Juicero Is Shutting Down(fortune.com)
fortune.com
Juicero Is Shutting Down
http://fortune.com/2017/09/01/juicero-is-shutting-down/
412 comments
Thing is, nothing about the Juicero is fresh squeezed. It's mostly masticated fruit pulp, that is squeezed out of a bag. That juice company you mentioned, is actually freshly squeezing juice. Juicero was complete nonsense from start to finish.
I believe originally they thought they might make a fresh squeeze. This story is similar to Theranos - the founders/executives just did not want to accept the reality. Juicero founders eventually gave up - and devised some crazy compromise that let them pretend that it is a fresh juice - but it was quite deceiving and it did not work well.
https://medium.com/@zby/the-juicero-story-2f4f762f7e60
https://medium.com/@zby/the-juicero-story-2f4f762f7e60
This story is similar to Theranos
It's one thing to provide a massively overpriced juice press combined with a ridiculous subscription model than actually endangering peoples health by willful lying.
I cannot see any other reason for Theranos' conduct and if this world would be only halfway fair their executives would look at it from behind bars.
It's like... 70% fresh squeezed. The fruit is chopped up into smaller pieces, so for the most part there isn't much difference, and it is very new fruit. But to the target demographic 70% might as well be 0%.
People might have a misconception about the machine then. I had heard that the juice was easy enough to extract from the pack that you could do it with your hands. This gave me the idea that the pack basically just had juice in it already.
It does, it is shredded vegetation in a bag which is squeezed by an amazingly overengineered solid steel screw press with giant, beautiful one-piece plastic moldings on the back. It is also true that you can extract the vast majority of the fluid without the press just fine. It is not "chopped" into "smaller" pieces, but literally shredded.
Nope; check it out: https://vimeo.com/214030931
That's mostly carrot (+lemon and orange) but still it's very dry. See also AvE's video[1] where he opens a bag and its full of processed but still largely intact pomegranate. You can squeeze most of a first glass out by hand[2] but that's about it. To get the rest out a press really is necessary- but Juicero isn't just a press. It's massive machined aluminum billets and expensive gears and a custom motor. The huge aluminum parts are likely the biggest cost sink- hundreds of dollars, easily. If they had made the things out of extrusions they could have saved 80%+ on the cost. Just goofy all around.
edit: also this... enthusiastic gentleman, who is pretty enthusiastic about the contents of the bag[3]
[1]: https://youtu.be/_Cp-BGQfpHQ?t=30m6s
[2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lutHF5HhVA
[3]: https://youtu.be/wOmB7H6meUQ?t=22m3s
That's mostly carrot (+lemon and orange) but still it's very dry. See also AvE's video[1] where he opens a bag and its full of processed but still largely intact pomegranate. You can squeeze most of a first glass out by hand[2] but that's about it. To get the rest out a press really is necessary- but Juicero isn't just a press. It's massive machined aluminum billets and expensive gears and a custom motor. The huge aluminum parts are likely the biggest cost sink- hundreds of dollars, easily. If they had made the things out of extrusions they could have saved 80%+ on the cost. Just goofy all around.
edit: also this... enthusiastic gentleman, who is pretty enthusiastic about the contents of the bag[3]
[1]: https://youtu.be/_Cp-BGQfpHQ?t=30m6s
[2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lutHF5HhVA
[3]: https://youtu.be/wOmB7H6meUQ?t=22m3s
> Nope
I don't know about you, but that cleanly fits my definition of "shredded".
> edit: also this... enthusiastic gentleman, who is pretty enthusiastic about the contents of the bag[3]
Yeah, discountjuicers.com guy is a real hoot. Good info too.
I don't know about you, but that cleanly fits my definition of "shredded".
> edit: also this... enthusiastic gentleman, who is pretty enthusiastic about the contents of the bag[3]
Yeah, discountjuicers.com guy is a real hoot. Good info too.
He says in the video, "Ain't no kill like overkill"
LMAO
LMAO
I think you're right. The Bloomberg video clearly shows someone just squeezing the back with their hands and juice comes out.
Once you cut open fruit and vegetables, the elements and bacteria are introduced and they start to break down.
Which is why the bags have a super short shelf life and the machine has a barcode scanner that will detect and refuse to squeeze expired bags. They touted this as a feature, of course.
It is a feature (only) if they send you a replacement for free (with free shipping and everything) if you sent them a picture of the expired packet.
Why even need to send a picture? Each package is barcoded and the machine is internet connected. As soon as it was rejected it should schedule delivery of a replacement packet.
Sorry because I forgot that the juicer is connected to the Internet. Don't get me wrong I love technology but my first thought is we need failsafe backups (:
I'm sure it's processed under an inert atmosphere and whatever yadda yadda new age bullshit. It's all woo anyway.
Point being is it's not just a juice bag- they do at least have good intentions/make a show of having good intentions.
Point being is it's not just a juice bag- they do at least have good intentions/make a show of having good intentions.
And you're removing all the fibers as well.
ggggp's whole point was it was going to compete with fresh squeezed. this whole discussion is how this isn't "fresh" in anyway. Unless FOJC is also fresh.
FOJC. Blech. I remember first trying Tropicana Pure Premium probably 2+ decades ago now. It was awesome. Tasted like pure juice from an orange.
I don't drink OJ much anymore, but a couple of years ago I had some Pure Premium and noticed that it really tasted a lot more like concentrate than I'd remembered--it had that kind of acidic/slightly artificial taste.
So, I did a little digging and found that it is now run through a process called "deaeration". Apparently, this is well-known and the subject of controversy. The short is that they take the oxygen out, pasteurize it, and store it in massive tanks. Problem with that is that it loses its flavor. So, they add "flavor packets" before packaging it.
It's amazing that they can still call it 100% juice. Then again, it's somehow legal to say that a carton "contains 100% juice" simply because at some point some measure of 100% juice was poured in, even if the total juice ratio ends up being 2% when other ingredients are subsequently added.
OJ is a scam from start to finish: from the ridiculous claims about its healthfulness; to the slightly-shrinking packages, designed to look the same standard sizes; to what they dub 100% pure squeezed juice.
I don't drink OJ much anymore, but a couple of years ago I had some Pure Premium and noticed that it really tasted a lot more like concentrate than I'd remembered--it had that kind of acidic/slightly artificial taste.
So, I did a little digging and found that it is now run through a process called "deaeration". Apparently, this is well-known and the subject of controversy. The short is that they take the oxygen out, pasteurize it, and store it in massive tanks. Problem with that is that it loses its flavor. So, they add "flavor packets" before packaging it.
It's amazing that they can still call it 100% juice. Then again, it's somehow legal to say that a carton "contains 100% juice" simply because at some point some measure of 100% juice was poured in, even if the total juice ratio ends up being 2% when other ingredients are subsequently added.
OJ is a scam from start to finish: from the ridiculous claims about its healthfulness; to the slightly-shrinking packages, designed to look the same standard sizes; to what they dub 100% pure squeezed juice.
AIUI it is 100% orange juice in the sense that all of the ingredients are extracted from orange juice. Yes, "flavour packets" are added, but these flavourants are also 100% orange juice, just processed in a different way.
Yeah, I believe the flavoring is typically derived from the oils found in the peel. I don't know if there are additional additives but, in any case, I think it's safe to say that peel oils are not what most people think of as orange juice. And, it certainly doesn't taste like it.
The trouble is, I've always thought Juicero was a bank shot for digitized food in general. If that's the case, they needed to be serving consumers not businesses.
The concept of food that's uniquely tagged and tracked from origin to consumption is pretty attractive - makes contamination a breeze to trace back, keeps you from cooking with rotten food since the machine knows to reject it, and it could automatically track what you've got in your kitchen to suggest recipes / restock for you.
That's all been thought of before, the trouble is how on earth do you build that network? I suspect the reason Juicero got so much money is they were trying to build it first with high end luxury foods, and then expand down-market to eventually own the 'groceries of the future.'
Personally, I think good ol Jeff Bezos is going to win this one too by first owning grocery delivery straight up, and then going 'oh by the way they're all trackable if you want, you should buy Amazon brand appliances to make use of the feature :)" because as others pointed out here, counter space is at a premium and nobody really wants appliances that don't work with all their ingredients.
Anyway, that's what I tell myself to make this whole ludicrous story less sad.
The concept of food that's uniquely tagged and tracked from origin to consumption is pretty attractive - makes contamination a breeze to trace back, keeps you from cooking with rotten food since the machine knows to reject it, and it could automatically track what you've got in your kitchen to suggest recipes / restock for you.
That's all been thought of before, the trouble is how on earth do you build that network? I suspect the reason Juicero got so much money is they were trying to build it first with high end luxury foods, and then expand down-market to eventually own the 'groceries of the future.'
Personally, I think good ol Jeff Bezos is going to win this one too by first owning grocery delivery straight up, and then going 'oh by the way they're all trackable if you want, you should buy Amazon brand appliances to make use of the feature :)" because as others pointed out here, counter space is at a premium and nobody really wants appliances that don't work with all their ingredients.
Anyway, that's what I tell myself to make this whole ludicrous story less sad.
> The concept of food that's uniquely tagged and tracked from origin to consumption is pretty attractive - makes contamination a breeze to trace back, keeps you from cooking with rotten food since the machine knows to reject it, and it could automatically track what you've got in your kitchen to suggest recipes / restock for you.
What makes you think people want those things? I certainly don't, and I've never heard anyone mention wanting any of those things. I have heard people mention that they hate appliances like the coffee makers that only work with the expensive patented coffee pods from their manufacturer. (And printers, etc.)
I don't want any appliance that the manufacturer can shut down or refuse to run remotely. (See the recent story about the guy who paid off his car, but it was disabled remotely because he didn't pay the "remove the disabler" fee.)
In ~35 years of cooking, I don't recall ever using ingredients that went bad. I'm sure I probably did once or twice, but it didn't leave a bad enough impression on me to even remember, let alone want this sort of device that's tethered to the network and manufacturer, with all the problems that brings.
What makes you think people want those things? I certainly don't, and I've never heard anyone mention wanting any of those things. I have heard people mention that they hate appliances like the coffee makers that only work with the expensive patented coffee pods from their manufacturer. (And printers, etc.)
I don't want any appliance that the manufacturer can shut down or refuse to run remotely. (See the recent story about the guy who paid off his car, but it was disabled remotely because he didn't pay the "remove the disabler" fee.)
In ~35 years of cooking, I don't recall ever using ingredients that went bad. I'm sure I probably did once or twice, but it didn't leave a bad enough impression on me to even remember, let alone want this sort of device that's tethered to the network and manufacturer, with all the problems that brings.
Let's call it what it is: the Internet of Rent-Seeking. As far as I'm concerned, I want my appliances to NOT be networked.
We should probably split hairs here. I would love for all of my appliances to be networked -- just not on the public internet.
- Preheat the oven as I'm driving home
- Alert me when my laundry/dishes are done
- Alert me if my air filter needs replaced.
- Manage my AC/Heating for maximum energy efficiency.
- Real time energy usage monitoring.
- Turn on/off lights when I arrive/leave.
- Preheat the oven as I'm driving home
- Alert me when my laundry/dishes are done
- Alert me if my air filter needs replaced.
- Manage my AC/Heating for maximum energy efficiency.
- Real time energy usage monitoring.
- Turn on/off lights when I arrive/leave.
I must be the completely wrong target consumer but I just see so little value in all of this to warent any expense and security risk of the appliances being networked.
Oven preheating: takes 15 minutes when I get home barely enough time to prepare whatever I'm putting in there.
Loud dry/dishes alerts: I don't see how it's useful. If I'm not home it doesn't matter to me if the laundry or dishes are done or not as I can't do anything about it.
Any filter changes: almost all either work on specific timing intervals, so just set 5 years worth of reminders in your phone, or they detect pressure differentials and a service light can just turn on when the machine needs a new filter.
Manage AC for max efficiency: nothing a programmable thermostat can't handle unless you have really crazy schedules but even then the savings are minuscule.
Turning on/off lights: okey, could be useful.
Oven preheating: takes 15 minutes when I get home barely enough time to prepare whatever I'm putting in there.
Loud dry/dishes alerts: I don't see how it's useful. If I'm not home it doesn't matter to me if the laundry or dishes are done or not as I can't do anything about it.
Any filter changes: almost all either work on specific timing intervals, so just set 5 years worth of reminders in your phone, or they detect pressure differentials and a service light can just turn on when the machine needs a new filter.
Manage AC for max efficiency: nothing a programmable thermostat can't handle unless you have really crazy schedules but even then the savings are minuscule.
Turning on/off lights: okey, could be useful.
While each little piece isn't very impressive, taken together I think it makes life significantly more convenient, anticipating your every need. The promise of IoT is that everything "just works", like magic. It's like having a personal butler.
Currently IoT delivers the experience of having a grumpy butler that regularly tells you to go fuck yourself and sells your personal information to the highest bidder.
And potentially refuses to open your main door since the union, to which the butler belongs, disbanded on two weeks notice and the butler refuses to work, unless he's unionized.
They 'anticipate every need' if all your needs revolve around turning on things according to a schedule, or at most according to where you are physically.
For me, turning on lights etc are such a small part of my day, not to mention my 'needs' as to be completely insignificant.
If the machines would do something like sort, wash and fold the laundry that would be something, but as it is I people just buy them for novelty value.
For me, turning on lights etc are such a small part of my day, not to mention my 'needs' as to be completely insignificant.
If the machines would do something like sort, wash and fold the laundry that would be something, but as it is I people just buy them for novelty value.
I agree with this sentiment. I made the decision a few years ago to try and automate away the little things.
And I am surprised how often I actually use little things like adjusting the lighting, finding my phone or keys, or even raising and lowering blinds.
Just yelling, "Alexa, turn off all the lights" as I walk out the door, or "Alexa, set the house temperature to 72" as I lay down for bed has really cut out a lot of fastidious things that by themselves doesn't matter much, but added up use a surprising amount of time.
Saying, "why would I want something to do x or y?" Sounds just like people I remember back in the 90s that said, why would I want email when I can just call? And then, why would I use text messaging when I can just email...
And I am surprised how often I actually use little things like adjusting the lighting, finding my phone or keys, or even raising and lowering blinds.
Just yelling, "Alexa, turn off all the lights" as I walk out the door, or "Alexa, set the house temperature to 72" as I lay down for bed has really cut out a lot of fastidious things that by themselves doesn't matter much, but added up use a surprising amount of time.
Saying, "why would I want something to do x or y?" Sounds just like people I remember back in the 90s that said, why would I want email when I can just call? And then, why would I use text messaging when I can just email...
To me the prize, which comes in a complete invasion of privacy, is much too high to make such a gizmo worthwhile. Ever!
To each his own, I guess.
To each his own, I guess.
Idk...
I wouldn't want to have my oven on when I am not home- it might just be me but it seems dangerous to leave a hot oven unattended. I always check the oven before starting it to make sure it's empty. I guess I am somewhat paranoid that something somehow ended up in there.
The rest of the stuff I, personally, don't see any value in other than energy efficiency and that doesn't really require networking. My fridge is constantly telling me that I need a new water and air filters but I just ignore it and assume it's a ploy to sell more filters (like printers that report you need more ink despite printing fine).
