The Hyperloop space has a number of competing companies that are all trying to figure out how to move people (between cities) in low-pressure tubes at nearly the speed of sound (1,234.8 km/h). For what it's worth, Virgin Hyperloop One, which was founded in 2014, has supposedly completed the most testing and raised the most money ($295 million as of December 2017).
This morning I was reading up on the Toronto-based TransPod, which was founded in 2015 by Sebastien Gendron and Dr. Ryan Janzen. They raised a $15 million seed round from an Italian tech group in 2016 and are close on another $50 million round right now. Following this, they'll look be looking for a few hundred million. They seem encouraged by where Canada's Strategic Innovation Fund has been placing money.
Supposedly, their biggest competitive advantage is cost. The company estimates their cost per kilometer to be about $25 million, which would put the cost of a Toronto-Montreal link at around $15 billion. This is not cheap, but it is allegedly cheaper. The travel time between these two cities could then be as short as 40 minutes.
Virgin Hyperloop One has been similarly looking at a Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal line, as it would stitch together about 25% of Canada's population. But apparently the federal government recommended that TransPod instead look at a line that sits entirely within one province -- at least at the start.
So the company has gone ahead and secured a 10-kilometer parcel of land in Alberta that will eventually form part of a future connection between Calgary and Edmonton. TransPod hopes to have this test track operational by 2022.
However, their focus right now is on France. (Being in Europe is another differentiator for the company. Europe gets transport.) With the help of a few partners, the company has started work on a 3-kilometer test track in Limoges, France. Permits were received at the end of last year and they hope to begin testing by the end of this year.
There's no question that this technology has the potential to be transformational, which is why so many companies are competing in the space right now. But it's obviously going to take a whole lot of moxie. Gendron is on the record talking about the risk-adverse nature of both Canadian regulators and investors when it comes to these sorts of large-scale innovations. That's a problem that we need to address.
The title of this post is a quote by Gendron taken from this TechVibes article.
Image: TransPod
Uber filed its S-1 last week in anticipation of going public in May. The WSJ reported on it, here. These are always interesting documents because you get access to previously private information. Here we can see that Uber's ride-hailing market share in the US is down to 67% (as of February 2019) from 78% two years earlier. Revenue from this business line -- which is the company's biggest -- also seems to have levelled off (chart from the WSJ):
The ride-hailing business today has become a commodity. A lot of people, myself included, simply check to see which service is the cheapest (usually it's Uber vs. Lyft). So this space feels to me like a giant race to build the biggest network and get to something new, whether that be autonomous vehicles or delivery drones. Uber calls this creating a "liquidity network effect." Here's an excerpt from the S-1:
We have a massive, efficient, and intelligent network consisting of tens of millions of Drivers, consumers, restaurants, shippers, carriers, and dockless e-bikes and e-scooters, as well as underlying data, technology, and shared infrastructure. Our network becomes smarter with every trip. In over 700 cities around the world, our network powers movement at the touch of a button for millions, and we hope eventually billions, of people. We have massive network scale and liquidity, with 1.5 billion Trips and an average wait time of five minutes for a rider to be picked up by a Driver in the quarter ended December 31, 2018. Every node we add to our network increases liquidity, and we intend to continue to add more Drivers, consumers, restaurants, shippers, carriers, and dockless e-bikes and e-scooters. We also hope to add autonomous vehicles, delivery drones, and vertical takeoff and landing vehicles to our network, along with other future innovations. Our strategy is to create the largest network in each market so that we can have the greatest liquidity network effect, which we believe leads to a margin advantage.
If you'd like to download a full copy of their filing, click here.
Jeff Bezos published his annual letter to shareowners this week. You can find it here. And as is his usual practice, he has attached his 1997 letter to shareholders at the bottom of it. This is his "Day 1" and he clearly likes the reminder.
I was somewhat surprised to learn that 58% of physical gross merchandise sales on Amazon are now by independent third-party sellers. This number has been steadily increasing almost every year since 1999.
And this is despite the fact that first party sales -- products sold by Amazon -- have grown at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 25% during this same time period. Amazon excels at the fulfillment component and you can have them do that for you as a third-party seller.
There are a number of other interesting facts sprinkled throughout the letter, but I particularly liked the bits on "intuition, curiosity, and the power of wandering." Here is an excerpt on how Amazon is working to scale the size of its failures:
As a company grows, everything needs to scale, including the size of your failed experiments. If the size of your failures isn’t growing, you’re not going to be inventing at a size that can actually move the needle. Amazon will be experimenting at the right scale for a company of our size if we occasionally have multibillion-dollar failures. Of course, we won’t undertake such experiments cavalierly. We will work hard to make them good bets, but not all good bets will ultimately pay out. This kind of large-scale risk taking is part of the service we as a large company can provide to our customers and to society. The good news for shareowners is that a single big winning bet can more than cover the cost of many losers.
A lot has already been said and written about accepting failure in life and business. Nobody wants to fail, but it can happen when you're trying to "imagine the impossible."
The two nuances here are that failures should scale along with the company. And that "large-scale risk taking" can actually be construed as a service. It might mean that the impossible becomes possible.
