Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YC’s 2016 Holiday Gift Guide

ycgiftideas.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–229 of 229 posts

Re: YC’s 2016 Holiday Gift Guide

#221

Post by CmdrSprinkles »

compumike wrote: post #185

A note to any future startup founders reading some of the broadly skeptical and pessimistic comments on this HN discussion thread: The people commenting here are not your customers. For every 1 person posting a snarky comment, there are 100+ simply browsing the gift guide. A few are saying "Hey, that's neat!", and a few are making purchases today or in the near future, either for themselves or as gifts. It's their be…

While this is indeed not the target audience (which makes it hilarious), that is a horrible attitude. A lot of the complaints that have been brought up (premium pricing, much cheaper and better alternatives, not actually a new idea, etc) are actually very valid and worth considering.

Now, if those aren't complaints and you are perfectly happy only targeting people who want The Next New Thing, go for it. Otherwise? Take the complaints with a grain of salt, but still take them.

Re: YC’s 2016 Holiday Gift Guide

#222

Post by chrischen »

xiaoma wrote: post #30

The thing that really strikes me about this list is how nearly everything on it is offered at a premium price. One thing I loved about the tech world while I was growing up was that it was consistently doing more with less. Wikipedia displaced Encyclopaedia Brittanica by being both better and free. Hotmail was a clear win over AOL and Yahoo's offerings and then Gmail was faster and handled spam better while giving mo…

Definitely a lot of startups target high end, but they end up competing in high end by being cheaper than the other high end alternatives. High end is just a better market to attack first since high end users are more liberal with their spending, and more likely to pay a premium for something new.

Uber is an example of something that started in the high end (black cars only).

Airbnb, Instapainting.com (disclaimer: my company) are examples of companies that broke into mid-market products by using technology to reduce costs and compete with significantly lower pricing.

Re: YC’s 2016 Holiday Gift Guide

#223

Post by joncrocks »

CPLX wrote: post #21
joncrocks wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not this specific device perhaps, but Sous Vides (as I understand it) can form part of a commercial kitchen, at high-end restaurants. A quick google shows: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/10/michelin-restaura... - A Michelin starred restaurant, which uses a Sous Vide. They are generally quite expensive to by for home use. I won't comment on the rest, but I'd agree that the list doesn't exactly fill me with wo…

But that doesn't make sense. If I'm selling a stainless steel bowl like they use in commercial kitchens can I say "now every person ever can whip up Michelin-starred omelettes" or something? I mean I suppose I could, but it makes me sound like an idiot. It's also plainly factually untrue. No Michelin reviewer will ever see my meal, no meal I make will receive a Michelin star. It's literal nonsense. And Sous Vide has…

I wouldn't disagree, I guess I was targeted at >I mean, I bet that literally zero Michelin-starred meals have been prepared with this device.

i.e. If this was a type of device that no-one would use/was using in high-end restaurants then it's clearly a ridiculous statement. But Sous Vides are.

And I'm sure that there are providers of bowls, pans, knives and other kitchen miscellanea that are marketed to the public as 'professional grade', even if they won't make your food taste better. That's advertising :-)

As to why this is a 'start-up', not sure, not a huge amount to disrupt.

Re: YC’s 2016 Holiday Gift Guide

#224

Post by baka »

nemothekid wrote: post #194
baka wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From at least the late 90s to recently you were consistently getting more for less with hardware. Things were expensive as they came out, but then got cheaper than the previous alternative. The market moved from a school having a couple of slow computers to everyone having multiple supercomputers. Not only did they become faster but you could do more things with them. These days many things seem to be getting slightl…

> The market moved from a school having a couple of slow computers to everyone having multiple supercomputers. This is exactly what he says here: > Hardware always starts expensive for early adopters and gets radically cheaper as adoption scales up.

Not really, I'm emphasizing that not only did things get cheaper but the market also moved. Things went from having different capabilities to were a netbook could essentially do the same things as a server farm or a workstation. Electronics hardware "always" existed in the form of game consoles, just not as personal computers. With many of these new things the premium segment is the market. Something custom is never going to be cheaper than the alternative. Once you've established a brand and market share you're probably even going to want to up the price.

Re: YC’s 2016 Holiday Gift Guide

#225

Post by logfromblammo »

RJIb8RBYxzAMX9u wrote: post #210
logfromblammo wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worse still is a paper check. I have to deposit that in my checking account to spend it. Once it is in there, it immediately becomes indistinguishable from the cash used to pay the utilities. Here, I want to buy you three cans of tuna, 75 kWh of electricity, and 4 gallons of gasoline. Enjoy! At least with cash, I could theoretically put it in a special envelope that is exclusively for fun expenses. Also, cash-equival…

> Worse still is a paper check. I have to deposit that in my checking account to spend it. Once it is in there, it immediately becomes indistinguishable from the cash used to pay the utilities. Here, I want to buy you three cans of tuna, 75 kWh of electricity, and 4 gallons of gasoline. Enjoy! > At least with cash, I could theoretically put it in a special envelope that is exclusively for fun expenses. Deposit check…

But I deposit checks via mobile banking app. There is no ATM in my phone.

