

I've been targeted a few blocks away from my real location. In Uber, you can easily contact the driver and tell him or her where you really are or move the pin to your location. Lyft didn't seem to have these features.

Quote

11-23-2015 , 04:57 AM

#21047

maxtower

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 7,996

I hate when I drop the pin exactly where I am standing, and they still have to call to find me. Learn how to use a map people!

Quote

11-23-2015 , 06:12 AM

#21048

Wolfram

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 15,066

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxtower

It's also interesting to me that Lyft is valued at $2.5B while Uber is $50B. Does Uber really have that much more of the market? I frequently use both and see drivers driving for both.

Probably mind-share.

I knew what Uber was way before Lyft. We have neither in my market. Uber is becoming the Xerox of crowd-sourced transportation.

Last edited by Wolfram; 11-23-2015 at 06:24 AM.

Quote

11-23-2015 , 05:03 PM

#21049

blackize5

old hand

Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 1,358

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjshabado

An article popped up on HN today that's pretty relevant.

There is a chart at the bottom that pretty clearly illustrates my point. At the fairly common 2x liquidation preference (I've heard rumors of some unicorns having higher preferences than this in their term sheets), you can see that a late stage investor can invest at a valuation 20% over true value and more than triple their expected ROI vs investing at market with even a 1x preference.