Lessons I learned from the failure of my first startup, Dinnr(medium.com)
medium.com
Lessons I learned from the failure of my first startup, Dinnr
https://medium.com/@michalbohanes/seven-lessons-i-learned-from-the-failure-of-my-first-startup-dinnr-c166d1cfb8b8
174 comments
Moreover, you don't even need to get to the "testing" step in a lot of cases. Are people going to like your spicy anchovy and cottage cheese pizza topped with ice cream? Answer: no. I didn't have to interact with a single customer to know that. Other ideas are not so obviously bad, but I feel like a lot of these failed startups would not have existed in the first place if the founders had been really honest with themselves.
If you don't have a reasonably strong belief that your idea is going to work, why bother testing it at all? At the least, you should probably try it on a tiny scale first (i.e. on yourself or a few friends) before taking investments, hiring employees, etc.
If you don't have a reasonably strong belief that your idea is going to work, why bother testing it at all? At the least, you should probably try it on a tiny scale first (i.e. on yourself or a few friends) before taking investments, hiring employees, etc.
All of your comment seems to have been covered by the author's article.
Sometimes you get positive feedback at a small scale that doesn't work in a larger sense. That was kinda one of the major points in the article.
Sometimes you get positive feedback at a small scale that doesn't work in a larger sense. That was kinda one of the major points in the article.
It seems to me the best market research is to try your idea with a minimum viable product. In the Dinnr case that I think would be somethig like a website saying "fancy this for dinner we'll deliver it for £25, phone this number", made with some free website builder (wix etc), the bloke with his bike ready to answer the phone, pop to Sainsbury's and deliver stuff, and promotion by mailing their mates on facebook, twitter and the like. Total cost ~0 apart from some time. For feedback they could have phoned any customers a few days later to ask if they liked it. This may have been a better way to start than raising £60k via Seedrs (https://www.seedrs.com/post_investment/9369/round_details/19...) and spending "9 hours a day, 6 days a week, sitting in a cold warehouse in West Acton" perhaps.
I'm half American but have grown up and have been living in German speaking cultures all my life.
I have found that people here simply respond well to a little bit of formal language, so it's not surprising the author would habitually use it. People tend to take it as an implicit promise that you know what you're doing.
You can usually get away with a little semantic trickery though; of course we do market research, we're a serious business after all. It's just that in the startup context, the best way of doing this is trying stuff and actually observing behavior.
When called on the bluff, invent a qualifier: Oh of course market research works differently in the startup context; we call it "highly iterative" market research. (Schnelliterationsmarktforschung).
I have found that people here simply respond well to a little bit of formal language, so it's not surprising the author would habitually use it. People tend to take it as an implicit promise that you know what you're doing.
You can usually get away with a little semantic trickery though; of course we do market research, we're a serious business after all. It's just that in the startup context, the best way of doing this is trying stuff and actually observing behavior.
When called on the bluff, invent a qualifier: Oh of course market research works differently in the startup context; we call it "highly iterative" market research. (Schnelliterationsmarktforschung).
Despite this being common sense...I still find businesses asking me where I heard about them. This is notoriously inaccurate, yet it is relied upon by so many businesses.
The best way to track how customers found you when they call is to use different phone numbers in your marketing. Even in web forms, asking where you heard about me...I bet 50% of your responses are the first choice in the drop down menu.
Customers Lie. Not maliciously...but you can't expect them to understand and respect the importance accurate tracking on your side of the fence is.
The best way to track how customers found you when they call is to use different phone numbers in your marketing. Even in web forms, asking where you heard about me...I bet 50% of your responses are the first choice in the drop down menu.
Customers Lie. Not maliciously...but you can't expect them to understand and respect the importance accurate tracking on your side of the fence is.
In your restaurant and cookie example you have a well defined market. If you're a restaurant you are really a Chinese restaurant, or a Mexican restaurant, or whatever. You have defined your market by type of food and price point.
In a startup all these things are up for grabs. You have much more freedom to experiment, but it is orders of magnitude more expensive to test business models then it is to test cookie recipes. One of these takes months or even years to validate, and one of these takes less than an hour.
"The second thing is that I get the feeling that the author simply haven't explored the huge "product space" between takeaway and ready-to-cook prepackaged ingredients with a recipe at all."
This is very true, but that ties into my point: it's much much harder to do this testing than to test a new recipe. Hence many people try to find a cheaper way to validate ideas, which is what market research is all about.
Now whether the OP did market research well is a different matter. In fact he's quite up-front he didn't. But that doesn't mean well conducted market research in not worthwhile.
In a startup all these things are up for grabs. You have much more freedom to experiment, but it is orders of magnitude more expensive to test business models then it is to test cookie recipes. One of these takes months or even years to validate, and one of these takes less than an hour.
"The second thing is that I get the feeling that the author simply haven't explored the huge "product space" between takeaway and ready-to-cook prepackaged ingredients with a recipe at all."
This is very true, but that ties into my point: it's much much harder to do this testing than to test a new recipe. Hence many people try to find a cheaper way to validate ideas, which is what market research is all about.
Now whether the OP did market research well is a different matter. In fact he's quite up-front he didn't. But that doesn't mean well conducted market research in not worthwhile.
How are the strategies you listed not market research?
It is market research, just not named as such.
I think OP was simply complaining that the article author approached market research academically, throwing common sense out of the window in the process. Classic outsmarting yourself. You don't need to call it market research for it to be effective (the chef probably doesn't).
I think OP was simply complaining that the article author approached market research academically, throwing common sense out of the window in the process. Classic outsmarting yourself. You don't need to call it market research for it to be effective (the chef probably doesn't).
Suppose I got into doing those things, yet I am aware of the "startup" terms for them.
Should I consciously avoid using the jargon (which is really a shortcut way of expressing a longer idea to a familiar audience)? No, rather than giving you a long winded discussion of the steps to getting dressed (or whatever the jargon may be), I'll just say, "I got dressed".
It conveys more information in a shorter frame. Why would someone avoid being compact and expressive to a niche audience?
Should I consciously avoid using the jargon (which is really a shortcut way of expressing a longer idea to a familiar audience)? No, rather than giving you a long winded discussion of the steps to getting dressed (or whatever the jargon may be), I'll just say, "I got dressed".
It conveys more information in a shorter frame. Why would someone avoid being compact and expressive to a niche audience?
I don't understand your getting dressed example. That seems to be cutting to the heart of what actually was done. That's the opposite of jargon.
The problem with jargon is that while it can express abstract purpose or intent (that can otherwise difficult to describe), it's basically meaningless in describing actual actions.
For example, you could say "I was doing market research today." But wtf does that really mean? It sounds smart and like you know what you're doing, but ultimately it's more meaningful to say "I was reading our competitor's website" or "I was asking people on the street if they would buy our product."
Jargon has it's place, but just because you call talking to your friends about your idea "market research" doesn't make it any more useful. I think it's easy to fall into that trap.
The problem with jargon is that while it can express abstract purpose or intent (that can otherwise difficult to describe), it's basically meaningless in describing actual actions.
For example, you could say "I was doing market research today." But wtf does that really mean? It sounds smart and like you know what you're doing, but ultimately it's more meaningful to say "I was reading our competitor's website" or "I was asking people on the street if they would buy our product."
Jargon has it's place, but just because you call talking to your friends about your idea "market research" doesn't make it any more useful. I think it's easy to fall into that trap.
Clothing was def a bad analogy, given my fashion sense (or at least that's what my ex-partner says!)
My point was that jargon has it's place as a shortcut to language. Sure, people use it to sound smart. But it's also a short cut.
Back to the original point, doing "market research" could be very meaningful to people I report to in the context of my job. They don't care what the steps were, exactly, just that I was doing my duty diligence and figuring out what the hell we should sell to whom.
Based on your last graph, I think I agree more than disagree. But I've had very dense, yet brief, conversations with other technical people that could only be brief due to jargon. And non-technical people thought we were b.s.ing each other because they didn't understand the terminology.
But you are definitely correct -- if you want the greatest reward-to-time ratio when learning a field, just learn the jargon first. In fact, even if you want depth of understanding, learn the jargon first. 1) you'll then know what other people are talking about, and 2) you'll be "part of the tribe", and more trusted.
YMMV. For me, learning the language of a culture is just step 1 to communicating with them.
My point was that jargon has it's place as a shortcut to language. Sure, people use it to sound smart. But it's also a short cut.
Back to the original point, doing "market research" could be very meaningful to people I report to in the context of my job. They don't care what the steps were, exactly, just that I was doing my duty diligence and figuring out what the hell we should sell to whom.
Based on your last graph, I think I agree more than disagree. But I've had very dense, yet brief, conversations with other technical people that could only be brief due to jargon. And non-technical people thought we were b.s.ing each other because they didn't understand the terminology.
But you are definitely correct -- if you want the greatest reward-to-time ratio when learning a field, just learn the jargon first. In fact, even if you want depth of understanding, learn the jargon first. 1) you'll then know what other people are talking about, and 2) you'll be "part of the tribe", and more trusted.
YMMV. For me, learning the language of a culture is just step 1 to communicating with them.
How would you recommend doing this if you are just working to set up your kitchen, and to perfect your recipes?
What if you are just learning to cook, and don't have the resources to setup a full kitchen?
A startup is not a 'real' company, writ small. There are tricks to emulate the necessary feedback mechanisms, but your analogy is more appropriate to an operating company.
What if you are just learning to cook, and don't have the resources to setup a full kitchen?
