- Cut R&D cost
- Grow in scale
- Force people out of buying their own cars by providing rides
- Carpool at work programs
- Lyft Shared rides - which taxies could not exploit efficiently, makes it a win win for riders and drivers
- Imagining auto-driving cars in the near future, that can change economics
- Cities that were generally transit heavy, can exploit this alternative, since car usage was low to go to work
- Their partnering with Rideshare programs at work, leads to a very cheap commute on demand, which cuts into the vanpool market - with flexible timings
- Even with same prices as taxis - it's put so many people and cars to work that were sitting in the driveway. I see some form of Government subsidy here too as an option ( since good for the environment, and the economy in general)
- Markets to expand in - Commercial Freight( unused capacity transportation) - basically structuring and leveling the playing field wrt rates, policies, contracts and availability via a digital centralized experience
- Food delivery
- Many more sure I'm missing
It seems to me as a layperson that they have both funded their growth by discounting rides at an unsustainable rate. The sustainable price seems to be pretty much what taxis charge. (No complaint here. I believe in paying my, ah, fare share. I’d be quite willing to pay that rate for Uber/Lyft because I don’t like taxis.)
Is that analysis unsound? What will keep them operating when they run out of investor money?