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

91–100 of 144 posts

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#91

Post by taheca »

throwaway0255 wrote: post #19
diogenescynic wrote: post #2

That's a major bummer. Nestle is one of the most evil companies there is--their CEO once said water isn't a human right. Nestle uses cocoa from slave labor and bottle water in drought stricken communities and national forests on expired permits, and do shady stuff like hiring the regulator who gave them their water license. Very few companies are as vile and amoral as Nestle. Unfortunately, this will taint Blue Bottl…

Counterpoint: Saying water isn't a human right is different than saying not everyone should have access to water. I generally agree that water isn't a right. I think it's a misuse of the word "right" and a misapplication of the concept of a "right". Rights define what you're free to do for yourself, and the various ways in which those freedoms can't be infringed upon by others. For example, you have a right to free s…

There is enough to disagree with Nestle about without even going into Water Rights.

What they do to women with their formula in developing nations is a crime. They miseducate them by telling them that Formula is better, give them free samples until their milk dries up, and then start charging them.

It's deplorable behavior, and as a result I refuse to buy any Nestle product.

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#92

Post by taheca »

zjaffee wrote: post #42
Eridrus wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I miss Four Barrell since moving out of SF. I don't really understand why they don't seem to be doing as well as Blue Bottle or Stumptown or even Ritual.

There are a few coffeeshops in LA that brew four barrel coffee, I think it's a result of how Four Barrel mostly just sells beans instead of opening their own shops everywhere. Additionally, Stumptown as well as Intellegencia are both owned by the same private equity firm that owns Peet's, Blue Bottle also got a ton of outside investment to allow them to grow as rapidly as they did, in addition to having a successful…

quick plug for Equator Coffee. Their stuff is great. Woman owned business based in Mill Valley, CA

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#93

Post by taheca »

ceejayoz wrote: post #3
diogenescynic wrote: post #2

That's a major bummer. Nestle is one of the most evil companies there is--their CEO once said water isn't a human right. Nestle uses cocoa from slave labor and bottle water in drought stricken communities and national forests on expired permits, and do shady stuff like hiring the regulator who gave them their water license. Very few companies are as vile and amoral as Nestle. Unfortunately, this will taint Blue Bottl…

Don't forget pushing "free" baby formula on new mothers in developing countries, so their milk supply dries up.

I posted this above a few times, thanks for reinforcing this with your own post.

This is HEINOUS behavior, and the primary reason I won't support any Nestle company or product.

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#94

Post by cwkoss »

tetrep wrote: post #78
cwkoss wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you buy the best X% of a crop, as scale increases, quality will go down. Unless a significant portion of profits are directed towards the improvement of farming methods, scale tends to decrease quality.

Are you saying that supply can't scale to demand? Because what you've described, a limited supply and increasing demand, is commonly solved by increasing supply. Unless we're at 100% coffee output for the Earth, which I don't think we currently are.

I'm saying that supply of highest-quality coffee may be less elastic than demand.

Certainly we could grow more coffee, and that would likely increase net output of high quality coffee. However, if a company is buying the 'best 10%' of coffee and need to double their output, it is more likely that they buy 80th-90th percentile coffee than reinvest their profits into increase the quality that tranche of coffee to meet that of the top 10%. Even if a company chose to do this, the amount of time it takes to deploy capital in agriculture (~1yr+) is likely much less than the amount of time it takes to deploy capital in manufacturing (months), which effectively would cap growth rate.

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#95

Post by okreallywtf »

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…

He may seem reasonable, but in a lot of cases like this companies seem to take the line of "we're following the rules and complying with all government regulations, we will happily follow any rules limiting X and Y if the state chooses to create them.", but at the same time they have a huge influence over especially local and state governments, but also the federal government. Like a lot of companies, they probably take a hand at writing legislation that is favorable to them, and then try to get it introduced [1]. I'm not familiar with the site in [1], but I was looking for a quick guide to lobbying efforts and it certainly seems plausible but I haven't vetted the info for myself.

The reality is they make huge amounts of money selling something that people can get for next to nothing from their cities and towns and pay next to nothing for it, at the expense of the people living where the water is taken and where it is sold at insane margins. Yeah, it is on us for letting them do it, but like everything they hold a lot more cards than we do, so they are just one more huge powerful corporation that will have to be challenged by the people which will take another gargantuan effort of education and activism.

[1] http://www.mintpressnews.com/nestle-spent-11m-lobbying-congr...

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#96

Post by ovao »

tetrep wrote: post #78
cwkoss wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you buy the best X% of a crop, as scale increases, quality will go down. Unless a significant portion of profits are directed towards the improvement of farming methods, scale tends to decrease quality.

Are you saying that supply can't scale to demand? Because what you've described, a limited supply and increasing demand, is commonly solved by increasing supply. Unless we're at 100% coffee output for the Earth, which I don't think we currently are.

We aren't. Like with any other plant, there's a relatively hard limit on the availability of land suitable for arabica's growth (premium coffee is almost exclusively arabica), which will shift in one direction or the other as climate changes.

Today there is still difficulty in generating enough incentive to get farmers into arabica, but that changes with different practices, which Blue Bottle has historically practiced (direct trade and direct investment in farms, etc.). This model seems to be very sustainable for the time being.

On the buying end, the roasting end, distribution, etc., the challenges in scaling are similar or the same as scaling any other business as far as I can tell.

My intuition is that consumer demand for genuinely premium coffee would run out before the land or the farmers do, but I know the market far less well than I'm sure others here do.

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#97

Post by BartSaM »

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…

I always postulated that a cubic meter of water should be a constitutional right to every human for free. Every water company etc. should allow one cubic meter of water to every citizen for free. Everything above can be paid. This would give people in extreme conditions at least some way to ease their chances to survive. Why it sounds like a small amount, it would help less fortunate. People should not worry about basic income more than it should about the constitutional right to basic products first like water, education, food and the internet.

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#98

Post by amelius »

BartSaM wrote: post #97
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…

I always postulated that a cubic meter of water should be a constitutional right to every human for free. Every water company etc. should allow one cubic meter of water to every citizen for free. Everything above can be paid. This would give people in extreme conditions at least some way to ease their chances to survive. Why it sounds like a small amount, it would help less fortunate. People should not worry about ba…

Is that per day?

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#99

Post by BartSaM »

amelius wrote: post #98
BartSaM wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always postulated that a cubic meter of water should be a constitutional right to every human for free. Every water company etc. should allow one cubic meter of water to every citizen for free. Everything above can be paid. This would give people in extreme conditions at least some way to ease their chances to survive. Why it sounds like a small amount, it would help less fortunate. People should not worry about ba…

Is that per day?

Per month. Not everyone lives in 1st world country. Cubic meter is a lot for many people.

Re: Nestlé Takes Majority Stake in Blue Bottle

#100

Post by [deleted] »

nsxwolf wrote: post #81
minikites wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about all of their other corporate abuses, including pitching infant formula as safer and better than breastfeeding (an outright lie no matter how you spin it)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9_boycott#Baby_milk_...

Formula is certainly safer and better than getting zero milk from women that can't lactate, no?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN