4 ms·

I used to work at Blue Apron...sending people boxes of perishables is actually a very tough problem to solve and there was extensive tech powering the warehouse

I used to work at Blue Apron...sending people boxes of perishables is actually a very tough problem to solve and there was extensive tech powering the warehouse side of things. We had a fairly large engineering team working on these problems. At the end of the day who really cares what is and isn't a "tech company"? Every company has a tech aspect to it these days.

astura 9y ago
How's that different from, say, the logistics of grocery stores? Yet Wegmans isn't considered a "tech company."
- ericwood 9y ago
  Most grocery stores use off-the-shelf tech for this sort of thing; our business model made a lot of that not feasible and there was a decision made early on to build it ourselves, if anything because the tech we developed could have its own value down the line. If Wegman's was writing software like this (maybe they do! I have no idea) then I'd happily consider them a tech company. But like I said, it's a silly thing to argue about anyways.
  - astura 9y ago
    I used Wegmans as an example specifically because Wegmans is known for doing a lot of their own R&D to improve their operations. I don't know if they write some of their own software, but it wouldn't surprise me if they do.
- maxxxxx 9y ago
  If your company is in SF and funded by VCs you are tech by default, otherwise you aren't tech.
hkmurakami 9y ago
It matters because of the multiples you get on the market.
Zimahl 9y ago
> At the end of the day who really cares what is and isn't a "tech company"? Every company has a tech aspect to it these days. Because the way a tech company grows and a non-tech company grows are very different. Nike extensively uses software but you wouldn't call them a tech company, because their growth is limited by sales of their apparel, which is a physical good. 'Real' tech companies aren't typically limited by the distribution of their product (other than scaling issues and the like). There's (generally) nothing physical produced so there isn't a resource problem - growth can be much greater and faster.
- DontGiveTwoFlux 9y ago
  That's right, 'real' tech companies such as Apple, Intel, Samsung, and many others can sell as many products as there are bits streaming across the network.
  - Zimahl 9y ago
    Fair enough. I'll add the caveat that the product they sell or use for revenue needs to be the tech they are developing. So, once again, Nike sells athletic apparel, and while they use tech to do so, I wouldn't consider them a tech company. But Facebook and Snapchat don't sell a product (other than user info) but depend on the tech they develop to make money. It's a fine line, but I think we can see what might divide tech and non-tech companies.

astura 9y ago

How's that different from, say, the logistics of grocery stores? Yet Wegmans isn't considered a "tech company."

ericwood 9y ago
Most grocery stores use off-the-shelf tech for this sort of thing; our business model made a lot of that not feasible and there was a decision made early on to build it ourselves, if anything because the tech we developed could have its own value down the line. If Wegman's was writing software like this (maybe they do! I have no idea) then I'd happily consider them a tech company. But like I said, it's a silly thing to argue about anyways.
- astura 9y ago
  I used Wegmans as an example specifically because Wegmans is known for doing a lot of their own R&D to improve their operations. I don't know if they write some of their own software, but it wouldn't surprise me if they do.
maxxxxx 9y ago
If your company is in SF and funded by VCs you are tech by default, otherwise you aren't tech.

hkmurakami 9y ago

It matters because of the multiples you get on the market.

Zimahl 9y ago

> At the end of the day who really cares what is and isn't a "tech company"? Every company has a tech aspect to it these days. Because the way a tech company grows and a non-tech company grows are very different. Nike extensively uses software but you wouldn't call them a tech company, because their growth is limited by sales of their apparel, which is a physical good. 'Real' tech companies aren't typically limited by the distribution of their product (other than scaling issues and the like). There's (generally) nothing physical produced so there isn't a resource problem - growth can be much greater and faster.

DontGiveTwoFlux 9y ago
That's right, 'real' tech companies such as Apple, Intel, Samsung, and many others can sell as many products as there are bits streaming across the network.
- Zimahl 9y ago
  Fair enough. I'll add the caveat that the product they sell or use for revenue needs to be the tech they are developing. So, once again, Nike sells athletic apparel, and while they use tech to do so, I wouldn't consider them a tech company. But Facebook and Snapchat don't sell a product (other than user info) but depend on the tech they develop to make money. It's a fine line, but I think we can see what might divide tech and non-tech companies.