Maximum of $70,000 a year, if they work 40 hours a week. That's not bad, but it's definitely not great.
They have not designed security in to your event. They don't have contingencies. They don't know floor plans and vulnerabilities. They maybe haven't met each other before. They don't know the difference between you and a look-alike. They don't know what's routine and what's out of the ordinary. They're probably not deputized, meaning they don't necessarily integrate well with law-enforcement. You're probably liable for everything they do.
There are parts of this idea that make it awesome. There are parts of this idea that should scare the crap out of anyone who actually cares about security.
This is most likely for things like house parties and large gatherings of people. You decide you want to throw a New Years pash at your condo? You're probably not worried about small things getting stolen, since you can lock up your main room, but rather people getting drunk and getting into fights.
The presence of one or two large bouncers will probably make someone think twice.
Furthermore, the company is probably taking a decent cut, I'd (random guess) say between 10-20/hour, giving the bouncer about $20/hr. These events most likely run at night, on Fridays and Saturdays, for 4-8 hours max. That means that most likely, bouncers are doing this for some extra cash, not necessarily as their primary source of income.
I think the key wording was "uber for bouncers" and "per guard". We're not talking executive protection or major event security. An average armed guard in my city would be lucky to make $15/hr. For $35/hr you can hire an off duty police officer. A quick google shows the mean security guard salary is ~32k in SF and 75% of $36k, so even with a 50/50 split a guard working 40hrs would be making normal wages and bringing home $35k a year.
There's a ton of small events (think a 100 attendee unconference) that may be required to hire security for legal/insurance/contract reasons. Many event spaces require you to hire security whenever alcohol is served. Small events like that where showing up an hour ahead of time is plenty to figure out where the exits are, who's in charge, etc. I could see this being useful for smaller restaurants/clubs/bars that don't have an established relationship with a security provider and could use this to call in security only on the busy nights.
Of course, I also see people using this for parties at their house/office just for the image of having a party so 'exclusive' there was a bouncer. People who need real actual security will look elsewhere and pay much more.
"The company sent me an eye-popping estimate for the size of the global security market in 2016: $244 billion."
This is in their pitch to Techcrunch. I'm pretty sure they mean executive protection and major event security if not more. Otherwise, how are you possibly going to turn this into a huge "opportunity"?
Personally, it seems like this company is one lawsuit away from complete shutdown. If a bouncer gets into a fight at an event and a person is hospitalized or worse, it seems like it's going to be lawsuit-hell for everyone involved.
I recently needed armed security for a 3 hour funeral, on 24-hour notice. This was in Central America. $350 for 2 guards for that time. So $35/hr, in the US, seems very reasonable indeed.
That's a middlebrow dismissal - honestly for $35/hr do you really think the target market is political VIPs.
I've hosted plenty of club nights were the venue didn't have bouncers, so security was me and a pool cue. This service would be perfect for that scenario.
I'm sure that this isn't for events that need serious security. This is for smaller gatherings where there just needs to be a few security guards present in case there's a fight.
If you need real security, you would probably use a much more expensive service.
Like most "Uber for X" companies, there will certainly be details to sort out in the short term, but a service that efficiently connects two sides of an otherwise obscure market has a strong chance of succeeding.
We hired a bannerman guard for a party in downtown San Francisco on the weekend. The guy arrived half an hour early and was courteous and effective. Highlights included him preventing people standing outside our place on the streets with open drinks (which the police had previously warned us for) and him keeping someone we had to eject from the party out. We used to DIY security which was unreliable and risky as hosts became more drunk.
I think you could argue this either way with security training vs. destructive tendencies vs. PTSD risk - but one of the core competencies is experience with risky situations and a proven history of not leaving post during an emergency. Much of the value of a security guard is having a level-headed authority when something goes awry - whether it is a fire alarm, a police officer inquiring about the party, a boisterous crowd in line, or a person who needs to be removed. Think of it as a "designated driver" as much as a protection.
They'd generally be more disciplined and physically fit / trained for combat. As long as they're screened otherwise, it seems like a great pool to draw from -- plus it helps out veterans.
The military are well drilled in rules of engagement and waiting for fire orders. Far more so than your average bouncer or off-duty police officer. I heartily wish the police force were trained and disciplined like the military, it would remove a lot of the individual variation in responses.
I'd imagine it would depend heavily on the military specialization and experience. Some specializations, e.g. military police, would probably feel right at home doing this. It's also worth noting that many members of the armed forces have served in peacekeeping capacities and probably have more experience defusing dangerous situations than your typical bouncer.
It sure would be nice to have some reviews associated with all of the fly by night valet services out there.
When I went to retrieve my keys from the Valet at a friend's wedding recently, I was told that they were unsure of where exactly my keys were.
"O.K." I thought as I stood on the street corner of an unfamiliar city, "this stinks".
So after following the Valet manager around while she searched for my keys over the radio and by rifling threw employees pockets... the manager gets into a fight with an employee right in front of me where the employee ends up quitting on the spot and says "I didn't sign up for this crap, I just wanted to make some money this summer, that's it.". That was the employee that the manager who lost my keys chose to hire. "Great!" I thought now, "hopefully that employee isn't holding my key out of spite!"
After walking around for another couple of minutes and having no luck finding my key, the manager looks in her right palm, and wouldn't you know it... there it was the entire time.
Weddings are tough to plan, and when my buddy was racing around getting everything together in the months prior, he probably just picked the valet with the best look and lowest price. It sure would have been helpful for him to have a reliable review service for that sort of thing.
At least it saved me a few bucks in her lost tip. The entire situation is kindof humorous now when you think about it in hindsight ;)
I realize that there is skepticism about extending the Uber model to other areas, but this is one of those applications where it makes a previously-confusing market accessible to consumers. When I have thrown parties in the past, I never considered hiring a security guard because of the difficulty in obtaining one. Time, not cost, was my limiting factor. I could justify hiring a guard through Bannerman for future events.
The difficulty is expanding to the corporate market. Recurring security services lack opacity - for instance, a night guard at an office. The main opportunity for Bannerman is targeting non-recurring security needs - the current service does not hit that sweet spot of the Uber model between consumer and business markets. The inefficiency they solve is making pooled resources available to those who would previously only have access on an recurring basis.
But this isn't really an Uberization. The main reason you feel comfortable with this security provider is because it's affiliated with a group (YC) that you trust. There are likely dozens of good security providers out there that make it easy and reliable to hire security guards but have been unable to break through the noise to reach you.
Also, most of the Uber-wannabes are missing a huge component: an industry with lots of existing rules and regulations that can be finessed around.
Sorry for being negative, but how is this innovative? Won't an existing security guard service be able to provide the same service, assuming they have a website booking form?
How many security guard services do you know of, or do you think most people know of? My guess is that the market is opaque, fragmented, highly variable, and prohibitively expensive for many needs and use cases. This service probably doesn't kill off high-end security guard businesses, so much as it puts more security guards (or other, similar personnel down the line -- valets, caterers, etc.) within reach of customers who wouldn't otherwise have considered them an option until now. It's pushing out one demand curve, while creating options for others.
Bouncers look like a pretty small niche right now, but there seem to be lots of extensible paths. This isn't a cure for cancer, but it's an interesting approach to a non-obvious market. How many people have private parties every year? How many of those parties could potentially use this service? Even a fraction of that is a pretty enormous potential TAM if you think about it.
There are a ton of potential improvements that can be made when you bring tech to a traditionally low-tech space. Online booking is just one of the more immediately visible improvements. Other obvious ones may include:
- Intelligent routing
- Better provider sourcing and screening
- Improvements in ongoing quality control
- Better payment systems on both the client and provider
side
- Reporting and other intelligence
That's just to mention a few. Collectively these improvements can amount to a much better customer experience, lower prices, or both. Uber isn't just a taxi calling form rendered on a mobile device.
> With its $35 per-hour, per-guard flat rate (paid after an event has gone on without a hitch), Bannerman is shooting right for the middle of those two markets.
Here's an interesting business idea for lovers of analysis and market research: Create a database of various industries, measuring especially these variables:
1. Cost of the service/good provided
2. Some very rough quantification of its value (NOT its cost)
3. The ease with which customers can obtain those services/goods; this includes how long it takes for the customer to obtain the services/goods.
Then, identify large gaps - places where there aren't many options at a certain price, or at a certain level of value, or where the ease of obtaining the services/goods is very high.
Sell subscriptions to this data to entrepreneurs looking to start or pivot companies.
I used to do this as a job; it's a form of market research. Usually you focus on a single vertical (mine was pharma) — getting the numbers right is HARD.
Interesting concept but there are no entry barriers for such businesses, right ? expect 10 similar sites to start targeting local markets. I thought sevicemagic and similar sites in US already offer this. Anyway it looks to be a good business model so at least the base is strong and they will make money.
As a Blackhawks fan I was really hoping the name was a reference to our beloved goalie Murray[1], but it seems it's also a Game of Thrones reference. Oh well...
The headline made me think they were offering IRC bouncers (e.g. ZNC) as a service which might have been slightly interesting. Sadly, the reality was much less fun.
Oh, and of course Bannerman promises that guards will have “physical presence for visual deterrence.” Translation: these guys are huge. That doesn’t come as much of a surprise, as co-founder Johnny Chin told me last week that most of the guards that Bannerman has recruited are veterans of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Isn't that discrimination? "physical presence for visual deterrence" also translates to "we don't hire females" or small males either for that matter. Where I live, bouncers always work in pairs to offset the size and the "female" problem and for increased security.
Maximum of $70,000 a year, if they work 40 hours a week. That's not bad, but it's definitely not great.
They have not designed security in to your event. They don't have contingencies. They don't know floor plans and vulnerabilities. They maybe haven't met each other before. They don't know the difference between you and a look-alike. They don't know what's routine and what's out of the ordinary. They're probably not deputized, meaning they don't necessarily integrate well with law-enforcement. You're probably liable for everything they do.
There are parts of this idea that make it awesome. There are parts of this idea that should scare the crap out of anyone who actually cares about security.