[shaoonb]

Public transport is covered in ads, has a much higher ridership than rideshares (i.e. has many more eyeballs to sell, and much lower per-user costs) and isn't even close to being profitable from ad revenue.

[raverbashing]

Which is obvious to a lot of people except for SV "tech bros" apparently

> Free, ad-supported Uber rides are inevitable, and if Uber doesn’t do them, a different competitor – perhaps Google! – will do it.

This doesn't survive 5 min of serious analysis. Not everything that becomes cheap end up free

But hey, if they BS hard enough Sequoia might put a lot of money in them

[salgernon]

It’s Uber for timeshare pitches. You get a ride to the airport instead of a fruit basket for sitting through the pitch.

I imagine they would have the driver multitask as the presenter.

[rippercushions]

The blog author is a partner at Andreessen Horowitz.

[d3vmax]

All the more reason to be skeptical. These VC/Crypto boys live in a bubble. https://a16z.com is hard crypto!

[bobkazamakis]

...cool? does that position come with the ability to defy gravity or math?

[true_religion]

No, but it does mean that someone (e.g. the authors company) might just put money into the idea.

They don’t even need to BS very hard if they are a partner in the firm, and sponsor a “vetted” team that they think can pivot from something stupid to something profitable.