3 ms·

Square really tried to make this work with Square Order - for a while the explicit focus was on coffee. Unfortunately that wasn't successful in getting the usag

by tdeck 7y ago

Square really tried to make this work with Square Order - for a while the explicit focus was on coffee. Unfortunately that wasn't successful in getting the usage numbers hoped for, and was eventually shut down. I hope you're able to make it work but this gives me a bit of deja vu.

timgriffin77 7y ago
Yep - they tried to build it twice I think. We were worried about that when we started, because we knew a partnership with them would be helpful. After working with them for a while now, I think it's clear they still believe in the opportunity. In terms of why it didn't work out, I think there are two factors to consider: 1) it wasn't their flagship product 2) they had a capped market of support. In essence, they could only build a network of locations within their existing ecosystem, and despite that being large, it wouldn't be big enough to win the space. I think a 3rd party is most likely to succeed here, because we can facilitate integrations with all of the POS providers, and build a really big network that way.
- tdeck 7y ago
  As someone who worked at Square, my impression at the time was that the problem was lower than expected engagement with the order functionality at existing locations, which made it hard to show the value proposition (I didn't work on Order but it was a small company). I'm not sure failing to be a flagship product caused the problem, Square has other products (e.g. Caviar, which people often don't know belongs to Square) that have succeeded. This despite Order having a decent UX and some interesting features like arrival prediction.
  - timgriffin77 7y ago
    Really great insight! Caviar is a good example of how a hybrid approach can work, especially to your point that most people don't recognize that Square owns it. Perhaps branding played into the decision, but they shut it down just after acquiring Caviar, which makes sense.

by tdeck 7y ago

timgriffin77 7y ago

Yep - they tried to build it twice I think. We were worried about that when we started, because we knew a partnership with them would be helpful. After working with them for a while now, I think it's clear they still believe in the opportunity. In terms of why it didn't work out, I think there are two factors to consider: 1) it wasn't their flagship product 2) they had a capped market of support. In essence, they could only build a network of locations within their existing ecosystem, and despite that being large, it wouldn't be big enough to win the space. I think a 3rd party is most likely to succeed here, because we can facilitate integrations with all of the POS providers, and build a really big network that way.

tdeck 7y ago
As someone who worked at Square, my impression at the time was that the problem was lower than expected engagement with the order functionality at existing locations, which made it hard to show the value proposition (I didn't work on Order but it was a small company). I'm not sure failing to be a flagship product caused the problem, Square has other products (e.g. Caviar, which people often don't know belongs to Square) that have succeeded. This despite Order having a decent UX and some interesting features like arrival prediction.
- timgriffin77 7y ago
  Really great insight! Caviar is a good example of how a hybrid approach can work, especially to your point that most people don't recognize that Square owns it. Perhaps branding played into the decision, but they shut it down just after acquiring Caviar, which makes sense.