Regina, Thank you very much for taking the time to write this post. As part of the coworking community it's easy to get caught up in why we're better than the alternatives, and in the process to paint a somewhat one-sided view of the downside of those alternatives (and of our own upsides). IMO, it's really valuable get a post like yours--and presented in a way that doesn't disparage either side--as it helps balance our own perspectives of the pros and cons of coworking versus other models (as well as to consider ways some of us might want to adjust our own models to better fit someone in your position).
Best, Will On Saturday, November 3, 2012 6:48:36 PM UTC+1, Regina Walton wrote: > > I'm a Regus customer simply because I mostly work from home and it's when > I'm in NYC that I need work space. Since they're worldwide, it just works > out to be a better bargain for me. I use their centers when I'm on the > road. > > However, I heard of places like New Work City and other co-working spaces > in NYC first. In fact, I know people who work for NWC and work at NWC. I > started my business in NYC and the tech community there is really active > and social. A lot of events happen at these spaces. When I moved back to > the San Francisco Bay Area, I joined HUB first. They have two offices > here: one in Berkeley and one in San Francisco. Unfortunately, I just > found HUB not to fit what I needed most because they don't have a NYC > location: a place to set up my laptop, focus and work no matter where I > am. That's why I joined Regus. If I'm in Manhattan, I've got a place to > work rather than having to fight for a seat and access to a plug in > Starbucks. It's also convenient to be able to go to San Francisco and > work. It so happens that a friend's company is in the same building of the > center I use. We can meet up for lunch frequently and then head back to > work. > > It's clear that the article is biased. The tone is dismissive and > condescending too. Regus isn't going to work for everyone. It's pretty > sterile and massively corporate. It's definitely not a place where there > is a lot of brainstorming and interaction. From what I've noticed the > people using the lounges are like me: they're in town for business and > simply need a place to get things done. That doesn't build community > except with the people at the front desk who end up knowing me well when I > show up daily for a few days. It's just a very bad and biased article. > > > On Thursday, December 8, 2011 1:40:38 AM UTC-5, Will Bennis, Locus > Workspace wrote: >> >> Go New Work City, getting a rise out of the Man: >> http://realbusiness.co.uk/news/lets-work-together >> >> The defensive undercurrent of the article aside, however, part of me >> agrees with Dixon: Coworking isn't a new invention, it's been going on >> for millenia, no doubt, and in many stellar examples in ways that many >> coworking spaces can only long for. Arguing that coworking didn't >> begin until 2005 because that's when the word was first used to >> describe a particular set of values about how to cowork seems to me to >> be a bit off the mark and to focus on labels over content (especially >> since there are so many self-identified coworking spaces that have not >> yet achieved their lofty ideals, my own space included). >> >> That said, Regus is clearly not one of those venues where coworking >> (between independent workers or members of different organizations) >> tends to happen. And if their way of "coworking" counts, then they >> clearly aren't the first, since there have been business lounges since >> long-before Regus was founded in 1989, I'm sure some airport or dozens >> of hotel chains could make better claims to being the first. :) >> >> -- Visit this forum on the web at http://discuss.coworking.com