A startup is not a 'real' company, writ small. There are tricks to emulate the necessary feedback mechanisms, but your analogy is more appropriate to an operating company.
Oh - I forgot the must basic thing that both my mum and the cook does: Tasting and eating their own stuff.
This analogy completely misses the huge chasm between a physical outlet where you can actually look at people, talk to them and watch their actual behaviour, vs. a web property (usability tests help to close the gap)
You summed up lean learning methodology very well with the restaurant analogy. You are absolutely right you can't just ask people, 'hey how are we doing', you study the result.
No joke, had someone on my team during startup weekend this weekend that could not let go of market research. It pretty much ruined the mural of the whole team.
What were you guys painting anyways? \s
haha it was my first and last time I attend one of those things.
Post mordems like this make me sad.
Not for the founder's bank account per se, but for the fact that he has all the wrong takeaways from his startup experience.
You started off well. You did the market research. Great. You've clearly gotten people interested in the service. Even better. You demonstrated in your post that a clear-headed approach was taken and you objectively determined people would want your product.
But then ... what ... you just buy a bunch of groceries and think people will just engage with your service? Not once in your start-up debrief do you mention your marketing approach. That's a huge red-flag for me about how you thought about your business.
Lesson 8. Marketing.
I believe this idea would have worked if you had decent marketing. Do I live in England? No. But I still know that the Brits are getting a lot more concerned about health. Even Jamie Oliver with school dinners and other social ventures. It's a sentiment that has cultural traction and I think the idea here is great.
But marketing ... oh yeah that thing:
- What was your overall engagement strategy?
- What genuinely creative concepts did you come up with that would make your service compelling and sexy to your people?
- How did you demonstrate how to use the service?
- How did you make others see the value your market research subjects saw?
- What compelled people to emotionally invest in your company as a consumer?
OP, you're a smart guy - so I'm using your failure as a case-study for a greater trend I see amongst startups around "pain points". Sure, pain points are important. But people forget that marketing, done well, is the creation of pain points.
I believe most startups die because founders don't have a vision beyond the mechanics of the business. It's sad to see post-mortems like these that point the finger back at the idea - which was inspired and had legs. I'm not sure what the marketing strategy was here (OP didn't think it was important enough to tell us), but I'm assuming like most he was happy enough with I-stock artwork and a quirky explainer animation that the public is so thoroughly bored of.
Not for the founder's bank account per se, but for the fact that he has all the wrong takeaways from his startup experience.
You started off well. You did the market research. Great. You've clearly gotten people interested in the service. Even better. You demonstrated in your post that a clear-headed approach was taken and you objectively determined people would want your product.
But then ... what ... you just buy a bunch of groceries and think people will just engage with your service? Not once in your start-up debrief do you mention your marketing approach. That's a huge red-flag for me about how you thought about your business.
Lesson 8. Marketing.
I believe this idea would have worked if you had decent marketing. Do I live in England? No. But I still know that the Brits are getting a lot more concerned about health. Even Jamie Oliver with school dinners and other social ventures. It's a sentiment that has cultural traction and I think the idea here is great.
But marketing ... oh yeah that thing:
- What was your overall engagement strategy?
- What genuinely creative concepts did you come up with that would make your service compelling and sexy to your people?
- How did you demonstrate how to use the service?
- How did you make others see the value your market research subjects saw?
- What compelled people to emotionally invest in your company as a consumer?
OP, you're a smart guy - so I'm using your failure as a case-study for a greater trend I see amongst startups around "pain points". Sure, pain points are important. But people forget that marketing, done well, is the creation of pain points.
I believe most startups die because founders don't have a vision beyond the mechanics of the business. It's sad to see post-mortems like these that point the finger back at the idea - which was inspired and had legs. I'm not sure what the marketing strategy was here (OP didn't think it was important enough to tell us), but I'm assuming like most he was happy enough with I-stock artwork and a quirky explainer animation that the public is so thoroughly bored of.
All the marketing in the world won't make any lasting difference if the product doesn't create value for customers. This product didn't.
[deleted]
Poppycock. This product has worked in similar environments. What's more, Rob found a proven value for it through extensive market research. To me it didn't land because of poor execution on marketing.
I live in London and really don't think the idea was ever going to work.
His market was for people who wanted to cook for themselves, but didn't know where to buy the ingredients.
There are lots of shops, so this really isn't a problem.
His market was for people who wanted to cook for themselves, but didn't know where to buy the ingredients.
There are lots of shops, so this really isn't a problem.
I believe this idea would have worked if you had decent marketing.
I'm not convinced. I am surprised to hear it has worked anywhere.
I'm not a gourmet cook by any stretch, but I do cook most of my own meals. I would never buy fresh ingredients online. Shopping for the ingredients, perusing the choices and selecting "the best" unblemished fruits, vegetables, and meats is part of the experience of cooking. I don't want to have someone else or some robot do it and dump it on my doorstep. When I don't care, I just go to a restaurant, which will be cheaper and faster than a service like this could possibly be.
I'm not convinced. I am surprised to hear it has worked anywhere.
I'm not a gourmet cook by any stretch, but I do cook most of my own meals. I would never buy fresh ingredients online. Shopping for the ingredients, perusing the choices and selecting "the best" unblemished fruits, vegetables, and meats is part of the experience of cooking. I don't want to have someone else or some robot do it and dump it on my doorstep. When I don't care, I just go to a restaurant, which will be cheaper and faster than a service like this could possibly be.
People may want the occasional experience of being a cook, without being super dedicated. It's like getting the occasional riding lesson, but never buying a horse. Horse enthusiasts say that caring for the horse, raising it, selecting a saddle, etc. is an integral part of the experience, and they might be right, but that doesn't stop places from succeeding at offering riding lessons.
I also like to cook, but I buy all my vegetables online anyway. I find the online experience good enough, and the convenience totally worth it. I would probably be an infrequent user of this service.
I also like to cook, but I buy all my vegetables online anyway. I find the online experience good enough, and the convenience totally worth it. I would probably be an infrequent user of this service.
Would you be interested in a service where you could outline a meal plan for say, a week, and then get all the groceries required for those meals? I think the service would be more valuable as something that fusses the traditional on-line grocery shopping experience with this per-meal ingredients offering based off of recipes..
It would also be neat if you could allow people to store customized versions of recipes. Say they like more carrots in a particular soup, etc.
It would also be neat if you could allow people to store customized versions of recipes. Say they like more carrots in a particular soup, etc.
My family uses a service called Green Bean delivery. They deliver fruits, vegetables, and herbs. I don't think they deliver meats yet. We were a little worried that we wouldn't be selecting the fruits and vegetables ourselves but they have excellent quality control. We've never been disappointed with a delivery.
The thing is, they do it right. Once they get the orders, they go directly to the farms and get exactly what they need for delivery each day. That way they never have to deal with spoilage. And they can be picky about the product they buy and later deliver to their customers. And to top it all off, they offer free delivery and are still usually cheaper than shopping at the grocery store. I believe this is profitable for them because they don't have to deal with spoilage.
The thing is, they do it right. Once they get the orders, they go directly to the farms and get exactly what they need for delivery each day. That way they never have to deal with spoilage. And they can be picky about the product they buy and later deliver to their customers. And to top it all off, they offer free delivery and are still usually cheaper than shopping at the grocery store. I believe this is profitable for them because they don't have to deal with spoilage.
One of Dinnr's selling points was same day or next day delivery. I think that sort of just-in-time direct from farmer delivery model would have required longer lead times between receiving and fulfilling orders.
For many people that is part of a lifestyle choice, and they tend to live in places where that shopping is easily accessible. Personally, I can do that whilst walking home from work.
I don't believe it's coincidental that the delivery service worked in the least densely populated part of Europe.
I don't believe it's coincidental that the delivery service worked in the least densely populated part of Europe.
"People forget that marketing, done well, is the creation of pain points." --l33tbro
I like that.
I like that.
My exact thoughts as I read through this post-mortem. I don't see this, nor do I see any service of this type, as something I would use everyday. However, I can imagine a scenario when my parents or friends come into town and I want to stay in with a home-cooked meal, and catch up, but don't have the time to select the dishes nor shop for the ingredients.
Did they ever attempt to position it in this way? How did they position it? The answers to these questions would be of equal value to all the other information provided.
Did they ever attempt to position it in this way? How did they position it? The answers to these questions would be of equal value to all the other information provided.
It's a bad idea for founders to be doing their own market research. The prevailing advice from "startup gurus" like Steve Blank is that you must "get out of the building" and talk to customers face-to-face. Here's the problem with that advice (as Dinnr found out):
1. Very few people will tell a founder their idea is bad right in front of them; and
2. Founders suffer from the worst case of confirmation bias ever. They are only looking for positive signs that their idea is good.
There are ways around this error if you know market research methods well enough, but unfortunately the prevailing wisdom in the startup community is the only way to do thorough market research is for the founders to "get out of the building" and do in-person interviews.
It's refreshing to see articles like this where the founder realized their errors and didn't just outright blame the process of market research.
1. Very few people will tell a founder their idea is bad right in front of them; and
2. Founders suffer from the worst case of confirmation bias ever. They are only looking for positive signs that their idea is good.
There are ways around this error if you know market research methods well enough, but unfortunately the prevailing wisdom in the startup community is the only way to do thorough market research is for the founders to "get out of the building" and do in-person interviews.
It's refreshing to see articles like this where the founder realized their errors and didn't just outright blame the process of market research.
It's for reason #1 that for all support and followup emails I sign my emails as coming from "Developer Support", despite being the founder.
