Landlords, would you use an app like this?

Cianos

Hi folks,
Myself and a couple of other Boardsies are working on a new app and I thought it might be of use to landlords to communicate with their tenants.

The idea of the app is "WhatsApp for work stuff". What's different between it and WhatsApp is that it allows you to share a To Do list with your contacts (for example reparations that need to be made, or tracking rent payments) as well as share Notes (it could be emergency numbers, info about bills, lease info etc).

It also allows you to receive online payments, however this may not make sense for receiving rent payments as you would incur Stripe payment processing fees (2.4% + 24c + VAT).

I'm curious to know if many landlords here use SMS/WhatsApp/Viber to communicate with tenants and whether these extra features (To Do list and Notes) would be useful.

Anyway, if you're interested I can PM or post up the link where we're gathering numbers for the beta release. I didn't want to include the link in my post here in case it was seen as too spammy.

I wouldn't like to encourage tenants to start making to-do lists for landlords. A premises rented out in proper condition should need minimal landlord input, certainly not enough to justify providing an app.
Some tenants would expect a landord to replace the loo roll when it gets used...
However, if it reminded tenants to cut the grass and tidy their gardens, that might be something...

Ray Palmer

Absolutely no use to me as a landlord. The idea that a tenant would use it is the main problem. I have worked in software development for years and people who are paid to use systems don't follow procedure no matter how many times they are informed. You expect a tenant to use a system when they really want to talk to the landlord. Tenants ring after you already replied via an e-mail and ignore their phone if the don't want to talk to you.
Maybe a letting agent would want it but the tenants will hate it and still ring. The problem will remain tenants complaining about an actual person hasn't contacted them for a 2 way live conversation.
This is a classic example of looking at what you as an creator might use and think everybody is like you and unfamiliar with what the users are actually like. If a letting agency wants such a tool it would be easier and cheaper to create one themselves.
Sounds harsh but I am sure friends and family all think this is a great idea but probably know very little about IT or renting.

Cianos

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Absolutely no use to me as a landlord. The idea that a tenant would use it is the main problem. I have worked in software development for years and people who are paid to use systems don't follow procedure no matter how many times they are informed. You expect a tenant to use a system when they really want to talk to the landlord. Tenants ring after you already replied via an e-mail and ignore their phone if the don't want to talk to you.
Maybe a letting agent would want it but the tenants will hate it and still ring. The problem will remain tenants complaining about an actual person hasn't contacted them for a 2 way live conversation.
This is a classic example of looking at what you as an creator might use and think everybody is like you and unfamiliar with what the users are actually like. If a letting agency wants such a tool it would be easier and cheaper to create one themselves.
Sounds harsh but I am sure friends and family all think this is a great idea but probably know very little about IT or renting.

No problem hearing harsh criticism don't worry I mustn't have made it clear in my OP but the app is not designed specifically for landlords/tenants. It's much more open than that (in the way that WhatsApp isn't designed for any particular user group).

I just thought it might be something that landlords would find useful as a communication tool, especially if they currently use WhatsApp/SMS as a main communication method with their tenants.

I do recognise that every industry has its own unique aspects and dynamics and I would be very foolish to assume we could produce a tool specific to any particular industry without having hands-on experience!

The app is purposefully kept very simple and accessible so that if someone happens to see value in using it for their particular niche they can invite others without worrying about them having trouble figuring it out.

Ray Palmer

Cianos wrote: »

No problem hearing harsh criticism don't worry I mustn't have made it clear in my OP but the app is not designed specifically for landlords/tenants. It's much more open than that (in the way that WhatsApp isn't designed for any particular user group).

I just thought it might be something that landlords would find useful as a communication tool, especially if they currently use WhatsApp/SMS as a main communication method with their tenants.

I do recognise that every industry has its own unique aspects and dynamics and I would be very foolish to assume we could produce a tool specific to any particular industry without having hands-on experience!

The app is purposefully kept very simple and accessible so that if someone happens to see value in using it for their particular niche they can invite others without worrying about them having trouble figuring it out.

