Uber president Jeff Jones is quitting

http://www.recode.net/2017/3/19/14976110/uber-president-jeff-jones-quits-management-turmoil-ride-hailing-company?utm_campaign=www.recode.net&utm_content=entry&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

by fluxic • 9 years ago

372 227 9 years ago

recode.net

thedarkginger2• 9 years ago

"That was not the reason for Jones’ departure, sources said, even though it meant that Kalanick was bringing in a new exec who could outrank him. Instead, these sources said, Jones determined that the situation at the company was more problematic than he realized."

notyourwork5• 9 years ago

Why did you quote the article and not add a comment? I read that in the article so adding it here doesn't add any value to the discussion.

hyperbovine3• 9 years ago

I appreciate somebody extracting the money quote. I don't even remotely have time to read everything posted here.

was_boring• 9 years ago

While this is big for the company, I am curious what it means for recruitment of future executives at the company.

My understanding is at this level it's about personal connections and grooming an image. With that in mind, does it become harder to attract great executives on a go-forward basis for Uber?

mc32• 9 years ago

I don't think so. Within some circles that may be true, but if they cast a wide net, I don't think it should be an issue. Just as sinking ship companies are able to attract people who think they can rescue them, or prove themselves capable, I think Uber can find the same kinds of executives if they reach outside "tech".

jimmywanger7• 9 years ago

With that in mind, does it become harder to attract great executives

A good analogy would be attracting candidates for coaching positions in sports.

If you're a team in a bad situation, you'll have to settle for candidates that don't have the experience usually required for the position, or people who've done it before who haven't had huge success.

Also most great execs are already in a great position - why would they step into a bad situation unless you gave them a higher title or more power?

Basically you get either a placeholder or an unknown quantity. The unknown quantity is just that. They might be awesome (everybody has to have had a first head coaching job) or completely overwhelmed.

dharmon2• 9 years ago

There's an important difference: compensation.

If a losing team wants a winning coach, they will either have to settle for someone inexperienced, or pay up to get someone experienced in turnaround situations.

Same with companies, except with turnarounds the most substantial part of compensation is the company's stock. If the turnaround is successful, the executive will get wildly rich as the stock appreciates (and rightly so).

With Uber, the stock is greatly overvalued, which means anybody coming in is trying to turnaround the company, but only to maintain the current imaginary valuation. Where's the upside?

nananonymous• 9 years ago

Meta: how can you write an article about Uber's president leaving and leave out the massive lawsuit from Google's parent company?

spectre• 9 years ago

The lawsuit is from Waymo which is technically a sibling company to Google.

daenney3• 9 years ago

Because they're unrelated? Mixing in the Waymo suit does nothing to clarify the situation around Jones. Sure it's juicy, but it's a different story.

jonathankoren2• 9 years ago

Not necessarily. It broke within six months. It's believable that he didn't know anything about the parentage of Otto, and when the lawsuit hit, he realized just how screwed up of a situation he found himself in and bailed.

We can't say it is related, but we can't say it's not related either.

hwillis• 9 years ago

It's at least as related as the sexism controversy, which is mentioned. The title and subtitle both blame Uber's current turmoil and controversy, and the Alphabet suit may easily become the biggest issue. If the CEO conspired to steal tech from Waymo then the entire management structure at Uber is going to be in serious, serious trouble with its board and with the law.

chejazi2• 9 years ago

News need not always be editorializing.

CydeWeys4• 9 years ago

Uber doesn't have a prayer of rehabilitation until Kalanick himself goes. The rot goes straight up to him. Jeff Jones was a much more recent acquisition who came from staid corporate America (Target) -- I don't think he was the problem.

tyingq5• 9 years ago

The short tenure, job description, and his history makes this bit believable: "Jones determined that the situation at the company was more problematic than he realized."

TorKlingberg• 9 years ago

Yes, this clearly looks like Jones getting out before his reputation is sullied by further association with Uber's leadership.

kosei• 9 years ago

Not sure if this update came before the HN share, but this is a very explosive statement from Jones:

“It is now clear, however, that the beliefs and approach to leadership that have guided my career are inconsistent with what I saw and experienced at Uber, and I can no longer continue as president of the ride sharing business."

draw_down• 9 years ago

I love when sentences like that tell you everything you need to know without actually saying anything.

taude• 9 years ago

I agree. There's enough social awareness that people don't want to support a company run by jerks like Travis Kalanick. In an era with socially conscious consumers, integrity of leadership matters.

It is easy enough to switch to Lyft (I live in major metropolitan area) without any inconvenience. And the Lyft driver's I've talked with about all the controversy say they make more $$$ and are happier driving for Lyft.

rickycook• 9 years ago

i wish that were true outside the US :( i really really want lyft here in AU so that i can ditch uber

as it stands, the options are taxis and not getting private transport, which is the option i've taken when it's not too inconvenient

TheCowboy• 9 years ago

There is still the problem that without the competition that Uber provides, Lyft likely becomes a more typical company and begins increasing their margins in ways that customers and employees dislike.

dominotw• 9 years ago

There's enough social awareness that people don't want to support a company run by jerks like Travis Kalanick.

I asked 7-8 of my non tech/internet obsessed friends what they thought of recent uber scandals and if they stopped using uber. I got blank stares.

all of my techy friends know about uber news but not one has deleted uber.

Very very few actually care about any of it, people have short memory and outrage fatigue is real.

marssaxman3• 9 years ago

That's been my experience too - drivers like Lyft better, and Lyft doesn't seem to be run by assholes. I never actually deleted my Uber account, but I didn't bother to install the app when I bought a new phone; I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything.

xrayspec• 9 years ago

Oh please. Jeff Jones knew what he was signing up for.

To paraphrase Chris Rock, "that Uber didn't go crazy; that Uber went Uber"

Xyz9292929• 9 years ago

As far as I'm concerned, the rot is pervasive.. Even the drivers. My ex girlfriend was riding an uber and the driver exposed himself. She complained to uber and they claimed they fired him but after the recent revelations, I don't trust that company at all.

redm• 9 years ago

The "echo chamber" works both ways. When there is excitement and buzz, it drives startups to success like no where else. Apparently it works in reverse too and people love to see the big kid on the block take hits.

Analemma_• 9 years ago

Kalanick forgot that proverb we're taught as kids: "Be nice to the people you pass on the way up, because you'll be seeing them again on the way back down."

ivraatiems7• 9 years ago

Sorry, this is not just or mainly what's happening here. Every time an anti-Uber article comes up, someone pops in and says something to the effect of your comment, but it simply isn't true.

Uber is evil. They do evil things. They should not be supported. Yes, people like to see the titans fall, but people also like to see those who behave poorly get what they deserve for that behavior. That's what's happening here.

For reference, here is a list I compiled a while ago of all the scummy things Uber does that would make one glad to see it go.[1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13793923

Anderkent11• 9 years ago

Many items on that list aren't actually bad things, they're just described using language with negative connotations.

For example

Uber breaks laws all around the world to enrich itself, including allegedly trying to deceive government officials across the world.[4]

Detecting malicious users and protecting drivers by shadowbanning malicious users is neither illegal nor wrong. Uber has no legal nor moral obligation to help the governments entrap its drivers, or perform sting operations. [1]

It refuses to treat its drivers as true employees, even though legally they are considered such in many jurisdictions, and only complies when faced with court orders.[6][20]

Stupid jurisdiction should not be complied with above direct legal necessity. Treating uber drivers as full time employees hurts both the drivers and the company (why do you think uber driver pay got lower the more 'benefits' uber is required to provide them?).

People shitting on uber always seem to ignore how much public utility it provides in every town it enters. I remember ~10 years ago when I was in Warsaw, coming back from a new years eve party, and I had to walk ~4 hours to get back home because there was no night public transport in that area, and no taxies were available at all. I was in wasaw again 2 years ago, and in the meantime uber has moved in. Getting a drive back on NYE was trivial - maybe we had to wait 20 minutes, and pay ~4 times more than a taxi would have been (but of course there were no taxis available); but split 4 ways it was still a great deal.

There's a reason people choose to use uber; and there's a reason people choose to be uber drivers. And yes, it sucks to be a taxi driver who has bought his way into a monopoly by buying a permit, and now cannot recoup the cost that easily. I wish there was a way to compensate them at a cost of the people who benefited from bringing in license requirements in the first place. But I don't see one, and in the end I believe it's more important to dismantle the broken system.

[1] http://www.valuewalk.com/2017/03/greyball-uber-app/

partiallypro• 9 years ago

Outside of the sexual harassment claims, literally none of this is different than any other huge tech company out there. People want to see Uber failing has a lot more to do with narrative than reality. People have created a caricature out of Uber's failings and applied it to every aspect of the company. It's starting to feel like an agenda more than actual concerns, it's pretty annoying actually. Once Uber is gone, if it ever goes, people will move on to Lyft or the next threat to the status quo. AirBnB and Uber are the current enemies because they endanger established businesses more than anything else. They don't have heavy B2B relationships like the other big players (Amazon, Google, etc) so they are naturally the targets of business that have no interest in seeing them succeed. This has a long history of happening well before Uber existed, people want to protect their interests and create and build upon a narrative of rapacious heartlessness.

Applejinx3• 9 years ago

The question is whether market capital wants to see those who behave poorly get what they deserve for that behavior (and its idea of 'deserve' may be somewhat counterintuitive).

Evil is more profitable than good, because of externalities. The question is, how MUCH more profitable, and for how long? There are also patterns to consider which have to do with over-reaching, hubris and inability to work within any external context.

Uber is the kind of evil that doesn't play nicely with other evil. It's an extraordinary profit opportunity and treated as such, right up to the point where it explodes. The whole thing is based on conflict and dominating everything it touches, but it escalates where it doesn't have to: it can only continue to grow when it's not meaningfully opposed.

As such, Uber doing evil actions isn't meaningful, but Uber running afoul of Google in legal conflict is meaningful. Government and law aren't rich enough to oppose Uber, but Google is, and if Uber prevails against Google that drastically weakens Google.

I think it'll go the other way. Google is like a considerably more restrained Uber. They're in a position to do what governments and laws cannot.

aphextron3• 9 years ago

I really hope that Uber serves as a warning to companies who think they can ignore customer complaints. I've never dealt with such an opaque company in my entire life, in terms of getting any actual human support whatsoever regarding anything.

alex_anglin• 9 years ago

In the cases where I've had a sub-par experience with Uber in the past, I've had the opposite experience. Giving a poor rating for the trip triggered a response from a Uber employee who resolved the complaint. This was quite a while ago, so things may have changed and YMMV.

Jare• 9 years ago

Google wants to have a word with you. Or rather, they don't want to, and won't let you if you do.

JumpCrisscross• 9 years ago

I pay for Google Apps. Their phone support is excellent. They literally built a feature for me (compliance-related tags in Vault) within a few days of my call.

perlgeek• 9 years ago

Have you had a positive experience getting in contact with any human customer support person at Google?

ucaetano• 9 years ago

When I'm paying for a product, sure.

koolba• 9 years ago

I really hope that Uber serves as a warning to companies who think they can ignore customer complaints. I've never dealt with such an opaque company in my entire life, in terms of getting any actual human support whatsoever regarding anything.

I've had positive experiences interacting with Uber support. The few times I've contacted them via the app to report an issue with a ride I've gotten a response relatively quickly and I think every single time ended up with them crediting me back either the full value of the ride or at least a token amount. As a customer, I think Uber's been awesome.

But that's not what any of the recent talk about Uber is about. The issues are about being there as an employee, the culture they promote, and the values they espouse.

aphextron3• 9 years ago

But that's not what any of the recent talk about Uber is about. The issues are about being there as an employee, the culture they promote, and the values they espouse.

