[HN Gopher] Bob Moore, who founded Bob's Red Mill, has died
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Bob Moore, who founded Bob's Red Mill, has died
        
       Author : mikhael
       Score  : 298 points
       Date   : 2024-02-14 04:38 UTC (18 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.nytimes.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.nytimes.com)
        
       | chubot wrote:
       | Some good testimonials for Bob's product 5 months ago:
       | 
       |  _Breakfast cereal is in long-term decline (wsj.com)_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37540770
       | 
       | This article is great -- I didn't know the back story behind the
       | company, but a few things stand out.
       | 
       | - He changed careers pretty late in life. _By his mid-40s, he was
       | managing a J.C. Penney auto shop in Redding, Calif., when he
       | wandered into a library and ran across a book called "John
       | Goffe's Mill," by George Woodbury, which chronicled the author's
       | restoration of a run-down family flour mill_
       | 
       | - He was religious, and not in a superficial way. _Mr. Moore
       | eventually began feeling the tug of a lifelong dream: to learn to
       | read the Bible in its original languages, including Hebrew and
       | Koine Greek_
       | 
       | As a person who was raised without religion, I've been noticing
       | that it can be a major reason why people make food of
       | "irrational" quality.
       | 
       | What I've been seeing in every area of life, including software,
       | is "optimization" of businesses by owners. It's been taken to new
       | heights in the last 10-20 years by private equity.
       | 
       | They buy up working businesses and lower the quality to the
       | amount that the market will bear, and pocket the difference.
       | 
       | It's apparently optimizing profits for the owners, but it's
       | destroying economic value. Multiply that by M businesses in N
       | different industries and you have a declining country.
       | 
       | So if you want to do something interesting and worth remembering,
       | you need a better reason than being "rational". So kudos to Bob
       | for this -- it seems like his life was its own reward.
        
         | kiba wrote:
         | _So if you want to do something interesting and worth
         | remembering, you need a better reason than being "rational". So
         | kudos to Bob for this -- it seems like his life was its own
         | reward._
         | 
         | You're going to need to define what 'rational' is. Optimizing a
         | certain kind of metric beyond all reason is going to destroy
         | whatever economic engine that is currently providing people
         | their livelihood.
        
           | TaylorAlexander wrote:
           | Doesn't seem to be true. Bob's Red Mill seems to be doing
           | fine.
        
           | banannaise wrote:
           | I believe they are referring to the modern economist's
           | definition of "rational", which is equivalent to "profit-
           | maximizing".
        
           | cogman10 wrote:
           | > Optimizing a certain kind of metric beyond all reason is
           | going to destroy whatever economic engine that is currently
           | providing people their livelihood.
           | 
           | I agree. The general trend of optimizing only for shareholder
           | value has destroyed the livelihood of countless workers.
           | Heck, it's destroyed legacy companies like kmart and sears.
           | It's all but killed off manufacturing in the US. And, were
           | the quality better, it'd kill off the jobs of most HN
           | commenters as businesses would love nothing more than to
           | offshore everything to the cheapest location possible.
           | 
           | The economy is a giant prisoner's dilemma. It'd be far
           | healthier if wealth was better distributed yet individual
           | companies and shareholders can make a boatload of money by
           | taking shortcuts and keeping things running at barebones
           | levels.
        
         | pimlottc wrote:
         | > As a person who was raised without religion, I've been
         | noticing that it can be a major reason why people make food of
         | "irrational" quality.
         | 
         | I don't follow, can you explain how religiosity relates to food
         | quality?
        
           | parl_match wrote:
           | There's a certain emphasis, by people of a certain type of
           | religiousness, on focusing heavily on the base needs of a
           | person instead of "worldly" desires. I don't mean this in a
           | condescending way, I'm having trouble expressing how it
           | manifests. It's sort of a focus on the gifts God gave us and
           | the way he wants us to live. I'm not religious btw, but I
           | think I understand the mindset.
        
             | hyggetrold wrote:
             | Well said - I think of Quaker (edit: I meant Shaker)
             | furniture as a great example of this.
        
               | psunavy03 wrote:
               | In areas that have them, Amish roofers are known for top-
               | quality workmanship, period dot.
        
               | InitialLastName wrote:
               | As a Quaker I appreciate the callout, but you probably
               | mean Shaker furniture. The Religious Society of Friends
               | isn't known for their carpentry.
        
               | Rapzid wrote:
               | Known for something even better though; banning a certain
               | practice from their society more than a decade before the
               | Constitution was ratified.
        
               | AlbertCory wrote:
               | Since my kitchen cabinets are "modified Shaker," I
               | appreciate this.
               | 
               | There's something about simple design that you can
               | appreciate without being in any way religious.
               | Christopher Alexander tries to get at it.
        
               | hyggetrold wrote:
               | D'oh - thank you, you are correct. I was thinking of
               | Shaker furniture.
               | 
               | That said, I also admire the Quakers for their values.
        
             | Rapzid wrote:
             | I don't think religiousness is a prerequisite or an
             | indicator for the mindset of enjoying the simple things in
             | life or quality craftsmanship. Perhaps religious people are
             | more likely to use religion to rationalize these
             | proclivities.
        
             | someuser2345 wrote:
             | It sounds like by "base needs", you mean basic, or
             | foundational needs. Like, making sure that people have
             | food, water and shelter. Which makes sense, if the
             | foundation is strong, you can build a lot on top of it.
        
           | hyggetrold wrote:
           | It's quality in general. If you are building something for
           | whatever god you happen to believe in, you are going to want
           | to build something of high quality to honor that. Why make a
           | shoddy sacrifice?
        
             | dangus wrote:
             | So atheists hate quality now?
             | 
             | I don't recall chick-fil-a sandwiches being offerings to
             | god, I'm pretty sure they're sold to consumers.
             | 
             | This theory also doesn't really explain why a lot of
             | Christian products are very low quality.
             | 
             | The eggs at Aldi with the Bible verses are downright
             | terrible compared to a pasture raised product from a brand
             | like Vital Farms.
             | 
             | MyPillow pillows are bottom of the barrel.
             | 
             | Tyson Foods is certainly not known for quality.
        
               | phaedryx wrote:
               | Or... atheists like quality for other reasons?
               | 
               | Saying "some people associate quality workmanship with
               | their belief in God" doesn't mean:
               | 
               | 1. all religious folks care about quality workmanship
               | 
               | 2. all people who care about quality workmanship are
               | religious
        
               | dangus wrote:
               | I agree with you but that's not really what all these
               | parent commenters are strongly implying.
               | 
               | They're giving religion way more credit than it's due.
        
               | quesera wrote:
               | Religion is a reason for many great things that people
               | do.
               | 
               | Food quality, perhaps. But art, music, architecture,
               | definitely.
               | 
               | Not all religious people do great things, not all great
               | things are done for religious reasons.
               | 
               | Your logic directionality is failing you badly here.
               | 
               | It is possible to say nice things about someone without
               | implying condemnation of another.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | I was just watching an old episode of Top Gear that had
             | Steven Tyler as a guest. He mentioned a quote that his mom
             | said, "The ark was made by amateurs while the Titanic was
             | made by professionals". I found it amusing.
        
         | nineplay wrote:
         | I have a friend who is Orthodox Christian and follows a very
         | strict fasting schedule. I disagree with her about many things
         | but I've always found her very thoughtful when it comes to her
         | religion. She says she sees fasting not as a requirement from
         | God but as a gift from God.
         | 
         | It is a opportunity to emphasize with those in poverty. It is a
         | way to truly appreciate every meal - saying grace before a meal
         | take on a real significance. And it is an opportunity to be
         | truly thoughtful about the food you are putting into your body
         | - particularly as the fasts are often "no meat" or something
         | else specific.
         | 
         | She is also not surprisingly a very good cook and cooks most
         | things from scratch. If she were to start a food company, I'm
         | sure she'd use the same values.
        
           | user3939382 wrote:
           | > She says she sees fasting not as a requirement from God but
           | as a gift from God
           | 
           | It's hard to be in prayer all day. If you're hungry however,
           | you are perpetually reminded and thinking of God.
        
             | orenlindsey wrote:
             | It also allows you to focus better, undistracted by the
             | next meal.
        
               | malfist wrote:
               | Undistracted by the next meal, but maybe by a growling
               | belly
        
               | nekasrbenda wrote:
               | Orthodox Lent is not about fasting, but about abstaining
               | from certain foods (so probably incorrect to call it a
               | "fast").
               | 
               | You are not supposed to go hungry, just be strict on what
               | you consume.
        
             | hindsightbias wrote:
             | I looked into one of those Trappist Abbey breweries way
             | back. The monks appeared pretty well fed. Brewing is fun,
             | but getting up at 5am and praying all day...
        
           | DylanDmitri wrote:
           | Fasting is less "do this for ritual purity" and more "this is
           | an exercise for building self control" like weightlifting is
           | an practice for building physical strength.
           | 
           | Some religious diets are perpetual, like "no pork ever".
           | Orthodox fasting is "eat everything half of the year" and
           | then practice self control by abstaining from the
           | meat/wine/oil/dairy the other half.
        
             | dangus wrote:
             | I feel like the obvious thing to point out in this whole
             | discussion is that this practice isn't inherently religious
             | at all. You can reap 100% of the benefits of fasting
             | without the religion.
        
               | robertlagrant wrote:
               | There's no need to turn a thoughtful thread into a
               | justification of the moral superiority of your identity.
        
               | giantg2 wrote:
               | Many religious practices are borrowed from other
               | religions or have some secular origin/reasoning. This is
               | especially true for many of the food restrictions. Prior
               | to germ theory, you ate something unclean and now God
               | must be punishing you for it, etc.
               | 
               | "I think atheists actually empathize with the poor even
               | more"
               | 
               | I think both this statement and the one you are
               | responding to are getting to general/stereotypical.
               | Fasting can be some meaningless ego/status religious
               | thing. Just as some atheists might be more empathetic.
               | 
               | In my limited experience, the religious fasters seem
               | mostly to be doing it because their community (church)
               | does it and they want to belong, not for the exercise in
               | self control or empathy. Although i msure both exist.
               | It's also been my experience that atheists aren't any
               | more empathetic towards the poor than the average person,
               | religious or not.
        
               | ymyms wrote:
               | I've been thinking about something like this recently. I
               | was raised Catholic but have since become atheist. I've
               | connected the health benefits of fasting and eating less
               | red meat to some of the practices in Catholicism during
               | lent. Personally, I find it hard to remember to try and
               | do a fast or really build a long-term avoidance of red
               | meat. So lately I've been thinking that while I may not
               | believe in any gods, becoming "culturally Catholic" and
               | re-adopting some of those practices could give me the
               | structure I need to make some of those beneficial
               | changes.
        
           | tharmas wrote:
           | Not just spiritually healthy but physically too:
           | https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/fasting-benefits
        
             | giraffe_lady wrote:
             | That is mostly different but the nomenclature is confusing.
             | The orthodox christian tradition of fasting is rarely ever
             | strictly fasting in the medical sense. What they mean is
             | voluntary abstinence from certain kinds of food on certain
             | days, with the specifics varying by tradition & individual
             | particulars.
             | 
             | Most lay orthodox christians only "truly" fast before
             | taking communion and around a few particularly important
             | holidays. So when they talk about fasting they are _not_
             | normally talking about something that resembles
             | intermittent fasting in practice.
        
         | chubot wrote:
         | Hm I'm glad this story made it to the top. I'll indulge this
         | train of thought some more, since it's something I've been
         | thinking about. (But still in honor of the person who this
         | article is about)
         | 
         | Again, growing up without religion, I always wondered what the
         | deal was with rules like "kosher" and "Halal". To me, it seemed
         | like people were following old rules that didn't make sense in
         | the modern world (though thankfully I never really voiced these
         | opinions).
         | 
         | Now, you can argue about the details of these rules, but the
         | point is that there actually have to be rules beyond
         | "rationality", as I said.
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | The "rational" thing is to adulterate food, and this has been a
         | big problem throughout history.
         | 
         | For example, here's a picture of stamped bread from the first
         | century AD in Pompeii -
         | https://ridiculouslyinteresting.com/2013/07/22/preserved-loa...
         | 
         | The stamp apparently being required to identify the baker in
         | case of fraud.
         | 
         | One way you can get a sense of the incentive to adulterate food
         | is to look at all the colorful punishments for doing so -
         | http://www.theoldfoodie.com/2011/09/bakers-dozen.html
         | 
         |  _In Vienna, bakers caught selling underweight bread were put
         | in the baeckerschupfen - a sort of cage which was then plunged
         | into the river several times._
         | 
         |  _In Turkey, a bad baker was stretched out on his own kneading
         | table and the bastinado (foot-beating with a stick) was
         | administered._
         | 
         |  _Perhaps the most public and painful punishment was in ancient
         | Egypt, were an offending baker could be nailed by the ear to
         | the door of his shop, where no doubt his customers gave him
         | even more abuse._
         | 
         | More -
         | https://musingsonfoodhistory.wordpress.com/2016/01/12/death-...
         | 
         | A law in Britain -
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_of_Bread_Act_1757
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | So the "rational" thing is to adulterate food, just like the
         | "rational" thing is to spray ads all over web content, and add
         | dark patterns to iOS apps. It makes money, in the short term.
         | 
         | But the cultures that survived and took over the world had
         | rules beyond what's "rational". Christians, Jews, and Muslims
         | all have extra rules you have to follow with regarding food.
         | You don't really question why, but the act of compliance is a
         | virtue.
         | 
         | So now I no longer think the arbitrary rules are so strange.
         | You can argue with the details, the high level bit is that you
         | don't just optimize for your own business. You have a higher
         | duty.
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | If a society has 10,000 food producers, and all of them are
         | doing the bare minumum, then eventually the health of the
         | citizens is going to be the bare minimum too.
         | 
         | The neighboring clan with stricter rules - and yes MORALS -
         | will overtake them.
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | And my point is that we're back in this situation NOW.
         | Corporations have optimized the production of food for profit,
         | while remaining technically legal.
         | 
         |  _America's packaged food supply is ultra-processed_ -
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20551847 -
         | https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2019/07/us-packaged-fo...
         | 
         | America exported this problem to countries like Brazil, which
         | started the recent research on ultra-processed foods:
         | 
         | https://www.theguardian.com/food/2020/feb/13/how-ultra-proce...
         | 
         | Stories on Hacker News -
         | https://hn.algolia.com/?q=ultra+processed+food
         | 
         | (People who don't think this is real have to answer the
         | question of why men and women weigh 30 or 50 pounds more on
         | average than they did in 1960, etc.)
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | Similar line of thought with respect to gambling and crypto -
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33910537. A younger me
         | would have thought that gambling is each person's choice. It's
         | a free country.
         | 
         | But if you have a society of 10,000 people where 50% of people
         | are playing negative sum games, then pretty soon that society
         | is not competitive anymore. They're not producing anything. The
         | societies that simply banned gambling are the ones that
         | survived. (And even now I don't necessarily agree with banning
         | gambling, just saying there is a a group selection phenomenon
         | there.)
         | 
         | Likewise, imposing burdensome and arbitrary rules on food is
         | probably good in the long term. That has to be a bigger reason
         | for doing things other than making money tomorrow. We might
         | want to bring back some of the colorful punishments, rather
         | than letting corporations make the rules.
         | 
         | In tech, we have poisoned our own information supply, which is
         | profitable in the short term, but obviously bad in the long
         | term.
        
           | beardicus wrote:
           | i can't imagine many people would agree with how you're using
           | the term "rational". short-term thinking is not an automatic
           | outcome of rationality... you seem to be describing some of
           | the negative effects of capitalism instead.
        
             | ymyms wrote:
             | "Short-term" is also relative. Reading what the original
             | author wrote, I interpreted it as them working backwards
             | from the severe punishments for underweighting bread and
             | what might cause them. Perhaps it's not the original baker
             | underweighting bread, but their son or their grandson who
             | doesn't have the right context for not doing so. Maybe they
             | are trying to get more out of the family bakery, try
             | something new, shake things up. It might be rational in the
             | sense of game theory and the expected outcome of multiple
             | generations of bakers. So over 100 years time you might
             | find half your bakeries have reduced the size of their
             | bread while the competing town has not and they overtake
             | you.
             | 
             | Or maybe the town faces hard times and the baker might want
             | to cut costs by reducing the weight of their bread to help
             | their own family. That might be rational under those
             | circumstances.
        
           | morning-coffee wrote:
           | Good post. (I appreciate the thoughtful responses and
           | references, so thank you.)
           | 
           | > In tech, we have poisoned our own information supply
           | 
           | Curious to know more about what you mean by this, if you have
           | the time... poisoned how? cheers!
        
           | tharmas wrote:
           | Greed and Corruption! And blame Milton Friedman for the
           | corrupt economic philosophy. He foolishly believed and
           | preached that shareholders would never act irrationally such
           | that they would harm the company. Alan Greenspan believed
           | that too but at least admitted that he was wrong, post 2008
           | bank meltdowns.
        
           | CobrastanJorji wrote:
           | To some extent, I think that the problem comes down to
           | communities. If you feel like your work is your contribution
           | to your community, and especially to specific people, your
           | goal isn't to make money. It's to contribute. You're
           | incentivized to make good things that people like and help
           | people. But when it's a massive crowd of people that you
           | don't even know, ordering your stuff from afar because it's
           | cheaper than whatever local source, you're not really of
           | them. You have no responsibilities towards them. It makes
           | sense that, as a society grows, it needs either stronger ways
           | to tie people to each other (religion, nationalism, war), or
           | some other form of control (laws, stamps, inspectors,
           | baeckerschupfen).
        
           | FredPret wrote:
           | The job of corporations is to optimize for profit.
           | 
           | The job of society is to set the rules within which they can
           | do so.
           | 
           | Our ruleset is thousands of years old and is rooted in
           | religion, myth, tradition, and millennia of practical
           | compromises. The evolution of this ruleset should not be
           | taken lightly, nor should old rules be discarded out of hand
           | because they stem from now-unfashionable traditions.
        
         | cupcakecommons wrote:
         | This seems like a very cynical take of how private equity
         | optimization works, it may be true in some instances, but it
         | hardly universal as you seem to be implying. There is often a
         | tremendous amount of low hanging fruit for businesses run by
         | individuals that is easy to replicate across businesses and
         | industries. Focus areas like implementing basic accounting and
         | administrative systems are often at the core of optimizing a
         | business when you do it professionally. These things almost
         | always add value and are entirely rational from a market
         | perspective.
        
           | pjmorris wrote:
           | > These things almost always add value and are entirely
           | rational from a market perspective.
           | 
           | From the perspective of efficiency for the ownership, yes.
           | However, every laid off staff member still needs to eat,
           | house themselves, and pay their other bills.
           | 
           | It seems to me that the long run effect, apart from good or
           | bad intent, is that the people in society who don't have
           | access to capital wind up having to manage at a subsistence
           | level.
        
         | legitster wrote:
         | Regardless of how you feel about Peter Thiel, everyone should
         | read Zero to One. He eloquently ties together the concepts of
         | entrepreneurialism and contrarianism
         | 
         | Real entrepreneurs only go into business because they believe
         | they know something that otherwise efficient markets do not. So
         | that means you have to be a contrarian and believe in secrets
         | or undiscovered principles.
         | 
         | Some of the more interesting data points he includes is the
         | decline in cult membership and belief in secrets. We as a
         | society are generating less iconoclasts, so all that's left in
         | business is an efficiency puzzle.
        