I wouldn't want to have my oven on when I am not home- it might just be me but it seems dangerous to leave a hot oven unattended. I always check the oven before starting it to make sure it's empty. I guess I am somewhat paranoid that something somehow ended up in there.
The rest of the stuff I, personally, don't see any value in other than energy efficiency and that doesn't really require networking. My fridge is constantly telling me that I need a new water and air filters but I just ignore it and assume it's a ploy to sell more filters (like printers that report you need more ink despite printing fine).
You might want to double-think that filter thing.
Water filters can build up bacteria (listeria is not a fun thing - there are others, too - some pretty bad); this can cause everything from a "funky smell" to "go to emergency room or die". That said, tap water in most municipalities is pretty damn clean, and you can run without a filter; but if you don't want to change the filter, then do just that - remove the filter, so that you don't give the bacteria a nice growth area. If you do change the filter, don't go more than a year between changes at most. Most filters are cheap enough, usually less than $50 USD.
As far as the air filter - well, I've never heard of one on a fridge - but if you have one, it's probably to filter the air before it gets to the fan that cools the compressor. If you let it get super dirty, it won't move the air, and your compressor will be overheated/overworked, and it's life will be shortened, or it will fail - or the breaker on the fridge (know where your's is?) will trip. And don't take the filter off and just run filterless - because now the cooling coils will act as the filter, and they are anything but easy to clean (because if you don't, again failures will eventually occur - nbtw, that they sell a special fridge coil cleaning brush that looks like a very narrow bottle brush).
If you're talking about other filters in your house (HVAC) - then you want to change those too, fairly regularly. If you don't, again, you'll be overworking your A/C unit, plus the air won't be moved around effectively (making the unit run longer to cool/heat - increasing your bill). Plus, those filters get pretty nasty too - and that stuff doesn't stay on the filter.
They make reusable filters - you cut them with scissors to match the filter opening, then when you are ready to clean them, you take them outside and run a water from a sprayer hose "backwards" thru the filter, then let 'em air dry. That can be a cheaper and easier alternative to holding on to a box or two of filters (though such filters are pretty cheap).
Finally - note that on many cars (not all!) there is a "cabin air filter". Check your manual on how to replace it; most people don't know about that filter, but it isn't difficult to change out. Costs of course are variable, depending on the car. Again, though, if you don't replace it regularly, your cabin heating/cooling will suffer, air flow will be reduced, the fan motor will have to work harder, etc.
Basically - for air filter, check them now and then. When they look like they are getting overly fuzzy, or you can't see thru 'em - change them out.
Water filters can build up bacteria (listeria is not a fun thing - there are others, too - some pretty bad); this can cause everything from a "funky smell" to "go to emergency room or die". That said, tap water in most municipalities is pretty damn clean, and you can run without a filter; but if you don't want to change the filter, then do just that - remove the filter, so that you don't give the bacteria a nice growth area. If you do change the filter, don't go more than a year between changes at most. Most filters are cheap enough, usually less than $50 USD.
As far as the air filter - well, I've never heard of one on a fridge - but if you have one, it's probably to filter the air before it gets to the fan that cools the compressor. If you let it get super dirty, it won't move the air, and your compressor will be overheated/overworked, and it's life will be shortened, or it will fail - or the breaker on the fridge (know where your's is?) will trip. And don't take the filter off and just run filterless - because now the cooling coils will act as the filter, and they are anything but easy to clean (because if you don't, again failures will eventually occur - nbtw, that they sell a special fridge coil cleaning brush that looks like a very narrow bottle brush).
If you're talking about other filters in your house (HVAC) - then you want to change those too, fairly regularly. If you don't, again, you'll be overworking your A/C unit, plus the air won't be moved around effectively (making the unit run longer to cool/heat - increasing your bill). Plus, those filters get pretty nasty too - and that stuff doesn't stay on the filter.
They make reusable filters - you cut them with scissors to match the filter opening, then when you are ready to clean them, you take them outside and run a water from a sprayer hose "backwards" thru the filter, then let 'em air dry. That can be a cheaper and easier alternative to holding on to a box or two of filters (though such filters are pretty cheap).
Finally - note that on many cars (not all!) there is a "cabin air filter". Check your manual on how to replace it; most people don't know about that filter, but it isn't difficult to change out. Costs of course are variable, depending on the car. Again, though, if you don't replace it regularly, your cabin heating/cooling will suffer, air flow will be reduced, the fan motor will have to work harder, etc.
Basically - for air filter, check them now and then. When they look like they are getting overly fuzzy, or you can't see thru 'em - change them out.
This is my fridge air filter - https://youtu.be/ziaCjNIPSCU all the new fridges have them now. It's literally just for filtering the air in the fridge, the high tech version of a box of baking soda. My HVAC system is steam radiators, which, thankfully, don't require filters.
I don't doubt that filters should be changed regularly but I don't trust LG to tell me when.
I don't doubt that filters should be changed regularly but I don't trust LG to tell me when.
Excuse my ignorance, but I've never heard or fridges having filters. What are they used for?
The air filter- It's just an electronic version of putting a box of baking soda in the fridge. See the video I posted in the comment you are replying to, its from the manufacturer and shows the setup.
The water filter- My fridge makes ice and dispenses cold water from one of the doors. This mechanism has a water filter.
The water filter- My fridge makes ice and dispenses cold water from one of the doors. This mechanism has a water filter.
In all my 34 years so far, I've never had the desire to have my fridge conditioned in baking soda. Sometimes I feel like manufacturers really just introduce stuff to make life more complicated (and sell supplies regularly), then afterwards come up with an IoT solution for a problem that I shouldn't have had in the first place.
> I wouldn't want to have my oven on when I am not home- it might just be me but it seems dangerous to leave a hot oven unattended.
Well, then you are in the market for an IoT oven that is connected to your phone and car. A device that can continuously track your phone and car location, and turn off the networked oven if you are outside the house.
Well, then you are in the market for an IoT oven that is connected to your phone and car. A device that can continuously track your phone and car location, and turn off the networked oven if you are outside the house.
Is there large demand for this? I just cook when I'm home and ensure to turn the oven off when I'm done. I'm sure there are people out there who appreciate the automation, but a) how many and b) how much would they pay for it?
Why? Just carry a dongle and when that is not in the vicinity of the house switch of certain circuits. What do you need the internet for?
Why a dongle? Lets just embed a chip into everyone at birth.
> Just carry a dongle
The problem is nobody wants to carry a dongle. Also, localizing the dongle inside the house is not as straightforward. Would the users need to put one dongle-detector in each room? one near each exit? If it has long transmission range, then it would probably be big/heavy due to larger batteries.
The problem is nobody wants to carry a dongle. Also, localizing the dongle inside the house is not as straightforward. Would the users need to put one dongle-detector in each room? one near each exit? If it has long transmission range, then it would probably be big/heavy due to larger batteries.
Assuming you have a dynamic ip this won't be possible without a cloud service.
There's absolutely no reason why everyone who wants one shouldn't have a static block of IP(v6) addresses. If they're hard to get, that's an ISP problem rather than anything else.
Apparently Tor hidden services works well for this- there's a mode where the hidden service authenticates clients, so you even get some security for free.
The Internet of Onion Things: https://github.com/n8fr8/talks/blob/master/onion_things/Inte...
More resources on the Tor Blog: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/quick-simple-guide-tor-and-...
More resources on the Tor Blog: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/quick-simple-guide-tor-and-...
Easy enough to set up duckdns etc, depends how you define cloud service, does that including renting a VM?
You need one cloud service to tell you what your dynamic IP is, but we've had that service since at least 2001.
use an overlay network like i2p or cjdns. problem solved
Of those, only real time energy usage monitoring is really interesting, I think.
I bought an 'Owl' energy clamp and display from the discount bin at a local hardware store - about £13 ISTR. I made a copy of the rflink (Arduino-based 433MHz rf sniffer/decoder: https://diyprojects.io/how-build-rflink-433mhz-radio-home-ga... - about £20 including ESP8266 wifi link) that decodes the signal from the Owl, my wireless doorbell and that of an outdoor temp/humidity sensor (£6 from Banggood). The board can also send control signals to the rf-enabled mains sockets I have collected over the years (for lights and home appliances).
It's all managed by a raspberry Pi (About £20). The system can also pick up my wireless doorbell, and I am about to add temperature sensors and relays (£25) to my central heating system so everything is automated and controllable from Node-Red and a Web interface. Overall, I will have a private home control system for under £100 and I can view and manage it from my laptop or a VPN link from my phone.
It's all managed by a raspberry Pi (About £20). The system can also pick up my wireless doorbell, and I am about to add temperature sensors and relays (£25) to my central heating system so everything is automated and controllable from Node-Red and a Web interface. Overall, I will have a private home control system for under £100 and I can view and manage it from my laptop or a VPN link from my phone.
For me, the IoT takeaway is, if you want to be able to trust it, you need to do it yourself. Commercial products seem to always want to sell your data to the highest bidder, aside from the potential firmware security problems.
At least with the Pi, Arduino, etc., you can control what your Things are doing, and have reasonable assurance they aren't doing things behind your back.
I have a Pi graphing outdoor and basement temperature and humidity using rtl433, MRTG, and some scripts, picking up the signals from existing temperature monitors. It's quite a surprise to see how much else is on 433 MHz in my neighborhood, even when using the stubby magnetic mount antenna that came with the RTL-SDR dongle.
At least with the Pi, Arduino, etc., you can control what your Things are doing, and have reasonable assurance they aren't doing things behind your back.
I have a Pi graphing outdoor and basement temperature and humidity using rtl433, MRTG, and some scripts, picking up the signals from existing temperature monitors. It's quite a surprise to see how much else is on 433 MHz in my neighborhood, even when using the stubby magnetic mount antenna that came with the RTL-SDR dongle.
Perfectly put!
People are way too paranoid over things "going bad" -- typically if something is unhealthy to eat, you'll see it or smell it. The expiration date is meaningless… I eat eggs or dairy past its expiration all the time. Meat and fish that's gone bad gets real smelly, there's very little chance you accidentally won't notice.
Part of the problem is that it isn't an expiration date, it's a use-by date. They imply entirely different things, and it is great for consumers because it provides real penalties for selling bad food.
That said, people need to be a lot more literate in this sense.
That said, people need to be a lot more literate in this sense.
The expiration date is a good guide for those of us who are anosmic and wouldn't otherwise notice.
I don't want any appliance like that either, and I find the Kuerig coffee maker appalling.
That said, Kuerig sells many of their machines, and many people like and use them. That fact is very strong evidence that there is a strong market for this type of product if it is done correctly.
In other words, people do want this kind of product.
That said, Kuerig sells many of their machines, and many people like and use them. That fact is very strong evidence that there is a strong market for this type of product if it is done correctly.
In other words, people do want this kind of product.
At the right price point, probably.
On demand juice for < 50c/serving? Sure.
$2-$3/serving? Nope.
We use kcups at the coworking space here, and at 30-35c, they're worth the convenience. 60c? $1? Nope - we'll just brew a big pot.
But... we can get kcups from dozens of vendors with various flavors and price points. If a juicer machine had low price points (original machine and packs) that were available from multiple vendors... yeah, I'd go for it. But it's gotta have all these other factors (flexible vendors and low prices) which I'm not sure anyone wants to target.
On demand juice for < 50c/serving? Sure.
$2-$3/serving? Nope.
We use kcups at the coworking space here, and at 30-35c, they're worth the convenience. 60c? $1? Nope - we'll just brew a big pot.
But... we can get kcups from dozens of vendors with various flavors and price points. If a juicer machine had low price points (original machine and packs) that were available from multiple vendors... yeah, I'd go for it. But it's gotta have all these other factors (flexible vendors and low prices) which I'm not sure anyone wants to target.
If you like keurig enough to drink it, why wouldn't you pay a dollar a cup? It's still a fraction of coffee house prices, even for takeaway.
if you drink 2-3 cups per day, you're now at... $3/day. Why pay more when you don't have to?
>Why pay more when you don't have to?
That wasn't the question. It was about living without something you enjoy if it costs 0.60 or more.
That wasn't the question. It was about living without something you enjoy if it costs 0.60 or more.
> If you like keurig enough to drink it, why wouldn't you pay a dollar a cup?
That was the question.
If I don't have to pay the extra 60c... why would I do that? I have no incentive to pay $1 cup for something which I can get for, say, 40c/cup.
I might pay $1/cup, sometimes, but if I can get it for 40c... why pay more?
That was the question.
If I don't have to pay the extra 60c... why would I do that? I have no incentive to pay $1 cup for something which I can get for, say, 40c/cup.
I might pay $1/cup, sometimes, but if I can get it for 40c... why pay more?
Kcups leech BPS, which I've heard is problematic similarly to BPA (about which opinions vary).
I was one of a bunch of people to stand in line at Costco because of listeria contamination of a bunch of different organic vegetables.
None of us got sick, so far as I know. I took 4 bags (peas, corn, green beans, unopened peas) back for full refund.
Not sure what happened to the company (in eastern Washington) because this had to be horrendously expensive for them.
None of us got sick, so far as I know. I took 4 bags (peas, corn, green beans, unopened peas) back for full refund.
Not sure what happened to the company (in eastern Washington) because this had to be horrendously expensive for them.
HELP the neighborhood is flooded and the network is down, now I cant feed myself!
interestingly enough much of Houston had running electricity the whole time. We have an office downtown that flooded and never went to backup power and the datacenters stayed on the mains as well.
Yes, it's been incredible. My ATT fiber has been ROCK solid and not dropped a byte as far as I can tell.
I've been working from home all week, and we had electricity and internet right through the storm.
That's with 3 feet of water in the street outside.
I've been working from home all week, and we had electricity and internet right through the storm.
That's with 3 feet of water in the street outside.
I'm sure it has dropped many many bytes of data, it's just that the other layers of IP and TCP covered for it. Just like every internet connection.
But that's pretty cool they handled it.
But that's pretty cool they handled it.
> keeps you from cooking with rotten food
If only we had some kind of olfactory or optical equipment stuck on the front of our faces that could help determine the rottenness or mouldiness of food.
Failing that, perhaps producers of packaged food could use some kind of common standard system to inform consumers of the date by which the food should be used by, or before which it might be at its best.
If only we had some kind of olfactory or optical equipment stuck on the front of our faces that could help determine the rottenness or mouldiness of food.
Failing that, perhaps producers of packaged food could use some kind of common standard system to inform consumers of the date by which the food should be used by, or before which it might be at its best.
I am now going to shut down all future attempts at dry humor because they will never, ever match or surpass this comment. I'm going to take my sense of humor out back and shoot it for never giving me this kind of service.
Fair criticisms, but I maintain we're going to end up tracking our food eventually. It's just going to get cheaper, and there are real upsides IMO.
Wrote this because I got in a similar conversation on twitter: https://medium.com/@nickparkerprint/in-defense-of-juicero-an...
Wrote this because I got in a similar conversation on twitter: https://medium.com/@nickparkerprint/in-defense-of-juicero-an...
