1. Uber could be profitable by not expanding. They stated that there are a number of markets in which they're profitable. It seems to be a decision as well to a

1. Uber could be profitable by not expanding. They stated that there are a number of markets in which they're profitable. It seems to be a decision as well to aggressively expand. These arguments seem to be backing into an argument why Uber is not like other things. 2. I'm commenting on what the article wrote. Of course there are competitors. I was pointing out the logical fallacy in the article. Easy to copy but no one successfully copied it. 3. So the market doesn't benefit drivers but the market is growing in drivers? Apparently the downsides of joining the market is less than the upsides evidenced by the fact that it's growing 4. The article claims there are little or no benefits to markets in Cabs. The fact that Uber has grown to this size questions that assertion. And your statement that there are other competitors also questions the articles assertion. So we're in agreement here 5. No idea but I assume the skin in the game that has invested billions has reason to believe so. Or maybe everyone else is stupid.