8 ms·

So many words trying to obfuscate the simple fact that “We are a treadmill maker trying to masquerade as a tech company.”

adrianomartins 5y ago
A treadmill maker trying to get users to pay monthly subscription to use it...
- mschuster91 5y ago
  The subscribers aren't subscribing for using the treadmill, they are subscribing for fitness courses and the likes. Which... isn't a bad business model per se IMO. With the current trend of "self improvement", there are enough people willing to pay lots of money, for everything from gym memberships to individual personal trainers. The issue is: this is not going to be an exponential-stock-growth-style business model, as many seem to expect. There is no hope for the usual "undercut the competition in pricing and establish a monopoly that can be used for rent-seeking afterwards" VC model, no hope for a make-everyone-filthy-rich acquisition by an established market player, at best this is going to be a steady, "boring" cash cow. (Note, I don't hold any stakes in Peloton or competitors)
  - sideshowb 5y ago
    Aren't gyms generally famous for cashing in on people who sign up for memberships they never actually use? Seems like a genius plan to disrupt that tried and tested business model with a more efficient alternative where users buy the gyms for you so you don't need to maintain them. (unless you want your job to be meaningful or something)
    - smorgusofborg 5y ago
      I think Richard Simmons already brought us this disruption, and you can pay what you want at the closest yard sale! The slide deck is comical in its defensiveness of the company itself, how does one compare video remote classes with boutique classes that had better have 8- students to explain $300/month?! Or is this people in LA assuming their local phenomenons are normal?
      - sideshowb 5y ago
        Second hand kit? Aren't you and your goals of self improvement worth more than that? ;-) I do agree on costs, though. I'm a pretty keen cyclist (outdoors) and dabble in running. I have tried various fitness apps like Strava out of curiosity, even played around trying to analyze my own gps traces in Jupyter to figure out my aerobic threshold. But I don't see any of the apps as worth paying a subscription for [1]. [1] Except maybe trailforks, if I'm on holiday in an area I don't know that has unofficial mtb trails well documented on that platform. But now they've made it proprietary I'm far less inclined to contribute my own trails to the database, so go figure.
  - dmamills 5y ago
    > With the current trend of "self improvement" Expecting long term income from trend followers.
- jasondigitized 5y ago
  You don't need any of their hardware. A large portion of the courses are exercises that need nothing but a floor. The quality of the classes is very good. Its a SaaS media company with an optional hardware upsell.
  - mdoms 5y ago
    This is not a core part of their business and never will be because there is an unlimited amount of this content available for free on Youtube.
auggierose 5y ago
Is that similar to a video store masquerading as a tech company? Or a book store masquerading as a tech company? Or an apple masquerading ... Oh wait, that actually IS a tech company.
- jdrc 5y ago
  I kind of agree it's time to depedestalize "tech"founders. Every company is a tech company and their bosses can be just as scumbags. The religion that worships infotech as inherently unevil and idealistic needs to die.
  - olliej 5y ago
    The fawning over Steve Jobs (and I don't mean apple coolaid folk) is always bizarre, and I think really drove a lot of the "super star ceo" nonsense these days. I'm not saying he didn't save apple or whatever, I'm just unconvinced that being that particular model of arrogance was necessary part of said "saving". Obviously we can't roll back time and replace him with an identical clone with the only difference being that he didn't shout at people or have personal vendettas against other people. I don't recall similar stories about Bill Gates, and yet MS clearly did well.
    - indigochill 5y ago
      > I don't recall similar stories about Bill Gates I don't know about yelling and vendettas, but he has a checkered relationship with the open source/hobbyist community because he imposed proprietary licensing on his BASIC implementation despite the computer hobbyists of the time working more on a FOSS model. When hobbyists copied his software despite the license, he wrote an open letter claiming they were stealing from him. However, the rampant copying also meant Microsoft Basic became the most popular variant which solidified Microsoft's market lead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists
      - TheRealWatson 5y ago
vishnugupta 5y ago
haha your comment reminded me of this incredibly well made video[1] The punch line "we are not a window blinds company; we are privacy company" takes the cake! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hv6EMd8dlQk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hv6EMd8dlQk
- leathersoft 5y ago
  Haha, damn, that’s perfect!
greggsy 5y ago
In the case of Juicero, being a ‘tech company masquerading as a juice company’ is and order of magnitude worse
swagatkonchada 5y ago
"tech company" is an obsolete term now. all companies are tech companies
- q-big 5y ago
  > "tech company" is an obsolete term now. all companies are tech companies Just have an ear what many employees talk about at the water cooler or coffee machine: * technology (in the engineering sense): tech company * software: software company * something else: ... company (for example finance company) In other words: Is producing software the actual goal of the company or a means to an end? * If software is in the opinion of most employees the actual goal of the company: software company * Is software a means to the end of producing engineering products: tech company * Is software written for high-frequency trading: finance company or investment company etc.
VoodooJuJu 5y ago
And HN eats it up because this company is on the front page on a seemingly weekly basis, so something's working for them.
- tootie 5y ago
  Their stock dropped like 75% in a bull market. That's what gets the vultures circling. If the CEO was a weirdo who gave some bad interviews while the stock doubled we'd all be calling him an eccentric genius. It works for Elon Musk.
Cd00d 5y ago
I think they're actually a media company that happens to make hardware. The loyalty of their customers is a result of the high-production value streamed and recorded classes and the celebrity appeal of their instructors.
usrusr 5y ago
They are a realtime content company that just happens to use technology in the same way a tv station is not a theatre troupe. Did they ever try to give the impression of being a tech company?
- my_usernam3 5y ago
  CEO quote from the link.... > which as a CEO of a technology company
  - usrusr 5y ago
    Heh, now they really convinced me that he need to be removed
dehrmann 5y ago
I get that, but when a lot of what they sell is the subscription, and streaming content still takes some work, I think there's a non-trivial amount of tech that makes that happen.