Possibly, and i certainly agree that there's benefit in a recipe suggestion tool that is linked to your inventory. It's also a good idea to have something tell you what's coming up to use-by, to reduce waste.
However, that tracking belongs at the kitchen door using a common industry standard format, and the ability to manually enter inventory items.
If you need a different appliance to prepare food from each vendor, then you won't be able to make Alphabet spaghetti with Amazon beef and Apple tomatoes; you can't pop to the local shop to get some milk; you can't go into your garden to pick some carrots; you can't go to a specialist vendor to get a particular spice mix or exotic vegetable; you can't buy your favourite varieties from a local grower.
I can't picture giving up on those advantages just so that Mr. Bezos can tell me what to eat.
However, that tracking belongs at the kitchen door using a common industry standard format, and the ability to manually enter inventory items.
If you need a different appliance to prepare food from each vendor, then you won't be able to make Alphabet spaghetti with Amazon beef and Apple tomatoes; you can't pop to the local shop to get some milk; you can't go into your garden to pick some carrots; you can't go to a specialist vendor to get a particular spice mix or exotic vegetable; you can't buy your favourite varieties from a local grower.
I can't picture giving up on those advantages just so that Mr. Bezos can tell me what to eat.
The thing is that all you need is a sticker on each piece of food with a unique QR code or an rfid tag containing all the expiration, source, and lot numbers. The consumer can just scan everything and get any necessary info about expiration dates and recalls if they want. Nothing very complex there and certainly doesn't require any fancy kitchen gadgets just a industry agreed on labeling standard.
About half the food I buy is not in a package. I wouldn't want every carrot and every loaf of bread to come with an RFID sticker.
This is, of course, a brilliant comment. Well stated.
The only thing I can add is perhaps a corollary to this, which is "nothing causes a business to fail more than solving a non-existent problem" which is what Juicero did.
The only thing I can add is perhaps a corollary to this, which is "nothing causes a business to fail more than solving a non-existent problem" which is what Juicero did.
Your point is valid, but recently here in Canada there was a recall on contaminated flour. Can't remember if it was anthrax or E Coli.
Your eyes/nose won't pick up bacteria in the flour.
Your eyes/nose won't pick up bacteria in the flour.
Sure, food recalls happen all the time. However, they are selling as a subscription service- they know what packets they shipped you. If there's a recall they should email you, snail mail you, and automatically issue you a refund on your credit card. WiFi is beyond overkill.
I'll say this -- and I'm in the "this is a stupid fucking product" camp -- but I think sending updates to your appliances to keep you from using bad food is actually the right way to go.
I barely read half my mail, snail or electronic. The chances I'm going to see and read and act on a "your food is bad!!!" email (assuming it doesn't get eaten by some filter) before I eat the food in question is low, low low. Some device getting the message and physically stopping me is really the only way to be sure.
I barely read half my mail, snail or electronic. The chances I'm going to see and read and act on a "your food is bad!!!" email (assuming it doesn't get eaten by some filter) before I eat the food in question is low, low low. Some device getting the message and physically stopping me is really the only way to be sure.
They could even do this without preventing the machine from squeezing improperly-ordained-by-DRM bags.
"If we recognize the bag, and it's recalled, we'll stop you—or at least yell at you. If you use someone else's bag you're on your own, but we won't stop you."
Surely they were capable of having this thought. That they didn't or chose to ignore it hints at ulterior motives—most obvious is overcharging for the bags, since not buying them makes you the proud owner of a $400 paperweight.
But a prediction: almost everyone who attempts to block consumers from consuming bad food with technology will do it to overcharge for the food. Safety will be the excuse, not the purpose.
"If we recognize the bag, and it's recalled, we'll stop you—or at least yell at you. If you use someone else's bag you're on your own, but we won't stop you."
Surely they were capable of having this thought. That they didn't or chose to ignore it hints at ulterior motives—most obvious is overcharging for the bags, since not buying them makes you the proud owner of a $400 paperweight.
But a prediction: almost everyone who attempts to block consumers from consuming bad food with technology will do it to overcharge for the food. Safety will be the excuse, not the purpose.
Oh yeah, it's a shitty move to use that as your excuse.
If your goal is reducing food poisoning through TECHNOLOGY! and CONNECTIVITY! to better inform consumers if their food has been recalled, you'd be better off developing food packaging that could eg change color when the food is recalled - a big giant red skull and crossbones appearing on my food packages would probably keep me from accidentally eating bad food. That would both be a challenging engineering project (since it'd have to be cheap, food-safe, and ideally biodegradable), and work for a far wider range of foods and ingredients.
If your goal is reducing food poisoning through TECHNOLOGY! and CONNECTIVITY! to better inform consumers if their food has been recalled, you'd be better off developing food packaging that could eg change color when the food is recalled - a big giant red skull and crossbones appearing on my food packages would probably keep me from accidentally eating bad food. That would both be a challenging engineering project (since it'd have to be cheap, food-safe, and ideally biodegradable), and work for a far wider range of foods and ingredients.
"Carl's Jr. believes no child should go hungry."
Kidding aside, this is too simple of a problem to solve. Serious contamination isn't a part of 1st world daily life, because we have excellent news and regulations (so far). Rotten food is easy to detect, and even some of the stuff we consider rotten would probably not make us sick.
It's all a shiny coat of wax on a non-problem, just like bottled water and gingivitis.
Kidding aside, this is too simple of a problem to solve. Serious contamination isn't a part of 1st world daily life, because we have excellent news and regulations (so far). Rotten food is easy to detect, and even some of the stuff we consider rotten would probably not make us sick.
It's all a shiny coat of wax on a non-problem, just like bottled water and gingivitis.
Food contamination is a low-probability problem, sure, but it is hardly a minor one. It kills people.
That moment when someone unironically recommends full-life-cycle logistics tracking for foodstuffs as a solution to simply checking the expiration date or examining raw ingredients before preparing...
How would tracking the food from origin to consumption allow the machine to reject rotten food?
Things going rotten are not that predictable, even if you know exactly when and where it was packaged.
Things going rotten are not that predictable, even if you know exactly when and where it was packaged.
If it knows when and where for everything about an ingredient, it probably also knows the tagged expiry/best-before. It's easy to play it safe and just reject everything past expiry, even if it need not actually have gone bad. And consumers who prioritize contamination safety (not everyone believes expiry dates, but many do) can respect that.
There are cases where something can go bad before its expiry date, due to improper storage, but storage conditions until food reaches given appliance could be tracked too to account for that.
There are cases where something can go bad before its expiry date, due to improper storage, but storage conditions until food reaches given appliance could be tracked too to account for that.
But fresh fruit in particular doesn't rot at a uniform rate. You can pick two peaches from the same tree at the same time with the same appereant ripeness, store them in identical conditions, and have them go bad on different days.
[deleted]
There are low-tech versions of spoilage alert. oxygen sensitive stickers that change color if too much o2 detected inside the package..
However - there is one food label that I have always wanted on meats: slaughter date, freeze/pack date, sell date, cook date, eat date.
So if I go to the store and there is meat in the freezer - when was that meat caught/slaughtered/packed/frozen.
Am I eating something a year old?
If you had that labeling - I would be willing to bet that healthier eating habits would ensue - not that the meat industry would prefer it though..
However - there is one food label that I have always wanted on meats: slaughter date, freeze/pack date, sell date, cook date, eat date.
So if I go to the store and there is meat in the freezer - when was that meat caught/slaughtered/packed/frozen.
Am I eating something a year old?
If you had that labeling - I would be willing to bet that healthier eating habits would ensue - not that the meat industry would prefer it though..
I eat year+ old beef all the time: I buy an entire year's supply at once and freeze it. Tastes fine.
What I really would like is a "picked on" label on fruits & vegetables. A cucumber from my garden is fine 3 weeks after picking. One from the grocery store is barely edible a few days after purchase.
What I really would like is a "picked on" label on fruits & vegetables. A cucumber from my garden is fine 3 weeks after picking. One from the grocery store is barely edible a few days after purchase.
I didnt word that as clearly as I meant;
I just think that each step in the processing of food should be transparent.
Has frozen food sat in various places far longer than expected?
I just think that each step in the processing of food should be transparent.
Has frozen food sat in various places far longer than expected?
Expiration dates are more for best taste rather than food safety. You're able to tell when fruits/veggies go rotten with your eyes, nose, and mouth.
It would apply if the ingredients were contaminated when they were processed but wasn't detected until after they were sold.
This is all textbook 'solution in search of a problem'
I think the future of food is different - it's about restaurant quality meals, for cheap, large selection, with zero effort. maybe via online ordering, maybe Whole-foods/Walmart. And you may need some fancy oven like combi-oven or solid-state microwave.
And even if we're talking cuts of meat, i think technology like MATS(microwave assisted thermal sterilization) may give you high quality meat that doesn't spoil for very long, so that won't be an issue.
And as for suggesting recipes based on fridge content or restocking (are those such big problems for consumers?) - there are probably other ways to solve that , like AI + camera, no need to reshuffle the whole supply chain.
And even if we're talking cuts of meat, i think technology like MATS(microwave assisted thermal sterilization) may give you high quality meat that doesn't spoil for very long, so that won't be an issue.
And as for suggesting recipes based on fridge content or restocking (are those such big problems for consumers?) - there are probably other ways to solve that , like AI + camera, no need to reshuffle the whole supply chain.
> restaurant quality meals, for cheap, large selection, with zero effort
If this were ever to happen - and what I know of food chemistry makes me strongly skeptical - you would definitely see it in actual restaurants way before you get it at home. Because for a restaurant, if you can effectively replace a human costing >$40k/yr with a change in supply chain and a fancy machine, you can easily afford to pay $40k for the machine alone. A consumer would never afford that.
(Same goes for fully autonomous cars.)
As for the "reducing food waste" concept - no store actually wants to achieve this. Think about it - actively trying to get people to buy less of what you sell is pretty bad for business.
If this were ever to happen - and what I know of food chemistry makes me strongly skeptical - you would definitely see it in actual restaurants way before you get it at home. Because for a restaurant, if you can effectively replace a human costing >$40k/yr with a change in supply chain and a fancy machine, you can easily afford to pay $40k for the machine alone. A consumer would never afford that.
(Same goes for fully autonomous cars.)
As for the "reducing food waste" concept - no store actually wants to achieve this. Think about it - actively trying to get people to buy less of what you sell is pretty bad for business.
Using frozen food, many french restaurants already do that for some stuff to an extent there was law on that matter, and there's a french/european consumer chain, picard, for gourmet frozen food. But it's expensive. but maybe prices will go down ?
> Because for a restaurant, if you can effectively replace a human costing >$40k/yr with a change in supply chain and a fancy machine,
Ever heard of a TurboChef oven? Because that's almost exactly what you're describing. Think of it as a combination oven that uses microwaves, thermal, and convection to cook stuff extremely fast, and generally of a pretty decent quality.
If you've eaten at just about any restaurant, you have likely had something prepared in one (if not the whole meal).
They are actually pretty nice machines; if I had the counter room at home I'd have one. But they aren't cheap...
Ever heard of a TurboChef oven? Because that's almost exactly what you're describing. Think of it as a combination oven that uses microwaves, thermal, and convection to cook stuff extremely fast, and generally of a pretty decent quality.
If you've eaten at just about any restaurant, you have likely had something prepared in one (if not the whole meal).
They are actually pretty nice machines; if I had the counter room at home I'd have one. But they aren't cheap...
Sous-vide?
>As for the "reducing food waste" concept - no store actually wants to achieve this. Think about it - actively trying to get people to buy less of what you sell is pretty bad for business.
Which is why it's ripe for disruption. The consumer could be better off, a company that isn't in the space already could be better off, they're the people who need to make it happen.
Which is why it's ripe for disruption. The consumer could be better off, a company that isn't in the space already could be better off, they're the people who need to make it happen.
There's the other half of the chain as well - the suppliers. If they know selling to NewFancyStoreWithLessFoodWaste leads to an end-game where there is less demand for their products, why should they bother?
Because the disruptor might succeed with or without them and the disruptor might treat them more favorably (at first) than the status quo.
My neighbor grows soybeans, and he hates the guy who buys his soybeans. If someone came in and treated him better and paid him more, I think he'd leap at the chance to sell his crop to them even if it imperiled the future.
Besides, suppliers aren't monolithic. Many suppliers are scrapping for new business or ways to differentiate themselves. Better farmers could be more successful in a paradigm where they could earn extra money for healthy plants than say selling to walmart who simply pays a fixed price if the plants meet minimum standards.
My neighbor grows soybeans, and he hates the guy who buys his soybeans. If someone came in and treated him better and paid him more, I think he'd leap at the chance to sell his crop to them even if it imperiled the future.
Besides, suppliers aren't monolithic. Many suppliers are scrapping for new business or ways to differentiate themselves. Better farmers could be more successful in a paradigm where they could earn extra money for healthy plants than say selling to walmart who simply pays a fixed price if the plants meet minimum standards.
This is as good a time as any to plug my company, Mellow: www.cookmellow.com (that's our exact value prop)
If you use a loyalty card at a Kroger owned store, they'll tell you if something is flagged for contamination, it's an automated call system. There is already pretty reasonable tracking on the industry side of the food equation; some things are better than others. It's just not at the point of consumption. I'm kind of okay with this, I'd rather the industry as a whole do more things to prevent contamination period. Making a more friendly notification is nice, it could be a phone call, and email, a notification with some app; it's pretty rare and I want it more rare, not a friendlier notification, that's just me though.
Now I think you could make that stuff better, don't get me wrong, I'm not going to hate on Juicero for that. Their entire play was just VC-Bingo though: they had a device, they had a subscription, they had "lock in" (device is only good with the subscription) they had internet attachment, it's a health and wellness type play, probably some other things I'm not thinking of. Anyone know if they had to subsidize the prices, that'd be the grand slam if they had to do that too. $30 a week for 5 packs of juice, that's $120 a month and you do the work and clean up the mess and you have to get different juice on the weekends. The bags aren't supposed to make that much mess but I think the psychology of it all is huge, a coffee maker doesn't make much mess either and you'll pay a gigantic premium at a coffee shop. How many months before you get a tip-top of the line cold press juicer that'll make juice out of any produce? With no subscription.
Now I think you could make that stuff better, don't get me wrong, I'm not going to hate on Juicero for that. Their entire play was just VC-Bingo though: they had a device, they had a subscription, they had "lock in" (device is only good with the subscription) they had internet attachment, it's a health and wellness type play, probably some other things I'm not thinking of. Anyone know if they had to subsidize the prices, that'd be the grand slam if they had to do that too. $30 a week for 5 packs of juice, that's $120 a month and you do the work and clean up the mess and you have to get different juice on the weekends. The bags aren't supposed to make that much mess but I think the psychology of it all is huge, a coffee maker doesn't make much mess either and you'll pay a gigantic premium at a coffee shop. How many months before you get a tip-top of the line cold press juicer that'll make juice out of any produce? With no subscription.
The idea itself isn't horrible. But investing $100m in a niche home appliance that hadn't yet been validated in the market was just dumb.
Interesting concept...
