Always seemed a strange business model.
Appealing to people who "want to cook", but doing so by turning yourself into a production-line assembler.
Like saying your want to learn carpentry, by buying some Ikea flat-pack.
What confused me (and makes me think I've overlooked something) is why nothing more interesting has come along from the supermarkets. In the UK at least, they're all online and deliver - but they all seem to stick to "buy your ingredients and we'll deliver them".
I'd quite enjoy one that let you browse recipes and would stick all the ingredients in your basket - but then added some intelligence.
e.g. You add the "roast chicken weekend meal" to your cart, and it asks "are you going to eat all that chicken?"
For £5 extra would you like to add some bacon, creme-fraiche, tarragon, frozen-pastry & peas to enable you to make a lovely pie on Monday?
Or asks "what's in your fridge" - here are some recipes and prices for things to use it up?
Could even add some intelligence - I don't like mushrooms, so when recommending a chicken pie and providing a recipe, switches something else into my basket & recipe (leeks are lovely).
Or would further adjust the recipe - you said you needed to feed 8 at the weekend, so I picked the larger lump of meat, and have adjusted the cooking time in the recipe.
Or "Do you own a pressure cooker, a freezer and have 2 hours free this weekend to batch cook some chilli"
Or... basically Blue Apron and the rest seem to be trying to solve a real problem, completely the wrong way.
I think the biggest problem for me as a single person is the way most stuff sold in supermarkets is designed for family meals. Which is fair, families probably represent a significant portion of their customer base.
But it becomes problematic for me because I either have to eat the same meal 4 days in a row (or freeze it) or only use half of the ingredients and shove the rest in the cupboard, or throw it away because its perishable
I wouldn't mind a service that works out a set of meals you can make for the week that makes the best use of ingredients (minimises waste) and brings some variety.
I suspect the economics don't work out on it though
I buy at least 3-4 of them a week because they're perfect for a single person who wants to eat in and maybe not prep as much but still wants a wide variety of meals to eat.
Some perishables like fruits and vegetables are terrible to buy. Cilantro comes in a massive bunch from which I take three sprigs, and its rotten in a couple days. Bananas are unedible until day 2, then I have maybe a 3-day window to eat all the bananas before they are flabby, brown, and mushy. Even if I throw a handful of arugula in every single one of my meals, its massive tub is barely half empty by the time it starts rotting in my fridge a week after purchase.
Even if I plot and plan to use all my cilantro in 3 days, all my arugula in 1 week, power through 3 bananas a day during my bunch's window of opportunity, I can still end up going out for dinner which throws everything out of schedule. Or maybe I forgot to pull out the chicken out of the freezer and into the marinade this morning, so there is now no point in cooking if I need to wait 2+ hours after I get home for my bird to thaw and flavor.
Cilantro/Basil/Parsley/Green onions: place the stems in a glass of water,cover with a plastic bag and keep in the refrigerator. It will last more than one week.
Mushrooms: place in a brown bag in the refrigerator. They will last more than a week. They slowly dry up and can be rehydrated like dried mushrooms.
Bananas: when they are about to ripen place in the refrigerator. The skin will turn brown and look miserable but the inside will be just fine. You'll gain two or three days more time to eat them.
Arugula,spinach and other salad greens: Put the leftovers in your lunch bag and snack at work.
Can confirm! Also,
- bread is awesome in the fridge, lasts weeks.
- put ice cubes in a plastic bag to stop sublimination
- drown basil in olive oil, squeeze out the air, cover in olive oil, then refrigerate - lasts months
- peppers: soak and refrigerate in vinegar
I struggle with cheese - olive oil can work but it's awkward.
I HATE bread once it's been refridgerated/frozen... completely destroys the structure and texture of the bread. Only don't mind if you're going to do toast, french toast or some other bread pudding or stuffing application. It's unfit for sandwich use after.
Leave them out and as they begin to get soft & ripe place them in the fridge. It'll slow it down, like bananas, and keep them ripe a little longer. When i was using avocados as snacks this was the only way I could keep them for multiple days.
As someone who often cooks for myself, bananas are a pretty terrible example because you can literally buy one banana if you want. Perhaps I've been violating a taboo all my life, but I have never had a problem breaking up a bunch of bananas in the store.
Fresh herbs I agree. It's one reason I tend to grow them. [ADDED: There are also a lot of frozen and freeze dried options these days that I often take advantage of.]
There are lots of meats you can pull out of the freezer and put in some water for 30 minutes or so.
I'm actually sympathetic to your basic point but it's just not something I find to be a huge problem.
> I have never had a problem breaking up a bunch of bananas in the store.
Ah, so you're one of those people. Don't you realize you're condemning those poor banana bunches to an ignominous death in the dumpster? Nobody's going to buy a bunch with an uneven number on bananas. :(
Being serious though, I don't think you're violating any major taboo. I see people do the same thing all the time. You're actually performing a public service for all those people who want fewer bananas but are afraid to split the bunches themselves.
I'll also usually cook two or three dishes that share all those ingredients. So for example, if i buy pre-made pesto sauce, i'll make pasta with pesto sauce, and chicken breast with Pesto sauce. If i buy a lot of Mexican ingredients (beans, cilantro, ground meat et all) i'll make a Chilli and taco bowls.
With bananas I make a banana milkshake when they are too soft to be eaten. With cilantro bunch, I keep some for garnishing rest I make chutney. Simple recipe of cilantro, garlic, green chilies, slices of fresh/frozen raw mango or even raw mango powder and salt etc goes in blender and out comes the chutney.
I (not quite sub-consciously) ensure I always leave some bananas to get to that 'black, but not crushed' state - solely to make milkshakes from.
I give myself a pass on the calories, as I'm "being green and eating my 5-a-day"
Pro-tip for Bananas: When they start to have black spots on the skin, throw them in the freezer. Use them in a smoothie, it will give your smoothie a really nice creamy texture, almost like an ice-cream and it's all natural!
Frozen bananas can also be used for banana bread pancakes (which are not only tasty, but don't require eggs--that's what the bananas are for). Recipe here (I use regular flour, not the whole wheat they call for): https://www.howsweeteats.com/2011/06/whole-wheat-brown-sugar...
For cilantro, get a mason jar with a little water in it. After the cilantro is in, cover the leaves with a plastic bag. The cilantro will be good for about a month.
I've found that by shopping at higher end grocery stores, or at least focusing on the organic/craft-oriented departments, the quantities tend to be smaller and much better suited to my childless, bachelor existence.
There was also a learning curve to preparing food for just myself to consume. The priorities are different from the family household I grew up in, so much of what I had learned didn't apply very well unmodified, to my adult life.
Families make the costly perishable ingredients go further by utilizing carbohydrates like pastas and breads as fillers.
I now make many of the same dishes I grew up eating, but without the pasta or bread, which I've entirely stopped purchasing to the very clear benefit of my health/weight.
When you dispense with the fillers, it's a lot easier to consume the perishable ingredients in one or two meals.
It definitely seemed strange at first to eat things like lentil or chicken soup or a meat ragu with pork ribs sans pasta or bread. But once acclimated, the recipes have changed a bit to be less liquidy while more meaty/beany with more veggies where applicable, and are very tasty and nutritious. It's basically decadence, and healthier than eating all the carbs.
>Families make the costly perishable ingredients go further by utilizing carbohydrates like pastas and breads as fillers.
As do many restaurants. I've (not very originally) joked that Tapas is Spanish for expensive and appetizers generally often seem pricey for the size of the portion. There are various reasons for this including the fact that there's a certain overhead to an individual order.
But it's also the case that typical main dishes tend to have a fair bit of "filler" that tapas/appetizers do not. At good restaurants, the rice or potatoes (or vegetables) may be nicely and even somewhat exotically prepared but the raw ingredients cost very little compared to the protein.
Seriously, try the tapas (or table) in Spain. The original is always better than the imitation. Besides being the price of a typical US sit-down burger or grilled chicken dish, it's much higher quality and healthier! Also for readers who aren't aware, tapas is usually a shared meal and best when everyone going agrees to get different tapas dishes or arrangements. Of course the jamón ibérico de bellota will be higher priced than a typical steak, but well worth it IMO. "Filler" in Spain tends to be olives, cheese, and bread.
Basically you can paste in recipe URLs (so far only supports seriouseats and bonappetit) it parses the ingredient list and generates a shopping list combining everything you need to make all the recipes).
Future features include adjusting the portion size to scale up and down and combining recipes in a manner that minimizes ingredient waste when shopping
Have you taken a look at Paprika? It imports from almost any site, adjusts portions, and generates a combined grocery list. The only thing is doesn't do is the last thing: combine recipes in a way to minimize ingredient waste.
A couple of years ago I became an empty nester and decided to get rid of my cars. I switched to delivery: CFA box, meat box, and regular grocery delivery.
My meals are a bit repetitive (I often make, as you note, the same meal for four days) but that makes my life easier. But what has amazed me is it really doesn't take long to make the kind of meals I like to eat -- often 30 minutes an almost always less than 60. I can't be bothered making fancy sauces and the like, so I eat healthier than I probably ever have in my life. It's really a great deal to feed myself for four days for only a few bucks and for not much more time per meal than it would have taken to heat up a premade package.
Even my gf and her kids like my cooking which astonishes me.
I live in Palo Alto so can use the BBQ year round -- BBQ and Instant pot account for a lot of my cooking.
> the way most stuff sold in supermarkets is designed for family meals
Dude. Leftovers. I used to make a couple of family-sized meals on the weekend to have for lunch and dinner throughout the week. I’d also dine out 2-3 times a week to mix it up a bit.
You can buy stuff in much smaller portions in most Japanese grocery stores, which I think is much better. There are also some grocery stores that have the option to buy unpacked produce, like Wholefoods.
"In [Father of The Bride, George Banks [Steve Martin] heads to a local market in order to cool off after having had a bit of a meltdown over his daughter’s impending wedding. While there, he has an even bigger meltdown over the fact that while hot dogs are sold in packages of eight, hot dog buns are sold in packages of twelve. So, he decides to take a stand by ripping open packages to remove the four offending buns. When a befuddled clerk tries to stop him, George says that the hot dog and hot dog bun corporations “are not ripping off this nitwit anymore, because I am not paying for one more thing I don’t need. George Banks is saying ‘no’!” LOL He winds up getting arrested and is sent to jail, where his wife Nina (aka Diane Keaton) has to bail him out."
It isn't just singles. I have a family of four and do basically all the cooking. I struggle to make use of the entirety of many perishables I buy simply because they're packaged in such huge volumes. Leafy/bushy things like herbs comes to mind, as well as some prepackaged vegetables (grape/cherry tomatoes) and fruits.
> Appealing to people who "want to cook", but doing so by turning yourself into a production-line assembler. Like saying your want to learn carpentry, by buying some Ikea flat-pack.
That's not a great analogy. It was far more than assembly...with Ikea products, you don't cut the wood to size, or carve joints, or even use glue. With Blue Apron and the other in this space, you do everything except the shopping. so you will learn how to handle a knife, different cooking techniques, etc.
The real value add was in removing the need for keeping a stocked pantry and doing grocery shopping. Many recipes used ingredients that it was inconvenient or impossible to buy in small quantities, or that were hard to find at a standard megamart.
Which is why the Blue Apron crates were always so ludicrously expensive compared to a regular grocer despite their purported scale. You got the right proportion of green onion but get to pay the price of a whole bundle.
It takes out the entire creativity process of cooking, and for people who actually like cooking on a higher level also the process of selecting the right ingredients.
I don’t understand the whole shopping part, it would seem to be pretty clear to me that any place that is serviced by Blue Apron should have a service for groceries to be delivered as well, in fact it’s highly unlikely that they won’t.
I order all my groceries online in London, primarily been using Ocado but Amazon has also now has much wider offering with Amazon Fresh since they offer their own, Morrisons and Planet Ogranic goods.
Every large supermarket chain here offers a delivery service, it also doesn’t cost anything extra but there is usually a minimum (usually £50) for that.
Many of them even would unpack the bags for you if you ask them.
If you really want to go to the recipe route then Ocado and many other groceries delivery services also do that so you can select a meal and how many people and they’ll add the ingredients for you to your shopping bag.
To me this seems a much better solution and service than Blue Apron.
> It takes out the entire creativity process of cooking, and for people who actually like cooking on a higher level also the process of selecting the right ingredients.
Did you ever try one of these services? Because that's the opposite of our experience. My wife is the cook in our family, and she loved it. She learned by example...seeing the quantities, getting an understanding of how to handle ingredients, practicing different cooking techniques, different variations, different flavors, etc., etc., etc...
Not only that, but we didn't get every meal from the service...she used what she learned to really branch out and make all kinds of things she never would have attempted in the past.
We always knew we were paying a premium for the convenience and variety, but it's a trade-off a lot of busy families are willing to make. It allowed us to prepare something at home instead of getting fast food or going to a restaurant, which would have been even more expensive.
How about you give me a list of meals, I pick 50 or 100 of them, and then you give me a shopping list for the month including where to get it at the best price, taking advantage of bulk purchasing and overlapping ingredients. Then email/text/notify me every day with the recipe for dinner that night. I'll keep the left overs and use them for lunches.
This should minimize time for planning and cost of meals, two things Blue Apron largely fails to do.
It'd also be nice if I could get a further notification asking me how long it took me to prepare, so the service can get an idea for how long it takes me to cook and help me plan dinners accordingly - maybe giving me faster alternative alongside the normal dinner plan.
Aside from the optimizing-where-to-buy part, this sounds like what https://mealime.com is attempting to do. I've only used it for one meal so far so but if you select multiple meals it creates a combined shopping list.
I came across platejoy (platejoy.com) a couple months ago while looking for a meal plan that would work around my food allergies and it check most of the boxes of what you are asking for.
The planning is week by week, and it doesn't have a best price thing, but it does pretty much everything else (recepies in app, you can tell it ahead of time you prefer to eat leftovers for lunch, each recipe has a prepare & cook time and asks for feed back). Also, it can send all the ingredient to Instacart in a single click, if that's your thing.
It's really changed the way I eat. I went from eating out for lunch and dinner almost every day, to cooking at home pretty much every night.
No you don't. As a single parent you don't have time, and kids don't appreciate and in fact often don't like elaborate or gourmet food.
Learn to make half-a-dozen simple dishes from memory. Pasta with meat sauce. Simple dishes with chicken, pork, fish, or beef, and vegetables. Stuff you can throw together with basic staple ingredients, minimal prep work, and minimal utensils. This makes shopping easier and minimizes time to prepare meals.
Avoid kitchen gadgets. They are just an extra thing to clean and you'll rarely use them. Have a few good knives, a couple of cutting/prep boards, and a basic set of pots and pans and utensils and stick to recipies that work with that.
May I nominate one exception: a pressure cooker. This includes plug-in electric like the Breville Fast Slow Cooker. If you are able to chop carrots, you can make endless variety of stews, casseroles, soups and curries with straightforward recipes, minimal complexity, short cook times and not too much cleaning up afterwards. And they're the sort of dishes that make great leftovers.
I really enjoyed Blue Apron. For a very long time I wanted to learn to cook, but didn't know where to start, and cookbooks where always intimidating because they usually assumed you already knew how to cook.
Blue Apron doesn't assume any of that.
I also liked the idea of "cooking good food", but for me it was a case of not knowing what good food was. With Blue Apron sending me tasty meals to make, I was able to learn by example about what worked and what I liked.
I thought it was great. I eventually cancelled though, once I was just cooking on my own entirely.
I think you've highlighted a problem with the business model. I had a similar experience. I really learned a lot about cooking from my first couple of years with Blue Apron, but now I'm at the point where I don't really need it any more. So as a "training wheels" for home cooks, it's great, but they have a built-in retention problem. Also, the recipes have gotten a lot simpler (and frankly not as appealing) over time. It's probably partly cost-cutting and partly people complaining about recipes taking too long to prepare.
Tbf, I have done one of those boxes(Hello Fresh) for nearly 2 years and I has absolutely definitely taught me how to cook, purely through repeated experience. It goes beyond being able to follow a recipe - after cooking nearly 500 meals I have enough experience to make delicious meals without looking at timers or measuring everything down to a gram.
Plus, each meal works out much cheaper than eating out. So for me personally this was money extremely well spent. I also live in the UK.
> Plus, each meal works out much cheaper than eating out. So for me personally this was money extremely well spent. I also live in the UK.
I just got 2 free boxes from Missfresh (seems local to where I live) and Goodfood. I tried my first yesterday and god I wish it was worth it to keep doing because they shown me that I actually can cook something amazingly good. However I didn't expected to keep buying theses boxes because they are so incredibly expensive, 10$ CAD per portion is starting to be pretty close to a restaurant (a cheap one but still a restaurant).
Have you really did the math to confirm this? Is the UK that much more expensive in terms of food? HelloFresh in the UK does seems cheaper at £ 4.20 / meal but still I just can't believe feeding 1 person would cost 430$ CAD per month where you live.
In UK £4.20/meal gets you pretty much nothing when eating out. Maybe if there is a deal on you can have a frozen burger and soda from Wetherspoons, but even Subway or McD is more expensive.
But that of course is eating out. I can cook a dinner for two for less than £8, no problem - but it's not as far as you'd think. Like, super simple meals:
And that doesn't include the cost of pasta/rice, spices....but those are easy to buy in bulk so I assume cost per meal is <£0.50 on those.
Now that we're off Hello Fresh we budget £200/month for food(but that includes lunches), and that's doing all our food shopping at Lidl, which is stupidly cheap compared to any of the larger supermarkets.
So yes, cooking by myself is cheaper(I don't think that's a surprise to anyone), but I still consider hello fresh to be money well spent just for learning how to cook well.
In general, the prices in the US are similar to a chain restaurant that maybe isn't quite fast food but in the ballpark. Getting the direct restaurant equivalent of most of the meals would typically cost quite a bit more.
These services aren't about value. You can get mostly lower quality restaurant meals for about the same money. And you can cook much more cheaply at home if you want to.
You make a good point that Blue Apron only teaches you how to assemble ingredients, but not to shop for them. They are two separate skills. But most people who don't know how to cook are bad at both, and Blue Apron gets rid of one of the highest friction parts and lets people dive right into the actual cooking part of, well, cooking.
Getting people unafraid of assembling ingredients and heating food and cleaning after is a good first step. If you didn't grow up cooking and shopping and cleaning, there's a lot to mentally unpack before you make a meal. If you have no basis for how to plan anything ("Would you like to add extra meat for $5") extra options quickly get confusing.
>"are you going to eat all that chicken?" For £5 extra would you like to add some bacon, creme-fraiche, tarragon, frozen-pastry & peas to enable you to make a lovely pie on Monday? Or asks "what's in your fridge" - here are some recipes and prices for things to use it up?
The fact that Blue Apron doesn't really do that is why I cancelled my subscription. I hated the way they would send all these tiny single-use things. Too much plastic and too much food waste.
Rather than sending me kits, I would prefer if they would essentially do my shopping for me. Planning meals and ensuring I have the right ingredients on hand is annoying and I would love some help with it. But I don't need all the ingredients in one box.
Kroger is starting to do these meal kits. They are within 5 feet of the door and serve two, and all cook in 20 minutes.
I just don't get the point, though. I can move past the box and into the Kroger, using the box as a shopping list, and buy the exact same ingredients for half the price, only now I must spend 5 minutes dicing a tomato instead of slicing open a plastic bag containing diced tomato.
The best way to get quicker in the kitchen is to cook with common ingredients, and prep things in tandem. Keeping your cooking within a certain cultural palate is a good way to limit the amount of different fresh ingredients you need to maintain, and simplify your cooking.
You can find fresh (not frozen), raw, already prepared meals that can be thrown in the oven, a pot, or on a grill at Kroger, Publix, Fresh Market, Costco and others. Those are great for when you're in a hurry and you don't want to waste time with the ceremony of putting together a meal kit. Meal kits are a weird compromise between a prepared meal and just following a recipe yourself.
I work in this space, so I may have some insight. The short answer is sort of tautological or whatever the term is: Nobody is doing the recipe thing because nobody does the recipe thing.
Think about it this way: Amazon has how many billions of dollars? And they haven't done the recipe thing yet... why? The answer is probably simpler than you think: that's not how consumers choose what to buy [in sufficient quantities to make unit economics positive].
Your reasoning as to why Blue Apron's model is weird is spot on: it's weird because that's not how consumers actually shop and cook. If they did, it wouldn't be weird and Blue Apron would be doing much better.
You have just described a value-add B2B SaaS; offers integration into existing retailer's online shopping portals.
If this doesn't exist, give it six months and it will. If you want to try and swing something like this and need an extra set of hands, my email is in my profile.
You don't go after the consumer. Consumers don't care enough and, as you said, the marketplace is glutted.
Instead, sell to grocery store chains that have existing infrastructure. In fact, you don't even build an app. Instead you offer an API that they can call when they want to implement this sort of functionality.
Optionally, you offer to do the integration (though this seems like it could make for an awful headache). Make sure the docs are good and the customer service is better.
The point is to give the grocery chains a value add that their competition doesn't have: a way to plan meals effectively and order all the ingredients.
There are some very relevant comments elsewhere in this thread that call out waste, which is a problem I'm not sure how to solve.
There's a lot of innovation opportunity, some of which you already noted. Some chains are already doing it, but most aren't. The most basic service that most aren't doing is curbside pickup. That's the biggest missed opportunity. I'd never go anywhere else. Most grocery stores that I've seen doing that offer it for free. Add in a delivery option for a charge and you take a massive chunk out of Amazon Fresh's market, and I'd put more faith in a local supermarket than the online model of Walmart.
Agreed on the meal plan delivery services. I tried one of them and it was horrible. They have cheap, small portions of ingredients, and even left out ingredients when I used them. Probably out of stock, and didn't want to refund my sale and have even more oddball ingredients leftover. They were unapologetic.
Worse yet, they're rather tasteless if you actually know how to cook. My wife is beyond most chefs because she grew up in a Latin country. A Latin person who grew up in the kitchen with mom and grandma is pretty much the best place to get food in the world.
