[HN Gopher] Instant Brands, maker of Instant Pot and Pyrex cookw...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Instant Brands, maker of Instant Pot and Pyrex cookware, files for
       bankruptcy
        
       Author : colinprince
       Score  : 145 points
       Date   : 2023-06-13 14:30 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.cbc.ca)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.cbc.ca)
        
       | dylan604 wrote:
       | I don't care about Instant Pots, but NOOOOOO!!! Not my Pyrex!!!!
        
         | ksaj wrote:
         | Too late to be worrying about that now. The glass change was
         | quite a while back.
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | I'm of a certain age that my pyrex is from a while back
        
             | mvdtnz wrote:
             | I assure you this bankruptcy won't affect your existing
             | Pyrex.
        
             | 0x457 wrote:
             | Well, you can keep using it after the company went
             | bankrupt.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | Until they disable the licensing server so the next time
               | it needs to renew the license it fails and becomes
               | unusable. So glad I bought that smart home pyrex set of
               | dishes
        
       | siddarthd2919 wrote:
       | They should have introduced the InstantPot AI line up with
       | ChatGPT 4.0 to save the company.
        
       | zwieback wrote:
       | Everyone who wanted one has one and whoever wants one now gets
       | their friends' cast-offs or duplicates.
        
       | luckman212 wrote:
       | So where can we buy quality oven-safe glassware now in the US?
        
         | proggy wrote:
         | Anchor Hocking is still around. For now. But if this pattern of
         | private equity destroying trusted brands continues, one can
         | only imagine how difficult it will be as a consumer to purchase
         | well-made household commodities. I do not want to navigate a
         | world where the provenance of every product is unknown, its
         | white-label manufacturing origins hidden behind an alphabet
         | soup name like MALACASA, KOMUEE, or M MCIRCO (all actual names
         | of oven safe glassware products for sale today).
        
         | zwieback wrote:
         | Thrift stores.
        
         | katbyte wrote:
         | import the good stuff from the EU:
         | https://icedteapitcher.myshopify.com/
        
         | quacker wrote:
         | OXO sells borosilicate cookware.
         | 
         | I'm unsure if all their glass cookware is borosilicate but they
         | clearly marked it as such when I last looked.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | chazeon wrote:
       | If Instant Pot goes out of business, I wonder where people should
       | go to get electronic pressurized pots?
        
         | berkle4455 wrote:
         | Someone will buy the brand/IP/factories/contracts/etc during
         | bankruptcy and will continue manufacturing them
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | Amazon? Or have they already come out with an AmazonBasics
           | version?
        
         | pjscott wrote:
         | They're almost certainly not going to stop making Instant Pots.
         | This is a chapter 11 bankruptcy -- the kind where the business
         | gets restructured but continues to operate.
        
         | sparrish wrote:
         | We bought a Ninja. It's bigger, which is wonderful for our
         | large family, and works great. Has lids for air frying and
         | pressure cooking.
        
         | jabroni_salad wrote:
         | The ninja foodi line is pretty good. I've had mine for a few
         | years now. I use the air fry, pressure cook, slow cook, and
         | sous vide functions weekly.
        
           | ksaj wrote:
           | Interestingly, Canadian Tire (very well known establishment
           | up here!) used to sell InstaPot, and pretty much always had
           | it on special. Lately they've shifted toward Ninja brand
           | items.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | Faberware and Ninja make some, and I'm sure if the IP IP
         | doesn't get slurped up, Walmart and friends will make store-
         | brand ones. They're not very complicated.
        
           | snuxoll wrote:
           | I <3 my Ninja multi-cooker, but they do a HORRIBLE job of
           | marketing the thing with the name alone: Ninja(r) Foodi(r)
           | 14-in-1 8-qt. SMART XL Pressure Cooker Steam Fryer with
           | SmartLid(r)
           | 
           | It's like something I'd read for some white-labelled Chinese
           | product on Amazon; but it's the single most heavily used
           | appliance in my kitchen!
        
             | bombcar wrote:
             | It slices, it dices...it even makes Julienne fries!
        
       | dtgriscom wrote:
       | I have an Instant Pot, and love it a lot. But, here is some
       | perhaps relevant anecdata:
       | 
       | 1. The original stainless steel removable liner is embossed with
       | nice, legible capacity levels. Unfortunately, they're way off:
       | the "9 cup" line is actually about 12 cups. (Not a big deal; we
       | just don't use the markings.)
       | 
       | 2. I bought the Instant Pot Air Fryer Lid lid add-on, which was
       | supposed to support temperatures of up to 400degF. But, after a
       | lot of testing, I found that it was seriously limited as to the
       | heat it would supply. Basically, the internal temperature never
       | got over 360degF, and in fact after eight minutes of running the
       | heater would turn off and the unit would cool down to 270degF and
       | then maintain that temperature. All the while, the external
       | temperature would happily show 400degF.
       | 
       | My guess: they discovered late in the development cycle that the
       | air fryer lid would overheat and kill older Instant Pots. They
       | couldn't fix this after the fact, so they modified the lid
       | firmware to limit the actual temperatures, but keep displaying
       | the desired temperature, hoping users wouldn't notice. (I
       | complained, and they promptly send me a new lid. But, it had the
       | same flaw.)
       | 
       | My Amazon review with the details:
       | https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R2D14J5XXHC2GA . (Yes:
       | I may have too much time on my hands...)
       | 
       | IMHO, a company which ships clearly flawed products and hopes
       | their customers don't notice is just burning their reputation.
        
         | sk0g wrote:
         | Maybe the temperature is meant to be "oven equivalent"? Our air
         | fryer goes up to 200C, but at that range it's closer to 250C on
         | convection ovens.
         | 
         | Your theory is probably right though, of course.
        
         | dbg31415 wrote:
         | While I don't disagree, I think the main reason they failed had
         | to do with spreading themselves too thin. Competing where they
         | had no business competing.
         | 
         | When they launched, they made an Instant Pots, and it was a
         | fairly good product, with good marketing. There were other
         | pressure cookers before, but this was beyond easy to use -- and
         | super Instagram and Facebook friendly to share cooking videos.
         | 
         | But then they expanded out to... Air Fryers, Coffee Makers,
         | even Air Purifiers... and it's just too much. They weren't
         | going up against old pressure cookers that hadn't really been
         | updated in 40 years, they were going up against established
         | modern brands like Nestle and Keurig, and whoever else.
         | 
         | And they never really established a reason for all the
         | different devices to live under that brand... and probably lost
         | quality control (as you said). And yeah, I mean... I got an
         | Instant Pots as a housewarming gift in 2010, and I loved it. So
         | I gave Instant Pots to a bunch of friends as housewarming
         | gifts... and it never seemed like a hit with the people who
         | received it. At one point someone told me, "Thanks, but I
         | already have one..." So I figured I'd replace my old one, and
         | holy hell the quality in like 2017 or so was not good.
         | 
         | Like you pointed out the measurements on the sides were not
         | accurate. And every dish I had made in the old Instant Pot
         | didn't cook right in the new one. (Probably because the temps
         | were off.) I was an idiot and tossed the old Instant Pot I had
         | before really trying the new one out... then when the new one
         | sucked I stopped using it all together and never bought another
         | one.
         | 
         | Edit... here's a pressure cooker from like 2004. It was such a
         | pain to clean and no matter what I did it splattered steam and
         | liquid all over when it was turned on. Instant Pot was so much
         | easier to use than this thing was.
         | 
         | https://www.overstock.com/Home-Garden/Wolfgang-Puck-7.5-qt.-...
        
           | CommieBobDole wrote:
           | There's a whole generation of pressure cookers after that
           | thing with electronic controls, presets for different food
           | items, etc, that precede the Instant Pot. I have one that I
           | got for free somewhere that has all of those features. Which
           | was why I wondered what the big deal was when everybody
           | started raving about the Instant Pot.
           | 
           | https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/OdoAAOSwPFNkUgOY/s-l1600.jpg
        
       | bsima wrote:
       | Instant Pot has become a cultural icon, everyone has one. How
       | does such an iconic brand go under so quickly? Just bad
       | management? I'm not buying the excuses of "its the macroeconomic
       | climate blah blah"
        
         | redleggedfrog wrote:
         | "...everyone has one." Going to be difficult to sell more then.
         | :^)
         | 
         | Also, they don't fully replace more traditional cooking
         | apparatus, like a pressure cooker, a crock pot, or rice cooker.
         | We have all 4, and what the Instant Pot got a lot of use
         | initially we found that the for purpose cooking pots worked
         | better and got better results. So the Instant Pot slowly fell
         | out of favor.
        
           | duped wrote:
           | But now you need to store three appliances instead of one,
           | and not everyone has a large pantry or kitchen.
        
           | kevinmchugh wrote:
           | What do crockpots and pressure cookers offer that the instant
           | pot doesn't? I have a breville instant pot-equivalent and
           | can't see ever needing a crockpot. And I understood it to be
           | fundamentally just a pressure cooker with some
           | programmability
        
             | ornornor wrote:
             | I have both but we use the instantpot (EU name) more often
             | because it fits more jar when canning, but mostly because
             | of the electronics controls that makes it reach the optimal
             | temp for pressure without making any noise from excess
             | steam releasing. You can achieve it with an analog pressure
             | cooker by it's harder and you can't get it completely
             | silent like the instapot without running the risk of being
             | under pressurized (and under temp), which affects cooking
             | and sterilization effectiveness.
        
           | MegaDeKay wrote:
           | Our Instant Pot makes great rice - I barely use my Zoji
           | anymore. The IP clearly beats it for brown rice both in speed
           | and flavor as the Zoji's seem to be optimized for white. My
           | Instant Pot also has a slow cooker function as well that
           | works just fine.
           | 
           | About the only place the Instant Pot falls down a bit as a
           | pressure cooker is when you need the full 15psi, like the
           | Modernist Cuisine recipe that pressure-cooks squash with a
           | bit of baking soda to kick in the Maillard reaction. The
           | recipe works great in a stovetop pressure cooker that hits
           | 15psi but fails in an Instant pot that only hits around
           | 12.5psi or so - you can always taste the baking soda when it
           | is done cooking. The pressure difference might also impact
           | making stock but I haven't tried a side by side (though the
           | Instant Pot is non-venting so I'd expect it's stock to at
           | least have superiour clarity).
           | 
           | If I could only pick one out of the four, it would be the IP.
           | No question.
        
             | Marsymars wrote:
             | Probably depends which rice cooker you have. My Zojirushi
             | (highest-end non-pressure model when I got it a few years
             | ago) clearly outclasses my IP for any kind of rice, though
             | is much slower.
             | 
             | I used to have a Cuckoo pressure rice cooker that made the
             | best rice, fast, but it eventually started leaking even
             | after replacing the seals, and professional repair would
             | have been prohibitively expensive in Canada
        
             | AlanYx wrote:
             | Just curious, can you adjust the cook time upwards by 10%
             | or so to overcome the pressure difference?
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | Wait, I thought the Instant Pot _just was_ a pressure cooker?
           | 
           | Or by pressure cooker do you mean a "on the stove double
           | boiler-like" setup?
        
             | dragonwriter wrote:
             | The instant pot in the most basic pot serves as all of
             | 
             | (1) An electric pot that can be used like a regular
             | stovetop pot,
             | 
             | (2) A pressure cooker, and
             | 
             | (3) A slow cooker (and a few other things that are
             | typically specialized single-use devices but are really
             | slight variations on those 3 things)
             | 
             | More advanced models are also:
             | 
             | (4) immersion circulator ("sous vide" cooker), and
             | 
             | (5) air fryer.
             | 
             | In many of these roles it is often seen as sonewhat less
             | good than a dedicated device, though even people who feel
             | that way may see it as useful as a multitasker and because
             | it can more conveniently do dishes that require more than
             | one function without changing pots.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | I need to look into this, I didn't know it could be a
               | slow cooker; that would save me two devices if I get rid
               | of the slow cooker and the rice cooker (though it is
               | really nice to make teriyaki chicken in the instant pot
               | and rice in the rice cooker).
        
           | alanbernstein wrote:
           | I got one to replace all three of those, and it works great.
        
           | BolexNOLA wrote:
           | Not that this means your response is wrong (I largely agree)
           | but funny enough in my household our insta-pot is essentially
           | just a rice cooker. We basically use it for nothing else, but
           | it's also _really_ good for rice! Fluffy and perfect
           | everytime.
        
             | redleggedfrog wrote:
             | "...our insta-pot is essentially just a rice cooker." Yeah,
             | ours pretty much boiled down to that, too. :^D
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Or boiled _up_ as it may be, they get nice and hot
               | inside.
        
         | goatforce5 wrote:
         | I think the problem is that _everyone has one_.
         | 
         | > The company's meteoric growth trajectory has slowed down in
         | recent years. According to S&P, sales declined by almost 22 per
         | cent in the first quarter of 2023, the seventh consecutive
         | quarterly contraction.
         | 
         | We got one for the house ~4 years ago. It's still working fine,
         | and we don't need to upgrade to one with Bluetooth connectivity
         | or anything like that.
         | 
         | I'm guessing they found the size of their market wasn't
         | infinite.
        
           | _the_inflator wrote:
           | Yes, no commenter here ever said: I own at least 3
           | generations of pots. Unlike an iPhone, no one is willing to
           | swap the model.
        
           | BobbyJo wrote:
           | Isn't that fine though? I mean, if you've created a popular
           | product, and make margin on every sale, why would only making
           | 100 million dollars instead of 400 million dollars in profit
           | push you into bankruptcy?
           | 
           | Did they take out a ton of loans to expand their
           | manufacturing capabilities with out of touch sales
           | projections or something?
        
             | hooverd wrote:
             | Private equity debt, mostly.
        
