Shuddle (Uber for kids) is shutting down tomorrow | Hacker News Reader

Shuddle (Uber for kids) is shutting down tomorrow

techcrunch.com

62 pointsphilip120953 comments

> News of the shutdown comes by way of an email sent to customers this afternoon, and it all certainly seems pretty sudden — they’ll cease operating at the end of tomorrow’s business day.

A service to get your kids to and from school shuts down with 48 hours notice? That's going to cause a few headaches, and unfortunately is a great reason to not become an early adopter making such a business even harder to get off the ground. Shame, seems like it would fill a useful niche.

At least they didn't write a rambling letter about how happy and excited they are to be kicking their customers to the curb. That's a common enough experience when you rely on a startup service. http://ourincrediblejourney.tumblr.com/

At least it is a Friday and the end of the week, so you have the weekend to find an alternative solution.

You don't usually get that much notice when the school is unexpectedly unavailable. Whether that's a snow day or (as we're currently experiencing in Edinburgh) catastrophic building problems.

Those are temporary events, a canceled bus route would be a better comparison.

Because those things can't usually be predicted in advance. There's no way that Shuddle thought everything was fine until they suddenly realized they had to shut down in two days. They knew this was coming, and they kept it from their customers, who now have to scramble to get their kids to school.

Great service. Sad to see it go. I used it every week.

For people asking, another difference between Shuddle and Uber (as I understand Uber) is that you could schedule your Shuddle rides in advance, and be confident a driver would come at the appointed time.

Did they spend the $9.6m series A already? The CEO is apparently a cofounder of Sidecar and has experience in investment banking and at a VC firm. Maybe they're bleeding money and realized in today's climate they'd never be able to raise again, and so decided to return whatever is left under pressure from his friends/investors.

The founder stepped aside and brought in an outside CEO in November. Not sure how that affected their fundraising chances.

You'd need some awesome growth projections to raise a Series B on what looks like less than half a million in lifetime revenue!

http://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/Shuddle-Uber-for...

What exactly was the logic with this company? It feels like a fundamental misunderstanding of the Uber business model, which thrived on the constant demand and ubiquity of a market. It also, frankly, is cashing in on people who uber when they know they'll be drinking. That's a giant slice of the market that, for obvious reasons, kids won't be a part of.

It seems like it would be tough for a "Shuddle" driver to make a lot of money, during the limited hours when they'd be needed.

The logic is that some parents will happily pay a premium to not have to drive their kids everywhere, but below a certain age they won't entrust them to random Uber drivers.

You seem to think that a driver can't do both Shuddle and Uber, but I don't see why that wouldn't be the case. During peak kid hours, they pick up Shuddle rides. When they don't have those, they do Uber, Lift, delivery, or one of the many other things you can do with a car and a cellphone.

When you think about it though, it seems like a feature of Uber or Lyft. Just pay an extra fee for extra vetting for sensitive rides where the passengers need extra attention (maybe it's a monthly subscription?).

You'd think, but Uber and Lyft aren't doing it.

But it's somewhat probable that they could (given their mission), and that's what makes this risky.

And even if they don't do it themselves, I imagine that uber will eventually release an API of sorts, allowing anyone to tap into their logistical network.

The food delivery startups faced similar risks, it'll be interesting to see how they fare now that uber eats is gaining momentum

This business model has existed forever in the taxi industry. It is often school districts contract with taxi companies to fill gaps in bus routes.

That seems like a service a taxi company (Uber in this case) with a normal revenue stream could afford to offer. It doesn't sound like a viable independent model.

This seems like an area where the lack of oversight of drivers would all of a sudden matter a LOT.

Sure, but again a company with Uber's money and network can afford to explore creating such a service, without having to fold before they can. More, they could sustain it, and generalize it to a network of "Trusted drivers".

So, to me, it seems much more viable as a sub-unit of a larger company.

Ummmm... well, in California, anyway, anybody that works with kids needs to be fingerprinted and pass a Livescan and keep it current. My daughter's 80yo violin teacher has to keep her Livescan up to date, FFS. Now, how many Uber drivers have ever even heard of Livescan, much less have submitted to one? And jumping through all the hoops required to do activity sign-out, that is a bunch of paperwork, too. So the safety and security part of the equation is what makes it different from Uber. The regulatory landscape for a kid-oriented service is totally different.

But there are long-standing competitors like Kid's Kab, etc. Mostly they are a scheduled service, like to/from gym every Tuesday and Thursday at 4:00PM or something, not a ride-on-demand like Uber.

I invested in this company. I love the idea and the founders. Startups are hard.

Why didn't you feel Uber would eventually be able to serve this niche?

How does a company that has made $1.5M revenue and is growing 50% in the last 6 months go out of business? Raise too much money? Inaccurate business plan? Wishful thinking about future funding to provide economies of scale? Lack of due diligance by investors?

