You said it yourself m8
Just don't throw around criticism without being sure of the facts. It's like I always say assuming makes an *** out of u and me, hence assume.
Yes. Congratulations, you can state that I said a quote of myself. Incredible lol
But in all seriousness, what are you even talking about. "You said it yourself m8" what was the point of saying that. I'm right. You provided strong evidence you have interested in implementing this idea, therefore, by definition *, it would not be presumptuous to assume you have interest in doing something with your idea.
* "failing to observe the limits of what is permitted or appropriate"
In my case, it is appropriate to assume you are interested in doing something with your idea, since you are proposing a business model to use, and asking for community feedback on the idea, which most people would agree to be a reasonable basis to make the simple conclusion you probably want to do something with the idea.
Now to part 2 of your statement.
"Just don't throw around criticism without being sure of the facts"
All my criticisms are based on facts. Shipping costs for the sender, regardless of who the sender is, is going to into profit margins. Return shipping costs, regardless of the sender, are going to eat into the value proposition of renting a cube, providing they pay the return shipping as you stated. Otherwise, it will also eat into your profit margin.
This reduces the value proposition because the price of the cube rental per day, plus the return shipping would likely be a significant portion of outright purchasing the cube they are interested in.
Now, let's say they want to get their own version. They are out the cost of whatever the cube is whenever they buy it, plus the money they spent on just renting the same cube. The money they spent on the rental could have been used for the cube, instead of essentially going into something they keep nothing to show for. It's essentially the same reason it is better to use a loan to buy a house than rent a place.
Conversely, in the case they either feel neutral or dislike the cube, they will spend the cost of rental, plus roughly $5 USD for return shipping. That's a fair amount of money to spend on a cube they don't really like, which I assume to be the driving force behind anyone considering a service such as this. Now, when you pair the idea of having spent money to get a cube you don't really like, and on top of that, that you have to send back and don't get to keep, you are still worse off than buying a cube and not liking it. If someone buys a cube and doesn't really like it, they might have wasted money on it but they still have options to derive some value from the money spent. They can use it as a travel cube, a test cube, a trainer cube, etc, gift it to a friend or a family member, or they could attempt to sell it at some point and recuperate some of the cost. However, in the case of the rental, if they don't like it, they spent money on something they don't like, nor get to keep, which makes them worse off.
So, that huge wall of text should prove that irregardless of pricing, the value proposition is for both parties since there is pretty good chance of having low profit margins since you can't charge too much or people will feel it's just better to buy their own cube, and since the money a customer spends could have been put into ownership of a new cube.
Now let's address all the other criticisms I've made and determine whether or not they too are based on facts or not.
1. Risk of Business
It is a simple fact of life that not everyone in this world is a good person. Scammers exist. Thieves exist. With a business model like this, the risk of losing a cube/having one stolen is relatively high, since the consequences are relatively low, since the party at loss will usually end up with greater loss trying to recover what was stolen than just chalking it up as a loss inherent to business. This is very common in large retail. Lots of petty theft losses are added up over the year and just chalked up as something no different than an operating cost, since it wouldn't be worth the time, money, and resources to go after every kid who steals a candy bar.
As such, any small-volume business like this with a high amount of risk of "high value" inventory being stolen will like either choose two options to handle the problem, and you already mentioned one.
1. They simply will have a high cost of service to ensure a healthy profit margin that can hopefully offset the cost of an occasional loss. However, this requires enough business to make profit and have a cushion to cover what ever amount of loss you expect for any given month, like say 1 cube theft per month. The other problem with this solution is that by driving up the prices of the service, less people will want to spend more money to rent a cube they can't keep since higher prices of rental means getting closer and closer to the price of just buying the cube. This inflates the opportunity cost, making them better off risking it and simply buying the cube so they at least get to keep it.
2. The other option, which you mentioned earlier, is requiring a cover of some of the cost of the cube, so essentially a form of collateral. This is a common practice. The issue I see with implementing this for you specifically is that you don't really have any reputation within the community. As a result, people would be reluctant to send a stranger on the internet a cover plus the cost of rental on the basis that some guy is going to send them a cube to try. I know I certainly wouldn't. Conversely, you probably don't want to deal with the risk of loss and don't really want to send a cube to random stranger on the basis it will get returned when they could easily steal it. This would likely deter people from partaking in the service because it would be safer to put that cost into just buying the cube from a big name retailer where they know they are for sure getting a product, that they keep, from a reputable source. Even if it all goes smoothly, and you get the cube back and send the cover back, customers will still have to consider the value proposition of the service like I mentioned before.
All of this is based on two major economic principles: Value proposition and Opportunity cost. You can learn more about them with a quick google search if you aren't convinced. In any case, it is a FACT that any time money is being spent, there is an opportunity cost of the transaction, and the person spending money will have to consider the value proposition of what they are paying for. So, this criticism is based on facts.
Now let's move on to the next criticism I had
2. Calculation of rental time period
This wasn't so much a criticism as much as something to simply decide on. Does the time the cube spend in shipping count towards how long the cube is being rented?
This seems simple but consider these cases:
a. You do not charge rent on the days the cube is in the mail
This means in the days it takes to ship, you are not making any money off a cube that is no longer available for rental to someone else. As a result, you have an opportunity cost here where the time the cube isn't making money in the mail it could be making money being rented to some else.
b. You DO charge rent on the days the cube is in the mail. This is simply going to balloon the cost of rental so much it absolutely wouldn't be worth it.
So, this was just me pointing out a choice that would have to be made. It is a simple fact that this choice would have to be made. So this "criticism" is also based on facts.
3. Only providing service to selected potential customers
Any business has the right to deny service under certain conditions. However, they have to based on a criteria that is applicable to any person. A business cannot legally refuse service simply because they felt someone was "untrustworthy" which is likely the main reason you would refuse service in a business like this. They could easily make a discrimination claim that they were deemed untrustworthy on the basis of XYZ, which can get a lot of businesses in big trouble.
So, yes you would have to right to deny service, but it would have to be based on some criteria and not just "they didn't seem trustworthy."
For example, if you deny a new potential customer because they are new to forum. They might not have any real reputation here to give trust behind their name, but they also haven't done anything that gives you a valid reason to deem them untrustworthy either other than being new, which is not a valid reason. Therefore, you would have to provide service and give them a chance to prove their name, or deny service on some other basis.
Alright, so that concludes an in-depth discussion of how each point I made was carefully thought-out, and based on facts and logic. If you actually read through this instead of just rolling your eyes and instantly going to reply congrats. I commend you for being open-minded enough to read this. Hopefully this enlightens you on the thought process behind each criticism and you reflect and reconsider your comment on their basis.
And if not, well, I guess I'm more willing to use logic, reason, and facts to prove a point.
www.surveymonkey.com
www.youcandothecube.com
