
Letter from Benchmark to Uber Employees [pdf] - ted0
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwpPJSL_5U3vVmZLSFJQTXVaeU0/view
======
ChuckMcM
Another interesting move on Benchmark's part. I wonder if this is the key
sentence: _" Travis’s failure to make good on this promise, as well as his
continued involvement in the day-to-day running of the company, has created
uncertainty for everyone, undermining the success of the CEO search."_

One of the key things about organizations which isn't always apparent is that
leadership isn't "given" it is earned. This is often used as a tool in story
telling where the hero's actions inspire people to follow them and so even
though someone else is the "boss" the people are following the "hero."

That they are complaining about Travis, who, AFAICT, does not even have an
employee role at all in the company, continues to be "involved" in day to day
operations, suggests that his lack of co-operation is the issue and Travis is,
or continues to be depending on your point of view, the 'bad actor' in this
situation.

Sometimes you have classes where they throw out a hypothetical question like
"What if you fired the boss and he didn't leave?" If Travis is able to exert
that level of control over the company then clearly he continues to have
people loyal to him doing as he asks against the wishes of the board. I can
imagine that this would make it extremely hard to manage a company in that
situation.

~~~
OzzyB
> Travis’s failure to make good on this promise

Is this what happens when a CEO has a large voting block of shares (b/c he's
smart enough to learn from previous founders' experience with VCs), and a VC
firm that finds they can't have it their way (like they've been used to),
publicly shame him for "not doing what he promised (us)"?

Last I checked they ousted _him_ and now they want to play "victim" because
they're finding it hard to find a replacement? Maybe none feels they're able
to fill his shoes or do as good a job as he's done? Last I checked Uber was
still a tremendous success regardless of all their bad press and
missteps/deeds.

Sorry, I just find it hard to sympathize with these people.

~~~
ChuckMcM
Not really a question of sympathizing, it's the fascination of watching
warfare at these levels. Travis getting himself a right to appoint three
directors, just before he is asked to step down, which he does and appoints
himself as a director and has tickets for two more. While Benchmark was
organizing other members of the Board to fire him, and now dealing a counter
play to Travis' board seat strategy. It's rare this stuff goes on where people
can see it.

~~~
elmar
Create a board that reflects the ownership of the company (2007)

[http://venturehacks.com/articles/board-
structure](http://venturehacks.com/articles/board-structure)

as a side-note actually current Uber board doesn't reflect the ownership

Benchmark as ~13,5% and one board seat

Travis as ~10% and three board seats

~~~
kashkhan
Someone who had the power, voted to give him those seats. Maybe they were
stupid, maybe not.

Travis may not be a nice person, but he is good at playing this game and is
beating the capitalists at their own game.

Why should I cry for benchmark?

~~~
elmar
Travis is probably the best entrepreneur ever in fundraising, so good he
managed to at such later stage to keep control and even have a
disproportionate power in relation to is ownership.

Mobody is crying for Benchmark and this lawsuit looks ridiculous and it's
going to affect their deal flow quality for many years to come.

------
dasil003
> _But we acted out of a deep conviction that it would be better for Uber, its
> employees, and investors to have a fresh start._

Bull-fucking-shit. Don't condescend to us and pretend like you have the
employees' interests at heart. I have no great love for Travis, but come on
don't act like this isn't about getting your returns. The letter would have a
lot more credibility if they just came out and admitted what is obvious to
everyone.

~~~
dfabulich
Are you saying that Benchmark thinks/knows this lawsuit is worse for Uber and
its employees?

It's an open secret that Kalanick is trying to regain control of the company,
telling people that he plans to return as CEO; that he's "Steve Jobs-ing it."
[1] That's what this lawsuit is trying to prevent.

I don't think Kalanick's return would be good for Uber, its employees, or its
investors. Clearly Benchmark feels the same way.

[1] [https://www.recode.net/2017/7/30/16066332/uber-ceo-search-
tr...](https://www.recode.net/2017/7/30/16066332/uber-ceo-search-travis-
kalanick-meg-whitman-steve-jobs-board)

~~~
aianus
Any examples of companies that have done significantly better after publicly
ousting their founder CEO?

I've worked at more than one where it turned to shit...

~~~
throwaway987634
[http://www.businessinsider.com/how-ciscos-founders-were-
oust...](http://www.businessinsider.com/how-ciscos-founders-were-
ousted-2014-12)

------
hkmurakami
This letter reads as faceless (who's Benchmark's representative on the board
as of now anyways?) and a bit condescending to me. "We've never interacted
with you in the past, but trust us, we're on your side and have your best
interests in mind."

Not sure what this letter is supposed to accomplish. Employees who were behind
Benchmark already will continue to support them, and employees who were behind
Travis will continue to support him, and if anything, the polarization will
increase with this message.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _Not sure what this letter is supposed to accomplish_

Communicate why Benchmark acted in a manner they find to be reasonable?
Assuming every single one of Uber's employees don't divide into neat pro-
Benchmark and pro-Kalanick camps, this could help keep nervous minds put.

 _Disclaimer: This comment is NOT investment advice. Please do not buy or sell
any securities based on it._

~~~
Gargoyle
I don't work at uber, but this letter communicates nothing but drama and
uncertainty to me. I can't imagine it put anyone's mind to rest.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _his letter communicates nothing but drama and uncertainty_

This letter or the lawsuit? The suit certainly communicated drama and
uncertainty, though if the accusations in this letter are true, it might have
been a calculated judgment that lots of drama now is better than a slow drip
over years.

After filing the lawsuit, Benchmark could (a) stay silent, leaving everyone
guessing (and letting the machinations they accuse Kalanick of orchestrating
continue to work their rot) _or_ (b) explain their actions. They chose (b).

------
uberemployee
As an Uber employee, I can say this: although the feelings on TK are mixed
(some loving TK, others glad that he's gone), the feelings about Benchmark are
pretty uniform. They are only out for themselves, and nothing they have done
have "helped" us. They have only hurt us. This current ploy they are doing is
only further hurting us. Everyone thinks this "letter" is a joke. Nothing to
see here, at least from an employee perspective.

~~~
BinaryIdiot
Interesting. As far as I can tell (from the outside, of course) Travis is
reneging on his deal and he's planning on reinstalling himself as CEO in
addition to the extra board seats he just procured. This seems like it would
hurt employees more than anything and possibly give Travis even more control
over the company.

To me it appears Benchmark is mostly aligned with employees; both want the
company to grow and do well. So why do many have bad feelings about
Benchmark's actions? What am I missing?

~~~
smallgovt
Benchmark's interest lies in protecting the value of their investment and
liquidating it as soon as possible.

This can be very different from employees' interest in the case where
Benchmark seeks to sell their stake via a private transaction (e.g. to
Softbank).

I'd also add that Benchmark couldn't care less if the company 'grows'. They've
already made enough money to return their fund many times over. Their strategy
now is mainly to mitigate risk to the paper value of their holdings.

~~~
BinaryIdiot
Fair point. I can't exactly blame them either.

------
exogeny
Come on, guys. You all are smart enough to read between the lines.

Benchmark is desperate to get out. Why do you think that is? Do you think
they'd be all hands on deck trying to get out of a rocket ship investment? Of
course not.

Uber's unit economics are garbage, and will remain garbage until self-driving
technology becomes universal. That will not happen in a timeframe that
Benchmark is comfortable with - or to put it another way, within the preferred
close dates of their fund - and even if it did, they clearly have little
confidence that the current leadership (or lack thereof) are the right
operators, either now or in the future.

The ship is sinking. They want out. Softbank wants in - for reasons I can't
understand other than they have the money and want to spray it around
aimlessly - and this bit of messiness is surely throwing a wrench into the
plans.

~~~
furioussloth
As much as you and many on the HN like it. Ship is not sinking at least not
any time soon. If all they wanted was a way out why tarnish their own image by
filing this law suit and make benchmark look less founder-friendly and
supposedly create leaks which make Uber look even worse. Making Uber look like
a bad investment is possibly something they don't want to do if they want $$$
for their existing shares.