I really think it is related, though. Those values flow from the top down, and when executives set the tone for treating people unfairly the rest of the business will suffer down to the lowest level of employees.

Anderkent11• 9 years ago

What kind of issues have you had? Every time I emailed ubers customer support after an unsatisfactory or badly charged trip, I had the trip fully refunded, and the customer contact was pleasant and understanding.

jackgolding• 9 years ago

Every complaint I've sent has been acted on, every refund I ask for I get. Uber Eats seems to have much worst customer service than Uber in Australia anyway.

Fricken• 9 years ago

I think Uber's biggest problem is the broken relationships it has with so many of it's drivers. Their abuse of their labour force is the reason unions exist.

nomnombunty4• 9 years ago

It is a broken relationship that would be hard to fix. Uber doesn't even try to hide its intention to get rid of the drivers once it has its self driving cars fully deployed

tomcam2• 9 years ago

At current burn rate they won't survive long enough for that to happen.

tomcam2• 9 years ago

[Modern] Union disliker here--that is hella true. Uber has earned it

bsg754• 9 years ago

He is leaving after apparently deciding the current controversies are too much to handle.

Not exactly leadership material.

Edit: Apparently an unpopular opinion. Do those here think otherwise given he joined the company less than a year ago (and is thus not part of the original culture), but instead could try to repair the damage done by the uber-bro culture instead of looking for an easier paycheck?

untilHellbanned• 9 years ago

Don't you think he tried?

bsg754• 9 years ago

Maybe not hard enough: http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/16/14643634/uber-public-faceb...

"the session did not go over all that smoothly. In total, Jones answered only 12 questions on his public Facebook post"

Anderkent11• 9 years ago

Apparently an unpopular opinion. Do those here think otherwise given he joined the company less than a year ago (and is thus not part of the original culture), but instead could try to repair the damage done by the uber-bro culture instead of looking for an easier paycheck?

Maybe 'uber-bro culture' is not actually a thing, and he doesn't see a possible solution for the PR problems?

It's really hard to stop the hatetrain.

bsg754• 9 years ago

That depends on where the train is directed: At the company as a whole, or at another set of company heads who ignore serious or hard problems?

I doubt the entire company is tainted, but it does have issues that need to be led by people who will address in something other a Facebook AMA.

daenney3• 9 years ago

but instead could try to repair the damage done by the uber-bro culture instead of looking for an easier paycheck?

You seem to assume that b/c he left after half a year he didn't try and just wants to get easy money somewhere else. I wouldn't be so quick to that assumption and that's probably what makes your opinion unpopular.

If I'd feel that after half a year I hadn't gotten anywhere, I'd get out too. Regardless of the pay check since one way or another I'm not able to have any meaningful impact on the organisation and its mission. I don't know if that's the case, but that's an equally reasonable assumption given what we know about Uber's culture. However, since we don't know one way or another it might be nice to assume good faith over cop-out or incompetence.

btian• 9 years ago

you know he's not the CEO right?

bsg754• 9 years ago

Correct, he was president. Not exactly unempowered.

zaphar• 9 years ago

Your comment is probably getting downvoted because it makes some unvalidated implied assumptions that may not be true. I would absolutely leave a position like that if I discovered that the company didn't actual have the will to do what was necessary in order to fix the problems. A year would certainly be enough time to determine that and Jeff Jones departure could just as easily be read in that way rather than a lack of leadership.

On the other hand the article also says that he doesn't really like conflict so that it may be that the very toxic culture he would need to be fixing is distasteful enough to him that he just doesn't want to deal with it. This doesn't say anything disparaging about him other than perhaps that he is sane and rational and Uber has a really big culture problem.

jimmywanger7• 9 years ago

Not exactly leadership material.

The reason it's unpopular is because it's just that. An opinion with no inside view of the situation.

Many times, it's better to just bow out of a bad situation, if you're not given the power to change it, or if the situation was mis-represented to you, or both.

Chalking this up to not being leadership material is intellectually lazy and flip.

israrkhan• 9 years ago

Given that he quit just in six months, probably he did not even wait for his RSU grants to mature (1 year cliff for stock grants). The situation might be much worse that what appears.

onion2k• 9 years ago

I'd guess the real problem is that Jones can't change things without other upper management agreeing to his proposals, and they're not agreeing.

jonathankoren2• 9 years ago

I really don't think he needs the money after being CMO at Target.

This is what having fuck-you-money gets you: The ability to walk away not care about the financial consequences.

xapata• 9 years ago

Target CMO gets you 10s of millions ($7 million comp last year), or a bit over 100 million after a decade or so.

People are funny. Millionaires get billionaire-envy and are sometimes willing to risk jail to add the extra zeros.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajat_Gupta

xyzzy4• 9 years ago

Or maybe he thinks his current mansions, sports cars, and retirement funds are good enough?

trevyn• 9 years ago

Leadership compensation does not work in the same way as rank and file compensation.

jaytaylor• 9 years ago

Not necessarily true. I've seen it work both ways, so probably best to leave it at "we don't know the details of the compensation arrangement".

goseeastarwar2• 9 years ago

That's correct, but that has more to do with what happens at termination or liquidity events.

It's very likely he had to forfeit everything, including any signing bonus (1 year timebomb is standard).

MichaelBurge2• 9 years ago

I wonder if it's a good idea to apply to Uber. With all the controversy, you could argue for a pretty good salary bump or signing bonus to compensate.

Though, if executives are quitting after 6 months even before their stock vests, maybe it's more than just the outrage machine news clamoring for clicks and views.

CydeWeys4• 9 years ago

There's lots of other companies out there that are paying good salaries that don't have these problems. It doesn't make sense to me to seek out a ship that's taking on water to sign up for. I know some Uber employees and none of them are happy with the situation.

MichaelBurge2• 9 years ago

You're probably right. The self-driving car stuff sounded like fun too, but not if you're being sued over it.

aianus2• 9 years ago

Of course it makes sense, they would be more desperate to hire and you would have less competition from others who have ethical problems with Uber.

scottmcleod• 9 years ago

Uber's board is failing the company and the public right now.

fluxic• 9 years ago

Update 1:

Travis Kalanick just sent out a company-wide email. It essentially says after Uber said it was naming a COO, Jones decided to leave.

[0] https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843586902817099777

Update 2: Ex-president Jones makes statement

"I joined Uber because of its Mission [sic], and the challenge to build global capabilities that would help the company mature and thrive long-term.

"It is now clear, however, that the beliefs and approach to leadership that have guided my career are inconsistent with what I saw and experienced at Uber, and I can no longer continue as president of the ride sharing business.

"There are thousands of amazing people at the company, and I truly wish everyone well."

[1] https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843620240961368065

elvinyung• 9 years ago

Haha, from the follow-up tweets[1]:

one or two back-handed compliments in there. but alas.
(one imagines taking the high road would have been a better decision here. but hey, im not an exec)

[1] https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843587293428375553

nomnombunty4• 9 years ago

More from the follow up tweets in regards to John's statement to Recode[1]:

one imagines that the above statement wouldn't have come if the below email didn't include the passive aggression

[1] https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/843620898967969793

tyingq5• 9 years ago

The content of that internal email is at the bottom of this article: http://www.businessinsider.com/report-ubers-president-jeff-j...

Kalanick certainly wanted to put his spin on the reason for leaving.

"After we announced our intention to hire a COO, Jeff came to the tough decision that he doesn't see his future at Uber."

loudin• 9 years ago

Serious question - why hasn't the Uber board replaced Kalanick yet? While it is indisputable he successfully brought Uber to where it is now, it doesn't seem like he has the good judgement to be leading Uber at this stage of the company's lifecycle. Wouldn't the best thing for the company at this point be a complete overhaul of leadership?

whalesalad• 9 years ago

You say that -- and externally the place looks like a catastrophe -- but we don't know what's going on under the covers. If they saw him as a true risk he'd be gone by now.

