[feedjoelpie]

Co-ops aren't a new idea, and they certainly can survive. But in the two forms I've really seen them in action, they have been a mess.

Form 1: Freelance designer and coder co-op. Top players were continually dissatisfied with performance of their peers and the bargain-basement rates that would result. And their only remedy was to go join a normal company.

Form 2: An employee-owned taxi company with a 100-person board whose response to Uber was, "Oh, we just need an app." However, they couldn't agree to change any of their practices, resulting in people still not being guaranteed service when booking through the app. And no customer feedback or punitive mechanisms for drivers not following through. The system is: Cabbie clicks in on the radio and says "I'll take that fare." After that, if they see an easier-made buck on the way, they divert and grab that instead. The customer doesn't get service.

This is not to say that any given co-op is doomed, but consider this: A community, of which the customer is not part, making decisions in a mostly democratic fashion, will frequently devolve into each member acting and voting in self-preservation within the organization. And with no one to wield a hammer on behalf of the customer, eventually killing the entire organization with a thousand paper cuts.

Were I to attempt something approaching a co-op today, from the ground up, I would want to think very hard about how to create a governance structure that could prevent the organization from cannibalizing itself. Can it be done? I'd like to think so, but I also think it would be very difficult. And dangerous to get wrong.

[ada1981]

I co-own a grocery store with ~16,000 other people (FoodCoop.com). We've been around since the 1960s and do about $50MM a year in revenue. It certainly has crazy political issues -- there has been a political war within the org for the last few years surrounding just getting together to vote on boycotting certain products, but we offer the freshest, most local and most affordable food in NYC (and this is in one of the most sought after neighborhoods in the city -- Obama once lived in a brownstone down the street from me).

I've been pushing to get our data exposed via API for developers to build apps and one of them I'd like to see built is a delivery service for owners to use.

[feedjoelpie]

Hello, fellow Park Slope yuppie!

Y'all have a good thing going. I just don't think the co-op model necessarily translates to that many scenarios. Park Slope Food Co-Op depends a lot upon volunteer hours, and operators are customers. I think that's been the distinction in every co-op or co-op-like that anyone has cited as successful. They're customer-owned as much as they're employee-owned.

[ada1981]

Very true.

All of our owners also must work 2.75 hours a month, and you can't shop at our coop without being an owner.

I have seen some other coops where they have separate pricing for owners vs. members vs. regular folk, but I don't know how successful they are.

About half the reason I joined the coop was to get a look under the hood of how a coop like this works - so far I've been fascinated and learned a lot about human psychology and politics.

In some sense, Uber drivers are also customers, in that they are buying the leads and software from Uber corporate.

I also think if there are ways to have customers also be owners that can be a really great set up.

[tlarkworthy]

John Lewis/Waitrose is a successful full scale co-op in Britain.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lewis_Partnership

[pricechild]

I find it amusing you'd think of them first rather than... The Co-operative? https://www.co-operative.coop/about-us

[eru]

Vanguard might be a good role model? I'm not sure exactly how they are organized, but I think they are owned formally owned by their customers _and_ seem to be doing a good job at providing customer surplus.

Of course, in the end it's competition that's keeping businesses customer focused. (Or rather competition provides for the survivorship bias so that mostly customer focused businesses survive.)

[feedjoelpie]

Vanguard is owned by funds that are owned by shareholders. Essentially, it's customer-owned. That's a very different proposition.

[eru]

Yes, on paper its customer owned; and that's why I suggested it as a role-model to study.

In practice you still get principle-agent conflict. But so far they are still doing well by their customers in practice.