jmzbond

Love this discussion! I’m currently running Last Minute Gear: www.lastmingear.com which rents outdoors gear for camping/ snowsports in the San Francisco Bay Area. Before that though, the concept was called www.projectborrow.com, very much borrowing!

I want to address why there aren’t “successful” startups here in my experience and my outlook on the future. The 2 dominant forces governing buy vs not-buy behavior for anyone are price & convenience. For example, if a tent costs $200 to buy and $100 to rent, you’re obviously going to buy it, since as long as you get 2 uses out of that tent, it’s financially more worthwhile to buy. If a tent costs $200 to buy and $1 to rent, you’re obviously never going to buy it since you’ll probably never camp 200 times in your life.

In the real world, though, the rental price is fixed and retail prices move. Let’s say the rental price is $20. A nice tent is $200 and a crappy tent is $40. If you’re like most people, you’re going to decide to buy the $40 tent, reasoning that as long as you get 2 uses out of it, you win.

But this is actually very irrational, because it doesn’t account for the fact that: - that crappy tent may break your 1st trip - even if not, you’d have to make sure you maintain it well enough such that it’s still usable the 2nd trip (i.e., did you know storing a wet tent can lead to mildew growth?) - and the psychological/ spatial burden cited elsewhere in this discussion

$40 may be too much of a low ball, but the reasoning above is why people persistently choose to buy instead of rent even though rationally, renting is almost always better. It’s irrational, but such is the amazing magnetic power of the low price. (Should prices be so low in the first place, aka should a bag of chips be cheaper than a bag of carrots, is a-whole-nother debate!)

Borrowing is just like renting, except that the cost is the value of your time in finding a lender and sorting out all the logistics. This has its own set of complications, because what I found is that different people place different premiums on non-monetary values (aka convenience). In other words, some people would rather pay a taxi back and forth $40 to get a tent for free, while others would rather rent a tent at a store for $40. Same cash outflow, but vastly different user beliefs about which is more “worth it.” Here’s an extreme example: if I told you that the building you lived in would stock a mini “toolbox” on every floor so residents could share things like drills, and the building would cover all costs, you can bet that plenty of people are still going to buy their own things. Your closet is 10 feet closer, and therefore, to some people, a million bucks more worth it. (Consider the startup service provider Alfred.)

Because people are so different in how they perceive the value of not buying, I think it’s improbable to have a product that works for even 50% of the market. In fact, I’d venture that stuff-sharing startups will continue, but you’ll see a lot of smaller players rather than large. But that of course limits investment, which further limits the appeal of this space.

Fair points

Thanks for sharing that! Yes the key difference here on the backend is that we make the food ourselves. But you're abs. right that from the frontend it's very similar.

This is also why I think people should be very careful before comparing two entrepreneurs, or saying something like: "why is ___ so much less busy than you and more successful?"

Well, because ____'s parents are literally billionaires. I have to work so much harder because my bank account is actually decreasing everyday!

I agree with you about how hard it is to maintain flavor and texture, it's always something we're working on. The meals come to you in biodegradable containers that you can microwave without transferring elsewhere. So far, so good, but we've definitely had to cut some meals where the reheat didn't work as well. We have stringent QC requirements!

I also love your last points, and totally agree that there are some work opportunities here, which we'd love to explore when we get to that size.

At the moment we're not scaling out ourselves just yet, we're just in one region, but you're totally right that franchising could potentially be a model. We have a lot of ideas on how to better scale, when the time is right. Thanks for your thoughts!

Love the illustrative parabola thanks! I agree with so many of your points, but I do hope there's an alternative as well, and that's actually why we're in business, to explore those models. This is just the consumer facing engine that will give us (hopefully) the funds to do so. And we have a lot of ideas about things to explore =)

Feel free to keep in touch if you ever have other thoughts, I always like chatting strategy: [email protected]

Oooh thanks for asking, why don't I give you my personal code: "jamesdd". It'll get you $25 off when you sign up for any of our plans =)

True story for almost anything in food. The industry is famous for razor thin margins. We're passionate about small-scale local food systems and the ability of certain models of said systems to better weather economic downturns. That's all a part of our larger mission and vision, to see which systems work and promote them. Wish us luck =)