Hacker News Reader

One of the big things about running a business is about being flexible and adaptable - particularly for a startup - there is even a cliched word that is bandied about for extreme examples of this - pivot.

The whole 'but if we do this it sets a precedent, it breaks our business model' is just an example of inflexibility. The circumstances that EJ is going through is not an outlier - it's a fundamental problem with their business model!

Pretending it doesn't exist, pretending that they can protect their model by not helping EJ isn't going to make the problem go away.

The only thing they should worry about now is making sure EJ has everything she needs. AirBnB's business model will no doubt adapt/change/pivot over the course of the lifespan of the business and few people will remember what it was in the past. What people will remember is their integrity and reputation - two things that AirBnB are burning to the ground at the moment. From the outside at least, it looks like AirBnB is focussed on protecting the former, when in fact, they should be protecting the latter.

AirBnB paying for one incident does not create any obligation on them to pay for other incidents. That's nonsense.

Apple replaced a friends phone that they abused and then made up a story about. Apple did this because Apple wanted to take care of their customer. Doesn't mean Apple is obligated to replace every phone, even when it is abused. Apple's only obligated to the terms of the warranty it promises. Apple promises little, but delivers a lot.

These are the incidents that test the true nature of a company. AirBnB is not coming off very well so far, and there is no negative ramification to doing the right thing-- except for the direct costs of doing the right thing.

If AirBnB thinks leaving their customer hanging is worth saving the money it would cost to "make things right" (Whatever that means) it is their right.

But lets not hide behind the spurious notion that the world operates like school.

Just because you give some gum to your friend doesn't mean you're obligated to give it to the whole class.

If it did, then I'd have the right to go to a party at the playboy mansion! Clearly other people were invited.

I'm not saying it's right or fair. I also think it's nonsense. You're thinking on the side of a smart entrepreneur, not a criminal.

All a crook is interested in is hearing or seeing the headline: "Airbnb pays for loss and damages to rattled user", or other more clever narrative. If you're a criminal, details aside, you've got all you need to scheme up an assalt.

Criminals don't work on high probability, if they did, there wouldn't be so many obvious ones. Just because they aren't likely to get the reward they desire doesn't mean they won't try.

I don't think this line of thinking works. Criminals aren't your customers. If you respond to incidents with non-customers in mind, you're going to create a negative response in current and potential customers.

This was an opportunity for AirBnB to prove that their service is excellent and worth using. This was a chance to prove to potential customers that if the worst happens they'll be their. Instead they proved they won't support their customers fully when worst case scenarios happen. Because they were thinking more about people who don't pay them then people who do.

Agreed. If AirBnB doesn't trust its customers, it can hardly ask them to trust one another.

The right way to handle this would be to make EJ right, then put insurance in place as part of the rental agreements that covers the future. Yes, insurance fraud exists, but insurance companies are good at ferreting that out. Since AirBnB is working on the latter, it makes no sense not to do the former.

If they pay for this incident, they are possibly opening the door for the kinds of schemes people pull on insurance. You know, the whole "rob my place and I'll collect the insurance" schemes.

If Airbnb pays for this incident, they effectively become an insurance company. Maybe what they should do is offer some type of actual insurance package on checkout. This way, they are providing a much needed service and indemnify themselves. Making their customers aware of this possibility rather than pretend it doesn't exist would also help create a safer environment.

Paying to make this right _should_ come out of a big, huge, hairy insurance policy. We haven't even begun to talk about the potential legal liability that AirBnb is under here. If they don't have an insurance policy that covers this stuf... You really shouldn't be in the hospitality business.

Dude, I work in an ER. When someone slips on a wet floor in a grocery store, they do _whatever_ _it_ _takes_ to be sure the person is cared for, taken to the ER and checked out. I've seen store managers drive people to the ER after getting hurt in their store.

Why? Because you take care of people. It's just good business.

Happy customers don't sue you. Angry customers sue you, even if you didn't do anything wrong, and you have no legal liability whatsoever.

"If Airbnb pays for this incident, they effectively become an insurance company."

If they don't, they very well might become a non-company.

AirBnB are on record saying one of their principles is that people are generally good. They have to believe this at some level or else their entire business model would be untenable. They cannot on one side claim that AirBnB is a safe proposition because most people are good and on the other refuse to take care of their customers because of the one-in-a-million who might cheat them.

Generally being the key word there. Even they recognize that there are outliers within their belief system. The real question is what their response is to an encounter with an outlier. If it is "Sorry, you're SOL". then this raises a huge red flag to the consumer. Now they're more aware of the stakes of the bet.

People are less likely to gamble once they have more understanding of the odds. AirBnB needs to make sure they mitigate "worst case scenarios" if they want to maintain a strong customer base.

ef that. take care of your customers or before you know it, you won't have any.

Blindly repeating a mantra without addressing the argument at hand is going to get you nowhere.

this is my argument: take care of your customers. contrary to your statement, it has gotten me somewhere since that is how i built my business. we've made mistakes and our partners have made mistakes, but we always put the customer's interests first in these situations, regardless of profit or precedent. solutions can be simple. this is one of them.

The are already introducing an insurance scheme, or that is what they claim. They simply will have to adapt - or it turns out their business model is not sustainable.