3 ms·

Why not? There is already an established company in this space, so surely the market is not zero. https://www.splitwise.com/ https://www.splitwise.com/

pedalpete 5y ago
Part of the reasoning "could/should" be that not everything can be a venture backed business. The question often asked is "assuming this takes off, how big can it get"? The 2nd question should be "is this an important problem to solve". Understanding that we don't have all the information at this early stage. Remember, we were asking ourselves how ridiculous AirBnB seemed at the beginning, or Twitter, etc etc. I will admit, my initial reaction was "why"? The US has Venmo. Why haven't they done this, or do they, or if they don't, why not? Is this an important problem to solve? I'm not sure why it is. I've managed this sort of bill splitting back in my early 20s where we had a house of 8 people. We set-up a bank acount, and when a bill came due, I posted the bill, and a spreadsheet of what everyone owed. They then put money into the account, and I would pay the bill. How big was the pain? Minor. The founder states they "don't like talking to friends about money"... harden up! Your friends are living in the house, they can't expect you to pay for their living expenses. Do I trust this company? No, AND I don't trust the providers either. Do I think there is an opportunity for them to pivot into something better but stay along the same problem space? Yes. No idea what that is...
- rognjen 5y ago
  Regarding: > The 2nd question should be "is this an important problem to solve". This is an idealist point of view that I used to share for a long time while I very much bought into the overarching vision that startups change the world. In fact, that question is completely unimportant. The only important question is: "Can we profit from this?" Building new things is unimportant. Building important things is unimportant. Building things that work exceedingly well is unimportant. Building things that generate a return on investment is the only thing that matters. Startups are businesses that have accepted money from others. That money has to be returned. At the very least the company has to work towards trying to return it. Startups that have a higher likelihood of returning that money (preferably in multiples) get funded. It's as simple as that.
  - tyleo 5y ago
    This is a valid point of view but would make me question using the service even more. It doesn’t seem like a good look when the more important question to a company is “can we profit” rather than “can we make the world a better place”.
    - rognjen 5y ago
      I think you'd have a difficult time finding a for-profit organization where "can we profit" is not the more important question.
      - tyleo 5y ago
        I agree. If a business can’t make a profit, it’s hardly a business at all. I don’t know that the question is so important as to outweigh the moral consequences of making that profit though. I suspect that to some people it is _just_ as important or more important to feel that they are having a positive impact. For example, I can see a business going without profit for some time if they are trying to align incentives with their consumers. I cannot see that happening indefinitely though. I think (but could be wrong) that given the choice to sell cigarettes and make a profit or run another type of business and _maybe_ make a profit, most entrepreneurs would choose the path that is more likely to benefit the world than the one that will generate the most profit.

pedalpete 5y ago

Part of the reasoning "could/should" be that not everything can be a venture backed business. The question often asked is "assuming this takes off, how big can it get"? The 2nd question should be "is this an important problem to solve". Understanding that we don't have all the information at this early stage. Remember, we were asking ourselves how ridiculous AirBnB seemed at the beginning, or Twitter, etc etc. I will admit, my initial reaction was "why"? The US has Venmo. Why haven't they done this, or do they, or if they don't, why not? Is this an important problem to solve? I'm not sure why it is. I've managed this sort of bill splitting back in my early 20s where we had a house of 8 people. We set-up a bank acount, and when a bill came due, I posted the bill, and a spreadsheet of what everyone owed. They then put money into the account, and I would pay the bill. How big was the pain? Minor. The founder states they "don't like talking to friends about money"... harden up! Your friends are living in the house, they can't expect you to pay for their living expenses. Do I trust this company? No, AND I don't trust the providers either. Do I think there is an opportunity for them to pivot into something better but stay along the same problem space? Yes. No idea what that is...

rognjen 5y ago
Regarding: > The 2nd question should be "is this an important problem to solve". This is an idealist point of view that I used to share for a long time while I very much bought into the overarching vision that startups change the world. In fact, that question is completely unimportant. The only important question is: "Can we profit from this?" Building new things is unimportant. Building important things is unimportant. Building things that work exceedingly well is unimportant. Building things that generate a return on investment is the only thing that matters. Startups are businesses that have accepted money from others. That money has to be returned. At the very least the company has to work towards trying to return it. Startups that have a higher likelihood of returning that money (preferably in multiples) get funded. It's as simple as that.
- tyleo 5y ago
  This is a valid point of view but would make me question using the service even more. It doesn’t seem like a good look when the more important question to a company is “can we profit” rather than “can we make the world a better place”.
  - rognjen 5y ago
    I think you'd have a difficult time finding a for-profit organization where "can we profit" is not the more important question.
    - tyleo 5y ago
      I agree. If a business can’t make a profit, it’s hardly a business at all. I don’t know that the question is so important as to outweigh the moral consequences of making that profit though. I suspect that to some people it is _just_ as important or more important to feel that they are having a positive impact. For example, I can see a business going without profit for some time if they are trying to align incentives with their consumers. I cannot see that happening indefinitely though. I think (but could be wrong) that given the choice to sell cigarettes and make a profit or run another type of business and _maybe_ make a profit, most entrepreneurs would choose the path that is more likely to benefit the world than the one that will generate the most profit.