Skip to navigationSkip to content
Close
Uber Battles Ride-Sharing Startups in SoftBank ‘Family’

Uber Battles Ride-Sharing Startups in SoftBank ‘Family’

Read more on The Wall Street Journal

Contributions

  • Very confusing to have your own money being spent against your own money. Door Dash is a ridiculous investment, as was Lyft. Luckily half this money is definitely from the middle east. Pocket protectors of 16th century mindsets.

    Will also add that Uber will dominate, having an experienced CEO is important.

  • This happens to an extent in much smaller funds sometimes too. On paper, I kinda get the strategy as noted here by SoftBank, but in practice, I’d like to see an example where it works as intended. Meaning, we are talking about highly competitive execs and industries and companies focused on growth. How

    This happens to an extent in much smaller funds sometimes too. On paper, I kinda get the strategy as noted here by SoftBank, but in practice, I’d like to see an example where it works as intended. Meaning, we are talking about highly competitive execs and industries and companies focused on growth. How do they transcend the natural distrust of their competitor who wants the same thing? Feels to me like this story was “leaked/suggested” to journalists to communicate this strategy to a larger audience and perhaps even to the companies themselves. There is no need for SoftBank to go on record. Somethings up or inspired this.

  • Softbank plays by its own rules and no one else’s. Startups in Softbank’s path can either choose to take their money or face the apparently endless firehose of capital that SoftBank is ready to deploy to areas that it finds interesting. I do wonder at what point the increased competition (which is funded

    Softbank plays by its own rules and no one else’s. Startups in Softbank’s path can either choose to take their money or face the apparently endless firehose of capital that SoftBank is ready to deploy to areas that it finds interesting. I do wonder at what point the increased competition (which is funded by SoftBank itself) starts to have negative consequences on the fundamental of each of the companies as they have to divert ever increasing amount of capital to user acquisition and retention.

    There is a precedent in China where VCs and the Tencents and Alibabas of the region would invest into competing startups and eventually due to mounting losses, force them to merge in order to decrease the outflow of capital. With SoftBank investing so late into so many competitors there might already be too many entrenched interests in place to pull off such a globalized consolidation

  • I would not be comfortable sharing detailed performance or strategic information with someone who can also make money from my competitors. This strikes me as a very short term strategy that will drive away other entrepreneurs. The only way this to work is to have very strict separation of teams, but

    I would not be comfortable sharing detailed performance or strategic information with someone who can also make money from my competitors. This strikes me as a very short term strategy that will drive away other entrepreneurs. The only way this to work is to have very strict separation of teams, but that’s very hard to pull off.

  • In related news, MIT economists say they'll revisit a recent study on earnings among Uber and other ride-share services, after an Uber economist (yes, there is one) complained about the methodology. Nothing like Uber to fuel debate! You can read that story here: https://newspicks.us/news/621601

  • There’s a Chinese saying that roughly translates to: there’s no such thing under the sky as a lunch you eat with no strings attached. (i.e. there’s no such thing as a free lunch.) Taking a SoftBank deal seems great because it’s so much cash, but SoftBank has made it pretty clear they expect to wield

    There’s a Chinese saying that roughly translates to: there’s no such thing under the sky as a lunch you eat with no strings attached. (i.e. there’s no such thing as a free lunch.) Taking a SoftBank deal seems great because it’s so much cash, but SoftBank has made it pretty clear they expect to wield significant influence over their investments.

    He who holds the purse strings holds the power. 🤷‍♀️

  • I actually like SoftBank's approach, although I can definitely see both sides of the argument.

    If you can agree that *theoretically* company A will do better and innovate in a particular industry with more cash, and the same can be said for companies B and C, them by investing in companies A, B, and

    I actually like SoftBank's approach, although I can definitely see both sides of the argument.

    If you can agree that *theoretically* company A will do better and innovate in a particular industry with more cash, and the same can be said for companies B and C, them by investing in companies A, B, and C will make the industry stronger overall and give Softbank a larger share (in a stronger market). But that's all theory, not quite sure if it plays out like that.

  • The relationship between a company and its investors is perhaps one of the most important ingredients in its long term success. SoftBank’s approach is unique, and is certainly not one of exclusive, unconditional partnership— I don’t personally agree with it, but at least they’re transparent about their strategy.

  • "SoftBank is breaking these rules in part because it has so much money that it is more like “a private-equity buyout firm that’s looking to consolidate a market,” said Vinnie Lauria, a founder of Golden Gate Ventures, a Singapore-based venture-capital firm."