Status Check: Poor Dash

It is with a heavy heart that we must announce the shelving of this well-intentioned social networking service. Poor Dash, of course, was intended to connect people of low means for the purpose of organizing and resource sharing and in some ways it was successful in that regard.

While the project did make remarkable in-roads with its target communities — sparking engagement and leading to the formation of several People’s Groups as we called them — we found that 90 percent of users canceled their accounts soon after the expiration of the introductory rate (shifting from 99 cents to $31.99).

Following the exodus, our research team has identified several Poor Dash People’s Groups emerging on other social networks, some populated with identical usernames and IP addresses. Furthermore, we have been informed that at least three of these groups have been declared domestic terrorist groups by federal authorities due to their being linked to organized actions against property. We roundly condemn these attacks and bear no responsibility. Poor Dash user logs have been submitted to the FBI without request.

But Poor Dash’s problems were not limited to dwindling membership or connections to terrorism. Here are the biggest issues, as we understand them.

Snippy: Our adorable little A.I. helper was deemed “annoying” and “unhelpful” immediately following its rollout, and feedback did not improve in subsequent surveys. Snippy’s suggestions on correcting grammatical faux pas were not appreciated, and his Let’s Live Frugal suggestions had a zero clickthrough rate. As you know, Snippy could not be muted or disabled, as he was part of the core Employment-N-Education Tenet for which Poor Dash had received startup funding.

User Confusion: A not insignificant number of Poor Dash users believed they’d signed up for some sort of inexpensive food delivery service. After cancellations, the top reason users called the customer service line was to order food. This issue is interconnected to the next one.

Product Name: Users, potential users, and external groups have declared the name to be “misleading,” “stupid,” “insulting,” “tone deaf,” etc. We thought it was funny and hip. Strangely, the project actually attracted greater positive outcomes in the early going when it was titled Poor Hub, though the focus groups reacted negatively.