HN user
How many launches has the Soyuz had?
Think how many more cycles a plane goes through a day / month / year / decade. Times that by the number of models of that plane out there.
Is this a joke? You think Uber China is truly "independent"?
Who do you think pulls the strings, dictates the strategy, provides the underlying technology?
Saying Uber China is "independent" is even more laughable than "Uber drivers are independent contractors".
I think your view is naive because you think Travis and his "strategy" have any bearing on Uber's long-term success in China.
The only strategy that matters is how to curry favor with, and kowtow to, the Chinese leadership and central to that strategy, unfortunately, is not being majority foreign owned/operated (especially by Americans).
My statements aren't "laughable" or "totally naive." You just want to be right huh?
Now you're just projecting.
Your view is in the minority, even here on HN. If you were to take this view to more China-centric online communities, you'll find even fewer supporters.
"Laughable" is mean-spirited, but "naive" is a fitting description.
Such as? Even if true they are running non-chinese OS software...
Huawei M8 is nice and well made.
Making the iPhone in China means they could make iPhones, not necessarily that they can design and build their own full stack phone without "borrowing" heavily from foreign cpetitors.
I generally agree with this, but you may be underestimating how quickly others can catch up in this globalized world.
Plus the blueprint has been well established by the other big Asian tech companies. Look at how quickly Samsung "caught up".
I respect that you have a different opinion but you shouldn't assume so easily.
You are assuming my opinion is easily formed, when it is based off of lots of experience in China and discussions with a wide network of people with even more experience in China.
Uber may succeed in China, but it will be at the blessing of the CCP (another HN commentator raises one possibility: if Chinese investors own a majority of the company). To think "Travis and his team" have any real control in China is - no offense - totally naive.
It's laughable not because of "their strategy", but because your statement displays a lack of understanding (complete imo) about how business is done (and has always been done) in China. It is a very naive view, made especially so by your "do you really think Travis would _allow_ ..." as if Travis has ANY control in China.
MS, Android, etc. those are outliers and every story has one. The reality is, the vast majority of foreign companies looking to dominate Chinese market share have met their demise.
I would say _especially_ so for companies that are displacing local operators.
Just think how mad the US taxi industry is about Uber. Now imagine if Uber is owned/operated by Jose in Mexico City. You think our politicians wouldn't regulate the hell out of it? You expect less from the Chinese?
In regards to Didi Kuaidi. Sure they'll be regulated too, but when it comes down to the wire who do you think the government will side with?
But Uber is not really blocked in China at all. They worked really actively with their government and even throw in a DC in China.
Uber is not blocked, for now. That can change in a whim. The Chinese government can simply create regulations that apply to them that do not apply to their local competitors. This has happened many times before in the past....
Unlike the fact that China still cannot make a smart phone as good as iPhone, or cannot make their own OS like windows, that's they Apple and MS thrived.
While the Chinese did not design the iPhone to say that they "cannot make a smart phone as good" is completely false. For one, the iPhone is largely manufactured in China and has been for a few generations now. Second, some of the best iphone competitors / android devices are being made by Chinese companies.
You really think Travis is going to lose in China? This isn't Google China in 2009. Travis partnered with the crazy guy who got Google kicked out of China.
You really think the Chinese government is going to hand over the country's taxi market to a foreign led/managed/owned company? LOL
The fact that you are comparing Travis to the CCP in the same sentence is laughable, as if he has some magical power that will allow him to defy papa Xi in his own country!
China is merely allowing Uber to experiment and establish the concept of ride-sharing in China. Once that happens they will steamroll them over using every trick in the book, including ironically, lots of regulation!
HN commentators are missing the point. Uber's strategy is lifted straight from Groupons playbook: they're expanding aggressively internationally to drive home the message that "HEY LOOK WE'RE A GLOBAL PLAY. WE'RE IN 42 CITIES IN CHINA!"
This will drive up the IPO value. By the time they get steamrolled by the local competitors or by the local regulators (likely both) they'll have sold off their shares to the dumb retail investor.
The fact that the heads of Uber China and its main local competitor are literally family members is very telling....
Founders can take more money off the table, but that doesn't solve for the bigger problem of down rounds mentioned in the article: employees leaving.
- Products that would violate known laws of physics or proven mathematical theorems. (Or sometimes even grade school math...)
Drop-Kicker just covered one such startup: http://drop-kicker.com/2016/01/ampy-move-teardown-and-review...
This is from three PHD engineering students from Northwestern.... over $1.5MM raised via Kickstarter and investors.
Hard to believe the founders (remember PHDs) are so naive to actually believe in their own advertising claims.
- They recruit their favorite McKinsey strategist - J Pearson - as CEO to change.
Oh and I'm sure he drove tons of money into consulting projects w/ McK. Who do you think helped him identify which companies to take over, build the pricing models to maximize profit, and devise the financial schemes needed to drive up the price of its share?
Behind every Enron, Valeant, etc. is a team of consultants...
Nevertheless, most institutions that have existed through human history no longer exist.
Interesting that you say that. I believe the China is the longest surviving political entity. It's been around for two thousand years...
There's no realistic world where China rises smoothly with no setbacks along the way. It's all but mathematically impossible by the nature of complex systems. It is reasonable to be concerned that their rise up to this point has also been unrealistically smooth. Communism has a track record of producing this apparent growth curve, after all.
Very true. My point is simply that growth is now in Asia. This is merely a bump in the road. The economic tide has changed in favor of the east. As an American its sad to state this, but its the truth.
Just look at tech. China has caught up in many many ways and starting to out innovate even the US. And they're just getting started.
I've yet to not be astonished by the pace of development and change in China, despite my frequent trips there since the mid-90s.
Especially in the hinterland... it's really night and day. Literally in a year you go from farms to skyscrapers. Crazy fast development.
The world is starting to notice though... now you see more Chinese middle-class tourists, more Chinese students (not the smart ones who just goto the ivies, but the rich mediocre students in community / for-profit / tertiary colleges), and real estate investors (which is starting to be a huge problem in Cali, PNW, etc.).
This is nothing but a road bump for China. The Chinese are hungry as hell. I don't really think the west fully appreciates their cultural drive.
The bigger story I don't see much mention of in the press is the growing dilemma facing Europe. Do they ally themselves with America or the growing East. This will grow to become a key political concern for the EU in the next 10-20-30 years.
India has a long ways to go before it catches up to China. Have you ever been? The differences in development are pretty stark.... even more so when you compare secondary cities. It's really night and day... not at all even comparable. Many Indian cities still lack decent plumbing. Westerners seem to equate India with China, some even seem to think that India is more developed on account of the english language skills and the growth of their services based economy. Couldn't be further from the truth.
Indians I know that have been to both are always surprised by how developed China is.
Westerners should travel more. It'll really open your eyes...
Naysayers have been predicting the demise of China for the past thirty years. See Gordon Chang, idiot extraordinaire.
The reality is that growth, in the long-run, is now in Asia (think of the hundreds of millions of Chinese still living in the countryside...).
This round of modernization (the third wave, after England, America+Western Europe) involves 4BN people led by India and China and they're just getting started. Take a pause and think of what that means. Four billion. BILLION.
We're entering the age of Asia. Just wait and see.
I think the bigger fear in China (at least amongst the leadership) is some crazy environmental disaster. Think of the hundreds of millions that live on the Yangtze... a massive flooding event that wipes up power/clean water is much more likely cause of revolution than an economic meltdown.
The US can barely handle Katrina... China is 10x more dense. Something like that would be death knell for CCP control.
Well they should at least be forthright with customers/patients. There are lots of anecdotal blog posts (one by former Apple vp of engineering) about the accuracy of their tests for example. Remember this is about people's health, so you can imagine the sensitivity here compared to your usual consumer type of startup.
In regards to the rest of your comment (as well as your other posts littering this thread), your not being difficult as so much as lazy :P
A quick Google search and 15 mins of reading will catch you up to speed about Theranos and all the (negative) attention they are currently receiving in the press. Start with the series of recent WSJ articles about Theranos.
Because it was an influencing factor in the initial media infatuation with Theranos.
If u goto their website a lot of the media and copy is very founder-specific. Almost like they are trying to build some cult of personality around her.
Lots of similar stories... Check out UBeam. It's basically Theranos-lite: outspoken female founder (also light on the technical credentials), revolutionary vision/product-promises (wireless charging), and tier one VCs (~$30mm raised from a16z, Marissa Mayer, Mark Cuban, etc).
Like Theranos, the story is coming apart at the seams... I haven't seen this discussed here but UBeam is quietly raising another round via some Israeli equity crowdfunding site. Crazy!!! This after raising Series A from a16z!
Will be interesting to see how many of these unicorn type startups are around this time next year.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and view. I appreciate the feedback and your even-handed moderation.
I don't know Ryan, but I've been observing PH for some time now. My opinions and thoughts are from these observations and those of others in the community.
I'm sure Ryan is a good person, with good intentions. Those good intentions stands in stark contrast to how PH works today. There have been other PH critics and from what I've seen RH has not been super open to those criticisms, and in fact, even going so far as to dismiss any critics as "haters" (which I think is a bit of a mislabel since many of his critics are in fact fans that are just opposed to the lack of transparency).
So I think given, its fair to address these failings. Perhaps I can use nicer language, but I trust that Ryan is a mature adult and can take it.
I do see your point about people saying mean things and how that can hurt, but c'mon, life is not fair or kind or nice. And we're not delicate butterflies.
Putting ourselves out there (to be celebrated and vilified) is part of the very nature of entrepreneurship / creation. I see the problems of suicides and mental health in our community (and I've definitely experienced and am still experiencing it first hand), but being overly cautious in our words to not-offend is not a solution to this problem. Somewhat off-topic but related, South Park this season did a great job of making fun of this.
I'm not saying that PG has built a cult of personality around himself, but rather around the narrative of the ethical, hard-working, pull your own bootstraps, outsider hacker hero.
Think Steve Jobs, Zuck, etc.
I've edited my post so that it appears less of a personal attack.
I think my critique is fair, though the delivery could use improvement (hence my edits).
PH is a for-profit company that helps users discover new products, yet controls and hides the process for how voting, submission, etc., work. It's a fair critique to question if the point of PH is to derive value for themselves from establishing themselves as gatekeepers rather than generating value in a more "normal" sense.
Meritocracy, transparency, and fairness are values that are particularly held in high esteem in the valley and here on HN. So I think those who run contrary to this, should be exposed to the harshest of scrutiny.
We need to keep each other honest. RH might construe this as "hating" but I think it's fair game.
I feel the point of PH is not to create a real business in the sense of earning money by selling you a product or service, but rather to establish personal brand equity and influencing power of the management team.
This can be useful for future projects (such as finding funding), to increase their standing in the SV community, and to establish themselves as marquee valley power brokers.
In this sense, it doesn't make much sense to add more transparency and voting control to ordinary users.
This is pure speculation and assumes the worst. So take this with a grain of salt.
This is somewhat true. There are far more former founders in the VC ranks than 15-20-30 years ago when it was dominated by old-crust finance, old money types.
That said, the vast majority of the new incoming class of VCs (think associates, VPs, etc.) are mostly freshly minted MBAs with 2-3 years of post college experience, typically spent at a management consultancy, investment bank (or related prestigious front-office work at PEs, HFs, etc.), or in corporate strategy for a F500.
These people are definitely smart, with great pedigrees from the best schools. I'm just not sure they know a damn thing about the nitty gritty work of building a company. These are people who sat in boardrooms hunched over excel models and used to scheduling a million meetings to discuss strategy. Not rolling up their sleeves and executing.
I say all of this as someone with this background and with many peers who fit this mold.
Fred Wilson and especially PG have created a dangerous cult of personality around the narrative of the ethical hacker.
Young folks in their 20s and 30s have unfortunately fallen for this narrative hook, line, and sink.
It's very sad when you think of all the wasted man hours, much of it during one's prime, spent pursuing this startup game—inspired in large part by writings from VCs like PG and FW.
PG and Sama present this picture of YC and SV being a place of meritocracy, that aspires to be free of racial or gender bias, where everyone is working on ethical world/life-changing projects.
Old-timers know this is a lie. New-comers are starting to uncover the truth themselves. Those of you who live in SV... just ask yourself how important it is these days where you went to school, what places you worked at, who you know, etc. I was at a hip SF bar the other day. Reminded me totally of DC. Everyone you meet, the same questions:
So what do you do? Where do you goto school? Where do you work?
PH Is the ultimate bubble startup. A literal circlejerk wrapped in some clean CSS and nice JS.
Get used to shit like this as increasingly more MBAs flock to the valley...
For those older in the community, the archetype of the honorable hacker - does it still exist?
Hard to find the Wozs of the world in the sea of douchetastic MBAs and former consultant/bankers. My personal favorite is the wave of MBA VC Associates every summer and fall.
Recently had dinner with a founder who kept on going about his "personal brand" and leveraging that to waste other peoples' money until he struck it big!
That is not part, it is ALL that you are paying for.
What is the difference between McK and Deloitte? One has Harvard grads the other has Cornell grads. The analysis is the same, but one is just wrapped up in a prettier package and more prestige.
At the top tier firms, the creation of slides, charts, etc is usually outsourced to a back office dedicated to the job. I'm not sure if this is still the case at McK, but this office used to be stationed in the developing world...
Consultants would draw and describe what they wanted, goto bed, and awake to slides, charts in their inbox.
Same thing with models. Most firms have "rockstar excel jockeys" (usually analysts/associates/etc.) that are pimped out to project teams to serve this singular role (making models, building business cases, etc.).
Management consulting, such a surreal profession...
I spent a few years as a management consultant. Consultants are almost never hired to provide truly objective analysis. In most cases, they're hired to "back-up the viewpoint of a given executive". This is done by the executive to hedge the political risk required to go through with their action. They can point to McK when they defend their strategy to the board and then throw them under the bus if things don't pan out.
The rewards for the consultant are high fees and living a luxe lifestyle of staying at high end hotels, traveling first class, and dining at michelin starred restaurants (all of course on the client's dime). Plus of course guaranteed future work. Even if the project tanks and the executive is fired, they'll be sure to hire McK again at their next gig.
What most people don't realize is that consulting engagements are a careful collaboration between consultant and client. The findings are almost always driven by an iterative process where you go through review cycles with the buyer until you reach your "objective" conclusions, which by the very nature of how the work is performed, is totally subjective and biased. Doubly so for turnaround projects like this one. (not to mention that consultants are constantly trying to recycle previously performed analysis, regardless if it at all fits or applies in the target project).
Management consultant is the biggest circlejerk profession. Even moreso IMO than ibanking. Classic self-serving MBA type job. Management consultants are to entrepreneurs what food critics are to chefs.
But but but Rumsfeld and Kissinger told me it was a sure thing!