           | karaterobot wrote:
           | But then why wouldn't the same process result in the
           | bankruptcy of all (relatively) durable goods manufacturers
           | with a limited set of products? For example, why hasn't
           | Vitamix (blenders) or Zwilling (knives) gone into bankruptcy?
           | 
           | Also, I don't think the market for this stuff is ever truly
           | saturated: every day, plenty of people get their first
           | apartment and need to buy appliances. Instant Pot seems
           | similar to other things like microwaves and toasters, which
           | we don't think of as a dead end due to market saturation.
           | 
           | I think the "bought by private equity and wrung dry"
           | explanation makes more sense. Or if not that, perhaps just a
           | poorly run business.
        
           | ksaj wrote:
           | I would compare that to the bedroom industry. How often do
           | you buy a bedframe or a new dresser? Those businesses are not
           | going out of business, yet the turnover per-household is
           | equally slow.
        
         | alexb_ wrote:
         | Pyrex in particular switched to a new type of glass that is
         | miles worse than their old glass, to the point where the brand
         | name now is a negative.
        
           | kgwxd wrote:
           | The awful noise they used to make when 2 pieces touched was
           | the brand.
        
           | theshrike79 wrote:
           | The (urban legend?) I heard was that they changed the formula
           | so that Pyrex couldn't be used for drug manufacturing.
           | 
           | They still handle all temperatures a home chef will ever
           | need, but a drug operation will reach the limits and the
           | glass breaks.
        
             | katbyte wrote:
             | the new formula was cheaper to make. think thats all you
             | really need to know
        
             | wavefunction wrote:
             | Definitely an urban legend. Heat and narcotic substances do
             | not mix very well beyond the barest threshold of baking
             | temperatures.
        
             | jbay808 wrote:
             | They do not handle the _rapid temperature differentials_ a
             | home chef often encounters when they aren 't careful
             | enough. Especially when they are expecting the resilience
             | of borosilicate glass.
        
           | katbyte wrote:
           | unless you are in the EU, pyrex glass from there is still the
           | good stuff
        
         | skippyboxedhero wrote:
         | Because everyone has one...you have explained it yourself.
         | 
         | Every consumer brand that expands quickly will keep expanding
         | to the point that they saturate their market (GoPro, Doc
         | Martens was a recent IPO in the UK that has self-destructed, it
         | happens over and over). What is unusual about this case is
         | that, afaik, they didn't IPO. Usually the IPO is the prelude to
         | saturation and then bankruptcy because the incentives get
         | totally skewed (and because companies will usually fiddle with
         | supply before the IPO to boost the sale price).
        
           | harimau777 wrote:
           | Declining quality might also be an issue. Doc Martens no
           | longer have the quality or guarantee that they used to.
           | Similarly, other posts have mentioned that Pyrex has
           | apparently changed their formula to a lower quality
           | substitute.
        
             | ksaj wrote:
             | If Doc Martens went public in the 70's, they'd probably be
             | in a lot better shape today. They aren't nearly as popular
             | now as they were in the 70's thru 90's. They picked a weird
             | time to go public.
        
         | branon wrote:
         | They changed the formula for Pyrex glass many years ago and the
         | new formula is inferior to the old one.
         | 
         | Somehow I doubt the current incarnation of these companies has
         | much at all to do with their origin.
        
           | quercusa wrote:
           | Look down the length of a Pyrex pan or measuring cup - if
           | it's green, it's the cheap stuff, if colorless it's old
           | Pyrex.
        
             | Larrikin wrote:
             | It's much easier to just look at the logo. The fake stuff
             | is easily spotted
        
           | zinekeller wrote:
           | > Somehow I doubt the current incarnation of these companies
           | has much at all to do with their origin.
           | 
           | The origin of Pyrex is Corning, the Gorilla Glass maker. They
           | divested Pyrex because they've got tired of dealing with the
           | consumer market and wanted to focus on B2B sales.
           | 
           | The US market was acquired by (as shown) eager to make a
           | quick buck on brand recognition. The European market was
           | acquired by a different company which still manufactures
           | borosilicate cookware to this day (and are not affected by
           | this bankruptcy).
        
             | myself248 wrote:
             | Aye, and this drives me nuts. For 50+ years, "Pyrex" was
             | the name of a material, borosilicate glass, with known
             | material properties. You could count on it being safe in
             | certain situations.
             | 
             | Then Corning somehow decided that it was the name of a
             | _brand_, and they could use whatever inferior material they
             | wanted, and if you put it in those same situations it would
             | explode and cover your kitchen/lab in glass shards.
             | 
             | How that was even legal, I will never understand.
        
               | retrac wrote:
               | Pyrex, the term, was originally a brand for borosilicate
               | glass. It has become partially generic over the years,
               | like Aspirin or Kleenex.
               | 
               | Aspirin is still a trademark of Bayer in Canada; if they
               | want to switch to ibuprofen instead of aspirin as the
               | active ingredient, and sell it as Aspirin, they could.
               | Similarly, if Kimberley-Clark decides to start selling
               | sandpaper and call them Kleenex, they could.
               | 
               | If a trademark becomes fully generic it can be ruled so
               | by a court, at which point the trademark protection is
               | lost. Aspirin is like that in the US. But that is pretty
               | rare these days.
        
               | MagnumOpus wrote:
               | Aspirin is different - the US trademark for the name was
               | explicitly expropriated from Bayer by the US government
               | during WW1 and became a generic... that didn't happen to
               | Kleenex or Pyrex.
        
               | myself248 wrote:
               | But if someone sold ibuprofen as "aspirin", doctors would
               | rightfully decry the move as likely to get someone
               | killed. It's a generic but it has a specific meaning.
               | 
               | Selling soda-lime glass as "pyrex" has gotten plenty of
               | people injured, but evidently none severely enough to sue
               | Corning's pants off.
        
           | throw9away6 wrote:
           | What you want is borosilicate glass. Bodum I think still
           | makes it but other brands Do too. Pryrex is no better than
           | generic Chinese glass
        
           | MegaDeKay wrote:
           | Here is a really good Wirecutter article that discusses the
           | differences. TL;DR: they don't consider the switch away from
           | borosilicate to be a big deal, but borosilicate-based
           | products are still out there if you want them.
           | 
           | https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/blog/tempered-vs-
           | borosili...
        
             | mholm wrote:
             | I've been skeptical of the Wirecutter for a few years now.
             | It seems their reviews are starting to lean away from
             | quality products, and start pointing towards companies with
             | a bigger marketing budget. Example, their handvac
             | recommendations are entirely Black & Decker, but I've tried
             | a few of them and found them vastly overpriced compared to
             | others on the market.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Anything like Wirecutter is good until the marketers
               | catch up with it.
               | 
               | Even consumer reports is gamed; they test toilets by
               | flushing golfballs and whatnot and if you talk to
               | plumbers, they recommend different brands.
        
               | Clamchop wrote:
               | This one looks well-cited though.
        
           | bonniemuffin wrote:
           | Corelle still uses the same really excellent formula they've
           | always used, though. I have a mixed set of new and old
           | Corelle dishes (<1 yr old and >10 years old), and I can't
           | tell the new ones from the old ones.
        
