That's because it needs only a fraction of the number of drivers that Uber does, and it can get by with more part-time drivers versus Uber, which needs as many full-time drivers as possible to meet its customers' demand. Part-time drivers are the marginal supply I was referring to above, and Lyft reported last year that 82% of its drivers work fewer than 20 hours a week; it's possible that it is these part-time drivers, exposed to Uber's relentless rate cuts but ineligible for its high-volume bonuses, are what has kept Lyft (which generally monetizes better on a per-ride basis, in part because of tips) alive. If so—and again, there is very thin information here—that would be for Uber a truly large penalty for a lack of financial controls and properly calculated unit economics…