Tracking what you have to suggest recipes or restock - that's the feature that seems most appealing. But I don't think you need a network like you describe to accomplish that. You could have a "smart" fridge or some other device that can catalog your food for you thru imaging and scans. Hell, you could just input a list you type up yourself. Like you say, Amazon could easily do this. They already have a part of it with their dash buttons and smart home devices. They have another part now with Whole Foods and Amazon Fresh.
The other benefits you mention are marginal at best, in my opinion. I would never pay a premium for tagged and tracked food like that.
Edit: Funny, there's a post on overengineering on the front page!
The other benefits you mention are marginal at best, in my opinion. I would never pay a premium for tagged and tracked food like that.
Edit: Funny, there's a post on overengineering on the front page!
They are already doing it with Amazon wand.
It's attached to the fridge, whenever I finish something I scan the barcode.
If I tossed away the package or I remember something that I don't have I just tell it to the wand.
> Hell, you could just input a list you type up yourself.
If you put that much effort into it, then you can just as well remember what you need to buy when.
If you put that much effort into it, then you can just as well remember what you need to buy when.
I write down a shopping list because otherwise I forget things.
It would be hard to make something more convenient than a pen and paper though. And in the store crossing things off the nigh indestructible scrap of worthless paper is better than fiddling with a device.
It would be hard to make something more convenient than a pen and paper though. And in the store crossing things off the nigh indestructible scrap of worthless paper is better than fiddling with a device.
I use Simple Notepad[0] on my android phone. It has a checklist option that I go to the store with, which works much better than the list I write, which works much better than the list I keep in my head.
[0]https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.mightyfrog...
[0]https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.mightyfrog...
Been there and tried it - went back to paper.
A piece of paper is 'always on', it wraps around the push bar of the food cart so I don't have to make adjustments to hold the 'device' and steer at the same time, or keep fishing the phone out of my pocket and unlocking it, nor from the cart itself, while ensuring I don't drop any shopping on the screen or stray too far from the cart and give someone the opportunity to grab the phone.
The only way I'd go back to using a smartphone is if the cart had a lockable universal smartphone cradle. Bonus points would be given for a built-in charger - provided the stores maintained everything so you didn't need to 'test' the carts outside to find one with a working charger and cradle.
A piece of paper is 'always on', it wraps around the push bar of the food cart so I don't have to make adjustments to hold the 'device' and steer at the same time, or keep fishing the phone out of my pocket and unlocking it, nor from the cart itself, while ensuring I don't drop any shopping on the screen or stray too far from the cart and give someone the opportunity to grab the phone.
The only way I'd go back to using a smartphone is if the cart had a lockable universal smartphone cradle. Bonus points would be given for a built-in charger - provided the stores maintained everything so you didn't need to 'test' the carts outside to find one with a working charger and cradle.
Adding items to a shopping list is actually one of the relatively few things I end up using my Amazon Echo for. It's easier to add and I don't forget my phone when I go to the store (or end up going when I didn't plan to). I'm not a huge Echo fan overall but I do find it good for that.
Well the difference would be that the food gets delivered to you based on what you specify in the list..
But obviously that wasn't the main point. Using computer vision you can automate it.
But obviously that wasn't the main point. Using computer vision you can automate it.
Or the industry could standardize receipts so that they can just be scanned into the fridge.
What's "digitized food"? Does every single one of my strawberries come with a bar code on it? Or does everything come in Juicebro style pouches?
Agafia is a hermit surviving in the Russian wilderness for 70 years. I recommend the RT report on her because they do not try to force a conclusion to the contact. She is afraid of barcodes even though she barely has any contact with other people. During the last world war humans were assigned serial numbers for efficient tracking and resource allocation and extermination. Agafia and her people ran away from several regimes that were set on extermination of her people because of their beliefs. All food she comes in contact with must have barcodes removed because to her, barcodes are a sign of the devil. She will not accept anything with barcodes on it. All aid packages must have barcodes removed from them before she will accept them. According to her the next logical step will be to microchip/barcode all humans and track their activities. Then humans will be treated like cattle and easily controllable assets. Sounds familiar?
Hmm... Whats this entirely detailed sensor that has ALL my access/identity/sentiment/social data on it - where I am required to pay a monthly fee for, and life in modern society will basically stop if I dont have one? The one where I am expected to follow and celebrate every release of one with far more tracking/identifying/documenting features -- and then spend more money on upgrading my tracker?
You know - the one where governments and police departments have equipment to fool the device to connecting to just them so they know exactly where I am?
That next logical step of Agafia sounds ludicrous!
You know - the one where governments and police departments have equipment to fool the device to connecting to just them so they know exactly where I am?
That next logical step of Agafia sounds ludicrous!
[deleted]
A lot of my trust in Amazon eroded after the whole co-mingling fake-eclipse-glasses fiasco. If I can't trust Amazon to tell me accurately where the stuff I buy on their website is coming from… how can I trust them in the retail grocery world where there's so much more middlemen and variables in play?
Because they're different businesses run different ways? And the grocery store ultimately is governed by the FDA and a totally different set of regulations and expectations?
Most packaged food has a serial number on it for tracking purposes.
Going from that to sticking it in a scanner to get permission to eat it probably doesn't add a lot of utility.
Going from that to sticking it in a scanner to get permission to eat it probably doesn't add a lot of utility.
What value does this add over stocking various drinks, in containers, in a refrigerated case with no machine?
I've noticed that the digital multi-flavor soda dispensers create more customer bottlenecks compared the regular 4-6 nozzle dispensers. Having every customer figure out how to load a "juice pack" then operate the machine seems like it would have a similar inconveniencing effect.
I've noticed that the digital multi-flavor soda dispensers create more customer bottlenecks compared the regular 4-6 nozzle dispensers. Having every customer figure out how to load a "juice pack" then operate the machine seems like it would have a similar inconveniencing effect.
> What value does this add over stocking various drinks, in containers, in a refrigerated case with no machine?
You can market it as "fresh".
You can market it as "fresh".
if it comes out of a bag, it's not fresh.
Of course not, but you can still market it that way.
Basically those units are a great idea, but to keep costs down they only serve one at a time. If that could change to each unit even serving 2-3 the bottlenecks would ease, and you could also consider blended approach in which you have the standard 4-6 nozzle dispenser and one or two freestyles. After all some people really have no interest in anything other than straightforward Cokeor whatever else.
I don't see a lot of differences between the self serve milkshake machines in gas stations and this proposed self serve juicer.
If you have slightly more space and $$ than an end user there are, IMO, much better options available. I see more and more in the grocery stores orange juice squeezers that make juice out of oranges in front of you. With a clear plastic front you see the machine slicing oranges and squeezing the juice for you into any container you want.
Cost-wise it is more expensive than buying not-from-concentrate juice in a half gallon quantities, but not that much more so. Definitely <= 100% premium and you get it freshly squeezed right before you.
Cost-wise it is more expensive than buying not-from-concentrate juice in a half gallon quantities, but not that much more so. Definitely <= 100% premium and you get it freshly squeezed right before you.
Those orange juice squeezers are pretty common in Brussels. Every Carrefour and Delhaize mini markets have them.
The problem is the founders did come from that world and tried to consumerize it. If they'd focused on per-juice-cost (thus, high volume) and gone from attended to semi-attended (office) or unattended (vending machine) it might have won.
They also could have just built a "scrappier" v1.0 hardware product at a lower cost (maybe with rollers or something) at 50% BOM cost and subsidized it a bit more. At $200 + $6-8 per pack they might have been successful; at $200 + $200/mo for 30 packs they probably would have been.
They also could have just built a "scrappier" v1.0 hardware product at a lower cost (maybe with rollers or something) at 50% BOM cost and subsidized it a bit more. At $200 + $6-8 per pack they might have been successful; at $200 + $200/mo for 30 packs they probably would have been.
Rollers were my immediate thought as to how to get the juice out. Would love one of their engineers to chime in and talk about the reasons they built it that way.
The AvE teardown mentioned this. It does give you uniform force across the entire work surface, which is theoretically superior, but I think it's a case where a 5% improvement in results does not warrant 75% increase in BOM cost and design, at least in v1 of a relatively virgin market (if the market were flooded with roller systems, you could possibly differentiate with a press based 1.0, but no need to do that out the gate in a virgin market.)
There is nothing complicated about squeezing something out of a bag with with uniform pressure. The book press / screw press has existed since the first century AD.
Here is a 'juicero' that you can fill with whatever chopped fruit you want and get the same/better results:
https://www.amazon.com/Fruit-Press-Italian-Stainless-Brewcra...
Here is a 'juicero' that you can fill with whatever chopped fruit you want and get the same/better results:
https://www.amazon.com/Fruit-Press-Italian-Stainless-Brewcra...
Oh but does it have the food DRM that forces you to buy all your fruits from one company in overpriced bags?
LOL. That was the fail. They had a tiny market of a subset of rich people whom bought into inkjet/razorblade/K-cup crapola.
If they did the "sell to stores" biz, the competition they would have seen would be far stronger, and stores would squeeze them, unlike their current dream of a printer for juice.
And it's far from certain that first business would attract VC's.
And it's far from certain that first business would attract VC's.
>I think they went about getting to market wrong.
I find this line really funny for some reason. (Juicero has been the laughingstock of the tech community over their go to market, pricing, and marketing/business models, and we are now looking at the pieces as they exploded over this fact.)
So I had to try really, really hard not to reply to your innocent comment with mock surprise - like no! You think?
>I think they went about getting to market wrong
I find this line really funny for some reason. (Juicero has been the laughingstock of the tech community over their go to market, pricing, and marketing/business models, and we are now looking at the pieces as they exploded over this fact.)
So I had to try really, really hard not to reply to your innocent comment with mock surprise - like no! You think?
>I think they went about getting to market wrong
Zumex is quite common in UK and does not hit the higher end of your price range.
I admit to a slightly childish glee in ordering an orange juce and watching the machine peel and juice the fresh oranges. (Mostly I eat actual fruit).
http://www.zumex.com/en
I admit to a slightly childish glee in ordering an orange juce and watching the machine peel and juice the fresh oranges. (Mostly I eat actual fruit).
http://www.zumex.com/en
[deleted]
But I already can buy cheaper juices at the grocery / convenience store. Why would this be any different?
They should have started with something that actually used the press. Who wouldn't want fresh olive oil?
> Who wouldn't want fresh olive oil?
Good idea but I don't think it's that easy: the extraction of olive oil is not a simple matter of pressing olives until the oil comes out, but a long process with multiple steps [1] that I doubt they could been done by a press that is relatively simple as/as big as Juicero (as it can be seen by the cons in the two methods for the extraction that are listed on wiki).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olive_oil_extraction
Good idea but I don't think it's that easy: the extraction of olive oil is not a simple matter of pressing olives until the oil comes out, but a long process with multiple steps [1] that I doubt they could been done by a press that is relatively simple as/as big as Juicero (as it can be seen by the cons in the two methods for the extraction that are listed on wiki).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olive_oil_extraction
Juicero did nothing inherently wrong. It is a fancy juice machine for fancy offices and busy people. It's really just another random victim of the internet lynch mob.
Along those same lines, I think spas, fitness centers, salons would have been good segments for them.
I don't think there _is_ a market for this over-engineered, overpriced monstrosity.
Caffe Macs near Vallco 1 at Apple has Juiceros doing exactly what you describe.
They should not have targeted fruits and vegetables with their equipment.
They should have gone, not went.
Seems like the perfect thing for an airport. :)
For Virgin Galactic and SpaceX
Airports are full of $6 lattes and smoothies, $4 bottled water, etc. I would imagine their might be enough folks who want something "healthy" who'd be willing to pay.
I was joking about the aesthetics only
The commercial options are cheaper, faster and more durable. This 'appliance' will break in a couple of days.
AvE tore one of their machines down awhile back[0]. It's so over engineered, I was wondering how they'd ever make money back with their business model.
[0] https://youtu.be/_Cp-BGQfpHQ
[0] https://youtu.be/_Cp-BGQfpHQ
He sums this up well [1] (paraphrasing):
> This is what you get with no constraints. Building something that lasts and doesn't break the bank is what's hard. This thing will last forever, but it's a machine to squeeze pre-masticated fruit in a plastic bag that costs $400.
I've watched this before and just skipped through to find that bit, but I'm fairly certain he also mentions at one point how they're almost certainly selling the juicer itself at a loss, which makes the whole thing that much more absurd.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ&t=37m09s
> This is what you get with no constraints. Building something that lasts and doesn't break the bank is what's hard. This thing will last forever, but it's a machine to squeeze pre-masticated fruit in a plastic bag that costs $400.
I've watched this before and just skipped through to find that bit, but I'm fairly certain he also mentions at one point how they're almost certainly selling the juicer itself at a loss, which makes the whole thing that much more absurd.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ&t=37m09s
> I'm fairly certain he also mentions at one point how they're almost certainly selling the juicer itself at a loss
Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ&t=15m07s
and here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ&t=33m42s
Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ&t=15m07s
and here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ&t=33m42s
After watching the teardown video - I really want one of these things - very impressive.
They will probably be available on eBay cheaply now that they are paperweights for those who bought them.
Actually I want more than one (I want the motor...)
Anyone have the specs on the motor specifically (and please ignore my naivete): max RPM vs power consumption -- what about the power of these motors would be preferable to those on a boosted board (or reverse)?
Anyone have the specs on the motor specifically (and please ignore my naivete): max RPM vs power consumption -- what about the power of these motors would be preferable to those on a boosted board (or reverse)?
Maybe I misread but apparently the company is offering refunds up until Dec-31 to anyone who purchased one of these.
That doesn't mean they are going to require you to ship the machine back to them.
(I'm assuming there's tons of people who are going to miss that deadline anyway)
(I'm assuming there's tons of people who are going to miss that deadline anyway)
If it's Internet-connected, it might not squeeze without an approved API call from the vendor.
That would be some serious activation DRM for pressing juice, although it does defend their (failed) business model.
How many units did they MFR?
A smart person would put a bounty on all the tings they made
A smart person would put a bounty on all the tings they made
Skookum as frig, possibly.
He had a better idea though: pass the bag between one or two rollers.
He had a better idea though: pass the bag between one or two rollers.
this is another teardown with a similar conclusion
https://blog.bolt.io/heres-why-juicero-s-press-is-so-expensi...
https://blog.bolt.io/heres-why-juicero-s-press-is-so-expensi...
I love how Bolt.io tore down a pair of Beats headphones and came to the opposite conclusion -- that they were a ripoff and that the components inside in no way justified the pricetag.
But, take a look at the quality of the internals of Juicero vs. Beats headphones and realize that one of the companies is worth $1.5B while the other is shutting down.
But, take a look at the quality of the internals of Juicero vs. Beats headphones and realize that one of the companies is worth $1.5B while the other is shutting down.
That "Beats" teardown was with a counterfeit pair of headphones.
Even so, I don't think a large difference between the BOM and the price the consumer pays is necessarily a ripoff. There's more to a product than simply how much it costs to manufacture.
Even so, I don't think a large difference between the BOM and the price the consumer pays is necessarily a ripoff. There's more to a product than simply how much it costs to manufacture.
The counterfeit pair probably had a more reasonable frequency response than the genuine product it was trying to imitate, so much for Beat's famous distorted bass.
