[itsdevlin]

Isn't the supply side of this being neglected? This article (and tbh a few others I've read on it) feels as if they're trying to say the following, but in 500 words: "They couldn't increase revenues enough."

The piece of this equation that I'm much more interested in is the cost side. By handling the training & bookings all in-house, it just feels like they couldn't get a low enough unit cost per job. Especially in something as low-skilled (read: low-margin?) as house cleanings, it sounds like what actually happened was that Handy couldn't get costs down low enough to deal with the true market equilibrium.

While I'm not disagreeing that the legal fees from lawsuits may have made the next round of funding a challenge and was likely a heavy drain on cash on hand, I think jumping on the 1099 vs employee debate is a bit of a cop out.

It's another company failing to launch a double-sided marketplace, which sucks for all parties involved, but I'd be really really interested in reading about what actually broke.