We started out wanting to do a similar model as Eaze&#x2F;Meadow - but we found we weren&#x27;t adding enough value to existing dispensaries&#x2F;delivery services to warrant a decent fee&#x2F;percentage (since they already had customer bases and we were starting from 0 with no outside funding like the other companies).<p>Then after running everything in-house for a while, I realized that it was actually a much better model to handle everything in-house because then we have complete control over product quality, customer experience, drivers, as well as being more profitable (we we profitable within our first two months). We&#x27;ve tried a few partnerships with outside delivery services and it never worked out because they were never able to replicate the very high standards of service that we require (coming from a background in hospitality management myself). I know there are all these companies purporting to be the &quot;Uber for weed&quot;, but that&#x27;s not really that accurate. If Uber were doing the same thing as these other startups in transportation, then the proper parallel would be Uber partnering with existing Taxi companies rather than independent drivers. Uber cuts out an established middle-man, but the other on-demand marijuana startups are partnering with established middle-men rather than cutting them out of the value chain.<p>However, I think the single biggest reason to go in-house is that services like Eaze&#x2F;Meadow can never compete with us on price. I consider our prices to be somewhat high right now, since our cash flow is still so fragile, yet we are still undercutting Eaze by around 20% on most products even as they have over $11 million in funding.