They’re not, particularly since “spending and losing VC money” is often tossed around Uber, which doesn’t make sense, since it’s no longer VC backed.
I’m interpreting your sentiment as having a cash-flow positive operating model. Ridesharing absolutely works on a fundamental level with enough gross profit to fairly compensate drivers. (It doesn’t if drivers can log on and off at will, nor in low-population density or poorer areas.)
I'm sure we'll see plenty of "gross profit" in their non-GAAP financial statements. I guess it doesn't take much to have people defend companies they know so little about in industries they have no experience in. Marketing really works I guess. Btw the Revel NY ridesharing isn't going so well:
> sure we'll see plenty of "gross profit" in their non-GAAP financial statements
You claimed the “moment that [ridesharing companies] have to start treating drivers like employee's they can't make money.” I showed a counterfactual. You’re doubling down with hunches and suppositions.
> Revel NY ridesharing isn't going so well
You’re citing an article from 2021 on the TLC blocking Revel’s application for more vehicles [1]. (It was since approved.) How is the government telling a company to stop growing an indictment of their business model?
Revel, in New York, has employees and does fine.