????打車應用Uber最近吸引了很多媒體的關注，但引發關注的可不是什么好事。該公司一位高管近日威脅稱，要對一位給Uber寫負面新聞的記者進行調查。另外據稱，一位用Uber打車的乘客被司機毆打。在舊金山，一位在Uber上提供服務的司機碾壓了行人。而且，Uber的CEO因為據說培養了一種“兄弟會文化”而受人詬病。

????我無意淡化這些問題的嚴重性，不過我認為，Uber帶來的這些基本性問題，與該公司一些具體的經營手法并沒有多大關系，而主要是由于它采用了一種自身不承擔責任的商業模式。除了Uber之外，其他很多做平臺的公司——也就是通過扮演中介的角色賺錢，而不是自身提供某種產品或服務——也有同樣的問題。我不知道人們是不是充分意識到了這種模式的許多內生性問題。

????今年夏天，我用租房應用Airbnb在加州克萊爾蒙特租了一套房子。預訂費用是79美元——超過了租金的10%。我問房東，房子里有大床嗎？她在電子郵件里回復說，等到我們入住的時候，她就會放一張大床進去。

????在入住日之前四個星期的時候，我試圖再次聯系房東，但是沒有得到任何回復。Anrbnb只是提供了非常有限的幫助，從我聯系他們到收到回復之間隔了很長時間。最后，那間房子里沒有大床，我們只好住進了波莫納的喜來登酒店（Sheraton in Pomona），因為克萊蒙特的旅店當時都已經訂滿了。經過一番催促，Airbnb的確返還了我們所有的預訂費用，不過其實他們不必這樣做。正如該公司的服務協議明示的那樣，這只是一個在線平臺，“Airbnb并不是房產的擁有者或運營者。”

????多好的一個業務模式啊！通過在一個具有高度可擴展性的IT平臺上提供一種對接服務，Airbnb就能坐收大筆收入，它也無需承受與任何常規住宿服務相關的運營成本。Airbnb不用負責房子的維修和清潔工作（或者干凈程度，這個原因讓我在伯克利的一個同事不再使用Airbnb），其實它什么都不用做。

做一門不用承擔責任的生意

????當然，Airbnb并不是唯一一家通過賺中介費掙錢的公司。Uber在其服務協議中也非常清楚地闡明，Uber既不是運輸商，也不提供物流服務。所以無論是乘客也好，司機也好，甚至擋了車輛的行人也好，出了問題只能靠他們自己解決。

????與之類似，易趣(eBay)也不是一家零售商。就像它在用戶協議中闡明的那樣，易趣并不“保證所展示商品的存在、質量、安全性或合法性。”我敢說，那些因為銷售含鉛玩具而倒了霉的零售商，或是那些有大量存貨賣不出去的零售商，肯定希望他們當初也能想到一個如此絕妙的生意。

????現如今，通過構建中介平臺來賺錢的企業越來越多，因為這樣能規避為產品和服務的質量甚至可用性承擔風險，所以何樂而不為呢？如果你除了網站之外什么都不用做，利潤當然是非常可觀的。

????要說這些公司還是學到了不少經驗的。不知大家是否還記得Webvan，這是一家前埃森哲公司（Accenture）高管創辦的企業，這家公司砸了10億美元重金，試圖提供日常生活用品送貨上門服務。Webvan雇了很多人駕駛該公司自己購買的貨車，然后利用非常復雜的管理軟件，讓司機從該公司自己的配送中心提貨。現在看來，這個商業計劃還真是蠢到家。如今像Instacart等公司使用的都是承包商，而不是自家的員工，從現成的食雜店里購買產品，然后遞送給消費者。這種運營模式的投資和風險都小得多。

????Uber is much in the news recently, for mostly the wrong reasons. One of its senior executives threatened to investigate journalists who wrote negative things about the taxi service platform. An Uber passenger was allegedly attacked by a driver. And an Uber-affiliated driver ran over a pedestrian in San Francisco. And the company’s CEO has been accused of fostering a frat boy culture.

????Without downplaying the seriousness of these events, I believe the fundamental issues posed by Uber have less to do with the company’s specifics and more to do with a business model that works by offloading responsibilities, something that many other platform companies—businesses that make money by making connections rather than providing a real product or service—do as well. I am not sure people fully appreciate the many problems inherent in this type of business.

????This summer, I used Airbnb to rent a house in Claremont, Calif. The booking fee was $79—more than 10% of the rental cost. Did the house have a king-sized bed, I inquired of the owner? She would put one in time for our rental, she assured me by e-mail.

????Four weeks before the reservation date, I tried to reach her. No response. Airbnb provided only modest help, with a long lag between e-mailing them and getting any reply. In the end, no king-sized bed, so we stayed at the Sheraton in Pomona as hotels in Claremont were fully booked by that time. Airbnb did, with some prodding, refund our entire booking fee, but they didn’t have to. As the company’s terms of service clearly state, this is an online platform and “Airbnb is not an owner or operator of properties.”

????What a great business model. Airbnb collects money for providing a matching service on a highly scalable IT platform but faces none of the normal operating costs entailed in providing accommodations. The company is not responsible for maintenance and repairs, cleaning (or cleanliness, an issue that has caused a colleague of mine in Berkeley to stop using them)—or anything, really.

Making a business out of not being responsible

????Of course, Airbnb is not alone in perfecting a business model in which companies take fees for doing nothing other than facilitating transactions. As it makes abundantly clear in its terms of service, Uber does not function as a transportation carrier nor does it provide logistics services. Passengers and drivers, and maybe even pedestrians in the way of Uber cars, are pretty much on their own.

????Similarly, eBay is not a retailer. As it explains in its user agreement, eBay does not “guarantee the existence, quality, safety, or legality of items advertised.” I bet the retailers who get stuck with toys with lead in them or with inventory they can’t sell wish they had thought of such a clever out.

????The list of companies that build platforms but eschew responsibility for the quality or even availability of goods or services grows daily, and why not? Margins can be enormous if you don’t have to deliver anything other than a website.

????Give these companies credit for learning from experience. Remember Webvan, the startup run by a former Accenture executive that ran through $1 billion in an effort to build a business delivering groceries to homes? Webvan hired employees to drive trucks that the company purchased to haul products from its own distribution centers operated by extraordinarily complex software. Dumb business plan. Today, companies such as Instacart use contractors, not employees, to buy products at existing grocery stores and deliver it to people. Much less investment and risk.