6 ms·

I... see absolutely nothing wrong with this. Imperfect produce has managed to create a market for food that was previously not able to be sold. Good for them.

I... see absolutely nothing wrong with this. Imperfect produce has managed to create a market for food that was previously not able to be sold. Good for them. Does this mean that we may have to restructure social programs as that food becomes sold rather than donated? Sure might. That's ok though. I'd also like to clearly point out that the author misquotes their source for the amount of food donated. The California Association of Food Banks states that they have donated 164 million pounds of fruits and vegetables. That's not 164 million PER YEAR. That's 164 million since they were founded in 1995 - or 7.1 million a year. Additionally, the Imperfect produce comment saying 150,000 lbs specifically calls out "From California farmers". While the food banks numbers are simply totals (they likely purchase and redistribute, as well as take donations from out of state sources). There's probably fudging on both sides, but I find this article fairly disingenuous.

VonGuard 8y ago
Yeah, this whole piece is from someone with an axe to grind. I get it, Beet Box was more community focused and basically a non-profit masquerading as a startup. It's natural they'd get stomped by a real startup, but in this case, the competition is literally taking trash and making people eat it. It's great! What could be wrong with that? We waste like 40% of all food made in this country.
- darkerside 8y ago
  But it's not trash. It's food that was being used. I don't think most of Imperfect Produce's customers would subscribe if they knew this food was previously being eaten by people in need. Their entire marketing and product concept is based on a lie.
  - jimmywanger 8y ago
    What? So you're mad for what reason exactly? You can say that about most things - if something doesn't have an available market, other people will use the sub-optimal thing. I don't see why that's a problem or why people wouldn't pay money for something other people use for free. If it makes you feel better, you can think of it as supporting farms, because once farms become unprofitable to run as a business, nobody will grow food.
    - dang 8y ago
      Personal swipes are not allowed here, and we ban accounts that do that repeatedly (and we've had to ask you not to do it before), so in the future would you please edit them out? Your comment would be fine without the nasty bits. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - gowld 8y ago
    Imperfect Produce's customers are more than welcome to donate their cost savings or other food to people in need if they are dissatisfied with how much someone else is donating.
    - Apocryphon 8y ago
      Then someone needs to first let them know about this situation, because there is information asymmetry afoot.
    - datavirtue 8y ago
      A market is informed buyers and sellers...this is not market activity it is sleeze.
  - imperfect1 8y ago
    To be very clear, we do not sell food that would've otherwise gone to folks in need. We source from the 20 billion pounds of produce that goes to waste on farms–that's after food banks take what they can. As a country, we've barely scratched the surface of this huge problem of food waste. This Feeding American report is a great resource: bit.ly/2wobdjK
will_brown 8y ago
>Imperfect produce has managed to create a market for food that was previously not able to be sold. Good for them. Like when Robin Hood was introduced to capitalism and started “robbing the hood.” Nothing like taking food from the poor and selling it to the rich, just need that good market...I know tell them they are saving the world by buying this food and otherwise it would be waste. Think of all these “untapped” markets startups can disrupt like soup kitchens and food stamps. These morons out here giving food away when they are just one round of VC money away from creating new markets.
kazinator 8y ago
I see nothing wrong with: selling something if a paying market is found for that, instead of giving it away for free. I do see something wrong with: creating that paying market by lying. I suspect most of those conscientious people who think they are helping farmers and reducing food waste would not be paying for this produce if they knew that it was being taken away from poor people.
- gowld 8y ago
  In that case, you should never buy anything, because anything manufactured might be donated if you hadn't bought it.
  - azrael49 8y ago
    In the majority of cases, retailers trash their products (sometimes after physically destroying them) that go unsold. Even for used items, most people are too lazy to donate even things in perfect condition
    - grawprog 8y ago
      Yup. Canadian Tire does this. They have a fence around their returned product smashing area. Any product returned that's not resellable is smashed and thrown away. And their criteria for what's resellable is fairly strict. Most returns just end up smashed. Employees aren't allowed to take or even purchase at a discounted rate or anything. It's just obliterated and trashed. I know someone who used to work there. Employees had ways of taking things(however you feel about it...i understand it's to stop scamming and such but I still feel like it's better than just trashing perfectly good things.). But they still destroyed hundreds of perfectly good stuff while they worked there. I gotta admit the grocery store I worked at back in the day was pretty good. They left their old produce for people with animals to take. Employees could take expired stuff that was still good but going to be thrown because it was past the date. I dunno I don't like wasting things that are good. There's always a better solution than just throwing things away and destroying them.
