Microsoft Corp. is considering an investment in Uber Technologies Inc. at a valuation of about $50 billion, a person with knowledge of the matter said.
The WSJ confirms the report.
I’m not so sure what to think of Uber. They are disrupting the horrible, horrible taxi market with a clearly superior product – I loved using Uber when I was in New York late last year – but at the same time, they are incredibly slimy. Not sure I would want to be associated with a company like this.
Both companies have a history of questionable business practices. Maybe it’s a good match in some ways.
Yeah, MS took one look at how Uber operates and said “I like the cut of his jib.”
As someone who’s visually impaired, can’t drive, and lives in a big city, I very much appreciate Uber. It’s definitely cheaper than taking a cab, and it can take two hours or more using public transportation to get from one end of the city to the other.
When self-driving cars become a thing, I won’t need them anymore. But for the time being, I’ll just have to deal with them being slimy
Seconded. In fact, Uber drivers have consistently treated me better than cabbies and, perhaps even more important, have consistently been able to understand and speak English. Better treatment, better service, and at half the price of cabs? This is free market at work and, funny thing, the drivers love it too because they’re not being abused, threatened, and robbed by the government/taxi protectionist mafia. Many of the Uber and Lyft drivers here are former cabbies, in fact.
Uber threatened the livelihoods of ordinary taxi drivers. A 2014 report in my country:
http://www.rappler.com/nation/75284-philippines-uber-taxi-regulatio…
Then it now appears to operate legally:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_Uber%27s_service#P…
As long as Uber won’t compromise any local laws and not compete unfairly to taxi operators, it will be fine, but if not (which is the case historically) this is another disaster for MS.
Actually, taxi unions threatened the livelyhoods of taxi drivers. Price fixing, market abuse, crappy treatment of members… the list is almost too long in the specifics. Their response has always been to litigate rather than innovate and, regardless of what you think of Uber, the cat’s out of the bag now. They need to adapt or fail.
It seems that it is too hard to take in account the social effects of Uber’s business modell.
It is based on paying as little as possibele for work done, avoiding any kind of responsibility and neglecting the law.
Like the slavery, with which the dutch have a history.
A society where the group “in the middle” disappears, rich get richer and poor gets poorer is bound to collapse.
2000 years of human history can teach you that.
I expected a bit more social competence from you. I guess I am from another generation with other values.
And the social effects of taxi maffia model??? Taxis are not affordable for a lot of people, they are over regulated to keep prices high.
Uber low prices are very useful for visually impared people for example. Just read the @WorknMan post, there’s no so much to add.
Let the people choose what is good for them. Stop with the socialist bullshit.
Edited 2015-08-01 08:49 UTC
learn some history, it used to be educated at the age of 7, I guess you missed it
Don’t take it personal, I don’t like to fight just discuss ideas.
Uber is very useful for people that cannot afford a cab. Banning Uber to protect the privileges of some mafias doesn’t sound ok to me.
There’s a market for taxis and there’s a market for Uber. Let the people decide!! Why not?
“Let the people decide!! Why not?”
because there are laws to obey.
Well, I’d like to change the laws to give people more freedom and less privileges to mafias/unions/politics.
Really, I do try to find a REAL bad thing about Uber and I don’t… (and no, ruining taxi business is not a bad thing to me, It’s a good good thing).
I agree with you. At least in my country, Uber is effectively bringing competition into the taxi offering market, which up to now has been a very protected one, with unreasonably high prices and the conduct of many drivers being sometimes questionable (with them most often driving like tanks because or their “privileged” status…)
Many other markets would badly need the same treatment in my country… Let’s hope technology comes to help once more!
P.S. Also, Uber is the biggest company in this field but not the only one. Will they be able to ban all of them? I highly doubt that.
Edited 2015-08-01 21:03 UTC
In almost every country that I know (western Europe and South America) taxis are hyper-overpriced and the common non-rich people cannot use them very often (taxis are some kind of luxury and/or a trap for tourists, not a service for working class people).
Why taxis are so freaking expensive? because of the high-end technology needed to run the business? because of the high education required to drive a car?
