The issue are the platforms...
.... which are not "peer-to-peer" at all but are huge concentrators of the offer, and which also control the demand through their apps/sites. And get a cut of *each* "transaction". It may became impossible soon to offer any service but outside the ruling "platforms".
If they were services that for a fixed fee allow offer and demand to meet, it would be a different landscape - but in they way they work they have a big interest in maximizing the number of transactions, the number of "sharers" to ensure the "cut" is accepted, and easily meet demand everywhere.
Even if some customers are screwed - they could still just blame the "sharer", maybe remove it from the service if really a non manageable and repeating issue, and keep on business as usual. After all, all the TOS will say they are not responsible of anything.
The same platforms also controls their own ratings (and just like Facebook they may "discover" numbers can be inflated...), thereby without independent assessment, and some liabilities, they have a strong incentive to build fake trust - not so difficult nowadays.
True innovation has no problem with some sensible rules. Exploiting people for greed usually has many.