References
- Agre, P.E, 1994. Surveillance and capture: two models of privacy. The Information Society, 10 (2), 101–127.
- Attoh, K., Wells, K., and Cullen, D, 2019. “We’re building their data”: labor, alienation, and idiocy in the smart city. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 37 (6), 1007–1024.
- Baranes, A.I, 2020. Intangible assets and the financialized business enterprise: a Veblen-Commons approach. Journal of Economic Issues, 54 (3), 692–709.
- Barboza, T, 2020. Taking an Uber or Lyft pollutes more than driving. Los Angeles Times, 7 March.
- Bhuiyan, J., and Warzel, C., 2014. Uber investigates its top New York executive for privacy violations. Buzzfeed. Available at: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/johanabhuiyan/uber-is-investigating-its-top-new-york-executive-for-privacy.
- Bialick, A., 2015. Lyft and Uber won’t release data to shed light on how they affect traffic. StreetsBlog SF. Available at: https://sf.streetsblog.org/2015/06/30/lyft-and-uber-wont-release-data-to-shed-light-on-how-they-affect-traffic/.
- Birch, K, 2020. Technoscience rent: toward a theory of rentiership for technoscientific capitalism. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 45 (1), 3–33.
- Birch, K., and Cochrane, D.T, 2021. Big tech: four emerging forms of digital rentiership. Science as Culture, 1–15. doi:10.1080/09505431.2021.1932794.
- Birch, K., Cochrane, D., and Ward, C, 2021. Data as asset? The measurement, governance, and valuation of digital personal data by big tech. Big Data & Society, 8 (1), 205395172110173–15. doi:10.1177/20539517211017308.
- Birch, K., and Muniesa, F, 2020. Introduction: assetization and technoscientific capitalism. In: K. Birch, and F. Muniesa, eds. Assetization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–42.
- Bliss, L, 2019. What ride-hailing is really doing to urban traffic. Bloomberg, 5, August.
- Bogage, J, 2016. Uber’s controversial strategy to finally defeat Lyft. The Washington Post, 23, August.
- Borkholder, J., et al., 2018. Uber state interference: how TNC’s buy, bully, and bamboozle their way to deregulation. National Employment Law Project. Available at: https://www.nelp.org/publication/uber-state-interference/.
- Borup, M., et al., 2006. The sociology of expectations in science and technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18 (3/4), 285–298.
- Brumley, J, 2021. More quarterly losses from Uber, Lyft suggest the current ride hailing model just doesn't work. Motley Fool, 10, May.
- Brynjolfsson, E., and McAfee, A, 2014. The second machine age. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.
- Caliskan, K, 2021. Platform works as stack economization: cryptocurrency markets and exchanges in perspective. Sociologica, 14 (3), 115–142.
- Caliskan, K., and Callon, M, 2009. Economization, part 1: shifting attention from the economy towards processes of economization. Economy and Society, 38 (3), 369–398.
- Caliskan, K., and Callon, M, 2010. Economization, part 2: a research programme for the study of markets. Economy and Society, 39 (1), 1–32.
- Callon, M., and Muniesa, F, 2005. Peripheral vision: economic markets as calculative collective devices. Organization Studies, 26 (8), 1229–1250.
- Calo, R., and Rosenblat, A, 2017. The taking economy: Uber, information, and power. Columbia Law Review, 117, 1623–1690.
- Cameron, L.D, 2022. “Making out” while driving: relational and efficiency games in the gig economy. Organization Science, 33 (1), 231–252.
- Christophers, B, 2020. Rentier capitalism. New York: Verso Books.
- Cochrane, D.T, 2011. Castoriadis, Veblen and the ‘power theory of capital’. In: J.F. Humphrey, and I.S. Straume, eds. Depoliticization. Malmö, Sweden: NSU Press, 89–123.
- Collier, R.B., Dubal, V.B., and Carter, C.L, 2018. Disrupting regulation, regulating disruption: the politics of Uber in the United States. Perspectives on Politics, 16 (4), 919–937.
