> Amazon or Google or any other cloud provider could spin up a service that pairs drivers with ride-seekers

I'm not sure I've ever seen the difficulty of starting a marketplace company with built-in network effects so vastly underestimated.

I think OP is just talking about the service-layer instead of the rest of the business model.

They already are such companies, and have deep experience at automating all aspects of customer service.

Open google maps. See that Uber icon? Swap it out for Waymo. Done. Google could even afford to hire drivers as actual employees and properly schedule them if they wanted to.

you are truly uninformed. There is so much more to the uber tech stack than this. Delivering rides efficiently, worldwide, at a scale of billions per year is not as easy as swapping out a button on google maps.

You don't have to do I worldwide, which is the problem for Uber. As a passenger, I only need a ride in one place; as a driver, I can only drive in one place. It doesn't cost a lot (for a company with deep pockets) to build the peer to peer stuff, but also lease a hundred cars and temp hire a few hundred people to seed the driver side of the marketplace in a smallish city. If you're Google and can easily drive the passenger side with Google maps integration, great. If you're someone else, get into the ride comparison apps, and put up some local ads. "Tired of Uber? Try Lesser!"

Take a smaller margin (or subsidize more, if the margin is already negative), build the driver side to be aware of and compatible with the reality that drivers are going to be driving for multiple services at once (with the exception of your seed drivers, maybe)

It probably could be provided by a 20% free time project at Google with their worldwide infrastructure, no?

>It probably could be provided by a 20% free time project at Google

Now there's a reference I have not heard in a long, long time.

Google doesn't still do that, do they?

Sure they do. It's not necessarily enshrined by some teams but as an individual initiative it is always possible.

It appears it's gone now from some quick Googling (the irony). My age is showing.

It still very much exists.

Source: I work there

thanks for the information. kind of weird it's not really publicized anymore. Any major products that came out recently as a result? if I recall, Google maps started out that way...

maybe you guys don't like to talk about it anymore though...

I heard some guys work on internal Haskell microservices trying to popularize the language within the company

The tech isn't the hard part

The human element isn't either. Google can offer ads to acquire drivers and riders for free through its various ad channels (mobile, search). They already own the verticals necessary.

Google is infamously bad at resolving or even acknowledging customer service problems.

In my experience, if there is an easy way, low risk for a company to make more money, then they will do it. So why haven't Amazon, Google, or such done so already? Do they just hate money?

Reasonable answers include:

- Google and friends don't perceive the ride-sharing market to be a profitable market to enter, in which case Uber may have problems, but competition from Google, Amazon, et all is not one of them.

- It actually isn't so simple to just "spin up" such a service. It would require a large investment in terms of development, regulatory hurdles, and marketing just to get a foot in the door, with a high level of risk that the effort doesn't succeed (see most all business ventures ever).

Uber has many problems. But competition from Google, Amazon, et all is not one of them. Lyft? Yes. Google, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and so on? No.

I feel like the biggest hurdle these other tech companies see is a lack of "disruption" without automated driving. If a human is still driving then you can't really ever make the system more efficient.

Most tech companies have made their billions by automating processes and undercutting the old school competition. If you can't automate driving you can't build a strong competitive advantage against traditional taxi businesses.

Uber realizes this and they're willing to do anything, no matter how unethical, to get self driving vehicles first. That will be the true market disruption, and likely winner-take-all because you will instantly have such a gigantic cost advantage.

That's why you see Ubers competitors all working on self-driving. They're trying to leapfrog the next obvious evolution of the transport business.

Why would Google Amazon enter a market with 1 massive competitor losing billions subsidizing its rides?

Why wouldn't they develop their own self-driving technology while at the same time assisting in the building of using ride sharing as a habit, and simply wait until uber goes out of business or retreats even further into "profitable" markets before unleashing their low cost self-driving fleet into those markets previously dominated by a heavily subsidized uber?

oh wait a minute ...

> Google or any other cloud provider could spin up a service that pairs drivers with ride-seekers.

People said the same thing about Google Plus and yet they completely failed. Its not so easy as it looks even if you have billions in the bank.

The General Counsel, Salle Yoo, was promoted to Chief Legal Officer.