4 ms·

Can anybody see a real future in any of these gig service companies? I'd say Uber is the exception because of the way the business works (i.e. ride sharing is s

Can anybody see a real future in any of these gig service companies? I'd say Uber is the exception because of the way the business works (i.e. ride sharing is something you can't plan for the future, it's a one shot per transaction deal) (this also doesn't account for it's constant boxing matches with various Governments, that's a different discussion)? Like the maid services, once you get linked up with a maid you like, you're directly incentivized to abandon the service to keep the maid you want, and they are incentivized you let you do it because they get more money? It seems like all of these "match x worker to x task" services are a countdown until the customer finds a worker they particularly like (or just one they can tolerate, I wouldn't be wild about strangers having access to my home) at which point they drop the service, and the servicer's time to handle clients for said service has now been reduced, since they have a direct relationship with a client. I mean they can put this in the ToS that you "can't do that" but in reality they absolutely can, there's nothing to stop them and no real way to follow up in a meaningful, actionable way for the service.

literallycancer 10y ago
The service can have a better insurance than the individual worker, etc. Ultimately it's up to the service to add enough value that you want to keep using it. What if your favorite worker is busy? Either you have to find a replacement yourself (a failure), or the worker knows someone else who's available (and then the worker is basically running their own small time service).
sharemywin 10y ago
You can certainly put a non-compete of existing customers in the contract with the "independent contractor" and make it clear that if the platform finds out you'll lose all your existing contracts and get sued. You could offer a way to buy themselves out of the contract too.
- FussyZeus 10y ago
  The tricky part is the platform finding out. The customer isn't going to out them, and the provider is going to do everything possible to not out themselves. Unless our hypothetical service is hiring PI's to follow all their contractors around, it seems unlikely they could catch even a small fraction of the offenders.
  - cowpewter 10y ago
    PIs are expensive. My dad's a PI, and mostly works for insurance companies on worker's comp fraud cases. Even the insurance companies, for all their money, don't hire a PI until they are 99.9% positive a given claimant is defrauding them, and at that point the PI is more of a formality to gather evidence for court than a tool for finding out if the claimant is a fraud or not.
    - FussyZeus 10y ago
      Right and that's what I'm saying, the expense for finding out who's skimming clients is going to be incredibly high compared to the minimal benefits. Even with VC cash that seems like a tough sell. Not to mention, it would be a trifle for even a lackluster reporter to paint this up like the company being the creepy big brother bad guy. The PR cost could be very high too, considering the levels of loyalty (read: none) most customers have to these services.
  - sharemywin 10y ago
    Most of the people would probably use the same service time and same location. But, even before that offer the customer a free service time with new contractor for canceling. if in a competitive situation offer to match prices just need a quote. if it starts to look kind "fishy" flag the contractor. Also, try to filter out dishonest contractors. In the cleaning situation do you want someone coming to your place that's willing to steal from the place they work?
    - FussyZeus 10y ago
      Except this offer goes against what I was saying is the "x factor" in the customer deciding to hire the contractor directly instead of using the service; they find a contractor they trust more than the service, or they find this contractor does better work, offers lower rates off the service, etc. The customer has multiple incentives to leave (keep the same worker that they like, pay less) and the contractor has them too (less overhead, makes more because the service isn't taking a cut, maintains own relationship with customer). The basic result is, while these services are good for helping customers -find- contractors, it's much harder to maintain that value gain once the contractor has been -found-. Most customers aren't going to perceive it as stealing from their employer, because they aren't employees, they are contractors, and because of the low value gain by using the service. The service is in effect getting paid to continuously provide contractors, and if the customer likes the contractor they have, they have no reason to continue using the service. See what I mean?

literallycancer 10y ago

The service can have a better insurance than the individual worker, etc. Ultimately it's up to the service to add enough value that you want to keep using it. What if your favorite worker is busy? Either you have to find a replacement yourself (a failure), or the worker knows someone else who's available (and then the worker is basically running their own small time service).

sharemywin 10y ago

You can certainly put a non-compete of existing customers in the contract with the "independent contractor" and make it clear that if the platform finds out you'll lose all your existing contracts and get sued. You could offer a way to buy themselves out of the contract too.

FussyZeus 10y ago
The tricky part is the platform finding out. The customer isn't going to out them, and the provider is going to do everything possible to not out themselves. Unless our hypothetical service is hiring PI's to follow all their contractors around, it seems unlikely they could catch even a small fraction of the offenders.
- cowpewter 10y ago
  PIs are expensive. My dad's a PI, and mostly works for insurance companies on worker's comp fraud cases. Even the insurance companies, for all their money, don't hire a PI until they are 99.9% positive a given claimant is defrauding them, and at that point the PI is more of a formality to gather evidence for court than a tool for finding out if the claimant is a fraud or not.
  - FussyZeus 10y ago
    Right and that's what I'm saying, the expense for finding out who's skimming clients is going to be incredibly high compared to the minimal benefits. Even with VC cash that seems like a tough sell. Not to mention, it would be a trifle for even a lackluster reporter to paint this up like the company being the creepy big brother bad guy. The PR cost could be very high too, considering the levels of loyalty (read: none) most customers have to these services.
- sharemywin 10y ago
  Most of the people would probably use the same service time and same location. But, even before that offer the customer a free service time with new contractor for canceling. if in a competitive situation offer to match prices just need a quote. if it starts to look kind "fishy" flag the contractor. Also, try to filter out dishonest contractors. In the cleaning situation do you want someone coming to your place that's willing to steal from the place they work?
  - FussyZeus 10y ago
    Except this offer goes against what I was saying is the "x factor" in the customer deciding to hire the contractor directly instead of using the service; they find a contractor they trust more than the service, or they find this contractor does better work, offers lower rates off the service, etc. The customer has multiple incentives to leave (keep the same worker that they like, pay less) and the contractor has them too (less overhead, makes more because the service isn't taking a cut, maintains own relationship with customer). The basic result is, while these services are good for helping customers -find- contractors, it's much harder to maintain that value gain once the contractor has been -found-. Most customers aren't going to perceive it as stealing from their employer, because they aren't employees, they are contractors, and because of the low value gain by using the service. The service is in effect getting paid to continuously provide contractors, and if the customer likes the contractor they have, they have no reason to continue using the service. See what I mean?