No, just because it’s an artificially over-regulated business to avoid competition with the sole objective of keeping the prices high and protect unions/mafia privileges.
That’s the truth and that’s why Uber have all that horrible press against them (nobody knows exactly why, but Uber is evil!!! evil!!! dangerous!! hahaha).
And regarding that stupid mantra: “Uber is dangerous, We need taxi regulations to keep passengers secure”
Well… maybe Uber is more dangerous than a perfectly regulated taxi business… but think for a minute… other on-line services like Tinder, where random people meet to have sex, are much much more dangerous than taking a car… but did you hear so much bad press against Tinder?? Why Uber is so demonized?? Well… that’s the power of Unions. Just my 2 cents.
Think of regulations, in most cases that is needed. I your employer brings your wages down to 50%, you complain and seek justice, don’t you?
Laws are there to make a society function, breaking laws down can be a good thing but you seem to forget that there are certain rules about responsebilities and insurance.
How would you react if you are run down by a car and the owner is not insured so you can pay your hospital bills and suffer the loss of income after the disability?
Uber ignores the law, so it is a good thing it is forbidden in many civelized countries.
If they advertised themselves as a “taxi” then they would be breaking the law. As it is right now, in most places, they’re not. Why do you think the unions are trying to change those laws in the first place? Think about it. If they actually had broken the laws, they’d already be shut down. They’ll only be breaking the laws if the mafias get the laws changed.
Also, while laws are there to make a society function, laws are also there to protect those who made them. Never forget the second half of that equation before you drink the coolaid. It might just save your ass one day when you try starting a business that competes with someone more favored than yourself.
Oh for sure if there weren’t laws against murdering people I would certainly be on the loose putting down most fucking politicians and businessman ruining my country. And I know I wouldn’t be the only one, but then life would be chaos, one bad look to your neighbour and you are gone.
I’ve had way more cabbies around whom I’ve felt unsafe than Uber or Lyft drivers. Can’t comment on Sidecar because we don’t have them here. I think it’s the mutual rating system, honestly. Bad drivers, or those who behave inappropriately, get rated lower and consequently don’t get offered nearly as much. The same goes for passengers, at least for both Uber and Lyft. But then again, that’s putting the power in the hands of the people who use it, rather than the higher ups. We can’t have that, now can we? That might actually keep people honest.
If all that is left is Uber, then that isn’t competition.
If it were up to me, I would choose a company like Lyft.
Uber management is a bunch of [insert-favorite-profanity-here].
This. Those that can’t adapt to compete ultimately fail. This is as it should be.
You know, it surprises me that so many techies are so closed-minded about these issues. How do people who supposedly value our internet freedom and our digital privacy turn so far the other way when it comes to the non-digital world?
Heresy, sir. The people? Obviously they’re too stupid to decide, because they haven’t so far decided the way the taxi mafia wants them to. They must be protected from this decision, for their own good.
** Sarcasm tag around all of this, just in case.
The entire business plan of Uber involves encouraging drivers to break the law. eg taxi drivers in Australia pay about $10K/year for public liability insurance. For private cars the fee is about $500.
I think the presence of Uber is one of many evidences that the current free market system isn’t working well on a worldwide scale.
Wait. What? It’s evidence of exactly the opposite…
Consider that Uber may implode at any time when/if it’s outlawed all around the world
It is outlawed all around the world. Breaking laws tend to be illegal, and Uber is based on providing a cheaper service by breaking laws. It is just taking time to take them down.
Bullshit. What propaganda have you been reading? They’re not breaking any laws. They’re not advertising themselves as taxis. Uber connects us, the passengers, to drivers. I could just as easily post a wanted ad on Craigslist, though I’d not like to trust the people that respond to it to drive me anywhere.
It doesn’t matter in the end if you outlaw Uber. This cat’s out of the bag whether it’s Lyft, Uber, Sidecar, or some other service that takes their place. The Taxi’s best hope of survival is to adapt to this new model. They’ve learned that they can’t just treat us like shit and get away with it. Cry me a river.