Comment by Cookingboy
11 years ago
I love how you can start a smuggling organization (from the description, it's just that, this is not even legal gray area bullshit, it's legally black) and call it a "disruptive startup" these days in Silicon Valley AND get funded by YC, I mean, what the actual fuck?
No kidding it's a $16 billion market in China alone, that's why people risk on getting EXECUTED to be in the smuggling business.
Edit: this is from their site, they call themselves the "only peer-to-peer platform that gives you access to the global market."
I actually bursted out laughing when I read it, I should start a money laundering service and call it the "only secure platform that unlocks the full potential of your earnings"
I remember reading one PG's essays a while ago that concluded
1. YC should fund riskier startups
2. Many good ideas sound bad at first.
Funding a criminal smuggling operation seems to fit both criteria.
Free idea for the next batch (or pivot!): often non-US citizens will be willing to work for lower wages in difficult jobs than US citizens. Why not match them up with people who are already driving across the US border, who can help get them in the country?
Here's the link: http://paulgraham.com/swan.html
Many great ideas do sound bad at first, but that's not remotely the same as "all bad sounding ideas are great ideas in disguise".
Breaking the law seems very much the modus operandi of Silicon Valley startups these days. Just look at AirBnb, Uber, Lyft, Aereo, 23andMe et al.
And rightfully so. Some laws exist to protect the consumer. Most laws exist to extort money and funnel it to a very specific group of people.
I really hope you don't actually believe this is the case with most laws.
Some laws need to catch up to the modern world, but thinking that they are all in place to enrich certain people is really far fetched. (I do think that all laws that were passed were voted in place by legislators who are self-serving...but that doesn't meant they dont have a good reason to exist.)
Not to say there aren't incumbents who feel threatened by the new world and will latch onto archaic laws to protect their empires...any good idea will have this hurdle, but the laws themselves almost always do serve a function that is in society's best interest.
Care to explain which of those "most laws" exist to extort money? It's common to hear this sentiment parroted around, but never does it come with anything backing it up. Until that point, people like me have to assume that sentiments such as that are purely self-serving.
4 replies →
Oh god the arrogance and naivety.
Yes, all import tax laws exist with the sole reason of funneling money to specific group of evil people, this is absolutely true regardless of circumstance or the country or product category. Things like local market production and foreign trade balance and a gazillion other factors never play a role.
/sarcasm.
Even if the law is out of bad intention, the best way to get it changed is to break it right? Be..because JUSTICES TRIUMPHS ALL IN THE END RIGHT?
/facepalm
Agree with your comment, but an inundation of these type of comments on HN in the past seem like a very good indicator that the company will succeed to the tune of multi-billion$ valuations.
This is actually quite astute. The problems with ideas like Backpack are obvious, but there is probably a safe way to address all the concerns with the right approach.
Personally I would never use Backpack after reading about people who unknowingly took a package to another country that had drugs and spent years in jail despite their ignorance.
However, if somehow there is a way to do this legally and still capitalize off arbitrage. For example, maybe brands have different MAP pricing in different countries, and even with paying taxes and securing the items, there is a gray market opportunity to exploit.
The simple reality is that this is done on a daily basis already, so finding a way to do it at scale in a legal way has massive potential.
If I was YC, I would consider investing a few bucks to try to tackle this problem knowing that there are hurdles to overcome and some creativity required to make it work.
The legal way just isn't lucratively profitable - because then you are just a courier escorting packages through customs and there are many companies that do that. So firstly, you have to pay all the regular taxes that any other importer has to pay, and then you have to go through all of customs' bureaucracy like any other importer has to do.
Travelers won't be able to do this since they won't know the local language, laws and customs, and they won't be licensed importers, and they will be scammed by customs officials in poor countries, and their goods will eventually be forfeited if they don't have enough money to pay the/arbitrary taxes and accrue fees while they decide whether to abandon the merchandise or not.
So yes, the process of importing stuff into many places is shitty and in need of disruption. "Don't get caught, mule" is not that disruption. Customs agents everywhere are united on that and actively looking for people smuggling drugs, animals, produce, electronics, luxury goods and anything else.
Price discrepancies when you factor in transport and taxes are still going to exist and some are going to be opportunities to make small amounts of money, not big amounts.