Uber CEO warns robotaxis can't find a fast route to commercial viability
- Reference: 1738845009
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/02/06/uber_fy_2024_av_update/
- Source link:
Khosrowshahi took the unusual step of including an update on his company's ambitions for autonomous vehicles (AV) in the [1]prepared remarks [PDF] delivered ahead of the company's Q4 2024 earnings call.
Those remarks opened with the observation that 2024 was a turning point for the AV industry as at least four operators now have fleets of the machines on the road, and many others are likely to join them soon. The CEO estimates AVs represent a trillion-dollar opportunity in the US alone.
[2]
However he then turned gloomy, saying: "Even as we see AV technology advancing, we expect AV commercialization will take significantly longer."
[3]
[4]
Khosrowshahi argued that widespread commercial AV adoption needs five things to all be in place, the first of which is a "consistently superhuman safety record."
"We don't think it's good enough for an autonomous driver to be better than a human. I think we have the chance to be multiple times better than a human," he said, adding that only superhuman safety will convince regulators to allow AVs onto the road.
[5]
The CEO also wants consistent regulation across the US, and more jurisdictions to introduce their own AV rules.
He also thinks carmakers need to improve because today's AVs cost $200,000 or more and have higher running costs than human-driven vehicles. Until AVs can run for under $2/hour, they can't compete.
Ground operations are another issue of concern. "It is important to note that an average-utilized AV can run as much as 100K miles a year, compared to a typical consumer vehicle at 10-15K miles a year," Khosrowshahi wrote. "This means that AVs need to be charged multiple times a day and serviced monthly. AVs will also require consistent cleaning and available parking." Additionally, someone will need to handle fare disputes, return lost items, rescue stranded vehicles, and handle insurance chores. The CEO reckons Uber can do all that.
[6]
Yet one thing he admitted Uber will struggle to do is handle variable demand for AVs.
That's because consumers expect cars they summon to arrive in around four minutes. To meet peak demand, an AV taxi operator would need a fleet of cars that would be underutilized most of the time.
To illustrate the problem, Uber's [7]presentation [PDF] included the graph below, which depicts demand across the week in a single unnamed US city. Each day is broken into four six-hour segments, the first of which starts at midnight.
[8]
Hourly demand for Uber rides in a single US city across a week – click to enlarge
Uber also offered another graph showing changing demand for rides across the year in two US cities.
[9]
Annual demand for Uber rides in two unnamed US cities – click to enlarge
"Any standalone player with a fixed depreciating asset will need to build against that reality: choosing between running a highly underutilized network (if supply is built for peak demand) or a highly unreliable network at peak periods (if supply is built for anything less than peak)," Khosrowshahi said.
[10]Cruise robotaxis parked forever, as GM decides it can't compete and wants to cut costs
[11]What do Uber drivers make of Waymo? 'We are cooked'
[12]Singapore to increase road capacity by tracking all vehicles with GPS
[13]China's rideshare champ Didi gives users the option to report stinky cars
"Underutilized vehicles cannot be easily repositioned and will likely sit unused for months, generating additional cost and complexity – against zero revenue," he warned.
The CEO thinks humans can solve this problem because they will "dynamically fulfill demand spikes – and take a break during demand troughs." He therefore suggested that AV operators should partner with Uber to tap its expertise getting humans on the road and avoid acquiring idle assets. Uber drivers the world over will likely find that comforting. They may also like Khosrowshahi's assessment that all five of the matters he identified "must work in concert, or the puzzle falls apart."
In other words, the robot economy doesn't add up – for now – meaning human drivers [14]perhaps have less to worry about than they thought. Another reason to be cheerful is the [15]demise of GM's Cruise robotaxi biz.
Uber bucks
Uber booked $44.2 billion of business in Q4, $22.8 billion of it for rides and $20.1 billion for deliveries, up 18 percent year over year. The company organized 3.1 billion rides across the quarter ended December 31, 2024.
All those rides and deliveries saw $12 billion arrive in Uber's coffers, a 20 percent year-over year increase. Net income was $6.9 billion, but $6.4 billion of that was a "benefit from a tax valuation release." Another $556 million came from "net unrealized gains related to the revaluation of Uber's equity investments."
Full-year gross bookings were $162.8 billion, delivering revenue of $44 billion and net income of $9.85 billion, from 11.273 billion trips. The company boasted 171 million "monthly active platform consumers" across the year.
Uber forecast Q1 2025 bookings growth of 17 to 21 percent, all of it from humans. ®
Get our [16]Tech Resources
[1] https://s23.q4cdn.com/407969754/files/doc_earnings/2024/q4/transcript/Uber-Q4-24-Prepared-Remarks.pdf
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Z6Tqs-8-7pcEO11KTVVlsAAAAJg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z6Tqs-8-7pcEO11KTVVlsAAAAJg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Z6Tqs-8-7pcEO11KTVVlsAAAAJg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z6Tqs-8-7pcEO11KTVVlsAAAAJg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Z6Tqs-8-7pcEO11KTVVlsAAAAJg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://s23.q4cdn.com/407969754/files/doc_earnings/2024/q4/supplemental-info/Uber-Q4-24-Earnings-Supplemental-Data.pdf
[8] https://regmedia.co.uk/2025/02/06/supplied_uber_variable_demand_graph_weekly.jpg
[9] https://regmedia.co.uk/2025/02/06/supplied_uber_variable_demand_graph.jpg
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2024/12/11/cruise_gm_shutdown/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2024/09/07/uber_driver_waymo/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2024/11/03/asia_in_brief_nov_4/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2024/08/23/didi_ride_hailing_china_new_features/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2024/09/07/uber_driver_waymo/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2024/12/11/cruise_gm_shutdown/
[16] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Until AVs can run for under $2/hour, they can't compete.
