I think it is an interesting product idea if the market is either:

a) People who are starving. If the price is right and it has the right properties as far as shelf life and nutrition, sure, it would make an excellent ration for feeding populations in food emergencies or natural disasters.

b) People for whom eating and food preparation is an undesirable chore. A good example would be combat soldiers who need to eat something and don't care what it is as long as it satisfies hunger and provides nutrition.

For many (most?) other people food is intimately tied in with culture and epicurean tradition. This product won't go over well in places like Italy and France, for example.

b) is interesting. In 2008/2009 I spent a year in Iraq on a small military advisor team. We went out in teams of 6-9 and lived with the Iraqis. Most of our MREs were expired (they expire quickly in 100+ degree heat) so we ate a lot of Iraqi food. I also brought tubs of True-Mass to mix with water. It worked pretty well, even over 1-2 weeks ops.

From this experience, I've always been interested to see how soylent turns out. Even back here in the rear nutrition is a chore. I eat to stay alive, not for the experience. Heck, I go to Costco and pay $3.77 for a slice of pizza, hotdog, and a drink whenever I can.

My major question about soylent is its nutritional value. I work out 2x a day, 5-6 days a week. I have a Syntha-6 protein shake after each workout with some fruit and orange juice. I'm curious if soylent will provide the same level of nutrition I currently get.

If it does, it'd be excellent under demanding physical conditions like combat operations and high performance athletes. I'd eventually like to see different mixes, i.e.: weight loss, weight-gain, distance athlete, etc. Hell, I'd pay a premium for it. My wife pays around $200/wk. for Bistro M.D. meals because she doesn't have time to cook. I'd pay something similar if I could get a high performance meal replacement that I could eat every day, for every meal (maybe different flavors to mix it up), and didn't taste like shit.

So how long until we see the ultra-lean startup that forgoes the in-house gourmet chef for a soylent dispenser?

I'd add another market category - people who are interested in a diet that has the correct ratios of fats/proteins/carbs (and the other nutrients) that will optimize one's energy. I've always been intrigued by the zone diet's claims that following the appropriate results in feeling much healthier and having more energy, but have found that cooking meals following that ratio is too tedious / time consuming.

b) Is me and a lot of people I know, probably most people I'd think, every meal isn't an important part of culture, no one is proposing eating/drinking exclusively soylent.

I really doubt that it would be cheaper than say, beans and rice. The initial one week supply is $65, which is nearly $10/day.

It may succeed competing on convenience (and marketing) not necessarily price.

Something mailed to your door monthly and quickly mixed together vs going to the grocery store for beans and firing up the rice steamer for 15min.

That is just the current price, it will go way down with mass production.

How can it become cheaper than harvesting and packaging something that needs very little additional processing? I don't see the economical argument.

> How can it become cheaper than harvesting and packaging something that needs very little additional processing?

One way that's possible is if the processing is done close to the point of production and reduces the size (and increases shelf life) enough that the savings in transportation, packaging, and reduced losses on the shelf compared to less-processed basic foods is greater than the processing cost.

Agricultural subsidies is one way.

My one month supply is going to cost me approx. $2.50 a meal. That's pretty damn cheap for the amount of nutrients packed in. Compare going to McDonalds and getting some $1 cheeseburgers and diabeetus.