Covers a lot of the same ground as Liz Gannes’ “I Want It Now” Series for Re:Code. Because the “Uber for X” model is so pervasive across so many different categories, it’s hard to speak in generalities to say they’re either all derivatives of “first world problems,” for lazy and/or rich people or B. that they’re the future of jobs, commerce etc. I think the model works well in some instances and not in others.
The bigger thing to me is whether or not all of these, particularly ones that rely on physical transportation, can scale to suburbia. From Sarah’s piece:
Not only that, but I live outside the Valley – and outside the city – so the things that are built and hyped as the “future of local services” don’t really touch me at this time. At least, not unless I move. Or until they scale to suburbia and beyond – aka 50% of the world today. Still, despite this sort of separateness from a large part of the on-demand, sharing-economy movement, I understand that much of what first gets offered to the better-off city dweller may eventually trickle down to the everyman or everywoman. (Or at least, this is the argument.) While some things will only scale to the urban centers, others could come to small town/middle America.
If you think about it, even big companies like Seamless that were able to scale on-demand food delivery in cities 7-8 years ago were never able to scale out in suburbia. Can a service like Sprig move beyond the SFs/NYs/LAs and cater to the rest of the country? Not so sure. I think making services like that work will require developers and an accompanying thought process that exists outside of the typical Silicon Valley bubble.