8 ms·

From the media coverage it appears WeWork was particularly dysfunctional but are the other giant "disruptors" (Uber, Zillow, meal kits), that went up against in

From the media coverage it appears WeWork was particularly dysfunctional but are the other giant "disruptors" (Uber, Zillow, meal kits), that went up against industries that were probably already pretty efficient, going to go down eventually as well?

wordpad25 3y ago
Yeah in hindsight it's easy to act superior as if it was never going to work, but at least they tried something new, that's how all innovation happens
- wongarsu 3y ago
  It worked for a remarkably long time, WeWork was founded all the way back in 2010. Back then coworking was somewhat new (the wikipedia article called it "an emerging trend" in the first revision in 2007). And WeWork did a lot to popularize it. In hindsight it seems obvious that the company was way over-valued, there aren't many efficiencies of scale or entry barriers; anyone with enough money to furnish an office and commit to a five-year lease can open a coworking space. Lots of people said so at the time too. I wonder if they would have been more successful if they hadn't gone the tech-VC route and become a "boring" real-estate business.
- readthenotes1 3y ago
  With a creepy leader bilking the company it was more like a innovation in long cons
- morelisp 3y ago
  What was the new thing they tried?
- rcxdude 3y ago
  what was baffling about wework's valuation is that it wasn't anything new at all: the product and business model already existed and was well understood, and well understood to not be worth anywhere near that much. The only new thing was the founder managed to convince a bunch of VCs that it was a tech company somehow.
echelon 3y ago
> Uber No. They've killed taxis, and they're way more convenient. Now their pricing will rise to match the actual business and the era of under-cost ride hailing will end. Their food delivery business will continue to battle it out with the other contenders until the market consolidates. > Zillow Realty sucks due to the MLS monopoly. Redfin is trying to break free of this. We'll see how it goes. In any event, modern home shopping almost always begins on one of these "tech" realty sites. > meal kits Anything with "kit" or "club" in the name is going to wither up and die.
- lock-the-spock 3y ago
  I don't think Uber is sustainable. It seems everyone is getting shafted - the drivers, the customers, the Investors. Their only profitable part is the food delivery service, which is neither novel nor particularly good in comparison to others. Once the Saudi/UAE-Softbank money dries up or gets cold feet Uber is dead. At this point I guess it is mainly a money laundering service, like the entire city of London property market.
  - TedDoesntTalk 3y ago
    How are customers getting shafted? Uber is still cheaper to the airport than a taxi (for me). I don’t use it for anything else, so genuinely curious.
    - ghaff 3y ago
      I assume in this context it means not getting rides for way under what traditional cabs cost. But those prices are just pretty much what a ride costs. If you decided to structure your life around cheap on-demand rides, then you may have to make changes. For all their faults, Uber/Lyft/etc. did make hailing a ride using your phone a much better experience than cabs in many cities. Not for everything; I still use a car service for airport rides.
    - nemo44x 3y ago
      > Uber is still cheaper to the airport than a taxi (for me). Sometimes. If you know the price it's obviously easy to compare. I do happen to know taxi prices from a few airports to central areas and Uber used to always be cheaper. Significantly cheaper years ago. Today it's a crap shoot and the taxi's are often faster since you don't have to wait. If the taxi is no more than 5$ more expensive then I take the taxi. I'd say it's about 50-50. Sometimes the Uber is a good deal ($10 or so) cheaper.
paulpauper 3y ago
Still waiting for Amazon to go out of business due to losses. or Netflix, Uber, or Tesla. Pundits are really bad at predicting this sort of stuff, and losses are not predictive of failure
- legitster 3y ago
  There's a difference between overall corporate losses from outlays, and companies selling their products at a loss. Netflix may lose a ton of money QoQ, but they still make money for every new subscription.
hef19898 3y ago
Meal kits and most grocery delivery services will either go down on unit economics as soon as VC money dries up (I talked to some people doing beverage wholesale and distribution to restaurants and groccery stores, and they do offer a service for consumers as well that piggy backs on their larger volume runs, and they simply cannot meet the prices those start-ups offer). So, either those companies raise prices or go bust, or they try run a hail mary with the money they have in some huge market consolidation.

