Hi, everyone. It's Shira. Startups and tech companies like Uber, Airbnb, Gojek, Bird and Compass operate in many cities and often multiple countries, and typically have a repeatable playbook for each time they arrive in a new place. What Gojek learns about optimal pay for food-delivery couriers in Jakarta can translate, at least in part, to Ho Chi Minh City. Airbnb's experience navigating local bureaucracies has been honed from its experience in hundreds of cities around the world. That's not necessarily true for the people, industries and policy makers with which these companies work. The Gojek driver in Ho Chi Minh City doesn't necessarily know how to avoid the pitfalls his counterparts in Jakarta already encountered. A city planner in New York City may not have the luxury of learning from a counterpart in Paris what taxes or guardrails were effective for Airbnb rentals in that city. It's centralized knowledge and action by the company, versus often highly fragmented knowledge and action by the contract drivers, homeowners, mom-and-pop restaurants, local real estate agents, trucking companies and governments dealing with startups trying to shake up how the real world functions. This imbalance is what I think about when I read stories like this one about hotel operators, delivery couriers and others who feel they got the short end of the stick from startups backed by SoftBank Group Corp. or its Vision Fund. Bloomberg News has also covered the ongoing, city-by-city or state-by-state efforts to tax or put limits on on-demand companies such as Airbnb and Uber. (Disclosure: A family member works for a labor organization that has advocated for legislation of short-term home rentals, such as those provided by Airbnb.) There are exceptions. Chain restaurants that deal with delivery startups have the advantage of seeing patterns in their dealings with the tech disruptors, as do multi-city adversaries such as hotel industry trade groups. U.S. cities that were caught off-guard by on-demand ride services a few years ago learned to move more quickly when scooter rental companies came to town. (It helped that cities could force companies to comply by impounding scooters, said Brooks Rainwater, director of the Center for City Solutions at the National League of Cities.) Coordinated knowledge and action isn't easy, though. In recently published research on the regulation of on-demand ride services, the New York University Rudin Center for Transportation pointed out that the crush of demands on local policy makers makes it difficult for cities to learn best practices from each other. The knowledge and power of sprawling companies isn't unique to on-demand startups, of course. When General Motors builds a factory, Walmart opens a distribution center and Amazon pushes for a local tax break, the law makers, workers and business partners they're dealing with probably don't have the same experience as a company that has gone through this process many times before. The scale of the startups, however, is on a whole other level. Uber had 3.9 million contract drivers and couriers working on its system at the end of 2018, and it operates in more than 700 cities. There are more than 100,000 cities with Airbnb listings, and more than 7 million homes listed. There are not 100,000 cities with a Walmart. The bigger the startups get, the more the parties they deal with will get fragmented. That is a lot of people potentially learning from scratch how to work a system the companies have mastered. – Shira Ovide |
Post a Comment