3 ms·

This strikes me as tech bubble stuff. There are already shops that sell you ingredients. And cooking is not that hard. In fact, part of the fun is spending tim

• patio11 11y ago
  First world problems are still problems; this is "What's the most convenient way to deliver a home-cooked meal without dispatching a chef to cook it for you?", which is a thing that well-off professionals historically buy. Systemize the human labor there and it makes it affordable to more of the middle class while allowing people to cook for themselves, which at least some people want to do. Cooking is not hard like reading is not hard: if you grew up doing it, you might not remember having learned it at all. The historical expectation that at least half the population grew up cooking has fallen apart, particularly among some social classes. I would not suggest contempt of business models which only succeed by helping more people learn to cook. (Cards on table: can cook, do so rarely, would be very open to doing more and very willing to trade money to decrease time investment required.) As to the economics of it: doesn't strike me as having unit economics compatible with investor expectations but oh well capitalism happens -- if it does they make a bundle, if not they're sophisticated rich people who can afford to lose money while buying food for less-rich people at a loss. "Even the poorest Americans will have cooked food prepared by servants" was once science fiction, too. That business worked out pretty decently, modulo latter-day concerns that "Well maybe poor Americans shouldn't have their food cooked by servants."
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]