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

Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 144 posts

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#61

Post by AndyNemmity »

dna_polymerase wrote: post #36
ErikVandeWater wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I don't get exactly what it means to declare water a human right. There are certainly people in the world not getting the clean water they need. But how do you solve this? You set up an international agency to acquire water for them. But where do you get the funding for this agency? If it really is a _human_ right, is this agency above local laws? What are the restrictions on this agency? Can this agency ban the…

Exactly. I often hear this whole "water a human right" argument from the left and when asked about what would change they really can't answer that. I think everyone knows how water is essential for the human life but declaring it a human right won't change anything. After all what would we do the next day after making it a human right?! Send the US Army to Malawi bearing Super Soakers?

It is a push because where water isn't a human right, they've made it so it's illegal to collect rain water.

It's not like some made up non-existent issue, it's in direct response to corporations privatizing water, then calling all water illegal.

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#62

Post by ceejayoz »

icebraining wrote: post #59
ceejayoz wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He argues water should have a market value so that it is treated more like a resource that should be well managed. They could start with themselves. They pay $200/year to suck 130M gallons of Michigan water, and fight attempts to charge a fair rate for it. http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2016/12/why_nestle_pays_...

Where does that article say they have fought attempts to charge for it? What that article says is some environmental law experts claim it would likely be fought, and a statement by Nestle saying they are ready to discuss an amount if the state wants to. The fight it talks about is about a cap on the quantity of water, not on a price.

The article discusses a previous court case they fought that gives them the ammo to fight usage restrictions.

> Now, "Nestle can argue under the Michigan Court of Appeals decision in 2005 that its pumping is within the scope of its reasonable use, to the extent it isn't harming anybody," he said. "And it doesn't have to pay for it."

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#63

Post by spike021 »

Eridrus wrote: post #43
spike021 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about Sightglass?

That list is entirely based on my personal preference for coffee which does not particularly like Sightglass or Verve. There is no objectivity here :)

Heh, no worries ;)

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#64

Post by pdog »

> The rapidly expanding niche accounts for 15 to 20 percent of coffee consumed in the United States, according to the Specialty Coffee Association.

One in every five or six cups of coffee is Blue Bottle or "third-wave specialty" coffee? This simply can't be true considering the scale of Starbucks, McDonald's, and Dunkin' Donuts, let alone brewing at home and coffee consumed at diners and non-specialty restaurants.

I'm surprised the Times would cite the SCAA so uncritically.

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#65

Post by spike021 »

santaclaus wrote: post #45
spike021 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about Sightglass?

> Sightglass I'm serious considering leaving my current job because the office coffee moved from Sightglass to some over-roasted junk from somewhere in Marin county...

I'm close to considering the same thing because the two closest coffee shops to my office in SF are both Starbucks...

I guess there's Philz a bit further, or Blue Bottle even more further.. but those are hardly convenient and Philz isn't great anyway.

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#67

Post by subnaught »

pdog wrote: post #64

> The rapidly expanding niche accounts for 15 to 20 percent of coffee consumed in the United States, according to the Specialty Coffee Association. One in every five or six cups of coffee is Blue Bottle or "third-wave specialty" coffee? This simply can't be true considering the scale of Starbucks, McDonald's, and Dunkin' Donuts, let alone brewing at home and coffee consumed at diners and non-specialty restaurants. I'…

I think it's pretty clear that the article intends "rapidly expanding niche" to refer to all of "third-wave specialty coffee," not just Blue Bottle.

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#68

Post by sergers »

subnaught wrote: post #67
pdog wrote: post #64

> The rapidly expanding niche accounts for 15 to 20 percent of coffee consumed in the United States, according to the Specialty Coffee Association. One in every five or six cups of coffee is Blue Bottle or "third-wave specialty" coffee? This simply can't be true considering the scale of Starbucks, McDonald's, and Dunkin' Donuts, let alone brewing at home and coffee consumed at diners and non-specialty restaurants. I'…

I think it's pretty clear that the article intends "rapidly expanding niche" to refer to all of "third-wave specialty coffee," not just Blue Bottle.

That is still hard to fathom 20% of coffee sales

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#69

Post by sergers »

mrleiter wrote: post #12

As this thread will ultimately will end up discussing the corporate evil that Nestlé apparently is, I want to, for the sake of the discussion, point out the reasonableness of the CEOs statement regarding water as a human right: He argues water should have a market value so that it is treated more like a resource that should be well managed. Of course a state can also do this and in my opinion should, but of course as…

Then we should charge Neste more for extracting the water.

Here in BC, numerous articles in past, they are paying like 2-3$ per million litres of water extracted.

That's cheaper than a single small water bottle in many stores which aren't even 1 litre size

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#70

Post by icebraining »

ceejayoz wrote: post #62
icebraining wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does that article say they have fought attempts to charge for it? What that article says is some environmental law experts claim it would likely be fought, and a statement by Nestle saying they are ready to discuss an amount if the state wants to. The fight it talks about is about a cap on the quantity of water, not on a price.

The article discusses a previous court case they fought that gives them the ammo to fight usage restrictions. > Now, "Nestle can argue under the Michigan Court of Appeals decision in 2005 that its pumping is within the scope of its reasonable use, to the extent it isn't harming anybody," he said. "And it doesn't have to pay for it."

That's what I said. The court case was about a cap, not payment. Nowhere in the article says they fought against a fee for taking out water.
Post reply on HN