Comment by MatthewMcDonald | Hacker News Reader

Comment by MatthewMcDonald | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

MatthewMcDonald

Taking on a contract for development that requires testing on multiple physical devices that you don't already own

Using a 3D printer to prototype basic hardware at a company that doesn't expect to have more hardware products in the near future

Renting multiple VR/AR headsets for an extended customer demo

-----

It might be worth mentioning that I'm one of the founders of EquipmentShare, which is sort of similar but in the construction industry, so this type of business only seems natural to me. In our industry, the more variability in the equipment requirements of your jobs, the more difficult it is to be efficient with your capital. In construction nobody owns _all_ of the equipment they use; it would require far too much capital, and a large chunk of your fleet would sit idle most of the time. It's far more efficient to have a blend of owning and renting.

Then you negotiate the cost of acquiring the devices with the person you're doing the work for. Odds are they will either have them available as you are not the first contractor they've hired, or you are, in which case you should be telling them that unless they intend not maintain whatever you make for them, it would be wise to make sure they have the hardware to develop it further.

The 3D printing can be contracted out. Consumer grade 3d printers wouldn't be a wise investment in that case.

You're doing business in VR/AR development. If you are going to be anything over a one-man operation, youshouldalready have multiple VR/AR sets for development and testing purposes.

I appreciate the candidates, and can better appreciatewhere you are coming from. In construction, however, you have already transcended the "consumer grade" level of investment. You're now dealing with industrial grade equipment which is a completely different ballgame.

Several of your examples somewhat contradict the stated intention of the company from my understanding. They were looking to break into the market for consumer grade cutting edge tech, NOT for primarily business level customers.

The article paints a picture of a company not looking at other companies as customers, but the general public.

If they intend to focus on the Enterprise level, your arguments make sense. Not so much for private customers. The niche they are trying to fill is a symptom of a lopsided economy, not a healthy one.

All good points. Perhaps I read too much into the bit about them exploring the B2B space, as I see this being most useful for small businesses.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com