    - kazinator 8y ago
xg15 8y ago
> Imperfect produce has managed to create a market for food that was previously not able to be sold. > Does this mean that we may have to restructure social programs as that food becomes sold rather than donated? Sure might. Except the former is already happening, while it's highly uncertain whether or not the latter will happen.
xondono 8y ago
That’s probably because you are not an Oakland hipster who attended a liberal college }:) Jokes aside, the article does read like a buzzword soup, and looks like a low blow from someone who is getting outcompited fair and square. I would also like to see an analysis of the impact in consumer prices, since imperfect food is making a net loss for producers into a net gain. If these producers are competing this should lower the prices, what could potentially reduce the need for donated food altogether (I know it’s very optimistic, but hey, a man can dream)
jonlucc 8y ago
This happened previously with "chocolate" diamonds. Those undesirable diamonds were often used in industrial applications. When jewelry stores started promoting them, the cost of "ugly" diamonds went up, making some other applications more expensive. Also, I do a fair amount of work with a local neighborhood center that has as a part of their mission meeting the basic needs of local residents. I haven't been there during fresh produce bank they run, but I've seen pictures and been told by the management that they get some very high quality produce. Apparently the local markets aren't that great at predicting the desire for a product, so they get some pretty high quality produce from every chain in the city.
ryanackley 8y ago
The author's best arguments aren't articulated well. I will try and paraphrase. Essentially, Imperfect Produce is buying scraps from medium to larger farms and marketing it to people that would normally buy produce from small farmers. They sell you on the concept of buying vegetables and helping the environment and farmers at the same time. They do this by claiming that the food would go to waste if you didn't buy it and they also imply through marketing materials that the food comes from quaint little ma and pa farms. The thrust of the argument is not "boo, capitalism!", it's that it is deceptive marketing and it's hurting small farmers. Because 1) the food would not go to waste if it wasn't purchased and 2) the food they are selling does not come from small farmers but it's marketed like it does and it's marketed to the same people that would normally buy from small farmers
- horsawlarway 8y ago
  I think I understood the author fairly well, I just find fault in his argument. He hasn't proved "1) the food would not go to waste if it wasn't purchased" AT ALL. He's merely implied it through incorrect facts about donations to food banks. number 2 is likely true, but that actually make it MORE likely that the food would have gone to waste. I've worked with donation programs in my local state that harvest crops left in the field. Large farms will leave crops unharvested if the price drops below a certain point (either because of market changes or because the produce grade would be lower). They do this because it costs more to hire the labor to harvest it than the crop will bring in. Small farms are much less likely to do this. Finally: The author of this piece is basically just a competitor in the SAME market. Literally. You can sign up for 16 weeks of BeetBox deliveries for a mere 530 bucks (I'm being facetious if it's not entirely obvious... they're asking 35 dollars a box for self pickup - they're selling expensive freaking veggies.) So I fail to find the argument that this is hurting donations compelling (or even factual) and I don't believe the author's motives are any more pure. Basically - this is a hit piece against a competitor in the same market, and it should be read as such.
- imperfect1 8y ago
  We have never claimed to source from small farms. We source from medium and large scale farms, where most of the 20 billion lbs of food waste happens. Rather than targeting CSA shoppers or farmers market patrons, we target shoppers who are going to supermarkets and buying “perfect” produce at a premium. We are encouraging them to think more about where they get their fruits and vegetables by offering another option so they can save money and reduce waste. We think CSAs are a great option for those that want locally-sourced produce that’s grown at a small-scale and we entirely support that choice if the option is financially available to you.
calcifer 8y ago
> Does this mean that we may have to restructure social programs as that food becomes sold rather than donated? Sure might. That's ok though. Said the man who never relied on donated food to survive. Still, I know I shouldn't be surprised to see this sort of comment on the mother of all capitalist congregations that is HN.
- horsawlarway 8y ago
  To repeat myself --- The author of this piece is basically just a competitor in the SAME market. Literally. You can sign up for 16 weeks of BeetBox for a mere 530 bucks (I'm being facetious if it's not entirely obvious... they're asking 35 dollars a box for self pickup - they're selling expensive freaking veggies.) So I fail to find the argument that this is hurting donations compelling (or even factual) and I don't believe the author's motives are any more pure. Basically - this is a hit piece against a competitor in the same market, and it should be read as such.
  - calcifer 8y ago
    You are making my point for me. I'm talking about people who rely on donated food to survive and you are talking about prices, markets and competition.

