Posted on 03/19/2017 4:28:15 PM PDT by dynachrome
Jeff Jones, the president of Uber, is quitting the car-hailing company after less than a year. The move by the No. 2 exec, said sources, is directly related to the multiple controversies there, including explosive charges of sexism and sexual harassment.
(UPDATE: Uber confirmed the departure and will be sending a statement.
(UPDATE: Jones also confirmed the departure with a blistering assessment of the company. “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,” he said in a statement to Recode.)
Jones, said sources, determined that this was not the situation he signed on for, especially after Uber CEO Travis Kalanick announced a search for a new COO to help him right the very troubled ship.
(Excerpt) Read more at recode.net ...
I am confused as to how Uber is still losing so much money. They have dominated the space, do not need to advertise to get customers and have a favorable revenue share off the labor of contractors. Seems like they should be a cash generating machine.
Libturds knifing each other....
They could change the corporate name to Unter
Here in Austin, the Leftists ran Uber and Lyft out on a rail. Utterly vicious, considering how ‘progressive’ the lift concept is compared to high-speed rail and buses and cabs.
I mean they slammed down on them like Thor’s hammer. I wonder if it’s because criminals can get around to ‘tasks’ untraceably with lifts.
Uber is basically built around an app for gypsy cabs. I have said for a long time that its current business model is seriously flawed.
It is quite odd.
But what is a ‘gypsy’ cab? A ride is a ride is a ride.
“I am confused as to how Uber is still losing so much money. “
They are subsidizing drivers to gain market share.
That’s the point. As Uber has been forced to do more and more things to meet the legal requirements to operate all over the place (like providing supplemental insurance coverage for their drivers, for example), they are having a harder time competing with regular cabs and informal ride-sharing arrangements.
to try to create a big business with almost zero capital investment....is clever and can sometimes be achieved
but to try to do it without any liability for harm, accidents, or losses to customers, innocent bystanders, and yes “employees” too...
achieving THAT is extrememly difficult, extremely.
I think causing thousands of untrained and perhaps under-insured drivers to start carrying passengers around on the public roads..when there are so many accidents and injuries out there....has to be seen as a very high-risk endeavor, one that the legislatures and courts especially will not permit to continue on an essentially riskless basis
just my opinion, the business model is flawed (in that it fails to take into full consideration the risk profiles involved and the legal and political environment).
“Gypsy cab” = an unlicensed, unregulated cab operation. Also known in the cities as “jitneys”. They’ve mostly been banned from all but poor neighborhoods for decades.
It’s all fun and profit until the SJW crowd highjacks your business.
If there are cases where such drivers harm passengers that's clearly not a good thing.
Hmmm . . . 4 years as Target Chief Marketing Officer (CMO), 6 months at Uber . . . Where else can he spread his . . .
Paying drivers
Uber was doing fine while they were able to transfer their risk to third parties. When they have to start meeting their responsibilities, the numbers don’t work nearly as well.
Liability for negligence - they claimed that the drivers were independent contractors, not employees. So what happens when someone is injured. Certainly most private insurance isn’t going to cover the driver while they are using their car for hire (check your own policy). So Uber ended up having to insure to cover the risk.
Intentional wrongdoing - they pulled out of Austin because that city was going to require them to screen out criminals. Uber realized that that might strike a deadly blow to their business models. Other cities have let them get by with faked paperwork (see Dallas) or minimal screening so that rapists can have a field day. (see San Antonio, Orange County, Sydney, Australia - the list is quite long, and dates back to at least 2014). Eventually, risk management costs will catch up with them.
Pay and benefits - drivers in some cities are chafing under the ‘contractor’ designation, and seeking minimum wage and fair treatment. It’s a typical labor - business dispute, with most of the country club Republicans on FR siding with the company on that issue.
We do have a number of CCRs....
UBER - Used by mindless 20 YO’S.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.