Having an effective strategy to skirt regulations probably requires just as much knowledge of the regs as a company who complies with them.

They don't "ignore" regulations. They violate regulations. They do so strategically or they would have been shut down long ago.

For example, if public opinion weren't on their side, perhaps due to, say, Uber rides being as dangerous as they're sometimes claimed to be rather than as safe as statistics show them to be, some of those "little" city lawsuits could have blown up much worse.

Unfairly, IMHO. It certainly helped, but they did so much, and better, than the other apps and they made legit, value-improving changes to the ride-hailing process: actually acting on feedback, dynamically setting prices, coordinating a movement away from tipping, applying modern IT.

Remember, their core product was not violating regulations: it was filling empty spots for legit black limo drivers, and was more expensive than taxis but still competitive because of the quality of service.

Ignoring regulations is easy.

Getting regulations to ignore you is the hard part.

That and the economic recession where lots of people who had vehicles were now trying to make ends meet. Also, they paid their drivers better initially until they build up their driver network. Of course leveraging the media helped and a symphony of other things all pushed them to where they are now.