I said predacious monopoly. There is an important distinction between a company with monopoly status because they provide the highest value among options freely

I said predacious monopoly. There is an important distinction between a company with monopoly status because they provide the highest value among options freely chosen by consumers and a company with monopoly status because they are benefactors of anti-competitive governmental policies. Google is dominant in US search, but they aren't really a monopoly. They have formidable competitors who hold nearly 1/3 of the US market. Of Google's service got really bad,I can switch my default search engine to a respectable competitor in a matter of seconds. I certainly wasn't implying that Uber doesn't benefit from network effects and can't establish long-term dominance like Google, but if they are solely a consumer chosen "monopoly", there really isn't anything to fear. The concern is that Uber will do as taxi companies did before them and lobby for anti-competitive regulatory favors. I expect this will be the case, but this predacious form of monopoly cannot be achieved without the help of governmental regulation.