You could write an algorithm for everything, someone from a culinary culture will never be duplicated or surpassed in our lifetimes. You'd need a hell of a finely-tuned general purpose robot to taste test your food and adjust a recipe to your tastes as a human can.
There are a number of apps and web sites that do what you ask. My favorite one (from the old iPhone days, now discontinued) would let you input the ingredients you have on hand, and it would suggest what you can make with them.
They seem to come and go. I think the problem for a supermarket to adopt something like this is that you can use it to make a list using one market's superior app, then do your actual shopping at another market.
> you can use it to make a list using one market's superior app, then do your actual shopping at another market
This critique makes no sense to me. Should amazon not recommend items online because you might purchase them from alibaba or walmart instead?
Whichever markets choose to make such a system would surely do so with the assumption that they are the best choice, and they will recommend their items. I doubt many consumers would go through the friction of comparison-shopping a whole list to find other things that are suitable substitutes.
Your comment to me seems akin to the silly statement "shoe stores should not display their wares in the window because consumers then might go buy them at other shoe shops for cheaper"
> Appealing to people who "want to cook", but doing so by turning yourself into a production-line assembler.
That's because you ignore the true reason why it's interesting. I got 800 games on Steam but when goes time to play, god it's awful. Never had this issue before having that many games. Recipes suffer from the choice overload.
Personally I also love it to try new ingredients. When it's part of a full meal, some ingredients "scare" me less.
> Like saying your want to learn carpentry, by buying some Ikea flat-pack.
No holes were predrilled in the yu choy I got in my recipes yesterday. It would be closer to get a few boards that you have to cut/trim/drill yourself, which as far as I know, seems to be a great way to learn.
> I'd quite enjoy one that let you browse recipes and would stick all the ingredients in your basket - but then added some intelligence.
It's weird but I don't trust my supermarket to offer me great recipes. I trust them to offer me food, but not great recipes. Even more so considering their goals is to sell food, not sell recipes.
> Or asks "what's in your fridge"
I agree but this always come down to the laziness out of me. Lazy me can easily click on an image that seems like a great meal, but way less on a adding every single things I may have in my fridge.
> Blue Apron and the rest seem to be trying to solve a real problem, completely the wrong way.
I personally think you just don't really understands whats the real problem.
You only need a sprig or two of tarragon, though. The grocery store won't sell you it in that form, but for a company making a few thousand meals it's perfectly doable. A rasher or two of bacon, a quarter cup of creme-fraiche, a sprig of tarragon, and a single pie-sized circle of pastry should easily be doable for £5.
Many grocery stores all over the US have that. Not for fresh spices though, maybe the poster was thinking of fresh tarragon, which is typically sold for around $2.50 for far more tarragon than you need for a single portion of anything.
it wasn't strange to me that they packing ingredients to prepare at home, what was strange is trying to get by on an idea easily replicated by businesses local and with a more direct connection to the same customer.
there was nothing blue apron or similar really was able to do to set themselves apart from what a grocery chain could do, less even.
I've also seen them at a local organic-y place near Davis Square.
In addition, whether or not they're "meal kits," you see more and more "one bowl meals" and the like (that you can add meat to if you're so inclined) in the produce section of grocery stores.
All of that boils down to 'looking up a recipe, buying ingredients, and cooking them' :) i.e. the hassle we want to avoid.
I do agree however, that grocery stores will own this category.
Reasons it's not happening yet:
1) Grocery store chains tend to not be very innovative
2) The 'behaviour' of such things is still maybe niche. Most people will take the 'pre cooked'. It's like books: few people actually read.
3) My bet is that small, local providers like Blue Apron end up proving such things. Some of them will grow, but mostly we'll see a lot of players and a lot of brands, just like everything else in food.
Blue Apron is a rational premise, just not quite sticky enough for the price.
Where we can connect some nearby retired folks to make dishes for others, without all the fuss and excessive additives (sugar, salt, butter) of commercial restaurants. Plus, allowing the cutlery and dishes to be reused (no plastics or disposables).
Probably with an emphasis on delivering multiple servings of food in one go, and with lead times in the days. Uber Eats with its single serves and lead times in the minutes is too wasteful.
Easier said than done, and a lot of friction in establishing a relationship like that.
The first group were never going to use blue apron. They have the skills and the interest to do it all themselves. The latter group is tricky to hold onto: margins must be relatively thin, and there’s a high probability that these users will learn how to assemble their own recipes to cut out even the razor thin margins that blue apron was making.
The result is a rotating user base, and extremely advertising costs to acquire new customers. This is probably why they’re on podcasts all the damn time.
There are several people I know who have used BlueApron for 2+ years. They are all married, no kids. They enjoy cooking, but they just as much enjoy going out to eat. They have steady, good paying jobs, so they are not price sensitive.
To them, BlueApron is an entertainment expense. It gives them variety in their diet, and makes for a good time when preparing it. Often they'll have friends over and add in some sides or something to make it a dinner date with people they'd otherwise just go out to eat with.
During the week I'm mostly cooking for myself when I'm not traveling and the 2-person orientation is sort of the nail in BA's coffin for me. And, on weekends, when I'm often cooking for others I rather enjoy planning a menu and making a meal from scratch.
If I were regularly cooking during the week with someone else, assuming we weren't regularly coming home too late, I could definitely see using these services off and on just for the sake of some variety.
Your categories match my experience living in Silicon Valley, but outside of that bubble is not accurate at all. In the real world most people I know cook at home by default. Ordering take out or eating out is the exception, even if they're not foodies (or poor).
After 10 years of marriage, my wife thought it would be helpful for me to start cooking, as she was getting stressed out with our 2 years old.
We used Blue Apron as the starting point.
I can't tell you how much time we save in planning meals and trips to the store. My wife doesn't have nag me about what I what I want for the week's dinner. The quality of the food and the time saved is well worth the price. I know there are some disadvantages about Blue Apron such as waste, carbon food print etc...
Cooking with Blue Apron is now extremely relaxing for me as I cook and just tune into NPR or teach my son to cook. Out of 100 meals I would say that we only had maybe one that was mediocre.
I suspect Blue Apron will survive as it will probably be taken over or bought out. It's kinda the leader of the pack and the market will eventually consolidate. It also helps that I might have helped I bought about $1000 discounted gift cards at Costco.
>I suspect Blue Apron will survive as it will probably be taken over or bought out. It's kinda the leader of the pack and the market will eventually consolidate. It also helps that I might have helped I bought about $1000 discounted gift cards at Costco.
I'm not so sure. Even most people I know who have tried Blue Apron tend to either regress back to not cooking or they "graduate" to buying their own ingredients and planning their own meals. It's not like grocery delivery is that different or hard to do.
I actually think it is pretty great as a way to build the habit of cooking at home and to get comfortable enough in your kitchen. But it only takes about a month to do that. Afterwards it's so much cheaper and easier to just handle the recipes and cooking yourself. Once you get a feel for proportions and learn some staple recipes Blue Apron adds very little extra value and a lot of extra headache (no flexibility in the menus, fixed proportions, etc.) So there isn't much point in doing it.
Also, their vegetarian options too often tend to either be carbs + cheese or bland vegetables. I'd much rather just make Indian food at home.
Yep - I'm in the latter. Did Blue Apron for about 9 months and then "graduated" to making my own recipes based on my experience cooking with them. Just last night I made gnocchi with a gorgonzola cream sauce.
It's a great way to learn how to cook, and though I cancelled a while ago, I do sometimes miss their precise portioning. That is probably Blue Apron's best long-term value for customers: accurate grocery delivery.
As long as you have low customer acquisition costs you can still have a large stable business like this. Look at huggies diapers, some kids spend a lot longer in diapers than others but generally it’s a short but profitable window.
>As long as you have low customer acquisition costs
Blue Apron doesn't though. And it doesn't seem like they have much luck lowering their customer acquisition costs. There are a lot more options for feeding yourself at or below $10 per meal than there are for containing poop.
>>> Look at huggies diapers, some kids spend a lot longer in diapers than others but generally it’s a short but profitable window.
Diapers are a much more stable market, with predictable values in birth rates that can be used to expand or contract the business as needed. Excess supply can also be stored for an indefinite period of time.
With food and home cooked meals, you never know when someone is going to wake up decide they want to learn to cook. Do they decide to learn to cook when they are 18? When they get married? When they have kids? When they get diagnosed with some diet related health condition? There is too much uncertainty about when someone will enter the target segment for there ever to be a stable market. Excess supply also doesn't store well, it'll go bad before the market can absorb the excess supply ;)
Perishable goods have a very different business model than non-perishable goods ;)
Completely agree. Blue Apron occupies a very unstable niche, with high customer acquisition costs to boot.
I'm in the "former" category, where after about a month I realized (a) I like to eat more than I like to cook, and (b) the time it took me to prepare 3 meals a week made it actually more of a stress-inducing thing to me than a relaxing thing.
There's definitely a use case for these services. It's just a fairly narrow one.
- Willing and able to cook for, ideally, more than one person
- Able to plan a week ahead for the most part
- OK with paying a non-trivial premium to have a lot of menu planning and shopping be handled by someone else
I tried Blue Apron and thought it was "OK" but I could never really make these meal kit services work out for me. t obviously works for some people though.
It's targeting a narrow intersection of people who are rich enough to pay $10 per serving for a meal, have the time to cook every night, and are okay with the lack of customizability in ingredients.[1]
We considered it but it made no sense for us. It would save us a little money versus eating out all the time, but it doesn't solve the time problem (my wife and I both get home around 7:30 or 8:00 and need to get the family fed immediately). It reduces grocery shopping time, but we do that on the weekend where we actually have a couple of hours to spare, unlike after work.
I would rather see a high-end TV dinner service.
[1] And also apparently don't have any kids--paying $10 for an adult is one thing, paying $10 for a full meal for a child is another.
> I would rather see a high-end TV dinner service.
Am exploring that market at the minute, the model would be order on your morning commute, pick up freshly prepped ready meals from your transport hub on the way home.
Interested in talking to anyone who's looking for something in that space.
We have a few of those in LA. They're called My Fit Foods and other similar names. They prep the food that day and offer breakfast, lunch, and deener options. Each meal runs 8 - 12 bucks. They're pretty wholesome usually, but they have a decent selection.
My fit foods went bankrupt not too long ago, but most have been transformed to local versions of the same company.
Looks like a very similar model - am interested in the local versions (for my interests in food, looking for something more sustainable than "startupy").
Sounds similar to munchery but without the delivery. Question is if the hubs are located in convienent locations or not. If you make me sit in rush hour traffic to pick up dinner not already on the way, that’s a no go.
My London-centric nature essentially has it as being train/metro/tube only, not sure it'd be worthwhile scaling to locations without intense public transport density.
Thanks for the link - seems like a lot of their issues are based on playing it as a "startup" (although in the UK you can use a home kitchen for commercial food, you just still need to register with the FSA).
Am planning it as "just a regular" food business, so not looking for the rocket-style growth it seems they were banking on. Interesting story of failure in the space though!
