Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** ** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD **

11-22-2015 , 02:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjshabado
palantir doesn't make profits? thought they'd be rolling in it
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 03:06 AM
they have secret vaults filled with NSA and CIA funds
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 04:29 AM
snapchat dropping brings me great joy. Also the Tinder CEO meltdown considering I didn't end up working there.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 08:28 AM
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 09:49 AM
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 01:54 PM
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
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 02:26 PM
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 02:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackize5
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

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).
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 02:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveT
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.

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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 02:57 PM
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 03:02 PM
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 03:06 PM
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 08:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjshabado
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).
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 08:25 PM
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 08:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackize5
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.

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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 09:05 PM
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 09:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveT
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.
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 11:02 PM
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-22-2015 , 11:42 PM
so, these apps use an address instead of gps data?

wtf is this, the 1950s?
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-23-2015 , 12:11 AM
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-23-2015 , 04:57 AM
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!
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-23-2015 , 06:12 AM
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-23-2015 , 05:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjshabado
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.
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.
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote
11-23-2015 , 09:58 PM
One of the comments I the thread seems to indicate that maybe this practice isn't as prevalent as I initially thought
** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** Quote

      
m