- Cooper, M., and McFall, L, 2017. Ten years after: it’s the economy and culture, stupid!. Journal of Cultural Economy, 10 (1), 1–17.
- Crain, M, 2014. Financial markets and online advertising: reevaluating the dotcom investment bubble. Information. Communication & Society, 17 (3), 371–384.
- Cusumano, M.A., Yoffie, D.B., and Gawer, A, 2020. The future of platforms. MIT Sloan Management Review, 61 (3), 46–54.
- Di Muzio, T., 2021. On ‘sabotage’. Economics from the Top Down. Available at: https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2021/09/27/di-muzio-on-sabotage/.
- Dobush, G., 2020. Uber’s real advantage is data. Medium. Available at: https://marker.medium.com/ubers-real-advantage-is-data-e54984ff524c.
- Doganova, L., Muniesa, F, et al., 2015. Capitalization devices: business models and the renewal of markets. In: M. Kornberger, ed. Making things valuable. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 109–125.
- Dubal, V.B, 2019. Uber’s new loan program could trap drivers in cycles of crushing debt. The Guardian, 5, December.
- Durand, C., and Milberg, W, 2019. Intellectual monopoly in global value chains. Review of International Political Economy, 27 (2), 404–429.
- Edelman, B.G., and Geradin, D, 2016. Efficiencies and regulatory shortcuts. Stanford Technology Law Review, 19 (2), 293–328.
- Edelman, G., 2022. Google’s alleged scheme to corner the online ad market. Wired. Available at: https://www.wired.com/story/google-antitrust-ad-market-lawsuit/.
- Efrati, A., 2017. Uber’s top secret “Hell” program exploited Lyft’s vulnerability. The Information. Available at: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/ubers-top-secret-hell-program-exploited-lyfts-vulnerability.
- Erhardt, G.D., et al., 2019. Do transportation network companies decrease or increase congestion? Science, 5 (5), 1–11.
- Evans, D. S., and Schmalensee, R, 2016. Matchmakers: the new economics of multisided platforms. Cambridge: Harvard Business Review Press.
- Fair, L., 2017. $20 million FTC settlement requires Uber to have proof for earnings, auto financing claims. Available at: https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2017/01/20-million-ftc-settlement-requires-uber-have-proof-earnings-auto-financing-claims.
- Foster, J. B, 1986. The theory of monopoly capitalism. New York: Monthly Review Press.
- Funk, J, 2021. The crisis of venture capital: fixing America’s broken start-up system. American affairs. February.
- Glasner, J., 2018. The formula behind San Francisco’s startup success. Crunchbase. Available at: https://news.crunchbase.com/formula-behind-san-franciscos-startup-success/.
- Glasner, J., 2019. Big revenues, huge valuations, and major losses: charting the era of the unicorn IPO. Crunchbase. Available at: https://news.crunchbase.com/news/big-revenues-huge-valuations-and-major-losses-charting-the-era-of-the-unicorn-ipo/.
- Goolsbee, A, 2019. Passengers may pay a lot more, drivers won't accept much less. The New York Times, 31, May.
- Griffith, E., and Johnston, T., 2022. The tech bubble that never burst. The New York Times [interactive]. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/04/19/technology/tech-startup-bubble.html.
- Griswold, A., 2014. The year in Uber. Slate. Available at: http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2014/12/uber_spent_2014_expanding_aggressively_and_pissing_off_just_about_everyone.html.
- Griswold, A., 2015. Uber’s siege on San Antonio. Slate. Available at: https://slate.com/business/2015/10/uber-returns-to-san-antonio-after-throwing-a-massive-tantrum-over-regulations.html.
- Griswold, A., 2018. Uber’s secret weapon is its team of economists. Quartz. Available at: https://qz.com/1367800/ubernomics-is-ubers-semi-secret-internal-economics-department/.
