The "if you don't like it go somewhere else" attitude seems significantly intolerant, and an intellectually and emotionally lazy way of dismissing valid points and others' experiences.

These posts also seemed to miss the point, which is accountability to messaging and statements being made to its contractors: They are adopting languaging of, as you described, a coop or otherwise organization that would normally have some degree of accountability to its people, as a marketing technique, without providing data or information to back it up. If you want to raise prices to make more money, then fine. But don't say it's for reasons that it's not. I would prefer the latter response you suggested, as it would at least be honest.

Rover spent 4.5 million on their marketing budget this year, and netted 150 million in revenue in 2016. They've raised in the region of 100 million over the past three years. Their Series E valuation was at $300 million, and are projected to grow at a 200% revenue increase for 2017. (Walt:) They are hardly hurting for cash. Meanwhile, they are steadily increasing fees to sitters and owners and giving whatever reasons they'd like for it, leaving them unverifiable.

And yes, they are not regulated or required to disclose information to its contractors. They are allowed to charge what they wish, use whatever languaging they want, and leave reasons unverified. But that certainly does not mean that it's right or decent.

Also of relevance that this post was a request for honest disclosure by the company themselves, or for individuals with verifiable information, rather than an opportunity for folks to say why they enjoy being charged these fees.

References below.

https://www.geekwire.com/2017/fast-moving-rover-launches-national-ad-campaign-starring-mans-best-friend/ (https://www.geekwire.com/2017/fast-mo...)

https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/09/rover-40-million/ (https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/09/rov...)

https://www.rover.com/blog/press-release/rover-com-raises-65-million-round-funding/ (https://www.rover.com/blog/press-rele...)

https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/dogvacay (https://www.crunchbase.com/organizati...)

Hi all,

I'm a member of Rover who, like many others on here, are grateful for the extra business the platform has brought in. At the same time, I am becoming concerned regarding the gradual and steadily increasing fees being incurred by the company, as well as the continuous rhetoric about maintaining and paying for company costs, with zero information to back that up. Petsitters on here are generally kind and grateful for receiving new clients, but I think the platform is becoming increasingly questionable in its accountability to them.

As one member said in another post, responding to yet another reply from the company in which the representative's logic was basically "everyone does it" so it's okay. (The rep said it's "industry standard," which it's actually not, to the degree that they are doing it.):

"This fee is ridiculous. Combine the fee and the amount withheld from the sitters (15-20%) and on a $250 booking, Rover is taking 27%. Rover gets $68; the sitter gets $200. No company, not Uber, not Lyft, no one takes close to 30%. Ridiculous.."

So, here's my query to Rover:

Rather than telling us about how you're paying for your costs, why don't you show us? Let's see some hard numbers from the company on costs, profits, what it's really costing the company to run, and what is being made off of sitters' pay (and now more recently, owners as well). I am not interested in more of the same rhetoric about how much you're helping sitters and how Rover just has to charge fees to run. I'd like to see actual, verifiable data.

Finally - and this is off topic but perhaps related to the rhetoric at issue - I am somewhat tired of seeing the fakey marketing languaging around "community" and "being a part of the Rover community." It too becomes subtly exploitative of people's tendencies towards belonging while obscuring actuality. Rover is a for-profit company with investors to answer to, one based on monetary exchange and profit- not a non-profit org or a meet-up group. Based on the replies I've read, many of the employees have been fed this rhetoric extensively.

I am wary of for-profits adopting languaging from the non-profit sector while reaping for-profit benefits. At the end of the day, Rover answers to their execs and investors- not petsitters.

Thank you for reading, and I hope eventually the company becomes verifiably transparent in its costs and revenues. If I find additional information, I will post it on here.