I've gotten some great feedback from customers 'venting at the support guy' that I don't think I would have if they knew I was actually the founder.
I've gotten some great feedback from customers 'venting at the support guy' that I don't think I would have if they knew I was actually the founder.
Thank you. Market research is a formal practice performed by trained professionals with experience in (among other things) framing the questions correctly and interpreting the responses. It's not something you can replace with surveymonkey and a few ad-hoc interviews.
Very valid points and I believe Stave Blank addresses these by stating the users decide with their wallets. This is a key part of his strategy on model validation. The early customers have to sign up. He's even against tu I g early customers discount.
> even if your company isn’t tech-heavy (such as Dinnr).
I feel like this would be a giant red flag to me. You are essentially a logistics startup, and you believe this is not "tech-heavy". Logistics is likely one of the most complicated tech-heavy problems being solved right now.
Things like pricing(30% margins in grocery food sounds very high), recommendations etc. Was there ever a way for food bloggers to have their recipes automatically pulled into Dinnr for readers to purchase?
This is almost a 100% tech company. I wonder how much of underestimating that, combined with the founders possible(I'm guessing) lack of tech knowledge contributed to the failure.
I feel like this would be a giant red flag to me. You are essentially a logistics startup, and you believe this is not "tech-heavy". Logistics is likely one of the most complicated tech-heavy problems being solved right now.
Things like pricing(30% margins in grocery food sounds very high), recommendations etc. Was there ever a way for food bloggers to have their recipes automatically pulled into Dinnr for readers to purchase?
This is almost a 100% tech company. I wonder how much of underestimating that, combined with the founders possible(I'm guessing) lack of tech knowledge contributed to the failure.
> This is almost a 100% tech company. I wonder how much of underestimating that, combined with the founders possible(I'm guessing) lack of tech knowledge contributed to the failure.
I think you are right about logistics being tech-heavy. But, I also do not think that having more knowledege/understanding of tech would have "saved" Dinnr. The tech and logistics (i.e., not being able to scale, fill orders, etc.) were not what did them in – lack of customers/market is what seems to have done them in and I do not think tech alone would solve that problem.
I think you are right about logistics being tech-heavy. But, I also do not think that having more knowledege/understanding of tech would have "saved" Dinnr. The tech and logistics (i.e., not being able to scale, fill orders, etc.) were not what did them in – lack of customers/market is what seems to have done them in and I do not think tech alone would solve that problem.
I do not agree - they never even got close to the point of this being a tech heavy logistics play. 26 order on v-day does not require much tech. Maybe some paper and pencil and a spreadsheet if you feel so inclined.
I agree that if he got a ton of orders and had the market excited for it - he might have failed from a logistics problem of not being able to serve the customer effectively, killing the brand.
Based on the post, I would guess not very much. It mostly sounded like they were unable to get people to pay for their service, not that they had problems fulfilling the orders they did receive and at their scale (23 orders on Valentines Day), I doubt a super sophisticated pricing algorithm would have helped.
This would maybe be a "100% tech company" operating at the scale of say Amazon. Over-engineering the technology would have been a huge waste of time and resources.
This would maybe be a "100% tech company" operating at the scale of say Amazon. Over-engineering the technology would have been a huge waste of time and resources.
Sorry, but no it isn't a 100% tech company. It, like many many others, are actually service companies that are using technology as a means of implementation. Understanding that separation is critical.
Should they have outsourced their development? Absolutely not, but only because they needed to iterate in order to find what makes the service useful for their customer base.
Should they have outsourced their development? Absolutely not, but only because they needed to iterate in order to find what makes the service useful for their customer base.
I think this is probably wrong; it's part of the playbook of early logistics companies that they can start with an Excel spreadsheet. What's important is that you find a market. ZeroCater seems to have found one, but Dinnr chose a value proposition that was way too niche-y to succeed.
This seems like a fairly easy idea to test without any capital investment but a bike and a landing page.
1. Throw up landing page explaining service
2. Have people put in orders via email or form submission
3. Ride bike to grocery and deliver items
4. Collect cash or use Square upon delivery
Market test complete. Failure with minimal $ committed.
It worries me that an idea that could be done for so little capital is able to raise money. These are heady times.
Question to OP: did you ever consider targeting caregivers who would like to cook for their loved ones but can't leave the house for significant periods?
1. Throw up landing page explaining service
2. Have people put in orders via email or form submission
3. Ride bike to grocery and deliver items
4. Collect cash or use Square upon delivery
Market test complete. Failure with minimal $ committed.
It worries me that an idea that could be done for so little capital is able to raise money. These are heady times.
Question to OP: did you ever consider targeting caregivers who would like to cook for their loved ones but can't leave the house for significant periods?
This is the common advice I've seen for being lean but step #2 is really hard. How do you get people to put in orders on a brand new webpage? It's far from trivial to get an audience for your landing page and kind of goes against lean to throw 5k in ad money to validate something. Who has that kind of money to throw around?
Another thought, to prove the concept, spend $20 to print flyers, stand out at the grocery and explain to people what you're doing. If after awhile no one is hitting the page and placing an order, then maybe you need to rethink your idea.
Facebook laser targeted ads work wonders here if done correctly:
> UK, London, Single Men/Women, Interest:cooking, TV shows: Biggest loser or Hells Kitchen.
> Then send them to Landing Page.
> UK, London, Single Men/Women, Interest:cooking, TV shows: Biggest loser or Hells Kitchen.
> Then send them to Landing Page.
step #2 is the absolute hardest part. If you can't figure out #2 then why invest in staff, logistics, a refrigerator...? The idea is to only focus on traction(#2). If you can't get traction then you don't have anything.
I agree but I can't help but think a subscription model would have benefited this service. Require people to buy 1 meal a week/month, try to automate it, reduce friction from the user's process of meal planning; these are things that may have actually gone the extra mile for the user + increased orders.
Granted they may have tried this
Granted they may have tried this
I like post-mortems but I vehemently disagree with the author's approach of trying to draw more general conclusions, to appeal to a startup audience.
What specifically happened? What were the recipes like?
Did anyone like the food?
Your experience is the most valuable thing you gain from a failed experiement. I urge you not to try to distill it into business platitudes. Be specific and descriptive!
What specifically happened? What were the recipes like?
Did anyone like the food?
Your experience is the most valuable thing you gain from a failed experiement. I urge you not to try to distill it into business platitudes. Be specific and descriptive!
> b) People are too optimistic about their future behaviour.
I read about a focus group once where a company was asking consumers about different color tea kettles. They had tea kettles in a dozen colors and asked people which one they would purchase. The responses were split fairly evenly among all the different colors. At the end of the day, the people who participated in the focus group were allowed to take home one of the tea kettles for free. Almost all of them chose white or black.
I read about a focus group once where a company was asking consumers about different color tea kettles. They had tea kettles in a dozen colors and asked people which one they would purchase. The responses were split fairly evenly among all the different colors. At the end of the day, the people who participated in the focus group were allowed to take home one of the tea kettles for free. Almost all of them chose white or black.
Nice story. Do you have the source to read it up?
I definitely read this story as well. It is possible it was in Robert Cialdini's book, "Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion." I may be wrong, but either way it is a must read book.
I wish I did, I've spent hours trying to find it again. If anyone could link to the study I'd be eternally grateful.
Hi all, I am the author of this post. Thank you very much for your comments, some of which were really thought-provoking. I will address them in a separate blog post when I find the time, probably next weekend. @mbohanes
waving goodbye to my 82 HN points with this one
Dude, you're obsessed with being a founder, more than you have vision/plan/reason/skill to actually be one. You have all of the lingo right, all of the right words, hell, your post here even knows how to speak to why you failed in a voice that will get the rest of this community to read it. Your company name even had an "r" at the end with a missing vowel!
Reading your article, like many others before me, I was annoyed at first but thought, you know, maybe this is just another young wantrepenuer who needed to learn for himself...
Then I saw this response. "I will address your comments in a blog post". Really? Look at the great posters/founders that come in here and respond to comments. They do so comment by comment, to the point where sometimes I wonder how they've got the time and then remember how much I cared when I was trying to do my own thing and know I'd have done the same. Do you really think we're all waiting with baited breath to see your next blog post? Think it'll get upvoted too? Not likely. Something cool with security/lisp/new tech x/can't believe someone just did y/PG's thoughts on life/3D 2048 MMORPG will drown it in seconds.
I'm not saying to quit, you're terrible, or anything like that. Just start being real, stop thinking about your presence, funding, seeding round 22, or whatever, and get to building something actually awesome, and you'll have the startup ecosystem banging your door down. The rest just makes you look hungry to be something you're not.
Dude, you're obsessed with being a founder, more than you have vision/plan/reason/skill to actually be one. You have all of the lingo right, all of the right words, hell, your post here even knows how to speak to why you failed in a voice that will get the rest of this community to read it. Your company name even had an "r" at the end with a missing vowel!
Reading your article, like many others before me, I was annoyed at first but thought, you know, maybe this is just another young wantrepenuer who needed to learn for himself...
Then I saw this response. "I will address your comments in a blog post". Really? Look at the great posters/founders that come in here and respond to comments. They do so comment by comment, to the point where sometimes I wonder how they've got the time and then remember how much I cared when I was trying to do my own thing and know I'd have done the same. Do you really think we're all waiting with baited breath to see your next blog post? Think it'll get upvoted too? Not likely. Something cool with security/lisp/new tech x/can't believe someone just did y/PG's thoughts on life/3D 2048 MMORPG will drown it in seconds.
