Why? My guess
is that it’s not because investors believe that there’s such an enormous market
in private rooms and fancy rides.
about creating a platform that could become a corner stone in the future
economic global landscape. Each of the two has a chance of becoming the Amazon
to imagine the next steps extending the business model to new areas. Airbnb
could start bundling rooms with other services: Cleaning, local transportation,
local guides, boats and sports equipment, local meals, and transportation from
home and back… They could basically try to cover all aspects of travel by using
idle resources and sharing. Indeed, they are already making such extensions.
Uber could extend in other directions: luxury services or various other modes
of transportation – including air travel.
the details, this general direction seems obvious. Once you have created a
platform for brokering resources, when you have the user interface in place,
the apps, the payment structure, the trust mechanisms and a strong brand with
lots of traffic, it’s cheap to include other areas of use.
such platforms have low marginal costs and strong network effects. Everybody
wants to be on the platform where everybody else is.
So it’s a
game for giants.
One thing I
don’t understand, though: Why is EBay just letting this happen?
The article is well balanced, it seems, showing both how the sharing economy bypasses a lot of the workers' rights and protection that have been built up over decades - but also acknowledging that this is an opening available for those who might otherwise not have employment. A couple of quotes: "In the promising parlance of the sharing economy, whose sites and apps connect people seeking services with sellers of those services, Ms. Guidry is a microentrepreneur. That is, an independent contractor who earns money by providing her skills, time or property to consumers in search of a lift, a room to sleep in, a dry-cleaning pickup, a chef, an organizer of closets." "In a climate of continuing high unemployment, however, people like Ms. Guidry are less microentrepreneurs than microearners. They often work seven-day weeks, trying to assemble a living wage from a series of one-off gigs. They have little recourse when the services for which they are on call change their business models or pay rates. To reduce the risks, many workers toggle among multiple services".
Another newsletter out from the Universe Foundation's Suitable for Growth project,
which looks at how Danish companies can expand their market in China beyond
premium customers in the coastal cities.
This issue examines online China. China has the most Internet users of any country, and
they are among the active users of e-commerce and social media. Clearly, no
foreign company can ignore the digital dimension of the Chinese market – but
they need to be aware of how Internet use is different there.
You can read an Interview with
the Danish founder and owner of Shanghai-based, web agency Shanghai jungle,
Frank Zhan, director at Grundfos
China, talks about Grundfos’ use of Weibo Miniblogs.
And there’s an overview of the
Big Four Chinese web services.
Jeg kan varmt anbefale at læse Politikens interview med Knud Foldschack, hvor han fortæller, hvordan en meget hård barndom har givet ham en forståelse for alle dem, der ikke lige har styrken til at fungere i et super effektivt konkurrencesamfund. Det er en rystende historie, men den er fortalt konstruktivt og uden fordømmelse. Her er et citat: "Alt er bygget op på, at vi skal tilbage til det traditionelle arbejdsmarked. Men hvorfor skal alle nødvendigvis det? Hvorfor er det en fuldkommen indiskutabel sandhed, at vi alle sammen straks skal i arbejde? Hvorfor er det ikke et mål at sige, at vi skal have et godt liv? Tænk på indvandrerkvinder, der kommer fra en verden, hvor de har set deres mødre blive skudt eller deres mænd blive tortureret ihjel. Hvorfor er det ikke et mål, at de skal yde f.eks. ved at passe på deres børn og så over tid komme ind på arbejdsmarkedet? Hvorfor skal de tvinges i arbejde i henhold til paranoide rådighedsregler? Vores samfunds ufravigelige logik er, at man kun er en del af fællesskabet, hvis man er med til erhvervseffektivt at producere. Og det er jeg simpelthen ikke enig i. Jeg mener, at alle mennesker på denne jord vil præstere og have et godt liv. Og i og med at ingen ønsker sig et dårligt liv, er det jo mærkeligt at påstå, at der findes mennesker, som ikke gider."
Free is lie, says Aral Balkan in his speech at London RSA. He points out the many ways in which you lose privacy or in which the personal information you leave behind by using free internet services creates massive businesses, and makes it easier to target you as a consumer. It's the usual story, but told with gusto. We know it all too well. Balkan is trying to create an alternative web service that does not take your private info. A long shot, it seems.
The video from my talk at the Ouishare Fest in Paris this summer is now online: How the collaborative economy challenges existing businesses. What are the challenges that companies face if they want to engage in the sharing economy? What tools and methods might make it less risky and more "normal" for a business to collaborate more widely?