~~~
warcher
I'd like to hear your reasoning that the ship isn't sinking. My reasoning is
their burn rate, unit economics, the writedowns, and VC's taking some
controversial hardball steps to protect downside risk. Since they're private,
there's not much real data to be had, but that's a lot of smoke for no fire.

Anecdotally, I have seen up close what it looks like when suit-and-tie MBA
types start looking for the emergency exit, and this smells right.

BUT

What I don't know would fill volumes-- whaddya got?

~~~
alphast0rm
A paper titled "Squaring Venture Capital Valuations with Reality" [1] was
recently published by students at Stanford GSB that put forth a new model for
valuing privately held companies [2]. If you consider "Table 8: Detailed
Unicorns Fair Values and Post-money Valuations", Uber objectively has one of
the smallest deltas of all valuations listed at 12% (bested only by Snapchat
and Lyft out of ~100 companies).

[1]
[https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2955455](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2955455)

[2] [https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/silicon-valleys-
unicor...](https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/silicon-valleys-unicorns-are-
overvalued)

~~~
warcher
I only skimmed these papers, but they seemed to be dealing with contract terms
that caused later shares to have value not totally reflected in the per-share
price, including but not limited to things like ratchets and liquidation
preferences. Such that the valuation is that of a "unicorn" but that some
conditions may apply if you want to realize that investment.

Nowhere did I find reference to the economics of Uber justifying their
valuation. I should clarify my point: I don't think Uber is worth what they
think they're worth based on the fundamentals. Certainly a bunch of tricky
contracts could exacerbate that, but I think everybody bought into Uber at a
valuation they were never going to sustain, and the ship is slowly crashing
back to earth.

------
dumbfounder
Jeez, not trying to defend Travis, but the guy did create an umpteen billion
dollar company in short order, creating absurd value for Benchmark's
investment. The least they could do is start off with a hollow thank you and
acknowledgement for that achievement. Apparently all Travis did was make
mistakes. It really does smell more like a vendetta and less like them
protecting their money.

~~~
warcher
So, this might be me just being dumb, but I don't understand how Benchmark has
made _any money whatsoever on this deal. Not yet._

And what I mean by that is this: they gave Uber money for shares. But they
have not yet sold the shares to anybody, b/c no acquisition or IPO. Other
investors buy more shares, but that's not a liquidity event, is it?

Benchmark has a whole boatload of paper profits that they can't return to
their LPs, not yet at least.

Or am I crossed up here? Could they, or have they, done some kind of private
sale? I kind of doubt it but could easily be wrong here. Is there some kind of
financial instrument to cash out early I'm ignorant of?

~~~
dumbfounder
That's why I said value and not actual return on investment. They have created
an insane amount of value in the stock that Benchmark owns. If you were an
investor would you rather take the money that Benchmark originally invested,
or the stock they received for it? Pretty easy answer unless you think they
will go bankrupt.

------
evanlivingston
"uber is the most important and promising company of our generation"

If that's true, I'm scared.

~~~
hsod
It's probably the company that has had the most concrete impact on my life and
the lives of my friends of this generation (depending on how you define
generation).

~~~
evanlivingston
I'll reiterate my point: if getting to the airport a little bit faster or not
having to drive home after getting drunk is the most important thing that
happened to our generation, well then that's a problem.

~~~
hsod
You haven't really made a point, just made a few vague but very strong
statements. Uber impacted my life by vastly increasing my mobility.

Can you give an example of what you think should (???) be the most important
company of a generation?

~~~
evanlivingston
Sure:

first, I would push back against the idea that Uber has vastly increased
mobility. It's made mobility slightly less annoying in certain places for
certain groups of people. But most parts of the world have had taxis for a
long time. You've been able to schedule a taxi for decades, something which
Uber just recently added. Prices are a bit better with Uber, but it's unclear
if the VC subsidized pricing is sustainable. In places like Cuba and Cambodia
the taxis and tuk-tuks have been excellent and painless methods of
transportation for generations and often require zero wait and have zero
barrier to entry other than the price of the transportation, that is; it
requires to smart phone, no data plan, no credit card.

