|
|
|
|
|
by buddapalm
3230 days ago
|
|
They need to be in the self driving car game or the company has maybe a 7-10 year life span. Managing that innovation is necessary, and it's unclear they are optimizing around that. The other interpretation is this decision is entirely about managing short term to get to an IPO, so investors who have lost faith can cash out. The candidate they are considering fits that bill more closely. |
|
It's not at all unreasonable to think that the way to save Uber is to ruthlessly cut costs and focus on the business of fleet and driver management, without banking on the assumption that the drivers are all going to go away within a decade. They should certainly still be watching autonomous cars, and perhaps find someone to partner with the way Lyft has with Google/Waymo, but I'm not at all convinced that's a business they should actually be in.
(I also suspect that the belief that we're going to have "level five" autonomous cars within the decade is far too optimistic. Also, an awful lot of discussions apparently assume the vast majority of consumers will, as soon as it becomes practical, stop buying cars and switch to autonomous taxis for all transportation needs. At least among American consumers, I'm going to stamp that with "[citation needed]" until further notice.)