           | ponector wrote:
           | Sounds like someone who want to rationalize being a
           | billionaire.
           | 
           | Another funny thing is to learn about "principles" of Ray
           | Dalio. Man has a cult but tries to proof otherwise.
        
           | hindsightbias wrote:
           | Cults and conspiracy thinking just went mainstream.
           | 
           | Back in the day, conspiracies were kind of unique and
           | interesting and you could talk to a believer about it for
           | hours about all the details and complications. People put a
           | lot of thinking into it.
           | 
           | Today, conspiracies are like everything else - as shallow as
           | the first page of google search.
        
           | wolverine876 wrote:
           | > the decline in cult membership
           | 
           | Was that written before QAnon, etc.?
        
         | nipponese wrote:
         | There are at least two ways to optimize:
         | 
         | 1. Max profit for a small group of shareholders
         | 
         | 2. A cool place to work with people you like.
         | 
         | Try explaining #2 to a PE group.
         | 
         | [edit: typos]
        
         | caycep wrote:
         | maybe it's a commodities mindset? vs. other companies who do a
         | Veblen good type of market targeting, i.e. the point where
         | raising price and quality expands the market/market segment
         | (i.e. LVMH, Hermes, to a certain point, Apple)
        
         | kevmo wrote:
         | I find it really interesting this went from the top comment to
         | the bottom one.
        
           | dang wrote:
           | We downweighted it because it veered off topic and generic.
           | That's standard moderation practice.
        
       | neonate wrote:
       | https://archive.ph/Xpkgo
       | 
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20240214160536/https://www.nytim...
        
       | Blackthorn wrote:
       | A great man, whose commitment to quality resulted in a great
       | company with a sterling brand. His commitment to the employees
       | that made it great was equally important as it's now (and has
       | been for a bit) an employee-owned company and stands in obvious
       | contrast to others who built up a known quality brand only to
       | sell out to private equity. Rest in peace, Bob.
        
       | neilv wrote:
       | > _Despite the company's explosive growth, Mr. Moore fended off
       | numerous offers by food giants to buy Bob's Red Mill. He opted
       | instead for an employee stock ownership plan, instituted in 2010,
       | on his 81st birthday; by April 2020, the plan had put 100 percent
       | of the company in the hands of its more than 700 employees._
       | 
       | Sounds like Bob Moore had some values most of us could admire.
       | 
       | Anyone know some of the pitfalls of an employee-owned company
       | like that, and proven ways to avoid them?
       | 
       | (For a tech industry example, a large chunk of CraigsList got
       | sold by a former employee to an overlapping large company, eBay.)
        
         | digging wrote:
         | The Craiglist example seems impossible (barring collusion) if
         | ownership is distributed among many employees, no?
        
         | UncleOxidant wrote:
         | > Anyone know some of the pitfalls of an employee-owned company
         | like that, and proven ways to avoid them?
         | 
         | I guess I can't think of any. Mostly seems to have a lot of
         | upside. I interviewed recently at an employee owned tech
         | company - a very rare bird indeed. It sounded like they did a
         | lot of decision making collaboratively. While the position
         | itself wasn't that interesting, the company structure and
         | culture seemed quite attractive.
        
           | anthonypasq wrote:
           | dictatorships are inherently faster moving and more decisive
           | than democracies.
        
             | UncleOxidant wrote:
             | I would much prefer to live in a democracy even given that
             | potential "downside".
        
               | anthonypasq wrote:
               | cool, no one suggested otherwise
        
             | klyrs wrote:
             | "Break shit fast" isn't universally accepted as a
             | beneficial mindset for an organization as large as a
             | country, despite having worked well for a scrappy startup
             | that one time. One idiot can quickly and decisively wreck
             | your entire economy with the stroke of a pen. A more
             | intelligent dictator may simply bend the economy to his
             | personal profits.
        
               | anthonypasq wrote:
               | Idk dont know what it is about hackernews commenters that
               | just feel compelled to post complete nonsequiters. none
               | of this relates to my comment in any way.
        
           | mgfist wrote:
           | What happens if you want to leave? Are you forced to
           | liquidate your stock, and to whom?
           | 
           | What happens if there is an underperforming worker? What
           | happens with their ownership
           | 
           | What if you want to divest?
           | 
           | Not sure on any of the above, if anyone knows would love to
           | hear the answers
        
             | ensignavenger wrote:
             | The short answer is it depends on the company. Different
             | companies have different governance models. Some allow
             | former employees to retain interest, but then they can only
             | sell to current employees, for example.
        
         | lr4444lr wrote:
         | Wouldn't the pitfalls generally be the same as the risks that
         | labor unions would have to hampering efficiency and slowing
         | innovation ?
         | 
         | (Before I get downvoted, I'm not saying unions are evil, and
         | that this always happens, just that it's a known risk)
        
           | badrequest wrote:
           | I would love to see some citations on this subject that don't
           | come from The Federalist Society.
        
             | lr4444lr wrote:
             | There's evidence it could be regional. This would not
             | surprise me given the differences in public social safety
             | nets.
             | 
             | https://www.researchgate.net/publication/4840766_Unions_and
             | _...
        
           | benzible wrote:
           | In fact it's not a "known risk". It's an active area of
           | research, with at least some findings contradicting your
           | assumptions, e.g.:
           | 
           | > Our findings suggest that the traditional hold-up view
           | whereby unions discourage innovation does not necessarily
           | survive. When the voice effect is neither too strong nor too
           | low, the unionized sector outperforms the market in terms of
           | process innovation, while the effect on product innovation is
           | strictly increasing in the voice power.
           | 
           | https://docs.iza.org/dp14102.pdf
        
         | badrequest wrote:
         | > Anyone know some of the pitfalls of an employee-owned company
         | like that, and proven ways to avoid them?
         | 
         | The primary pitfall is that if you become successful, your
         | investors don't get the returns they crave at the expense of
         | those responsible for your success getting to live like serfs.
        
         | peter_l_downs wrote:
         | An ESOP is also a great way for a founder to exit the company
         | in a tax-advantaged way. The stock that the employees receive
         | also usually takes the place of alternative 401(k) investments
         | they could be making. ESOPs are a very interesting tool but
         | there are some real nightmare scenarios (owner liquidates via
         | ESOP; company then fails; employees end up without jobs and
         | without retirement savings.)
         | 
         | Another issue with ESOPs is that they are extremely expensive
         | to administrate.
         | 
         | EDIT: this is a succinct and reasonable summary of some of the
         | risks of an ESOP (primarily from an employee's perspective)
         | https://pensionrights.org/resource/problems-with-esops/
        
           | neilv wrote:
           | Good point. At least in the US right now -- where an S&P
           | index tends to grow over time, and is vastly less risky than
           | all eggs in one basket -- I guess an employee-owned company
           | should emphasize also doing ordinary Bogle total-market
           | retirement investing.
           | 
           | If participating in employee-ownership ends up at the cost of
           | a retiree having sufficient retirement savings -- such as if
           | the employee can't or doesn't build a solid 401(k) or IRA --
           | that indeed seems risky.
        