My two working parent family used it for a while. While it didn't save any time vs. cooking something from scratch, it really helped us broaden the food horizons of our family. We
(including a formerly finicky child) ate a lot of things that we normally wouldn't, and fewer trips to the local market meant fewer impulse buys of random other food. That meant dinner was all we had and it was a great tool to get our child to try new things and to start to enjoy eating new things (catfish tacos, squid ink pasta, etc).
We eventually stopped due to many delivery issues we encountered. Our deliveries would frequently come one or even two days late and sometimes not at all. My favorite was when a weeks worth of deliveries all arrived on the same day.
And that is a very narrow intersection, hence the penny stock status. I knew Blue Apron was going to fail when my Mom kept trying to give me hers that were going to go rotten soon.
I cook because it's cheaper than eating out. But the trade-off is the time I spend researching and preparing healthy and diverse meals. I'm only feeding myself and fresh food goes bad quickly, so I also don't have the benefits of scale. The problem is, currently you can only pick two out of cheap, good and quick.
So a better product which solves a real problem needs to nail all three. It needs to be cheap, good (fresh, healthy and diverse) and quick.
Being quick involves subsidizing not only the meal prep but also the research involved in making good choices. Properly educating consumers on basic nutrition and using graphic labels to encode nutritional information at a glance.
Being good means sourcing fresh meat and vegetables. Properly flash freezing, separating, storing and shipping meals to maximize longevity and the area covered by each commissary kitchen.
Being cheap is the hard part. First, you and your shareholders have to be willing to put the consumer first. as Bezos did with Amazon. Profits are a side-effect of maximum efficiency, but the baseline is whether the customer is happy with the product.
You also have to reduce waste as much as possible by streamlining recipes and ingredients and measuring portions precisely. Reduce plastic use. If you ship meals with special packaging like refrigerants, encourage monthly rebates for customers who ship them back out in bulk.
It's not a hard problem, the issue is that of funding. Shareholders expect a certain margin or eventual buyout whereas the food industry has notoriously low margins to begin with. Existing convenience meal businesses tackle the higher end market as a result. But the convenience meal lifestyle is slowly becoming a necessity across demographics, and a company which tackles this issue smartly and aims for sub-$5 meals, and offers great bulk prices for monthly memberships, and is willing to not be raking in billions, will come out on top.
Yeah. Much as I like cooking, there are many evenings when I just want to pop something in the oven. I have a few options. (Have a great local turkey farm and there are a few traditional comfort food staples in the grocery store that I like.) But it would be nice to be able to just buy a frozen lasagna as good as the ones I sometimes make and freeze.
How would you define "rich enough"? My SO and I collectively make $80k per year and we can afford 4 meals a week. Granted, it's a little more expensive than planning our own meals. But it saves shopping and planning time, so the overall time commitment is at most an hour per day (the time it takes to cook the meal).
> OK with paying a non-trivial premium to have a lot of menu planning and shopping be handled by someone else
This is the one I've never been able to get past. For what these services cost, I can have someone else prepare my meal that will taste just as good or better. Why would I not do that?
I get if you're trying to learn to cook or something like that, but that only sounds like a temporary problem.
$10 per serving is essentially fast food prices in the bay area - you can't really get a healthy meal with meat and vegetables.
My family used Blue Apron for a while when we first had kids, and it was great for our lifestyle. We did move on to a service that optimizes grocery shopping so we can buy ingredients for a week's worth of meals in one shopping trip.
Edit: for those who asked, I am using thefresh20 now. It's pretty low-tech (just a weekly pdf). Besides being straightforward to shop for, it tells you how to prep stuff ahead of time. For example, bake 8 potatoes the first day and use half in a recipe today, half in a few days. Cook some pork chops today and save some for fried rice in a few days. Cook a pot of quinoa today and use it throughout the week.
There are a number of other services out there that allow you to customize things like servings/calories per meal and diet types but I am dubious about how well they could possibly optimize shopping and prep to use up a whole quanta of an ingredient over multiple recipes in the course of a week to be near the manually curated efficiency of fresh 20. If anyone has experience with those please let me know!
And that makes sense for those living there, but not everyone lives in the Bay Area or pays anything near what people pay there for things. I would think for a service like this to succeed, it needs to be applicable to places where you can go to a real restaurant for ~$10-15 a person. Which is most of the US where the other 315million Americans live.
Eh what? I can eat out at a restaurant for like $15 with tax and tip, and the packed food usually lasts me an additional meal. I avoid pricey restaurants though.
Implying that $10 and $15 are approximately the same is telling. I'm talking about 6 to 40 person-meals per week for a family. (FWIW $10 per person-meal from blue apron is at the high end of home cooking, unless you are cooking high end ingredients like fancy fish or steak or including wine)
Especially when you start really planning meals around whatever is on sale that week and carrying ingredients from one meal to another, $10 per person per meal is definitely a lot. Also, pantry items where that $10 can get you a 5# bag of rice that lasts for many meals.
One of my favorite personal discoveries is to buy the whole broccoli, use the florets as a vegetable side, and the stems in a soup. The sturdier stems hold up better with the same flavor.
You said $10 per serving. I average $7.50 per serving from eating out ($15 per eat-out which lasts me two meals, since I go for restaurants which provide generously sized dishes).
I'm unaware of any common restaurant (i.e. not fast food) where you can get a full meal for much below $10. Factor in the additional cost of a non-water beverage (soda or beer, for instance) as well as a tip, and it's likely you're spending $15 or more.
This article from BusinessInsider (2015) indicates that the average cost per meal at common "chain restaurants" starts at $12.17. Over half of the restaurants on the list have average meal prices in excess of $15. [1]
Dishes are usually $10-$12. Slightly less for some restaurants, but usually at those restaurants I need to order something else as well (e.g. $2 naan at an Indian restaurant or fries at a burger place). Add in tax and 20% tip and it comes out to ~$15.
What service did you move on to? I'd be interested a better curated grocery delivery system than Amazon Fresh (which is already saving us a ton of time as a busy family).
> Take a blue apron recipe with you to a grocery store, and I bet you can buy all the ingredients for $2.5 a meal
Where the hell are you shopping that you can self-construct a blue apron meal for $2.50?
$2.50 will get you the basil to use in the recipe and that is about it. Then you need the chicken ($7 minimum) and produce ($5-$7). The starches ($2-$5). Any one-off spices (could be $1 or $15 depending).
Sorry, but people who brag about eating for $2.50/meal either live in places with a dirt cheap cost of living or don't know how to add.
To me, your prices seem unrealistic. You can get chicken for like $2 a pound, and you're not using a pound of chicken for a single serving of any meal, so it's something like a dollar or less per person. Starches are dirt cheap, $5 buys you enough pasta or rice or potatoes for at least a dozen servings. E.g. a five pound bag of rice is $3 in Walmart, and if it's a side to some chicken&produce dish, then that comes out to something like $0.20 for starches per person - an order of magnitude difference.
Not in the same quantities you can't. If something calls for, say, eggs, you aren't going to buy a single egg, you're buying six at a minimum. If something calls for fresh cilantro, you're buying a whole bunch.
If you're cooking for a family, fine, but cooking for one or two? The food waste problem sucks, and you can't really get around it unless you like eating the same thing for days in a row.
Please, you do what we have been doing for the last 100 years. Freeze the extra. So you get 1 meal that is fresh and two that are frozen you can eat in a couple weeks. Do you honestly think that when you go to applebee's (or similar) the food didn't come out of a freezer?
But maybe the real problem here is lack of "cooking" knowledge. Grinding that cilantro up and mixing it with some garlic and olive oil will extend its life in the fridge for weeks. Or just freeze it, or dry it. Yes, food waste sucks, but that is because a lot of traditional skills have been lost. My wife thinks I'm weird for taking chicken/turkey bones/necks/etc and making stock, but it turns a pile of bones meat scraps into a nice soup.
This is also how to (apparently) run a profitable restaurant. Food rolls down from the fresh vegetables/meat, through the casserole stages until it ends up in a soup somewhere.
Really it doesn't take much effort, but really after a day of work + driving/etc I'm lucky if I have the motivation to tear open a frozen bag of stir fry.
>My wife thinks I'm weird for taking chicken/turkey bones/necks/etc and making stock, but it turns a pile of bones meat scraps into a nice soup.
I was at my dad's over Thanksgiving and we had a pretty good-size turkey. Saved some leftover meat for sandwiches. And then I made turkey soup and stock out of the carcass and some more of the leftover meat. Maybe this is considered weird by SV standards but I'm by no means a pioneer homesteader and this seems absolutely normal to me.
Eggs last for quite some time. Yeah, herbs are an issue if you don't grow them. But not all recipes that call for them really need them. And you can also freeze leftovers that are useful for some purposes. I cook for one during the week. I do eat leftovers but I also repurpose ingredients, freeze things, and definitely don't eat the same thing for days in a row.
> I can have someone else prepare my meal that will taste just as good or better
Maybe. For one thing, it depends on where you live. I guarantee you that I can cook better than pretty much anyplace within a 15 minute drive of my house. Secondly--and this is perhaps at least partly a reflection of how much I eat out when traveling on business--but, when I'm home, I mostly don't want to go out to a restaurant.
When I get home, there’s a 60 min window for socializing and meals before bedtime routines begin. Going out to eat requires picking a location, getting everyone into the car, picking your order at the restaurant, waiting for food, waiting for check, piling in and going home. That just doesn’t fit in 60 min.
On the other hand, grocery shopping requires advance collaborative choice. Sometimes the choosing can take over an hour. Delegating one decider comes with its own hazards, and effectively binds the decider to also be the grocery shopper in order to execute appropriately.
Services like BlueApron solve for that by reducing the number of choices and removing the need to leave the house. If you don’t mind cooking / enjoy picking up new cooking skills, you optimize for stress-free time with your family.
Blue aprons should seek to have some subsidies from states or insurance where they can provide healthy meals to SnAP users, or elderly, or offer it to apartment complexes where they know how many units just want "blue apron sunday dinner" or something
The average SNAP benefit is $126 a month. According to Blue Apron, their price per serving is $10 plus shipping. At their lowest tier, Blue Apron costs $50 a week for 4 servings.
Neither Blue Apron nor SNAP recipients could survive off of one another.
Sounds like they have a lot of high-tech labor costs for a fundamentally low-tech, low-margin business. They were all over my LinkedIn a year or two ago.
Who are the most moon-shot long-term visionaries of the investment market, where their actual investments will exponentially benefit a large group of humans positively over time, aside rom bill gates
They recently added meals that take 20-30min rather than 30-55min and it has made a world of difference, not to mention they expanded the menu. I also find some of the meals tastier because they're simpler rather than using too many ingredients. I still get the occasional bland one, but they have improved.
As a company I wouldn't invest in them. The amount they spend on advertising (e.g. really pricey podcast advertising) with a high churn rate is concerning.
I only used them once and one of the meals was the most complicated hamburger recipe I'd ever made and I didn't think it was really all that good.
I half suspect there are motivations behind making the recipes for these services complex and a little exotic. If they had four ingredient recipes that took 10 minutes of prep, I daresay a lot of people would think "I'm paying 2x to 3x what I would pay in the grocery store for that???"
