[jjfoooo6]

Three different flavors of big bet. Meta realizing their core business, while massive, has peaked, loudly reorienting their business around a dubious moonshot bet.

Google burning cash in a moonshot division, dubiously betting that creating startups within Google is easier than outside of it.

Uber/Lyft subsidizing customers for a long while to take over the market, which... pretty much worked? Of the three "big bets" this seems most promising. Even if the market decreases, it's not going away, nor is it going back to regional taxi companies.

[bin_bash]

I think you’re right. I couldn’t imagine using taxis when traveling for work ever again. Uber sends the receipt straight into Concur for me.

Pre-Uber I remember having to get Taxi drivers to write me a freehand paper receipt to expense.

[lumost]

Its worth considering that 3 is actually quite common within large companies as well. I can think of a few industries dominated by big tech that have never turned a profit or even positive free cash flow.

[ghaff]

The thing that actually puzzles me is that in the post-Kalanick era, Uber didn't more aggressively pivot to essentially being a taxi company where drivers supply their own vehicles. You've got a working app--how many people do you need to maintain/enhance it? Self-driving isn't happening in an economically interesting time horizon--certainly not reliable door-to-door in cities. So raise prices, cut costs, and have what's a fairly attractive taxi business for many places.

Of course, that may not have been what investors wanted to hear.