You're parroting Kalanick's era stuff. Both of these companies have been chasing profitability since IPO and posted profits (on adjusted ebitda basis) this week, and are promising better results in Q4. My understanding is that various important markets are actually cash flow positive now.
Any idea of "destroying competition" also clearly is oblivious of what actually is happening in the industry. Uber made some acquisitions sure (e.g. Careem, Autocab), but also ceded marketshare in exchange for equity in various markets (Didi, Grab, Zomato) and did partnerships in others (e.g. SKTelecom). It definitely has its hands in a lot of pots, but monopolistic it is not. Its latest courier marketing slogan was literally "we're not the jealous type"...
As for Lyft, I don't believe it's ever been in a position to be able to aim for a monopoly of any sort.
Sure, but the original point wasn't about whether bottom line is red, it was about whether it's an investing ponzi scheme or an actual attempt at operating like a proper business. It may not be profitable on an absolute basis (many unicorns aren't), but that's very different from having your entire business plan centered around never ending VC rounds.
Generally speaking, once a company goes public, it must start showing results.
Any idea of "destroying competition" also clearly is oblivious of what actually is happening in the industry. Uber made some acquisitions sure (e.g. Careem, Autocab), but also ceded marketshare in exchange for equity in various markets (Didi, Grab, Zomato) and did partnerships in others (e.g. SKTelecom). It definitely has its hands in a lot of pots, but monopolistic it is not. Its latest courier marketing slogan was literally "we're not the jealous type"...
As for Lyft, I don't believe it's ever been in a position to be able to aim for a monopoly of any sort.