Yeah, someone wrote a CRUD app to do ride sharing and now somehow their worth is in the same ballpark as a semiconductor superpower.

You mean you don't like a bunch of rich people throwing money away so you get a 10% improvement on some service?

I only have a problem with them trying to make it out on the IPO instead of making a profitable business. But this one can not go forever, or the public will wake-up, or the law enforcement will.

A 10% improvement over an incumbent means a complete takeover of the industry.

These percentages are all subjective, I'm just trying to illustrate a point.

I don't think it does mean a complete takeover. There are plenty of industries where being 10% cheaper doesn't mean you "win", and there are plenty where being 10% better doesn't either. In a world of perfect competition and perfect information it might, but it's well accepted that we do not live in that world.

It's an odd argument to make in the context of Uber/Lyft, which have indeed "won" by any reasonable definition, and handsomely rewarded it's investors (which should be victims in the overhype / under deliver scenario).

Assuming that incumbent does not improve...

10 percent improvement from a local small taxi company vs a worldwide company? It does make sense..