Not trying to be confrontational or rude, just genuinely curious.

unit economics

I would make 1.5m in rev so fast if I gave each of my customers $1 for $.90!

That's always the risk with a business plan like this. Uber seems to have a similar business model, but the difference is that Uber is an easily scalable business that has become a household name. Investors are happy to keep throwing money at Uber until they have taken over the world, and then they can worry about profit. Not every business is going to be an Uber, so it's a big risk basing your business plan on requiring constant injections of cash until you become a billion dollar business.

Just as Amazon does.

So, maybe now parents can talk directly to drivers they got to know through the app and cut the middle man

http://www.hopskipdrive.com/

oh geez...if only you knew why the new COO from Uber was fired you would not be promoting this company that clearly did not do a reference check.

can you elaborate?

his comment is #2 on google when searching 'uber coo fired' and its only been 20min. so 2 takeaways:

1. google is damn impressive

2. he is probably just trying to stir shit

1. 99.9% of tech workers in SF have 1 degree of separation from an Uber employee or is one. 2. any one of those people would tell you the same thing.

Don't you hate it when you Google for an answer to your problem, find a promising StackExchange post, and it's your question you asked a few days ago and there are still no answers?

Obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/979/

I can't find it on google so it must be false...

This person is talking about an ex uber employee who was hired as COO at hopskipdrive.

The terms of his "resignation" were confidential, because the truth is pretty embarassing for the company and could damage its image as a safe family company.

None of this really matters though, the whole company is just an uber feature.

They aren't far behind shuddle, they will be gone in 6 months.

Very sad. I intended to use this service one my child became old enough to do so.

As a user of uber since they were founded, and a father of three, I was super exited to start using shuddle, but I could only do so for my eldest child. (My younger ones are below their requirements)...

But I had planned on using them.

Uber should buy their whole fleet and their drivers.

I WILL use a service like this. I will be sad to see it not exist...

I mean do you really believe the background checking was much better than Uber's? What exactly do you think was actually different? Seems like optics to me.

What if Uber gave you the option of a female driver/highly rated tenured driver/female tenured driver?

Just curious what'd make you actually feel better about leaving your kids in a stranger's car.

this really sucks. i was looking forward for my kid to turn 8 in a few months to be able to use this service daily.

Uber works for kids and provides the same guarantee as the rest of society– none!

If only that were true. Uber doesn't allow unaccompanied minors to ride. Lyft has the same rule.

The taxi company that I drove for required kids who were less than 12 years old to have a fingerprint-cleared driver, or to be accompanied by someone over 12 years of age. One time I did get a group of siblings who needed to get home from school, and the oldest one was 11. I asked, and learned that it was an exception that a manager in dispatch allowed to go through.

Some of the teenagers' case managers [foster care/etc] specified that their drivers also have a fingerprint clearance. I'm not entirely sure what the criteria was.

Parents in most cities can certainly contact a local taxi company and arrange for their kids to be hauled around by fingerprint-cleared drivers.

Cool story, meanwhile Uber and Lyft drivers just look the other way. Works really well

Minors ride Uber and Lyft all the time. I have never heard of a driver denying a ride to any minor that I know. Like I said, it works for minors, de facto. You are not informed how the world works for the masses. Kid needs a ride? Parent works? Parent is going to stay at work and the kid is going to take that $5.75 ride, bottom line. That's the real market

I'm surprised at the reactions. Are parents really that cavalier about putting their kids in some random person's car and entrusting them to some random person's driving habits?

You are technically misusing the word random, and that is the crux of the matter.

I hate the pedantry that surrounds the word random. Language is defined by those who use it, and clearly by a random person he meant "someone that the parent do not know"

Which is a real concern, and probably is contributing to the downfall of this company, because their market consists entirely of well-off, but also really apathetic parents, which is a niche market if I have ever seen one.

What, you mean like a bus driver?

Also, "Shuddle’s main pitch point was their focus on safety: They did intense background checks on drivers, monitored drivers to ensure they stayed on route and didn’t speed or text while driving and offered real-time ride tracking to parents."

Turns out to be a school bus driver takes a little bit of work: http://www.wikihow.com/Get-a-School-Bus-Driver's-License

Indeed, and so does being a Shuddle driver. It's not (wasn't) the equivalent of trusting your kid to some random cabbie.

Yeah, it's like babysitting, but with better background checks and oversight.

This is true. And to go a bit further I was attempting to build a Shuddle like service a bit over a year ago, and many of our early interested families actually requested that the driver double as a sitter after driving them. Drive the child home from school at 3:30pm and stay with them until 5:30pm when the parent gets home. I do still believe there is a niche here that's not simply an Uber "feature".

When I was a little kid, I walked or rode my bike. Everyone did. And back then, crime was multiple times higher than today.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com