I'm not saying to quit, you're terrible, or anything like that. Just start being real, stop thinking about your presence, funding, seeding round 22, or whatever, and get to building something actually awesome, and you'll have the startup ecosystem banging your door down. The rest just makes you look hungry to be something you're not.
Wow, I think that's quite a low blow in response to what I found to be an honest and introspective post. And what's wrong with commenting in a new blog post? So what if it doesn't get upvoted, that just means that he won't get exposed to another round of this.
Yeah I agree. Everyone has different schedules and ways to do things. It's a better experience for me to read it as a well thought out response than individual comments sometimes.
Amazingly negative comments on this. How interesting. I thought the post has value, even if they are mistakes that people make over and over... which is interesting, to my mind, and means I should try extra hard to not fall prey to them. It seems like that's easier said than done however, no matter how "obvious" and "simple" it is...
I was also genuinely shocked by how negative the feedback here was.
I almost feel like these negative comments are coming from founders who feel like frauds on the inside and need to call out others as frauds to elevate themselves and their own egos.
Here's the truth. This guy took a shot. That makes him more entrepreneurial than 99% of the folks out there! Did he make mistakes. Yes. Could they have been avoided. Probably.
But... he took a shot. He who fails the most, succeeds! You only need one success.
I almost feel like these negative comments are coming from founders who feel like frauds on the inside and need to call out others as frauds to elevate themselves and their own egos.
Here's the truth. This guy took a shot. That makes him more entrepreneurial than 99% of the folks out there! Did he make mistakes. Yes. Could they have been avoided. Probably.
But... he took a shot. He who fails the most, succeeds! You only need one success.
This post links to an e-book by @robfitz called _The Mom Test_, which I hadn't known about before. It's fantastic and totally worth the price; also, that guy can write. I can see so much of my own bad pitching in the "how not to do it" examples he gives.
I've met Rob in London. Good guy and his thesis is spot on (both in the book and outside of it).
How do you know that book is "fantastic and totally worth the price" if you hadn't known about it before? Have you purchased and read it in the day between reading the article and writing your comment?
I don't understand your question, but I think the answer might be: yes, obviously, I found out about the book, bought it, read it, and liked it.
You write "which I hadn't known about before". I suppose it depends on what you refer to as "before". I assume it means before you read the article.
The other alternative is that it was not the book which you hadn't known about before - but rather that the article had the link to the book .... but in this case, what does "before" refer to? Did you submit another comment earlier in the thread?
The other alternative is that it was not the book which you hadn't known about before - but rather that the article had the link to the book .... but in this case, what does "before" refer to? Did you submit another comment earlier in the thread?
Well, the most logical reading of the grandparent is that he hadn't heard of the book before seeing the article, purchased and read it, and then submitted the above comment. Some people are fast readers :)
Thanks for writing it up. Processing what went wrong will lead you to better opportunities up ahead.
Interesting though on #5: "As one of my first investors later told me, you must have developers on your core team in the same room."
I think this is never the guess and am surprised when some startups take their devs offshore.
Interesting though on #5: "As one of my first investors later told me, you must have developers on your core team in the same room."
I think this is never the guess and am surprised when some startups take their devs offshore.
I'm not the blog author, I just saw this and thought it was an interesting story to share.
"I will try not to go too much into the Dinnr specifics. Most of the readers of this post will not be interested in Dinnr itself."
It's actualy the interesting part. Advices or lessons don't have a lot of value without context.
It's actualy the interesting part. Advices or lessons don't have a lot of value without context.
Maybe I missed it, but I wonder what their pricing was like, in particular.
edit: never mind, I found http://meatinabox.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/dinnr-a-review/ and it suggests it was in the $20-25/person/meal. That seems steep... I see other reviews (they did a nice job getting reviews and getting good search placement with them) saying 22GBP for an entree for 2, and 12GBP for an app for 2.
edit: never mind, I found http://meatinabox.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/dinnr-a-review/ and it suggests it was in the $20-25/person/meal. That seems steep... I see other reviews (they did a nice job getting reviews and getting good search placement with them) saying 22GBP for an entree for 2, and 12GBP for an app for 2.
Yeah, I feel his conclusion was that the idea was bad by itself and blame people to be nice with him. But, maybe, it was the execution which was bad. Like crappy recipes with crappy ingredients and a poor experience.
> No way it would be an investment that would give investors a 10x return.
I think this kind of expectations ruin good business ideas.
A thing like Dinnr may have worked well if run for years, not just tested out for 18 months. It may have not produced a 10x return, but it may have been enough for four people to live on and, maybe, then expand to another city and have four other people live working at Dinnr 2.
I think this kind of expectations ruin good business ideas.
A thing like Dinnr may have worked well if run for years, not just tested out for 18 months. It may have not produced a 10x return, but it may have been enough for four people to live on and, maybe, then expand to another city and have four other people live working at Dinnr 2.
Maybe, but if it was your money paying their salaries, would you pay them to find out if it works on year 2?
This is probably another lesson: if your business isn't worth investing in for two years to look for growth, it's probably not worth investing for one either. Most real businesses start extremely small, and grow over a span of 3-5 years. Expecting a business to boom immediately is yet another symptom of misguided startup expectations.
I'm sorry to hear all the "psh...of course it didn't work. he should have done this and that's!".
I thought this was an interesting read. Armchair after-the-fact analysis when you weren't the one involved (which can cloud judgement) is pretty easy.
Thanks to the author for taking the time to write up his experiences.
I thought this was an interesting read. Armchair after-the-fact analysis when you weren't the one involved (which can cloud judgement) is pretty easy.
Thanks to the author for taking the time to write up his experiences.
Count me among the many wondering if the correct lessons were learned. I still have the feeling that the basic concept is OK and that the execution was lousy. He needed 10 very good, easy-to-provide/make recipes at a decent price point. And then market/sell the bejeezus out of it.
"Having such detailed feedback wouldn’t require diving into the data, but having someone spend an hour stress-testing my thinking and assumptions would have been gold dust and could have prevented a lot of effort wasted."
Hrm... I get asked (on occasion) to do this sort of 'stress test' on someone's idea - and usually they don't want to hear the negatives anyway. Sometimes it can morph a not-great idea in to a better/great one, but sometimes the reality is "this should be dropped". I wonder if the author had actually received some of that hyper-critical thinking on dinnr earlier, and the feedback was "this is bad, don't do it", if he'd still pressed on or not.
Hrm... I get asked (on occasion) to do this sort of 'stress test' on someone's idea - and usually they don't want to hear the negatives anyway. Sometimes it can morph a not-great idea in to a better/great one, but sometimes the reality is "this should be dropped". I wonder if the author had actually received some of that hyper-critical thinking on dinnr earlier, and the feedback was "this is bad, don't do it", if he'd still pressed on or not.
I see this all the time with the startup founders I work with. It's a version of the IKEA effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IKEA_effect).
Many founders (myself included) find it difficult to scrap an idea they have created and are emotionally attached to, even after seeing strong evidence to the contrary.
I often wonder if YC has seen better results from teams that were accepted without an idea (granted, it's likely a much smaller sample size to work from). I wonder if that somehow makes them less susceptible to this tendency for founders to place a disproportionately high value on the quality of their idea(s), allowing them to focus more broadly on markets and identifying real problems to solve.
Many founders (myself included) find it difficult to scrap an idea they have created and are emotionally attached to, even after seeing strong evidence to the contrary.
I often wonder if YC has seen better results from teams that were accepted without an idea (granted, it's likely a much smaller sample size to work from). I wonder if that somehow makes them less susceptible to this tendency for founders to place a disproportionately high value on the quality of their idea(s), allowing them to focus more broadly on markets and identifying real problems to solve.
Absolutely, and mirrors my experience. It seems the more the stress test shows big flaws in the idea, the more the founders want to retrench down to "you just don't understand how great our idea is and how infallible we are". At some level, it's the fundamental nature of entrepreneurship to soldier on when everyone counts you out, but more often than not, fundamentals are fundamentals and maybe you should pay attention to them.
> I really would have needed a critic who said:
> “Look, you have the following problems:
> 1. Show me your market research.
> 2. You do realize there’s no comprehensive online supermarket in Sweden, right?
> 3. What are your assumptions about the customer’s problem?
Yeah, after trying, I've found it's very difficult to get people to listen to this kind of advice and give it the weight it deserves. I feel like most would-be entrepreneurs either can already think in this manner themselves and so don't need me or anyone else to do it for them or are destined to learn how, expensively.
Yeah, after trying, I've found it's very difficult to get people to listen to this kind of advice and give it the weight it deserves. I feel like most would-be entrepreneurs either can already think in this manner themselves and so don't need me or anyone else to do it for them or are destined to learn how, expensively.
For "would-be entrepreneurs", can we substitute "people"? Is it the case that all people are either already self-critical, or immune to external criticism? That strikes me as a pattern i see a lot.
From what I've gathered the problem is one of comfort. The state of mind that got them in the mood to build something is completely orthogonal to the state of mind they need to make that something grow and be successful. Plus it involves a lot more consideration than just 'getting out there and doing stuff'.
So when you bring up all this other stuff, you're messing with their flow, breaking them out of their comfort zone, killing their buzz. You become that weird guy who's always telling them no, the more you try to impress upon them the need to critically analyze what they're trying to do, and to keep doing it as time goes on and they make limited progress.
There is that rare breed of "person", as you want to put it, that can sustain a critical dialogue about themselves, but these people won't need you to do it for them.
