Glede Uberja je potrebno prebrati tale clanek iz FT Alphavilla:

ftalphaville.ft.com/...-kalanick/

Poudarek "more efficient competitors" je moj. Skratka, kako lahko ena taxi sluzba zahteva tako ogromen kapitalski vlozek? Zato ker ne poskusa izriniti manj konkurencnih ponudnikov iz trga, ampak mora, da ji bo poslovni model zalaufal, izriniti bolj konkurencne, to je pa strasansko drago.

Uber’s strategy was always to skip the hard “create real economic value” parts of this process, and focus strictly on the pursuit of artificial market power that global dominance would provide. As noted, Uber’s $13 billion investment base was used to fund the predatory competition needed to drive more efficient competitors out of business. This was 1600 times the investment funding Amazon needed prior to its IPO because Amazon could fund its growth out of positive cash flow. By contrast, Uber’s carefully crafted “narrative” allowed it to pursue predatory competition for seven years without serious scrutiny of its financial results or whether its anticipated dominance would improve industry efficiency or consumer welfare.


in se en dragulj (poudarek FT Alphaville)

Kalanick’s management culture, while repulsive on many levels, was actually brilliantly aligned with its business strategy and its investors’ objectives. Companies that can make money in competitive markets by creating real economic value do not have to create ruthless, hyper-competitive cultures where there are no constraints on management behavior as long as they are totally loyal to the CEO’s vision and can rapidly capture share from more efficient competitors. None of Uber’s bad behavior was aberrant—it was a completely integral part of its business strategy. Without this culture, Uber would have never grown as rapidly as it has, and would have never had any hope of industry dominance.