Note that all revenue numbers are <i>gross</i> not <i>net</i>.<p>In other words, they represent total fare $, not the 15% of fares that Uber actually gets.
It is actually viable for Uber to recognize the entire fare as Uber's revenue, even though they get 20% cut. There are a bunch of rules for revenue recognition, and one of them is that if the customer perceives the driver as being an agent of Uber, then the recognized revenue is likely the entire fare.<p>If a customer has a problem with a particular driver, they contact Uber, they don't contact the driver directly. This is a key fact that makes a strong case for recognizing the entire fare as revenue.<p>The difference with Groupon is that the customers were still interacting with the end merchant, ie. whoever supplied the coupon, as opposed to Groupon as a whole.<p>One problem with recognizing the entire fare is that their margins will look a lot worse.
First post.<p>Just got a ping from an Uber recruiter who was linking to this article. If they didn't leak it themselves they're certainly embracing it.
Assuming these numbers are fact, has there been any extensive research on how taxi / private car / shuttle services' revenues have been affected by Uber and the like?<p>Pre-Uber, I probably spent $100/year on taxis / shuttles (Los Angeles). Post-Uber... I'm hesitant to look at my bank statements.
Side note: UBER is valued at several billions higher than the entire taxi + Limo industry in the US ($11B). Uber is probably creating more demand then there was before. If correct, entrepreneurs should take the untapped part of industries into consideration when sizing their markets.