Re: YC’s 2016 Holiday Gift Guide

#226

Post by antisthenes »

andrewksu wrote: post #167
antisthenes wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And like all "modern prefab" houses, it is extremely overpriced. $400k for 1200 sq. ft is nuts.

It's all relative. In Des Moines it's outrageous (although still worth it!), but in the Bay Area or similar market it's a steal. Comparable homes out here can be 2-3x. We did our fist home at $145K for 1200 sqft and can offer than again late next year. Margins are too slim to grow at that rate, re:Tesla.

You're confusing the value of land vs the value of the structure itself.

The $1 million properties in the bay have structures on them that are worth maybe $150-200k tops, whereas the rest of the value is in land.

A high land:structure value ratio is not uncommon for the US coasts, in high demand areas (especially that have older houses, built in the 20s and 30s that will need significant renovations to be brought up to a safe living standard)

That's why it's outrageous. If you're considering paying 400k just for the structure, that means you already own a piece of land worth at least $800k where to put it. So we're talking about being a millionaire to be able to afford something like that. So let's be honest for a second and not pretend like you're not targeting the top 1-1.5% demographic here.

I noticed you're a founder for the company.

Construction is a perfectly competitive market. It shouldn't have economic profits, which means it should be paying your costs and salaries and that's it. I'm not sure what was the rationale for your getting into the business, but the modern prefabs are a dime a dozen and the thing they all get wrong is affordability. If you don't think I can go to another state and bring 4 construction workers to build the same type of structure for $200k, sourcing my own materials and paying them salary, you're just deluding yourself.

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that companies like that go bankrupt by the dozens, because they all miscalculate the economics of the market.

But I do wish you good luck in your business.

Re: YC’s 2016 Holiday Gift Guide

#227

Post by andrewksu »

sbov wrote: post #215
andrewksu wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Embodied energy is certainly worth considering, but major retrofits of homes built in the 60's or earlier are hugely inefficient and result in a home that looks better, but performs no better energy wise. You CANNOT retrofit to Zero Energy with out significant cash outlays or at all. Putting a new carb and a dash mat on a 70's Oldsmobile will not justify the embodied energy argument. Melt that sucker down and build a…

Maybe I'm wrong, but my assumption is the difference between "standard home" and "standard home with solar + other easy wins" (such as tearing out your lawn in SoCal, where I live) is overall "better" than going from those easy wins to a Zero Energy home. I would guess it's also location dependent though. Under that assumption, I would have a hard time justifying tearing down an existing home to build a Zero Energy h…

Certainly in the short run those are more cost effective and less intensive options, but homes built 50 years ago do have a very short lifespan remaining and will consume gobs of energy every day until they are plowed under. Zero Energy refits are cost prohibitive, so at best, you'll have a band aid. Ultimately, It's a sunk cost fallacy.

We're not the solution to the entire problem, but I entirely confident that we are a fantastic value for our customers and the most efficient home available at this price/performance.

Re: YC’s 2016 Holiday Gift Guide

#228

Post by andrewksu »

antisthenes wrote: post #226
andrewksu wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all relative. In Des Moines it's outrageous (although still worth it!), but in the Bay Area or similar market it's a steal. Comparable homes out here can be 2-3x. We did our fist home at $145K for 1200 sqft and can offer than again late next year. Margins are too slim to grow at that rate, re:Tesla.

You're confusing the value of land vs the value of the structure itself. The $1 million properties in the bay have structures on them that are worth maybe $150-200k tops, whereas the rest of the value is in land. A high land:structure value ratio is not uncommon for the US coasts, in high demand areas (especially that have older houses, built in the 20s and 30s that will need significant renovations to be brought up…

Most of the value is in the land, and the homes are no different than $200K homes in the midwest. However, they are worth more and cost more because of very high demand and limited supply of labor and land. Putting a standard new home on a property that just sold for $1.6M (a home that should, anywhere else cost $300K) allows you to flip that property for $3.2. That's in Redwood City in a decent, but not over the top (for the Peninsula) neighborhood. Same home in a different market is worth quite a bit more.

Bare minimum for non tract construction is about $250/sqft or 3x the rates in the middle of the country. For high performance homes, $600+ /sqft is not uncommon.

Construction is not perfectly competitive, especially here in the bay. Guys (builders/trades people) pick their rates because demand on them is so high. Regulation, permitting and crazy processes mean the barrier to entry are higher than ever before. It's not fixable with day labor and a spunky attitude.

That said, our current line is the Tesla Model S of homes, late next year we'll be able to offer our Model C range for a much broader market.

Thanks for the well wishes!

Post reply on HN