Comment by keithwarren | Hacker News Reader

Comment by keithwarren | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I love this because bootstrapping the concept is far simpler than an infrastructure build out, this is a super-service which can start out by sub-contracting all the individual services.

I am game, when do we start!

update: Some further thoughts on cost.

Looking at what I pay for my home (some of these I use, some I have had quoted; I also factored a monthly cost out of some of these which are quarterly). My home is upper-middle class in the midwest, about 5K square feet on 1/2 acre.

Lawn mowing: $150/mo Lawn treatment: $40/mo Pest control: $35/mo HVAC maintenance: $30/mo House cleaning: $300/mo General maintenance: $100/mo

I would certainly pay a premium for a single end point for managing these services but that last one is the stickler. Some people will never call but you will have those who want a maintenance person for every creaking floorboard, dripping faucet and other little nuance of the home.

I think the idea has lots of merit, would love to know what others think.

I think the main weakness in this business model, which is the same one with condos, is that people don't like to think about the really expensive things that they don't need to pay for regularly. When you need a new furnace/roof/fence/siding/driveway/etc., it's a multiple-$K hit. If you haven't budgeted for it (and I think most people don't), then the tendency will be to put it off for another year or three. I would guess the regular maintenance you outline takes care of perhaps only half the larger long-term upkeep problem. So prompt comprehensive maintenance with a flat monthly rate requires what seem like very high rates and some escrow, and also involves lower margins than it may appear to the customer. You may also become a magnet for customers who have already accrued a lot of "maintenance debt". So maybe you'd just need a long list of major unpredictable maintenance exclusions? Would that still be a satisfactory value proposition?

Regarding the main weakness, I think you nailed it. That being said, one could make a pretty convincing argument to the home owner that by participating in such a service, even at a premium, they'd actually save thousands of dollars. By keeping a home well maintained, you can avoid many of the big repairs that you'd otherwise be subject to. Most people don't caulk cracks when they first appear. They don't check their siding and roofing for cracks and leaks on a regular basis. They don't change out their furnace filter every winter. And a 100 other things they should be doing but aren't.

And you're right - people don't budget for the big issues. And that's all the more reason they need a service like this. A monthly, predictable bill is more manageable than a series of big, one time hits.

As for maintenance debt, pricing might need to take into account the age of the various components (roof, fence, siding, ect...). And, of course, any pre-existing conditions (ie. roof needs repaired now) wouldn't be covered at all.

I agree that the correct initial approach would be to bootstrap by sub-contracting out all the work. The trick would be negotiating favorable rates with the contractors and staying on top of things to make sure they do a good job and don't add unnecessary friction for the customers. Once business picked up enough in a city, it might be more profitable and manageable to switch to full time employees.

To start with, you could leave general maintenance off of the list of services performed, perhaps offering those fixes a la carte.

How about it being more of deductible. You would pay a flat fee for each visit of professional except the regular checkups.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com