- Griswold, A., 2022. The Uber files are old news. Oversharing. Available at: https://oversharing.substack.com/p/the-uber-files-are-old-news.
- Gupta, S, 2021. Manipulations of freedom. Monthly Review, 1, February.
- Hern, A, 2017. Uber allegedly used secret program to undermine rival lyft. The Guardian, 13, April.
- Hill, D.W, 2020. The injuries of platform logistics. Media, Culture & Society, 42 (4), 521–536.
- Hollister, S, 2021. Instacart, Uber, Lyft, Postmates, and DoorDash totally conned you into paying for Prop 22. The Verge, 19 February.
- Hughes, S., 2021. Gig work has helped a lot of people get through this pandemic. Marketplace. Available at: https://www.marketplace.org/shows/marketplace-tech/gig-work-has-helped-a-lot-of-people-get-through-this-pandemic-amazon-flex-instacart-doordash.
- Hwang, T., and Elish, M.C., 2015. The disingenuous ways Uber hides behind its algorithm. Slate. Available at: https://slate.com/technology/2015/07/ubers-algorithm-and-the-mirage-of-the-marketplace.html.
- Jack, C., 2017. Lexicon of lies. New York: Data & Society. Available at: https://datasociety.net/library/lexicon-of-lies/.
- Jones, S., 2015. The Postmates problem: why some restaurants are forced to fight the delivery app. Eater. Available at: https://www.eater.com/2015/7/31/9074491/postmates-delivery-problems.
- Kennedy, E.J, 2017. Employed by an algorithm: labor rights in the on-demand economy. Seattle University Law Review, 40 (3), 987–1048.
- Kerr, D., 2020. ‘A totally different ballgame’: inside Uber and Lyft’s fight over gig worker status. CNET. Available at: https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/features/uber-lyfts-fight-over-gig-worker-status-as-campaign-against-labor-activists-mounts/.
- Khan, L.M, 2017. Amazon’s antitrust paradox. Yale Law Journal, 126 (3), 710–805.
- Langley, P., and Leyshon, A, 2017. Platform capitalism: the intermediation and capitalization of digital economic circulation. Finance and Society, 3, 11–31.
- Levy, A., 2019. Uber will soon join an ugly but exclusive club: unprofitable companies worth more than $50 billion. CNBC. Available at: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/27/uber-one-of-only-3-unprofitable-companies-worth-more-than-50-billion.html.
- Li, A.K, 2021. Beyond algorithmic control: flexibility, intermediaries, and paradox in the on-demand economy. Information, Communication & Society, doi:10.1080/1369118X.2021.1924225.
- Mackenzie, A, 2018. 48 million configurations and counting: platform numbers and their capitalization. Journal of Cultural Economy, 11 (1), 36–53.
- Marx, P., 2017. Uber’s auto-loan program is basically indentured servitude. Medium. Available at: https://thebolditalic.com/ubers-auto-loan-program-is-basically-indentured-servitude-78011b8ea9b2.
- Mattioli, M, 2018. Autonomy in the age of autonomous vehicles. Boston University Journal of Science and Technology Law, 24 (2), 277–298.
- Mazzucato, M, 2018. The value of everything. New York: PublicAffairs.
- McGee, C., 2017. Only 4% of Uber drivers remain on the platform a year later. CNBC. Available at: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/20/only-4-percent-of-uber-drivers-remain-after-a-year-says-report.html.
- McMillan Cottom, T., 2020. Where platform capitalism and racial capitalism meet: the sociology of race and racism in the digital society. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 6 (4), 441–449.
- Mills, H, 1961. Marketing as a science. Harvard Business Review, 39 (5), 137–142.
- Monahan, T, 2020. Monopolizing mobilities: the data politics of ride-hailing platforms in US cities. Telematics & Informatics, 55 (101436), 1–9.
