You clearly have a viewpoint you're entrenched in - and you're pigeon holing this into that.
Uber is a bad investment to you - but a good investment to others. If in the end they successfully become one of the first firms to have a self-driving fleet, then they'll likely be able to make a tremendous return on their investment.
And maybe they won't, maybe they'll fold before then. But saying that this was all the fault of Fed policy is nonsense.
> If in the end they successfully become one of the first firms to have a self-driving fleet, then they'll likely be able to make a tremendous return on their investment.
Why? Everyone's building self-driving cars these days, if they have an advantage its not going to hold up for long. Then the car producers can simply do the same via their existing ride-sharing networks (car2go, DriveNow).
Largely the first mover advantage, I think. I'm sure once someone does it it'll be a (or it already is) a gold-rush, but the first to get to the finish line will realize the most gains initially.
I'm also not sure how relevant it is, but Uber has been successful in branding. It's not, "I'm going to ride share to the airport", it's usually, "I'm going to Uber to the airport."
But in the end - I have no idea :). It'll be interesting to see what happens!
Uber is not in the self-driving car business. They aren't in competition with car companies. They don't really have any competition now. I doubt that is going to change.
Uber is a bad investment to you - but a good investment to others. If in the end they successfully become one of the first firms to have a self-driving fleet, then they'll likely be able to make a tremendous return on their investment.
And maybe they won't, maybe they'll fold before then. But saying that this was all the fault of Fed policy is nonsense.