Gargoyle4• 9 years ago

The question is when does he become a liability for the IPO aka VC exit?

throwaway20483• 9 years ago

Not if he controls the company (which by all appearences, he does)

dhruvrrp• 9 years ago

Because kalanick and early investor control the class B stocks, which means they control the voting power. Additionally kalanick has been outspoken about running uber himself so its unlikely that he'll step down.

throwaway20483• 9 years ago

Im guessing if uber crashes and burns, it will make investors re-evaluate stock-but-no-control deals.

throwawaysbdi• 9 years ago

Why replace him? He's publicly unpopular but the company is worth more than ever, and the investors care most about money.

Why get rid of him when they're plenty of ways to spin the narrative. Like making unrelated but scandalous sounding press releases, and finding an occasional fall guy

fredophile3• 9 years ago

Because when you have an unpopular leader making decisions that are unpopular with customers you lose those customers. I no longer use Uber and don't see myself using them again until he leaves.

More recently I've been considering closing my Amex card now that they've partnered with Uber.

prostoalex• 9 years ago

Because the boards act in structural manner, rather than by spur of emotion.

The new CEO will most likely get some key performance objectives related to current problems as well as revenue (or margin) growth.

If there's a reason to believe TK can commit and be evaluated against the same indicators, the incumbent CEO is a better choice since no time is wasted on onboarding and getting familiar with the business. If he refuses to commit or commits and is then unable to execute, now that stipulates a much more productive board discussion on how the current CEO should step away to let a "more mature" or "more tenured" CEO that can execute against those objectives.

So if any resignation is imminent, expect it in 3-6 months, not now.

beager• 9 years ago

I agree with respect to the behavior of boards, but the public relations imbroglio could prompt a more rash action. Interim executives could perform his duties for 3-6 months. I believe that.

To me, that the perception of Uber as a toxic company has not abated indicates that, even if the board and investors have tried to ameliorate the situation, they have little control over Kalanick. I'd be fairly upset to see my return hang in the balance over something like that, but I suppose your return is always hanging in the balance over something.

If I were an investor in Uber I would be more concerned about the Waymo/Otto business. If some injunction comes down with that, a huge amount of the value of Uber could evaporate. If their self-driving business stays on course and they oust Kalanick, I'm reasonably certain that they can deliver on a large portion of their valuation.

tyingq5• 9 years ago

Would be fun for the remaining bro culture if the board ousted Kalanick and installed Marissa Mayer.

drivingmenuts• 9 years ago

So she could bury the details of getting hacked? Again?

Seriously, if she is ever allowed to hold a paying job again, something is wrong with corporate culture.

gfosco• 9 years ago

Yeah, she might be able to finish destroying Uber quicker than Travis.

bogomipz3• 9 years ago

What is the role of "President" of the company? Where does that title fit in to an org chart or relate to the C-level execs? I am not familiar with this title in tech companies.

icelancer3• 9 years ago

I am the President of my company, and the founder. I gave up the CEO title to someone who bought a piece of my business. The way we split it is:

President (me): Head of corporate strategy, networking, and vision. (I also am the acting CTO but that's kind of not relevant here)

CEO (him): Fiscal policy, hiring planning, org chart projections, etc. He is the main executor of plans and also somewhat the Chief Revenue Officer. He's also the COO and his work is more meaningful in being the ops director, actually.

I loved giving up the CEO title. I don't want it back. Ever.

EDIT: Essentially the President title is flexible. In my company's case, I am the head of the entity and the buck stops with me for 85-90% of use cases across 30+ employees. But that's not always the case.

bogomipz3• 9 years ago

Thanks, interesting division of duties. I think as a title it's certainly more common in non-tech companies. Oddly though the VP title seems to be a dime a dozen. I have worked at many places where there was department with one or two people and one of them was the VP.

thrill2• 9 years ago

In many states there is no requirement (or legal recognition) of the CxO titles - to be incorporated there you need to name only a Secretary. All other titles are for business focus reasons.

bogomipz3• 9 years ago

Sure, Secretary is very old school. I also think the C titles are relatively new compared to President and Secretary.

throwaway3332• 9 years ago

This Uber story, where scandals just kept dropping struck me as very suspicious. Like Google just randomly got CCed by a supplier? You want me to believe that?

