A couple of examples where it sort of happens for individuals:
Ebay
Customers: Sellers and Buyers (individuals)
They have an issue balancing the sellers and buyers interests which are diametrically opposed in many cases, especially if there is a dispute. Many sellers complain that things are too far in the buyers interests but I think this because most of the world that sells things is even more tilted in the direction of sellers (ie, going to a store, purchasing using your credit card where the transaction and data terms are all dictated by Visa/MC yet they are much more in the merchant's favor than the buyer because Visa/MC has merchants as customers ultimately and not individuals, the warranty is defined by the seller, not the buyer, and the quality is take it or leave it. Obviously the buyer can go elsewhere, or just not buy, so the seller is incentivized to meet some level of expectations, but it's a take it or leave it deal for the buyer on everything including price.) Sometimes Ebay changes the rules to favor buyers a bit more, and then sellers slowly figure out how to game the system to get more control, money or benefit from the Ebay system. This happens about every 18 months to 2 years.
Has the "search follow" function which tells you daily if matches for your "intentions" appear.
Amazon
Customers: Sellers and Buyers (individuals)
They have more rules and consistency required for sellers so that they don't mess with buyers, but less flexibility with price for buyers -- but there is some (Amazon will sell at one price but Amazon resellers are almost always significantly lower), and there are few one-offs like at Ebay. Shipping and returns are much more consistent at Amazon than Ebay.
Also.. has a way to get notified if things come up that you are after. Sort of an "intent system." Also Jeff Bezos said at PC Forum years ago that if we wanted our Data, we could have it, he just didn't know how to do it. It's possible that we could get our data out at some point.
Etsy
Customers: Sellers and Buyers (individuals)
Consistent rules required for sellers so that they don't mess with buyers, but less flexibility with price for buyers -- but there is some. They have cultivated a community of people with certain expectations that people will take care of each other and not screw each other (like the first couple years of Flickr) and it works. But the prices are easily 50-100% higher than Ebay for comparable items, though the handcrafted items are unique and fairly priced. They treat individuals very well.
20x200
Customers: Artists (sellers) and Buyers (individuals)
Curated art in limited edition. Sales and coupons now and then, but consistently priced, quality items. They made $10m their first year I believe. Then went away and have started back up. They treat everyone very well. Its probable that if asked they would share our data, but they would need an easy way to get it to us.
I would say the best of this bunch are Etsy and 20x200.. but from the company perspective, it's hard to totally do the right thing because we still have retrograde payment and infrastructure systems that slant toward companies.. and no one has offered up ways to change that, in order to make it better or do more of the right thing for customers.
On Feb 15, 2014, at 7:36 PM, Johannes Ernst wrote:
On Feb 15, 2014, at 17:30, Ben Werdmuller <
">
> wrote:
Define "customers"? If users count, I'd historically put Mozilla in this bracket.
I used customers == users here.
Mozilla: yes. But it's a not-for-profit.
On Feb 15, 2014 5:25 PM, "Johannes Ernst" <
">
> wrote:
(actually, not in their rhetoric)
I'm looking for examples of decent-size (consumer) internet companies that clearly put "doing the right thing" for their customers first. Companies whose customers would agree with that.
Not advertisers first, not business partners first, not company/shareholders first, not world domination first etc.
I think there are some examples in the to-business market, but what about in the to-consumer market?
Thanks,
Johannes.