I'm glad to hear they're simplifying things though. The only reason I'd use something like this is if they did a lot of the pre-prep so it really is a quick meal on a weekday night when I really just don't have the energy to do more than minimal cooking. (Especially when there's so much in the grocery store that's partly prepped these days.)
They seem to frequently include one atypical or exotic ingredient, I’ve always figured it was a way to get people to think it’s something they can’t get at the store and thus more likely to purchase.
To be honest it does work on me. I get a BA shipment here or there and it’s always because they’re using something I wouldn’t normally work with or see at the at the store.
I personally don’t mind most of the other common complaints, I tend to do a lot of scratch cooking so these are usually quick recipes in comparison. Likewise it tends to be cheaper per-meal than my normal dinners.
The first meal I got from BA was some sort of poached Cod with ramps. Ramps I had never heard of although I understand now that some people get very excited by them during their short season. (I think I've seen them once in a grocery store--Whole Foods naturally.) However, I'm pretty sure that if you substituted scallions, the world would not come to an end.
I think you're spot on with that last assessment. Generally those ingredients I mentioned I'm sure don't make a big difference over some other reasonable substitution.
For me, it makes for a nice change of pace anyways and as I've mentioned in another comment the BA meals tend to be quicker/easier to prepare than my normal cooking so that's also a nice change of pace. I tend to order one shipment ever 2 months or so on average I'd guess.
There's definitely a novelty factor--sometimes it pays off and other times it doesn't. I think "the standards" for American cuisine have the least payoff. I like that they would rarely repeat the grain/rice. It's likely a lot cheaper for them to acquire something popular in Italy in bulk, interesting to try in a controlled setting, and if I want to make the recipe again I can swap it out for white rice.
> The only reason I'd use something like this is if they did a lot of the pre-prep so it really is a quick meal
That sounds like a different market than Blue Apron is going for. From what I've seen they seem to be focusing on people who like getting whole fruits and vegetables and you cut and peel them yourself. People who are interested in cooking, but don't necessarily have formal training. Other meal kits will probably be a better fit for a quick, weeknight meal with little to no prep.
What's really weird to me is that you can go to the store and get food that's basically ready to serve after you warm it up.
You could eat steaks, fish sticks, brats, chicken, pork, chicken nuggets, fries, a huge variety of vegetables ready to be steamed from the frozen section. You could eat that every day and pay a quarter of what it costs for this stuff to be hand picked for you.
You don't even need to season any of it and it's delicious fried up in olive oil and butter and a little salt.
Most of the prepared food in the grocery store that you just need to heat up isn't very appealing to me for the most part. Fish sticks and chicken nuggets, blech.
However, there are a lot of things like salmon, brats (as you say), etc. that mostly do just need a quick saute or bake. And vegetables can be very quick and simple as well.
However, some people do like the idea of more complex meals and some of those people find BA makes it a bit easier to get there.
Don't tell me blue apron doesn't have fish sticks ;)
I usually use fish sticks or other frozen fish for making fish sandwiches. 10 mins of cook time vs 60+ for fresh breaded baked fish. But to each their own!
I'm probably fussier than I used to be and the fact that I work mostly from home gives me more flexibility than I used to have :-)
I'd be more likely to bread and saute some flounder--which is a pretty quick meal too. (And flounder is sold in vacuum packed individual servings so it can definitely serve as a "what's in the freezer?" meal.)
I buy the family size of Blue Apron for myself (12 meals at $8.99 per serving). There is no food in NYC of any considerable size/quality/taste that is a quarter of that price for that amount of calories. Ramen noodles and tuna maybe..
> I buy the family size of Blue Apron for myself (12 meals at $8.99 per serving). There is no food in NYC of any considerable size/quality/taste that is a quarter of that price for that amount of calories. Ramen noodles and tuna maybe..
I live in midtown Manhattan, and I could easily purchase 12 prepared meals per week of good quality for $9/meal.
In fact, that's one of the reasons I stopped using Blue Apron when I tried it - even before I factored in the cost of my time, it was slightly more expensive per meal than ordering delivery on Seamless. Once I factored in 15-30 minutes per meal (30-60 minutes divided by two servings), it was clearly way more expensive.
The other reason, though, was that I didn't live in a building with a doorman, and the last delivery window they had on weekdays was 6-8PM. I couldn't guarantee I'd be home by 6PM, and I wasn't thrilled with the idea of them just dumping a box of food on the stoop where anyone could take it.
I go to cheap grocery stores all the time. You said to find comparable stuff for a quarter of the price. I can't get a high quality meal of the same caloric value for $2.50, that's what I was getting at.
We've been using Gobble and we really like it. Usually the 4-year-old can't/won't eat it, but at least my wife and I don't have to worry about what to make for dinner 3 times a week. The food is really tasty, simple to make, one pan and takes around 30 minutes (not the 15 minutes that they advertise, but still ok.)
It's really tough to time a recipe. Especially, because Blue Apron has so many whole foods that need peeling and cutting--it's not like you just put it in the oven and set a timer. I do think their estimations are a bit idealistic. I've seen the prep times vary 2-3x depending on who in the family makes it.
One thing I've noticed that can improve prep times is taking a basic knife skills class. You'll notice grandmothers who have been cooking for decades are often pretty clunky with a knife. There are still some things that you have limited control over that will slow you down: counter space, kitchen layout, sink size, or what bowls and pots you have.
Years ago I feel like they had more leftovers. Usually, it was the side dish where they gave you a whole head of cabbage instead of half to prep. It was usually mentioned in the recipe. I had been meaning to look back to see if they amended the recipes when they repeated them removing the leftovers--but I haven't used Blue Apron in probably a year now.
I'm glad you learned that roasting vegetables are dead simple and delicious. I feel like growing up with canned and boiled vegetables this was somehow a well kept secret until recently. But there are other meal-kits out there that vary widely on complexity and prep time.
I agree that there is just enough food, maybe not enough. But then again, I'm dropping weight. So maybe a good thing.
I got faster making meals over time.
For me right now time is more important than money.
I don't think have ever eaten more roasted beets, carrots, cauliflower, kale and broccoli in the last two years, than I have in my life. (and enjoyed.)
Roasting vegetables seems so obvious in retrospect and, even for a group, it's actually much easier to control doneness. I'm not sure why it mostly only appeared as a technique (outside of root vegetables and squash) relatively recently in the US.
Because when you're paying $10 for one meal you kind of hope it goes a little further.
To put this in perspective, if I go to the store and buy a 10 dollar meal, I'll be eating: porter house, slathered in butter and olive oil, asparagus fried in the juices, with a baked potato. I'll have also a side of chilean grapes and a slice of cheese cake for desert.
10 dollars is a crazy amount for a dinner. (Ok that might cost more like $15)
A porterhouse alone is typically 8 to 10 dollars, so no you're meal you listed there is more like 20. Sure Blue Apron is expensive but don't go making it sound like you can have a big nice steak, a baked potato, an expensive dessert, some butter and vegetables for near the same cost.
If you buy every single ingredient absolutely but that's not how cooking-at-home food math works.
You head to the grocery store and buy whatever beef cut is on sale so if you're buying a porterhouse it's because it's $4-6. Your pantry is already stocked with butter, flour, eggs, sugar, and potatoes. You had some almost stale graham crackers lying around which is why you decided to make cheesecake. You hit up the store buy some asparagus, cream cheese, and whatever fruit is in season rounding out to about $10-12 bucks and you've pretty much got the meal with plenty of leftovers and leftover ingredients for whatever you do next.
You can spread a good cheese out over multiple meals to lower the cost but I'm not seeing how to get even a brie without going over budget here though.
When I spend a lot on food I don’t hope there’ll be a ton of it - I hope it’s high quality. I think BlueApron aims at higher quality rather than massive portions designed to be too much.
Blue Apron misses massively on the high quality front, IMO. Every single beef cut we got from them ranged from terrible to barely mediocre and many made me think of Rodney Dangerfield's quote in Caddyshack: "This steak still has marks where the jockey was hitting it..."
Their chicken was generally very good and pork OK and I'm not a BA hater, though we did initially enjoy it and eventually stopped because the value simply wasn't remotely there for us.
One benefit of cooking "a meal" is that the effort to cook 1 meal for 2 people is not significantly different than the effort to cook 2 meals for 2 people. Since Blue Aprons competition is people cooking and preparing their own meals, it seems like a reasonable criticism to me.
Because the second meal is going to be eaten at work: I only have a microwave, they frown on anything sharper than a butter knife, and my time is limited. There are lots of options that can work; but they compromise taste, quality, speed, price, or time - often all of the above. (It need not be - but good luck finding exceptions). Making a little extra and bringing it in latter is useful.
Because if it takes 30 minutes to prepare one meal, but 35 minutes to double your ingredients, and prepare two meals worth of food, the second option is probably a better use of your time.
> my wife thought it would be helpful for me to start cooking, as she was getting stressed out with our 2 years old.
This seems like a good opportunity to see if there is more labor (emotional or physical) that your wife is doing that she could use a hand with.
> My wife doesn't have nag me about what I what I want for the week's dinner
Meal planning is work. She is doing a job for the family. She is trying to include your preferences in the calculus of meal planning. Balancing nutrition, variety, individual preferences, cost, and difficulty is a non-trivial problem to solve every week.
When you say she is 'nagging' you about what you want for dinner, take a step back and consider what that is telling others (including your wife) about how much you value that work.
Tip from a long-time husband: If you often have the perception of your wife "nagging" you, there's probably a relationship-antipattern in effect that you'll want to deal with as soon as you have the emotional energy. IMO, perceived nagging can be the narrow end of a big wedge between a couple.
The point I was trying to articulate was broader than individual relationship advice. It's more about recognizing and respecting the work everyone does -- especially the work that's taken for granted.
I thought the Blue Apron recipes were too complicated, used too many pans to wash, and wasted too much packaging material. I found no time savings when was all said and done. I have an easy enough time following recipes from books like America's Test Kitchen cooking for two [1], etc, and spending 10 or 15 minutes planning meals each week. Plus, I probably spend quite a bit less, and if I meal plan correctly, I'll do some form of big-batch meal one night that then becomes leftovers or other meals...
I did like not making dinner decisions, though, when the meals were things I liked.
Note: I haven't used the service in nearly four years.
> I thought the Blue Apron recipes were too complicated, used too many pans to wash, and wasted too much packaging material.
I've rarely seen a BA recipe use more than one pot and one pan, most, IME, use a single pan (often with a wipe-and-reuse step to do that.)
If anything, BA goes out of their way to minimize the required cooking vessels compared to most recipe sources (even America’s Test Kitchen, which is actually pretty good about not gratuitously using cookware.)
I first used them about three years ago and most recently about one year ago; packaging changed a bit, but the overall complexity and demands of the recipes didn't seem to much.
Of course, change before that I couldn't speak to.
BA recipes have gotten WAY WAY simpler over time so your two different experiences are almost certainly explained by using the service at different times.
The problem is the extremely small niche it fills. The market is people who have enough time and patience to cook their own meals, but not enough to grocery shop and look up a recipe. If you're new to cooking that's one thing, but I'd imagine many users eventually "outgrow" the service as they become more skilled and/or realize how much the convenience is costing.
