Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why we’re closing Walnut

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 95 posts

Re: Why we’re closing Walnut

#71

Post by CPLX »

rcarrigan87 wrote: post #12

Very few people understand just how difficult it is to operate in the moving industry. Having worked with a lot of moving companies, here are just a few reasons: -In terms of stress, moving ranks just under death and divorce. Movers joke that half their job is carrying furniture, the other half is therapist. -1 in 5 moves involves some kind of claim. This isn't because movers are careless, it's just the nature of mov…

> In terms of stress, moving ranks just under death and divorce

Even more accurately, moving generally accompanies these events, and other painful life disruptions.

Meeting someone in the process of moving is often to meet someone on one of the worst days of their lives.

Source: worked at a U-Haul rental counter throughout high school

Re: Why we’re closing Walnut

#72

Post by underwoodley »

Mtinie wrote: post #69
underwoodley wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moving awkwardly shaped pieces of furniture up and down stairs without damaging them or the building is one of the jobs that is not likely to be performed by robots for a long time to come. It is very difficult to automate, and very easy for humans to do.

> It is very difficult to automate, and very easy for humans to do. Easier , but if you’ve spent time attempting to do it, you’ll agree it is not a trivial type of task by any means. Judging the center of balance for awkwardly shaped furniture, while safely navigating the interior of a multi-level residence is not on my short list of “easy” tasks I’d sign up for on a regular basis. In many ways, it’s a task that shou…

The price point is exactly the challenge. Robots to do this on the Moon, or inside nuclear power stations after an accident, will make economic sense quite soon. Robots to do this competing with a semi-skilled worker who may have substance abuse problems, a criminal record, or be undocumented (all factors which make them cheaper to employ) are not going to be seen for some time. Most desk jobs will be made obsolete before this is an automation priority.

Re: Why we’re closing Walnut

#73

Post by whipoodle »

goatherders wrote: post #9
zdean wrote: post #4

"In short, we found product-market fit." "Despite our early successes, we’ve decided to close Walnut. Our tests revealed that we could create an experience customers loved, but we doubted our ability to be profitable long-term." If people weren't willing to pay for a product you were offering at a price that would sustain the business, then you did not in fact find a product-market fit.

I don't much care about the semantics of product market fit, but there are a lot of companies - some with astronomical valuations - that sell things at prices that won't sustain the business. These guys could have taken other people's money and done the same thing. "We just need to buy market share until the autonomous moving robots are available!" I applaud them for not doing so. And FWIW I usually find these autops…

I guess I see what you’re saying. But it’s not clear to me why I should care if companies do this or not. That’s between them and their investors.

Re: Why we’re closing Walnut

#74

Post by 0898 »

I wonder if the founders considered serving the B2B market, rather than B2C audiences.

Corporates are more likely to appreciate the 'hospitality' service, and less likely to be price sensitive.

(I've no doubt they did consider this – I just wonder why they didn't think it viable.)

Re: Why we’re closing Walnut

#75

Post by notyourday »

Illniyar wrote: post #59
jblow wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hahahaha So they wanted to claim to offer a high-quality product, but don't think they can actually do that. Startup culture is so terrible.

As I understand it, they wanted to offer a high-quality product at high-quality product prices, however if they moved to service the very rich they'll need to offer a luxury product, which would obviously require luxury product price. Consider it the difference between an iPhone and a 24 caret gold plated iPhone elite (which apparently exists)

No, what they wanted to do is use a sharpie to fix the the defect on a Louis Vuitton bag from Canal St and offer it to an NYU student from Taiwan as a real thing without realizing that the said NYU student's family has hundreds of real bags.

Re: Why we’re closing Walnut

#76

Post by notyourday »

Mtinie wrote: post #69
underwoodley wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moving awkwardly shaped pieces of furniture up and down stairs without damaging them or the building is one of the jobs that is not likely to be performed by robots for a long time to come. It is very difficult to automate, and very easy for humans to do.

> It is very difficult to automate, and very easy for humans to do. Easier , but if you’ve spent time attempting to do it, you’ll agree it is not a trivial type of task by any means. Judging the center of balance for awkwardly shaped furniture, while safely navigating the interior of a multi-level residence is not on my short list of “easy” tasks I’d sign up for on a regular basis. In many ways, it’s a task that shou…

Companies that do it successfully for people who do not have replaceable furniture sometimes rent small cranes in cities like NYC.

Re: Why we’re closing Walnut

#77

Post by notyourday »

zdean wrote: post #4

"In short, we found product-market fit." "Despite our early successes, we’ve decided to close Walnut. Our tests revealed that we could create an experience customers loved, but we doubted our ability to be profitable long-term." If people weren't willing to pay for a product you were offering at a price that would sustain the business, then you did not in fact find a product-market fit.

That's because it simply does not exist.

It costs $4K and a weekend to furnish a three bedroom 2400 square feet apartment in NYC with IKEA + TJMAX ( source: done it ). Say I dont want to do it. So it would be $5k with $1k or labor. This means that for people who make $200k/year or below moving cannot cost more than a replacement.

So you either go upmarket and target people who do not use disposable furniture ( i.e. they are moving hundreds of thousands dollars of stuff ) or you are playing in your $1000/move market.

Re: Why we’re closing Walnut

#79

Post by cpursley »

rtpg wrote: post #15
yeukhon wrote: post #7

I am a Chinese so my family usually have some Chinese contractor do the moving. A couple years ago my family and I bought a home (finally!) and we hired a contractor to come in, after my family and I had packed up everything (since my dad is a jack-of-all-trade kind of a smart man). The contractor paid two Hispanic workers to do most of the heavy-lifting work, but we also helped anyway so we get the move done ASAP. T…

You've mentioned it yourself: Many of the people in these systems are likely underpaid. Systemic exploitation is the name of the game for a lot of the base infrastructure in our society. I'm for communities helping each other, but in your moving example you think those workers have health insurance? Why do you have to sneak the tips? I bet the bus drivers make a good amount of money though.

> Many of the people in these systems are likely underpaid

This is largely anecdotal, but back when I was doing landscaping over summers in high school and college (2002-2005). For some tasks (installing sod grass, for example), I'd pick up undocumented Central American day laborers^. They would not even get into my truck for less than $14 per hour plus lunch. There's fewer of these laborers around the Atlanta area these days, but from I hear, they still require well over minimum wage.

^ We did our best to avoid hiring from this pool but finding reliable day labor from any legal source was nearly impossible at any price.

Re: Why we’re closing Walnut

#80

Post by r0ze-at-hn »

oldboyFX wrote: post #51

How is this a startup? You can't scale it fast, it's not using an innovative business model, it's not driven by tech at all. It's just a normal company trying to offer a better service at higher prices — which is okay — you don't need to slap a startup label on everything. The medium piece was a great read. Kudos to everyone involved!

A startup is a company that is trying to find a sustainable business model.

startup != tech

Post reply on HN