VonGuard 8y ago

Yeah, this whole piece is from someone with an axe to grind. I get it, Beet Box was more community focused and basically a non-profit masquerading as a startup. It's natural they'd get stomped by a real startup, but in this case, the competition is literally taking trash and making people eat it. It's great! What could be wrong with that? We waste like 40% of all food made in this country.

darkerside 8y ago
But it's not trash. It's food that was being used. I don't think most of Imperfect Produce's customers would subscribe if they knew this food was previously being eaten by people in need. Their entire marketing and product concept is based on a lie.
- jimmywanger 8y ago
  What? So you're mad for what reason exactly? You can say that about most things - if something doesn't have an available market, other people will use the sub-optimal thing. I don't see why that's a problem or why people wouldn't pay money for something other people use for free. If it makes you feel better, you can think of it as supporting farms, because once farms become unprofitable to run as a business, nobody will grow food.
  - dang 8y ago
    Personal swipes are not allowed here, and we ban accounts that do that repeatedly (and we've had to ask you not to do it before), so in the future would you please edit them out? Your comment would be fine without the nasty bits. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- gowld 8y ago
  Imperfect Produce's customers are more than welcome to donate their cost savings or other food to people in need if they are dissatisfied with how much someone else is donating.
  - Apocryphon 8y ago
    Then someone needs to first let them know about this situation, because there is information asymmetry afoot.
  - datavirtue 8y ago
    A market is informed buyers and sellers...this is not market activity it is sleeze.
- imperfect1 8y ago
  To be very clear, we do not sell food that would've otherwise gone to folks in need. We source from the 20 billion pounds of produce that goes to waste on farms–that's after food banks take what they can. As a country, we've barely scratched the surface of this huge problem of food waste. This Feeding American report is a great resource: bit.ly/2wobdjK

will_brown 8y ago

>Imperfect produce has managed to create a market for food that was previously not able to be sold. Good for them. Like when Robin Hood was introduced to capitalism and started “robbing the hood.” Nothing like taking food from the poor and selling it to the rich, just need that good market...I know tell them they are saving the world by buying this food and otherwise it would be waste. Think of all these “untapped” markets startups can disrupt like soup kitchens and food stamps. These morons out here giving food away when they are just one round of VC money away from creating new markets.

kazinator 8y ago

I see nothing wrong with: selling something if a paying market is found for that, instead of giving it away for free. I do see something wrong with: creating that paying market by lying. I suspect most of those conscientious people who think they are helping farmers and reducing food waste would not be paying for this produce if they knew that it was being taken away from poor people.

gowld 8y ago
In that case, you should never buy anything, because anything manufactured might be donated if you hadn't bought it.
- azrael49 8y ago
  In the majority of cases, retailers trash their products (sometimes after physically destroying them) that go unsold. Even for used items, most people are too lazy to donate even things in perfect condition
  - grawprog 8y ago
    Yup. Canadian Tire does this. They have a fence around their returned product smashing area. Any product returned that's not resellable is smashed and thrown away. And their criteria for what's resellable is fairly strict. Most returns just end up smashed. Employees aren't allowed to take or even purchase at a discounted rate or anything. It's just obliterated and trashed. I know someone who used to work there. Employees had ways of taking things(however you feel about it...i understand it's to stop scamming and such but I still feel like it's better than just trashing perfectly good things.). But they still destroyed hundreds of perfectly good stuff while they worked there. I gotta admit the grocery store I worked at back in the day was pretty good. They left their old produce for people with animals to take. Employees could take expired stuff that was still good but going to be thrown because it was past the date. I dunno I don't like wasting things that are good. There's always a better solution than just throwing things away and destroying them.
  - kazinator 8y ago

xg15 8y ago

> Imperfect produce has managed to create a market for food that was previously not able to be sold. > Does this mean that we may have to restructure social programs as that food becomes sold rather than donated? Sure might. Except the former is already happening, while it's highly uncertain whether or not the latter will happen.