I don't perceive Uber as having done anything other than contribute a level of
convenience to transportation. I don't feel as though it's provided mobility
to anyone who didn't have it before, it hasn't decreased congestion or
pollution. How many lives has it saved? How many people who desperately lacked
needed resources has it helped? How much has it decreased dependency on non-
renewable resources?

I think companies that provide life-saving resources to people or companies
that increase equality are much more important. Creating the technology to get
everyone access to clean water or drought resistant crops are some ideas that
come to mind.

~~~
stickfigure
I'm guessing you don't live in San Francisco, or at least didn't before Uber.

I can recall a number of times waiting on street corners trying to flag a cab
for an hour, only to give up and walk home. Calling the taxi company on a busy
night was a joke.

At least in this city, transportation was _broken_. Clean water and draught
resistant crops are great in general, but on a personal level I'm still
drinking and eating more or less like I was five or ten years ago.

~~~
evanlivingston
I admit to nitpicking at this point, but my OP was mostly to trying to say
that for a company to be called the most important of our generation the value
judgement needs to look past the personal level of affluent people who already
have their basic life necessities met. Personally, I think the criteria for
the greatest company needs to account for all classes of people. If poor
people are replacing broken or otherwise overly expensive transportation
systems with Uber and those pricing models are sustainable then I'll admit to
not giving them enough credit.

Also, Bart allows bikes, San Francisco is always pretty pleasant riding
weather, the busses are robust and have provisions for bikes, there's an
assistance program for public transit in the bay. But damnit Bart why can't
you have 24 hour trains.

~~~
olalonde
Uber did help a lot of less affluent people make money.

~~~
evanlivingston
Is there data to back this up?

------
smallgovt
IMO, this was a clever PR move on Benchmark's part.

Benchmark needs to limit any reputational damage that results from the ensuing
battle. In order to do that, they need to justify their actions to the public.

Engaging with journalists directly is suboptimal because it lets the
journalist control the narrative which will naturally paint them in a
defensive light. Addressing the public via a "letter to employees" allows them
to fully control the narrative, defend their actions while not seeming
defensive, and paint the picture that they are looking out for the greater
good.

Of course, we all know that Benchmark is self-interested. Their goals are:

\- Liquidate their investment ASAP via a private transaction (e.g. Softbank)
or IPO

\- Protect the value of their investment until liquidation event occurs

\- Limit any reputational damage to their firm

Everything they do can probably be explained by at least one of these
objectives. And, it should be obvious that they don't genuinely care about
Uber's employees -- only to the extent that it preserves the value of their
investment (i.e. preventing substantial attrition).

~~~
mychael
Spot On

------
AJRF
"Uber is the most important and promising company of our generation."

That is a totally delusional statement. The current status of Uber's decline
is a direct contradiction to this very line. Uber isn't anything special. A
case could be made to say that Travis is special, an exceptional force that
bulled his way through red tape and created a lot of value for shareholders
and users of Uber, but Uber, as a company is nothing more than a very nice
brand, which has now turned bad.

You can see this in every market they try to capture, fail and end up
partnering with others in.

These kind of statements are why people take the piss out of the Silicon
Valley thought bubble. Uber augments the middle class by providing convenience
functions on their phone. That is not going to change the world. Not one bit.

~~~
elmar
_> Uber isn't anything special. A case could be made to say that Travis is
special_

in my opnion a very strong case, if you compare it to a proxy like Lyft, very
competent funding team they preceded Uber by several years [1], add access to
the same pools of capital and talent and probably are worth 10% of Uber and
only have a regional impact on US not the rest of the world.

So what is special about Uber? Travis is.

\------------------------------------

[1] The first company with the ability to get everyday cars with drivers was
SideCar, Lyft copied SideCar, Uber copied SideCar.

