[ihsw]

Local monopolies are usually the rule rather than the exception, with global monopolies rarely (if ever) occurring.

This makes me wonder if Lyft can leverage the backlash against Uber and achieve success in areas hostile to Uber but not hostile to ridesharing/Car-as-a-Service services.

It is essentially a land-grab but on a global scale, with the measure of success being on-going local dominance on a per city basis. Personally I find it fascinating, the goings-ons of municipalities are usually quite opaque to outsiders and the insight is new.

[discodave]

Local monopolies are the norm in industries where massive capital investment is required (electricity, cable). Uber is not this type of business. Uber is more like a marketplace (like Amazon or Ebay)... while network effects are strong there is no reason to think that local monopolies are inevitable.

Also, if you catch an Uber in SF or Seattle, the driver is likely to be running Lyft and Uber. Sure, Uber can try to give drivers disincentives to use multiple apps. But good luck doing that AND staying out of anti-trust investigations AND convincing everybody that their drivers are still contractors not employees.