xondono 8y ago

That’s probably because you are not an Oakland hipster who attended a liberal college }:) Jokes aside, the article does read like a buzzword soup, and looks like a low blow from someone who is getting outcompited fair and square. I would also like to see an analysis of the impact in consumer prices, since imperfect food is making a net loss for producers into a net gain. If these producers are competing this should lower the prices, what could potentially reduce the need for donated food altogether (I know it’s very optimistic, but hey, a man can dream)

jonlucc 8y ago

This happened previously with "chocolate" diamonds. Those undesirable diamonds were often used in industrial applications. When jewelry stores started promoting them, the cost of "ugly" diamonds went up, making some other applications more expensive. Also, I do a fair amount of work with a local neighborhood center that has as a part of their mission meeting the basic needs of local residents. I haven't been there during fresh produce bank they run, but I've seen pictures and been told by the management that they get some very high quality produce. Apparently the local markets aren't that great at predicting the desire for a product, so they get some pretty high quality produce from every chain in the city.

ryanackley 8y ago

The author's best arguments aren't articulated well. I will try and paraphrase. Essentially, Imperfect Produce is buying scraps from medium to larger farms and marketing it to people that would normally buy produce from small farmers. They sell you on the concept of buying vegetables and helping the environment and farmers at the same time. They do this by claiming that the food would go to waste if you didn't buy it and they also imply through marketing materials that the food comes from quaint little ma and pa farms. The thrust of the argument is not "boo, capitalism!", it's that it is deceptive marketing and it's hurting small farmers. Because 1) the food would not go to waste if it wasn't purchased and 2) the food they are selling does not come from small farmers but it's marketed like it does and it's marketed to the same people that would normally buy from small farmers

horsawlarway 8y ago
I think I understood the author fairly well, I just find fault in his argument. He hasn't proved "1) the food would not go to waste if it wasn't purchased" AT ALL. He's merely implied it through incorrect facts about donations to food banks. number 2 is likely true, but that actually make it MORE likely that the food would have gone to waste. I've worked with donation programs in my local state that harvest crops left in the field. Large farms will leave crops unharvested if the price drops below a certain point (either because of market changes or because the produce grade would be lower). They do this because it costs more to hire the labor to harvest it than the crop will bring in. Small farms are much less likely to do this. Finally: The author of this piece is basically just a competitor in the SAME market. Literally. You can sign up for 16 weeks of BeetBox deliveries for a mere 530 bucks (I'm being facetious if it's not entirely obvious... they're asking 35 dollars a box for self pickup - they're selling expensive freaking veggies.) So I fail to find the argument that this is hurting donations compelling (or even factual) and I don't believe the author's motives are any more pure. Basically - this is a hit piece against a competitor in the same market, and it should be read as such.
imperfect1 8y ago
We have never claimed to source from small farms. We source from medium and large scale farms, where most of the 20 billion lbs of food waste happens. Rather than targeting CSA shoppers or farmers market patrons, we target shoppers who are going to supermarkets and buying “perfect” produce at a premium. We are encouraging them to think more about where they get their fruits and vegetables by offering another option so they can save money and reduce waste. We think CSAs are a great option for those that want locally-sourced produce that’s grown at a small-scale and we entirely support that choice if the option is financially available to you.

calcifer 8y ago

> Does this mean that we may have to restructure social programs as that food becomes sold rather than donated? Sure might. That's ok though. Said the man who never relied on donated food to survive. Still, I know I shouldn't be surprised to see this sort of comment on the mother of all capitalist congregations that is HN.

horsawlarway 8y ago
To repeat myself --- The author of this piece is basically just a competitor in the SAME market. Literally. You can sign up for 16 weeks of BeetBox for a mere 530 bucks (I'm being facetious if it's not entirely obvious... they're asking 35 dollars a box for self pickup - they're selling expensive freaking veggies.) So I fail to find the argument that this is hurting donations compelling (or even factual) and I don't believe the author's motives are any more pure. Basically - this is a hit piece against a competitor in the same market, and it should be read as such.
- calcifer 8y ago
  You are making my point for me. I'm talking about people who rely on donated food to survive and you are talking about prices, markets and competition.