             | salad-tycoon wrote:
             | This is certainly not my understanding. After production
             | left USA quality is worse. Breaks more often and when it
             | shatters, it doesn't just break apart. It's like a kinetic
             | blast sending forth hair and bigger sized razor sharp glass
             | shards in a surprisingly wide radius. It's like a mutually
             | assured destruction event and will require heavy clean up
             | and you still might end up with glass in your feet and
             | eyes.
             | 
             | I remember reading the Amazon reviews and the amount of 1
             | star stories about how a plate landed them in the ER was
             | concerning.
             | 
             | I bought some vintage Corelle at a private sale and it
             | seems different to me at least but maybe I am buying the
             | wrong contemporary stuff.
        
               | nrclark wrote:
               | Corelle plates have always been that way, I think. I was
               | raised using them, and I still buy them now that I have
               | children of my own.
               | 
               | For me, they're 100% shatterproof until they're not. You
               | can drop them over and over again, and never notice any
               | visible change. But then when they finally do shatter,
               | it's almost like an explosion.
               | 
               | I think this is because they're built from a pressurized
               | metal/glass layered composite. Very sturdy until enough
               | internal damage builds up.
        
               | snuxoll wrote:
               | More or less matches my experience, including having been
               | raised eating on Corelle dishes. They'll take drop after
               | drop and then suddenly the last one leaves a giant mess
               | to sweep up. Every time.
        
               | Sunspark wrote:
               | I have discovered that if you leave a Corelle plate
               | outside during the winter, in the spring it will be
               | broken into little bitty pieces. It can't handle the
               | freeze and thaw cycles which surprised me.
        
               | bonniemuffin wrote:
               | I wonder if some of the bad Amazon experiences are due to
               | counterfeit/fakes, and/or the product lines that are made
               | in china? Their products vary in materials and country of
               | manufacture. The ones I like are made of Vitrelle, come
               | directly from Corelle, and it's one of the product lines
               | they still make in New York:
               | https://www.corelle.com/product/winter-frost-
               | white-78-piece-...
               | 
               | I think they're all (even the vintage ones) subject to
               | risk of shattering into pointy shards if they break,
               | though. They're not magic. :)
        
             | bradfa wrote:
             | Corelle is owned by the same conglomerate as Instant and
             | Pyrex, it seems.
        
           | goerz wrote:
           | Does anyone have a specific recommendation for a glass
           | measuring cup that is safe to boil on a gas stove (like PYREX
           | before they changed their glass)?
        
             | bonniemuffin wrote:
             | I use borosilicate lab beakers in the kitchen. The main
             | disadvantage is that they don't have handles so you'll need
             | a pot holder to use them for hot things.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | I went full tilt and bought beaker tongs! Lab coat works
               | great instead of an apron too.
        
               | tstrimple wrote:
               | And another "food scientist" was born.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | Okay, so i might have intentionally left out the eye
               | protection as well, but it's perfectly natural to have a
               | triple beam in place of the instant pot, yeah?
        
             | flyinghamster wrote:
             | Oxo would be a good brand to check - when I looked for a
             | baking dish, I noticed that Oxo specifically mentioned
             | borosilicate on the label.
        
               | wavefunction wrote:
               | Oxo is one of the finest examples of mass-market consumer
               | industrial design and quality I've ever seen. Every
               | product of theirs I've purchased has been exemplary, even
               | years later after heavy and extensive use.
        
               | branon wrote:
               | I had an Oxo digital thermometer that broke after a
               | couple weeks, outside of that all their products have
               | been fantastic
        
             | alwaysbeconsing wrote:
             | I have been satisfied with Anchor-Hocking. They have a
             | different kind of glass than borosilicate but it is still
             | specially made for resisting heat.
             | https://www.anchorhocking.com/why-choose-glass/
        
               | bob1029 wrote:
               | Strongly recommend AH. I've got a lot of their products
               | in varying sizes. Integrated measuring feature makes them
               | easily the most practical pieces of glassware in my
               | kitchen.
        
         | londons_explore wrote:
         | Sounds like they took on lots of loans to grow the business,
         | relying on interest rates staying at ~0%.
         | 
         | When those loans come up for renewal and they have to pay 7%
         | corporate bond rates, of course they're going to collapse.
        
           | Mountain_Skies wrote:
           | That's the crazy part of the "free money" short term loans of
           | the past couple of years. Did these companies not think that
           | they'd need to be refinanced?
        
             | coldpie wrote:
             | More likely the execs know they can take their piece and
             | then bounce when the check comes due. There's no downside,
             | they can just move on to the next victim and repeat until
             | they have enough money to retire.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | When the interest rates bump up, that's not a per company
               | thing. Where's the "next victim and repeat" opportunity
               | going to be when there's no 0% available?
        
               | mcmcmc wrote:
               | Why do you think the acquisition of single family homes
               | picked up so much? They took their war chests and
               | switched investment vehicles
        
               | londons_explore wrote:
               | Well we've had 2 decades of super low rates... Thats
               | plenty to build up a nice big retirement fund...
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | is retirement the next victim?
        
       | OGWhales wrote:
       | Related post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36301612
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | MegaDeKay wrote:
       | I'm shocked by this. We have an Instant Pot and use it. All. The.
       | Time. It is a well made product that is simple to use, has a good
       | feature set, is useful, and relatively inexpensive (even better
       | when it goes on sale, which is frequent). All the people I know
       | that have one (and that is a lot of people) feel the same way.
       | How can't you make money when you have something like this on
       | your hands?!?!?!
        
         | 0xffff2 wrote:
         | Counterpoint, we were gifted an instant pot and used it about
         | half a dozen times before realizing it was an extra piece of
         | kitchen equipment that did absolutely nothing for us in terms
         | of food quality or ease of cooking. It sat in the back of a
         | deep cupboard for a couple of years until we threw it away when
         | we moved.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | Ours is mainly a glorified rice cooker that sometimes does
           | something else.
           | 
           | As a rice cooker, it cooks rice.
        
             | pessimizer wrote:
             | You're missing out, because you should be using it to make
             | _beans._ As a bean cooker, it turns a annoying multi-hour
             | job into from dry to beautifully cooked in an hour. As a
             | rice cooker, you should just use a rice cooker, they 're
             | like 1/3 the price and you can run it at the same time as
             | the bean cooker.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | I really do need to get into the bean scene, but we have
               | had issues [1] in the past.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.whelenmassnotification.com/wp-
               | content/uploads/si...
        
           | irrational wrote:
           | That is interesting. Like OP, we use ours constantly. I
           | consider it to be the kitchen appliance I would never do
           | without. I wonder if it comes down to OP and we making more
           | similar foods than what you eat.
        
             | nikole9696 wrote:
             | This is quite possible. I use mine to cook wild rice, which
             | takes awhile stovetop. And hard boiled eggs, which come out
             | great. Everything else I've tried with it, I might as well
             | just cook with the stove or oven. I don't like most recipes
             | I've seen and am somewhat of a picky eater.
        
               | Eisenstein wrote:
               | It is wonderful to use instead of an oven since it
               | doesn't heat up the whole room and you can pressure cook
               | dry beans without soaking to fully done in about 20 - 30
               | minutes.
        
