Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

My take on the reasons that soylent didn't go with paper packaging (cartons or bag-in-box):

1. Paper packaging is much more fragile than plastic packaging. Boxes permanently dent, buckle when compressed, tear much more easily, etc, when enduring punishment that a plastic container will shrug off. Paper is also much less resistant to water damage. Paper-packaged products like milk cartons or juice boxes are usually transported in durable, rigid-walled crates, and would probably do much worse than the previous plastic bottle in a regular door-delivery use-case.

2. I've always found the relatively low rigidity of the whole assemblage to make sipping directly from a TetraPak sort-of-thing a little slippery and uneasy. The box can warp in all sorts of ways. Maybe I've just been burned by spilling milk on my shirt late at night trying to drink from the carton...

3. Bag-in-box specifically doesn't "scale down" to single servings that well. The experience of drinking out of a bladder within a larger box is less-than-ideal because the bladder can slosh around inside the container. Maybe if they aimed to sell bulk wet Soylent fluid, bag-in-box would be the way to go.



The plastic bags that cheap wine comes in is Rogue river, class 5-6, over Rainey Falls, sucked 10 feet into the vortex tested.

A few years ago I took a two week river trip with a buddy. We bought three boxes of wine.

We nixed the boxes, and the wine bladders were just strapped to to raft with all our other stuff.

At the end of the trip, we we both surprised how much abuse those bags went through, and not even a small leak.

Now--the raft was another story.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: