In the past UBER was supposed to lead in shared rides(i.e. UberPool) , and their VC's talked about that as the thing that will bring UBER to replace private cars.

Currently, other companies seem to have the lead.And btw, when done well, this segment has a pretty strong network effects.

In the same way,if most of UBER's advantage is awareness and installs, credit card numbers, and common trip data, in the context of real self-driving cars, that's almost nothing:

Awareness and app install - a working self driving car will the miracle of the century. Everybody will hear about the company who offers it, constantly. from there the road to installs is short. And for such value as self-driving cars offer, entering a credit card number doesn't seem like a big deal.

As for common trip data? well at the very least Apple, Google, Moovit, Cellular ISP's, and maybe others have plenty of that(in one form or the other) to start.

But most importantly:time. Self-driving cars are a risky technology. it also takes time to scale manufacturing. so they'll probably be deployed relatively slowly. That gives the companies who own them enough time to not need UBER.

But UBER still has one strong card to play: flying cars.

As I recall, Travis Kalanick's overall goal to is reduce private car ownership. Driverless taxis would get Uber closer to that realization. However, my pessimistic view tells me that self-driving cars also grant Uber more control over the private transportation industry. And perhaps they could use that power -- some call it network effect -- to negotiate large-scale contracts with auto manufacturers and oil-and-gas companies.

Overall, as a consumer, I couldn't care less who is first to market, but which company offers the best quality-to-price point.

On another note, when self-driving cars need to refuel, is that payment going to be in USD or some cryptocurrency?

Lets be real, Travis ultimate goal is to be rich and powerful.

He saw private car ownership as counter-indicator to Ubers growth and thus his own wealth.

Wouldn't driverless taxi not be a good reason to buy a car yourself? Especially, when you don't have a driver license?

I did some back of the napkin calculations and a two car suburban family would save approximately $7000 using Uber to commute compared to owning a 15-20K second card over a 10 year period.

That's the market, if uber wants to scale they have to do that driverless.

$7k a year, or $7k total? no one in america is giving up their car for $700/year

Who is giving up a car?

Who will want to own, maintain, deal with parking, insure, etc etc a car for 10 years when you can have this year's model appear anywhere, anytime by just taking out your phone?

The 7k savings assume you bought a cheap car and kept it, I also did not factor tax & insurance. Savings increase dramatically if you were to finance a 35k+ 2nd car that many Americans in the burbs seem to do.

Uber loses money at that price.

Uber doesn't "scale", there is no economies of scale that kick in anywhere in their business model.

I don't understand what you 'mean at that price'

As for scale? There very much is efficiencies to be gained in becoming a true mass transit system.

But that means Uber takes on all the things that they currently offload on the drivers (car ownership, maintenance, etc).

By 'at that price's I mean Uber have currently lost 15 billion dollars subsidising taxi fares. They cannot sustain that.

I agree they can't sustain that. Without insight into their roadmap we can only speculate.

To the point of Uber maintaining driverless cars. What's to stop them going to a franchise model. Uhaul-like hubs where the cars go to get charged, cleaned etc?

Even if they aren't paying any drivers?

The drivers in Uber handle more than just the driving - they essentially handle all the other logistics of offering a taxi service. They keep the car clean, they handle any regular maintenance and servicing, they store the car when it's not in use, they manage registration and insurance, they manage any insurance claims, they fix any damage, they mop up the vomit, etc.

Once Uber goes self driving, they take on responsibility for all of these logistical activities, and they currently have no capability and capacity to do that. These activities only scale so far.

> Once Uber goes self driving, they take on responsibility for all of these logistical activities

Why would they need to do that. They're a software company, they have explicitly demonstrated no motivation to take on this work.

It's really not hard to envision them partnering with an existing bricks and mortar to provide those services - e.g. car rental companies provision through their hubs, or uhaul steps into the game and their franchise owners become uber hubs.

I really feel this is the obvious endgame, but who is to say.

Network effects (they already have many app installs and habitual users), and possibly an early mover advantage at the rate their program had been progressing.