4 ms·

The Just Mayo guys paid people to buy cases of their products at supermarkets to juice sales https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-04/food-startup-ran

The Just Mayo guys paid people to buy cases of their products at supermarkets to juice sales https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-04/food-startup-ran-undercover-project-to-buy-up-its-own-products https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-04/food-star...

findjashua 8y ago
If this was done to juice metrics shown to investors, doesn’t this constitute fraud?
- jackcarter 8y ago
  Supposedly, they weren't trying to trick investors so much as the stores themselves. Demonstrating high demand convinces the stores to allocate better shelf space and stock in more locations.
  - mlonkibjuyhv 8y ago
    That is so unethical. If you want to buy shelf space, be upfront about it.
- hn_throwaway_99 8y ago
  Yes, of course the probability of suffering negative consequences of this basically depends on if you "make it" before your "fake it" is discovered. Also, the mayo-jar-eating-itself gif in this article is brilliant.
lifekaizen 8y ago
To me, this is a different thing. I think most founders would say things that don't scale are hacks that let them go faster, but cause extra work on the back-end or a higher unit cost. The upshot is speed to revenue or product-market fit, and if you don't find that then you don't need to waste time building the thing. And these subsidies can go away eventually with product improvement. The Mayo story seems like something else. While you might learn something by buying the product in retail once or twice, buying in bulk to simulate demand isn't an acceleration to learning something. It's this thought that if only people could find my product, or have an easy way to buy it, it will sell. But once you stop buying, the effect goes away. It reminds me more of a dilemma that larger companies talk about: juicing this quarter's earnings at the expense of next year's.
LgWoodenBadger 8y ago
In a similar vein, As a teen at my first job, we would prime our tip-jar with a dollar bill from the register in order to jump start tips. You'd be amazed at how well that worked.
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago
  Should have primed with $10s instead!

findjashua 8y ago

If this was done to juice metrics shown to investors, doesn’t this constitute fraud?

jackcarter 8y ago
Supposedly, they weren't trying to trick investors so much as the stores themselves. Demonstrating high demand convinces the stores to allocate better shelf space and stock in more locations.
- mlonkibjuyhv 8y ago
  That is so unethical. If you want to buy shelf space, be upfront about it.
hn_throwaway_99 8y ago
Yes, of course the probability of suffering negative consequences of this basically depends on if you "make it" before your "fake it" is discovered. Also, the mayo-jar-eating-itself gif in this article is brilliant.

lifekaizen 8y ago

To me, this is a different thing. I think most founders would say things that don't scale are hacks that let them go faster, but cause extra work on the back-end or a higher unit cost. The upshot is speed to revenue or product-market fit, and if you don't find that then you don't need to waste time building the thing. And these subsidies can go away eventually with product improvement. The Mayo story seems like something else. While you might learn something by buying the product in retail once or twice, buying in bulk to simulate demand isn't an acceleration to learning something. It's this thought that if only people could find my product, or have an easy way to buy it, it will sell. But once you stop buying, the effect goes away. It reminds me more of a dilemma that larger companies talk about: juicing this quarter's earnings at the expense of next year's.

LgWoodenBadger 8y ago

In a similar vein, As a teen at my first job, we would prime our tip-jar with a dollar bill from the register in order to jump start tips. You'd be amazed at how well that worked.

pbhjpbhj 8y ago
Should have primed with $10s instead!