A year into the on-demand revolution, the question persists: Where’s it going next? So far, it’s gone into nearly every local vertical, sometimes comically. The common mistake: seeing attractive unit economics in one vertical, then failing to reach them in other verticals when porting the model wholesale.

For example, Uber’s success stems partly from factors that exist across verticals: mobility, millennials, and urbanization. But it’s also due to some unique factors, such as aggregating, liquidating, and dispatching previously disaggregated supply. And in Uber’s case, that supply — drivers — is relatively interchangeable.

Those supply-side factors are critical, yet sometimes ignored when porting the model to new areas. I wrote recently about how that plays out in home services, where supply isn’t as interchangeable. Instead it’s highly variable and mired in service specialties. It’s also prone to lots of leakage, which was Homejoy’s undoing.

Restaurants are another example. Despite

[Read the full story here ]
Source: Street Fight