ovengoats

📀🧪👽💿

hi im oven or ven
corporate account: @glumbocoin
competitive splatoon: @gootuber
pfp by @miimaker



morayati
@morayati

The Instant Pot flourished because the company found a tiny bit of white space in a crowded market, and it sold a machine that did a serviceable job at helping out a particular type of very common home cook: someone who cooks regularly for more than one or two people, more out of necessity than because they find the process creative or relaxing. There was no slick branding exercise foundational to the Instant Pot’s success. The device was the brand. It still is. ... From the point of view of the consumer, this makes the Instant Pot a dream product: It does what it says, and it doesn’t cost you much or any additional money after that first purchase. It doesn’t appear to have any planned obsolescence built into it, which would prompt you to replace it at a regular clip. But from the point of view of owners and investors trying to maximize value, that makes the Instant Pot a problem. A company can’t just tootle along in perpetuity, debuting new products according to the actual pace of its good ideas, and otherwise manufacturing and selling a few versions of a durable, beloved device and its accessories, updated every few years with new features. A company needs to grow.


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @morayati's post:

In April 2021, in the midst of that sunny period, Instant Brands took on a $450 million term loan, according to the filing. That debt refinanced $294 million in existing debt, including $100 million tied to the 2019 acquisition, and helped support a $245 million dividend to the shareholders, according to a Moody’s rating of the loan in May 2021.

Link - section links yahoo finance article too if needed.

So not only is it not enough to make money, you have to take on debt to pay out shareholders!