> Even so, I don't think a large difference between the BOM and the price the consumer pays is necessarily a ripoff.
Actually, in some jurisdictions, if that difference goes over 12.5% of the paid price, and the customer is not specifically informed about this (and about potential cheaper competitors), the contract is not valid.
Actually, in some jurisdictions, if that difference goes over 12.5% of the paid price, and the customer is not specifically informed about this (and about potential cheaper competitors), the contract is not valid.
I think you mean "so", not "but" :)
Holy crap. That's the kind of thing I expect from undergrads who don't know what COTS stands for.
Like how do you convince yourself that this is a sane design for something more than a prototype? Using more off the shelf stuff might result a little more weight and a higher overall part count but the cost savings would be huge.
Like how do you convince yourself that this is a sane design for something more than a prototype? Using more off the shelf stuff might result a little more weight and a higher overall part count but the cost savings would be huge.
As I kept watching the video I thought the word "overengineered" was the completely wrong word, and AvE himself addresses it perfectly in the end: It's "underengineered", "underdesigned" but "overbuilt".
I always assumed that the revenue was going to come from selling the bags of fruit. The machine is easily and cheaply cloned, but a network for distributing prepackaged produce would be much harder to copy and provide the recurring revenue that really matters.
I've wondered if some of the problem here is how many people involved are so well off, the VCs especially, that they've forgotten what $40/week is to the vast bulk of people in the world, or even in the industrialized countries. That's on the order of 5% of the median total income and a great deal more than 5% of the median disposable income in the US. I wonder how many people just forgot how expensive that is and how small the market is for that level of extravagance.
[deleted]
wow great video! Just wasted half a days work just watching that channel's stuff :/
Likewise. That channel might be the most Canadian thing ever to exist - got a little homesick just watching it.
After watching their promo video at the top of the page, I'm left wondering two things:
- If the machine takes away all my liberty (I cannot use it on my fruit and vegetables) and even their packs need to be refrigerated and stay good only for 8 days, can't I just buy the resulting juice and put it in my fridge? (If I left the bottle closed, that would last equally long). So what do I gain?
- They're using QR codes to check that I'm not using their packs beyond the "best by" date or try to trick the machine into squeezing a competitor's cheaper packs. And for that, they need a camera on the inside. And WiFi. Didn't somebody at some point notice that the way they're treating their customers is really disrespectful? This is the whole printer-cartridge-thing all over again.
EDIT: layout/typos
- If the machine takes away all my liberty (I cannot use it on my fruit and vegetables) and even their packs need to be refrigerated and stay good only for 8 days, can't I just buy the resulting juice and put it in my fridge? (If I left the bottle closed, that would last equally long). So what do I gain?
- They're using QR codes to check that I'm not using their packs beyond the "best by" date or try to trick the machine into squeezing a competitor's cheaper packs. And for that, they need a camera on the inside. And WiFi. Didn't somebody at some point notice that the way they're treating their customers is really disrespectful? This is the whole printer-cartridge-thing all over again.
EDIT: layout/typos
You gain the prestige of saying "you want a fresh-squeezed juice?" to your guests. Keurig grew HUGE in large part thanks to the appearance of higher class it brought to ordinary homes and offices. Instead of fooling with tools, you click a button on a sleek looking SV futuremachine, and presto.
Humans are weird, and this is a very good marketing strategy.
Humans are weird, and this is a very good marketing strategy.
I'm not familiar with Keurig, but I assume it is similar to Nespresso?
Nespresso became extremely popular because:
1) The machines are very cheap (compared to other espresso makers)
2) They take a fraction of the time to prepare coffee (compared to other methods)
3) They are extremely easy to clean
4) Capsules have a long shelf life, you can get them in small quantities, so it doesn't matter if you drink 3 cups of coffee per day or 3 cups of coffee per month.
5) They have really fancy stores in top locations where they sell their capsules
Everything about Nespresso is convenient and feels great. There is no DRM, because that would not be convenient.
The only thing that's convenient about the Juicero machine is that it is easy to clean. Everything else about it, from the short shelf live to the subscription pricing, to the long time it takes to make juice, is just inconvenient. The DRM and Wifi requirement is just stupid.
Nespresso became extremely popular because:
1) The machines are very cheap (compared to other espresso makers)
2) They take a fraction of the time to prepare coffee (compared to other methods)
3) They are extremely easy to clean
4) Capsules have a long shelf life, you can get them in small quantities, so it doesn't matter if you drink 3 cups of coffee per day or 3 cups of coffee per month.
5) They have really fancy stores in top locations where they sell their capsules
Everything about Nespresso is convenient and feels great. There is no DRM, because that would not be convenient.
The only thing that's convenient about the Juicero machine is that it is easy to clean. Everything else about it, from the short shelf live to the subscription pricing, to the long time it takes to make juice, is just inconvenient. The DRM and Wifi requirement is just stupid.
The fact that anyone can make a sort of decent cup of coffee with a nespresso is also important.
Additionally, the taste benefit of nespresso over instant coffee or something similar is probably much higher than juicero over the best bottled juice.
Additionally, the taste benefit of nespresso over instant coffee or something similar is probably much higher than juicero over the best bottled juice.
Those coffee 'cup' machines automate a majority of the series steps and outputs a decent coffee... perfect for office environments or mornings before work where people don't have time to grind or babysit a drip machine.
The value is quite clear in the context of alternatives. Which is where I believe Juicero stumbles when one considers the various alternatives. Especially with the high cost and fast expiration dates.
The value is quite clear in the context of alternatives. Which is where I believe Juicero stumbles when one considers the various alternatives. Especially with the high cost and fast expiration dates.
I thought nespresso had DRM to stop other coffee pods.
No DRM, but patents on the machine and the capsules. Enforceability of the patents varies a lot between countries, so in some there are non-Nespreso capsules, in others there aren't.
I think you're thinking of Keurig's K-cups (a different and of course wholly incompatible means of coffee capsule thingy)
No DRM as far as I can tell. You can make your own pods with simple kits which are basically just an empty capsule and some foil you stick on the top.
Indeed. Lots of supermarkets and coffee brands in the UK sell their own Nespresso-compatible pods, often much cheaper than the "real" ones.
In Germany, Nestle tried and failed to ban sales of unlicensed pods:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandcon...
In Germany, Nestle tried and failed to ban sales of unlicensed pods:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandcon...
> 1) The machines are very cheap (compared to other espresso makers)
Simply not true, I have an 160eur Delonghi espresso machine which takes grounded coffee (doesn't grind it itself), and it's pretty awesome for what it cost me. Every 2 weeks, I go to a local coffee shop where I buy on high-quality freshly roasted coffee which I let the shop grind for me. It gives me way better coffee than what I get from a Nespresso.
Sure it's a bit more cleanup, but the results are a lot better, and it allows me to pretty easily make a killer cappuccino.
> 4) Capsules have a long shelf life, you can get them in small quantities...
Coffee, once roasted and grounded does not have a long shelf-life, taste and quality goes down remarkably. That's probably also what makes the most difference in quality comparing a Nespresso with my 'fresher' coffee. The capsules being packed in vacuum does improve this, but I wouldn't keep them for longer than a year.
I get my coffee in 250g bags, which is about 15 espresso's, that's not exactly 'large quantities'.
> 5) They have really fancy stores in top locations where they sell their capsules
I prefer local specialized shops that know what the hell they are talking about.
But yes I get the convenience and cleaning. Time to prep is a thing, with my machine, it takes about 1.5 to 2 minutes from start to finish, including 30 sec brew-time and quickly rinsing and wiping everything - which isn't that bad in my book - but yes, a Nespresso scores points here. I don't think I would go through the hassle at work every time I wanted a cup.
Simply not true, I have an 160eur Delonghi espresso machine which takes grounded coffee (doesn't grind it itself), and it's pretty awesome for what it cost me. Every 2 weeks, I go to a local coffee shop where I buy on high-quality freshly roasted coffee which I let the shop grind for me. It gives me way better coffee than what I get from a Nespresso.
Sure it's a bit more cleanup, but the results are a lot better, and it allows me to pretty easily make a killer cappuccino.
> 4) Capsules have a long shelf life, you can get them in small quantities...
Coffee, once roasted and grounded does not have a long shelf-life, taste and quality goes down remarkably. That's probably also what makes the most difference in quality comparing a Nespresso with my 'fresher' coffee. The capsules being packed in vacuum does improve this, but I wouldn't keep them for longer than a year.
I get my coffee in 250g bags, which is about 15 espresso's, that's not exactly 'large quantities'.
> 5) They have really fancy stores in top locations where they sell their capsules
I prefer local specialized shops that know what the hell they are talking about.
But yes I get the convenience and cleaning. Time to prep is a thing, with my machine, it takes about 1.5 to 2 minutes from start to finish, including 30 sec brew-time and quickly rinsing and wiping everything - which isn't that bad in my book - but yes, a Nespresso scores points here. I don't think I would go through the hassle at work every time I wanted a cup.
I have a Nespresso machine and highly disagree with you. The worst part of preparing Coffee is cleaning and the time required when I just want the coffee and not to mess with tools.
With the Nespresso, I just put the capsule and I get my coffee. The cleaning is easy and I don't need to clean stuff for every coffee.
Sure, you might do a whole bottle of coffee and consume it during the day. But the machine gives you convenience and it is affordable.
I have no problem putting 200-300USD on a coffee machine.
For juice? Well, I like it fresh. I didn't try Juicero but I highly doubt that it compares to freshly squeezed oranges.
With the Nespresso, I just put the capsule and I get my coffee. The cleaning is easy and I don't need to clean stuff for every coffee.
Sure, you might do a whole bottle of coffee and consume it during the day. But the machine gives you convenience and it is affordable.
I have no problem putting 200-300USD on a coffee machine.
For juice? Well, I like it fresh. I didn't try Juicero but I highly doubt that it compares to freshly squeezed oranges.
Except that Keurig/Nesspresso/Tassimo machines actually make coffee using ground beans. It's a convenience thing, sure, but they are roughly the same as an espresso machine that you don't have to fill up yourself. Juicero was squeezing juice out of a pack. It could come in a bottle and you could pour it yourself, the product would be exactly identical.
But the printer-cartridge-thing made lots of money, so people probably want more of that!
Even if the machine was $50, I don't think many people would want to spend that much for the privilege of being locked in to Juicero proprietary juice packs, letalone spend kitchen counter space to a dedicated juice squeezer machine. And everyone who did now has an exquisitely engineered $700 paperweight.
Ultra expensive juicers aren't new[1]. Even "normal" juicers are quite expensive[2]. Juicero was just trying to jump on a fairly well-established gravy train catering to the juice woo crowd.
[1]: https://www.acemart.com/equipment/beverage/juicers/zumex-ess...
[2]: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01EXF4PLC/
[1]: https://www.acemart.com/equipment/beverage/juicers/zumex-ess...
[2]: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01EXF4PLC/
Has there ever been a juicer before this that has forced you to buy all your fruits from one company? I think that's the key. People are ready to pay big bucks for premium appliances, but lock-in is another matter.
People love being locked in. Applying the keurig model to the juicing trend was a very solid business idea- it rocketed keurig to the top of all coffee makers, and juice fanatics make coffee fanatics look positively sane. I'm pretty cynical about it, but it is still a real and good thing. A half second of convenience makes you feel good and selecting, storing, washing and prepping produce is not trivial. A few extra clicks in one area of UI makes it a terrible design. The same thing translates into the real world, although at extreme cost (to the environment, primarily).
Negative press, overengineering, the smaller market group, and underdelivering convenience (the bags are just way too big compared to coffee) killed juicero. It was such a high-profile and brutal lambasting that it will be a scarlet letter for quite a while, but the core idea is solid enough that I wouldn't be surprised to see the idea re-emerge in 2-3 years.
I still can't get over how much people viscerally hate the idea. You'd think apple, google and microsoft had partnered to make a juice press because of how much juicero represented silicon valley-ness.
Negative press, overengineering, the smaller market group, and underdelivering convenience (the bags are just way too big compared to coffee) killed juicero. It was such a high-profile and brutal lambasting that it will be a scarlet letter for quite a while, but the core idea is solid enough that I wouldn't be surprised to see the idea re-emerge in 2-3 years.
I still can't get over how much people viscerally hate the idea. You'd think apple, google and microsoft had partnered to make a juice press because of how much juicero represented silicon valley-ness.
> People love being locked in.
Are you serious? I think Keurig succeeded because it was able to offset the lock-in with genuine convenience and better coffee than most people were drinking.
If the idea will re-emerge, I'm sure it will be more focused on customer convenience rather than lock-in. Literally every single "feature" of juicero was there to enforce the lock-in. The camera, qr codes, always-on wifi, proprietary bags. It's a miracle the company lasted this long.
Are you serious? I think Keurig succeeded because it was able to offset the lock-in with genuine convenience and better coffee than most people were drinking.
If the idea will re-emerge, I'm sure it will be more focused on customer convenience rather than lock-in. Literally every single "feature" of juicero was there to enforce the lock-in. The camera, qr codes, always-on wifi, proprietary bags. It's a miracle the company lasted this long.
'normal' juicers aren't anywhere near as expensive because you can buy your produce at the grocery store.
Apparently as per the article they're at least offering refunds to some subset of their customers.
Also, I think at $50 a lot more people would consider it. Keurig coffee makers seem to have done pretty well and I'm sure the $100 cost was a big part of that (as opposed to charging say > $200).
Also, I think at $50 a lot more people would consider it. Keurig coffee makers seem to have done pretty well and I'm sure the $100 cost was a big part of that (as opposed to charging say > $200).
Founder seems to be having a good time at Burning Man the day his company shuts down.[1]
[1] https://www.instagram.com/p/BYaIlV4jFb5/?taken-by=dougevans
[1] https://www.instagram.com/p/BYaIlV4jFb5/?taken-by=dougevans
They have probably been preparing for this for many months now and now that it's over, I think the founder deserves some time to relax and reflect. I only hope the employees get good severance packages.
The Bloomberg article described Juicero as "one of the most lavishly funded gadget startups in Silicon Valley" and founder Doug Evans once said he planned to do for juicing what Steve Jobs did for computers.
With vision like that, it's hard to believe there were any issues.
With vision like that, it's hard to believe there were any issues.
Meanwhile, the Chinese clone with what is likely a very similar mechanism, but no DRM or other IoT crap, seems to be still alive:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1793272089/juisir-juici...
...and Juicero even tried to sue them a few months ago:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/04/juice-wars-juice...
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1793272089/juisir-juici...
...and Juicero even tried to sue them a few months ago:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/04/juice-wars-juice...
At least some people have common sense. This is so much better!
Come on. Juicero was pure Silicon Valley craziness.
It’s strange they didn’t fail from the very beginning.
Tried it in a bar in San Francisco: slow as fuck, avg juice.
It’s strange they didn’t fail from the very beginning.
Tried it in a bar in San Francisco: slow as fuck, avg juice.
Can we agree that if any founder makes a statement comparing themselves or their vision for their product with Steve Jobs and Apple, that they are automatically disqualified from being funded? Steve Jobs was one of a kind. If you are like Steve you don't have to say it, people will figure it out.