I was suspicious but who could be behind it, and why? Who is telling people to air the dirt that's undoubtedly very real, but that they have been just sitting on for a long time, at this particular moment?

I recently learned that Kalanick is very close to Trump, and given that this started just after the election that would seem the likeliest explanation.

fred_is_fred• 9 years ago

Are you claiming that Jeff Jones applied for a took a job with Uber just so he could resign 6 months later to create a controversy?

throwaway3331• 9 years ago

No, I didn't mean to imply that. I'd say either he is not part of the shadiness at all, or he left because someone applied pressure on him recently.

But this is just my guesswork.

(Switching account because I didn't store the old password... Wrote this password down)

toast0• 9 years ago

People in general send attachments to the wrong people, add the wrong person on a thread fairly often, or add someone to a thread on purpose without thinking about what was in all the quoted stuff that shouldn't be shared with that person. It's totally believable that it happened on accident. It also could have been a plausible accident on purpose by the person at the supplier. Even if the supplier disclosed on purpose though, it doesn't excuse the apparent conduct that was discovered because of the disclosure.

Overtonwindow• 9 years ago

Jones saw the writing on the wall...

rexreed• 9 years ago

I don't understand the obsession by the press, VCs, and even consumers for Uber. I know it has changed the dynamic of transportation for many people. I know it has changed the dynamic of self-employment for many people. I know it has changed the dynamic of regulation for many cities. Oh wait. Ok I get it now. All that said, it's remarkable that ride sharing is the pinnacle of startup valuation in this latest wave of startups.

yalogin• 9 years ago

If you are living in the Bay Area you would think Uber is a bad company. But I just met someone outside of the Bay and realized people love Uber. They have a lot of problems and a lot to do but they are still the market leader.

adjkant• 9 years ago

Coming from LA and Boston, plenty of people think Uber is a bad company but still use them for lack of better prices. Most people check Lyft and will go with it if cheaper/the same cost.

akinalci• 9 years ago

Unfortunately for them, their reputation in the Bay Area will make it harder for them to attract and retain talent and stay competitive in the long run.

cyberferret• 9 years ago

Cities that still don't have ride sharing services still see Uber as the shining Messiah coming to save them. Current shenanigans within the company are really not that well known outside of tech circles.

At present, in our city in North Australia, ride sharing services are still technically illegal, but Uber is campaigning hard against local government to get it overturned and the general population are behind them because the local taxi service stinks. Uber are even placing targeted ads on Facebook for local residents, and have a special page on their website just for our city residents to get information on the progress of the fight with our state govt. and local council.

blntechie• 9 years ago

I live outside the US. I'm a vocal critique of Uber - the company but I love Uber - the service. Evaluating their competitors where I live, it's pretty obvious Uber is a much more seamless and better customer oriented taxi experience than anything else in the market.

TulliusCicero• 9 years ago

Uber has certain ethical issues with its internal culture and with how it interfaces with local government/regulations, but the customer experience is really excellent compared to traditional taxis.

dkarapetyan• 9 years ago

Hypergrowth is a lot like cancer. Either they take swift action to excise all the toxic elements or it is going to be a slow and steady decline.

NicoJuicy• 9 years ago

In the assumption that any news is better then no news. Has the bad publicity contributed in a decline or increase of installations / usage for Uber?

brooksbp• 9 years ago

I love this thread. TK is loving this. GaryV is loving this too.

Go build an Uber. Do it. Please. I wish you all the successes of this world.

Worry about yourself, not Uber.

Uber president Jeff Jones is quitting

Related Stories