Sounds nice from a PR standpoint but you can't really compare the two companies based on revenue growth. Lyft is still a smaller company so in a global industry it's much easier for it to grow faster on a percentage basis. They're still expanding to cities where Uber already exists. If you started a rideshare company and gave 11 rides this month you'd be growing 10x faster than Lyft.
I agree. They just recently entered Canada (and it seems only one province), so of course they are going to have bigger revenue growth than Uber as they enter new markets.
A stretch: is Lyft going to use these metrics to go public before Uber to hype itself up?
It's funny you mention this. I know Uber has a lot of bad PR but my friend at Lyft was telling me how it's kind of an awkward situation where yeah sure Uber is a competitor for them but they have done so much for paving the way for ride-sharing being allowed in many different places.
but if they are entering markets where Uber already exists, wouldn't there users mainly be ex-uber users ? unlikely that all of them are new users. Unless people user both at the same time, but it could still eat into ubers revenue in those regions.
I remember when Uber was clearly dominant. That was over a year go. For the past two conferences I've been to, including the one I'm at now(Ember Conf), EVERYONE has been using Lyft.
It really is possible for a company to piss off enough people.
Anecdotally I haven't found this HN-wide negative sentiment of Uber (and narrative of its decline) to be shared anywhere else in the US.
My extended family in the southeast and northeast US is familiar with Uber (without using it), but they haven't heard of Lyft. When I lived in Chicago, most of my peers had Lyft, but Uber was the always the first choice.
Does anyone else see the same trend? The bay area certainly seems to be Lyft-dominant, but I haven't seen that anywhere else.
Uber has been ridiculously overvalued. They're core offering an app for hailing taxis. There's a dozen copycats that do it exactly as well as Uber. They are #1 by being first to market and establishing a strong brand. Their product is extremely vulnerable.
Agree with all the comments here about how the actual statistic here shouldn't lead one to the conclusion that it may on the surface. But... Every time I've visited a big city of the last few years, "Uber" has been the verb for just grabbing a ride-share. My last 2 visits to a big city over the law few months, "Lyft" has been the go-to that people talk about. I'm pretty sure the tide is shifting in Lyft's favor, this specific statistic and its flaws aside.
This is very anecdotal. I really wish we had data on market share, costs, revenues, etc. Obviously we won't have even most of the picture until both companies are public, but at this point it seems like all of these articles are just speculation. When I interned at Uber, media estimates were pretty inaccurate.
Well of course. What a dumb title. Lyft is smaller than Uber (drivers, user base, and operating markets). They have more room to accelerate their revenues because every time they add a market it has a larger impact on their added revenue. The title is just stupid because I can buy a cab tomorrow and also claim that my revenue is growing faster than Uber.
If you're in the US it's easy to forget that Uber is very world-wide and as a frequent traveller I use it nearly everywhere I go. Lyft is mostly US-only right now.
It's much nicer and easier to get an Uber at most airports and know you're not getting screwed, communicate your destination easily when you don't speak the same language and know that they take payment by card -- rather than arriving at the destination, having already asked if they take card payment, they said yes, then suddenly they don't.
My gut says Juno is dark horsing and about to make a splash. I have no proof for this outside of my gut, but the way they are laying up reminds me of early day uber. My main point of reference for this feeling is the drivers, if I get a lyft driver with 4.9 or 5.0 rating, they inevitably try to push Juno during the ride, however the value prop to the rider is somewhat compelling: the drivers are compensated to a higher degree (lower fee) however, the must maintain a 4.9 on other apps, and an equivalent on their app, consequently, the caliber of chauffeur on Juno is quite high.
the last i heard of juno, they were acquired and drivers were upset about being screwed over in the deal (their RSUs were almost worthless). Just googled around and couldn't find any updates, do you know what happened? Are they seen as driver friendly again?
I'm not sure what's impressive about growing revenue in an industry that has no obvious economies of scale. This seems like a case of "sure we lose money on every ride, but we'll make it up with volume!"
Looking at it another way, given a huge funding pool (say $10B) a modestly competent company could outpace both Uber and Lyft in revenue growth by the end of the year simply by subsidizing rides even more. The initial skepticism towards ride sharing services is gone and there's little keeping customers and drivers loyal to either Uber or Lyft.
UBER has already cemented a path around the world. He is facing legal battles in an attempt to demonstrate that his business is legitimate and beneficial to society. All others will have the facilities to travel in this vacuum.
But it will reach a point where the dispute will not be with the old business models related to mobility. And at this point, it will make sense to compare these companies. But at the moment it makes no sense to compare revenue.
