4 ms·

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. Un

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?

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?