- Mordowanec, N., 2022. Undelivered DoorDash orders spark debate in viral video. Newsweek. Available at: https://www.newsweek.com/no-tip-no-trip-undelivered-doordash-orders-spark-debate-viral-video-1697322.
- Mouré, C, 2021. Soft-wars: a capital-as-power analysis of Google’s power trajectory. Review of Capital as Power, 2 (1), 71–90.
- Mueller, G, 2021. Breaking things at work. New York: Verso Books.
- Mullainathan, S, 2014. Hold the phone: a big-data conundrum. The New York Times, 26, July.
- Muniesa, F, 2016. Setting the habit of capitalization: the pedagogy of earning power at the Harvard Business School, 1920-1940. Historical Social Research, 41 (2), 196–217.
- Muniesa, F, et al., 2017. Capitalization. Paris: Presses des Mines.
- Muniesa, F, 2021. Finance: cultural or political? Journal of Cultural Economy, doi:10.1080/17530350.2021.1927151.
- Myers West, S., 2019. Data capitalism: redefining the logics of surveillance and privacy. Business & Society, 58 (1), 20–41.
- Newton, C, 2014. This is Uber’s playbook for sabotaging Lyft. The Verge, 26, August.
- Nitzan, J., and Bichler, S, 2009. Capital as power. New York: Routledge.
- Ogurchak, A., 2016. A primer on the patents, trademarks and copyrights owned by Uber. IP Watchdog.
- Ongweso, E., 2019. We’re all killing Uber just by using it. Vice. Available at: https://www.vice.com/en/article/zmjew8/were-all-killing-uber-just-by-using-it.
- Ongweso, E., 2020. Proposition 22’s victory shows how Uber and Lyft break democracy. Vice. Available at: https://www.vice.com/en/article/akddx8/proposition-22s-victory-shows-how-uber-and-lyft-break-democracy.
- Pershan, C., 2020. ‘We don’t even do take out’: why, then, is this restaurant on Seamless? Eater. Available at: https://www.eater.com/2020/1/29/21113416/grubhub-seamless-kin-khao-online-delivery-mistake-doordash.
- Phillips, M, 2020. Market edges toward euphoria, despite pandemic’s toll. The New York Times, 26, December.
- Pitt, S., 2022. Uber reports another big loss but beats on revenue, shares pop 19%. MSN. Available at: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/uber-reports-another-big-loss-but-beats-on-revenue-shares-pop-19-25/ar-AA10dVjM.
- Plante, S.G, 2019. Uber and lyft have admitted to making traffic worse in some US cities. Vox, 6, August.
- Plantin, J.-C., et al., 2018. Infrastructure studies meet platform studies in the age of Google and Facebook. New Media & Society, 20 (1), 293–310.
- Polillo, S, 2011. Wildcats in banking fields: the politics of financial inclusion. Theory and Society, 40 (4), 347–383.
- Pollman, E., and Barry, J.M, 2016. Regulatory entrepreneurship. Southern California Law Review, 90 (3), 383–448.
- Proctor, R, 2008. Agnotology: a missing term to describe the cultural production of ignorance (and its study). In: R. Proctor, and L. Schiebinger, eds. Agnotology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1–31.
- Rahman, K.S., and Thelen, K, 2019. The rise of the platform business model and the transformation of twenty-first-century capitalism. Politics & Society, 47 (2), 177–204.
- Ramesh, R., 2018. How DoorDash leverages AI in its logistics engine. YouTube video. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s203ScTy4xQ.
- Rana, P., and Haddon, H, 2021. Doordash and Uber Eats are hot; they’re still not making money. Wall Street Journal, 28, May.
- Rana, P., and Rundle, J, 2020. Uber sues Los Angeles over data-sharing rules. Wall Street Journal, 25 March.
- Richardson, L, 2015. Performing the sharing economy. Geoforum: Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences, 67, 121–129.
- Richardson, L, 2018. Platforms and the publicness of markets. Mediapolis, 4 (3). Available at: https://www.mediapolisjournal.com/2018/10/platforms-and-the-publicness-of-urban-markets/.
