When they started, the taxi companies wouldn't have gone for it. They started adopting apps after their customers came to expect it.

That said, I think they always should have planned that sort of transition. They bet on self driving cars instead, which hasn't panned out.

Modesty is an underappreciated aspect of running a successful company. The endless pursuit of growth is usually a byproduct of ego or at the behest of some intangible idea of "creating shareholder value."

Just fucking create a killer product and work on refining that product to the best of your abilities. If you get bored, start a new company. You don't have to grow every company into the next Apple.

> The endless pursuit of growth is usually a byproduct of ego or at the behest of some intangible idea of "creating shareholder value."

Previous discussions here have repeatedly told me that it's a condition for or result of getting vc funding.

There is more to life, and indeed more to the economy, than "getting vc funding".

There is also such a thing as "HN bias".

I don’t think we need to jump to “these dummies can’t conceive of a world outside of VC”…

Uber already took a huge amount of VC funding, so mid-size strategies won’t work. Investors would rather risk the whole company on a 1% chance of becoming Google or Home Depot than take a 50% chance of becoming Applebees. Even though Applebees is presumably a nice, profitable business, those kind of numbers are not useful for the portfolio position they have Uber in.

That’s just the reality for the folks running Uber today. If they try to turn it into a mid-sized business, the board will fire them.

If I read the discussion charitably, someone up-thread wanted to shift the conversation to “what should’ve Uber done in 2012?” while their responders think they’re talking about “What can Uber do at this point?”

I don’t think you need to act like we’re incapable of thinking about building businesses smaller than Google.

You're absolutely correct. The fact you're being downvoted rather than rebutted speaks volumes.

You're talking about a tech company here, not a business that makes sense.

Yeah, file that under "creating shareholder value."

"Just fucking create a killer product and work on refining that product to the best of your abilities".

I'd argue that that is the exact reason why Apple is where it's at today.

Yes but then the ceo can't walk off with a gazillion dollars

And more importantly, they lose the ability to liken themselves to Steve Jobs. This is often cited as the final stage of social suicide for many founders.

> The endless pursuit of growth is usually a byproduct of ego or at the behest of some intangible idea of "creating shareholder value."

If you don't want to grow that's fine, but then don't go public and don't seek VC funding. Investors make money when you grow; they generally don't make much when you don't. Ergo, they will always be pushing you to grow.

And ironically I think that's where they may end up long term.

Aka Lyft ?