             | bee_rider wrote:
             | I wonder if there's an index for majority employee-owned
             | companies. Wait, is that even possible?
        
               | starkparker wrote:
               | There are a few thousand in the US, but most are so small
               | that an index wouldn't be much. NCEO maintains lists but
               | they're paid (and priced for consultants):
               | https://www.nceo.org/employee-ownership-data/esop-
               | company-li...
               | 
               | DOL posts Form 5500 filings but they lag by 2-3 years:
               | https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ebsa/employers-and-
               | advisers/pla...
               | 
               | As of 2021 they listed 6,533 ESOP filings at a combined
               | asset cap of about $2T. For context Apple's market cap
               | just passed $3T in December.
        
               | aaronax wrote:
               | I don't think that is possible. How would you own shares
               | in multiple companies where the shares are owned
               | (exclusively? mostly?) by employees?
               | 
               | Any mechanism which facilitates outside ownership erodes
               | the effect of being ESOP.
        
         | legitster wrote:
         | There are lots of great, successful employee owned companies.
         | But by their nature they don't really invest in growth.
        
           | bdcravens wrote:
           | "growth" isn't always a net positive
        
             | legitster wrote:
             | Sure, but if the question is "why are there not more of
             | them" then that's your answer.
        
         | hindsightbias wrote:
         | There was a study way back of a printing company, I think in
         | MN, four characters like OCCP or something but can't find it.
         | 
         | But I did find this: https://www.mnceo.org
         | 
         | Which looks pretty impressive. I wonder how many states have
         | something like this.
        
         | poulsbohemian wrote:
         | >Anyone know some of the pitfalls of an employee-owned company
         | like that, and proven ways to avoid them?
         | 
         | I'd argue that when you look at companies with _longevity_ they
         | tend to be held closely, either by a family or within a coop
         | style model. They also don 't have to be small companies - look
         | at places like Kiewit. As someone working to energize a small
         | town economy, there's a lot to be said by exploring these
         | cooperative models, given that PE / VC ain't likely to come to
         | rural America anytime soon.
        
         | ensignavenger wrote:
         | Limited liquidity- if you can only sell shares to employees,
         | you have to find other employees to buy your shares who have
         | the money to do so, and you may have to accept a much lower
         | price than some one on the open market might pay.
         | 
         | Decision making- depending on the companies governance model,
         | it may be hard to get everyone onboard to make large
         | investments in new areas.
         | 
         | If the company/employees do make bad decisions, it can result
         | in employees not just losing their jobs, but also a substantial
         | portion of their saving, which may be tied up in the company.
         | This is the same reason why the common advice is to not tie up
         | too much of your savings in your companies own stock (see Enron
         | employees, for example).
         | 
         | I am sure there are many more- but there are also a lot of
         | advantages, as such, I am a big fan of both worker owned
         | businesses and consumers cooperatives. I wish both were far
         | more common.
        
           | samatman wrote:
           | > _if you can only sell shares to employees, you have to find
           | other employees to buy your shares who have the money to do
           | so, and you may have to accept a much lower price than some
           | one on the open market might pay._
           | 
           | If you can only sell to fellow employees, that's priced in to
           | the value of the stock. There is no open market price, so it
           | can't really be higher or lower except hypothetically.
           | 
           | This isn't a nitpick, it means that the price you get for the
           | stock is more based on the dividends it bears, since market
           | speculation plays no role. I don't think it's legal to force
           | people to sell stock when they're no longer associated with a
           | company, so "employee and former employee owned" is probably
           | more accurate.
        
             | bruce511 wrote:
             | Stocks have 3 values;
             | 
             | A) tradeable on a Stock exchange. (Capital value)
             | 
             | B) income from dividends (income value)
             | 
             | C) voting rights (direction value)
             | 
             | If the company is not publically traded, then Capital value
             | more or less disappears (can be assumed to be 0).
             | 
             | Income value is almost always the primary use-case for this
             | kind of share.
             | 
             | Usually "employee held shares" have limited or restricted
             | voting rights. (An extreme short-term position might be
             | "liquidate the business and divide the spoils", which might
             | be popular if the majority is nearing retirement, but is
             | clearly not good for business survival.)
             | 
             | These shares should in no way ever be considered as part of
             | your retirement plan. Period.
        
       | calny wrote:
       | Sorry to hear this, but congrats to Bob for a life well lived and
       | building a brand that made quality products. We have their muesli
       | multiple times a week, their farro as well, and this morning our
       | kids loved Valentine's Day pancakes made from their mix. Thanks
       | Bob
        
       | morning-coffee wrote:
       | Kudos to Bob, for a life well lived.
       | 
       | I love both the Oat Bran, and Scottish Oats they make.
        
       | phaedryx wrote:
       | "What made you want to switch to the employee-owned model?"
       | 
       | "I came up here to study the Bible, and the Bible says to do unto
       | others as you would have them do unto you. And so there's an
       | element of how you treat people that impressed me. And sharing in
       | the profit, sharing in the company to make things more fair and
       | more benevolent impressed me, and I felt strongly about it."
       | 
       | source: https://www.pdxmonthly.com/eat-and-drink/2023/02/bobs-
       | red-mi...
       | 
       | It's always interesting to me to see how Christianity intersects
       | with capitalism.
        
         | hyggetrold wrote:
         | _> It 's always interesting to me to see how Christianity
         | intersects with capitalism._
         | 
         | Reminds me of a conversation I had with a Danish person, in
         | reference to their welfare system: "some call it socialism - in
         | Denmark we call it Christianity."
        
           | UncleOxidant wrote:
           | It seems likely that Socialism would not exist without
           | Christianity. We know that the early Christians were
           | essentially communist - they owned everything in common.
           | Christianity taught that wealth should not be hoarded but
           | used to improve people's lives in community. That every
           | person is created in the image of God and thus has value no
           | matter what they can (or cannot) do - meaning that disabled
           | and old people had just as much right to live as anyone else.
           | 
           | Now the dominant American expression of Christianity
           | (Evangelicalism) teaches that socialism is some kind of evil
           | and has politically aligned itself with the owner class.
        