Uber doesn't own it's vehicles, or technically employ the drivers, so it's overheads in those areas is vastly reduced.
Running robotaxis it'll own the vehicle/device, be responsible for insurance, fuel/charge and obviously maintenance. So per hour running costs need to be low to offset the huge rise in costs.
At what point...
...does this whole scam unravel?
Autonomous vehicles are very much in the same line as all of the other tech industry's recent 'breakthrough ideas' - an attempt by corporations to insert themselves between the consumer and the thing they want to do, to minimal (or even negative) benefit to the consumer and usually an additional cost.
And it's so important to them to force themselves into that position that they will promise the earth just to get there. Remember the idea that Robotaxis would make their owners tens of thousands of dollars a year? Not only was that blatant economic illiteracy, but it was purely being dangled in front of people to get them to hand over their assets for the benefit of yet another corporation.
Ah, Uber
The sexual harassement, legal cheaters and grifters of the world.
Whatever you say, I only think one thing : fuck you.
Choosing between running a highly underutilized network...
That's been the fundamental logistical issue for all public transport providers ever since the existence of public transport: responding to traffic peaks in periods of high demand and maintaining a usefully responsive service in periods of low demand. Has Uber just noticed?
The same Dara Khosrowshahi is reportedly a [1]fan of workers returning to the office ; ironic, as the most significant driver of peak demand is the daily commute. Perhaps he hopes to make up on volume for what he is losing on margin.
[1] https://fortune.com/2024/05/08/uber-ceo-dara-khosrowshahi-wants-more-workers-to-return-to-the-office/
Re: Choosing between running a highly underutilized network...
That peak demand problem the reason why people will continue buying their own vehicles. Nobody else is prepared to make the necessary investment on their behalf.
Autonomous vehicles
I have never got the push for AVs. It is, yet again, a solution looking for a problem to solve
Re: Autonomous vehicles
The problem is easy to see - thousands of road deaths every year caused by motorists being selfish pricks.
Re: Autonomous vehicles
While I don’t disagree with your observation, I don’t think AVs are a solution
For one, I would find it frankly terrifying to be charging along a motorway with nobody but a buggy computer in control. I would find it scary enough pootling around town. And I doubt I’m alone in that.
And I don’t think the whole issue of who is at fault when someone gets killed has been addressed. Not a technical issue, but not a resolved issue either.
Re: Autonomous vehicles
One particular stretch or road locally has signs up saying so many casualties in 3 years (which 3 years not stated). What is the correct question to ask about that?
1. None (apparently the local authority's)
2. Who are the anomalously large population of selfish pricks?
3. What's the matter with the road?
In answer to 3 it could be 5 out of 7 junctions having bad sight-lines, 2 being virtually blind in one direction another which really needs to be a roundabout, probably double and was far from being improved by being improved a few decades ago and yet another being quite deceptive at night in that a badly placed reflective speed limit sign makes the main road appear to go on straight on while it actually bends to the near side.
The reason for these, by the way, are that in the age of the horse and cart and stage coach it didn't matter if the turnpike cut at odd angles across the old roads used by pedestrians and pack ponies.
But it's OK, if we just put up signs warning drivers that this road may be dangerous in unspecified places for unspecified reasons all will be well.
Just for added joy, a few miles away there's a left bend sign just at the point where the road bends to the right.
AV's really aren't going to fix issues like those.
Re: Autonomous vehicles
Whilst AV's might in future be how we reduce Road deaths with technology, We are not there yet. As even Uber are admitting the superhuman safety record is not yet proven. In the mean time Automatic Emergency Breaking, Lane Keep Assist, and dynamic cruise control have advanced exponentially in recent years. Focusing on deploying the mature technologies like this, whilst being honest about their capabilities seems to be a much better bet for reducing fatalities in the near term. Longer term we already have electrified autonomous capable (many lines already have autonomous trains as there are less unknowns its already safe) intercity passenger/freight options in the form of Rail. Moving traffic from road to rail in Europe and America would make for fewer direct emissions (could help reducing global emissions as part of a low carbon electricity market), reduced traffic would result in safer roads. We are not investing effectively in additional rail capacity because the tech bros prefer to fritter away billions on automation and making futuristic technologies that will enrich the 1% if and when they mature to dealing with Rail regulations and unions, and governments are all claiming to be too poor to invest or are just inept (see HS2).
Until AVs can run for under $2/hour, they can't compete.
So Uber pay their slaves, sorry human drivers less than $2 per hour?!?
How are they still in business?