That doesn't matter right now. It eventually matters, but when you're in a new category and fighting for marketshare and brand awareness, it's fine to invest in the form of losing money today. Nearly every company more complicated than "selling hours of labor" goes through such a phase.
(No doubt that some companies take it much too far, but profits are not critical in this stage of any online/mobile ride-hailing company.)
After I rode in an Uber with a self-proclaimed rapist driver, and Uber's response was "we'll consider limiting his access to uber", I uninstalled. Fortunately, the police took the case a little more seriously than Uber did.
Pardon the micro-rant, but this is yet another great example of fake news. It's everywhere.
Factually accurate, but none the less closer to bias / propaganda than truth. Unnecessary and inappropriate.
Techcrunch (and all others who choose to deny their journalistic responsibilities) should be embarrassed for being so willing to publish such click bait-y headlines.
Lukeas14|8 years ago
juicy-fruit|8 years ago
A stretch: is Lyft going to use these metrics to go public before Uber to hype itself up?
unknown|8 years ago
[deleted]
augbog|8 years ago
kayoone|8 years ago
unknown|8 years ago
[deleted]
__bee|8 years ago
chiefalchemist|8 years ago
ravenstine|8 years ago
It really is possible for a company to piss off enough people.
121789|8 years ago
My extended family in the southeast and northeast US is familiar with Uber (without using it), but they haven't heard of Lyft. When I lived in Chicago, most of my peers had Lyft, but Uber was the always the first choice.
Does anyone else see the same trend? The bay area certainly seems to be Lyft-dominant, but I haven't seen that anywhere else.
nikanj|8 years ago
Contrast e.g. Equifax, Comcast, SAP, etc, who've pissed of plenty of people with little consequences.
spaceflunky|8 years ago
Apple didn't sell the first smartphone or tablet...
Facebook wasn't the first social media site...
Amazon wasn't the first to sell shit online...
And Lyft wasn't the first ride-sharing app.
Maybe being first to market is overrated?
manojlds|8 years ago
tootie|8 years ago
atwebb|8 years ago
ipsum2|8 years ago
Where's the data for this?
> with a particularly strong Q4 during which its revenue outpaced Uber’s by 2.75x
How much revenue did Lyft pull in? Or Uber? This article isn't very good.
hcnews|8 years ago
TallGuyShort|8 years ago
LethargicStud|8 years ago
whoisjuan|8 years ago
lathiat|8 years ago
It's much nicer and easier to get an Uber at most airports and know you're not getting screwed, communicate your destination easily when you don't speak the same language and know that they take payment by card -- rather than arriving at the destination, having already asked if they take card payment, they said yes, then suddenly they don't.
m3kw9|8 years ago
rhino369|8 years ago
hawaiianbrah|8 years ago
neom|8 years ago
OiNG|8 years ago
rainbowmverse|8 years ago
AlexandrB|8 years ago
Looking at it another way, given a huge funding pool (say $10B) a modestly competent company could outpace both Uber and Lyft in revenue growth by the end of the year simply by subsidizing rides even more. The initial skepticism towards ride sharing services is gone and there's little keeping customers and drivers loyal to either Uber or Lyft.
vit05|8 years ago
But it will reach a point where the dispute will not be with the old business models related to mobility. And at this point, it will make sense to compare these companies. But at the moment it makes no sense to compare revenue.
unknown|8 years ago
[deleted]
meuk|8 years ago
It is a expression with no clearly defined meaning, and really shouldn't be used.
sebleon|8 years ago
It's 300%. If company A is growing 10% every month, and company B is growing 30% a month, people would call B's growth 3x faster (30/10=3).
unknown|8 years ago
[deleted]
dominotw|8 years ago
unknown|8 years ago
[deleted]
avar|8 years ago
zitterbewegung|8 years ago
sokoloff|8 years ago
(No doubt that some companies take it much too far, but profits are not critical in this stage of any online/mobile ride-hailing company.)
mushbino|8 years ago
banned1|8 years ago
TomK32|8 years ago
exabrial|8 years ago
chiefalchemist|8 years ago
Factually accurate, but none the less closer to bias / propaganda than truth. Unnecessary and inappropriate.
Techcrunch (and all others who choose to deny their journalistic responsibilities) should be embarrassed for being so willing to publish such click bait-y headlines.
Perhaps greed isn't so good after all?
heisnotanalien|8 years ago
bildung|8 years ago
Perhaps Uber should first try to get profitable.