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

91–95 of 95 posts

Re: Why we’re closing Walnut

#91

Post by oldboyFX »

r0ze-at-hn wrote: post #80
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

And which companies are trying to find an unsustainable business model?

Re: Why we’re closing Walnut

#92

Post by kgwgk »

notyourday wrote: post #86
jimmywanger wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, to continue your analogy, they wanted to be the Nordstrom of the moving world, not the Saks Fifth Avenue, not knowing that not enough people would use the high-end but not quite luxury service to make it worth their while.

That's the problem: Saks Fifth Ave and Nordstrom are in the exactly same market. The upmarket is Bergdorf Goodman.

FWIW, wikipedia lists Saks higher than Nordstrom: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_store#Segmentation

Re: Why we’re closing Walnut

#94

Post by notyourday »

kgwgk wrote: post #92
notyourday wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the problem: Saks Fifth Ave and Nordstrom are in the exactly same market. The upmarket is Bergdorf Goodman.

FWIW, wikipedia lists Saks higher than Nordstrom: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_store#Segmentation

Wikipedia is wrong. Saks went downmarket, Nordstrom went upmarket. They go to the same malls and same suburbs.

Re: Why we’re closing Walnut

#95

Post by [deleted] »

underwoodley wrote: post #50
slackingoff2017 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's several companies dedicated to moving ultra high net worth individuals. It's hard to believe there's no market between that and the cheapest options. Sounds like their marketing wasn't great or they ran out of runway.

The service they offer has existed for a long time. Rich people pay top dollar to get good, professional movers who take care of their stuff and don't add to the stress of moving. This company tried to provide this service, but at a lower price, so low that they couldn't be profitable. Unfortunately, they couldn't cover their labor costs this way. Movers who will show up, take good care of the customer's stuff, are c…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN