The first order effect is just price sensitivity. People will decide to take public transportation, drive, take a conventional cab (which now has an app)--or just skip going out for the evening--if prices, say, double.
The second order effect is that there will be fewer passengers which will lead to fewer drivers. This probably doesn't matter much in a big urban core. But in marginal areas, such as where I live, it may be the difference between a viable service and an unviable one.
If I schedule in advance, or need more flexibility in car type, then the minicab companies win, but it's very rare for me to pick them because of price, even though they're often much cheaper.
But of course not everyone can afford the luxury of paying extra, and will just factor in longer waits instead.
They've never made money and they never will. If they haven't gotten after 10 years they wont get it.
Compare to a casino: people think that the ball will land on black and are willing to put their money down based on that. That doesn't mean they are right. In this case there is much more of a casino mentality at work that determines Ubers stockprice than that the underlying fundamentals are solid and sound enough to compute a price that is reasonable.
In that sense you can't lump everything on the stockmarket on one pile. 37signals had a funny bit about marketcap: https://signalvnoise.com/posts/1941-press-release-37signals-...