Paul developed his concept for mobile ride-hailing over a wireless network,
applied for a patent in 2000 and was granted U.S. patent 6356838 “System and
method for determining an efficient transportation route” in 2002. Paul turned
his idea into reality. He co-founded San Francisco startup Sidecar, which
offers paid rides by private drivers in their own cars, summoned by passengers
over a wireless network.

[http://www.google.com/patents/US6356838](http://www.google.com/patents/US6356838)

~~~
elmar
quoting Greylock here:

 _If we rewind the clock to 2012, Lyft launched a peer-to-peer ridesharing
service and Uber was a black car marketplace. Lyft and Sidecar’s P2P taxis
were a bigger idea in a bigger space. And like most marketplaces, it was a
winner-take-all opportunity, or at least a winner-take-most. At the time, all
three companies were only in SF and everyone was racing towards liquidity,
with sights to have a right of first refusal on every other city in the
country thereafter. Lyft had a big head start, but Uber was trailing right
behind.

Uber began to aggressively put its war chest to work to achieve liquidity as
fast as possible. This meant enabling ~5 minute pickups for riders and ~$25
hourly earnings for drivers. First, it guaranteed drivers hourly rates and
spent money to acquire drivers. With drivers on the road, Uber focused on
filling their cars through paid channels and incentivizing referrals. In a
nutshell, the company subsidized fares and gave away free rides until there
was enough demand and drivers could earn enough on their own. City by city,
Uber implemented this playbook — buying drivers, buying passengers,
subsidizing rides — to shave minutes off the pickup SLA and increase driver
earnings, propelling Uber to liquidity._

In short, Uber burned cash to get more drivers and more customers on the road.
As availability went up and the marketplace became stable, Uber got closer to
profitability and could scale faster.

\-----------------

Sidecar: ‘We failed because Uber is willing to win at any cost’ (2016)

[https://venturebeat.com/2016/01/20/sidecar-we-failed-
because...](https://venturebeat.com/2016/01/20/sidecar-we-failed-because-uber-
is-willing-to-win-at-any-cost/)

------
etr71115
"I have come to bury Travis, not praise him."

Last time I checked, Benchmark has one board seat? A bit bizarre for them to
assert themselves (note the plural) as a benevolent agent for employees. I
know 'corporations are people too', but how are employees supposed to respond
to this letter? They're not. This is a PR release. Good thing "this isn’t
about Benchmark versus Travis."

The CFO inclusion screams IPO, which, consequently, is all this comes down to:
money. Benchmark wants to cash out.

Entrepreneurs will still work with Benchmark. Yes, they'll push you out a la
Twitter and Uber style, but, at the very least, you'll be a billionaire by the
time they do.

~~~
frandroid
The pro-Travis side of the board is trying to get Benchmark to sell its shares
to them. It seems that they have a good cash-out option in front of them that
doesn't not require an IPO!

~~~
fosk
Yes, at a 30% discount. Seems like Benchmark is pursuing other options to
avoid selling at a lower price (although with a huge return on their
investment regardless).

~~~
frandroid
Yeah, at a huge return, and they could make that value higher if they were to
start negotiations.

------
darkstar999
> Uber is the most important and promising company of our generation.

Give me a break. Are you curing cancer? Are you solving hunger? Are you fixing
climate issues?

I hate when employers talk like salesmen to their employees.

~~~
drak0n1c
They are certainly exaggerating, but the service is a social good - my mother
and other elderly and disabled without cars have more independence and freedom
to do things around town without spending exorbitant sums on finicky taxis, or
spending an hour or more in buses.