             | azinman2 wrote:
             | That's because it got wrapped up in right wing politics. It
             | used to be evangelicals were equally likely from both
             | parties. Then Regan courted them and the rest is history.
        
               | UncleOxidant wrote:
               | Indeed. Jimmy Carter was (is) an Evangelical. They turned
               | their back on their own to go after Reagan.
        
               | QuercusMax wrote:
               | Way earlier than that - once Constantine claimed to have
               | seen a cross and heard God saying "In hoc signo vinces"
               | (Under this sign you will conquer), Christianity was
               | forever connected with Empire.
        
             | tekla wrote:
             | > It seems likely that Socialism would not exist without
             | Christianity.
             | 
             | I may be drunk, but I can't believe this argument is being
             | made
             | 
             | I was not aware that Christianity had some sort of monopoly
             | of "be nice".
        
           | ren_engineer wrote:
           | In the US socialism/communism got tied to the state atheism
           | of the Soviets and China which is why there is the political
           | divide
        
         | akira2501 wrote:
         | > It's always interesting to me to see how Christianity
         | intersects with capitalism.
         | 
         | The parable of the three talents is pretty instructive. It is
         | considered a good work to run a business and employ people, to
         | put them to useful work, and to pay them a fair wage so that
         | they may raise a family.
        
           | Der_Einzige wrote:
           | I always go back to this:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_the_rich_young_man
           | 
           | "Jesus looked at him and said, "How hard it is for the rich
           | to enter the kingdom of heaven! Indeed, it is easier for a
           | camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who
           | is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven." Luke 18:8-18:30
           | 
           | The biblical writers could _not_ have been more clear on this
           | topic. Prosperity theology is heresy.
        
             | akira2501 wrote:
             | Is Jesus saying earning money is bad or that hoarding it is
             | bad? If you earn a lot of money and give to charity, take
             | care of your community, and spend it for the betterment of
             | your neighbors does this make it hard to get into heaven?
             | 
             | Jesus speaks in parables for a reason.
        
             | samatman wrote:
             | As long as we're linking to the Wikipedia article for
             | parables, the one OP was referring to deserves a fair
             | shake. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Talents
        
         | legitster wrote:
         | The earliest corporations were created by monasteries as a way
         | of pooling collective resources without requiring heredity
         | bonds or government enforcement.
         | 
         | Fast forward to the enlightenment and new understanding of
         | universal human rights implies that all people (not just
         | monarchs) should have rights to property including ownership
         | stakes of enterprises. And that the actions of enterprises
         | should be overseen by boards.
         | 
         | Our modern idea that prices should be publicly posted and fair,
         | and that losses should be born by businesses was created out of
         | Quaker practices of equality.
        
           | SantalBlush wrote:
           | >was created out of Quaker practices of equality
           | 
           | If you have a link to some reading material about this, I'd
           | love to check it out.
        
             | legitster wrote:
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_tag
             | 
             | > "The Pennsylvania Quakers" "honest price" was
             | institutionalized in 1874 by John Wanamaker, when he opened
             | his eponymous department store in Philadelphia. A renowned
             | innovator of the highest integrity, Wanamaker was the first
             | retailer to offer money-back guarantees. He also invented
             | the price tag: "A devout Christian, he believed that if
             | everyone was equal before God, then everyone should be
             | equal before price." Before Wanamaker's, every purchase was
             | open to a haggle."
        
         | UncleOxidant wrote:
         | > It's always interesting to me to see how Christianity
         | intersects with capitalism.
         | 
         | Indeed. There are many different Christian views on capitalism
         | ranging from being outright anti-capitalism to the prosperity
         | gospel which encourages it's adherents to get rich (and views
         | riches as a sign of God's blessing - this is why that
         | particular group could overlook so much of Trump's seemingly
         | unchristian actions and values - they figured he's rich so he
         | must be blessed by God).
         | 
         | Bob's Christian philosophy seems to have been somewhere between
         | those two extremes. He definitely didn't view wealth as
         | something to be hoarded, he used it to help lift up his workers
         | and his community.
        
           | svieira wrote:
           | Catholic doctrine on the issue sounds pretty close to Bob's -
           | see Rerum Novarum [1], Quadragesimo Anno [2], Populorum
           | Progressio [3], Centesimus Annus [4], Caritas in Veritate
           | [5], and Fratelli Tutti [6] for various expressions of the
           | doctrine over the modern era.
           | 
           | Or, if you want a shorter version see
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_destination_of_goods
           | 
           | [1]: https://www.vatican.va/content/leo-
           | xiii/en/encyclicals/docum... [2]:
           | https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-
           | xi/en/encyclicals/docume... [3]:
           | https://www.vatican.va/content/paul-
           | vi/en/encyclicals/docume... [4]:
           | https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-
           | ii/en/encyclicals/d... [5]:
           | https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-
           | xvi/en/encyclicals/d... [6]: https://www.vatican.va/content/f
           | rancesco/en/encyclicals/docu...
        
       | chanandler_bong wrote:
       | Sad day in the food world... William Post, who helped create Pop-
       | Tarts died today as well.
       | 
       | https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/14/business/william-post-dea...
        
         | lIl-IIIl wrote:
         | From what I can tell, William Post worked for Kellogg. Any
         | relation to Charles William Post, founder of the company that
         | makes Post cereals?
        
           | mathgeek wrote:
           | His obituary has the answers you are looking for:
           | https://www.mkdfuneralhome.com/obituaries/william-
           | post#obitu...
        
             | laborcontract wrote:
             | Not really. The answer is no. But the obituary is worth
             | reading as the man seems to have lived a good life.
        
       | UncleOxidant wrote:
       | He also essentially gave his business to his employees. He was
       | known in the community (I live in the area) as being a very
       | generous person and all around mensch.
        
         | ekTHEN wrote:
         | can you explain what exactly you mean by "mensch" or which
         | character traits are being associated with it? as a non-native
         | english speaker i have never seen it used and just know it as
         | the german word for "human"
        
           | bdcravens wrote:
           | from Oxford:
           | 
           | "a person of integrity and honor"
        
           | s0rce wrote:
           | It's a Yiddish word m`ntsh, means honorable or admirable
           | person
        
             | jjtheblunt wrote:
             | It's a German word meaning man and in the Yiddish use has
             | the connotation of honorable man?
        
               | hellcow wrote:
               | Yes. It's a compliment in Yiddish.
        
               | bqmjjx0kac wrote:
               | It's kind of like saying someone is "the man" in English.
        
               | debatem1 wrote:
               | Worth noting that "the man" may instead mean
               | police/government/etc, usually with negative
               | connotations. So context may make this less appropriate
               | as a synonym than "righteous dude" as mentioned above.
        