So when you bring up all this other stuff, you're messing with their flow, breaking them out of their comfort zone, killing their buzz. You become that weird guy who's always telling them no, the more you try to impress upon them the need to critically analyze what they're trying to do, and to keep doing it as time goes on and they make limited progress.
There is that rare breed of "person", as you want to put it, that can sustain a critical dialogue about themselves, but these people won't need you to do it for them.
An entrepreneur in New Zealand created such a service in March 2013. It's now worth $27m and is expanding into Australia.
http://www.brw.com.au/p/business/mid-market/how_frustrated_c...
http://www.myfoodbag.co.nz/
http://www.brw.com.au/p/business/mid-market/how_frustrated_c...
http://www.myfoodbag.co.nz/
HelloFresh is doing pretty much the same as well:
http://www.pehub.com/2013/09/berlin-based-food-site-hellofre...
I signed up in Australia when they were doing a 50% off promo, figuring on getting a cheap box of groceries and then cancelling immediately. My wife loved it and now we're paying full price.
Also, I found this bit about their target market weird:
urban professionals, couples without kids or with one baby max
Urban professionals without kids have time to shop. It's families with young kids that don't!
http://www.pehub.com/2013/09/berlin-based-food-site-hellofre...
I signed up in Australia when they were doing a 50% off promo, figuring on getting a cheap box of groceries and then cancelling immediately. My wife loved it and now we're paying full price.
Also, I found this bit about their target market weird:
urban professionals, couples without kids or with one baby max
Urban professionals without kids have time to shop. It's families with young kids that don't!
It's not only a matter of time, but taking your children to the store can also be an exercise in continuously saying no.
From "Creativity, Inc." (fantastic book), this quote: "Give a good idea to a mediocre team, and they will screw it up. But give a mediocre idea to a great team, and they will either fix it or come up with something better."
Seems like it could of worked..
Something I see missing from a lot of these startup discussions are the ideas of identity and community.
Sure, "solving a problem" is important. But Nike isn't solving a problem that other shoe companies haven't solved a thousand times over. The reason they're successful is that buying into their brand makes you part of a bigger community, and that community has a positive identity attached to it.
Same thing with a startup like Exposure (https://exposure.co/). Sure, the product is great, but they're also fostering a community and projecting a very specific image. Without that special "something" they'd be no different from Flickr or the countless other photo sharing services out there.
This brings me to Dinnr. Did you try to grow a community of passionate members organically by writing a blog, hosting events, being active on forums like whatever the Hacker News for cooking is?
Or did you just try to "solve a problem"?
Sure, "solving a problem" is important. But Nike isn't solving a problem that other shoe companies haven't solved a thousand times over. The reason they're successful is that buying into their brand makes you part of a bigger community, and that community has a positive identity attached to it.
Same thing with a startup like Exposure (https://exposure.co/). Sure, the product is great, but they're also fostering a community and projecting a very specific image. Without that special "something" they'd be no different from Flickr or the countless other photo sharing services out there.
This brings me to Dinnr. Did you try to grow a community of passionate members organically by writing a blog, hosting events, being active on forums like whatever the Hacker News for cooking is?
Or did you just try to "solve a problem"?
> Or did you just try to "solve a problem"?
This comment misses the point. The first goal of a startup should be to solve a problem. Companies identify problems and offer solutions to customers. If you've started a company without having identified and solved a problem a lot of people face, you've already failed as a business. Trying to organize a "community of passionate members" should be considered incidental, particularly considering that the overwhelming majority of successful companies (particularly young ones) have no organized "passionate" community whatsoever. You don't need to spend your free time hosting events to rally people around your brand identity if your product is legitimately good and useful -- and if your product is legitimately good and useful you'll attract brand loyalty organically anyway. Trying to do this in the opposite order by attempting to bind people to a brand that hasn't proven its worth and doesn't actually do anything worthwhile is going to be futile.
This comment misses the point. The first goal of a startup should be to solve a problem. Companies identify problems and offer solutions to customers. If you've started a company without having identified and solved a problem a lot of people face, you've already failed as a business. Trying to organize a "community of passionate members" should be considered incidental, particularly considering that the overwhelming majority of successful companies (particularly young ones) have no organized "passionate" community whatsoever. You don't need to spend your free time hosting events to rally people around your brand identity if your product is legitimately good and useful -- and if your product is legitimately good and useful you'll attract brand loyalty organically anyway. Trying to do this in the opposite order by attempting to bind people to a brand that hasn't proven its worth and doesn't actually do anything worthwhile is going to be futile.
Well, there are countless successful products that don't "solve a problem". What problem do Call of Duty or League of Legends solve? What "problem" would the hypothetical iWatch solve?
In other words, solving problems is great and all, but you can also make a great product that people just enjoy using, and let it grow organically.
Of course, you could argue that any good product does solve a problem. But my point is that despite what everybody says, the problem doesn't always have to be the starting point.
In other words, solving problems is great and all, but you can also make a great product that people just enjoy using, and let it grow organically.
Of course, you could argue that any good product does solve a problem. But my point is that despite what everybody says, the problem doesn't always have to be the starting point.
of course all of duty solves a problem: entertainment
also why would people use a product they enjoy that doesn't solve a problem?
also why would people use a product they enjoy that doesn't solve a problem?
Nike definitely solves a problem...A big one... called, "Identity."
The functional problem it solves as a shoe may not need solving, but indentifying with a brand, culture and community is a much more powerful need than protection for feet.
If you really think about it...Pain points are primarily emotion driven and solutions need to solve the emotional point much more than the functional one. (the functional point is just the ante to play the game.)
The functional problem it solves as a shoe may not need solving, but indentifying with a brand, culture and community is a much more powerful need than protection for feet.
If you really think about it...Pain points are primarily emotion driven and solutions need to solve the emotional point much more than the functional one. (the functional point is just the ante to play the game.)
Looks like Blue Apron is doing much better with the same idea in the USA - according to CrunchBase they raised $50M in round C several months ago (http://www.crunchbase.com/organization/blue-apron).
Uh so the author ventures the hypothesis, that no one used his product because there was no demand. Can I venture a second hypothesis? No one used his product because it was too expensive? How much did things cost and how did dinnr experiment with pricing?
This is only one level removed from what munchery does and I actually would pay for this service if it was in SF and they also offered on premise cooking lessons or something along those lines. This is still in my opinion a pretty good idea and has wings.
On premise cooking lessons is not something that can scale / can be implemented easy. It also comes with a whole bunch of problems (letting a stranger into your home / kitchen while you are there, etc)
It's quite normal for the rich in the UK - as opposed to the merely middle class - to hire a personal cook to live on or near the premises and work full-time.
These people used to be called 'house keepers'. Some of them offer other domestic services and may be called 'butlers.'
That aside - there are some useful reality checks in the piece.
Back around 2000 I had a conversation with someone who was trying to launch a pickup-your-goods service for online shoppers. He said that out of everyone he'd talked to, I was the only person who told him it was a losing idea with no commercial prospects. (It sank without trace not long after the first dotcom bust. After about a decade of unstoppable brand building, Amazon eventually reinvented something not unlike it.)
It's interesting that he had the same experience of alleged market research and comments from prospective customers that gave him totally worthless and misleading information.
These people used to be called 'house keepers'. Some of them offer other domestic services and may be called 'butlers.'
That aside - there are some useful reality checks in the piece.
Back around 2000 I had a conversation with someone who was trying to launch a pickup-your-goods service for online shoppers. He said that out of everyone he'd talked to, I was the only person who told him it was a losing idea with no commercial prospects. (It sank without trace not long after the first dotcom bust. After about a decade of unstoppable brand building, Amazon eventually reinvented something not unlike it.)
It's interesting that he had the same experience of alleged market research and comments from prospective customers that gave him totally worthless and misleading information.
It doesn't have to be at your house. It can be at a dedicated location which does scale.
Doesn't that business already exist, and isn't it called "cooking classes"? Near as I can tell, none of them are drowning in cash. People generally figure out how to cook on their own.
This gets into one of the points the post made: you need to verify that people actually prioritize the problem you want to solve.
Cooking might fall into an uncomfortable crack, in this model, because the people most receptive to the benefits of a home-cooked meal with greater variety and quality ingredients are also disproportionally likely to be DIY cooks.
This gets into one of the points the post made: you need to verify that people actually prioritize the problem you want to solve.
Cooking might fall into an uncomfortable crack, in this model, because the people most receptive to the benefits of a home-cooked meal with greater variety and quality ingredients are also disproportionally likely to be DIY cooks.
Sure and munchery is also called take-out food. It's not like silicon valley or sf these days is some kind of center of innovation. I believe the UX designers have a word for it, skeuomorphism. Everything I see in tech these days is some old thing re-packaged as an app. "cooking classes" as you put it falls in that category and is just as valuable as every other derivative thing in tech these days if not more.
One problem with cooking lessons is that a lot of cooking requires practice for you to be any good. And it's practice in mundane drudgery like chopping things to a uniform size, quickly.
Meanwhile you are five times as slow as an experienced cook, and the food doesn't come out as good. That's really frustrating, and not something one or two lessons can fix. You just have to chop your hundred onions.
Meanwhile you are five times as slow as an experienced cook, and the food doesn't come out as good. That's really frustrating, and not something one or two lessons can fix. You just have to chop your hundred onions.
Right after I read this, my immediate reaction was to feel kind of annoyed at the author. A little superficially, no tech or design talent in house, no food industry experience, and not much marketing and sales expertise, so what exactly does he bring to the table here, besides really wanting a startup?
Also, this idea hits on one of those things that lots of people really want to believe that they would do - cook their own healthy, organic, gourmet, etc food - but very few will actually take much initiative to do on their own. That doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't viable, but it does mean that your big challenge is going to be marketing and conversions - getting people to go beyond saying things that basically mean "I really want to believe that I am the kind of person who would use something like this, even though I'm not", and actually buy the product regularly.
After thinking about it some more and reading some of the posts on here, this might be a viable idea, but it's going to need a lot better marketing to go anywhere. A few ideas, some stolen from other posts, mostly in an attempt to exercise my own marketing-think muscles:
Make the product stickier - try to sell a recurring plan of a meal a week that has to be explicitly cancelled. Or at least email people who have ordered regularly to suggest new meals for them. You do have new, promoted meals, right?
Have a spread of products, from things that just require heating, barely a step above microwavable, though mild prep, up to things that may require an hour or 2 in the kitchen to make. See which ones sell the best, and emphasize those.
Try to partner with anybody involved in cooking or recipes with an audience in the area. If they're on the web, make it super easy for them to submit ingredient lists for their recipes to you, then an easy way for them to put a link on their site for "Get the ingredients for my [whatever] delivered to your door today with Dinnr!", with affiliate payments for orders. Now you're helping them monetize their sites too, so they have a good incentive to work with you.
In person, too. There's probably some cooking classes in the area. Get those classes to plug your site for their students to get ingredients for an affiliate fee.
Get some cooking experts on staff, and start producing your own youtube videos and blog content on how to cook things, with an emphasis on explaining the basics for newbie cooks. It would probably help you make sure you're actually getting good quality ingredients too.
Make social connections. Make a way for people to tell their friends on FaceTwitInstaPint that they just cooked X, and it was awesome! It might even be good to make it so that they can only order basic things at first, and they get points or something from cooking them, which will eventually make them eligible to order the more advanced things. They can brag about how many Dinnr points they have. They can see that they're either getting more than the other guy, so they can think they're better than them, or they aren't getting as much as somebody else, so they need to order more stuff. Then you can suggest new meals, too, based on their skill level and their preferences.
The real pain point isn't shopping, getting ingredients, or throwing away unused ingredients. It's wanting to be seen to their social circle as the kind of person who cooks awesome stuff. Figure out how to hit that, and you'll probably sell.
Also, this idea hits on one of those things that lots of people really want to believe that they would do - cook their own healthy, organic, gourmet, etc food - but very few will actually take much initiative to do on their own. That doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't viable, but it does mean that your big challenge is going to be marketing and conversions - getting people to go beyond saying things that basically mean "I really want to believe that I am the kind of person who would use something like this, even though I'm not", and actually buy the product regularly.
After thinking about it some more and reading some of the posts on here, this might be a viable idea, but it's going to need a lot better marketing to go anywhere. A few ideas, some stolen from other posts, mostly in an attempt to exercise my own marketing-think muscles:
Make the product stickier - try to sell a recurring plan of a meal a week that has to be explicitly cancelled. Or at least email people who have ordered regularly to suggest new meals for them. You do have new, promoted meals, right?
Have a spread of products, from things that just require heating, barely a step above microwavable, though mild prep, up to things that may require an hour or 2 in the kitchen to make. See which ones sell the best, and emphasize those.
Try to partner with anybody involved in cooking or recipes with an audience in the area. If they're on the web, make it super easy for them to submit ingredient lists for their recipes to you, then an easy way for them to put a link on their site for "Get the ingredients for my [whatever] delivered to your door today with Dinnr!", with affiliate payments for orders. Now you're helping them monetize their sites too, so they have a good incentive to work with you.
In person, too. There's probably some cooking classes in the area. Get those classes to plug your site for their students to get ingredients for an affiliate fee.
Get some cooking experts on staff, and start producing your own youtube videos and blog content on how to cook things, with an emphasis on explaining the basics for newbie cooks. It would probably help you make sure you're actually getting good quality ingredients too.
Make social connections. Make a way for people to tell their friends on FaceTwitInstaPint that they just cooked X, and it was awesome! It might even be good to make it so that they can only order basic things at first, and they get points or something from cooking them, which will eventually make them eligible to order the more advanced things. They can brag about how many Dinnr points they have. They can see that they're either getting more than the other guy, so they can think they're better than them, or they aren't getting as much as somebody else, so they need to order more stuff. Then you can suggest new meals, too, based on their skill level and their preferences.
The real pain point isn't shopping, getting ingredients, or throwing away unused ingredients. It's wanting to be seen to their social circle as the kind of person who cooks awesome stuff. Figure out how to hit that, and you'll probably sell.
> Right after I read this, my immediate reaction was to
> feel kind of annoyed at the author. A little
> superficially, no tech or design talent in house, no
> food industry experience, and not much marketing and
> sales expertise, so what exactly does he bring to the
> table here, besides really wanting a startup?
But also: am I wrong to think that there are many examples of successful startups being started by outsiders? Execution sounded pretty reasonable, he just had misjudged the market, based on the same model working well in other markets.
>Execution sounded pretty reasonable
>Misjudged the market
This business was a pure play "do this thing you already do, but now with a computer" model. Understanding the market IS the execution. He subbed out the design of the site and frankly most of the actual company. So really, the "execution" was essentially knowing product/market fit. I would argue the execution was, in fact, horrible. He did non-representative research, tried to start at full scale, and had no idea what sort of market he was operating.
>failed to pivot when his launch did 12 orders first week.
>Misjudged the market
This business was a pure play "do this thing you already do, but now with a computer" model. Understanding the market IS the execution. He subbed out the design of the site and frankly most of the actual company. So really, the "execution" was essentially knowing product/market fit. I would argue the execution was, in fact, horrible. He did non-representative research, tried to start at full scale, and had no idea what sort of market he was operating.
>failed to pivot when his launch did 12 orders first week.
If anyone wants to hire a critic (per #4) I am your man! I find entrepreneurs don't like hanging out with me because I am "not positive" enough (you're meant to surround yourself with upbeat go-do people right?). However, this pessimism also translates to realism. I'm not always right, many times too pessimistic esp about new ideas, but many times right about why an idea isn't going to fly and where the weaknesses are.
If you have ideas how to make that skill marketable (or even better received)...
If you have ideas how to make that skill marketable (or even better received)...
"An experienced optimist for hire" ;)
Thanks for sharing this! I appreciated how candid you were. I'm sure a lot of startup founders are taking a look at what they're building right now to look for the same patterns.
Funny, I just bumped into a startup[0] that seems to do the same thing, and looks like it received some funding[1]...
I wonder how well these guys are going to do.
[0] http://signup.marleyspoon.com/ - it's operational in germany at https://www.marleyspoon.de/
[1] $1.5M Seed according to https://angel.co/marley-spoon/
I wonder how well these guys are going to do.
[0] http://signup.marleyspoon.com/ - it's operational in germany at https://www.marleyspoon.de/
[1] $1.5M Seed according to https://angel.co/marley-spoon/
Cooking is much more a thing in Germany than in the UK, so it might just work.
I'm originally from Israel, but have lived in London for 9 years and now in Berlin in the last 3+ years. I can't say I notice a vast difference. Especially if I look at middle-class, educated, well-earning people, which this kind of service targets.
There could be some cultural difference, sure. But I think it's relatively small. Other factors, some mentioned on other comments, can come into play. For example:
* much easier way to order fresh groceries online in the UK (including Sunday delivery, 1 hr delivery slot, mobile apps etc)
* execution, execution, execution (I can't tell about the OP, but the founder of Marley Spoon is also a founder of Delivery-Hero, which is well-established in the fast-food delivery online market)
There could be some cultural difference, sure. But I think it's relatively small. Other factors, some mentioned on other comments, can come into play. For example:
* much easier way to order fresh groceries online in the UK (including Sunday delivery, 1 hr delivery slot, mobile apps etc)
* execution, execution, execution (I can't tell about the OP, but the founder of Marley Spoon is also a founder of Delivery-Hero, which is well-established in the fast-food delivery online market)
I also am living in Berlin now and was wondering if you had some recommendations for online grocery deliveries?
We tried Rewe and Bringmeister. Rewe seems a bit better overall.
Ocado still seems light-years ahead in terms of flexibility, convenience and service.
Ocado still seems light-years ahead in terms of flexibility, convenience and service.
Rewe is cheap and supposed to be good.
What execution differences do you see?
Do you know of a resource that describes these various cultural differences? I could research each country/region individually but your post made me wonder how to develop a knowledge of these country-to-country differences that can be used to assess feasible of a product/venture
> Do you know of a resource that describes these various cultural differences?
Unfortunately not. In this case it's just personal experience. I am a German who has been living in the UK for 4 years now. Over here everything is more fast food and 'instant' oriented than in Germany.
Unfortunately not. In this case it's just personal experience. I am a German who has been living in the UK for 4 years now. Over here everything is more fast food and 'instant' oriented than in Germany.
Could you expand on that? In my experience, cooking is a significant preoccupation for middle-class British people.
Hmm. Was this written in 1999? Or perhaps the notion of the Lean Startup is not understood in London?
Seriously, the author seems completely unaware that his "lessons" could have been avoided if he would have simply looked at the growing body of literature, on-line classes, Startup Weekends, blogs by Eric Ries, Alexander Osterwalder, et al that now exist.
Even in writing these lessons he seems to be unaware of them.
What's missing?
Seriously, the author seems completely unaware that his "lessons" could have been avoided if he would have simply looked at the growing body of literature, on-line classes, Startup Weekends, blogs by Eric Ries, Alexander Osterwalder, et al that now exist.
Even in writing these lessons he seems to be unaware of them.
What's missing?
So why is plated doing so well?
Plated uses a subscription model - which in my mind makes a lot more sense for this.
Why don't you go out and do the research, find out if Plated is, actually, doing so well, and then come back with some actual findings, rather than a flippant dismissal of this article?
According to CrunchBase [1]:
[1] http://www.crunchbase.com/organization/plated
Most Recent Funding
$15 Million Series A on August 9, 2014
[1] http://www.crunchbase.com/organization/plated
Doesn't necessarily mean they are doing well. After all, Color got $41 million and . . . Color, remember them? http://www.crunchbase.com/organization/color-labs
We tried plated as well as blue apron.
In reality, both of them were way too much work. We were excited to try them but don't miss them at all. I think the blog describes it well: this is not a real pain point (at least for us - 2 adults, one baby).
In reality, both of them were way too much work. We were excited to try them but don't miss them at all. I think the blog describes it well: this is not a real pain point (at least for us - 2 adults, one baby).
Blue apron freaked me out because they deliver a huge box that is 80% packaging and cold packs. Inside that box are many other little boxes that contain, for example, a single tomato.
They require you to be pretty adept with a chopping knife and good at prep work, while assuming that the only ingredient you own is cooking oil. So you get cocaine-like bags full of two tablespoons of flour.
It's like a sous chef simulator that fills your house with packaging. I buy as much as I can from them, since I figure they are running at a loss and I want venture capitalists subsidizing my dinner.
But it freaks me out to stab all those melted cold packs and bleed them out into the sink every night.
They require you to be pretty adept with a chopping knife and good at prep work, while assuming that the only ingredient you own is cooking oil. So you get cocaine-like bags full of two tablespoons of flour.
It's like a sous chef simulator that fills your house with packaging. I buy as much as I can from them, since I figure they are running at a loss and I want venture capitalists subsidizing my dinner.
But it freaks me out to stab all those melted cold packs and bleed them out into the sink every night.
"They require you to be pretty adept with a chopping knife and good at prep work, while assuming that the only ingredient you own is cooking oil."
Yes, that was pretty much what we experienced as well. The prep time was often much longer than 20~30 minutes, and really took the fun out of it.
Admittedly, it was all very tasty but for us, it created more pain than it solved. We tried Plated to see if it was better but it pretty much was the same experience.
Yes, that was pretty much what we experienced as well. The prep time was often much longer than 20~30 minutes, and really took the fun out of it.
Admittedly, it was all very tasty but for us, it created more pain than it solved. We tried Plated to see if it was better but it pretty much was the same experience.
I found both prep time and quantity of food varied really widely. Sometimes I was chopping for what felt like hours, other times you just had to mix stuff together and fry it for five minutes. And then make a second dinner, because you'd been given two spoonfuls of seeds and a pearl onion.
I think a lot of people like the idea of a fresh cooked meal a lot more than the reality of actually making it.
I think those of us who like fresh cooked meals have already adapted to how to make them, the market for people who need and want to convert to that stage is small.
VC investment does not a successful business make...
That's precious. Dude, its about the journey, man. Take the 40 Mil spend it on booze. Live fast, pivot and ride the wave to the soft landing. Then do it again. Beats a real coding job any day.
Well, that may be true, but I doubt that process is gonna make successful businesses, unless you lace that booze with copious amounts of adderall.
I am not responsible for the state of your liver if you follow the implied advice.
I am not responsible for the state of your liver if you follow the implied advice.
I am the author of this medium post.
Thank you for bringing it to this forum and for the intense debate around it, some comments were highly interesting and brought me to re-assess my own lessons learned.
I will set aside some time in the next few days to write a response to most of the points raised. I'll then post the link here (or you can follow me on twitter @mbohanes)
Again, many thanks for taking the time.
I will set aside some time in the next few days to write a response to most of the points raised. I'll then post the link here (or you can follow me on twitter @mbohanes)
Again, many thanks for taking the time.
All the A/B testing in the world feels desperately pointless when a founder claims that the #1 lesson learned was a 7th grade statistics lesson. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suggestive_question
You should have just delivered multiple meals at once. With an accompanying schedule and appropriate food that wouldn't go bad before its time.
Then you are removing the inefficiency of buying food items that you only use portions of and eliminate things going bad.
Then you are removing the inefficiency of buying food items that you only use portions of and eliminate things going bad.
I disagree strongly with the generalisations in #2. I do not find people in the UK people who actively do. The education model sounds very similar to Austria.
London Business School is world-class and the self-starters who go there are self-selecting.
London Business School is world-class and the self-starters who go there are self-selecting.
Not suprising the story sounds similar to the pets.com failure.
Groceries distribution requires good experience and knowledge of logistics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pets.com
Groceries distribution requires good experience and knowledge of logistics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pets.com
I am in London and just don't see who the target customer was meant to be.
If I wanted to buy some ingredients, I would go to the supermarket or (usually a better choice) one of the many different foreign grocers that are 5 minutes away.
If I wanted to buy some ingredients, I would go to the supermarket or (usually a better choice) one of the many different foreign grocers that are 5 minutes away.
My only question is: Why would anyone invest on Dinnr when it had an insignificant client base and no profits? OP must be a great sales person or have great connections.
The "Turd Polishers" picture really makes me laugh.
[deleted]
What's an online supermarket?
Not sure if you're serious, but I'll bite. It's a grocery store (typically one of the big 'real world' ones) that also takes complete orders online and delivers them to you. It's a big deal in the UK with most major supermarkets now having an online component.
I'm in rural North America so that's a pretty amazing concept. Thanks.
So this article is saying people can order the ingriedidnts for a single meal and have them delivered that day? That would definitely put him out of business huh?
So this article is saying people can order the ingriedidnts for a single meal and have them delivered that day? That would definitely put him out of business huh?
Even in England, the population isn't dense enough except in, say, London to support same day grocery deliveries, it's usually the next day, with a minimum spend (not much though), and often a charge of £1-£5 depending on time of day.
The problem with London, however, is that even compared to other large world cities, the density of food stores is so high that it's easy to get ingredients.. and the sort of people who are active enough to cook their own food are also the sort who'd be happy to pop out for five minutes for ingredients they can touch and feel first.
The problem with London, however, is that even compared to other large world cities, the density of food stores is so high that it's easy to get ingredients.. and the sort of people who are active enough to cook their own food are also the sort who'd be happy to pop out for five minutes for ingredients they can touch and feel first.
Most of the online supermarkets in the UK have a minimum delivery spend, which means you wouldn't really be able to do that (unless your idea of a single meal involves lobster and champagne).
From what I can tell, Dinnr didn't seem like a bad idea - I know a lot of people in London who really care about food, really enjoy making it themselves, and get excited about anything to which they can attach words like "artisanal"... and many of them don't really care much about the cost.
Shame it didn't work out, really.
From what I can tell, Dinnr didn't seem like a bad idea - I know a lot of people in London who really care about food, really enjoy making it themselves, and get excited about anything to which they can attach words like "artisanal"... and many of them don't really care much about the cost.
Shame it didn't work out, really.
this guy has some funny ideas about "anglo saxon" education. british education is by and large very much like the austrian model in delivery at least, though we are not as keen on specificity.
I can't help but have a very negative reaction to this, not necessarily at the author, but at the startup ecosystem as a whole. These are posted as "lessons" as if they were difficult to learn, when this really should be labeled "things no responsible person would ever not know before even considering raising money." Of course you should be self-critical of your product, of course you should test with real customers, of course you need a technical co-founder, of course you should pick a market with a bigger niche than tech-saavy-foodie-cooks-in-major-cities. Every mistake was classic marketing grad trying to do startup things in a bubble environment. These are the types of "lessons from my failed startup" that have been written a thousand times before. I fear over-exuberant and irresponsible entrepreneurs will repeat these mistakes for as long as startups exist.
The fact that people lie to you when doing market research isn't incredibly obvious to a lot of people. That seems to be his biggest problem: he thought there was a market because people said they liked the idea.
I loved this post (gets one of my rare upvotes) because the guy does a great job taking apart everything he did wrong. Maybe these lessons should be obvious, but empirically they aren't: people keep making these mistakes, over and over.
I loved this post (gets one of my rare upvotes) because the guy does a great job taking apart everything he did wrong. Maybe these lessons should be obvious, but empirically they aren't: people keep making these mistakes, over and over.
> The fact that people lie to you when doing market research isn't incredibly obvious to a lot of people.
Thank you for saying this. It's something that's only cemented in me over the past few years to connect the similarity between "anonymous" survey data and what gets posted on another anonymous posting place, 4chan.
Thank you for saying this. It's something that's only cemented in me over the past few years to connect the similarity between "anonymous" survey data and what gets posted on another anonymous posting place, 4chan.
I was told a story about a focus group of women who had to judge a bunch of shawls. Almost every one of them said they preferred the colourful shawls with bold patterns. After they were done each of them got to pick a shawl to take home as a thank you, and they all picked the plain-coloured ones.
I can't help but have a negative reaction to your comment. Yes, similar "lessons learned" are proliferated throughout the startup world, primarily because these are some of the hardest things about building a successful business even if you already know that they're the hardest things. This is clearly just a self-reflective piece, entitled "lessons I learned" not "lessons you should learn". If the rest of us want the story, or the reminders, great. If not, no sweat. The ad hominem is a little rough.
Their observation isn't remotely an ad hominem: They are specifically criticizing the message, not the speaker.
