[frgtpsswrdlame]

Keep focus on self-driving through the next funding cycle (for the hype) then drop it like a hot potato. It is way too long term for Uber to be burning money on it, they have immediate short-term problems.

I'd probably try to rebrand as the new, legal Uber and start spending money on lobbying local politicians. The "taxi-app" market has almost no switching costs and so Uber has almost no pricing power. They'll need to fix this to ever run a profit. Effectively Uber exists because it broke the laws that created barriers to entry. If it wants to continue to exist it needs to erect new barriers that protect it and keep out competition.

[castis]

> If it wants to continue to exist it needs to erect new barriers that protect it and keep out competition.

If making it illegal for competition to exist is the only way to keep Uber running then it shouldn't keep running.

[blowski]

Erecting barriers to entry is what every single business tries to do. Whether it's buying patents, spending vast sums of money on your brand, monopolising key resources - they're all trying to do the same thing.

[castis]

It makes complete sense to me why they would go to these lengths.

I'm looking at this from the perspective of: Vehicle manufacturers are not allowed to manage their own dealerships. All vehicles in my state are required to be sold through a 3rd party. That kind of thing is shitty to me.

[wonder_bread]

Is Uber's brand as bad across the rest of the world as it is in the tech news echo chamber? Simply curious how ubiquitous news of the turmoil has become

[twobyfour]

So instead of changing the culture, basically pretend that the only problem Uber has is damage to its brand because its lack of ethics was finally called out?

[pavel_lishin]

That's not how I read it.

You're right, frgtpsswrdlame totally skipped over that Uber currently seems like a rampant shit-show from the outside - I can't imagine any women applying to work there - but he did address two concrete issues Uber has that aren't just "brand damage": focusing too much on self-driving tech, and their flagrant disregard for local laws.

[twobyfour]

But he's not suggesting that they change their ethics and stop abusing local laws. Rather, he's suggesting engaging in unethical anticompetitive practices that abuse regulation to create barriers to entry. That's just a change of tactic, not a change of mindset.

[pavel_lishin]

Is lobbying politicians unethical and anti-competitive?

[frgtpsswrdlame]

To be clear, I hate Uber's culture and my plan isn't exactly ethical, it's just the best way to turn them around in 180 days. Uber's culture is set, the time it would take to root out "bad apples" and then change the mindset of whole teams is longer than Uber's money will last. They've grown enough, they need to start making money, then once they've stabilized go on an intense housecleaning. It's also just my layman's opinion.

[atemerev]

Except of workplace attitude problems, which are fixable, the rest of the behavior are OK for a disruptive company. They are at war with taxi companies and regulators, the war is their business model.