               | woodruffw wrote:
               | I think it's closer to "stand-up" or "decent" than
               | honorable, but yes.
               | 
               | (The neutral version would be man, which literally means
               | man or husband.)
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | I think it goes well beyond honorable, it also means
               | likeable, friendly and easygoing.
        
               | jjtheblunt wrote:
               | american slang : righteous dude
               | 
               | :)
        
               | samatman wrote:
               | The German word for man is der Mann. Der Mensch is a
               | human/person. And yes, in Yiddish it has strong positive
               | connotations, which have carried over into the (American,
               | at least) loanword.
        
         | lIl-IIIl wrote:
         | What does it mean for a company to be employee owned?
         | 
         | What is the benefit to the employee?
        
           | jjtheblunt wrote:
           | extra compensation floats with profits and plausibly creates
           | a positive feedback ?
        
           | HWR_14 wrote:
           | It avoids the issue of dividing profits between employees and
           | shareholders, which means the employees keep it.
        
           | ensignavenger wrote:
           | Ability to vote on how the business operates and things like
           | compensation and benefits. Different employee owned
           | businesses are governed differently, but in general, the
           | employees have more control.
        
           | CptFribble wrote:
           | think of how shareholders drive a company's behavior, and how
           | much of most public corporations bad behavior is generating
           | dividends or increased share price for large institutional
           | shareholders, because the leadership (board) is voted for by
           | those same shareholders
           | 
           | now imagine if a company's only shareholders are the
           | employees who work there. how much different would a company
           | act if the people to whom the leadership are responsible are
           | the employees themselves?
        
             | dhc02 wrote:
             | All of this is true, and on top of that, at least in the
             | case of ESOP plans like the one at Bob's Red Mill, the
             | outstanding stock of the company is held in a trust and
             | distributed to employees as part of a benefits package over
             | time, sort of like a 401k they don't have to pay anything
             | to contribute to.
        
           | oooyay wrote:
           | Employees have a say in the direction of the company. It
           | depends on the bylaws, but employees will vote on certain
           | things. There's a lot of talking it up here, but it can also
           | suck. I worked for one that was very blue collar as a systems
           | engineer and watched as our IT infrastructure decayed and our
           | contractual promises would not be met because employees voted
           | for bonuses rather than refreshed infrastructure.
        
             | bruce511 wrote:
             | With any sufficiently large group there will be a variety
             | of opinions when making any decision.
             | 
             | Voting is one way to get a majority opinion, but of course
             | that doesn't make it right. Since everyone is in a
             | different place in life what may be good for one
             | (maximising income before retirement) may conflict with
             | another (ensuring job stability and sustainability for the
             | next 20 years.)
             | 
             | This is all true regardless of the decision making group -
             | board of directors, c-suite, or employees.
             | 
             | So sure, some employee groups would make decisions not
             | aligned with my goals. But equally other decision making
             | groups do that all the time too.
             | 
             | This is a hard problem because, as a decision group you
             | "can't make everyone happy." So it helps if the employee
             | group are mostly on the same goals page, and if there are
             | leaders who understand the decisions in terms of the agreed
             | goals.
             | 
             | Meaning, that regardless of profit share, its a good thing
             | if you work at a place where your goals, and the leadership
             | goals are aligned.
        
             | wavefunction wrote:
             | Sounds like white collar IT other than the bonuses
        
       | ericholscher wrote:
       | I met him at a factory tour that we did outside of Portland. He
       | was so humble and just seemed like a lovely human. A highlight
       | that brings me joy every time I eat his museli for breakfast (70g
       | museli, 70g frozen blueberries, 170g whole milk yogurt)
       | 
       | I love that the company is employee-owned, and he just seems like
       | an overall inspiration in many ways.
        
         | criddell wrote:
         | Are the blueberries still frozen when you eat them?
        
           | Marsymars wrote:
           | Different poster, but I have a kinda-similar breakfast. I put
           | the frozen blueberries in a bowl in the fridge the night
           | before to thaw, or if I forget to do that just microwave them
           | for 30s.
        
             | pinchy wrote:
             | I put the frozen ones straight into the pot toward the end
             | of cooking. They thaw quickly and the juices turn the
             | oatmeal bluish. It's great!
        
           | csa wrote:
           | I let my muesli, frozen blueberries, and yogurt sit for a
           | little bit so that the muesli softens. The blueberries thaw
           | enough during that time.
           | 
           | Delicious!
        
           | dhc02 wrote:
           | Frozen blueberries thaw extremely quickly. I put them into
           | refrigerated yogurt and wait about 10 minutes and they're
           | delicious.
        
           | ericholscher wrote:
           | I use the wild blueberries (smaller) for better texture, and
           | usually just let them sit for ~5 mins and they defrost pretty
           | quickly!
        
           | subpixel wrote:
           | I bought a chest freezer mainly to accommodate the 20lbs of
           | wild blueberries I freeze each summer. A cup of bloobs with a
           | little granola on top is my daily breakfast. The berries
           | freeze the milk and result in a delicious slush.
           | 
           | Oddly the rest of my family prefers other things so I eat
           | them all myself.
        
             | bethekind wrote:
             | I love the word Bloobs. I'm going to use it whenever I can
             | today
        
       | UncleOxidant wrote:
       | Great to see Bob make the front page of HN. I live in the metro
       | area where Bob's Red Mill is located. He was known to be very
       | generous to many local causes including OHSU (Oregon Health
       | Sciences University) and was an all around mensch. Passing the
       | company on to it's employees was such a generous move as well.
       | 
       | Bob is a great example of living in such a way that you get a
       | great eulogy after you die instead of living in such a way as to
       | accumulate as much as possible.
        
       | toomuchtodo wrote:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Moore_(American_food_execu...
        
       | xrd wrote:
       | I often feel frustrated by the community here but having this
       | story be at the top of HN gives me so much hope for my little
       | sheltered world. Kudos to Bob, and kudos to all the people of HN.
        
       | mrinterweb wrote:
       | Bob Moore was one of my friend's neighbors. Bob's home was a
       | simple residence nothing fancy, big or flashy. Just blended right
       | into the neighborhood. The quality of Bob's Redmill products has
       | always been great.
        
       | demondemidi wrote:
       | Bob turned the business over to the workers. It is worker owned.
       | Isn't this what Marx was talking about, aka a Soviet? Or am I
       | wildly misunderstanding economic philosophy. I'm not trolling HN
       | here, but I just have two trump loving parents who adore Bobs
       | decision to make it worker owned and I'd like to gotcha them next
       | thanksgiving ;)
       | 
       | Here's their statement on being employee owned for the mute
       | downvoters:
       | 
       | https://www.bobsredmill.com/employee-owned
        
         | LastMuel wrote:
         | I don't think employee owned, by definition, means equally
         | shared and profits equally distributed. Which may be the root
         | of the confusion.
        
