Why isn't this site as successful as Craigslist?
thwarted: I'm not sure that "because X was first" is that much different than "because X has users" or "because X has 90% of the market", so that isn't really that shallow of an answer.  The challenge is to get people to switch services from one that they are already comfortable and successful using, and sites like craigslist, ebay, and google already have a significant headstart by being both first (long ago) and good.It's not just enough to say "we have a better search engine than google" if you want to dethrone google, you actually have to be better (although the former may get you funding).  Witness Cuil.  Or Live -- who tried to pay people to use their search engine: even the lure of easy money isn't enough to get people to switch.  With places like craigslist and ebay, the first mover advantage is significant.  These sites bring two parties together.  Those who have something to sell and those who have something to buy.  The sellers want to be where the buyers are and the buyers will go where the sellers are.It is possible to have a successful business as a small time competitor to an established, entrenched player, but if your goal is to be competitive, you've got a long uphill battle ahead of you.  It may be wiser to redefine the industry or look at it from another angle, then tackle that.  What does craigslist do really bad that could be better?  Is the lack of a competitor that eases that pain the reason why people still use the incumbent?I'm not sure what craigslist's weak points are.  The site is extremely minimal, search works reasonably well, people automatically sort most things into the right places (because otherwise they'd be wasting their time), the majority of posters don't need to pay, fraud is managed well enough that people are not looking for something else.  I can't think of any weak points -- which may be why I'm not working on craigslist competitor.