Thanks for your thoughts. I’d like to follow up on a few things you mentioned:
I see your point with Tonal and I think a lot of what will make Mirror more capable will be on the software side-being able to execute on feedback that is not reliant on actual instructors but rather automated feedback (ai). That being said, I’m assuming that the data in order to get to that point is not something that Mirror has yet. They’d need to be collected from users. There are some targeted data files that have athlete data in Asia for instance but I’m not sure that could be applied for lay people or would be applicable to folks in the US. So in the meantime instructor led classes would be worthwhile with the ability to get feedback via the camera/speaker and added knowledge to the user by self-assessment through the reflection during that feedback.
The Peloton app is also a great idea but largely limited by the hardware that displays information on such a small scale; it would be interesting to see if Mirror has a play as an app hosting product that would be integrated much in the way that alexa/googlehome are.
We shall see how it pans out!
I agree with a lot of your points! I do wonder if there is a space that venmo is not capitalizing on and that is around charitable giving. From your post and my understanding venmo is largely free to use c2c but costs businesses about 3% off customer payments. With a large majority share of the marketplace in the US for c2c transactions it may not be necessary for venmo to tackle this charitable giving transactions in order to remain competitive but i would argue that this type of transaction could be a new market for venmo as the demand for smaller contributions to these causes could go up with venmo’s platform (and perhaps increase stickiness of venmo in multiple types of financial transactions). The current business model is an issue for lean, non-profit, organizations that may not want to loose on donations at such large margins. The other thing that would be interesting to understand in global market is how foreign transaction fees and/or exchange rates would come into play.
Mobile money continues to grow especially in emerging markets. This app is great because it simplifies the process of connecting funds across countries from different parties and as I understand, would still work as a delivery model to those with mobile phones (that aren’t smart). I wonder about two things 1. how this might be helpful on the b2b or b2c level and what kind of tax implications there might be and 2. is there a way or a reason to penetrate the non-smartphone mobile user market? If non users bought a phone could it be assumed that they would get a feature phone instead of a smartphone? I wonder what the upside would look like with changes in these factors.
Entering the grocery market was an interesting, and as you pointed out, strategically complementary move to their existing offerings. One aspect that I’d be interested to know more about is how this offering could play out in international markets. Amazon made a bid to buy Deliveroo which operates in 14 or so countries (like France and Australia) but since “food delivery” encompasses both delivery of foods from restaurants (where competition is already high) and grocery stores, would this change Amazon’s “winning” model?