wordpad25 3y ago

Yeah in hindsight it's easy to act superior as if it was never going to work, but at least they tried something new, that's how all innovation happens

wongarsu 3y ago
It worked for a remarkably long time, WeWork was founded all the way back in 2010. Back then coworking was somewhat new (the wikipedia article called it "an emerging trend" in the first revision in 2007). And WeWork did a lot to popularize it. In hindsight it seems obvious that the company was way over-valued, there aren't many efficiencies of scale or entry barriers; anyone with enough money to furnish an office and commit to a five-year lease can open a coworking space. Lots of people said so at the time too. I wonder if they would have been more successful if they hadn't gone the tech-VC route and become a "boring" real-estate business.
readthenotes1 3y ago
With a creepy leader bilking the company it was more like a innovation in long cons
morelisp 3y ago
What was the new thing they tried?
rcxdude 3y ago
what was baffling about wework's valuation is that it wasn't anything new at all: the product and business model already existed and was well understood, and well understood to not be worth anywhere near that much. The only new thing was the founder managed to convince a bunch of VCs that it was a tech company somehow.

echelon 3y ago

> Uber No. They've killed taxis, and they're way more convenient. Now their pricing will rise to match the actual business and the era of under-cost ride hailing will end. Their food delivery business will continue to battle it out with the other contenders until the market consolidates. > Zillow Realty sucks due to the MLS monopoly. Redfin is trying to break free of this. We'll see how it goes. In any event, modern home shopping almost always begins on one of these "tech" realty sites. > meal kits Anything with "kit" or "club" in the name is going to wither up and die.

lock-the-spock 3y ago
I don't think Uber is sustainable. It seems everyone is getting shafted - the drivers, the customers, the Investors. Their only profitable part is the food delivery service, which is neither novel nor particularly good in comparison to others. Once the Saudi/UAE-Softbank money dries up or gets cold feet Uber is dead. At this point I guess it is mainly a money laundering service, like the entire city of London property market.
- TedDoesntTalk 3y ago
  How are customers getting shafted? Uber is still cheaper to the airport than a taxi (for me). I don’t use it for anything else, so genuinely curious.
  - ghaff 3y ago
    I assume in this context it means not getting rides for way under what traditional cabs cost. But those prices are just pretty much what a ride costs. If you decided to structure your life around cheap on-demand rides, then you may have to make changes. For all their faults, Uber/Lyft/etc. did make hailing a ride using your phone a much better experience than cabs in many cities. Not for everything; I still use a car service for airport rides.
  - nemo44x 3y ago
    > Uber is still cheaper to the airport than a taxi (for me). Sometimes. If you know the price it's obviously easy to compare. I do happen to know taxi prices from a few airports to central areas and Uber used to always be cheaper. Significantly cheaper years ago. Today it's a crap shoot and the taxi's are often faster since you don't have to wait. If the taxi is no more than 5$ more expensive then I take the taxi. I'd say it's about 50-50. Sometimes the Uber is a good deal ($10 or so) cheaper.

paulpauper 3y ago

Still waiting for Amazon to go out of business due to losses. or Netflix, Uber, or Tesla. Pundits are really bad at predicting this sort of stuff, and losses are not predictive of failure

legitster 3y ago
There's a difference between overall corporate losses from outlays, and companies selling their products at a loss. Netflix may lose a ton of money QoQ, but they still make money for every new subscription.

hef19898 3y ago

Meal kits and most grocery delivery services will either go down on unit economics as soon as VC money dries up (I talked to some people doing beverage wholesale and distribution to restaurants and groccery stores, and they do offer a service for consumers as well that piggy backs on their larger volume runs, and they simply cannot meet the prices those start-ups offer). So, either those companies raise prices or go bust, or they try run a hail mary with the money they have in some huge market consolidation.