[fwdpropaganda]

There's no barrier to entry.

Some people claim that there is a barrier to entry which is that "Uber has all the drivers". However every big city I go you see local players. Not only Lyft and Yandex, but regular cabs, or regular cabs dispatched by an app (as opposed to telephone) etc.

No barrier to entry.

[valuearb]

No barrier to entry, yet despite two years of the most horrendous (and self inflicted) press imaginable, Uber still has a massively dominant position?

Reminds me of another company with no barrier to entry, Coke. It’s massive profits led Sam awaiting to spend millions creating Sams Cola, which crushed Coke in taste tests and got massive distribution from the get-go. And utterly failed.

If you can understand the massive barriers to entry Coke really had, you’ll begin to understand how massive Uber’s competitive barriers are.

[mseebach]

Barrier to entry typically means something something physical or formal. Needing to build a billion dollar fab is a barrier to entry in the micro chip business, needing more than a decade of training is a barrier to entry to being a doctor. Having to produce a better product than your competitor isn't generally considering a barrier to entry, that's more on the competitive advantage side of things. Coca-Cola has an amazing brand, and that's very difficult to complete with. Uber works really, really well, there are a lot of details that aren't just "push button, get car". I've used used a few of the alternative apps, and while they generally clear the bar of "working", they are a long way from being as good as Uber. That said, it's a one way ratchet, and some of the apps are catching up quickly.

Sidenote on barriers to entry: one of the original meanings of "disruption" was the tearing down of barriers to allow new entry and competition in a field. Ubers steamrolling of medallion schemes constitutes such a kind of "disruption". Of course, once disrupted, there's no closing the door behind you.

[peteretep]

> Uber still has a massively dominant position

Are you confusing America for the world? Uber's position is not massively dominant in Europe, and they've pulled out of SE Asia with their tail between their legs because of a competitor.

[valuearb]

MyTaxi is neck and neck with Iber in Europe, but doesn’t exist in the US. Even after leaving a bunch of countries, overall Uber is by far the biggest rife sharing company in the first world. It’s beating Lyft in the US by more than 5-1.

[probe]

Can you elaborate more on the Coke and Uber comparison? Why did Coke win and maintain a competitive advantage, was it just brand?

[valuearb]

Cokes Brand was built on mouth feel, ie once someone develops a preference for Coke, they are generally immune to switching sodas. Coke did a ton of marketing to reinforce hat.

Uber’s moat is built on its brand as well, not just the massive awareness of their services, but the fact so many people have their app, and they have the most drivers. More drivers makes the customer experience that much better.

Just looking at app installs, it will take Lyft years and will cost hundreds of millions just to catch Uber in US app installs.

[nstart]

Agreed on this one. I'll also add, low barrier to clone but high barrier to localise. Both are not good for Uber.

Sri Lanka launched it's own (privately owned) ride hailing/sharing app ahead of Uber entering our market. A lot of drivers work with both companies, but Uber is being squeezed out bit by bit. There's a lot of money in the local player to be sure, but even then, it's crazy to think that the giant international player couldn't take on our local market all that well.

This is despite the local player doing all the hard work of training the market to understand how this concept works. Both drivers and riders needed significant investment. Uber came into a primed market and failed to capture it despite burning money on ridiculous bonuses for drivers at the start.

Recent sales in Asia prove this inability to capture localised markets is not a one off.