               | Marsymars wrote:
               | If I'm being really miserly about heat output and/or food
               | smells I'll walk my pot out to the back deck to release.
               | (Could also plug into an outdoor outlet to cook, but gets
               | logistically complicated with timing if I'm not already
               | hanging out on the deck.)
        
               | taylodl wrote:
               | > It is wonderful to use instead of an oven since it
               | doesn't heat up the whole room
               | 
               | Energy efficiency is a big point. Between my Instant Pot
               | and Air Fryer I have few opportunities to turn on the
               | oven. These devices heat up faster, cook faster, and
               | provide more consistent results. This is especially true
               | now that I'm an empty nester and no longer cooking for a
               | large family. It also makes it easy to resist the
               | temptation to rely on processed foods.
        
               | nvy wrote:
               | I primarily use mine to make rice, beef stews, and
               | hummus.
               | 
               | All of those take less time and are just as good if not
               | better than stovetop.
               | 
               | Once I made shawarma in mine, that was pretty neat.
        
               | pessimizer wrote:
               | You use it to make hummus? Is there a good recipe that
               | you use, or are they just floating out there?
        
               | nvy wrote:
               | I have one from my sister-in-law, that she got from her
               | (Israeli) partner's grandmother, which is a very
               | traditional Israeli hummus recipe. That recipe is for
               | stovetop and I adapted it to the instant pot.
               | 
               | The trick is to use baking soda when you cook the
               | chickpeas in the instant pot, because it
               | dissolves/softens the shells. Then you take them out and
               | rinse thoroughly in water to get rid the baking soda
               | taste, before slapping them into a food processor with
               | tahini and whatever else.
               | 
               | Good quality tahini also makes a difference. Lots of
               | north American brands have a wildly different taste than
               | what's common in the middle east.
        
             | Marsymars wrote:
             | Interestingly, different people also use pressure cookers
             | in entirely different ways, which I learned when my partner
             | and I moved in together, and we both brought an Instant Pot
             | the household.
             | 
             | I use mine exclusively for single items that I want to cook
             | efficiently in bulk - eggs, beans, potatoes, yams, etc.
             | (Most recently, made a pot full of chick peas this weekend
             | to split between hummus and a quinoa salad.)
             | 
             | She uses hers for single-pot soups, stews, etc. that are
             | ready to eat as-is.
        
           | js2 wrote:
           | Things I use mine for regularly:
           | 
           | - Hard-boiled eggs. Takes just 5 minutes. Not much time
           | savings, but the eggs are consistently easy to peel and yes,
           | I've tried it Serious Eats way too.
           | 
           | - Incubating yogurt. Makes a perfect batch of four mason jars
           | worth every time.
           | 
           | - Risotto. Saves the 30 minutes of attending to rice where
           | you slowly ladle in the broth.
           | 
           | - Black beans. Start from dry beans in a pinch, no soaking
           | needed.
        
             | downut wrote:
             | I'm doing a complete tear down remodel of the kitchen so I
             | bought some devices to make our 95% cooked from scratch
             | meal lifestyle bearable through the awful times.
             | 
             | A top of the line Breville toaster oven was the first, it's
             | fantastic, but it is also silly to compare it to our 25 y/o
             | Viking duel fuel range, waiting to reenter our life.
             | 
             | A week ago I got my Instant Pot Pro, and I've been putting
             | it through its paces. I boiled some eggs. This is what
             | really irks me about IP fans: it does not take 5 minutes.
             | It has some indeterminate amount of preheat, the 5 min.,
             | and then a cool down. The eggs are just fine, as flawless
             | as the following method on a quality gas burner stove: Put
             | eggs and water into pot to just cover, turn burner
             | high"ish"; when bubbles just start, turn down to a very
             | very slow bubble generation and set timer for 10m (12-13min
             | at 5500' elevation), scoop out the eggs when the timer
             | expires and put on the counter, peel when cool enough. I
             | very rarely had to spend any attention monitoring this. The
             | IP is just, but only just, as good.
             | 
             | BUT ITS NOT FIVE MINUTES.
             | 
             | Shouting because why do instant pot fans do this?
             | 
             | Now, I am quite interested in the yogurt thing. That sounds
             | very cool, we love yogurt and industrial yogurt, meh. Also
             | strawberries are cheap right now and I'm thinking of making
             | some exotic French confitures, and mixing that with the
             | yogurt.
             | 
             | Risotto? No brainer on a decent stove. Dried beans? I also
             | have a 30 y/o Magefesa pressure cooker that has a thicker
             | bottom than the instant pot "pot" and does dried beans
             | perfectly. No magic, or even "instant", there.
             | 
             | Another gripe: compared to the Breville that roller knob in
             | the center is a gawdawlful POS. Reeks of cheap.
             | 
             | Compared to the 15 y/o electric range that is going to be
             | tossed out the back doors, and then shot multiple times
             | with 12 gauge 3" buckshot loads, the IP is great, so maybe
             | I'm a little sad that the inevitable PE bankrupt/shitify it
             | happened to it too.
        
               | jerf wrote:
               | "why do instant pot fans do this?"
               | 
               | You may hatenjoy the discussion at
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36038796 .
               | 
               | (Hmmm... with hatenjoy I may finally have ticked "create
               | a legit googlewhack" off my bucket list. I see some
               | usages that appear to be "Hat Enjoy" jammed together as a
               | domain name or company name but a portmanteau of hate-
               | enjoy Google is not finding for me. Of course Google
               | isn't what it used to be...)
        
           | cdumler wrote:
           | It's a tool. What you get out of it will depend on what you
           | expect of it. What I try to tell people is that Instant Pot
           | is not something that makes food better nor does it
           | necessarily cook things faster. When you factor in the time
           | it takes to get up to pressure and the time it takes for it
           | release it, it isn't necessarily faster than normal cooking.
           | 
           | What is does do it take care of itself. In other words, I can
           | throw a bunch of stuff in the pot, configure it for cook time
           | then turn off the heat, set a timer and know that in 45
           | minutes it will be ready to serve. In a house hold where
           | multitasking is a necessity, that is a huge boon. Finally,
           | one pot to clean up.
        
             | jerf wrote:
             | For me, culinarily, it is basically a slow cooker that
             | produces acceptable results, and also isn't necessarily
             | slow either. We do ribs a lot in the instant pot and while
             | I disagree with just about every recipe on the internet and
             | add 10-15 more minutes than they specify, it is still
             | faster than conventional methods because the extra heat
             | does matter. We also use it as a rice cooker a lot; whether
             | or not it is faster it is convenient, and, you know, we
             | have one, which makes it cheaper than buying a dedicated
             | rice cooker.
        
             | ksaj wrote:
             | There is also the pressure cooker option. That's where our
             | household gets the most mileage out of it. Pressure cooking
             | is easy. Instant Pot pressure cooking is automagic.
        
               | HarryHirsch wrote:
               | Pressure cooking is magic. Your dhal is reliably done
               | after 30 minutes, even with an old batch of beans.
               | Before, I might have waited 2 hours, and dinner was till
               | not ready because the beans were too old.
        
