5 ms·
The central concept here -- a transaction triggers when a threshold of participants is met -- is bigger than group coupons. It's a sort of "Group Transactional
by thunk 17y ago
The central concept here -- a transaction triggers when a threshold of participants is met -- is bigger than group coupons. It's a sort of "Group Transactional Economics" by analogy to the atomicity of db or stm transactions. I think it could eliminate a lot of the risk and inefficiency dealt with by independent makers of all stripes.
- brm 17y agoThe central concept is incredible but the way groupon uses it is not, the spa did not book over $4300 in business like Chris says, rumor has it that groupon actually takes 50% of the sales for itself. Sure, Groupon is a good business but its borderline abusive to its partner businesses (something that would not work if applied to independent makers).
- thunk 17y agoWell, Groupon is the least interesting manifestation of the idea. I'm interested in two other takes on the idea: group purchasing collectives on the consumer side, and limited editions on the maker side.
- req2 17y agoCould you elaborate on your claim of abusiveness? I'm not sure such an unsourced rumor is sufficient evidence, nor am I aware of Groupon having such Walmartian clout that it can bully vendors into deals. Surely the spa signed its own end of the contract?
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- gojomo 17y agoSee also 'assurance contracts' and 'dominant assurance contracts': http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2005/05/assurance_contr.html http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2005/05... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assurance_contract http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assurance_contract A system that was (theoretically) better at funding public goods than taxation would compete in some rather large markets.