Uber Drivers Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Garage Forums

Uber suspends self-driving car program after Arizona crash

Jump to Latest
1 - 20 of 29 Posts

Uberx zoom

· Banned
Joined
·
1,031 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 · (Edited)
#5 ·
My comments are not centred on the technology, good or bad, about autonomous vehicles but what totally amazes me is that Uber are willing to piss away money at an alarming rate on something that is best left to the auto and sensor manufacturers. Uber do not belong in that space and while they remain there they will continue to lose money hand-over-fist
 
Discussion starter · #6 ·
Graham J said:
My comments are not centred on the technology, good or bad, about autonomous vehicles but what totally amazes me is that Uber are willing to piss away money at an alarming rate on something that is best left to the auto and sensor manufacturers. Uber do not belong in that space and while they remain there they will continue to lose money hand-over-fist
Click to expand...
Precisely.

Not to mention that the technology is mostly stolen from Google to begin with. What a mess.
 
#10 ·
Uberx zoom said:
Great technology they've got going. No allowance for other driver errors?

According to the Hearladsun:

The accident occurred when the other vehicle "failed to yield" while making a left turn, police said.
Click to expand...
At the risk of getting into the pros and cons of autonomous vehicles how many cars driven by human beings have been hit by other drivers who "failed to yield" which resulted in an accident?
 
#11 ·
Graham J said:
but what totally amazes me is that Uber are willing to piss away money at an alarming rate on something that is best left to the auto and sensor manufacturers
Click to expand...
Uber's (obvious) primary objective is to lower their staffing costs. Staffing costs are almost always the single biggest cost to business, bar perhaps the mining industry or others of that nature.

Their second and subsequent bonus to Uber would be to patent the technology and sell it to said car manufacturing industry on a royalty basis, that is essentially how their business model works after all, ie commissions.
 
#12 ·
Zero Sum Game said:
Uber's (obvious) primary objective is to lower their staffing costs. Staffing costs are almost always the single biggest cost to business, bar perhaps the mining industry or others of that nature.

Their second and subsequent bonus to Uber would be to patent the technology and sell it to said car manufacturing industry on a royalty basis, that is essentially how their business model works after all, ie commissions.
Click to expand...
While I agree that's Uber's end-game it is flawed on both accounts. Staffing costs are currently almost zero because they don't own cars and don't pay the drivers and on the other point the auto manufacturers will kill Uber in the technology race because guess what they are good at doing? They are good at designing and building cars and Uber are not
 
#13 · (Edited)
Graham J said:
While I agree that's Uber's end-game it is flawed on both accounts. Staffing costs are currently almost zero because they don't own cars and don't pay the drivers and on the other point the auto manufacturers will kill Uber in the technology race because guess what they are good at doing? They are good at designing and building cars and Uber are not
Click to expand...
You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm not picking a fight, but the current cost to Uber having drivers is 75% of their income. The bean-counters (accountants) at Uber have done their sums and in order for them to go down the self-driving path, rest assured, they're going to make more money. Remember, the R&D costs, vehicle purchases, maintenance etc will be amortised and written off, don't believe me, just look at the manufacturing industry as proof of concept.

Remember, with machines there no off days, no industrial action, no sick days, etc, etc....just machines working 24 hours per day 7 days per week.....humans simply can't compete.

Whoever patents the technology is usually determined by whoever pours most money into the venture. If Uber patent it and the car industry adopts it, Uber will receive a royalty from each and every car on the planet. Conversely, if the car industry patents it, Uber will be forced to pay the royalty to the patent holder.

Correction: Uber would make 75% more with driver-less cars.
 
Discussion starter · #14 · (Edited)
Zero Sum Game said:
Correction: Uber would make 75% more with driver-less cars.
Click to expand...
Sure they would. No car purchasing, Depreciation, maintenance, petrol, insurance, rego, road fines or the million and one other things drivers fork out of their own pockets every week.... really?

At current base rates Uber is making +/- the same $ they would have made with a fleet of driverless cars. Once you account for all car expenses you realize the driver is almost at break even with very little take home profit.

Currently the drivers are the muppets paying for all of the ride expenses.

Who do you think will have to pay for all of these expenses once you take the driver out of the equation?
 
#15 ·
Uber believes it is a technolgy company, not transportation. It has no choice but to look far ahead and consider potential competition from technology giants like Google and others. The same companies are currently developing driverless technology. Uber cannot allow itself to be left behind. The time another co.pany successfully deploys a well worked out driverless car tech, that would be the death of Uber.
 
#16 ·
Uberx zoom said:
Who do you think will have to pay for all of these expenses once you take the driver out of the equation?
Click to expand...
You need to read my post in its entirety. I was alluding to their income which would increase by 75%. I also, if you read my entire post, alluded to amortisation, ancillary expenses, core expenses etc.

onTheMove21 said:
The time another co.pany successfully deploys a well worked out driverless car tech, that would be the death of Uber.
Click to expand...
It wouldn't be the death of Uber, it would just cost Uber more to run their cars with it as they would be beholden to paying the company responsible for the tech.... in my opinion.
 
Discussion starter · #17 ·
Zero Sum Game said:
You need to read my post in its entirety. I was alluding to their income which would increase by 75%. I also, if you read my entire post, alluded to amortisation, ancillary expenses, core expenses etc.
Click to expand...
Their income may increase three folds but so are their expenses, exponentially!... and in a way that no creative accounting will ever be able to fully hide from the market. The market will look at clear profit after expenses. Yes, a massive turnover is always good but at the end of the day a company must show some profit OR the possibility of ever making a profit.
 
#18 ·
Zero Sum Game said:
You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm not picking a fight, but the current cost to Uber having drivers is 75% of their income.
Click to expand...
No offence because this is a very interesting topic and worthy of discussion. I don't disagree with your take on the end-game that no drivers would eventually mean more income for Uber albeit nowhere near 75%. My view is that Uber do not have the ability to win this race against far better suited companies. And I doubt anyone can claim that Uber are very good at anything except pissing away vast sums of other people's money on frivolous and stupid ventures into technology and businesses where they don't belong.

If Uber had been able to prove to me they were a credible company capable of making good decisions then perhaps I could be persuaded to believe they could finally patent the autonomous car. But Uber have shown to me time and time again they are not a credible company when they have to play by the rules
 
#19 ·
UberxZoom, I believe that one day in the far, far distant future autonomous vehicles will be a reality and personal ownership of cars will all but disappear to be replaced with fleets of vehicles being whistled up with your smart phone. These "cars" will be owned and operated by transportation companies (Uber will have been dispatched to history by then) but the cars will be built by auto manufacturers who, with their partners, will have developed the technology. Uber getting into the development of autonomous vehicles is, in my opinion, nonsensical! It would be like saying Silver Top taxis should have developed their own taxi instead of just buying them off Ford or Holden.

I believe we may see a very limited application of autonomous vehicles soon in car parks, specially designed housing estates etc. but for someone to whistle up a driverless Uber in Chapel Street on a Saturday night is not going to happen in our time and it certainly won't be a car that was developed by Uber
 
Discussion starter · #20 · (Edited)
I agree Graham. No doubt in my mind that driverless cars will eventually become the reality in 20-30 years. We are simply not ready right now technology, roads and legislation wise... too many years away.

Fun research but that's about all really... much like Google glass. It will eventually get shelved after a few more "the other" driver errors. A robot (with current technology) is still too dumb to anticipate trivial traffic surprises.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
About this Discussion
28 Replies
8 Participants
Last post:
Uberx zoom
Uber Drivers Forum
posts
7.9M
members
203K
Since
2014
A forum dedicated to Uber drivers and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about taxes, documents, visas, travel, car care, finances, banking, maintenance, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Los Angeles & Orange County Advice Toronto (Ontario) New York City Complaints