> If the “her” he is referring to is me, then the first part of this statement is false (the second I cannot attest to). During the first week of my nightmare, the customer service team at Airbnb was - as I stated in my June 29 blog post – helpful, caring and supportive. In particular, one customer service manager - and the company’s freelance photographer - were wonderfully kind to me, and both should know how grateful I am.

> And since June 30? On this same day, I received a personal call from one of the co-founders of Airbnb. We had a lengthy conversation, in which he indicated having knowledge of the (previously mentioned) person who had been apprehended by the police, but that he could not discuss the details or these previous cases with me, as the investigation was ongoing. He then addressed his concerns about my blog post, and the potentially negative impact it could have on his company’s growth and current round of funding. During this call and in messages thereafter, he requested that I shut down the blog altogether or limit its access, and a few weeks later, suggested that I update the blog with a “twist" of good news so as to “complete[s] the story”.

> Look, despite what some of you are saying, I am not an idiot. I understand why Airbnb called me and asked me to bring this story to an end; it is in their best profitable interest to do so. Unfortunately for me – 5 weeks and counting – there is no end in sight. Too much about this case remains unknown and unresolved, and according to both the District Attorneys and the police, it could be many more months before the criminal investigation moves forward.

> And for those who have so generously suggested a donation fund be set up to help me recover, I thank you from the bottom of my heart, and suggest that instead, you keep the money and use it to book yourself into a nice, safe hotel room the next time you travel. You’ll be glad you did.

I'll just leave this here.

https://www.airbnb.com/host-protection-insurance

> Effective January 15, 2015, if a guest is injured in a listing or elsewhere on the building property during a stay, the Host Protection Insurance program provides coverage for Airbnb hosts and, where applicable, their landlords under a general commercial liability policy.

There are a variety of gaps, and have been, where AirBnb and/or its insurance failed to cover things. It isn't until this year that insurance coverage was anywhere close to what I'd consider acceptable and basic. It still isn't "complete" as far as what I'd use for my rental property.

These missing packages have been primarily from when UPS/FedEx decides to use a last mile delivery service, instead of delivering it themselves, which is primarily staffed by low wage workers with frighteningly high turnover.

> I'd expect them to make better deliveries and more accurately.

I wouldn't. I'd expect the additional supply would get you faster, cheaper delivery at the expense of accuracy and a slight increase in other problems. I'm not against that trade off but there's no need to pretend it doesn't exist.

> Uber/Lyft have shown this model works fine.

Uber/Lyft and particularly Lyft where you're less likely to get an experienced professional, have shown that the model is not without it's tradeoffs.

Let's assume there is zero difference between the quality of full time people and part time people, but, being people there is distribution of people that a) need to be trained over time to handle certain on-the-job situations (e.g. dog in yard, etc...), and b) the system needs time (or some number of deliveries) to discover that some people are basically not fit for the position - including people signed up with the intent to scam the system. Let's compare two groups of employees, a full-time group and a part-time group.

The first thing that might surface in this model is that the part-time group requires more people to fill the same number of deliveries that the full time group can fulfill. So, in terms of numbers of bad deliveries, you'll have more failures just because you had to draw a larger number of individuals for the part-time pool vs the full time - even if quality of individuals for the full time vs part-time are exactly the same.

Adding further assumptions doesn't improve things. Maybe one might assume that part-time employees are more likely to move on to other jobs and leave the Flex workforce - well that's more churn and you get more people in category b, and more people temporarily needing training/experience. Maybe the distributions aren't exactly the same between full time and part time - one might theorize that scammers are more likely to take jobs under flex (maybe even under multiple aliases to keep from getting caught)... again this makes the performance under Flex worse...

Maybe even given the quality differences, it only ends up making sense to offer Flex delivery on the periphery of where it doesn't make cost sense to install or expand full-time infrastructure.

With flex, it's likely the same quality process, only the workforce is larger and more likely to churn. So no matter what the performance of the quality process it has some non-zero time to detect and correct worker performance, so I don't see how one avoids a larger rate of delivery faults just from the workforce dynamics.