We use a similar service that's closer to a CSA + recipe cards. We get a basic recipe and a bunch of raw veggies/locally produced products.
Meal planning is work. Grocery shopping is work. Cooking is work. We've decided that cooking is the work we enjoy, and the other parts are work we'd rather pay someone to do for us. We are more than capable of putting together a meal plan, we just value our time more than money and have found the right service to pay to help us in that regard.
I’m really surprised... you don’t have any online grocery shopping in US?
I have been buying groceries only online for years and I wouldn’t definitely call work to click a couple times more on the ingredients that you need for some meal.
If you are particularly lazy you can even create shopping lists for every meal that you need and add all of them with a click.
What countries have widespread online grocery shopping? I've seen it advertised a bit in the US (more and more recently), but haven't seen it gain a strong foothold yet. I've had some friends that used Amazon Fresh. I've used it once or twice, but wasn't confident it was price competitive and also didn't want to wait the day or two when I could just pick it up for dinner tonight. For me it's just an expectation and familiarity thing (I get confused about all the Amazon services and forget that most of them exist).
I've heard some people talk about why grocery delivery "won't work" in the US. There's a huge last-mile problem. For the first few years, Blue Apron was northern east-coast, then west-coast only. It took awhile to get most states covered. Another argument I've heard is that people like to pick their food. They're worried they'll get stuck with blemished/bruised food.
Online grocery delivery is fairly widespread in the US at least in the general vicinity of urban areas. I've had Peapod available for over ten years in the Northeast even though I'm far enough out of Boston that I don't get most of the delivery service things.
However, the only time I've used it was when I had a broken foot and, while I could drive to the store or pick up one or two things, doing a grocery shopping was difficult.
At least at the time, they'd invariably be out of something I needed for a recipe and/or they'd make substitutions that weren't really what I would have wanted. Quality was "OK." Normally, it's not a big deal for me to go to the store and I just didn't love the service in general.
In UK all the big chains give you the option for online delivery.
The quality is not a problem and it’s fairly easy to switch to a competitor in case it is.
Edit:
Ah Amazon fresh is simply not working as a food delivery service.
They handle the trolley like a normal amazon order, it’s not optimised for tens of items, they mess up a lot of orders and the refund workflow is simply ridiculous.
If you only ever used Amazon fresh for grocery shopping then I can understand your issues.
The problem with online groceries is lack of control over quality. Particularly fresh fruits, meats, etc - they'll grab what's on top, as far as I can tell. This is usually the fruit that's bruised, leafy vegetables that are wilted, the meat that's closest to date, etc.
Our local store's online service is actually one of the better ones I've tried in terms of finding things and getting the task done - but they fail in quality at the end.
We buy a box that specifically is sourced in our local area. Online grocery shopping solves the 'trip to the store' but doesn't solve meal planning, sourcing local ingredients, managing a shopping list, etc.
Right now, the cost of my box includes all those steps. It also occasionally includes locally sourced meat, fish, dairy, or eggs. I can find information on the farms where those items came from easily.
I value that service enough to pay a small premium for it.
Most of the online grocery delivery shops give you food from local producers, all of them must indicate the origin, at least in uk.
For some recipes you can’t have local produce, by definition.
Your box doesn’t solve the trip to the store because you still need to buy household stuff, breakfast food and all the other stuff that you use daily that is not sold by blue apron or these kind of services.
The premium doesn’t seem small to me given that is 2-3x a grocery store, at least in case of blue apron...
I don’t think that there is a huge market for people that don’t want to click a couple times more to add the ingredients for a recipe (or actually just a click if you add it once in a shopping list), that are willing to pay a premium but that still need to go to the grocery store for the normal shopping and do all the cooking.
"This solved a problem for me, and I found it valuable."
"No, you're wrong, it'd didn't solve that problem for you."
Wat? I'm able to evaluate a cost benefit scenario in the context of my own life quite adequately. The stuff we need from the store these days is staples, which we buy rarely in bulk.
I said that I don’t think that there are many people that benefit from this scenario for the reasons that I wrote.
If you benefit from it being aware of the alternatives of course you can use it.
> Meal planning is work. Grocery shopping is work.
There's definitely a time limit to this. As you get better at cooking, you get better at thinking of recipes that don't have ingredients that quickly spoil, and/or can be cooked from frozen, or can be frozen after cooking, or can be portioned out as part (let's say) half the meals you cook this week.
These habits accumulate, they don't appear all at once. Worse for a service like blue apron: cooking a lot of new recipes fosters that sort of thinking.
I think an important perspective to remember is that most styles of cooking were come up with by people who didn't have refrigeration, although they weren't as fragmented as we are (lots of single people and couples due to capitalist alienation.) When you tighten the constraint of the number of people being cooked for while loosening the constraint of how long ingredients will last and how long things you cook can be saved (without changing the taste much e.g. pickling and drying), things come out about even.
In my case it was a combination of that and quality problems. (This was Hello Fresh, not Blue Apron though). We had a lot of great meals, used the "family plan" so we'd have left overs, but there was some kind of inflection point where we started have regular issues with the meats. In a period of about 6 weeks we had 4 or 5 problems. Beef that was open and dropping it's liquid out. 3 chicken meals in a row where it gave off a foul odor of sulfur, indicating it had spoiled. We had issues with other fresh ingredients as well, though these were the only ones that ruined the meal completely.
Each time, Hello Fresh customer service was good in giving a refund and even a meal credit, but it was too much. You can't plan your meals when there get's to be a 1 in 3 chance your food is spoiled. We cancelled, but by that time we already had about 20 solid recipe cards for dishes we loved and could easily do ourselves, so we didn't bother looking for another meal service. Maybe we will if/when we get bored with our choices again, but it would probably be temporary given the premiums paid.
I'm looking towards Amazon's purchase of Wholefoods and what that might do for meal services to bring the cost down substantially, then I'd consider a regular subscription.
This is the sort of binary differentiation that has led to countless services being discounted on virtually identical criteria. AWS, for instance.
But it isn't so simple. I live in Canada and have used a couples of services and currently and semi-regular with makegoodfood (which I assume is very similar to Blue Apron). I'm a pretty decent cook and baker, have all of the cookware, and go to the grocery store relatively regularly, but still I make use of it because it isn't simply that they give me ingredients.
I like their menu. They constantly surprise me with good meals with great ingredients. Things that I would have never, in a million years, have chosen on my own. And the recipes (and thus, the meted out ingredients) have been almost perfect. This is a far cry from finding recipes online and replicating them -- this food vendor has been completely incentivized to make their creations perfect, versus recipe sites like AllRecipe where it's just user contributions, often with shockingly bad errors in some top recipes (pancakes with 3 1/2 tablespoons of baking powder to 1 1/2 cups of flour? Give me a break... 4.5 stars)
Cost wise there is no way I could go to the grocery store and buy the ingredients for less. I should say that I get the 4 meal versions (so the shipping is less a component of the price), but to get all of the often odd spices, small amounts of various things like odd ciders, vinegar, etc, it would be very pricey to replicate. Cooking interesting meals is expensive because you can't buy exactly what you need for most things. Not to mention that it wouldn't just be time consuming trying to find every oddball ingredient, it's stressful too. But every couple of weeks I get a box with very, very high quality meats, fish, perfectly portioned out spices and ingredients. It's so much nicer.
This is a bit like the "cloud server" versus "your own raw metal" discussions. In the end many underestimate the advantages of the former, and grossly underestimate the cost and inconvenience of the latter.
So my local grocery store chain is offering what blue apron does, except it's just their in house butchers and whatnot preparing the ingredients. Then you buy the kits the way you would groceries: off the shelf or online for pickup.
I'm not sure blue apron has any magic that can't be reproduced by everyone else.
I think this is their biggest weakness: grocery stores are all starting to offer this service, on demand. Grocery stores don't even need to devise the meals themselves, they can outsource that to a third party, and just handle the ingredient gathering component. On the other hand, this improves the utility of grocery stores greatly!
>My wife doesn't have nag me about what I what I want for the week's dinner.
This line has been misinterpreted. My wife would normally ask me on Sunday, what we should have for dinner for the week. My response was usually "whatever is fine", which doesn't really help her. Blue Apron removes that question. My wife never "nagged" me, it was more my fault, because didn't give a good answer. So the overall process was an issue and mostly on my part.
After over ten years of marriage and a child and two dogs, it really becomes clear how important a partnership is.
My son is now learning to cook with me as well. Obviously, men can be in the kitchen as well. It's fun, even if I'm just a "blue apron cook".
I'm also adding this clarification because it's pretty slow here at work and I have to look busy...
I think Blue Apron recipes are generally too fancy: check out Sun Basket. I like them more, and they are pretty good on the timings (if it says 20 mins, it's actually 20 mins).
Agree with everything you said and I don’t think mealkits are the problem, BlueApron isn’t sufficiently addressing the biggest pain point—time. We used BlueApron but moved to Gobble. The dishes tastes better and it takes 1/2 to 1/3 the time to cook compared to BlueApron. That’s less dishes as well so cleanup is fast. I suspect BlueApron is suffering because competitors are better addressing customer needs, not because mealkits are a bad idea.
I've never used Blue Apron and I'm curious - how much actual cooking do you do with a typical Blue Apron meal? Are you preparing, mixing, cutting, etc. or are you primarily mixing together already prepared ingredients and timing them as they cook? Could someone who has never cooked use Blue Apron as a starting point to learn basic cooking skills?
You are preparing, mixing, cutting and cooking everything yourself. You're given the raw ingredients just like you'd buy yourself at the grocery store and given an easy to follow recipe to do everything yourself. If you've never cooked before, you are definitely in their target demographic. The recipes are generally simple enough and explained well enough that it would teach you the basic cooking skills you lack.
It sounds like grocery stores could provide that service pretty easily now that they have online shopping. Send them a recipe and they put the ingredients into a shopping bag ready to go.
They could, but flour is sold in sacks. With blue apron you get your 2/3rd cup of flour not the full sack. The labor to measure out is too high, and you need larger scale factors than a store would have to make automating that work out.
To some degree. The portions the meal kits ship for things like spices are only what's needed for the recipe. For people who don't have a well-stocked larder that's probably one of the big advantages of these kits.
My experience from trying it out a few years ago is that you do all the work. Nothing comes prepared, so basically a box of ingredients + the recipe. I would think it would be a good way to learn how to cook. I hated this, and would rather have all the prep work done for me (e.g. diced onions instead of a whole raw onion). Also I didn't like all the packaging/ice packs/bubble wrap. It all seemed really wasteful compared vs. going to the store with reusable bags.
That being said, the food/recipes were good but the portions were pretty small for two people. I think this would have been perfect when I was single and had a lot more time on my hands.
Recently they’ve been moving towards preprepped or semi prepped ingredients such as presliced beef and chicken, prechopped kale. Not sure if that’s a pro or a con, but it does make the recipes faster to prepare
> Could someone who has never cooked use Blue Apron as a starting point to learn basic cooking skills?
Somewhat; it won't, e.g., teach you knife skills, which are important for both safety and speed in preparation, but it will give you exposure to a wide range of cooking techniques and what they produce.
Ok, but don't you usually go to the supermarket anyway? I don't quite see what the point is, how did you survive until this point? The only thing difference is you are buying some more ingredients.
>> I know there are some disadvantages about Blue Apron such as waste, carbon food print etc...
>How nice of you to throw in a one line disclaimer, I'm sorry but that's not enough and undersells the horrible underbelly of this industry.
I suspect that a lot of the people who make the most noise about the packaging waste eat out a lot. And there's an enormous amount of food waste (and well as all sorts of other costs) in restaurants. But, heh, out of sight out of mind.
What is with this comment on Hacker News? This is not appropriate. GP gave his experience with Blue Apron and you’re here picking fights about his marriage?
I understand if you’re not a fan of Blue Apron, if so, try to stay on message.
There is basically nothing helpful or constructive in your comment here. You seem to be pretty upset about this, do you have some sort of vendetta against Blue Apron?
I have a vendetta about people lying to themselves. Blue Apron saves neither the time nor money people like to think it does. I get a very "the emperor's new clothes" vibe from the whole thing.
I also have a vendetta against people who assume women should do all the cooking and that by asking questions about what someone might want to eat they are "nagging".
I have a vendetta against our culture fof writing off all the waste this produces for such little gain.
You can do that, but shareholders can also do the following in response:
1) Demand a change in leadership, a sale, or any number of significant changes.
2) Bail out en masse and sell, lowering the price even further. Few investors want to jump aboard what appears to be a sinking ship.
Eventually you'll hit the minimum market cap requirement as well, at which point a reverse stock split won't save you from being delisted.
Reverse stock splits simply to avoid being delisted is telling investors "we have no idea how to change direction so we're just gonna kick the can down the road for a bit". They can work sometimes, mostly for:
1) Large, established companies (e.g. AIG). Investors are more willing to believe that this is just a bad stretch for an otherwise valuable company.
2) Inherently risky and volatile industries, like Biotech. Investors are willing to roll the dice a bit more with Biotech because it is entirely possible for a "worthless" company to become very valuable very quickly (e.g. by discovering a new drug, being approved for trials, etc.).
Blue Apron isn't a large company, and it's very unlikely they figure out some magic formula that makes their company significantly more valuable overnight.
EDIT: For a recent example of a company reverse splitting to avoid delisting, check out Helios and Matheson (MoviePass). Even after the reverse split, they're trading for pennies a share. They're almost certainly going to be delisted in the near future.
> You can do that, but shareholders can also do the following in response:
Why would investors retaliate over a reverse stock split though? All other things being equal, isn't it good for shareholders if the stock stays on the NYSE?
> Reverse stock splits simply to avoid being delisted is telling investors "we have no idea how to change direction so we're just gonna kick the can down the road for a bit".
29 days isn't a lot of time, and even if the company quickly pivoted, they can't be sure about how the market will react.
Even if the company believes they can increase their valuation within 29 days, why not have a backup plan also?
> All other things being equal, isn't it good for shareholders if the stock stays on the NYSE?
Shareholders would MUCH rather you have a plan to get back above $1/share. If this is your basement flooding, a reverse split is trying to soak it up with paper towels: It might work temporarily, but eventually you're gonna run out. Shareholders want to know you have a plan to fix the leak, or at least have a plan to call the plumber to fix it.
> 29 days isn't a lot of time, and even if the company quickly pivoted, they can't be sure about how the market will react.
29 days is to trigger the delisting process. NYSE will then contact them about their plan to become compliant (which gives them an extra 10 days to respond), and basically puts them on the equivalent of a PIP (and carries many of the same implications that PIPs do). They're then held to certain financial milestones, which can result in delisting if they don't meet them.
Depending on the company, the whole process can be pretty long - see, for example, HMNY which I think triggered the delisting process officially in June of this year, but obviously is still listed on NASDAQ. If Blue Apron does get delisted, it won't be until well into next year.
> Even if the company believes they can increase their valuation within 29 days, why not have a backup plan also?
Because it's not a plan. It doesn't improve the fundamentals of the company at all. It's an admission that you have no idea how to create more value and are merely buying time. Unless you truly believe that Blue Apron is on a great trajectory and just needs a few years for the market to catch up on that idea, a reverse stock split should anger you as a shareholder.
A backup plan is to take on debt, to replace every single executive, or to seek acquisition. A reverse stock split could be part of a larger plan, but it's not a plan itself. It's a tactic.
Thanks for elaborating on the delisting process; that does seem somewhat more reasonable.
> [A reverse split] doesn't improve the fundamentals of the company at all.
It doesn't improve the fundamentals, but doesn't worsen them either. What's the harm?
> It's an admission that you have no idea how to create more value and are merely buying time.
Not necessarily. The company might have decided that its best option is to take a calculated risk, like creating a new market, introducing an unfamiliar pricing scheme, betting on economies of scale which don't exist yet, etc. In that case Wall Street analysts might maintain a low valuation, but the company isn't doomed, it's just risky.
Investopedia and most finance textbooks define any security trading as less than a dollar as a penny stock. Here is why: If a stock listed on the NASDAQ fails to meet a closing bid price of $1 for at least 30 consecutive days, it is delisted. If a stock listed NYSE trades for under $1 for 29 consecutive days, the company must, within 10 days, submit a plan to the NYSE to move the stock into the $1 territory within a short period of time or it is delisted. The Nasdaq has 3430 companies. The NYSE has 3136 companies. The Amex has 322 companies. Together, the 3 make up well over 95% percent of the publicly traded stock market. Thus the problem with penny stocks is that they can be delisted and then you become a bag holder.
Doing a reverse split just to meet the share price requirements is generally viewed as a sign the company is spiraling out of control (i.e. investors will continue selling to cut their losses).
I don't have the numbers offhand, but I would wager a large sum that companies in trouble doing reverse splits just to meet listing requirements almost always continue tumbling downwards. For a recent example, see Helios and Matheson (MoviePass).
Companies that have successfully navigated reverse splits while publicly-listed (it's very common with pre-IPO companies for sure) are generally much larger and more well-known than Blue Apron (e.g. AIG), or in inherently risky businesses (e.g. Biotech companies).
Perhaps not spiraling but yes it isn't exactly a healthy sign either. It happened a lot during the dot com fallout :-) and even Sun did a reverse split 3:1 on its way out of existence. Literally though it is 'price neutral' and serves to meet investor needs (like to stay listed on an exchange) just as 'forward splits' are done, in part, to enable institutional investors to own fractions that are compatible with their portfolio goals.
> even Sun did a reverse split 3:1 on its way out of existence
"on its way out of existence" being the operative phrase there :).
Either way, Sun had been a public company for 20 years at that point - Blue Apron's been one for a year. Far more reason to believe that Sun could turn it around (and AIG and similar companies), which is why it works for them and not for Blue Apron.
> I don't have the numbers offhand, but I would wager a large sum that companies in trouble doing reverse splits just to meet listing requirements almost always continue tumbling downwards.
If you believe markets are even slightly efficient, you'd lose this wager. Companies announce reverse splits before they happen. Therefore, any predictable price depression will be priced in before the split.
Put another way, your hypothesis is simple and easily testable. Because it's so simple, even if it held true at some point in the past, it would no longer be true because a hedge fund or counter party would have done the work to price it in pre-split.
I feel like grocery stores could easily compete with blue apron for much lower costs. Just ration the food they already have in stock in little packages. Charge a little more than you would otherwise for the employees time picking recipes and combining them into the packages. I would happily use this service at local grocery stores. But compared to grocery stores and cooking from scratch blue apron is too expensive for me.
edit: Blue apron is currently $7.50 - $9.99 per serving. I cook delicious food for myself regularly for less than $4 per serving if I make enough to have leftovers for a day or two. It really seems to me that grocery stores could eat blue apron alive with their lowered costs to provide this same service.
Some already do this [0] and it's 10000x better than Blue Apron/Plated/Hello Fresh. Also they don't have the same perverse incentives that BA/P/HF have. Kroger might make a profit off their meal kits but they aren't 100% reliant on that revenue, in fact I'd bet they don't really care that much if you but the meal kit or all the parts of the meal kit because you are still buying it in their stores.
That's really good to hear. I don't have Kroger near me now unfortunately. I might contact some local grocers and suggest this as I really think this model of cooking could improve my quality of life significantly.
My partner and I have used it a few times and if we like a meal I record the recipe in Paprika (amazing recipe app, really love this app) and we just buy the ingredients "raw". It means we can adjust portion sizes, plan for leftovers, and alter the flavor as desired.
Yup this is already happening. Save-on-Foods in British Columbia has this and they also have their own food delivery service, so they're successfully replicating both Blue Apron and Instacart.
This is like saying, "Why take your car to the mechanic? I do my own repair work and it's way cheaper!"
Blue Apron is for people who don't know what to buy at the grocery store. Grocery stores could definitely attack this by doing what you're suggesting, but part of this is the very concept that I can't walk into a grocery store, buy some chicken, and turn it into something tasty.
I recently subscribed to a different box service, which does all the food prep work for you (chopping/dicing/slicing, making sauces). It generally takes us 20-30 minutes less to prep, cook and clean over Blue Apron. IMO this is the main value prop Blue Apron is missing.
For me, Blue Apron is really only solving for time spent looking up a recipe. In most cases, I'm already going to the grocery store each week. So, where's the value in spending $80/week? If you can shave off the time I spend in the kitchen, that's what I want to pay for. I suspect most people subscribe, love the new recipes they would typically pass over from the internet. And then a month in realize "I'm not saving any time by doing this... I don't want to spend an hour or more in the kitchen tonight... Let's just get take out.".
Aside from that, Blue Apron's fulfillment execution is very wonky. Missing/Bad/Broken ingredients, late boxes (which spoil if not delivered timely), and excessive packing.
Blue Apron is a perfect example of a company that has no moat. Anyone could compete with them -- other delivery startups, Amazon, grocery stores, etc.
There is also no obstacle to Blue Apron customers jumping ship to a competitor. That contributes to making a moat impossible, but it also means Blue Apron and services like it are probably going to be commoditized and forced into a race to the bottom on prices, so I wouldn't expect their future profit margins to be very good.
The only way Blue Apron can differentiate itself is by offering better recipes and better customer service than its competitors. But their competitors can easily become equally good at those things.
Overall it's not a good investment because even if the business manages to survive, it won't be able to make very much money for its shareholders. I guess you could buy the shares cheap and hope Blue Apron will be acquired.
Maybe we're seeing now that burning up hundreds of millions in VC cash to try to acquire users with free meals isn't really a viable business model? After being annoyed hearing them on every podcast I ever listened to for awhile, I signed up for the sole purpose of getting free meals, nothing else. I have a grocery store a mile from my house, I don't need a startup sending me food to cook. I did enjoy the free meals, though! Thank you VCs!
Somewhat OT but do any of these services let you opt into deliveries rather than opt out? As someone who might consider trying out a few meals now and then on a week when I'm not traveling/busy, the menus look appealing, etc. I'd be potentially interested. But I don't want to have to be constantly opting out and/or canceling my subscription (which I'm sure would get messed up sooner or later). It really is a dark pattern that makes me even less likely to use any of these services than I otherwise would.
As someone who's very un-knowledgeable about the stock market - is there something special about the $1 mark? Isn't it arbitrary how the total market value of the company is divided into individual shares?
This is correct. To add to this, you will sometimes see companies attempt to avoid delisting by reverse stock splits (e.g., 10 old shares become 1 new share).
You can only bid up to a cent difference. So if every new bid changes the entire valuation of your company by at least 1% then it becomes very volatile.
Not a stock market expert by any means, but human psychology has a major impact here. That’s why stocks tend to find floors/ceilings at nice round numbers like multiples of ten or whatever. Likewise to a machine a number is a number but to a human who’s evaluating the stock, seeing something less than $1 is a red flag. Someone please correct me if I’m off!
I once worked for their biggest competitor - HelloFresh - as a door-to-door salesperson and I have to say... the way we were told to pitch to potential customers was terrible. We were told to sign up the customer and then then opt-out of delivery for a period of 5 weeks so the customer forgets that they’re still subscribed. The salespeople - mostly ~20 year olds - were also heavily exploited and the wages and commissions not paid. I’m lucky I got out quick because otherwise they pressure you to stay because most of your colleagues become your friends and they then peer pressure you...
I’ll assume it’s quite similar to BlueApron... but I don’t know for sure...
A sales job will always be one of the easiest ways to get hired in the US, and also one of the easiest ways to go unpaid and mistreated for a long time.
It's rare than anyone buys from an outbound sales person anymore, especially when it's not very complex or important.
I'm thoroughly surprised that food service companies would go door to door to beg for revenue. That is far more desperate than spam emailing,
I thought about doing some subscription cooking service before but I recently joined the New York Times free 6 month trial and I didn't know/expect how useful their recipe section is. Takes most of the anxiety of choosing what to cook. For those who know how to cook, I highly recommend trying it out and following their weekly/daily suggestions. With this and the grocery delivery services, it doesn't make financial sense to join subscription food services. Though admittedly, I was taught how to cook at a young age so it's easier for me to follow the recipes.
The NYT has long had a great food section. I also have a couple generations of their cookbooks. I understand how some people appreciate the greater structure of BA and its ilk but, as I wrote elsewhere, it's a pretty narrow use case.
It's sort of like when you see the college kid who doesn't know how to do laundry. It's amusing, but even the most inept and lazy individual doesn't need alot of time to learn how to fold pants. In the food space, if you have the money to have pre-packaged groceries fedexed to your home to save time... why wouldn't you just get takeout?
My wife did a personal chef business with a friend when she got out of school. They would cook meals for dentists and doctors and deliver it. The most insane customers even had clean silverware and plates delivered, and one asked paid a 5x markup for them to go to Williams Sonoma and buy a fully outfitted fancy Thanksgiving dinner, with place settings and all. (ie. "Make it look like the catalog, please")
Blue Apron appeals to some middle ground of harried people, but the customer isn't rich enough to pay a wacky markup for burgers and isn't getting enough done to save a ton of time!
While I enjoyed the trial, the food was great, and the freezer packs they ship with the food have found a new life keeping things in my cooler nice and cold, i can't say that i'm surprised at all. Cancelling the service required jumping through numerous hoops, ultimately requiring me to call them to cancel.
I love Blue Apron but get how they are not exactly profitable. Almost every single week they leave an item out of my box and the customer support resolution is to credit my account $40... for like a $3 head of broccoli. I am not complaining obviously, but yeah, fix the missing ingredients.
How well is papa Murphy’s doing? I found it really odd that I get the ingredients home and then cook again. Now Blue Apron is just making a generic company out of the papa Murphy model. I don’t find it attractive. When I saw that they are going public it just felt like a way to cash out of their short term popularity.
I stopped using blue apron because I can't stand having a subscription to everything. I travel with some frequency and it's just a hassle to have to plan that ahead. All I want to do is order a box for next week without thinking about when I can cancel again for the following week.
I considered trying one of these but I realized I'm not going to get all my at-home meals (or any drinks, snacks, paper towels, etc.) from them. Which means I'm still making a weekly trip to the grocery store. So where's the convenience?
Blue Apron customer here, family of two, three meals a week for the past two years.
I like BA a lot, but I don't see anything about BA that is unique to them. There's probably 5 other options in my area. I stick with BA largely due to momentum.
For those curious:
Pros:
- No food waste. Grocery shopping inevitably resulted in large amounts of food getting tossed due to expiration (or even space concerns).
- "Forced" variety. I have had a _ton_ of meals and ingredients I would have never gotten if I wasn't doing BA. Things I've never heard of and wouldn't know to ask for. Now that I know of them, I bring them into some of my non-BA cooking too. Part of this is just just breaking habits. Before BA there were about 10 meals I was making a lot - I liked them I know how, etc., this meant I was only eating the ingredients in these meals which was probably not "complete nutrition."
- Learning a few "tricks." While the actual BA meals are cook by numbers, the specific steps often contain general purpose info. Random example: Before BA I never cooked with garlic, just never thought of it, but most BA meals use it. Now I use more garlic when I cook non-BA meals.
- Portion control. If I cook from a supermarket (and buy in super market portions) I inevitably make more than a meal, and inevitably _eat_ more than a meal. BA means I make and eat the suggested amount.
- No grocery shopping. I'm not a big fan of shopping and my wife hates grocery shopping, not having to do it is a plus.
- Less eating out. BA isn't cheap, but it's cheaper than most restaurants I'd go to. Having already paid for BA meals encourages eating them at home.
- Fast. The food isn't easier to prepare and certainly doesn't cook faster, but having exactly the right ingredients all together means I don't have to spend time assembling (or googling alternatives when I realize I forgot something).
- Fun. I look cooking, and I like BA cooking. Probably not for everyone, but there you have it.
Cons:
- Not cheap.
- Bummer when you don't like the meal. (Rare, but it happens.) Worse when you _know you're not going to like it_ but it was you're only option. Example: The texture of kale bugs me and sometimes you can't get a meal without it.
- Doesn't scale for guests.
Note: I don't buy the argument that BA packaging is bad. It's almost all recyclable. But I live in an area that makes recycling pretty easy so that might not be generalizable.
> I don't buy the argument that BA packaging is bad. It's almost all recyclable.
Reduce, reuse, recycle. In that order.
People vastly overstate the value of recycling, especially for glass and plastic. Steel and aluminum are about all that's 'good' to recycle.
For plastic and glass, it's only marginally less bad than going to a landfill. The cost to collect, sort, melt, and produce an inferior product is just too much.
Food waste has to be factored in. I can't help but wonder what the math for net energy consumption breaks down as when you're forced to buy x+y quantity of food when you only want or need x, vs packing material.
APRN's Q3 filings are ominous-- although margins are decent at 33%, they've never been profitable and their customer base decreased 25% Sept. 2017 to Sept. 2018.
HMNY didn't really tank because they did a reverse split. They primarily tanked because they continued to dilute investors after their reverse split by issuing new shares and selling them to the public markets via their ATM offering.
Reverse splits cause further depression in share price, but pretty much any example other than HMNY would be better. i.e. Price dropping by 1000x after a split is not typical at all.
It's a symbolic milestone, that's it. If a company's stock keeps plunging eventually you have to decide that it's time to talk about it, having it cross the $1 threshold seems like a decent time.
It gives an excuse to make an article and recap the events that lead to this situation. As someone who didn't follow this story closely it's useful to have this bit of context.
I'm not sure what your argument is here, it seems like you don't think reverse splits have any implications or consequences for the company. You can't casually do a reverse split just to avoid being delisted. You're telling investors "we have no idea how to change direction so we're just gonna kick the can down the road for a bit". It's a really big deal, and if Blue Apron survives into 2020 it's very unlikely it will look anything like it does today.
Passing below the $1/share marker is a forcing function (i.e. it's not arbitrary at all) for the company to make significant adjustments, as opposed to the plethora of companies that trade in the $1-$10 range who can continue plodding along. BI's audience is one that's mostly aware of this fact, so that's why the article is about that "arbitrary" price marker - it's a sign of major changes incoming rapidly.
So, I guess I'm not really sure what your point is. "Just do a reverse split" is like saying "just declare bankruptcy" or "just charge more money" in that it glosses over the consequences of those actions greatly.
> You can't casually do a reverse split just to avoid being delisted.
Narrator: You can.
The point that it is a valid option and your point is that it has consequences. Not mutually exclusive.
Being punted to the Bulletin Boards or Pink Sheets has worse consequences for some of the investors who literally can't hold it anymore, thats a greater consequence than their opinion on a reverse split.
Blue Apron, Hello Fresh, Plated, and all the other food prep deliver services are a hack. A disgusting, wasteful hack.
Calling someone using Blue Apron a cook is like calling someone doing a "paint by numbers" a painter. I'm not trying to be a cooking snob but I get really sick of people praising BA/Plated/etc as some amazing concept or a huge time saver. It's neither, it's for people who want food delivery (as in UberEats, Grubhub, etc) with extra steps.
>Calling someone using Blue Apron a cook is like calling someone doing a "paint by numbers" a painter
>I'm not trying to be a cooking snob
Yes, yes you are trying to be a cooking snob. If you had said "someone who uses Blue Apron is not a chef" you'd have a point, but then again no one ever said that. Someone who cooks is a cook. Someone who paints is a painter. There is a big difference between cook vs chef and painter vs artist.
Blue Apron is not McDonalds, they don't make your food for you. They give you a recipe and the raw ingredients, same as finding a recipe online and buying the raw ingredients from the store. And then you cook it. As any normal cook would do.
There are definitely people a service like this makes sense for. The issue isn’t that someone following a recipe doesn’t match your expectation of a Parisian chef carefully selecting items at a hole-in-the-wall fromagerie on Rue Mouffetard.... it’s that Blue Apron’s model is simply too easy to copy.
My local Albertsons has meals in box ready to roll. Amazon is launching their service. There are the Blue Apron clones you listed.
BA’s stock price isn’t because they are “hacks” or because the idea is bad.
They are there to separate fools from fool's money. Eventually they run out of fools that have money, which is why all of them if they do go public will become penny stocks.
What confused me (and makes me think I've overlooked something) is why nothing more interesting has come along from the supermarkets. In the UK at least, they're all online and deliver - but they all seem to stick to "buy your ingredients and we'll deliver them". I'd quite enjoy one that let you browse recipes and would stick all the ingredients in your basket - but then added some intelligence. e.g. You add the "roast chicken weekend meal" to your cart, and it asks "are you going to eat all that chicken?" For £5 extra would you like to add some bacon, creme-fraiche, tarragon, frozen-pastry & peas to enable you to make a lovely pie on Monday? Or asks "what's in your fridge" - here are some recipes and prices for things to use it up? Could even add some intelligence - I don't like mushrooms, so when recommending a chicken pie and providing a recipe, switches something else into my basket & recipe (leeks are lovely). Or would further adjust the recipe - you said you needed to feed 8 at the weekend, so I picked the larger lump of meat, and have adjusted the cooking time in the recipe. Or "Do you own a pressure cooker, a freezer and have 2 hours free this weekend to batch cook some chilli" Or... basically Blue Apron and the rest seem to be trying to solve a real problem, completely the wrong way.