[ad_1]
<div _ngcontent-c14 = "" innerhtml = "
Uber autonomous vehicle
TNW
The fear of running out (FOMO) is the only rational reason why Toyota and Denso would spend $ 667 million on such a terrible badet. & Nbsp; In addition, the only hope that this billion does not disappear in a black hole is that Uber buys one. its abundant rivals and clearly superior, self-driving.
Uber said it raised $ 1 billion from a group of mainly Japanese investors by selling shares in its $ 7.25 billion autonomous driving unit that was melting the spirits. & Nbsp;The badessment melt& nbsp; because, based on the available data, Uber's autonomous driving unit has virtually no value. & nbsp;Toyota and Denso together invest $ 667 million, with Vision Fund's Softbank fund making up the balance ($ 333 million).
The problems with Uber's autonomous driving solution are legion, but here are the top three:
First, the performance:& nbsp;The available data indicate a poor quality offer in 2016, which has significantly deteriorated in 2018. In 2016, Uber was multiplied by 5,000 compared to Waymo, with approximately one disengagement per kilometer traveled (see here). Uber has gone back in the last two years, as in 2018 (see hereThe performance of Uber deteriorated by a factor of 3, its vehicles having suffered 3 disengagements for each kilometer traveled. Uber's offer now stands at 31,570 times on Waymo.
Secondly, intellectual property:& nbsp;Events indicate that the quality of Uber's intellectual property in autonomous driving is very bad. Uber was the subject of a lawsuit in 2017, where Waymo alleged that Uber had stolen part of his intellectual property. The case was settled amicably in 2018, with no blame on either side, but it is obvious that Uber was on the losing side. Uber paid Waymo $ 245 million in Uber shares and promised not to use its hardware or software in its standalone products. At the time, RFM was of the view that Waymo's intellectual property had not really helped Uber's offer, as it was by far the lowest-performing company tested in California (see here).
However, it seems that the main reason for Uber's significant performance degradation is the withdrawal of Waymo IP from its offering. This strongly implies that Uber's own intellectual property in autonomous driving is far worse than what RFM had estimated and perhaps almost worthless. IP software is the most valuable component of any standalone driving offer, as most hardware is available and commercially available. Therefore, in any rational evaluation of investments where there is no revenue, the intellectual property of the software will be the basis on which any evaluation argument will be advanced. How this IP address is valued at $ 7.5 billion in a complete mystery, especially compared to its best (see below).
Third, competition:& nbsp;There are many autonomous driving offers that we are working on today. Some are part of big companies like Google, Baidu or BMW, while others are standalone start-ups such as Zoox or Pony.ai. In 2018, 29 companies tested the autonomous driving in California and all have at least 3 times better performance than Uber. On the basis of the current performance and trajectory, it should be concluded that if Uber operated an autonomous fleet as a service, it would be a disaster. Therefore, something must change and the only credible option is an acquisition.
Therefore, there are 2 conclusions:
First of all, FOMO:& nbsp;the reported valuation of $ 7.5 billion makes no sense. Zoox, which RFM ranked # 3 in self-driving, raised funds in July 2018 for $ 3.2 billion. It is absurd to see that intellectual property whose material quality is obviously worse can be worth twice as much. NIO, Yandex & amp; pony.ai are all clearly superior to Uber's offer, but their self-driving badet is also valued at a fraction of $ 7.5 billion.
Therefore, one can only conclude that it is the fear of failure (FOMO) that has convinced Japanese investors to pay much more than what this badet is worth. & Nbsp;That says a lot about the power of the Uber brand despite its recent difficulties. According to RFM, they should have looked at the other abundant and superior offers.
Second, the acquisition: The only hope for Uber to have a credible self-driving offer is to close what it has built and buy one of the other players. Zoox and Nuro would be the best choices for RFM baduming Uber can not buy one of the Chinese players, but there is much more to see in the middle of the pack. Moreover, with a very distant autonomous driving, there is a prospect of round sales, as the mediocre end of the race is short of money and no longer increases.
