10 ms·

I can understand the sentiment of the parent post but I disagree. The recent UberXPostgres articles are an insight into the engineering challenges that go into

by yomly 10y ago

I can understand the sentiment of the parent post but I disagree. The recent UberXPostgres articles are an insight into the engineering challenges that go into solving these business problems at scale. The projects probably started as some hacky glue programmed Frankenstein but their current iterations solve considerably difficult and expensive problems that I don't think is trivial for new entrants to come in and instantly replicate. So engineering and capital requirements aside, there's the matter of network effects and customer adoption to tackle. It'd be a very hard sell to convince users to stop using AirBnB or Uber - the inventory may be volatile, but it's deep and expansive. Any country I go to, I will first think AirBnB or Uber as I will be confident without even checking that they'll have coverage. Much like how I don't even bother looking anywhere else for products other than Amazon - they'll probably have what I'm looking for, it'll either be the cheapest or close to the cheapest product and the delivery experience will be dependable. We at HN consider ourselves being more acquired than most but are probably still prone to appreciating convenience over optimisation now and then. Current consumer trends suggest though that our behaviour is in the minority and so "first-mover"* advantage is king. *(AirBnB and Uber almost certainly were not the first in their respective spaces, just like the iPad wasn't the first ever tablet)

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
spaceflunky 10y ago
Uber definitely has built some technology that allows them to scale out a real-time ride-sharing app with payment, locations, optimizations, etc, which is a real technological feat. However, I still question: 1.) how difficult that is to do (iirc its not like Lyft is far behind and there are others as well) and 2.) does uber have patents on these developments and 3.) how much of those UberXPostgres articles are just posturing to the investment community (i.e. Uber flexing it's muscles to show how it's spending that cash) vs. serious long-term competitive advantage? You're missing my point about Airbnb, by pivoting to Uber, which I think is in a totally different boat than Airbnb given that Uber does have greater control over some of their inventory than Airbnb and total control over some of the Uber inventory which Airbnb does not. Unless Airbnb starts buying apts and renting them out themselves, which be a better play for them, albeit politically disastrous most likely. As others pointed out, Airbnb has not published big engineering feats (ala UberXPostgres) nor does it need to, nor likely ever will. The point about Airbnb is that Airbnb is a retailer with total lack of control over inventory. Competitors will one day create a sleeker better platform because there's no defense for Airbnb. I think a good analogy would be dating sites. It feels like every year there's a new app: Match.com->eHarmony->OkCupid->plentyoffish->jdate->tinder->bumble, the list goes on and on. Where's the brand loyalty in dating sites? There is none because no one cares about the brand, they care about the inventory (i.e. booty) and so if a site has a better way of finding those dates (be it faster or more curated) or just better "inventory" then people are going to use those new sites. That's how I see Airbnb going. Eventually there are going to be different sites that do the same thing, but tailored to different needs. Airbnb will still be around, but it sure as hell won't be worth $30 billion dollars. Also, home-sharing is about as fickle as dating. People date until they find a mate and then stop. Most people don't live their home for more than 3 years, especially in popular Airbnb markets like NYC, LA, or SF. Therefore there's a lot inventory turn over that Airbnb has to deal with, just like dating sites, which makes it easier for a competitor to come in and swoop up people who new to home-sharing.

by yomly 10y ago

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

spaceflunky 10y ago

Uber definitely has built some technology that allows them to scale out a real-time ride-sharing app with payment, locations, optimizations, etc, which is a real technological feat. However, I still question: 1.) how difficult that is to do (iirc its not like Lyft is far behind and there are others as well) and 2.) does uber have patents on these developments and 3.) how much of those UberXPostgres articles are just posturing to the investment community (i.e. Uber flexing it's muscles to show how it's spending that cash) vs. serious long-term competitive advantage? You're missing my point about Airbnb, by pivoting to Uber, which I think is in a totally different boat than Airbnb given that Uber does have greater control over some of their inventory than Airbnb and total control over some of the Uber inventory which Airbnb does not. Unless Airbnb starts buying apts and renting them out themselves, which be a better play for them, albeit politically disastrous most likely. As others pointed out, Airbnb has not published big engineering feats (ala UberXPostgres) nor does it need to, nor likely ever will. The point about Airbnb is that Airbnb is a retailer with total lack of control over inventory. Competitors will one day create a sleeker better platform because there's no defense for Airbnb. I think a good analogy would be dating sites. It feels like every year there's a new app: Match.com->eHarmony->OkCupid->plentyoffish->jdate->tinder->bumble, the list goes on and on. Where's the brand loyalty in dating sites? There is none because no one cares about the brand, they care about the inventory (i.e. booty) and so if a site has a better way of finding those dates (be it faster or more curated) or just better "inventory" then people are going to use those new sites. That's how I see Airbnb going. Eventually there are going to be different sites that do the same thing, but tailored to different needs. Airbnb will still be around, but it sure as hell won't be worth $30 billion dollars. Also, home-sharing is about as fickle as dating. People date until they find a mate and then stop. Most people don't live their home for more than 3 years, especially in popular Airbnb markets like NYC, LA, or SF. Therefore there's a lot inventory turn over that Airbnb has to deal with, just like dating sites, which makes it easier for a competitor to come in and swoop up people who new to home-sharing.