adrianomartins 5y ago

A treadmill maker trying to get users to pay monthly subscription to use it...

mschuster91 5y ago
The subscribers aren't subscribing for using the treadmill, they are subscribing for fitness courses and the likes. Which... isn't a bad business model per se IMO. With the current trend of "self improvement", there are enough people willing to pay lots of money, for everything from gym memberships to individual personal trainers. The issue is: this is not going to be an exponential-stock-growth-style business model, as many seem to expect. There is no hope for the usual "undercut the competition in pricing and establish a monopoly that can be used for rent-seeking afterwards" VC model, no hope for a make-everyone-filthy-rich acquisition by an established market player, at best this is going to be a steady, "boring" cash cow. (Note, I don't hold any stakes in Peloton or competitors)
- sideshowb 5y ago
  Aren't gyms generally famous for cashing in on people who sign up for memberships they never actually use? Seems like a genius plan to disrupt that tried and tested business model with a more efficient alternative where users buy the gyms for you so you don't need to maintain them. (unless you want your job to be meaningful or something)
  - smorgusofborg 5y ago
    I think Richard Simmons already brought us this disruption, and you can pay what you want at the closest yard sale! The slide deck is comical in its defensiveness of the company itself, how does one compare video remote classes with boutique classes that had better have 8- students to explain $300/month?! Or is this people in LA assuming their local phenomenons are normal?
    - sideshowb 5y ago
      Second hand kit? Aren't you and your goals of self improvement worth more than that? ;-) I do agree on costs, though. I'm a pretty keen cyclist (outdoors) and dabble in running. I have tried various fitness apps like Strava out of curiosity, even played around trying to analyze my own gps traces in Jupyter to figure out my aerobic threshold. But I don't see any of the apps as worth paying a subscription for [1]. [1] Except maybe trailforks, if I'm on holiday in an area I don't know that has unofficial mtb trails well documented on that platform. But now they've made it proprietary I'm far less inclined to contribute my own trails to the database, so go figure.
- dmamills 5y ago
  > With the current trend of "self improvement" Expecting long term income from trend followers.
jasondigitized 5y ago
You don't need any of their hardware. A large portion of the courses are exercises that need nothing but a floor. The quality of the classes is very good. Its a SaaS media company with an optional hardware upsell.
- mdoms 5y ago
  This is not a core part of their business and never will be because there is an unlimited amount of this content available for free on Youtube.

auggierose 5y ago

Is that similar to a video store masquerading as a tech company? Or a book store masquerading as a tech company? Or an apple masquerading ... Oh wait, that actually IS a tech company.

jdrc 5y ago
I kind of agree it's time to depedestalize "tech"founders. Every company is a tech company and their bosses can be just as scumbags. The religion that worships infotech as inherently unevil and idealistic needs to die.
- olliej 5y ago
  The fawning over Steve Jobs (and I don't mean apple coolaid folk) is always bizarre, and I think really drove a lot of the "super star ceo" nonsense these days. I'm not saying he didn't save apple or whatever, I'm just unconvinced that being that particular model of arrogance was necessary part of said "saving". Obviously we can't roll back time and replace him with an identical clone with the only difference being that he didn't shout at people or have personal vendettas against other people. I don't recall similar stories about Bill Gates, and yet MS clearly did well.
  - indigochill 5y ago
    > I don't recall similar stories about Bill Gates I don't know about yelling and vendettas, but he has a checkered relationship with the open source/hobbyist community because he imposed proprietary licensing on his BASIC implementation despite the computer hobbyists of the time working more on a FOSS model. When hobbyists copied his software despite the license, he wrote an open letter claiming they were stealing from him. However, the rampant copying also meant Microsoft Basic became the most popular variant which solidified Microsoft's market lead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists
    - TheRealWatson 5y ago

vishnugupta 5y ago

haha your comment reminded me of this incredibly well made video[1] The punch line "we are not a window blinds company; we are privacy company" takes the cake! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hv6EMd8dlQk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hv6EMd8dlQk

leathersoft 5y ago
Haha, damn, that’s perfect!

greggsy 5y ago

In the case of Juicero, being a ‘tech company masquerading as a juice company’ is and order of magnitude worse

swagatkonchada 5y ago

"tech company" is an obsolete term now. all companies are tech companies

q-big 5y ago
> "tech company" is an obsolete term now. all companies are tech companies Just have an ear what many employees talk about at the water cooler or coffee machine: * technology (in the engineering sense): tech company * software: software company * something else: ... company (for example finance company) In other words: Is producing software the actual goal of the company or a means to an end? * If software is in the opinion of most employees the actual goal of the company: software company * Is software a means to the end of producing engineering products: tech company * Is software written for high-frequency trading: finance company or investment company etc.

VoodooJuJu 5y ago

And HN eats it up because this company is on the front page on a seemingly weekly basis, so something's working for them.

tootie 5y ago
Their stock dropped like 75% in a bull market. That's what gets the vultures circling. If the CEO was a weirdo who gave some bad interviews while the stock doubled we'd all be calling him an eccentric genius. It works for Elon Musk.

Cd00d 5y ago

I think they're actually a media company that happens to make hardware. The loyalty of their customers is a result of the high-production value streamed and recorded classes and the celebrity appeal of their instructors.

usrusr 5y ago

They are a realtime content company that just happens to use technology in the same way a tv station is not a theatre troupe. Did they ever try to give the impression of being a tech company?

my_usernam3 5y ago
CEO quote from the link.... > which as a CEO of a technology company
- usrusr 5y ago
  Heh, now they really convinced me that he need to be removed

dehrmann 5y ago

I get that, but when a lot of what they sell is the subscription, and streaming content still takes some work, I think there's a non-trivial amount of tech that makes that happen.