               | koolba wrote:
               | Pressure cooking itself is magical but the InstantPot is
               | like a level one mage casting magical missile. Even the
               | "high pressure" setting is pretty low compared to a real
               | pressure cooker.
               | 
               | Thankfully most meals have low HP.
        
               | ksaj wrote:
               | Yes, you might not use it as an industrial broaster,
               | which requires a significant amount of pressure. But for
               | most home use, InstaPot is painless. And the cleanup is
               | really easy.
        
         | sp332 wrote:
         | They merged with a private equity company. It got turned into a
         | financial instrument instead of a business.
        
           | dpflan wrote:
           | How does PE survive? If these companies become instruments
           | and now forced into bankruptcy, the PE must write off the
           | bankruptcy (some economic advantage must exist for this
           | path). But then the PE has to move on and find another
           | company to possess, right? I wish we had Instant's
           | financials, they did _seem_ to be selling well, so their
           | value was based on expected sales /profit in
           | perpetuity...bankruptcy stops that because bankruptcy has a
           | cap, right?
           | 
           | I need help understanding how PE continues to exist, beyond
           | the assumption that they got money out of the deal and will
           | move on to another one...
        
             | govg wrote:
             | PE exists because the cases you hear about are the
             | failures. It would be like looking at the products of
             | Google that never made money and then wondering how Google
             | runs, you're not looking at the full picture. For every
             | failure story like this, there are numerous other firms
             | where PE has come up, removed a bunch of inefficiencies,
             | driven up profits, and then moved on. It is just a more
             | involved form of VC investing, and in that world failures
             | are even more common.
        
               | dpflan wrote:
               | Sure, PE is bigger than this. But isn't the issue people
               | are having is that this "failure" isn't a failure (PE
               | gains something)...it's part of doing business as a PE
               | firm?
        
             | Zigurd wrote:
             | PE continues to exist by gaming the system: As others on
             | this thread have speculated, driving a company into
             | bankruptcy can shed pension obligations and enable breaking
             | other contracts, leases, etc. Hence the paradox of everyone
             | having these seemingly very popular products while the
             | company is "bankrupt." Bankruptcy is not a loss for PE,
             | yet, anyway. Which is why there is a perverse incentive to
             | "go bankrupt" in large measure due to LBO loans, while
             | there is plenty of brand equity and other assets to propel
             | future sales.
        
             | lmm wrote:
             | PE is the Ticketmaster of finance. They charge a bunch of
             | fees, take a bunch of money, take all of the heat, and
             | quietly funnel the money back to the founder/early
             | investors/etc. who sold out but don't want you to know.
        
               | gruez wrote:
               | >and quietly funnel the money back to the founder/early
               | investors/etc. who sold out but don't want you to know.
               | 
               | I don't understand this attitude. If you're in the arts I
               | can understand why you don't want to be a "sellout", but
               | founders/investors? Isn't the point literally to sell
               | out?
        
             | dpflan wrote:
             | A basic HN Search yields some interesting top articles: htt
             | ps://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu..
             | .
             | 
             | The Atlantic: _When Private Equity Firms Bankrupt Their Own
             | Companies_
             | https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/05/private-
             | eq...
             | 
             | > Interesting, "pension laundering" is a tactic that seems
             | quite abusive.
        
               | robd003 wrote:
               | Pensions should be outlawed. If employees want retirement
               | savings they should be given money for 401k plans, not
               | outdated and inefficient defined benefit plans.
        
               | Tuna-Fish wrote:
               | More importantly, company-ran pension plans should be
               | outlawed because they are a morass of perverse incentives
               | and opportunities for quasi-legal theft. To put it
               | simply, it is often the incentive of the people who make
               | decisions about the pensions to mismanage them.
        
           | wnevets wrote:
           | Isn't that what happened to Bed Bath & Beyond? Can someone
           | explain to me why this happening isn't a bad thing?
        
             | katbyte wrote:
             | > explain to me why this happening isn't a bad thing
             | 
             | because there is now a good change everyone with one of
             | these devices is likely no longer going to get support,
             | warranty, or updates. apps will become outdated and fall
             | off the app store parts to repair will no longer be
             | available etc
             | 
             | devices/a brand people enjoyed using is now gone because PE
             | did what PE does and destroyed the brand for a quick buck
        
               | wnevets wrote:
               | that sounds like a bad thing tho
        
               | katbyte wrote:
               | oh that is my bad, i read your comment on why this IS a
               | bad thing not isn't :(
               | 
               | sorry
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | Like real estate.
        
           | nathanaldensr wrote:
           | Yep. There's always the assumption that just because a
           | business sells a product or service that it is in business to
           | sell a product or service. This is not always true.
        
         | mikeyouse wrote:
         | Private Equity. Instant Pot had great cashflow but slowing
         | sales, so the PE owners issued $450M in new debt and then
         | immediately paid out $250M in dividends to themselves resulting
         | in the company carrying 8x leverage compared to the 4x it had
         | prior to the financial engineering. Further slowing sales and
         | all the cash being stripped from the company ends up with
         | bankruptcy every time.
        
           | rossjudson wrote:
           | You've got a few numbers there, and I'm really really curious
           | about the whole story.
           | 
           | Besides killing the company/jobs, the debt-holders are left
           | holding the bag?
        
             | mikeyouse wrote:
             | Yep, pretty much. PE Owners get rich(er), debtholders get
             | wrecked, employees lose their jobs, any assets (pension
             | contributions etc) are given to the debtholders. The
             | company will likely continue to exist and Instant Pots will
             | still be made/sold, but with a much smaller footprint in
             | the future.
             | 
             | The linked article talks to management about how
             | unsustainable the $500 million in debt is without noting
             | that it was half of that amount until these jokers took out
             | loans worth $450M to gave themselves $250M.
        
             | Nifty3929 wrote:
             | No reason to think the company or jobs are in jeopardy.
             | Maybe they are, maybe not. The really bag-holders are the
             | lenders who will take a haircut. Most companies emerge from
             | bankruptcy stronger than before, having never ceased
             | operations.
             | 
             | From the article: "Broadly speaking, the CCAA is the
             | Canadian equivalent of Chapter 11 of the U.S. bankruptcy
             | code. Companies enter both processes when they are seeking
             | the court's help to protect them from their creditors while
             | they try to come up with a way to restructure the business
             | and continue to operate."
        
           | falcolas wrote:
           | I'm apparently stupid. I can't understand how that can be
           | even remotely legal.
        
             | soganess wrote:
             | I know basically nothing about this, but hear money peeps
             | talking about it all the time like it is common practice.
             | Some version of it happened to the B&M store Clarie's.
        
             | taylodl wrote:
             | The company's officers are in on the take. Legally they can
             | take these actions on behalf of the company, as long it's
             | clear and in the open.
        
               | pavon wrote:
               | It is the bankruptcy part that I don't understand the
               | legality of. Parent company pulls a ton of money out of
               | subsidiary, claims bankruptcy, then magically parent
               | company isn't liable for subsidiary's debt?
        
