I think Exec and TaskRabbit share(d) a similar problem in that they are so broad that consumers aren't sure what to use the platform for. Renewed focus on a single service makes sense, but they face competition from Handybook and Homejoy. It's probably also difficult to differentiate in this market since the maids are all likely independent contractors.
I think the author hasn't researched the topic very well - there are a ton of startups who have tried this "stuff-sharing/selling model" and it hasn't really worked out.
Your post and outlook on this problem is the result of your definition of "sharing economy" being too narrowly focused.
To me it seems most people interested in the sharing economy only care about to talk about sharing if both sides of the transaction are individuals. If you're open to the idea that the sharing economy could be a transaction between a business and individual, then the market for temporary product rentals suddenly becomes a $40B space. This is nothing new, either. Small businesses have been renting out to other businesses and individuals since the 1950s. And, it's an existing $40B+ industry.
So while sure, peer to peer rentals for small items might never work, that's not to say that an "Uber for rentals" model wouldn't work. Uber started by bringing existing limo drivers online... not by trying to create a new supply side.
Edit: I also find the conclusion and only looking at drills to also be too narrow of a conclusion. Seems like most people when they look at tools only think about power drills. Totally agree that there isn't a $2B market for power drill rentals. However, there is a massive market for all other types of tool rentals.
If you think of it in terms of the 1 or 2 pawn shops you might have access to, eBay's initial audience of 100 or 1000 as well as the usenet groups Omidyar would post to provides significant "single user" utility that most marketplaces can't provide at that same audience size. So while you're correct that it's not truly "single" user, eBay did provide significant value to the very very early sellers.
Trust is a big problem for any peer to peer situation. eBay, Airbnb, and Paypal all had to figure out ways to jumpstart trust in their communities - if Bitcoin can do the same, then the potential is huge.
Do you expect those users to be sticky? The barrier to entry for making a to-do list is negligible, and having a long history of completed tasks is of very little value.
With Wunderlist we've already seen many repeat users and have daily users adding new tasks, especially during the week. With Wunderlist 2 we will have more features that will help grow this.
Fred Wilson wrote about user metrics, he called it the 30/10/10 rule (http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2011/07/301010.html) - 30% monthly active users, 10% daily active users and 10% new users each month. We can apply this rule to Wunderlist, but as we're in the 'task' market, we generally have more monthly users than daily users - because the product is more optimized for weekly use.
Sorry - I meant to clarify stickiness when asked to pay. Freemium conversion is like 1-5%, so I'd imagine somewhere closer to 1% with you guys.
With 30ish people, let's say you burn $2 million a year. You'd need to get 30,000 people to each pay ~$70 a year for your app. My numbers might be wrong, but I'm just curious how you'd get people to spend that when it's so easy to switch to another task app.
Dropping out has come to mean you will never get a degree because most people only consider college in the first place because they perceive a workplace advantage to having a degree. When they get out into the real world and realize they can live comfortably without one, there is little reason to go back. Someone who loves learning and is in college for reasons not related to future employment is not likely to leave over an idea in the first place.
Because of that, the number of people who leave and then go back is significantly small. Though I think you make good points anyway.
To me, this just demonstrates the problems that arise when you say you're trying to tackle this huge gigantic problem. There's a ton of building hype, and then people are disappointed/scornful when you can't deliver. It reminds me a bit of the Thiel Fellowship.
Maybe this YC class is just a result of many lessons learned. It does seem the problems they tackle are, for lack of a better word, lame, but that doesn't mean they can't grow into something really big.
I guess time will tell, but best of luck to Makr.io. My only wish is that they share everything they must have learned through the process of Diaspora.
It's awesome that App.net is trying to build something new, but I think the Hacker News market is somewhat saturated considering how many articles have been on the front page lately. If people haven't donated by now, I don't think a few screenshots will sway their opinion that much. I'd guess that turning your effort towards other avenues would be a better use of time.
First I'd ever heard of App.net was Siracusa's "Hypercritical" podcast last night. This post on HN reminded me to check it out. I added my support. Just wish someone would do something like this for Path (and all the other web services that I love, but don't want to become the "product")
It's times like this that I realize how much I take HN for granted. Great service. No Ads. Fantastic Community.