And their point is valid: There is a wide "startup" belief that you needn't know the market or domain, the customers, etc. You just need to find a domain name and make a web page and customers will come and somehow a business will fall together. Only the overwhelming odds are that it will face likely failure.
Another trait of many of these types of posts is what idlewords points out: The tendency for people to generalize lessons. This is the risk of the dirty sushi restaurant with poor service that inevitably fails, but then writes a broad treatise about how the area won't support sushi restaurants. We see this constantly among such "lessons learned", where macro inputs are often substituted for micro failures.
And their point is valid: There is a wide "startup" belief that you needn't know the market or domain, the customers, etc. You just need to find a domain name and make a web page and customers will come and somehow a business will fall together. Only the overwhelming odds are that it will face likely failure.
Another trait of many of these types of posts is what idlewords points out: The tendency for people to generalize lessons. This is the risk of the dirty sushi restaurant with poor service that inevitably fails, but then writes a broad treatise about how the area won't support sushi restaurants. We see this constantly among such "lessons learned", where macro inputs are often substituted for micro failures.
Many of the start-up lessons here are those preached by Eric Reis, Steve Blank, and others. I don't think this is a broad treatise on how food start-ups won't work.
Also:
..."things no responsible person would ever not know before even considering raising money." ...
...classic marketing grad trying to do startup things...
...over-exuberant and irresponsible entrepreneurs...
not sure how you don't see this as ad hominem critical.
Also:
..."things no responsible person would ever not know before even considering raising money." ...
...classic marketing grad trying to do startup things...
...over-exuberant and irresponsible entrepreneurs...
not sure how you don't see this as ad hominem critical.
Ad hominem is an attack that discredit the argument by trying to discredit the person writing the message (ie. "You didn't success why should I listen to you"), mostly by attacking the credentials of the person.
An attack on BOTH the writer and the argument, as unnecessary critical or negative as it could be, is not an ad hominem attack, and by no mean make the criticism an invalid one. Especially if the criticism of the writer comes because of the writing (ie. "from what you've done, it seems like you're too inexperienced and naive etc...")
(I'm sorry that this is really off topic ...)
An attack on BOTH the writer and the argument, as unnecessary critical or negative as it could be, is not an ad hominem attack, and by no mean make the criticism an invalid one. Especially if the criticism of the writer comes because of the writing (ie. "from what you've done, it seems like you're too inexperienced and naive etc...")
(I'm sorry that this is really off topic ...)
This is pretty much the opposite of an `ad hominem` attack.
Wait, what? I thought I was cynical about startups, but I've never noticed this wide belief that you can get a startup off the ground simply by standing up a web page.
Some good examples of that:
Using mailchimp and wufoo-
https://medium.com/who-what-why/from-a-mailchimp-email-and-w...
Built a Facebook page-
http://wpcurve.com/y-combinator/
Using mailchimp and wufoo-
https://medium.com/who-what-why/from-a-mailchimp-email-and-w...
Built a Facebook page-
http://wpcurve.com/y-combinator/
> Their observation isn't remotely an ad hominem
>> "things no responsible person"
Calling someone irresponsible is not, in and of itself, an ad hominem argument.
Saying a position should be rejected because it is presented by someone who is irresponsible is ad hominem.
Ad hominem argument isn't the same thing as a personal attack; its the fallacy of arguing that a position should be rejected because of the personal characteristics of the person presenting it.
Saying a position should be rejected because it is presented by someone who is irresponsible is ad hominem.
Ad hominem argument isn't the same thing as a personal attack; its the fallacy of arguing that a position should be rejected because of the personal characteristics of the person presenting it.
Don't call things ad hominem that aren't, you dumb jerk.
I agree with you that there are a lot of "startup lessons" out there, and that most of them sound super basic and obvious.
I've learned the hard way that it's exactly the lessons that are "obvious" are the ones that I should be paying attention to. If a lesson was both obvious and easy to implement, you probably wouldn't hear the lesson repeated so many times over so many different people.
So whenever I read yet another startup lesson that seems obvious and is frequently repeated, that's a signal for me that that lesson is actually very difficult to implement on the ground, in the moment.
I've learned the hard way that it's exactly the lessons that are "obvious" are the ones that I should be paying attention to. If a lesson was both obvious and easy to implement, you probably wouldn't hear the lesson repeated so many times over so many different people.
So whenever I read yet another startup lesson that seems obvious and is frequently repeated, that's a signal for me that that lesson is actually very difficult to implement on the ground, in the moment.
Yes, they will. And so will many other people in many other industries. I know numerous people who've had the "lets start a bar/music venue/restaurant" idea, and failed dismally (because they're difficult industries to break into and become successful in), never mind stacks of other business owners who pick a niche and struggle in it.
Basically, I don't see it as an inherently bad thing. Until we've got Culture terminals and a Hub to chat with to convince us why something is a bad idea, I believe it'll always be this way. The other thing is that sometimes it works, so being an entrepreneur can have the same allure as a lotto ticket, only with even more illusion of control.
I thought this was a great post by OP, and I thank him for it.
Basically, I don't see it as an inherently bad thing. Until we've got Culture terminals and a Hub to chat with to convince us why something is a bad idea, I believe it'll always be this way. The other thing is that sometimes it works, so being an entrepreneur can have the same allure as a lotto ticket, only with even more illusion of control.
I thought this was a great post by OP, and I thank him for it.
To be fair, all post mortems sound obvious in the end. You can analyse any failure write the reasons down and it'll seem obvious. Why did Microsoft fail on it's pre-iPad TabletPC? Because the Office teams were too politically strong and didn't care about touch. That sounds like a simple management problem. What's wrong with Microsoft?
When you're in the startup you most often miss the forest for the trees. You're too involved sort of like a peson in an abusive relationship. It sometime takes a neutral third part to make you realise "wow you really have it bad".
I've never read a story about any failure that didn't sound obvious in a after-the-fact analysis. Read up on why Nokia failed against Apple or how the banking system collapsed. When reading any of thee you will always think "huh, what a bunch of dumbasses", we highly over value our own behaviour and pretend that can never be us but it frequently is.
When you're in the startup you most often miss the forest for the trees. You're too involved sort of like a peson in an abusive relationship. It sometime takes a neutral third part to make you realise "wow you really have it bad".
I've never read a story about any failure that didn't sound obvious in a after-the-fact analysis. Read up on why Nokia failed against Apple or how the banking system collapsed. When reading any of thee you will always think "huh, what a bunch of dumbasses", we highly over value our own behaviour and pretend that can never be us but it frequently is.
I used to believe this as well. Experience is the toughest teacher because of the method -- you're given the test before the lesson.
When you're young, you are bulletproof and ten feet tall and can run through walls and you have no concept of your own limitations. What seems obvious to those of us who have gone through the cycle of a startup is the greenfield learning experience for starry-eyed newbies.
Paul Buchheit has talked about the "danger of experience" (http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-technology.html). It's tough, but it's compulsory on us to apply our experience while simultaneously challenging conventional thinking.
When you're young, you are bulletproof and ten feet tall and can run through walls and you have no concept of your own limitations. What seems obvious to those of us who have gone through the cycle of a startup is the greenfield learning experience for starry-eyed newbies.
Paul Buchheit has talked about the "danger of experience" (http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-technology.html). It's tough, but it's compulsory on us to apply our experience while simultaneously challenging conventional thinking.
The most important lessons are ones we already know...but we need constant reminders to make sure we don't ignore them.
This idea that there is some magic advice that this article is lacking and that only a seasoned (technical) founder can share with you is a fallacy. You are chasing a unicorn if you cannot accept common sense advice on its face.
Here's a piece of advice and lesson that you might not know (although I hope you do.)
There is something to learn from everyone, and the if you aren't willing to learn from EVERYONE, the problem is you that you aren't willing to learn, not that they don't have something to share with you.
This idea that there is some magic advice that this article is lacking and that only a seasoned (technical) founder can share with you is a fallacy. You are chasing a unicorn if you cannot accept common sense advice on its face.
Here's a piece of advice and lesson that you might not know (although I hope you do.)
There is something to learn from everyone, and the if you aren't willing to learn from EVERYONE, the problem is you that you aren't willing to learn, not that they don't have something to share with you.
(This is essientially the first and maybe the second point reiterated.)
Suppose you were a cook with your own restaurant. How do you figure out what works and what doesn't?
Do you go and do market research, have questionaries, focus groups, do statistics, user-driven cooking or whatever?
Surely not. You create dishes, put the new ones in the menu as today's special. Then you figure out whether people like them or not.
How do you figure that out? Do you ask them? Of course you don't because you know that if you ask "did you enjoy your dinner?" People will just be polite and tell you "yes - it was excellent - thank you very much". No. You look at whether they finished their plates or send it back half-full. Whether you get any sales. Whether they come back for more.
Even my mother knows this. When she cooks cookies, she doesn't ask me "do you like them?" Because she knows I will just say "yes - they are the best cookies in the world, mum". She asks me if I want another. And if I stay the night, she looks at whether I get up at 3 am to roam the kitchen for more of them cookies.
This is basic human behaviour but somehow lost in the academics of business administration.
The second thing is that I get the feeling that the author simply haven't explored the huge "product space" between takeaway and ready-to-cook prepackaged ingredients with a recipe at all. How about - this is essientially takeway but you have to heat the curry in your microwave and then add the fresh coriander yourself - the upshot is that it will last a week in your fridge should you not eat it all tonight. Or maybe: It is protein shakes and vitamin pills for a week - no problem - it stays "fresh" for 5 years. Or: It is the latest Jamie Oliver book with ingredients to get you started on the first three dishes.