So you are going to recreate an app that is nothing new for an already overcrowded market? I assume the desire is to compete with these multi-million Euro companies? Any new feature you have will be easily replicated by these companies. What do you think you are going to have that will make people switch over?
I just don't understand what the point is. You don't need hands on experience to develop a product but you do need to consider what the advantages really are and if there is a need. I don't see the need for another messaging service and bigger companies have already tried and failed and they were using existing brand loyalty.
I have seen people spend time developing software like this many times and even get investment and fail. The investor is taking a punt that they can afford but the developers are wasting time they don't have. For every success story you hear there are hundreds that fail. I don't know what you have but are you a
really such a good programmer that you will develop code that is super efficient? I look at code from recent graduates a lot and the standard is terrible with highly inefficient code and poor stability. In the app market you need to have a good idea more so than coding abilities which are actually cheap to hire and cheaper if you have them on salary.

Definitely not.

If there is a long to do list, then you're not a particularly good landlord.

I see absolutely no reason to have such an app.

AntiVirus

Ray Palmer wrote: »

are you a
really such a good programmer that you will develop code that is super efficient? I look at code from recent graduates a lot and the standard is terrible with highly inefficient code and poor stability. In the app market you need to have a good idea more so than coding abilities which are actually cheap to hire and cheaper if you have them on salary.

You'd be amazed at the amount of systems out there that are generating millions of euro's/dollars/pounds that are written with poor inefficient code. The end user would never no this or even care about this. If the app is a hit it does not matter. The real problem here is that the app doesn't seem to be a good idea.

Oink

Deleted User wrote: »

Definitely not.

If there is a long to do list, then you're not a particularly good landlord.

I see absolutely no reason to have such an app.

Agree with Whoops.

Landlords are supposed to provide accommodation in a good condition. Then the tenant gets "peaceful enjoyment" of the house, i.e with minimal interference. Communication is required at times, but should remain exceptional enough not to require an app.

EDIT: and don't get me started on this malarkey of rent being collected in person every two weeks and ^&%$ like that. Some people seee their landlords more often than I see my mates.

kingtut

Have to agree with a few others, I see no benefit whatsoever to an app like this (sorry if it's harsh but you did ask :P)

Cianos

Ray Palmer wrote: »

So you are going to recreate an app that is nothing new for an already overcrowded market? I assume the desire is to compete with these multi-million Euro companies?Any new feature you have will be easily replicated by these companies. What do you think you are going to have that will make people switch over?

We've no intention of competing with the likes of WhatsApp - we don't expect it to take off like WhatsApp, Skype or similar because it's not that type of product. Ours is more aimed at teams/organisations and service provider-to-client engagements.

They could of course replicate our features but that's unlikely because doing so will change their product's essence. And of course, if they do consider replicating our features because of what we're doing then that's definitely a good problem to have.

I just don't understand what the point is. You don't need hands on experience to develop a product but you do need to consider what the advantages really are and if there is a need. I don't see the need for another messaging service and bigger companies have already tried and failed and they were using existing brand loyalty.

There may not be a need for landlords and that's fine, but there are many other areas we feel our app will add a lot of value.

I have seen people spend time developing software like this many times and even get investment and fail. The investor is taking a punt that they can afford but the developers are wasting time they don't have. For every success story you hear there are hundreds that fail. I don't know what you have but are you a really such a good programmer that you will develop code that is super efficient? I look at code from recent graduates a lot and the standard is terrible with highly inefficient code and poor stability. In the app market you need to have a good idea more so than coding abilities which are actually cheap to hire and cheaper if you have them on salary.

My outlook wouldn't be as pessimistic Of course the likelihood of failure is high, but it's a project a number of us have decided to embark on because we believe in the concept. If nobody took these kinds of risks there'd be very little in the way of innovation. Look at Slack - they've built an amazing product that enhances the desktop based instant messaging experience, when many would have said Skype is perfectly fine.

If the concept is truly good (which we'll only know once we get it out there) and it's built well (which we're certainly capable of) then that's at least some of the groundwork for it to be a success.

Ray Palmer

AntiVirus wrote: »

You'd be amazed at the amount of systems out there that are generating millions of euro's/dollars/pounds that are written with poor inefficient code. The end user would never no this or even care about this. If the app is a hit it does not matter. The real problem here is that the app doesn't seem to be a good idea.

I would not be surprised in any way. They are being rewritten constantly because of it or expected to fail at certain points. End user worry about the product working is true but when they break or security breaches happen they suddenly care.

Ray Palmer

Cianos wrote: »

We've no intention of competing with the likes of WhatsApp - we don't expect it to take off like WhatsApp, Skype or similar because it's not that type of product. Ours is more aimed at teams/organisations and service provider-to-client engagements.

