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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
This criticism does seem to be more harsh than is necessary, but I don't see what the problem is in seeking the advice from those with more experience teaching. Khan has created something amazing, but that doesn't mean he is infallible nor that his videos should stay as they are today.
If you read the second to last paragraph, they don't suggest that Khan Academy shuts down, or that he stops teaching. They literally just say, "Hey, it'd be nice if he asked some really great teachers to look over his examples before he uses them to make sure he doesn't confuse people." I'm not an expert, but sounds like it couldn't hurt.
I can't speak from experience about getting acquired, but I definitely see how it could be an attention drain. I was more speaking to the stickiness of the product. Socialcam grew really quickly, but shrunk just as fast because people didn't stay around. That to me seems very hard to monetize.
My understanding is that a bunch of people clicked on Socialcam when it showed up in their news feed and didn't know they were signing up - now it seems the numbers are starting to reflect that not many people actually use it.
I honestly think people focus too much on pain relief/solving problems vs. making people happy. Most ideas can be described in either paradigm, and there's really no reason to argue about it - just make something people want. Maybe they want it because it makes them happy, or maybe it makes them way less sad.
Take bookmarking. Del.icio.us made people really happy because they could keep track of all the sites they liked. It also made people way less sad because they didn't lose track of sites they liked. Either way, people used it.
Sorry, should have been a bit more clear. Some of the spaghetti being thrown against the wall (companies taking crowdsourced money) will stick (be successful), but the people who threw it (people putting in crowdsourced money) won't necessarily benefit the most, and there could also be damage from the spaghetti on the floor (failed companies). I'll work on my analogies.
If you throw enough spaghetti against the wall, some of it will stick. That doesn't mean you get to eat the spaghetti, nor does it mean the spaghetti on the floor has no cost.
I don't see a sticker telling me what kind of processor is in inside, nor do I see a sticker telling me which version of Windows this is. I'm a bit confused.