The Hyperloop space has a number of competing companies that are all trying to figure out how to move people (between cities) in low-pressure tubes at nearly the speed of sound (1,234.8 km/h). For what it's worth, Virgin Hyperloop One, which was founded in 2014, has supposedly completed the most testing and raised the most money ($295 million as of December 2017).
This morning I was reading up on the Toronto-based TransPod, which was founded in 2015 by Sebastien Gendron and Dr. Ryan Janzen. They raised a $15 million seed round from an Italian tech group in 2016 and are close on another $50 million round right now. Following this, they'll look be looking for a few hundred million. They seem encouraged by where Canada's Strategic Innovation Fund has been placing money.
Supposedly, their biggest competitive advantage is cost. The company estimates their cost per kilometer to be about $25 million, which would put the cost of a Toronto-Montreal link at around $15 billion. This is not cheap, but it is allegedly cheaper. The travel time between these two cities could then be as short as 40 minutes.
Virgin Hyperloop One has been similarly looking at a Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal line, as it would stitch together about 25% of Canada's population. But apparently the federal government recommended that TransPod instead look at a line that sits entirely within one province -- at least at the start.
So the company has gone ahead and secured a 10-kilometer parcel of land in Alberta that will eventually form part of a future connection between Calgary and Edmonton. TransPod hopes to have this test track operational by 2022.
However, their focus right now is on France. (Being in Europe is another differentiator for the company. Europe gets transport.) With the help of a few partners, the company has started work on a 3-kilometer test track in Limoges, France. Permits were received at the end of last year and they hope to begin testing by the end of this year.
There's no question that this technology has the potential to be transformational, which is why so many companies are competing in the space right now. But it's obviously going to take a whole lot of moxie. Gendron is on the record talking about the risk-adverse nature of both Canadian regulators and investors when it comes to these sorts of large-scale innovations. That's a problem that we need to address.
The title of this post is a quote by Gendron taken from this TechVibes article.
Image: TransPod
Uber filed its S-1 last week in anticipation of going public in May. The WSJ reported on it, here. These are always interesting documents because you get access to previously private information. Here we can see that Uber's ride-hailing market share in the US is down to 67% (as of February 2019) from 78% two years earlier. Revenue from this business line -- which is the company's biggest -- also seems to have levelled off (chart from the WSJ):
The ride-hailing business today has become a commodity. A lot of people, myself included, simply check to see which service is the cheapest (usually it's Uber vs. Lyft). So this space feels to me like a giant race to build the biggest network and get to something new, whether that be autonomous vehicles or delivery drones. Uber calls this creating a "liquidity network effect." Here's an excerpt from the S-1:
We have a massive, efficient, and intelligent network consisting of tens of millions of Drivers, consumers, restaurants, shippers, carriers, and dockless e-bikes and e-scooters, as well as underlying data, technology, and shared infrastructure. Our network becomes smarter with every trip. In over 700 cities around the world, our network powers movement at the touch of a button for millions, and we hope eventually billions, of people. We have massive network scale and liquidity, with 1.5 billion Trips and an average wait time of five minutes for a rider to be picked up by a Driver in the quarter ended December 31, 2018. Every node we add to our network increases liquidity, and we intend to continue to add more Drivers, consumers, restaurants, shippers, carriers, and dockless e-bikes and e-scooters. We also hope to add autonomous vehicles, delivery drones, and vertical takeoff and landing vehicles to our network, along with other future innovations. Our strategy is to create the largest network in each market so that we can have the greatest liquidity network effect, which we believe leads to a margin advantage.
If you'd like to download a full copy of their filing, click here.
Jeff Bezos published his annual letter to shareowners this week. You can find it here. And as is his usual practice, he has attached his 1997 letter to shareholders at the bottom of it. This is his "Day 1" and he clearly likes the reminder.
I was somewhat surprised to learn that 58% of physical gross merchandise sales on Amazon are now by independent third-party sellers. This number has been steadily increasing almost every year since 1999.
And this is despite the fact that first party sales -- products sold by Amazon -- have grown at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 25% during this same time period. Amazon excels at the fulfillment component and you can have them do that for you as a third-party seller.
There are a number of other interesting facts sprinkled throughout the letter, but I particularly liked the bits on "intuition, curiosity, and the power of wandering." Here is an excerpt on how Amazon is working to scale the size of its failures:
As a company grows, everything needs to scale, including the size of your failed experiments. If the size of your failures isn’t growing, you’re not going to be inventing at a size that can actually move the needle. Amazon will be experimenting at the right scale for a company of our size if we occasionally have multibillion-dollar failures. Of course, we won’t undertake such experiments cavalierly. We will work hard to make them good bets, but not all good bets will ultimately pay out. This kind of large-scale risk taking is part of the service we as a large company can provide to our customers and to society. The good news for shareowners is that a single big winning bet can more than cover the cost of many losers.
A lot has already been said and written about accepting failure in life and business. Nobody wants to fail, but it can happen when you're trying to "imagine the impossible."
The two nuances here are that failures should scale along with the company. And that "large-scale risk taking" can actually be construed as a service. It might mean that the impossible becomes possible.
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog