zlacker

Uber feels like such an apt comparison to OpenAI to me. The service they provide is obviously going to be absolutely huge, but no guarantees at all that they’ll win it or be last man standing. I don’t see a world in which generative AI doesn’t continue to be a massive disrupting force, but no particular reason to think Anthropic or OpenAI will still be independent entities in a few years.

I’m even more bearish on Uber than I used to be, as someone who’s used Grab and Careem and Bolt extensively, and seen Uber have to beat a retreat from SE Asia. If their more nimble competition get a foothold in the US they’re toast.

>>petese+(OP)
I feel like the value-proposition of Uber was three-fold.

1. Solving a pain-point of many people re: hailing a cab, via an app that works everywhere.

2. Using VC funds to (initially) pay drivers more than you, the customer, were paying them.

3. Ignoring local regulations and passing the savings/convenience on to you.

1 is nice but I don't think they established much of a moat (both drivers and customers are willing to use multiple apps); 2 isn't sustainable in the long-term, and they failed to leverage 3 to establishing a permanent right to operate as they had been in most markets.

I think this makes Uber an even more interesting benchmark for other unicorns, since besides "solving a real problem without establishing a moat" they are also often burning through VC cash to prop up their business model while ignoring some laws which they may not be able to get away with ignoring long-term.

>>saalwe+Ax
1 especially is a social function. Having to have a million different apps is terrible, but if there is too much competition for drivers it's inevitable to churn through apps because of marketplace pricing and rent seeking on all sides