~~~
aphextron
I'd agree that the concept of ride sharing is great. But Uber's execution of
it has been a complete travesty. The precedent they set for people not
expecting to tip drivers has set the standard for all "sharing economy" apps
that came after. It is downright deceptive how they presented the service as
"tips included" at first. On top of that, their technology is nothing that
can't be copied and done better. I think Lyft is going to eat their lunch in
the long run.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _the concept of ride sharing is great...Uber 's execution of it has been a
> complete travesty_

Most cities would have no ride sharing industry to speak of had it not been
for Uber de-fanging the taxi industry.

~~~
bacongobbler
Cities where ride sharing services like Uber was banned (e.g. Vancouver) have
been getting along just fine with car sharing services like Car2Go[1], Evo[2],
ZipCar[3] and Modo[4] for years. Uber hasn't really brought anything new to
the table asides more competition to taxi companies though more convenient app
services and VC money to drive prices lower.

[1]: [https://www.car2go.com/CA/en/](https://www.car2go.com/CA/en/) [2]:
[https://evo.ca](https://evo.ca) [3]:
[http://www.zipcar.ca/vancouver](http://www.zipcar.ca/vancouver) [4]:
[http://modo.coop](http://modo.coop)

~~~
concede_pluto
Those services don't bring a car to you with a driver. They're competing with
Avis and Hertz, not taxis.

~~~
bacongobbler
Because of the per-minute billing nature of Car2Go (as opposed to Avis which
is per-hour billing) as well as the convenience of these cars being within
walking distance at any point and can be left anywhere within the service
area, it is a direct competitor to one-way travel services like taxis. If I'm
choosing to use Car2Go instead of a taxi service to drive my fiancé and I to
the ferry on a weekly basis or to drive us home from downtown Vancouver after
shopping, or I'm driving myself to the airport, then it's a direct competitor
with taxis. Keep in mind that in all these use cases, Car2Go and other car
sharing services are significantly cheaper than equivalent taxi rides.

There are enough cars in Vancouver that you'll find one within a few blocks
90% of the time, so the argument of "not bringing a car with a driver" is moot
unless you don't know how to drive. There's also no surge pricing. It's always
the same flat rate.

------
beager
Methinks the fact that this letter has gone out to rank-and-file employees at
Uber signals a very tumultuous cultural impasse that the board is having a
huge amount of difficulty clearing.

------
anindha
No mention of the IPO disagreement. I wonder if most Uber employees would be
for or against an IPO. I am sure many would want to cash out at this point and
might support Benchmark for that reason alone.

------
umanwizard
> The search for a new CEO started over 50 days ago. It was at the same time
> that Travis agreed in writing to modify the company’s voting agreement to
> ensure that the board was composed of independent, diverse, and well
> qualified directors. Despite agreeing in writing to sign these amendments,
> he has still not done so.

I'm having trouble wrapping my head around what the legal difference is
between "agreeing in writing to sign something" and "signing something".
Anyone familiar with contract law want to chime in?

~~~
ABCLAW
Say you sell wizards from the university of manchester. Say I want a wizard
from the university of manchester.

If you and I sign a document that says umanwizard sells me a umanchesterwizard
with all the little deets like price and timing of delivery and such, then
we've reached an agreement.

If you and I sign a document that says we will put together a purchase in the
future, however, we explicitly are acknowledging that we haven't signed the
aforementioned document yet.

Depending on the facts and jurisdiction, some places deal with these
situations differently, but in common law generally an agreement to agree is
not the agreement, and is a non-binding promise. That said, this is very
general and you should speak with a lawyer (because i am not yours) if you
want a fast and firm answer in a specific situation.

~~~
umanwizard
Awesome explanation, thanks!

FWIW, the jurisdiction in this case seems to be Delaware. Nobody can know what
the facts are until a court or jury determines them...

------
mbesto
> Uber’s excellent executive leadership team is making commendable progress on
> these changes, many of the most important issues agreed to by the board
> remain unaddressed.

And so who precisely is Uber's "excellent executive leadership team" comprised
of? No COO, CFO, and CEO...

------
thinbeige
This letter is pure Machiavellism.

'It's not Benchmark vs Travis.' BS.

Basically, they try to involve the employees and bring them up against Travis.

Travis should fight back, and hit Benchmark as hard as possible, so Benchmark
looses all their reputation forever.

------
Twirrim
Do we know this is genuine?

All I'm seeing is an unsigned PDF, stored in google drive, purporting to be
from Benchmark.