The thing i'm curious about: why did this raise $120M? And how much has already been spent, on what ???
Founding team were serial successes in an adjacent/directly-related industry. "Because they could" is probably the best explanation of why they did.
I could be extremely wrong about this, but I doubt they've spent the majority of that money. I think they're likely to be giving it back to avoid shareholder unpleasantness and seeking a buyer to try to neutralize the overall outcome. They raised $98m of the money in the last 18 months, I would bet 2/3rds of that is still there if not more.
not sure how they managed to convince the investors.
as far as the money spent - setting up physical manufacturing of anything, especially at scale is orders of magnitude more expensive than setting up an "IT" shop. here we're talking the actual (apparently worthless) juicers and the packs.
This video is one of my favorites
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ
Edit: Most like contains strong language...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ
Edit: Most like contains strong language...
This will serve as a good example for future startups where taking one concept from one market does not always work in another market. Keurig managed to make a great product at an affordable price range, both the machines ($80-$250) and the K-Cups (~$0.85 per pod). However, a $400 machine, that just squeezes the pack for juice, and each juice pack running several dollars is enough to kill anyone's wallet. I liked how they made an attempt to promote a sustainable healthy lifestyle, but ultimately there are cheaper alternatives.
But how is it sustainable to grow fruit, pick it, wash and peel it, then cut it up and put it into some sort of disposable bag, then ship it to each individual who wants it, then require them to own an appliance that likely runs on fossil fuels to get the product out? They could have just shipped bottle of juice to the local supermarket and cut out the machine entirely. The waste would have been less because the bottles would have been recyclable, and they'd own the machines and use them in place in bulk. The shipping would be more sustainable because of the scale of doing all shipping to fewer grocery stores than all their customers (or at least all they hoped to reach eventually). The whole thing is wildly wasteful.
To clarify, I meant sustainable in the context of maintaining a healthy lifestyle, not in their overall manufacturing process and waste output.
> I liked how they made an attempt to promote a sustainable healthy lifestyle, but ultimately there are cheaper alternatives.
That was always a bullshit reverse-engineered marketing spin on their device.
That was always a bullshit reverse-engineered marketing spin on their device.
[deleted]
It was a product solving a problem few people had, at a price point few people could justify for a one-purpose device.
That the founders and the dialogue around it were all aspirational BS just exasperated the problem. It felt like it was constantly pitching a lifestyle very few people have, want or care about.
That the founders and the dialogue around it were all aspirational BS just exasperated the problem. It felt like it was constantly pitching a lifestyle very few people have, want or care about.
The fundamental problem with Juicero (at least as an ambitious startup) is that juice isn't a product with broad appeal, especially after the recent trend against sugary drinks. You could overcome price barriers and other issues if there were some real demand, but I just don't see it.
I thought the fundamental (and well documented) problem with Juicero is that they over-engineered themselves into a product that was far beyond what a consumer would ever pay for a kitchen appliance. Kinda like exactly what the article says.
Consumers will (and do, all the time) spebd $700 or more for kitchen appliances, provided the use of the appliance is expected to provide adequate value to warrant that. The fact that it's a juicer, and that you are locked-in to Juicero packs, is what limits the market, not the fact that it is a “kitchen appliance”.
> The fact that it's a juicer
The biggest problem is Juicero isn't a juicer. Juicero's market was limited because the average customer doesn't want to pay a premium for juice press theater. Shoving juice into packs that are hard for the consumer to access is simply a worse experience than the status quo containers of juice.
The biggest problem is Juicero isn't a juicer. Juicero's market was limited because the average customer doesn't want to pay a premium for juice press theater. Shoving juice into packs that are hard for the consumer to access is simply a worse experience than the status quo containers of juice.
> juice press theater
Yes, this should be their epitaph.
It's actually hopeful in a way. Substance still has sway over style.
Yes, this should be their epitaph.
It's actually hopeful in a way. Substance still has sway over style.
Yep. You can buy a Vitamix for about the same amount of money which is great for making smoothies but also certain soups, adult beverages, etc.
AvE tore one down. It really was well-built. Too much so, really.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ (possibly NSFW for language - use headphones)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ (possibly NSFW for language - use headphones)
No, the fundamental problem with Juicero is that the product was bullshit.
Did you just call pressed veggies and fruits sugary drinks? As in more or less the same as Pepsi? The problem with Juicero is that it was a scam, pure and simple. Overpriced bullshit and awesome profits, at least that was the plan. Thank god it's over. Now we're just waiting for Uber to fold and then maybe we can start actually making a difference, as opposed to spewing bullshit until no one can tell the difference.
> Did you just call pressed veggies and fruits sugary drinks?
Pressed fruits at least, are sugary drinks. Anyone who's calorie conscious is probably wary (as a calorie counter I know I am).
Pressed fruits at least, are sugary drinks. Anyone who's calorie conscious is probably wary (as a calorie counter I know I am).
yup pressing/blending fruits destroys any nutritional value. You're left with basically sugar water. Yes it's "natural sugar", but it's still not the healthy food people make it out to be.
Wouldn't chewing fruit destroy all nutritional value as well, if that were true?
> yup pressing/blending fruits destroys any nutritional value.
Pressing (but not blending) leaves some of the good bits (including bits that mitigate some of the adverse effects of sugars) behind, but it does not destroy the nutritional value, as many of the important micronutrients of the fruit are retained in the juice.
Hyperbole isn't helpful here.
Pressing (but not blending) leaves some of the good bits (including bits that mitigate some of the adverse effects of sugars) behind, but it does not destroy the nutritional value, as many of the important micronutrients of the fruit are retained in the juice.
Hyperbole isn't helpful here.
You're correct, I mixed up pressing and blending. My bad.
Either way - an all fruit diet is not healthy or balanced. And as far as I can tell, whole fruits are still better for your health then pressed/blended/squeezed.
Relevant : https://www.wired.com/2015/04/nobody-can-prove-cold-pressed-...
Either way - an all fruit diet is not healthy or balanced. And as far as I can tell, whole fruits are still better for your health then pressed/blended/squeezed.
Relevant : https://www.wired.com/2015/04/nobody-can-prove-cold-pressed-...
yup pressing/blending fruits destroys any nutritional value
That is utter nonsense.
Yes, whole fruit is healthier than blended fruit or juice. No, that does not mean there is no nutritional value.
That is utter nonsense.
Yes, whole fruit is healthier than blended fruit or juice. No, that does not mean there is no nutritional value.
Why is whole better than blended? Assuming you blend everything that you'd otherwise eat, that is.
My understanding was that blending caused insoluble fibre to be less effective, but I might actually have been wrong about that. I would expect blending however to increase the adsorption speed of fruit sugar and affect blood sugar levels more rapidly, which might be somewhat negative.
It’s certainly not as clear-cut as I thought, and I reckon smoothies are probably still pretty good if you aren’t overdoing it!
It’s certainly not as clear-cut as I thought, and I reckon smoothies are probably still pretty good if you aren’t overdoing it!
Eating them whole is even better. But calling pressed fruit the same thing as the poisonous crap they would rather have us drink isn't helping anyone. It's clearly not the same thing.
Are you saying that sugar is good for you depending on the source? Sugar is terrible for you no matter what. If you have a juice with the juice of say 5 apples is not healthy. That is 5 servings of the sugar with almost 0 of the fiber. It is just as poisonous as a sugary soda or other sugary drink.
Your view on sugar is wrong and quite dangerous.
First, human beings need sugar to survive, yep it's like water, without sugar you die, in particular your muscle and your brain.
There are good and bad sugar, artificial sugar in food and drink sure are terrible for the health, but you also have natural sugar like fructose in fruits, lactose in milk, etc. those are good.
You definitively can not say that apple juice is poisonous like sugary soda.
Those are not the same type of sugar.
First, human beings need sugar to survive, yep it's like water, without sugar you die, in particular your muscle and your brain.
There are good and bad sugar, artificial sugar in food and drink sure are terrible for the health, but you also have natural sugar like fructose in fruits, lactose in milk, etc. those are good.
You definitively can not say that apple juice is poisonous like sugary soda.
Those are not the same type of sugar.
You should qualify what you mean by "artificial sugar" and why you believe those are "bad" and fructose is "good". Sucrose, the most commonly used table sugar and food addictive, is a mix of glucose and fructose, and occurs naturally in plants (like sugar cane).
Who on earth is the "they" that you are referring to here?
PepsiCo and friends, clearly.
> Did you just call pressed veggies and fruits sugary drinks? As in more or less the same as Pepsi?
Well, they didn't make any comparison to Pepsi in their comment, but I 'll go ahead and make that comparison.
12 fl oz of:
* Orange juice: 31.2g of sugar
* Apple juice: 36g of sugar
* Coca-Cola: 39g of sugar
* Pepsi: 41g of sugar
Not the same, but in the ballpark. But iirc, regular Coke and Pepsi aren't growing. Diet Pepsi/Coke are. The brands are also coming up with semi-diet versions, such as "Coca-Cola Life" (17g of sugar).
Well, they didn't make any comparison to Pepsi in their comment, but I 'll go ahead and make that comparison.
12 fl oz of:
* Orange juice: 31.2g of sugar
* Apple juice: 36g of sugar
* Coca-Cola: 39g of sugar
* Pepsi: 41g of sugar
Not the same, but in the ballpark. But iirc, regular Coke and Pepsi aren't growing. Diet Pepsi/Coke are. The brands are also coming up with semi-diet versions, such as "Coca-Cola Life" (17g of sugar).
The diet sodas are getting crushed along with the regular:
http://fortune.com/2017/04/19/coca-cola-pepsi-dr-pepper-soda...
Oh wow, water it is then. Thanks for the correction.
They are though, Juicero being a scam or not (it's not, they shipped at straight forward pricepoints).
Even "traditional" pressed juice companies are starting to see a crunch, as their evangelical customers ("health nuts") are realizing that eating an apple is healthier than pressing 4 of them.
Even "traditional" pressed juice companies are starting to see a crunch, as their evangelical customers ("health nuts") are realizing that eating an apple is healthier than pressing 4 of them.
> The problem with Juicero is that it was a scam, pure and simple.
I'm not sure how you can even make an argument that it was a scam. A stupid business model isn't the same thing as a scam - it was a real product, however ill conceived.
I'm not sure how you can even make an argument that it was a scam. A stupid business model isn't the same thing as a scam - it was a real product, however ill conceived.
I am fully aware that this is business as usual these days, but that doesn't make it any less destructive to society or any less a scam. What you're saying is basically that as long as people fall for it and you don't go to jail it's ok, I don't agree.
There wasn't much fraudulent or dishonest about Juciero. It was overpriced, stupid, and a totally unnecessary luxury item, but that's not the same thing as scamming people.
Apart from the fact that the founders clearly didn't intend to fold the company (removing the malice part of a scam), as a consumer, spending $700 on something that stops functioning nearly immediately is pretty indistinguishable from a scam.
[deleted]
Their failure was in trying to "squeeze" a hardware-as-a-service/recurring revenue model into a device that was better suited as a single purchase appliance.
If you could have just shoved fresh fruit into it, they would have been ok.
But whoever talked investors out of $118M probably also sold everyone on the H-A-A-S model, which didn't quite fit for this product.
If you could have just shoved fresh fruit into it, they would have been ok.
But whoever talked investors out of $118M probably also sold everyone on the H-A-A-S model, which didn't quite fit for this product.
One of the VC-funded businesses we all knew would fail has finally failed, is this an early indicator of a market correction?
I don't think so, because an idea this obviously silly should fail under almost any market conditions.
It's an indicator that the market needs to be more discerning about consumer needs. There is a lot of dry powder waiting to be deployed in the VC industry, so expect to see more specious stuff get funded until LPs decide that they can generate returns elsewhere.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ breakdown of juicer. So fantastically overengineered. Beautiful.
I am a big fan of kitchen gadgets - and there are a few really useful ones around, this product is just odd. Besides the price for the machine and the pods, I fail to see how it adds any value to the process.
If you want really fresh and nutritious drinks, get a high-power blender. Not only do they operate on any fresh fruit and vegetable, they keep all the fiber in the produced drink. So less sugar percentage (especially if you have lots of vegetables in the mix) and vs. eating the fruit directly, the high power mixing helps digesting all nutritients much better than just chewing can.
As a bonus, you can use it for many other cooking tasks (soups, sauces) but also you can do things like blending a good amount of ice with the fruit to get a cold and icy drink and my favorite is just to mis a scoop of natural yoghurt with frozen berries (add sugar, cream, a shot of bourbon to your taste) to instantly get a nice ice-cream like dessert.
(Disclaimer: there are a very few vegetables which should be eaten cooked only, so don't use those for a smoothie, others only in reasonable dosis, so some very basic reading is recommended)
If you want really fresh and nutritious drinks, get a high-power blender. Not only do they operate on any fresh fruit and vegetable, they keep all the fiber in the produced drink. So less sugar percentage (especially if you have lots of vegetables in the mix) and vs. eating the fruit directly, the high power mixing helps digesting all nutritients much better than just chewing can.
As a bonus, you can use it for many other cooking tasks (soups, sauces) but also you can do things like blending a good amount of ice with the fruit to get a cold and icy drink and my favorite is just to mis a scoop of natural yoghurt with frozen berries (add sugar, cream, a shot of bourbon to your taste) to instantly get a nice ice-cream like dessert.
(Disclaimer: there are a very few vegetables which should be eaten cooked only, so don't use those for a smoothie, others only in reasonable dosis, so some very basic reading is recommended)
I simply do not understand the mindset of silicon valley investors. I used to think that perhaps they had some edge that helped them to get behind successful companies, but looking at this -- how much money they raised and from whom -- I think that there are just a bunch of people who have so much money that they can afford to risk throwing it away on something that will not likely succeed.
Can someone watch the video in the article and explain what sort of mindset you have to be in and think that this is a good idea? Perhaps the initial vision was different somehow and the final product does not align with what you thought you were putting your money behind? Is it possible that you see the issues, but have so little faith in consumers not to buy crap that it seems like you'll make a reasonable profit? Maybe there's something you see or know that I don't -- perhaps some sort of shake up in the fruit industry was set to make this a hit only to not meet expectations?
I am now more deeply concerned than ever about the effect that an exploding tech bubble is going to have on our economy.
Can someone watch the video in the article and explain what sort of mindset you have to be in and think that this is a good idea? Perhaps the initial vision was different somehow and the final product does not align with what you thought you were putting your money behind? Is it possible that you see the issues, but have so little faith in consumers not to buy crap that it seems like you'll make a reasonable profit? Maybe there's something you see or know that I don't -- perhaps some sort of shake up in the fruit industry was set to make this a hit only to not meet expectations?
I am now more deeply concerned than ever about the effect that an exploding tech bubble is going to have on our economy.
The answer to this is fairly straightforward: VCs don't actually expect (or need) every investment to be successful, they just need it to have the potential to be huge if everything works out.
Laypeople always seem shocked when a VC-funded company implodes. We should actually be surprised if we didn't see routine flame-outs, as that would mean VCs aren't taking on appropriate quantities of risk for the asset class.
As a final aside: I've lost count of the number of times I've pulled an about-face on businesses I initially thought were stupid -- once I had a chance to talk to the founders and better understand the vision. Many of these seemingly 'dumb' ideas have surprising depth.
Some, granted, are in fact dumber than a box of rocks.
Laypeople always seem shocked when a VC-funded company implodes. We should actually be surprised if we didn't see routine flame-outs, as that would mean VCs aren't taking on appropriate quantities of risk for the asset class.
As a final aside: I've lost count of the number of times I've pulled an about-face on businesses I initially thought were stupid -- once I had a chance to talk to the founders and better understand the vision. Many of these seemingly 'dumb' ideas have surprising depth.
Some, granted, are in fact dumber than a box of rocks.
The reason people are shocked isn't that VCs are willing to take a risk on an idea that appears ridiculous at first blanche, it's that Juicero had 4 rounds of investment before they launched, which amounted to $118.5M. That includes a $70M Series B in 2016-03 which was quickly followed by a $28M Series C one month later. [1]
Few would be surprised by a few million being spent looking for a market fit on a wacky idea, it's the scale and obvious demand to get involved at such a late stage.
[1] https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/juicero#/entity
Few would be surprised by a few million being spent looking for a market fit on a wacky idea, it's the scale and obvious demand to get involved at such a late stage.
[1] https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/juicero#/entity
It's not that a VC company failed, it's that the entire idea looks completely ridiculous from the start.
You could say that same about Soylent as it's simply a Pediasure/Ensure marketed towards hipster 20-somethings. People love drawing the conclusion that superior marketing/design equates to better products.
Often times, if you can make a consumer happy with the experience, they don't care if they're overpaying for a terrible product.
The problem with Juicero is that their user experience laid bare how futile and ridiculous their product was by having consumers manufacture the product themselves.
If the Juicero simply made those juices in a bottle (EVEN IF the nutritional value was lost during bottling) I can see them succeeding based purely on their marketing and people suspending disbelief to support their idea they were being healthy while looking cool.
Often times, if you can make a consumer happy with the experience, they don't care if they're overpaying for a terrible product.
The problem with Juicero is that their user experience laid bare how futile and ridiculous their product was by having consumers manufacture the product themselves.
If the Juicero simply made those juices in a bottle (EVEN IF the nutritional value was lost during bottling) I can see them succeeding based purely on their marketing and people suspending disbelief to support their idea they were being healthy while looking cool.
>The problem with Juicero is that their user experience laid bare how futile and ridiculous their product was by having consumers manufacture the product themselves.
Blue Apron and every other meal kit delivery business sits on the other end of the same road, yet they seem to be doing okay and without the same level of ridicule.
I wonder whether Juicero could have avoided this outcome had they mailed their customers whole fruits and asked them to peel and fill their own juice bags, that way people will not be able to put two and two together to realise that it is just another beverage maker with DRM.
P.S. I remember Juicero being rather well received by the resturant industry as it is fully automated and requires minimal cleanup, so perhaps they marketed to the wrong crowd after all.
Blue Apron and every other meal kit delivery business sits on the other end of the same road, yet they seem to be doing okay and without the same level of ridicule.
I wonder whether Juicero could have avoided this outcome had they mailed their customers whole fruits and asked them to peel and fill their own juice bags, that way people will not be able to put two and two together to realise that it is just another beverage maker with DRM.
P.S. I remember Juicero being rather well received by the resturant industry as it is fully automated and requires minimal cleanup, so perhaps they marketed to the wrong crowd after all.
I agree Blue Apron is equally ridiculous and I totally agree that Juicero marketed to the wrong crowd.
Juicero was too visible in high-standard markets and thus became an easy target. Whereas Blue Apron flew under the critic radar (mostly in Facebook mom feeds) before gaining enough market share for consumers to shrug off ridicule
Juicero was too visible in high-standard markets and thus became an easy target. Whereas Blue Apron flew under the critic radar (mostly in Facebook mom feeds) before gaining enough market share for consumers to shrug off ridicule
As a former blue apron customer I don't think it was ridiculous. I churned when my wife was out of the country. There are still recipes that they sent that I still cook. Now as a business I don't think they will be able to compete with a hybrid solution that amazon/Whole Foods will be able to devise. But I see Juicero as completely different.
A bunch of fresh ingredient shut downs just this year:
https://www.google.com/search?num=20&q=fresh+food+delivery+s...
https://www.google.com/search?num=20&q=fresh+food+delivery+s...
I expect a lot of failures and consolidation in the meal kit business soon, especially if Amazon starts delivering Whole Foods products.
Pediasure/Ensure show that the market that Soylent enters actually exists.
Odwalla/Naked Juice?
For Odwalla/Naked juice:
Do you pay 8 dollars per bottle, need to wait for it to arrive in the mail, pay $400 for the juice press to make it, and get locked into a single product for all of your "fruit juice needs"?
The last 3 words make this all the more stupid.
The last 3 words make this all the more stupid.
You don't need to convince me that juicero was stupid and unnecessary, just saying there's an analogue to gp's example in that there are already fairly expensive ($4/bottle) juices out there showing that there's a market for juice. There are also much more ridiculously priced juices, including, yes, $8 juices. I'm not the target market for those, but they exist at cafes and some other grab and go type places and have for a bit, so there must be at least a small market for overpriced juice.
I'm not sure it's analogous though. It'd be analogous if juicero were selling just another juice bottle ready to drink but maybe mailed to you instead of sold in stores.
What juicero did was sell you an expensive machine to essentially squeeze odwalla bottles for you into a cup... something ludicrous like that.
There may be a market for juice bottles, but juicero wasn't selling juice bottles.
What juicero did was sell you an expensive machine to essentially squeeze odwalla bottles for you into a cup... something ludicrous like that.
There may be a market for juice bottles, but juicero wasn't selling juice bottles.
The problem is a lot of disruptive businesses initially looked "completely ridiculous from the start".
VCs are not idiots, they are probably much more humble than what ordinary people think they are, because any active VC--especially if they're successful--would have run into at least several cases where they passed on a company because they "looked stupid", just to find out that they went on to become wildly successful.
Once you go through this routine several times, you generally learn to appreciate and not immediately discount seemingly stupid ideas. This happens not just to VCs but overall if you live in Silicon Valley.
Since ideas alone aren't enough, the only good measure in my experience is looking at the person who's working on it. And here lies a lot of mistakes VCs make, they just look at some guy who was successful in the past and just think it's safe to bet on them.
To be clear, I also think Juicero was a stupid idea, and I think it was stupid of them to waste so much money upfront instead of starting scrappy, but my point is that there is no such thing as an "absolutely stupid idea". Ideas are contextual.
VCs are not idiots, they are probably much more humble than what ordinary people think they are, because any active VC--especially if they're successful--would have run into at least several cases where they passed on a company because they "looked stupid", just to find out that they went on to become wildly successful.
Once you go through this routine several times, you generally learn to appreciate and not immediately discount seemingly stupid ideas. This happens not just to VCs but overall if you live in Silicon Valley.
Since ideas alone aren't enough, the only good measure in my experience is looking at the person who's working on it. And here lies a lot of mistakes VCs make, they just look at some guy who was successful in the past and just think it's safe to bet on them.
To be clear, I also think Juicero was a stupid idea, and I think it was stupid of them to waste so much money upfront instead of starting scrappy, but my point is that there is no such thing as an "absolutely stupid idea". Ideas are contextual.
You see a juice shop sprout at every corner of your yuppie neighborhood, and you read about the success of Keurig, who married the coffee machine with the consumer-level printer, which allows you to control which consumables go into your machine, and you think that this can somehow be translated to said fresh juice craze.
So I don't think it's completely crazy. But a back-of-the-envelope calculation should have shown that it's probably not a great idea.
So I don't think it's completely crazy. But a back-of-the-envelope calculation should have shown that it's probably not a great idea.
The parallel to Keurig is a key piece of insight.
Investors see "Coffee -> Starbucks -> Kerrig", and think "Juice -> Jamba -> $$$".
Juice is not addictive as caffeine, perhaps that’s why.
Maybe not enough for Juicero, but sugar is addictive. Their 'juices' had a lot of sugar (via fruit) in them.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081210090819.h...
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jan/05/is-sugar-wor...
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081210090819.h...
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jan/05/is-sugar-wor...
It is probably because I can go to the store right now and buy pretty great Odwalla stuff that tastes good and is healthy. However, pre-brewed coffee from a bottle isn’t at the same level as fresh coffee. The point is that there are reasonable substitutes for a Juicero, but coffee at home is something people already make but most people don’t care about making their own juice — and if they were aficionados, they would have a real juicer. Juicero just didn’t make much sense. It wasn’t solving a problem most people had.
Many people make coffee each day and they might even drink juice, but most people drink juice from bottles, so Juicero was solving a problem that didn’t really need solving for the average consumer.
Many people make coffee each day and they might even drink juice, but most people drink juice from bottles, so Juicero was solving a problem that didn’t really need solving for the average consumer.
> It is probably because I can go to the store right now and buy pretty great Odwalla stuff that tastes good and is healthy.
Contrary to popular belief none of that stuff is healthy. It doesn't matter whether it comes from a juicero or from a bottle, it just all contains far too much sugar.
Contrary to popular belief none of that stuff is healthy. It doesn't matter whether it comes from a juicero or from a bottle, it just all contains far too much sugar.
For some reason, people seem to think that eating 40 grams of apple sugar is healthier than eating "sugar cane sugar" or "corn sugar".
IMHO, of you take an apple and extract the fiber and water, you shouldn't be calling that fruit any more.
IMHO, of you take an apple and extract the fiber and water, you shouldn't be calling that fruit any more.
- A capsule coffee machine is way cheaper than an expresso machine.
- Expressos are minimally hard to make correctly, and those capsules are above even the quality of some coffee shops.
- There is a big movement of gourmet coffee that favors high priced drinks with the correct marketing (not perfectly correlated with quality).
None of those seem to apply to Juicero. They may have aimed at the last point, but I don't think it's something you can create on a startup's budget.
- Expressos are minimally hard to make correctly, and those capsules are above even the quality of some coffee shops.
- There is a big movement of gourmet coffee that favors high priced drinks with the correct marketing (not perfectly correlated with quality).
None of those seem to apply to Juicero. They may have aimed at the last point, but I don't think it's something you can create on a startup's budget.
I know what you meant, but the word doesn't have an x in it. Espresso is the correct spelling of the word.
It's espresso, not expresso.
Capsule is far more expensive over the it's lifetime than something like a Gaggia Classic. Capsules aren't anywhere near the quality of coffee shops, unless you're counting Dunkin.
Capsule is far more expensive over the it's lifetime than something like a Gaggia Classic. Capsules aren't anywhere near the quality of coffee shops, unless you're counting Dunkin.
> It's espresso, not expresso.
Nitpick on your nitpick. While the word originated in Italy as espresso and that is mostly what we use in the English-speaking world, expresso is not totally uncommon and it's not necessarily a misspelling or folk-etymological error. French and Portuguese use the expresso variation for instance, and the x spelling is considered 're-latinized'.
Depending on where you live the beverage may have entered your culture via French or Italian influences, perhaps one reason why expresso seems more common in Canada than in the US (though espresso dominates in Canada as well, no doubt helped by the ubiquity of Starbucks).
Nitpick on your nitpick. While the word originated in Italy as espresso and that is mostly what we use in the English-speaking world, expresso is not totally uncommon and it's not necessarily a misspelling or folk-etymological error. French and Portuguese use the expresso variation for instance, and the x spelling is considered 're-latinized'.
Depending on where you live the beverage may have entered your culture via French or Italian influences, perhaps one reason why expresso seems more common in Canada than in the US (though espresso dominates in Canada as well, no doubt helped by the ubiquity of Starbucks).
I think that's giving too much credit - for most it's the same mistake as axe and ask (you a question).
Actually, ANY coffee brewed in a proper machine is going to be better than keurig, even from a Dunkin Donuts. Coffee needs three things to be ok: recently roasted grounds in suffice quantity, hot enough water, and long enough brew time. You can skimp on one of those three and still get barely passable coffee. Fall short of two of those marks and the coffee is crap water. Keurig machines fail at all three. The only redeeming quality of Keurig is a convenient single serving format.
> Capsule is far more expensive over the it's lifetime than something like a Gaggia Classic. Capsules aren't anywhere near the quality of coffee shops, unless you're counting Dunkin.
To add on to this - many offices replace their teas with Keurig capsules as well. This leads to a tea that's much more expensive (capsules are something like 4 or 5 times the cost of a tea bag), dirtier, more complicated and more time consuming to make.
Looking at the popularity of Keurig machines, I'm not surprised people saw potential in Juicero.
To add on to this - many offices replace their teas with Keurig capsules as well. This leads to a tea that's much more expensive (capsules are something like 4 or 5 times the cost of a tea bag), dirtier, more complicated and more time consuming to make.
Looking at the popularity of Keurig machines, I'm not surprised people saw potential in Juicero.
> It's espresso, not expresso.
Portuguese is my first language, and I never even noticed it's written differently in English. Noticed now.
As I said in my gourmet item, it is not something that correlates perfectly with quality. It may correlate better with price than quality. It's a property coffee shares with wine.
Portuguese is my first language, and I never even noticed it's written differently in English. Noticed now.
As I said in my gourmet item, it is not something that correlates perfectly with quality. It may correlate better with price than quality. It's a property coffee shares with wine.
> A capsule coffee machine is way cheaper than an expresso machine.
The cheaper capsule machines are about the same price as the cheaper non-capsule espresso machines.
It's true that the high end of espresso machines goes well above the high end of capsule machines, but that doesn't seem particularly relevant.
The cheaper capsule machines are about the same price as the cheaper non-capsule espresso machines.
It's true that the high end of espresso machines goes well above the high end of capsule machines, but that doesn't seem particularly relevant.
The main price gap is between a capsule machine, and an entry level automatic coffee machine (where you dont have to clean up the mess after each coffee, just empty the grinds every few days). That's the same barrier juicero was going after in my view.
If you look on gumtree (like craigslist here in Australia) by far the most common appliance item by a very large margin are basic juicers. People like the idea, but in practice they go un-used because they're a pain to clean and people can't be bothered.
Best I could tell that was the same idea Juicero was after.
If you look on gumtree (like craigslist here in Australia) by far the most common appliance item by a very large margin are basic juicers. People like the idea, but in practice they go un-used because they're a pain to clean and people can't be bothered.
Best I could tell that was the same idea Juicero was after.
Espresso is are more sensitive to the quality of the beans being used and the evenness of the grind than the machinery. Personally, I don't like most coffee shop espresso - beans are roasted so much they taste burnt and chemical, and any character from the terroir has been lost. For similar reasons, I think most capsule coffee is disgusting.
I get my beans whole, by subscription, grind them myself just before making an espresso. Another advantage of starting from the beans (apart from something that is actually pleasant to drink) is that you can select lots of other brewing methods, whether it's aeropress or moka pot, cafetiere or filter, with different grind levels as appropriate.
Also if you like milk-based coffee products (where the taste of the coffee is far more diluted, and the quality is less relevant), having a steam wand is handy and much better than any attachment I've used on any coffee machine, including Nespresso, and other much more expensive models that do bean to cup.
I get my beans whole, by subscription, grind them myself just before making an espresso. Another advantage of starting from the beans (apart from something that is actually pleasant to drink) is that you can select lots of other brewing methods, whether it's aeropress or moka pot, cafetiere or filter, with different grind levels as appropriate.
Also if you like milk-based coffee products (where the taste of the coffee is far more diluted, and the quality is less relevant), having a steam wand is handy and much better than any attachment I've used on any coffee machine, including Nespresso, and other much more expensive models that do bean to cup.
The thing that troubles me is not that people tried a dumb idea. It's that they spend $120m trying a dumb idea.
That is 100 seed rounds that never happened. Could we have learned the lessons here for less?
I'm gueessing yes; the ridiculously over-engineered [1] juice press is a good sign that efficient use of capital was just not a priority.
[1] https://blog.bolt.io/heres-why-juicero-s-press-is-so-expensi...
That is 100 seed rounds that never happened. Could we have learned the lessons here for less?
I'm gueessing yes; the ridiculously over-engineered [1] juice press is a good sign that efficient use of capital was just not a priority.
[1] https://blog.bolt.io/heres-why-juicero-s-press-is-so-expensi...
I think what makes it frustrating is all the times people with honest good ideas walk out of investor meetings with nothing but empty promises. There doesn't appear to be any specific meritocracy or guidelines in the venture market, not even a chance to make money!
Huh, it's almost like it's not a meritocracy at all!
[deleted]
If "knowing your users" applies to startup success, it should also apply to VC startup success. I think most VCs are simply out of touch and thus don't understand what average consumers want, leading to poor investment decisions like this.
While I agree, I don't think it's the case every VC desires to appeal to the average consumer. Companies ranging from Gucci to Rolls Royce to Tesla have made a good business for themselves knowing what the above average consumers they want to cater to like. Thus VCs, like any company, should be judged as to how well they know their target audience. At their price point, Juicero clearly wasn't wanting to appeal to the average consumer. But they instead missed the mark in appealing to their target market--the wealthier than average.
What I don’t understand is how they flopped after getting so much publicity?
Was the price too high? Didn’t manage to turn PR against them? Was it designed to fail?
I think the product is awesome in every possible way.
The model worked for Nespresso (Kruger or smth in US), printers, dishwashers, Soylent, etc.
Was the price too high? Didn’t manage to turn PR against them? Was it designed to fail?
I think the product is awesome in every possible way.
The model worked for Nespresso (Kruger or smth in US), printers, dishwashers, Soylent, etc.
Soylent? No normal person I have ever met in my life has ever heard of the stuff. Slim Fast — everyone has heard of that, but Soylent? That’s an ultra niche product with little mass market appeal. Is it successful? Sure, but about as successful as a company that produces kits for growing orchids. The whole concept of Soylent is essentually Ensure for Hipsters. Even the name sounds like some kind of cyberpunk cliché.
> Even the name sounds like some kind of cyberpunk cliché.
I'm pretty sure this is a deliberate reference to the specific thing. I'm not sure if I won't end up looking stupid for saying the obvious, but this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green
I'm pretty sure this is a deliberate reference to the specific thing. I'm not sure if I won't end up looking stupid for saying the obvious, but this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green
I know a couple of people that worked at Juicero. The news article that humiliated Juicero came just as they were about to get another round of funding. All of the investors pulled out, so they basically ran out of cash. This is completely due to the negative publicity generated by that one article that went viral. It couldn't have come at a more inopportune time for them, it's almost as if the reporters wanted to do as much damage as possible to the company.
You talk as if the negative press wasn't justified. And as if journalists were supposed to consider a company's convenience when writing about them. And as if investors were such empty vessels that they are blown hither and thither by each thing they read.
If one negative article about your product can kill your company, your problem is not a couple of journalists. It's your product.
If one negative article about your product can kill your company, your problem is not a couple of journalists. It's your product.
Most companies get hard press. This report went viral and shut down the company because it exposed the product as being ridiculous.
Can someone watch the video in the article and explain what sort of mindset you have to be in and think that this is a good idea?
Hate to be glib, but I'm pretty sure it's all about e.g. Redfin and Vanguard, and that there's a sucker born every minute.
Hate to be glib, but I'm pretty sure it's all about e.g. Redfin and Vanguard, and that there's a sucker born every minute.
This investment seemed to me to be in search of the next Dollar Shave Club.
The idea of getting people to subscribe to your product looks really good to your investors these days -- once you get people to start the subscription, they are likely to keep giving you money, even when they don't really want the product anymore because there is some effort in canceling it.
I am NOT saying anything bad about the DSC, I love the commercials, but you have to wonder about a company who's business model is intertwined with subscribing to a product.
I am NOT saying anything bad about the DSC, I love the commercials, but you have to wonder about a company who's business model is intertwined with subscribing to a product.
Subscription model businesses are actually pretty good businesses if you can service a genuine recurring need with a genuinely good product at a reasonable price point.
I order diapers for my kid on a subscription. As a consumer it works great for me since I didn't have any upfront one time cost like $700.
The problem I see with Juicero and its investors is that the machine is not unique, it is redundant, the investors were clearly blinded by the founder's pedigree to overlook the simple clear fact that the machine was not needed and the founder was delusional to think the machine was needed.
I order diapers for my kid on a subscription. As a consumer it works great for me since I didn't have any upfront one time cost like $700.
The problem I see with Juicero and its investors is that the machine is not unique, it is redundant, the investors were clearly blinded by the founder's pedigree to overlook the simple clear fact that the machine was not needed and the founder was delusional to think the machine was needed.
It is a shame that Juicero could not develop a product with a lower price point that could reach a much broader marketplace. With the initial price point they should have clearly seen that their customer pool was going to be smaller than that of a lower cost product.
It seems that they did not have enough time and money to right their ship. It is sad to see a dream die even if you don't agree with the product or business plan.
It seems that they did not have enough time and money to right their ship. It is sad to see a dream die even if you don't agree with the product or business plan.
I think it's more a shame that they didn't actually make a product anyone needed. Just remember that this was a thing actually said about real life humans who can walk and talk and dress themselves:
> One of the investors said they were frustrated with how the company didn’t deliver on the original pitch and that their venture firm wouldn’t have met with Evans if he were hawking bags of juice that didn’t require high-priced hardware. Juicero didn’t broadly disclose to investors or employees that packs can be hand squeezed, said four people with knowledge of the matter.
This was a dumb thing from the jump. Maybe all that money spent on an evenly-pressing juice-o-tron would have been better used almost anywhere else.
> One of the investors said they were frustrated with how the company didn’t deliver on the original pitch and that their venture firm wouldn’t have met with Evans if he were hawking bags of juice that didn’t require high-priced hardware. Juicero didn’t broadly disclose to investors or employees that packs can be hand squeezed, said four people with knowledge of the matter.
This was a dumb thing from the jump. Maybe all that money spent on an evenly-pressing juice-o-tron would have been better used almost anywhere else.
I agree they should have done what they said they would do and should have talked to potential customers before making something that was not wanted or needed. And I do not dispute what you say about the product not being needed. I also agree that the money would have been better used on other companies but personally I think that the employees are the losers here (as are the investors). If the employees truly believed in their product then the employees have worked on something that has gone nowhere. All their work and effort is gone. That cannot be regained. These people are out of work. And for that reason, it is sad.
> It is sad to see a dream die even if you don't agree with the product or business plan.
Why is that sad? They were trying to solve some made-up problem in a way that would have wasted resources and created a lot of waste. They didn't do this to make the world a better place, their goal was to get rich (which isn't immoral by itself), so why should we – as a society or as individuals – be sad that they failed?
Why is that sad? They were trying to solve some made-up problem in a way that would have wasted resources and created a lot of waste. They didn't do this to make the world a better place, their goal was to get rich (which isn't immoral by itself), so why should we – as a society or as individuals – be sad that they failed?
Whatever their motivation, there are employees who had no say in the decisions the founders made who are now out of work. It is sad that the founder and those who make product decisions etc did not think of their employees when they went off in a direction with little hope of success and mainly because they failed to carry out basic business research.
I don't think the price point per se is an issue, people happily pay over 400 for a quality juicer. But the kind of person who does that probably wants the full experience, chopping the vegetables etc. This experience just seems too similar to just buying high quality juice in the shop.
I know this model works for coffee, but there the prefab alternative is not an option.
I know this model works for coffee, but there the prefab alternative is not an option.
I think the "full experience" you speak of is getting fresh juice rather than some pre-oxidized slurry in a bag.
And shame on the VCs for not using their heads. You can't get a half pint of juice out of a pint bag of fruits and veggies.
Which reminds me of my brilliant idea of making fresh squeezed lemonade for our wedding guests. I had to cut a whole 25lb box of lemons in half and then press them into the Kitchen Aid to get about two quarts of juice. It took me hours and a lot of elbow grease to do that.
And shame on the VCs for not using their heads. You can't get a half pint of juice out of a pint bag of fruits and veggies.
Which reminds me of my brilliant idea of making fresh squeezed lemonade for our wedding guests. I had to cut a whole 25lb box of lemons in half and then press them into the Kitchen Aid to get about two quarts of juice. It took me hours and a lot of elbow grease to do that.
Most people I know with juicers also like the fact that they can save money by throwing in fruit or veg before it goes bad. It makes it easier to capture the shopping surplus that otherwise ends up in the trash. The QR-code scanning Juicero basically does the opposite.
I don't think it's about price really. People pay $700 for all sorts of high quality kitchen appliances. But all that was good about the machine was offset by the lock-in, stupid pre-pulped juice packs, DRM, always-on internet, and other user-hostile stuff.
You're right that people may have been able to stomach all that 1984 stuff if the price was low.
You're right that people may have been able to stomach all that 1984 stuff if the price was low.
> It is a shame that Juicero could not develop a product
That's where the period goes.
That's where the period goes.
Juicero has been quoted as saying that they sold "over a million Produce Packs." [1] Does anyone know who bought so many of them? Or how many they would've had to sell to stay in business?
[1] https://www.juicero.com/company-news/
[1] https://www.juicero.com/company-news/
[deleted]
I think this will be a wake-up call for companies like uBeam. For uBeam's case, you can send mechanical energy via ultrasound: true, with very little efficiency. But very few will be interested to buy the device.
[deleted]
Rumor has it that their engineers couldn't concentrate...
Magnificent engineering to solve a stupid non-problem. Sigh.
I hope the writers of "Silicon Valley" were paying attention to this saga. There's some juice left to be squeezed from it.
If anything, I'm surprised they're only laying off 25% of their staff. I have a feeling more lay offs are around the corner.
I'll pick one up in the liquidation sale.
What are you gonna do with it with the the packs? Or you can use it without them too?
Like for what?
I think it was a joke, maybe.
Yeah, it's a pun on the word 'liquidation'.
Yes, it was what passes for a joke attempt on a Friday afternoon.
There are amateurs successfully manufacturing ancient Kodak photographic processes; given that, "insert apples into bag" sounds pretty easy in comparison. The problem is my real juicer juices better than I can likely make this machine juice with homemade bags, and to keep my carb load low, I generally eat pieces of fruit not juices so I'd not use it personally, although its an interesting challenge.
I guess the components. I think the sold the machine at a loss and maybe you could make some profit reselling some components, yet I am not quite sure.
I just secured the purchase of two of these... for $200 to tinker with...
Anyone have any ideas on the DIY project to make from them?
Anyone have any ideas on the DIY project to make from them?
Juice is bad for you anyhow, no matter the price. TOO MUCH SUGAR!
This will be one for the (forgotten) history books!
Oh noooo!! Think of the Juice(ro). What will happen to existing machines once the servers are shut down!? Are we destined return to the days of squeezing juice by hand?
[deleted]
So they got squeezed.
Color me not shocked? The whole premise of this was ridiculous from the start
I guess the juice just wasn't worth the squeeze.
These remind me of the CUE::CAT
Are they shutting down using a super-complicated completely over engineered method of shutting down, or the regular way?
I heard someone was able to shutdown about 98% of a similar company using their bare hands.
But they'd have squishy stuff on all over their hands, wouldn't they?
Only if you accidentally pierce the corporate veil [1], but that's pretty hard for one person to do with their bare hands.
[1]: Much as I hate to explain a pun: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil
[1]: Much as I hate to explain a pun: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil
The ancient Babylonians would shut down companies by burying their executives and employees with clay tablets, which were much more accurate and humane than modern methods.
There was Shutdownify, but now there isn't a trace of it left, aside from news articles about how fake it was.
My gut says that they'd have a lot of repeat customers.
They're starting a web site called GoFireMe.com, to crowd source their layoff packages.
I'm pretty sure there are startups that exist solely to aid the liquidation of other startups.
Drink, drink of the dark nectar of schadenfreude.
I imagine Richard, the owner of Desk Depot, rubbing his hands together and chortling to himself.
https://www.yelp.com/biz/desk-depot-mountain-view
https://www.yelp.com/biz/desk-depot-mountain-view
Nevertheless, I'm sure it'll be done in a pulp-conscious manner despite their feeling the squeeze of such pressing times.
[deleted]
As funny as this thread of jokes was (and it was; I had a good laugh), I don't come to HN for jokes. I come for interesting, deep, and intelligent discussions. I don't find much value in amusing jokes… isn't that what we have Facebook or Reddit for?
Seems like they felt the squeeze after that expose
And now it's time for a liquidation
The early investors are left holding the bag!
They should have scanned the QR code on it first, it would have told them something's rotten in there.
WTF? HN is allowing humor now?
There's a Hacker News subreddit. We should keep all the puns there.
I don't think the expose changed much. They would've died anyway. The product was a joke.
Its been a pressing time for them
Their grapes have soured, but I'm glad I didn't buy one of their lemons ;-)
Please don't.
Noooo!!! :)
Juicero is shutdownero.
Those who funded this will only squeeze their portfolio companies still remaining for a juicier return.
120 million USD in funding and such a spectacular failure because of one article. This whole episode goes on to show the power journalists have. I know the sales number were bad but with so much money the founder could have bought the market or pivoted but with no coming back from the PR disaster the investors most likely just wanted their money back.
Unless their was a serious problem with their product or their team, with 120 million USD, they should have been able to avoid a PR disaster set off by a single article.
Obviously, there are numerous issues with the product itself: no one wants to subscribe to packets of fruit,
especially if those packets are perishable,
especially if they have to buy a six-hundred dollar machine to properly use the packets and to know if they are fresh,
even if you later find out you can just squeeze them with your hands.
I suspect if you dig, and probably not too deep, you'd find issues with the team that tried to make money with this product as well.
There are problems that even $120 million can't fix.
There are problems that even $120 million can't fix.
Shoot the messenger?
They should have went after the convenience store market using the soda dispenser/automated latte/vending machine/icee making business model. Basically convince the store owner to have some refrigerated space dedicated to the pouches and then put the machine nearby for the customer to make their own juice in real time.
I see a Juice company in the SF Ferry Building selling fresh squeezed juice for over $8. If they could have positioned themselves somewhere between that and $2 pasteurized/packaged juice from the grocery store, they could have done very well.
https://www.yelp.com/biz/sow-juice-san-francisco