And you thought I had no talent….

“Get out there and get hurt” said my coach, as he waved me onto the field.

We were getting clobbered in a soccer game, and one particular player was killing us.

My assignment was to irritate this guy to the point where he decked me, and was kicked out of the game.

No sweat, I’m good at irritation.

The whistle blew, and I trotted onto the field. As usual, my manly physique struck giggles in the hearts of the opponents. I sidled up to their star, and said something rude about his Mommy…

He stomped me, was promptly ejected, and I staggered back to our bench. I think there was applause… but maybe it was my head ringing.

One way of beating competitors is to force them from the field. This time it didn’t work, because their whole team was better than ours. The other way is by being better than they are.

Established companies are often tempted to deal with competition by either preventing it in the first place, or driving it from the field.

Taxi companies have taken that approach with Uber… enlisting regulators’ help in either eliminating or hamstringing the upstart. They point out a myriad of potential flaws (some valid) in an effort to have government help them out of trouble. It’s an illustration of “Regulatory Capture” where businesses being regulated smooch with, then influence, those who are supposed to be controlling them.

What they underestimate of course, is the overwhelming popularity of Uber. People love them because they are perceived as doing a better job than traditional cabs. Instead of trying to improve their own business practices, cab companies fight a losing battle, and ultimately the voting public recognizes and demands value.

Many scheduled service operators initially resisted the “curbside carriers”, not by emulating what made them popular and successful, but by nudging regulators to drive them out of business.

Clearly some of the curbsides weren’t playing by the rules, and needed discipline, but that’s unrelated to their success at both serving new markets and taking business from conventional carriers. They found a better way, and the public rewarded them. Despite heavy regulatory scrutiny most are still thriving, some with better safety records than established companies.

Similar confrontations sometimes take place on the “hardware” side. In an effort to offer passengers a better experience, some companies buy unique equipment. When the market responds positively, sometimes competitors go back channel to regulators with unfounded hints about safety and legality… rather than looking at whether innovative equipment helps customers, the environment, and the industry.

Years ago the Scenicruiser stole the public’s imagination, and competing companies sued in an effort to be able to operate the iconic bus. Buy the new stuff if it works, don’t fight it. Innovate, don’t denigrate.

We’re creeping back towards a regulated industry, because the burden of compliance falls unfairly on start-ups and small companies. That hurts everyone. Innovation is stifled, and the industry shrinks. People revert to traveling in cars, dying in disproportionate numbers.

The Soviet Union had a regulated marketplace. On the surface it seemed silly to ignore the economies of scale by having several manufacturers of consumer goods when single large ones would work. Eliminate competition and costs should go down. There’s no reason quality should suffer, and you get to tell the market what to buy. How’d that work out?

Looks great on paper, but dinosaurs are big, and they aren’t around anymore. Cockroaches are adaptable, and still with us. (Darn, wish I coulda thought of a nicer metaphor)

Competition is what gets our juices stirring. Think of the changes in the industry since deregulation. It’s not an accident that dramatic improvements in equipment and service made a giant leap when bus companies were forced to compete in the mid 1980s..

Beautiful buses, better efficiency, improved suspensions, entertainment systems, and many other innovations that attract customers all became available once government embraced competition, rather than smothering it.

Two things to remember…

If you’re tempted to stifle your competitors, rather than improve on them, that can be a two edged sword. You could end up squished by a bigger company.

And

In a recent documentary an American astronaut captured in a few words what I’m trying to say here.

(I think it was Frank Borman, but it ain’t plagiarism if I can’t remember who I stole it from).

He was asked if we’d have ever gotten to the moon if we hadn’t been racing the Russians. Paraphrased, he said of course not, and we should be grateful for the push they gave us.

Competition is a bit like democracy... messy, strenuous, sometimes dirty, but still better than the alternative. If we want the industry to thrive we need the innovation that competition and competitors bring.

Government should be encouraging it, rather than being a crushing tool of “legacy” businesses.