~~~
sah2ed
Funny thing is someone linked to Benchmark's twitter demonstrating the
authenticity of the PDF in a reply to you. But refreshing this page and the
post has now being deleted.

[https://twitter.com/benchmark/status/897144805762793472](https://twitter.com/benchmark/status/897144805762793472)

~~~
Stratoscope
When I click your link, the tweet is there. Must have been a glitch?

~~~
carb
@sah2ed actually meant that a HN comment had linked the tweet they did. I saw
it there too. The tweet itself was never deleted.

~~~
sah2ed
Yes, was referring to a HN comment. The original comment [0] had an id of
15011549.

[0]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15011549](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15011549)

~~~
Stratoscope
D'oh! That's what I get for not reading carefully. Thanks for clearing up my
puzzlement! :-)

------
cletus
Wow. Is there any precedent for this? Where the board is at war and the
investors mail the employees? They must be utterly desperate for a fire sale
IPO at this point. How is something like this not meant to spook other
investors, employees and potential CEOs?

I do wonder if Travis is miffed at his ousting. Probably. But is he willing to
burn the company to the ground in response? He must be a significant
shareholder in Uber and obviously is still a board member.

The lawsuit by Benchmark alleging fraud was one level of desperation. I mean
Becnhmark gave Travis the power to fill those board seats and now they have
buyer's remorse? You get no sympathy from me.

This does raise obvious questions about what the lawsuit will reveal.

------
georgeecollins
Going for two years without a CFO at a company of this scale is enough reason
to justify a management change, full stop.

------
cbtacy
This suggests that the full Holder report has some real, ugly dirt in it.

~~~
rdiddly
Yes... leak please!

------
jtchang
When reading letters like this always be aware of the interests of all the
parties involved and what they have to gain. Benchmark has a lot to lose if
Uber starts bleeding talent (especially so in the engineering department). And
it is there investment at stake if they can't turn the tide.

I'm not advocating for one side or the other but there is a lot of money
involved and when that happens you have to be very vigilant of who is
espousing for what.

------
uhhhhhhh
This seems conflicting:

>It was at the same time that Travis agreed in writing to modify the company’s
voting agreement to ensure that the board was composed of independent,
diverse, and well qualified directors. Despite agreeing in writing to sign
these amendments, he has still not done so.

then

>A number of people have asked why we took legal action before giving Travis
the chance to sign these amendments.

It doesn't sound like he agreed in writing yet based on their own words. Maybe
that's just bad wording though.

They also fail to point to any actual actions taken on his part, just
references to vague statements or inferences of inaction.

Not to say I'm on Travis's side of this, but from what I've read its much more
likely Benchmark is trying to stabilize leadership under someone who will
focus on shareholder value (not company growth/stability) as they need to
divest themselves within the next year or two. This obviously stands contrary
to what Travis supposedly wants (and has failed to accomplish), and probably
much of the rest of the board.

------
blizkreeg
What cowards for hiding behind the cover of "we care so much about this once
in a lifetime company" (cough, investment). So all this while, when Travis was
fucking up but building Benchmark a giant return on their investment, they
were fine with his behavior. And now they're calling it out?!

So basically Benchmark's people on the board are incompetent.

------
ProfessorLayton
I really want to read the "Holder Report". Reading from this context, it
sounds like it may be pretty damning.

~~~
vkrm
There's a part of it here:
[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/13/technology/do...](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/13/technology/document-
The-Holder-Report-on-Uber.html)

------
wbillingsley
In other news, I hear the SPECTRE board is also scratching its head why it's
struggling to find a popular replacement for Ernst Stavro Blofeld in its CEO
position. While they had a bit of difficulty around that Nine Eyes launch, the
numbers in its Extortion business are growing phenominally, and investors just
can't understand why up-and-coming executives wouldn't want to associate
themselves with its brand and lead arguably the most important and exciting
business of our generation.

------
abovethecrow
Bill Gurley is a clear vulture waiting for his opportunity and worried. Travis
is definitely not a gentleman known fact from his video which the driver
posted. I always wonder why they got to be so nasty and squeeze the little
people.

I visited Uber and I felt that place was more of bar with the light settings
in the lunch room. So many hastags outside the conference rooms e.g.
#pumpedup.. pure sh __.

------
zitterbewegung
Is this being sent to "Contractors" (drivers) and Employees or just Employees?

~~~
ted0
I would assume that it is not being sent to drivers.

~~~
anindha
"We have tremendous respect for the incredible work you do to provide this
vital service in cities all around the world and to create work opportunities
for millions of people globally."

Suggests that it is addressed to employees creating jobs, which would be the
full time employees.

------
hownottowrite
The letter appears to be authored by Kris Fredrickson, presumably the same
Kris Fredrickson listed as an Investor/Principal at Benchmark.

------
toephu2
"his continued involvement in the day-to-day running of the company"

Question to Uber employees: Does Travis still come into the office everyday?

------
kerkeslager
> _Uber is the most important and promising company of our generation._

If Uber is the best our generation has to offer, the future is doomed.

------
idibidiart
The human race is facing slow but almost certain extinction (if things don't
change radically) and people in tech (who can potentially do something about
it) are wasting their precious bandwidth debating who's right and who's wrong.
Everyone is wrong. Except for Elon Musk of course!

------
spraak
Off topic: wow, someone who uses a diaeresis!

~~~
elmar
The Curse of the Diaeresis

[http://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-curse-
of-t...](http://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-curse-of-the-
diaeresis)

~~~
frandroid
> And yet we use the diaeresis for the same reason that we use the hyphen: to
> keep the cow out of co-workers.

------
kumarski
LTV faking only works sometimes:

Worked: SocialCam

Failed: Uber HomeJoy Sprig Etc...

------
cocktailpeanuts
I wonder how Uber employees actually feel about this, it sounds really
condescending and tone deaf.

If I was working at Uber I would be like "Who are you to suddenly show up and
act like mom?"

------
samstave
___" Uber is the most important and promising company of our generation"_ __

THen fuck you.

Why wasn't, mr. VC, ___" taxi companies and their rates and availability and
regulations and customer dissatisfaction the most important and disuptional
problem of our generation"_ __of the past?

"oh look - people want this! Arent we innovative. Oh shoot! look people are
pissed when the company still acts like douchebags! Why would they act like
that?"

\--

I love the uber product, hate the player and all that...

b ut give me a fucking break - uber is a taxi, as taxi's should be and self-
driving cars are the next inCARnation of said service - but stop patting
yourself where you can see that they acted like many disruptors who come into
big money do... it is not a surprise.

Uber is a very interesting litmus to the state of things - the confluence of
big money, big problems is amazing:

* 1. female engineering drama

* 2. ceo drama

* 3. legal drama

* 4. funding/VC drama

* 5. employees love/hating drama (tech issues are cool and all - but fuck this place)

* 6. user drama

* 7. data drama

* 8. driver drama

\---

1\. sexist blah - we know this one

2\. sexist blah, douchebaggery blah -- now the ousting...

3\. cities/states/countries banning them

4\. raised how much for what? uber car leasing/VC battles, waymo, etc

5\. employees love the eng - hate the grind/sexism/bro-bullshit

6\. many complaints, new complaints, better than those on Richess. What about
the lame "party button" that I already wrote about - lamest contest mode ever
___" compete for a spot to exclusive lame party - we will pick you up and drop
you off to a specific location... OH, You want a ride home from said
undisclosed location; FUCK YOU - stand at the corner and cal a surge uber like
every other pleb, you moron"_ __

7\. No access to any recent data - but we will use it against all our drivers.

8\. Here, hold my hammer in your skull for a sec.

~~~
askafriend
Please keep this type of inane content on Reddit. It is not welcome here.

~~~
samstave
please keep this inane bullshit comment to yourself...

go act superior [OVER THERE]

~~~
askafriend
If you don’t want to participate in respectful and thoughtful discourse, then
that’s fine...but please take your comments elsewhere.

This is not a free for all.