They could of course replicate our features but that's unlikely because doing so will change their product's essence. And of course, if they do consider replicating our features because of what we're doing then that's definitely a good problem to have.



There may not be a need for landlords and that's fine, but there are many other areas we feel our app will add a lot of value.



My outlook wouldn't be as pessimistic Of course the likelihood of failure is high, but it's a project a number of us have decided to embark on because we believe in the concept. If nobody took these kinds of risks there'd be very little in the way of innovation. Look at Slack - they've built an amazing product that enhances the desktop based instant messaging experience, when many would have said Skype is perfectly fine.

If the concept is truly good (which we'll only know once we get it out there) and it's built well (which we're certainly capable of) then that's at least some of the groundwork for it to be a success.

None of this sounds new or needed. High probability of failure is down to not creating something new or innovative rather than effort. Have you done any proper research on the market?
I don't think you realise what companies are actually like and the users, many organisations use old software so their user can manage and high roll out costs. I know many organisation using IE 9 due to the hassle of upgrading is your product going to handle that along with old phones?
Your product is aimed at people using the latest tech who will also change brand for some extra functionality that may or may not link to the other software they use that might be a few versions behind. I just can't see how you could possibly have that much development time or resources to be anything but below other products doing similar work. Am I going to suddenly drop Sharepoint and Lync that I have paid a licence for another product which doesn't have a security certification? Maybe something you do is clever but I can't even vaguely see why moving would be in anybody's interest. So maybe sports groups or the like but much easier to use something more people are familiar with or already use.
I am only a pessimist for what you are doing not the ability but it doesn't sound like you have any understanding of the market

Cianos

Ray Palmer wrote: »

None of this sounds new or needed. High probability of failure is down to not creating something new or innovative rather than effort. Have you done any proper research on the market? I don't think you realise what companies are actually like and the users, many organisations use old software so their user can manage and high roll out costs. I know many organisation using IE 9 due to the hassle of upgrading is your product going to handle that along with old phones?
Your product is aimed at people using the latest tech who will also change brand for some extra functionality that may or may not link to the other software they use that might be a few versions behind. I just can't see how you could possibly have that much development time or resources to be anything but below other products doing similar work. Am I going to suddenly drop Sharepoint and Lync that I have paid a licence for another product which doesn't have a security certification? Maybe something you do is clever but I can't even vaguely see why moving would be in anybody's interest. So maybe sports groups or the like but much easier to use something more people are familiar with or already use.
I am only a pessimist for what you are doing not the ability but it doesn't sound like you have any understanding of the market

The app isn't aimed at desk-bound companies and especially not those who depend on any existing software infrastructure. It's aimed at teams/organisations who are not in front of a computer all day and who are used to communicating via instant messaging and for whom these extra features would be of benefit.

There's nothing incredibly innovative about a To Do list or Notes, but the main USP is packaging all of this in to an instant messaging app that is easy to use and instantly intuitive and also a format that many people prefer communicating through nowadays.

For example just today I showed the prototype to a bike mechanic (I saw that he was messaging a colleague via WhatsApp for an answer to my query). He said they use WhatsApp all the time and would find the task sharing feature very handy. This is obviously just an anecdotal example and we'll only know for certain how people embrace it when it's out in front of unbiased users.

lcwill

I actually think it is a good idea. There is so much collaboration software out there but the fact that I don't use it means something is wrong. I use a to do list app with my wife - an app called "todoist", and i use WhatsApp all the time. I can imagine something very simple which combined the two of them which could be very useful for work.

EmmetF

This could possibly be useful between architects/engineers and their clients - there's a period of constant interaction between the two from conception right through to construction. If you believe this is genuinely a different application than other instant messengers, there is always the possiblility of finding that niche market that needs this.

Cianos

lcwill wrote: »

I actually think it is a good idea. There is so much collaboration software out there but the fact that I don't use it means something is wrong. I use a to do list app with my wife - an app called "todoist", and i use WhatsApp all the time. I can imagine something very simple which combined the two of them which could be very useful for work.

EmmetF wrote: »

This could possibly be useful between architects/engineers and their clients - there's a period of constant interaction between the two from conception right through to construction. If you believe this is genuinely a different application than other instant messengers, there is always the possiblility of finding that niche market that needs this.

Thanks for the feedback These are the types of cases we'd love to see people using it for.