Uber會(huì)與谷歌產(chǎn)生競爭嗎？
|
????在去年夏天的《財(cái)富》科技頭腦風(fēng)暴大會(huì)上（Fortune Brainstorm Tech），我與Uber的首席執(zhí)行官特拉維斯?卡蘭尼克聊了聊誰會(huì)認(rèn)真考慮收購他的公司。我認(rèn)為會(huì)是租車公司赫茲（Hertz），他笑著說這家公司“太小了”（很有先見之明，赫茲公司目前估值只有97.5億美元）。隨后我提到了谷歌（Google），他的嘴咧得更開了些，說：“至少他們買得起?！?/p> ????兩天后傳來消息，谷歌風(fēng)投基金（Google Ventures）對(duì)Uber進(jìn)行了一輪大規(guī)模投資，價(jià)值約為35億美元?！驹陔S后的一輪融資中，富達(dá)投資集團(tuán)（Fidelity Investments）對(duì)Uber的估值高達(dá)180億美元】。 ????這次合作意義深遠(yuǎn)。谷歌得以利用這家美國最為炙手可熱的數(shù)據(jù)驅(qū)動(dòng)型消費(fèi)公司。而Uber獲得了數(shù)億美元資金，擁有了一位來自大公司、經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的董事長，以及一個(gè)隱含的保證：其競爭對(duì)手Lyft無法得到谷歌的投資了。此外，Uber還能用上谷歌的自動(dòng)駕駛汽車。 ????但這就是讓我疑惑的地方：兩家公司最終是否會(huì)展開競爭？所有人似乎都認(rèn)為Uber未來方向是按需的同城快遞，而“打車”更像是公司創(chuàng)立時(shí)的特色，而非主要服務(wù)。Uber已經(jīng)建立了許多基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施，并開始嘗試在不同市場運(yùn)營其他產(chǎn)品（比如上周在波士頓提供流感疫苗遞送服務(wù)）。而考慮到谷歌最近推出了Express，他們無疑對(duì)按需送貨也很感興趣。 ????我們假設(shè)兩家公司都按照這樣的計(jì)劃繼續(xù)發(fā)展，就能預(yù)想到在未來連耗時(shí)23小時(shí)的“當(dāng)日”送達(dá)都會(huì)顯得太慢。最明顯的解決方案就是谷歌（市值3,700億美元，手握600億美元現(xiàn)金）直接收購Uber。這里唯一的問題在于，很難想象卡蘭尼克會(huì)出售公司。沒有人想憑空多出一個(gè)上司，即便他保證不多加干涉。而任何一個(gè)有理性的人也不想擁有卡蘭尼克這樣強(qiáng)勢的直接下屬。 ????據(jù)此可以得出結(jié)論：盡管有過2013年的投資，然而兩家公司依然會(huì)展開競爭。但這一過程可能會(huì)有些丑陋，尤其是考慮到谷歌仍然控制著搜索領(lǐng)域的主導(dǎo)權(quán)，而Uber試圖快遞的許多商品都依賴于它【亞馬遜（Amazon）已然遭遇了這樣的競爭】。 ????這就是未來的情形。除非谷歌錯(cuò)過了時(shí)機(jī)，或是雙方達(dá)成了某些商業(yè)協(xié)議，競爭才可能有所緩和。但當(dāng)戰(zhàn)略投資讓雙方都獲益頗豐時(shí)，這類競爭的確可能發(fā)生。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)） ????譯者：嚴(yán)匡正 |
????During the Fortune Brainstorm Tech conference last summer, I spent some time chatting with Uber CEO Travis Kalanick about who might make a serious acquisition run at his company. I suggested Hertz HTZ 0.42% , to which he smiled and said something along the lines of “too small” (that proved prescient, as Hertz is currently valued at only $9.75 billion). Then I mentioned Google GOOG 0.18% , to which he smiled a bit wider, and said “At least they could afford it.” ????Two days later, word came that Google, via its Google Ventures unit, had helped lead a massive investment in Uber at around a $3.5 billion valuation (a subsequent round, led by Fidelity Investments, valued Uber at $18 billion). ????The pairing made perfect sense. Google GOOG 0.18% got access to the country’s hottest data-driven consumer startup. Uber got hundreds of millions of dollars, an experienced big-company director and a tacit guarantee that rival Lyft wouldn’t be able to tap the Bank of Mountain View. Plus there’s the whole wildcard of self-driving cars. ????But here’s what I’m beginning to wonder: Are the two companies on an eventual collision course? Everyone seems to believe that Uber’s future is on-demand local delivery, with “rides” becoming a founding feature rather than a primary product. It already has built out much of the infrastructure, and has doing trial runs of other products in various markets (i.e., flu shots in Boston last week). Google, of course, also appears to have interest in on-demand delivery, given its recent Express roll-out. ????Let’s assume both companies continue moving forward with such plans, and envision a future where “same-day” delivery is about 23 hours too slow. The obvious solution would be for Google ($370b market cap, $60b in cash) to simply buy Uber. Only problem here is I can’t imagine Kalanick selling. Not the sort who wants a boss, even if that boss promises to be hands-off. Nor would any reasonable person want him as a powerful direct report. ????So that leads us to the two companies competing, despite the 2013 investment. And this is where it could get a bit ugly, particularly given that Google would still control the dominant search function for many of the goods Uber would be seeking to deliver (a battle Amazon already is fighting). ????Again, this is way down the road – and possibly mitigated by Google passing on the opportunity or the two sides forging some commercial deal – but it’s the sort of thing that can happen when a strategic investment works out too well for both sides. |
最新文章