- Richardson, L, 2020. Platforms, markets, and contingent calculation: the flexible arrangement of the delivered meal. Antipode, 52 (3), 619–636.
- Rochet, J.-C., and Tirole, J, 2003. Platform competition in two-sided markets. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1 (4), 990–1029.
- Roose, K, 2014. The problem with profitless start-ups. New York Magazine, 11, April.
- Roose, K, 2021. Farewell, millennial lifestyle subsidy. The New York Times, 8, June.
- Root, A., 2021. Lyft is profitable now? What profit? Barron’s. Available at: https://www.barrons.com/articles/lyft-profitable-accounting-adjusted-ebitda-51628111994.
- Rosenblat, A, 2018. Uberland. Oakland: University of California Press.
- Rosenblat, A., and Stark, L, 2016. Algorithmic labor and information asymmetries: a case study of Uber’s drivers. International Journal of Communication, 10, 3758–3784.
- Rosenfeld, S., 2020. Safety report from Uber leaves out most accidents. San Francisco Public Press, 7 January.
- Roy, R., 2020. DoorDash and pizza arbitrage. Read Margins. Available at: https://www.readmargins.com/p/doordash-and-pizza-arbitrage.
- Rushe, D, 2020. Twenty years after the dotcom crash, is tech’s bubble about to burst again? The Guardian, 12, September.
- Sadowski, J, 2019. When data is capital: datafication, accumulation, and extraction. Big Data & Society, 6 (1), 205395171882054–12.
- Sadowski, J, 2020. The internet of landlords: digital platforms and new mechanisms of rentier capitalism. Antipode, 52 (2), 562–580.
- Sainato, M, 2021. Gig workers say pay has fallen after California’s prop 22. The Guardian, 18, February.
- Samuels, W.J, 1994. On “shirking” and “business sabotage”: A note. Journal of Economic Issues, 28 (4), 1249–1255.
- Sanchez-Cartas, J., and León, G, 2021. Multisided platforms and markets: a survey of the theoretical literature. Journal of Economic Surveys, 35 (2), 452–487.
- Saxena, J., 2019. Grubhub’s new strategy is to be an even worse partner to restaurants. Eater. Available at: https://www.eater.com/2019/10/30/20940107/grubhub-to-add-restaurants-without-permission-like-postmates.
- Schor, J.B., et al., 2020. Dependence and precarity in the platform economy. Theory and Society, 49 (5), 833–861.
- Selvam, A, 2021. Chicago sues Grubhub and Doordash for allegedly scamming basically everyone: restaurants, drivers, and customers. Eater Chicago, 27, August.
- Shapiro, A, 2018. Between autonomy and control: strategies of arbitrage in the ‘on-demand’ economy. New Media & Society, 20 (8), 2673–3094.
- Shapiro, A, 2020a. Design, control, predict: logistical governance in the smart city. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
- Shapiro, A, 2020b. Dynamic exploits: calculative asymmetries in the on-demand economy. New Technology, Work & Employment, 35 (2), 162–177.
- Shapiro, A, 2022. Platform urbanism in a pandemic: dark stores, ghost kitchens, and the logistical-urban frontier. Journal of Consumer Culture. doi:10.1177/14695405211069983.
- Siddiqui, F, 2021. You may be paying more for Uber, but drivers aren’t getting their cut of the fare hike. The Washington Post, 10, June.
- Smith, W.R, 1956. Product differentiation and market segmentation as alternative marketing strategies. Journal of Marketing, 21 (1), 3–8.
- Solman, P., 2019. How data drives Uber’s efficient but controversial business model. PBS News Hour. Available at: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-data-drives-ubers-efficient-but-controversial-business-model.
- Solomon, B, 2016. Uber sued for predatory pricing by San Francisco taxi company. Forbes, 2, November.
