Exactly. Uber is doing all of the work on the regulation front, which benefits any company wanting to do the same thing. And I would imagine the barrier to entry is already fairly low.
Uber is behaving extremely anti-competitive, as far as directly calling Lyft rides and then cancelling as soon as the car arrives during important days (like Christmas) hundreds of times.
Uber has been fighting against other competitors, too, with predatory pricing, or by directly trying to use the regulations (that uber itself breaks) against competitors.
The barrier to entry for uber competitors is only going up since uber exists in several countries.
> Uber is behaving extremely anti-competitive, as far as directly calling Lyft rides and then cancelling as soon as the car arrives during important days (like Christmas) hundreds of times.
I heard about the recruitment tactics, but I've never heard about holiday cancellations.
I've seen that before, but it's what I was referring to as "recruitment tactics." It seems pretty clear that the primary thing these people were trying to was to recruit drivers (and canceling drivers they'd already spoken to), not systematically disrupting Lyft service. For one thing, the scale is just too minuscule to matter. In a market where Uber is doing a million rides per day, 5,000 rides over months is nothing.[1]
That being said, disrupting availability on sensitive days (ex. holidays) could make a lot more sense in terms of sabotaging a competitor, which is why I was keen to see evidence of that. Unfortunately the link you provided has no evidence of holiday cancellations.
True, but I think that the fact that they're using these anti-competitive practices indicates they don't have that firm hold. Predatory pricing will only work as long as they keep doing it. Although I've heard stories of the opposite, where people really get gouged during surge pricing.