Acquisition is the only rational use of the product because doubling the worst available supply seems like a disaster.
">
Uber autonomous vehicle
TNW
The fear of running out (FOMO) is the only rational reason why Toyota and Denso would invest $ 667 million in such a terrible badet. In addition, the only hope for this billion people does not disappear in a black hole is for Uber to buy one of its abundant and significantly superior rivals, endowed with the same energy.
Uber said it raised $ 1 billion from a group of mainly Japanese investors by selling shares in its $ 7.25 billion self – contained driving unit that had melted the mind. The badessment melt because, based on the available data, Uber's autonomous driving unit has virtually no value. Toyota and Denso together invest $ 667 million, with Vision Fund's Softbank fund making up the balance ($ 333 million).
The problems with Uber's autonomous driving solution are legion, but here are the top three:
First, the performance: Available data indicate a poor supply in 2016, which has significantly deteriorated in 2018. In 2016, Uber has outperformed Waymo by a factor of 5,000 times, with roughly one disengagement per kilometer traveled (see right here). Uber has made a comeback in the past two years, as in 2018 (see here), the performance of Uber have deteriorated by a factor of 3, its vehicles having suffered 3 disengagements per kilometer traveled. Uber's offer now stands at 31,570 times on Waymo.
Secondly, intellectual property: Events indicate that the quality of Uber's intellectual property in autonomous driving is very bad. Uber was the subject of a lawsuit in 2017, where Waymo alleged that Uber had stolen part of his intellectual property. The case was settled amicably in 2018, with no blame on either side, but it is obvious that Uber was on the losing side. Uber paid Waymo $ 245 million in Uber shares and promised not to use its hardware or software in its standalone products. At the time, RFM was of the opinion that Waymo's intellectual property had not really helped Uber, as it was by far the lowest-performing company tested in California (see here).
However, it seems that the main reason for Uber's significant performance degradation is the withdrawal of Waymo IP from its offering. This strongly implies that Uber's own intellectual property in autonomous driving is far worse than what RFM had estimated and perhaps almost worthless. IP software is the most valuable component of any standalone driving offer, as most hardware is available and commercially available. Therefore, in any rational evaluation of investments where there is no revenue, the intellectual property of the software will be the basis on which any evaluation argument will be advanced. How this IP address is valued at $ 7.5 billion in a complete mystery, especially compared to its best (see below).
Third, competition: There are many autonomous driving offers that we are working on today. Some are part of big companies like Google, Baidu or BMW, while others are standalone start-ups such as Zoox or Pony.ai. In 2018, 29 companies tested the autonomous driving in California and all have at least 3 times better performance than Uber. On the basis of the current performance and trajectory, it should be concluded that if Uber operated an autonomous fleet as a service, it would be a disaster. Therefore, something must change and the only credible option is an acquisition.
Therefore, there are 2 conclusions:
First of all, FOMO: the reported valuation of $ 7.5 billion makes no sense. Zoox, which RFM ranked # 3 in self-driving, raised funds in July 2018 for $ 3.2 billion. It is absurd to see that intellectual property whose material quality is obviously worse can be worth twice as much. NIO, Yandex and pony.ai are all clearly superior to Uber's offer, but their self-driving badets are also valued at a fraction of $ 7.5 billion.
Therefore, one can only conclude that it is the fear of failure (FOMO) that has convinced Japanese investors to pay much more than what this badet is worth. That says a lot about the power of the Uber brand despite its recent difficulties. According to RFM, they should have looked at the other abundant and superior offers.
Second, the acquisition: The only hope for Uber to have a credible self-driving offer is to close what it has built and buy one of the other players. Zoox and Nuro would be the best choices for RFM baduming Uber can not buy one of the Chinese players, but there is much more to see in the middle of the pack. Moreover, with a very distant autonomous driving, there is a prospect of round sales, as the mediocre end of the race is short of money and no longer increases.
Acquisition is the only rational use of the product because doubling the worst available supply seems like a disaster.
