Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How is this kind of "growth hack" not simply dumping[1]? "Dumping" is bad because it harms unsubsidized competitors. (It also pits foreign governments against private companies.) I fail to see who MoviePass hurt except its own investors. > Can healthy, truly profitable technology companies develop in an environment where they have to compete with startups that are ready and willing to undercut them by losing tons o…
>"Dumping" is bad because it harms unsubsidized competitors. (It also pits foreign governments against private companies.) I fail to see who MoviePass hurt except its own investors. Everyone who might have started a competing company but did the math to figure out they would have to charge more? >Lyft seems to be doing fine. Hasn't Lyft been spending billions of dollars without posting a profit just like Uber?
Point well taken, but in the case of MoviePass I'm not sure this is a bad thing?
I can see how it's a long-term harm if a value-adding startup is shut out by a competitor which relies on burning investor money. But I really can't work out what value-added startup MoviePass could be displacing; effectively the only benefit for consumers is the artificially low pricing. It seems like "VC money pit" is the entire story for this one.