Tom King

I think that companies will take the option that costs them the least, both in terms of money and time and headaches and so on.

So if you really care about resiliency of always having your services available over the internet, you would invest the money and the time and everything else to have your own servers.

The reason they choose to go with one of the cloud providers is because they gain many different advantages.

It's probably cheaper for them.

It's less work for them.

It expands to full the needs.

There is no limit to how much demand their service can supply, so that there's no limit on the hardware.

Amazon handles that problem, or Google or Microsoft.

So I think companies are always going to make a decision that is best for them in their own unique circumstances.

So no, I don't think that any kind of additional risk needs to be considered here.

Dave, what do you think?

I would probably say faker because, you know, it's heavily dependent on the level of speculative activity in the markets, which goes up and goes down.

And when it goes down, it really, really hurts the people that are involved.

So I would say faker.

Yeah, so Lyft is pretty much concentrated in the United States.

Uber took the global expansion option.

I think that Uber's size gives it certain advantages over Lyft.

I know from being a regular, or at least until a few years ago, a regular user of both, that Uber was always cheaper and always quicker to get to you.

They also probably lose more money than Lyft or were back then at the time.

I mean, I think it's hard to say, but I mean, there has to be a lift because Uber can't have this market entirely to itself.