- Sonnemaker, T, 2020. Uber and Lyft say the battle over AB-5 is about preserving flexibility; the reality is their businesses have become dependent on full-time drivers. Business Insider, 21, August.
- Srnicek, N, 2017. Platform capitalism. Malden, MA: Polity.
- Standing, G, 2016. The corruption of capitalism. London: Biteback publishing.
- Stewart, A., 2021. A focus on profit is hindering progress, business, and the future. NASDAQ Blog. Available at: https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/a-focus-on-profit-is-hindering-progress-business-and-the-future-2021-05-10.
- Sundararajan, A, 2016. The sharing economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Tarduno, M, 2021. The congestion costs of Uber and Lyft. Journal of Urban Economics, 122, 103318.
- Tedder, M., 2022. Grubhub shows that food delivery alone won’t bring profits. The Street. Available at: https://www.thestreet.com/investing/grubhub-shows-that-food-delivery-alone-wont-bring-profits.
- Thomas, C, 2018. Ride oversharing: privacy regulation within the gig economy. Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 36 (1), 247–276.
- Uber, 2015. How efficiency benefits riders and partners. Available at: https://www.uber.com/en-GB/blog/how-efficiency-benefits-riders-and-partners/.
- van Dijck, J., Poell, T., and de Waal, M, 2018. The platform society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- van Doorn, N., 2020. At what price? labour politics and calculative power struggles in on-demand food delivery. Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation, 14 (1), 136–149.
- van Doorn, N., and Badger, A., 2020. Platform capitalism’s hidden abode: producing data assets in the gig economy. Antipode, 52 (5), 1475–1495.
- Veblen, T, 1908. On the nature of capital: investment, intangible assets, and the pecuniary magnate. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 23 (1), 104–136.
- Veblen, T, 1919. On the nature and uses of sabotage. New York: The Dial Publishing.
- Veblen, T, 1923. Absentee ownership and business enterprise in recent times. New York: B. W. Huebsch.
- Viljoen, S., Goldenfein, J., and McGuigan, L, 2021. Design choices: mechanism design and platform capitalism. Big Data & Society, doi:10.1177/20539517211034312.
- Waheed, S., et al., 2018. More than a gig: a survey of ride-hailing drivers in Los Angeles. Institute for Research on Labor & Employment. University of California Los Angeles. Available at: https://irle.ucla.edu/publication/more-than-a-gig-a-survey-of-ride-hailing-drivers-in-los-angeles/.
- Walters, J., 2020. ‘If you want to keep your car, you drive’. Jacobin. Available at: https://jacobin.com/2020/04/lyft-express-drive-coronavirus-pandemic-drivers/.
- Wark, M, 2019. Capital is dead: is this something worse? New York: Verso.
- Waxman, N., 2022. Chicago raises new allegations in lawsuit against Grubhub. Eater. Available at: https://chicago.eater.com/2022/2/2/22912477/chicago-grubhub-lawsuit-third-party-delivery-amended-complaint-restaurants.
- Wilhelm, A., 2021. Will ride-hailing profits ever come? TechCrunch. Available at: https://social.techcrunch.com/2021/02/12/will-ride-hailing-profits-ever-come/.
- Willmott, H, 2010. Creating ‘value’ beyond the point of production: branding, financialization and market capitalization. Organization, 17 (5), 517–542.
- Winner, L, 1980. Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, 109 (1), 121–136.
- Wong, V., 2020. Even if you’re trying to avoid Grubhub by calling your favorite restaurant directly, Grubhub could still be charging it a fee. BuzzFeed News. Available at: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/venessawong/grubhub-phone-order-call-fee-coronavirus.
- Wood, A.J, 2019. The Taylor Review: understanding the gig economy, dependency and the complexities of control. New Technology, Work and Employment, 34 (2), 111–115.
- Zhao, G., et al., 2021. Uber’s real-time data intelligence platform at scale. Uber Engineering Blog. Available at: https://eng.uber.com/gairos-scalability/.