               | Zigurd wrote:
               | PE isn't a parent company. LBO debt is debt carried by
               | the acquired company. So there is no sleight of hand in
               | bankruptcy. The poison is already in the acquired
               | company's bloodstream.
        
               | mikeyouse wrote:
               | Yep, all correct. The sleight of hand comes _just_ before
               | bankruptcy when the assets are stripped and sold to a
               | different entity so the debtholders are screwed with
               | worthless assets and are stuck filing longshot lawsuits
               | to recover assets while the ghouls who raided the company
               | invest their ill-gotten proceeds while tying the mess up
               | in court for years.
               | 
               | https://archive.is/LsqUp
        
           | youainti wrote:
           | Really disappointed that this happened.
        
           | No1 wrote:
           | Who in their right minds lends to a PE-owned company? You
           | know they're going to raid the piggy bank and leave the
           | lender holding the bag. There can't be that many rubes with
           | $450 million laying around. Are the investors government
           | pension funds or something?
        
             | hef19898 wrote:
             | I guess those loans are rather quickly sold on to third
             | parties, either as bundles or stand alone. Kind of like
             | what happened to MBS, mortgage backed securities.
        
               | ajsnigrutin wrote:
               | Also, a lot of the time, the government will bail them
               | out, and they can continue doing that.
        
             | Zigurd wrote:
             | LBO lenders charge high rates. This means a loan that
             | eventually settles for less than face value can still be
             | more profitable than a low-interest loan that gets paid off
             | on schedule.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | civilitty wrote:
             | Just another in a long list of the awful long term
             | consequences of zero interest rate environments interacting
             | with the principle-agent problem.
             | 
             | The people approving these loans get to report better
             | quarterly numbers and by the time the chickens come home to
             | roost, they've already moved on.
        
         | CPLX wrote:
         | The money was stolen.
         | 
         | This is an utterly textbook private equity play, the kind of
         | thing that has been wrecking American business and jobs.
         | 
         | There's nothing subtle about this at all, it's looting with a
         | pen.
         | 
         | They acquire the business, load it down with massive amounts of
         | debt, do reckless short term things to boost growth (aka
         | "eating the seed corn") and then take the money and keep it
         | leaving someone else holding the bag.
         | 
         | It has nothing at all to do with how much people do or don't
         | like cookware.
         | 
         | It's a bust out, a racket, just an inch away from organized
         | crime. It happens daily in this country.
        
           | clairity wrote:
           | to be clear, PE isn't always purely extractive, but when it
           | is, it can be highly destructive. sometimes a business is so
           | mismanaged that debt (and the pressure it adds) and new
           | management is all that is needed to right the ship.
           | 
           | PE itself is a bloated industry because we have too much
           | money being extracted out of the real economy going into the
           | pockets of the already wealthy who don't know what to do with
           | it, so they hand it to a money manager (i.e., PE) to make
           | more money for them, not knowing what to do with those
           | potential future earnings either. this is the kind of
           | economic inefficiency that concentrations of capital brings,
           | in direct refutation of the common economic argument that the
           | wealthy are better at investing money (i.e., more capital
           | efficient, which in turn supposedly adds more real
           | productivity to the economy).
           | 
           | small, local amounts of wealth are more capital efficient,
           | but large, distant amounts are not.
        
             | CPLX wrote:
             | Private equity, as a concept, just means a firm or group of
             | people that owns something. We're posting these comments
             | right now on a website owned by a private equity firm.
             | Technically if I sell my lawn service to some guy with an
             | LLC it's private equity.
             | 
             | Private Equity, as a distinct industry, is fully engaged in
             | looting of the type contemplated by the principal-agent
             | problem:
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal-agent_problem
        
               | clairity wrote:
               | not sure what point you're making here, but my point was
               | that there is room for little PE, but not big PE, because
               | little PE can have the effect of making capital more
               | efficient for the overall economy. it's the same with
               | arbitrage--a little arbitrage is good for the economy,
               | but large, systemic arbitrage is extractive for no
               | overall benefit.
               | 
               | the principal-agent problem emerges in any business where
               | professional managers are employed (which usually happens
               | when a business gets too big for its britches), so it's
               | not PE-specific.
        
           | MandieD wrote:
           | A little piece of classical music on this theme:
           | https://www.woodyguthrie.org/Lyrics/Pretty_Boy_Floyd.htm
           | 
           | "Yes, as through this world I've wandered I've seen lots of
           | funny men; Some will rob you with a six-gun, And some with a
           | fountain pen.
           | 
           | And as through your life you travel, Yes, as through your
           | life you roam, You won't never see an outlaw Drive a family
           | from their home."
        
           | coldpie wrote:
           | If that's true, I wonder why the article doesn't make this
           | clear. All it says is the company has a half-billion in debt,
           | without any explanation for how that came about. It doesn't
           | even mention that the company is owned by a PE looter.
           | 
           | Quotes from the article:
           | 
           | > In 2019, his company merged with Illinois-based Corelle
           | Brands, the owner of Pyrex, CorningWare, SnapWare and
           | Corelle.
           | 
           | > In 2021, at the height of its popularity, the company
           | borrowed $450 million US worth of bonds, due in 2028, to
           | expand its business.
           | 
           | Is Corelle the PE firm? Is "expand its business" the standard
           | figleaf PE firms use when looting a business?
        
             | CPLX wrote:
             | For some unknown reason this all still happens right out in
             | the open without a major media narrative built around it. A
             | few activists and lawmakers have tried but it's still not
             | in the public consciousness.
             | 
             | But it's constant and blatant and somehow seems to still be
             | legal.
             | 
             | The PE firm here is Cornell Capital.
        
             | anigbrowl wrote:
             | The business press is in on it. I don't mean in the sense
             | that they get financial kickbacks, but business reporting
             | is a cushy job where 90% of the work is rewriting press
             | releases and boilerplate 'analysis' of stock movements.
        
           | hungrigekatze wrote:
           | A while back I was reading up on private equity as an
           | 'industry' after a prior employer was bought up by PE, carved
           | into bits, with each 'chunk' being sold off to the highest
           | bidder.
           | 
           | If you look up the names of some of the PE companies they're
           | quite on the nose: https://macellumcapitalmanagement.com/
           | Macellum literally means "meat market":
           | https://m.dict.cc/latin-english/macellum.html 'Take an animal
           | (company); chop it into parts and sell those off'
           | 
           | Wikipedia page for Macellum:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macellum
        
         | Alupis wrote:
         | > We have an Instant Pot and use it. All. The. Time. It is a
         | well made product that is simple to use, has a good feature
         | set, is useful, and relatively inexpensive
         | 
         | You may have just described why they're filing for bankruptcy.
         | 
         | While I do not own an Instant Pot, I do own an awful lot of
         | Pyrex cookware that I bought well over a decade ago... My
         | mother has Pyrex cookware she's owned for decades and will
         | likely pass down one day.
         | 
         | It's hard to build a lasting company when your customer's buy
         | once and never again. Perhaps there's really such a thing as
         | "too good".
        
           | Nifty3929 wrote:
           | Not at all - as long as they're earning a profit on each one
           | large enough to justify having produced it, then they lose
           | nothing by their products lasting a long time. The worst
           | outcome might be that the market becomes saturated and
           | everybody already has one or two, in which case the business
           | just scales down and goes away, having earned a lot of money.
           | But I doubt even that outcome in this case.
        
             | Alupis wrote:
             | Maybe, but in the same time duration I've bought multiple
             | sets of pots/pans, wooden spoons/spatulas, several wooden
             | cutting boards, mixing bowls, etc.
             | 
             | If the company drags on long enough, all that profit gets
             | eroded away. Pyrex has been around since the early 1900's
             | for instance.
             | 
             | I agree, might not be 100% of what happened here, but it
             | surely has to be a component.
        
         | Nifty3929 wrote:
         | It sounds like you're getting a lot of value from your
         | purchase, which is great. But this doesn't mean that the
         | company made any money by selling it to you. Maybe they did or
         | not, but that's a different question.
        
         | dragonwriter wrote:
         | Instant Pots are awesome, broadly useful, and last a long time.
         | They reached market saturation, though, and the company kept
         | trying to find a way to keep up the growth curve it had when
         | Instant Pot was being adopted. And then, of course, the Private
         | Equity "extract money and load the firm up with debt" maneuver
         | of death.
        
           | sgtnoodle wrote:
           | I recently bought their sous vide gadget and it seems pretty
           | good. I wish it would remember its setting after erroring
           | out, but that's very minor. It seems very accurate, within a
           | degree.
        
         | bonniemuffin wrote:
         | Everyone who wants one already has one, and it's not the kind
         | of thing you need to upgrade every year. I'll keep using my
         | Instant Pot for the next 10 years, but that won't help Instant
         | Brands make money.
        
           | Mimmy wrote:
           | By that logic, the following industries would not exist:
           | automotive, furniture, computer, kitchen appliances, other
           | home appliances, television, bicycle...
           | 
           | The article itself and mikeyouse's comment explain the
           | situation most clearly. Standard PE financial
           | (over)-engineering was the primary cause of their problems.
           | 
           | Slowing sales obviously don't help, but changes in the macro-
           | environment can typically be weathered if the companies'
           | financials are appropriately managed.
        
             | makeitdouble wrote:
             | > automotive, bicycle
             | 
             | They're supposed to have recurring maintenance fees. One
             | might do the maintenance themselve, but a significant part
             | of the user base will ask a shop to do it, probably the
             | dealer where they bought it.
             | 
             | > furniture, kitchen appliances, other home appliances
             | 
             | On the higher end it survives by charging years worth of
             | purchase. Like a 4000 bucks oak dining table. Kitchen
             | appliance also either cost an arm and a leg or won't last
             | for 10 years (including buying replacement for the
             | perishable parts)
             | 
             | The lower end is the market IKEA dominates.
             | 
             | > television
             | 
             | They exactly saw this problem front and center and started
             | pivoting to selling viewing data and pushing ads, getting
             | "smart"
             | 
             | > computers
             | 
             | That's exactly why companies (the biggest cmputer
             | purchasers) are led to leases instead of purchases, and
             | those renew every 3 years. On the user side cheaper
             | computers are also the mainstream, and people don't expect
             | those to last 10 years.
        
           | digikata wrote:
           | Or you recognize that the product area it's in, and size the
           | business to market and make it efficient for a long term run
           | (probably growing shrinking according some metric of market
           | adoption gap, demographics, household growth...). But that's
           | crazy talk.
        
       | AndrewStephens wrote:
       | This is a shame - I have one of their combo air-fryers/pressure-
       | cookers and although it is only a passable air-fryer, it is the
       | best pressure cooker I have ever used and very good value for the
       | relatively cheap price.
        
         | 01100011 wrote:
         | I tried their air fryer. Could not get rid of the toxic smell
         | despite numerous, extended burn-in sessions, cooking in it, re-
         | cleaning it, spraying oil in it, etc. Eventually gave up and
         | got rid of it. It had great features but the smell was
         | terrible.
        
       | chris_va wrote:
       | So, taken over by private equity in 2017...
       | 
       | It'll continue to operate... I'm curious what fraction of the
       | creditors are backed by Cornell Capital (PE owner), and if they
       | just are using this to wipe out retirement plans/other
       | creditors/dump a bunch of debt, or if they actually messed up.
        
         | kurthr wrote:
         | So I wonder how much was that the PE didn't feel like they were
         | getting a large enough coupon (2017-19 rates) and wanted a
         | quicker bankruptcy to redeploy their efforts? A rational corp
         | would have refinanced the debt at 2021 rates.
         | 
         | https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/instant-brands-to-m...
        
       | cactusplant7374 wrote:
       | Has instant pot ever made a dual voltage version that works in
       | USA and Europe? I really want to use mine for nomad'ing but not
       | have two versions. It seems like this is probably more expensive
       | when high voltage is involved? I noticed there is no dual voltage
       | Vitamix product as well.
        
       | jeremy_wiebe wrote:
       | I'm not too surprised. Since introducing the Instant Pot there
       | has been a lot of competition on their main product (pressure
       | cooker). It seems like a race to the bottom for cost and so they
       | must have faced shrinking profit margins. Also, they were
       | diversifying their product offering into products that seemed
       | like they were grasping and not really aligned with their main
       | offering.
        
         | agloe_dreams wrote:
         | Yup, they were trying really hard to break into the pod coffee
         | game by making machines (but not pods, lol razor/blade model
         | backwards) the machines were neat, they have a combo
         | Nespresso/Keurig machine we bought but it was kinda bad at
         | both.
        
       | prh8 wrote:
       | For all the discussion about Pyrex manufacturing below, here's a
       | quick helper-
       | 
       | The original (and good quality glass) is sold as PYREX.
       | 
       | The worse glass is sold as pyrex.
       | 
       | Those 2 are licensed out separately.
        
         | tecleandor wrote:
         | There's a simple explanation:
         | https://www.allrecipes.com/article/what-is-the-difference-be...
         | 
         | From the EU Pyrex webpage, when they talk about their materials
         | in the French factory, they say it's borosilicate:
         | The Pyrex(r) glass is unique. It is a borosilicate glass that
         | is tempered, of superior quality and has a great thermal and
         | mechanical shock resistance. [...] The Pyrex(r) glass is made
         | of pure sand (80%), soda (4%), Alumina (2,5%) and bore (13%).
         | 
         | So I'd say that at least EU Pyrex is safer (when talking about
         | thermal shock, I guess).
         | 
         | PD: Following the life of Pyrex, Duralex and Saint-Gobain is
         | quite a thing...
        
         | zwieback wrote:
         | Wow, I had no idea, thanks for the tip. I've been snatching up
         | old PYREX in thrift stores when I heard the new stuff is no
         | good. Now I know...
        
           | katbyte wrote:
           | you can still buy the good stuff from various websites in NA:
           | https://icedteapitcher.myshopify.com/
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-06-13 23:02 UTC)