Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses China Transportation

Uber and Didi Call a Truce In China With a $35 Billion Deal (recode.net) 45

Kara Swisher, reporting for Recode: Uber, which has been spending hugely in China over the last two years, has folded, striking a deal in which it will merge its Chinese operations with its main rival there, Didi Chuxing. Under terms of the deal, Uber China, the ride-hailing company's Chinese subsidiary, will be part of a larger Didi company valued at $35 billion. Uber gets a 20 percent stake in that -- Didi's previous valuation was $28 billion. That's a $7 billion value for upward of $2 billion that Uber has frittered away, um, spent there. In turn, Didi will invest in Uber at a valuation of almost $70 billion. That was about the value of Uber's last round. Now, everyone owns everyone everywhere.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Uber and Didi Call a Truce In China With a $35 Billion Deal

Comments Filter:
  • Frittered Away? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Diss Champ ( 934796 ) on Monday August 01, 2016 @09:08AM (#52621129)

    If they managed to get a stake worth $7 billion from spending $2 billion, that $2 billion is arguably well spent, even if the actually places the money went look silly.

    • In Communist China stake get you !
    • Yeah, but the running gag is this 35 and 70 billion dollar "valuation" scam, which is phonier than a three dollar bill. How can anybody believe this shit? It has to be just the number the taxpayers will pay out in the next set of Wall Street Bailouts... Once again we are being set up as pansies during an election year grift.

    • Re:Frittered Away? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by whoever57 ( 658626 ) on Monday August 01, 2016 @12:08PM (#52622283) Journal

      If they managed to get a stake worth $7 billion from spending $2 billion, that $2 billion is arguably well spent, even if the actually places the money went look silly.

      The problem is that the $2B spent is cold, hard cash that came from investors, while the $7B valuation is just an estimate, based on what a few people think. It may prove to be ephemeral.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    For everything that Uber is good for a rider. It's bad for the industry as a whole. It's driven down rates, but at the same time ignored regulations, driver pay, and uniform service. When you basically have a short and quick application, no significant back ground check because myself was approved to drive even before being approved by Checkr the company doing the background check. This sends up red flags in so many ways, and now Uber is raising the percentage they keep from rates all the while reducing rat

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by AvitarX ( 172628 )

      As someone in a smaller market, the cost is a very minor part of Uber.

      There's also the fact that I can actually get a ride.

      I've waited 90 minutes for a cab, while Uber in the same location same time of night is always under 10.

      I'd happily pay 25% more than cabs for Uber (and when there's surge pricing I often pay more than that even), cabs aren't worth it (in Philadelphia outside of center city, in northern Delaware, and in New Orleans. In San Fransisco, I'd use the Uber app, but often just to hail a cab.)

  • If the taxi regulations are good for anything, it's keeping out slimeball business tactics like this.
  • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Monday August 01, 2016 @09:29AM (#52621279)

    Whenever China finds out that something you do is profitable, they'll sure find a way to wrest it from your hands. In the end, anything that's profitable in China has to be in Chinese hands, in one way or another. If nothing else, you'll be forced into a joint-venture with a Chinese "partner". With "partner" being something akin to being married in a shotgun wedding.

    • That's their business model since 40 years now and its working well.

  • same china that where helping some makes you liable so people just keep running the same person over.

    Uber will work good there

  • by Anonymous Coward

    In a different article it was called "ride-sharing".

    Why don't you just call it what it really is - an unlicensed, unregulated taxi company.

    • In a different article it was called "ride-sharing".

      Why don't you just call it what it really is - an unlicensed, unregulated taxi company.

      That would be a better description. The passenger hails the ride, the company responds to the hail with a driver. So its neither a ride-hailing nor a ride-sharing company, it is a ride-selling company.

  • Trump is right China forces you have to have them own parts of your company to be able to sell there. But we can't do the same hear.

It is now pitch dark. If you proceed, you will likely fall into a pit.

Working...