           | dhc02 wrote:
           | The way most ESOP plans work is more like this:
           | 
           | 1. Owner[s] sell their stock to the company (note the company
           | needs to be fairly successful to have the cash to buy the
           | shares. Sometimes it's bought all at once, but often on some
           | sort of multi-year payment plan. Bob's Red Mill took approx.
           | 10 years to buy out Bob and his partners.)
           | 
           | 2. The company puts the stock into a trust held for the
           | benefit of employees.
           | 
           | 3. A portion of shares may be immediately distributed to
           | employees based on key status, years of service, etc.
           | 
           | 4. The shares are used as part of benefit packages. It's sort
           | of like a 401k that the employees don't actually have to pay
           | anything to participate in. The longer you're there, and the
           | more important your role (generally), the more you end up
           | owning, and it's generally treated like employer 401k matches
           | in terms of income tax.
           | 
           | Usually after you reach a certain threshold, you're allowed
           | to sell your shares to others or back to the company in order
           | to diversify.
        
         | richardgreeko27 wrote:
         | A soviet is a governing workers' council made up of workers
         | from various local shop floors. A worker owned co-op under
         | capitalism is still capitalist, although theoretically less
         | exploitative. It is not necessarily Marxist and definitely not
         | a soviet.
        
           | demondemidi wrote:
           | Thanks!
        
         | roarcher wrote:
         | Ah yes, the true spirit of Thanksgiving: finding out you have
         | some common ground with your parents, and spending all year
         | planning how you're going to use it to dunk on them.
        
           | demondemidi wrote:
           | It is against the rules here to make personal attacks. And I
           | added the smiley face, relax, I'm kidding.
        
             | roarcher wrote:
             | Fair enough, I removed the last sentence. Point still
             | stands.
        
         | TimTheTinker wrote:
         | Marx was talking about no ownership at all of any means of
         | production -- i.e. all means of production are owned by the
         | "collective"... which in practice turns out to leave a power
         | vacuum that attracts the worst sorts of people, who become
         | tyrants.
        
       | dang wrote:
       | I feel sure that HN had a thread or two about him over the years,
       | most probably about how he turned his company over to the
       | employees. But I couldn't find one. Anybody?
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | There are lots of mentions but I also can't find a thread.
         | 
         | But some more interesting mentions here including a video:
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7465124
        
       | csours wrote:
       | I put his nutritional yeast on my popcorn. (along with
       | butter+olive oil, Tony Chachere's, and Tajin)
       | 
       | Thanks Bob!
        
       | adfm wrote:
       | I just ate a bowl of Bob's steel cut oats this morning. They're
       | the best in the business. The flours that Bob's Red Mill produces
       | are top quality and of a purity hard matched by others. I admire
       | his dedication to producing a first-rate product and for his
       | forethought to establish an ESOP for the people actually
       | producing it.
        
         | throwway120385 wrote:
         | I always get their 25 lb bags of quick oats because they're 1/5
         | the price of the paperboard cans and way better.
        
           | formvoltron wrote:
           | quick oats will spike your blood sugar.
        
         | 7thaccount wrote:
         | As someone who recently developed food sensitivities and can't
         | eat much of anything (elimination diet), I'm thankful so many
         | companies exist in recent years that have
         | gluten/soy/dairy/peanut/tree nut free products. Food allergies
         | really suck. I've started eating a lot of oatmeal and Bob's
         | stuff is great. I also have to practically cook everything to
         | ensure I'm not getting soy and other stuff.
        
       | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
       | Aw man. I like their flaxseed as an egg substitute.
        
       | vonzeppelin wrote:
       | Bob's Red Mill Extra Thick Rolled Oats with a couple of over easy
       | eggs on top is my jam.
        
       | hedgehog wrote:
       | Sad event but he built a great company. At any given time we have
       | a few of their products at home including flour purchased by the
       | 50lb sack.
        
       | Singletail wrote:
       | He won the Golden Spurtle at the World Porridge Championships in
       | Scotland in 2016, a rare honor. Rest in porridge.
        
       | Der_Einzige wrote:
       | My local high school had a "technical center" that they would bus
       | us and other students from other local high schools to for
       | additional electives: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabin-
       | Schellenberg_Center
       | 
       | I was going there during the recession years, and during those
       | years when the schools were struggling hard with funding, Bobs
       | Red Mill sent out huge amounts of flower, vegan cheese, and other
       | extra food they had to our culinary program.
       | 
       | I have always loved that brand as a result, and have never
       | declined the opportunity to buy from them. Their restaurant
       | within their local store is also quite decent for what it is.
        
       | priprimer wrote:
       | we can only hope that he will succeed where old Mr Kellog did not
        
       | klyrs wrote:
       | Damn, and Bill Post just died too. Too soon for a cereal killer
       | joke?
        
       | wizardforhire wrote:
       | If you happen to be in Portland the Bob's Red Mill factory is
       | totally worth a visit... especially for breakfast!
       | 
       | They make the food with flour that was milled that day and I
       | never new that pancakes could taste so good. Truly eye opening
       | food experience.
        
       | salute_to_bob wrote:
       | Once many years ago I was eating in the restaurant at the main
       | Bobs Red Mill location. They have a lovely second floor indoor
       | balcony that looks over the main floor of the store, which
       | provides lovely people watching while you eat. There is a piano
       | on the second floor, which by itself is already pretty awesome.
       | As I ate the tasty food, I thought to myself, it sure is nice to
       | hear somebody play the piano while you eat and looked over to see
       | who was playing. I squinted my eyes and said to myself, "That
       | sure looks like the dude that is on every package of this store,
       | he is even wearing the same hat". I walked over and to my delight
       | it was indeed Bob Moore, playing the piano in his own store,
       | wearing his trademark hat that you see on every package. I waited
       | until he was done playing to thank him and shake his hand and
       | tell him that it was an honor to meet him. Rest in peace, Bob.
        
       | sircastor wrote:
       | An interesting listen if you're up for it, is Guy Raz's interview
       | with Bob Moore about the founding of Bob's Red Mill and how they
       | became the company they are. It's good stuff.
       | 
       | Personally, I'm a fan of their products. My shelves currently
       | hold Vital Wheat Gluten, Arrowroot flour, Tapioca flour, Powered
       | milk, and Xantham gum all from Bob's Red mill. They make quality
       | products.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-02-14 23:00 UTC)