This is an oft-repeated meme but I don't see it ever substantiated.

Disregarding the fact that the "driver in a car" model is never going to be the most efficient means of transporting things (as opposed to people), we're ignoring the fact that the "Uber for X" formula already has many players.

Instacart, Seamless, GrubHub, Google Shopping Express, Postmates, every product category already has an "Uber". In fact every product category already has several "Ubers".

Uber won't have a first-mover advantage in any of them, and a lot of them thrive on having logistics options that aren't "dude in a sedan/SUV", and have built substantial hard-to-clone infrastructure on that front.

Uber has a lot of momentum, and a lot of hard-to-clone systems built around freelancer drivers, but IMO others are ahead in applying logistics to other things. This is like saying "Toyota can leverage their engineering expertise and totally own aerospace!" ... without acknowledging the existence of Boeing and Airbus.

You might be right but to me there is a big difference.

Uber seems to be collecting much more interesting data accross greater distances than those you mention which I why I think about them as a logistics company.

But again I think they are grossly overvalued and I think they will find themselves having to change to something else as competition will heat up and pushes prices down.

http://fortune.com/2014/09/11/uber-vs-lyft-the-credit-cards-... I don't know. The numbers appear to disagree. That just shows a sample of their growth in the US, but according to reports the bulk of their growth is internationally. They are likely orders of magnitude larger than their closest competition and growing rapidly. Real money is going through that system. If they can find a way to leverage that user base and become a full-on logistics company they're probably undervalued.