Home » Archives for Kate Sparks
Author

Kate Sparks

Hello, my name Kate Sparks. As a seasoned SEO content writer I've danced with the digital ink for more years than I care to count. My keyboard has serenaded the pixels of high-traffic websites, leaving behind a trail of eloquent breadcrumbs for curious souls to follow. I don't just write; I compose symphonies of words that resonate with search engines and human hearts alike. My prose pirouettes through algorithms, pirouettes again, and lands gracefully on the first page of Google results. Brands are my canvas, and words are my palette. I mix metaphors like a mad scientist—each sentence a bubbling potion of persuasion. Whether it's a tech startup or a cozy coffee shop, I weave narratives that transform mere businesses into legends.

Hold Your HaunchesShark Tank

Hold Your Haunches Shapewear: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

by Kate Sparks
written by Kate Sparks

The Basics

  • Company: Hold Your Haunches
  • Owners: Erin Bickley and Jenny Greer
  • Product: shapewear apparel for women
  • Asking Price: $75,000 for 20% equity
  • Final Deal: $75,000 for 40% equity, plus a line of credit
  • Sharks Who Took The Bait: Barbara Corcoran and Lori Greiner
  • Season/Episode: Season 5, Episode 23

Hold Your Haunches Before Shark Tank

Erin Bickley and Jenny Greer are the “head haunchos” of Hold Your Haunches, a women’s shapewear apparel line. They are two fearless Southern belles from Macon, Georgia, and their entrepreneurial spirit shows in their innovative product. “When it comes to business, we’re as tough as a peach pit.”

The two friends are both mothers with three kids each. Over the years they’ve noticed their reflections have changed – particularly when it comes to their legs and derriere.  They’ve founded Hold Your Haunches to make their own product, a line of form-fitting, slimming, and flattering shapewear apparel.

“We’re on the cusp of something great, but the industry we’re in requires so much capital and so much expertise to even get to the doors, much less get them open.” They need the Sharks’ help to break into the industry and make it big. “We’ve put blood, sweat and tears into this, and if we don’t get a deal from the sharks, we’ll be heartbroken.”

Hold Your Haunches On Shark Tank: A Quick Recap

Erin and Jenny pitch their apparel line: a fashion product legging, with a fully integrated shapewear liner. It’s a totally unique, chic and one-of-a-kind product that offers smoothing and slimming support for all ages. It can be worn anywhere from the carpool lane to a cocktail party.

Charmingly, the two explain how as they’ve aged, despite all their best efforts at diet and exercise, they’ve been unable to stop their behinds from sagging beneath their underpants line, creating what they refer to as the “two-butt effect.”  They couldn’t find a legging that included shapewear anywhere in stores. “Since we were unable to find our dream pant anywhere on this earth, we created it.”

The sharks are impressed by the before and after picture. Jenny passes out samples of the fabric, and the sharks confess they’ve never felt shaper fabric this intense.

Leave it to Kevin to start raining on their parade.

“Women of a certain age with, let’s say, Rubenesque figure. Let’s say they use your product. They meet a single guy who sees them a certain way,” says Kevin, while Barb and Lori start to groan. “But on the third date, it’s time..and they find out the horrible truth. This is false advertising. And there should be litigation.”

Robert also wants to know who’s going to wear their product if the shapewear fabric is too thick and hot. “It’s too hot.”

Lori comes to the contestant’s defense. “I just have to inform my fellow male sharks here, because I think Barbara already knows: women like shapers. They do. If they have muffin tops, thighs that they don’t like, whatever it is.”

Running the Numbers

Mark, Robert and Kevin drop out before the ladies can even discuss financial details, but eventually, Lori gets around to asking about numbers.

  • Cost of production: $18 per pair, made in Asia; $30 domestically
  • Wholesale: $69
  • Retail price: $139
  • Profit margin: 87%
  • Profits for the prior year: $50,000, all reinvested into the business
  • Total sales-to-date: $280,000 since 2010
  • Total annual sales: $165,000

The men are impressed by the profit margins here, and it’s somehow deeply satisfying to know that their innate sexism pushed them out of the bidding before they even heard the numbers. (Serves you right, Kevin!) 

The Bidding

Mark jumps in to say that while he understands “every push needs a tush,” this area isn’t his core competency, and he’s out. (Looks like we’re just going to skip the numbers section of this episode entirely – no sales breakdown? No profit margin discussion? The sharks must be getting tired.)

Robert drops out next, stating he can’t see someone using it because it just feels too heavy and thick. “Which goes to show, I know nothing.”

Barbara takes the opportunity to point out sexism: “Why is it every time we have a female-oriented product on this show, you guys go out right away?” 

Kevin, meanwhile, denies that he’s a sexist, and holds fast to his claim that he “knows a lot about shapewear,” but maintains that his problem with the product is that it’s “false advertising.”

Thank God for Lori and Barb Shark, lest the entire show go down in chauvinist flames. After the men drop out like a simpering pack of gutless weasels, Lori and Barb jump in to save the day, with a fantastic offer that both sassy Southern moms are thrilled to accept.

Final Deal: $75,000, plus a line of credit, for 40% equity.

Hold Your Haunches After Shark Tank

Erin and Jenny’s business is doing so well that in 2016 they received one of Georgia’s most prestigious business honors – the Georgia Grown award.

The sassy Southern duo was featured in one of Shark Tank’s Where Are They Now? segments, where it appears that business was booming and sales were stronger than ever. Like most businesses, they received a significant boost in sales immediately following their appearance on Shark Tank. 

The full Hold Your Haunches shapewear apparel line is now available to purchase on the brand’s website, on Amazon, and at a range of smaller retailers.

Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is strictly informational; Seo Insights is not affiliated with Hold Your Hanches Shapewear, SharkTank, or any of its subsidiaries.

0 comment
2 FacebookTwitterPinterest
Gameday CoutureShark Tank

Gameday Couture: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

by Kate Sparks
written by Kate Sparks

The Basics

  • Company: Gameday Couture
  • Product: Fashionable sports apparel for women
  • Owner: Shawnna and Kurt Feddersen
  • Asking Price: $500,000 for 20% equity
  • Final Deal: $500,000 for 33% equity, on condition of creating a fashion line for Dallas Mavericks
  • Shark Who Took The Bait: Mark Cuban
  • Season/Episode: Season 6, Episode 11

Gameday Couture Before Shark Tank

Shawnna and Kurt Feddersen are from Oklahoma (in case you couldn’t tell by the spelling of their names), and they’re out to solve one of life’s most common problems: you want to support your boyfriend’s sports team, but you have nothing to wear. 

The charismatic couple founded Gameday Coutoure in 2014 to create fashionable sports apparel for women, working with NBA and NCAA teams to create unique, fashionable clothing lines with feminine touches.

Gameday Couture On Shark Tank: A Quick Recap

It’s hard to focus on Shawnna and Kurt when their stage display is so distracting – a large and glittering display of sparkling, sequined women’s tops, all decked out in sports logos, MVP player numbers, and team colors. Hats, hoodies, t-shirts, tunics, leggings, skirts, you name it. It’s all there, and it’s all adorable. “High-quality fabrics, at competitive price points,” says Kurt, reminding us that the product is not just cute but functional and durable, too.

“We’re a success in the South, but we want to dress fans from all over,” Shawnna continues.

Robert Herjavec interjects with an insightful question, seeing as he has invested in a clothing business that has recently learned how expensive it is to acquire logo licensing from each college and university. “How many colleges and universities do you have licensing from?”

“As it stands right now, we’ve got about 37 licenses, with a few more in the works,” says Kurt, eager to show that they are capable of playing by big-kid rules.

gameday couture onsharktank - Gameday Couture: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

Gameday Couture

Running the Numbers

The models pass out samples of gear and apparel while the sharks dig into the numbers.

  • Annual sales: $750,000 last year; $1.5 million projected
  • Average wholesale cost: $22
  • Retail price: $44
  • Cost of production: $8
  • Profit margin: 64% wholesale; 82% retail
  • Projected earnings on $1.5 million sales: $100,000 in revenue

Lori interjects to say that she recently bought a blinged-out, bedazzled sports team hoodie of her own, but the price point was $60-some odd dollars. Whereas, with Gameday Couture, the price point is much lower and more affordable. The brand has a much better chance of appealing to the masses and selling well.

They’ve also worked hard to procure something called an “alumni cut,” at a competitive price point, which helps grow their student and university customer base.

The Bidding

Kevin scolds them for not being proprietary, and for not knowing their own value. “I think you overpriced your business, and I think you’re worth about $750,000.” (In retrospect, this is deliciously ironic, given that the company did $20 million in sales just two years after this episode aired.) Kevin is first to drop out.

Daymond is next, and then Robert.

Mark wants to know how their business is doing online – as he thinks most of their business should be online. They’re doing well, but not as well as he’d like to see. After realizing that it was a matter of proving themselves to their licensing partners with store orders, rather than vague online fellowship, Mark seems confident enough in the business and makes an offer – with a caveat. 

“I’m going to make you an offer for the full $500,000, for 30% equity, but there’s a caveat. And I’m not going to tell you what that caveat is until you answer the offer. So you’re going to have to trust me a little bit.”

Josh and Sara take only a moment to mull it over, before happily accepting Mark’s offer. (And the caveat? They have to make a line for the team Mark Cuban owns – the Dallas Mavericks.) 

Final Deal: $500,000 for 30%, with a custom line for the Dallas Mavericks

Gameday Couture After Shark Tank: Where Are They Now?

Gameday Couture is one of the most successful companies – and best investments – that Mark Cuban has ever played a role in lifting out of obscurity.

In 2018 alone, Gameday Couture racked up a staggering $20 million in revenue. 

Their full product line is sold directly online, through Amazon, at Dick’s Sporting Goods, Social House Boutique, and tons of other retail locations around the country.

Gameday Couture consistently tops internet lists of the best Shark Tank investments and the most successful Shark Tank companies of all time.

The company’s Instagram boasts nearly 30,000 followers, while the Gameday Couture Facebook page has more than 318,000 followers. 

Needless to say, this women’s fashion line didn’t just score a touch down with sports fans – they changed the whole game, for fashionistas, designers, entrepreneurs, and investors.

Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is strictly informational; Seo Insights is not affiliated with Gameday Couture, SharkTank, or any of its subsidiaries.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterest
Coffee Meets BagelShark Tank

Coffee Meets Bagel: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

by Kate Sparks
written by Kate Sparks

The Basics

  • Company: Coffee Meets Bagel
  • Owner: Arum, Dawoon, and Soo Kang
  • Product: Online dating site for women
  • Asking Price: $500,000 for 5% equity
  • Final Deal: None – Rejected largest offer in Shark Tank history ($30 million from Mark Cuban)
  • Season/Episode: Season 6, Episode 13

Coffee Meets Bagel Before Shark Tank

Coffee Meets Bagel is an impressive concept that uses mutual friend matching to take the fear and uncertainty out of online dating. The user-friendly app culls data from Facebook friends and mutual connections to find a high-quality romantic match. If both users approve of the proposed match, the app offers them a coupon or discount to use on dates. First launched in April 2012 in New York City, Coffee Meets Bagel quickly expanded to Boston and San Francisco markets a few months later.

How exactly did this online dating site manage to bag the single largest offer in Shark Tank history (Mark Cuban’s jaw-dropping $30 million proposal)?

And how fast, exactly, did these sister entrepreneurs reject his deal?

Read on to find out.

Coffee Meets Bagel On Shark Tank: A Quick Recap

Arum, Dawoon, and Soo Kang are three sisters from San Francisco, California. They were born and raised in Korea, but as teenagers they immigrated to America. To say they’re accomplished is a bit of an understatement: one went to Stanford Business School, one went to Harvard Business School, and one went to Parsons School of Design. They put their heads together, quit their high-paying jobs, and went into business together. Their company offers a new twist on online dating, and they believe it has the power to change lives.

They’re here on “Shark Tank” asking for a $500,000 investment in exchange for 5% equity in their company.

They’ve taken the proven concept of daily flash cell sites and merged it with social networking elements to create the highest-quality dating service for singles.

The app works in a beautifully simple way, as Soo explains:

Every day at noon, the app curates one perfect match – a match who also just happens to be a friend of a friend. You have 24 hours to review their profile information and choose to ‘like’ or ‘pass’ on the match. A ‘mutual like’ results in a private chat line that expires in 7 days.

“The secret to online dating success is winning over women,” says Dawoon. “Women are tired of signing up for online dating sites only to get hit on by creepy strangers bombarding them with disgusting messages.” (A fact which this reporter can absolutely confirm.)

The app solves all that, and takes the stigma out of online dating. Since the app was launched, it has grown by double digits each month, and is rapidly becoming a favorite among women. 

The core service is free, but premium services can be unlocked using virtual currency in the form of coffee beans. For example, the most popular premium service is called ‘Open Sesame,’ and it reveals to you who the mutual friends are that are usually kept anonymous. This level of intrigue increases the mystery and lures people into buying the Open Sesame feature, which costs about 95 coffee beans (around $0.50 in actual currency).

The app uses a proprietary machine-learning algorithm to sort matches based on user data. All users must sign up through Facebook, and the algorithm uses Facebook’s data as a foundation. No other questionnaires or features are used to gather data at this point, which helps streamline the signup process and keep processing time to a minimum.

“The idea is that you don’t have to make someone go through a separate application process,’ says Kevin.

“Exactly,” the sisters confirm, almost in unison.

Shark Tank Coffee Meets Bagel Kang sisters 1024x640 - Coffee Meets Bagel: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

Running the Numbers

After an impressive introduction and review of how the product works, the sharks dig into the financial details of the dating app.

  • Monthly users: Between 100,000 and 500,000 users
  • Annual sales: $87,000 last year; $270,000 in first five months of current year
  • Projected annual sales: $1 million for current year; $10 million for next year
  • Customer acquisition cost (CAC): $0.30 cents
  • Profit margin: negative

The sisters refuse to reveal an exact number of monthly users, which they claim is for competitive reasons, but they are maddeningly vague on this point. They claim that it gives a good idea of user base, but it clearly doesn’t. After repeated grilling from the sharks, Mark Cuban drops out on principle. “I’m out.  You have to give us that, are you kidding? I’m out,” he says. The sisters seem unruffled, and continue fielding questions.

As it turns out, their profit margins are negative – meaning they aren’t making any profit currently. They had to spend a huge amount of money upfront, mostly on salaries to pay their web developers. That includes paying themselves a $100,000 salary each. The sharks seem incredulous at this number.

“That is still a significant pay cut from what we were making prior,” says Dawoon, to which Robert responds with rollicking, mocking laughter.

The sisters have raised $2.8 million in external funding so far, with one notable investor being one of the co-founders of Match.com, who loved their idea.

But although they’re raking in the money, they’re not making any. 

They plan to break even on a projected $10 million in revenue, but here’s why: they plan to bring on 4 million users next year, which will generate about $2.50 each – hence the $10 million. They plan on spending about $3 million on marketing.

“It is our decision to invest more now to accelerate growth,” says Dawoon, sticking to her guns.

coffeemeetsbagel on shartkank after 1024x576 - Coffee Meets Bagel: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

The Bidding

Robert says they’re an all-or-nothing game. They’re losing so much money that they’re not really in the making-money business, they’re merely in the business of acquiring users. They absolutely need to hit a home run for this to work, and it’s too risky for Robert. He’s the first to drop out.

Kevin is next to drop, saying that one of the things he’s noticed after six seasons of Shark Tank is that he’s really, really valuable. And it’s made him very, very greedy. “I don’t do 5% deals,” he says. “That’s worthless to me. I’m out.”

Lori drops next, saying that the combination of the very high salaries they are drawing out of their own business, combined with the internet’s high propensity for knocking off ideas and stealing their business model, makes her weary of investing.

Barbara respects their killer fundraising skills, and says their site is needed. (And she’s right.) The market for this is definitely there, and women really do need a site where they can feel like more than just a piece of meat. Much as she loves the idea, the investment is just way too much risk for way too little payoff. She drops out next, leaving only Mark Cuban remaining.

“Let me ask you a question,” says Cuban. “If I offered you $30 million for the company, would you take it?”

The sisters’ mouths fall open in shock.

They take only a few seconds to regain composure, though, and are swift to answer a resounding “No.”

“30 million dollars might sound like a lot of money, but Match.com makes $800 million a year. We think we’re on track to be as big as Match.com.”

And with that, the Kang sisters walk confidently off stage and out of Mark’s life forever. 

Final Deal: None – Largest offer in Shark Tank history, rejected.

Coffee Meets Bagel After Shark Tank

After the Coffee Meets Bagel episode of Shark Tank, the Kang sisters raised $23.2 million over the course of five funding rounds.

The app is still available on both Android and Apple devices and has reportedly 10 million users – but overall, it seems to be struggling. The market dominance the sisters envisioned has failed to materialize. In a search of top-ranked and most-popular dating sites, Coffee Meets Bagel doesn’t even crack the top 20.

Their website, meanwhile, looks sparse and suggests that their marketing angle has shifted from marketing specifically to women, to marketing to young professionals “from the richest countries in the world.” A strange shift, and one that was likely forced upon them with the rise of insanely popular women-oriented dating apps like Bumble and Zoosk.

Given the site’s sink to the bottom of the online dating barrel, it seems like the Kang sisters should have taken Mark’s deal. At least they could have used the money to buy a lifetime supply of bagels. 

Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is strictly informational; Seo Insights is not affiliated with Coffee Meets Bagel, SharkTank, or any of its subsidiaries.

0 comment
2 FacebookTwitterPinterest
RingShark Tank

Doorbot (Ring) Doorbell Camera: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

by Kate Sparks
written by Kate Sparks

The Basics

  • Company: Doorbot (now Ring)
  • Product: Doorbell camera hybrid (security product)
  • Owner: James Siminoff
  • Asking Price: $700,000 for 10% equity
  • Final Deal: None (rejected one offer from Kevin O’Leary)
  • Season/Episode: Season 5, Episode 9

Ring Before Shark Tank

Opportunity knocked loudly on the Shark Tank doors, back in 2013, but only one of the sharks seemed to recognize the visitor. Like all brilliant ideas that revolutionize daily life, Ring was ahead of its time, and the market for it didn’t quite exist at the time of its inception. Ring is a simple concept that seems so logical and intuitive that its invention now is almost surprising – because one assumes it had already been invented. Its usefulness is so valuable to society that it fits seamlessly into modern life, as though in hearing about it you do a double-take and think to yourself, “Oh, obviously. You mean, this didn’t already exist?”

But at the time that the product debuted on Shark Tank back in 2013, the mass marketability of this product wasn’t so obvious – at least not to the sharks. Their failure to invest in this product – and to recognize opportunity knocking – would ironically become one of their biggest regrets.

Ring On Shark Tank

Jamie Siminoff, founder and CEO of Doorbot, opens this episode with one of the more memorable entrances in Shark Tank history. Instead of striding through the double doors onto the stage like most contestants, Jamie waits behind the door and knocks politely. The sharks have to guess who’s knocking. “Who is it?” “It’s Jamie,” he says, and Lori tells him sweetly to come in.

“Wouldn’t it have been nice to know who was behind the door before you let me in? With my product, you can.”

Siminoff now has full command of the room, all the sharks rapt at attention. He’s seeking a dizzying $700,000 for 10% equity in his company. (If you’re doing the math, that’s a $7 million valuation. But given that the company, seven years later, is now worth more than a billion dollars, this would have been a steal.) 

“Customers are spending billions of dollars outfitting their homes with smart security technologies that connect to their phones,” says Siminoff. “But the doorbell hasn’t changed since it was invented in 1880. Until now!” Adorably excited, Siminoff whips out a prototype of his product, the Doorbot. (Back then, Ring was called Doorbot.) It looks a little like a silver soda can, with a concave glass lens on top and a speaker built into the bottom. Not much to look at, and clumsy in design, the concept is undeniably brilliant.

ring on sharktank - Doorbot (Ring) Doorbell Camera: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

Siminoff demonstrates the product with a prop front door and doorbell hookup, showing the video feed connected to his smartphone – (with his smartphone projected on a television screen, to make the demonstration easier to view). He rings the doorbell, and the Doorbot app alerts him to the visitor, showing him a live video feed of the front door. The app allows him to see and hear his visitor without opening the door – a revolution in both household convenience and home security. He can either accept or decline the visitor directly through the app.

“Think of it as caller ID for your front door.” 

If you hit ‘accept’ on the app, Siminoff explains, your doorbell turns into a standard apartment building intercom, so you can hear and speak to your guest. The product features two-way audio and one-way video. (Essentially, you can see out, but they can’t see in.)

Running the Numbers

The sharks are impressed with the product’s home security potential, but want to dig into the financial details before making any bids.

  • Retail price: $199
  • Cost of production: $81.83 per unit, landed
  • Revenue streams: direct-to-consumer online, with Staples distribution deal in progress
  • Sales to date: $1 million over 9 months
  • Direct competitors: None

Siminoff is careful to point out the distinctions between his product and the closest competitors on the market. Though there are none that include 2-way communication and smartphone connectivity, there are several companies making products in a similar vein – but these products tend to be multipanel security systems that cost thousands. Doorbot, as Siminoff explains, is the first of its kind: a true original.

The Bidding

Mark Cuban gets into a little bit of a tiff with Siminoff at this point, daring to wade (as only Cuban does) into philosophical waters. He seems concerned that other businesses could come along with a better, smarter product and push this company into oblivion before it takes off. Siminoff counters by asking “What technology isn’t going to be replaced? The doorbell’s not going to change. We’re always going to need this technology.”

Lori Greiner is first to drop out, stating that she isn’t confident enough that the product can distinguish itself from other similar products on the market – especially given the product’s higher price point.

Mark Cuban is next to drop out, and in a scene that is almost comically off-base in retrospect, he says that he doesn’t see what makes this company worth its $7 million valuation. He wants to see something that could “someday be $80 or even $90 million.” (As of 2020, the company is worth $1.2 billion.) He doesn’t see the potential, so he’s out.

Daymond and Robert drop out next, stating that the product doesn’t have what it takes to rise through lower and mid-tier markets. (This reporter would like to note here that Daymond Green’s red-and-white pinstriped shirt with red silk tie is an exceptionally great look during this episode.) 

With four sharks out, Kevin is Siminoff’s last chance at a deal. Kevin offers $700,000 for a 10% royalty (in perpetuity) that drops down to 7% after the initial investment is recouped – but he wants 5% equity today. (This is a borderline predatory offer, at which Mark Cuban audibly scoffs.)

Siminoff mulls it over for a moment, but respectfully declines the offer. He counter-offers, replacing the royalty with an interest fee, which he insightfully points out can be paid off – unlike Kevin’s royalty-in-perpetuity offer. Kevin doesn’t like the terms, and Siminoff walks away without a deal.

Final Deal: None (one offer rejected)

Though Siminoff walked away from the tank empty-handed, Doorbot (now Ring) has gone on to become one of the most successful companies to have ever been pitched on Shark Tank. One major takeaway from the Ring saga is that not all the sharks are as good at spotting a billion-dollar idea as they’d like to pretend, or as NBC would have us believe. While Mark Cuban is never one to admit regret, the rest of the sharks’ are open about their mistakes with this episode, seeing it as a missed opportunity to invest in a billion-dollar company. 

In 2018, Ring was sold to Amazon for $1.1 billion. Shaquille O’Neal even came onboard as a Ring spokesman, hired by Amazon.

Ring is now the highest-valued company ever to have appeared on Shark Tank. 

In a final spectacular twist of fate, Jamie Siminoff – CEO of Ring – joined the tank as a guest Shark five years after his initial appearance as a contestant, now the CEO of one of the most successful security companies on earth, and a certified billionaire in his own right.

If you liked it, then you shoulda put a ring on it. 

Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is strictly informational; Seo Insights is not affiliated with Doorbot, Ring Doorbell, SharkTank, or any of its subsidiaries.

0 comment
1 FacebookTwitterPinterest
HoneyfundShark Tank

Honeyfund: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

by Kate Sparks
written by Kate Sparks

The Basics

  • Company: Honeyfund
  • Owner: Sara and Josh Margulis
  • Product: Honeymoon registry service
  • Asking Price: $400,000 for 10% equity
  • Final Deal: $400,000 for 33% transaction revenue until 3x investment recouped
  • Shark Who Took The Bait: Kevin O’Leary
  • Season/Episode: Season 6, Episode 6

Honeyfund Before Shark Tank

Josh and Sara Margulis are a beautiful married couple from Sebastopol, California (aka Sonoma wine country) who founded Honeyfund, the free honeymoon gift registry.

Both aspiring entrepreneurs when they met, they founded the Honeyfund site to fund their own wedding and honeymoon, originally – but when they saw how successful it was and how much their wedding guests raved about the idea, they knew they had hit on something big.

Honeyfund On Shark Tank: A Quick Recap

Josh and Sara take the stage dressed like – you guessed it – a newlywed couple on their honeymoon, replete with Hawaiian t-shirts and flower leis around their necks. They look sun-kissed and glowing, and confident enough to ask for $400,000 in exchange for 10% equity in their company, Honeyfund.  

The idea behind Honeyfund is brilliant and long overdue: a free, unique wedding registry where couples can raise funds for their dream honeymoon, using donations as wedding gifts. Their entire honeymoon, essentially, becomes their wedding gift, which is collectively paid for by individual guests. “We call this process crowd-gifting,” says Sara, and the sharks look highly impressed.

“Would you rather have a set of China, or a trip to China?” 

Instead of traditional samples, Sara and Josh pass out flower leis and Mai Tais in cutesy Tikki bar coconut cups.

honeyfund sharktank - Honeyfund: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

Somebody take away Kevin’s Mai Tai before he gets belligerent.

Running the Numbers

“We’d like to propose a toast!” The sharks and contestants all raise their coconut cups in a toast to cash flow, as the show heads into the numbers segment.

  • Fundraising totals: $200 million
  • Revenue streams: Paypal transaction fees
  • Annual sales: $67 million in transactions
  • Income from annual sales: $987,000
  • Profit from annual sales: $219,000

Kevin points out here that this business raises the essential, age-old question of customer-acquisition cost (CAC). Sara explains that every wedding registry account invites an average of 150 wedding guests, so their exposure and brand visibility automatically expands with each new registered couple.  On average, she says, their customer acquisition cost is $0.88 cents per customer, and their average value per customer is $9.

These numbers might sound great to the layman, but Mark Cuban is skeptical.

As Cuban explains, putting half a million dollars in the bank for themselves, as a couple, is phenomenal. But it’s not necessarily investable. He wants to know what the long-term plan is and how they intend to grow. “Because, to be honest, to be in business ten years and do $987,000 in gross revenue is horrible.”

“It’s been a lifestyle business up to this point, but of course – we’re here because there’s more,” says Sara.

People eventually began using honeyfund for things other than weddings and honeymoons. The couple took this idea and ran with it, creating Plumfund. Plumfund lets users crowdfund anything, online, for free.

“Hang on,” says Robert. “So…your answer to expanding Honeyfund…is to do…another fund?” 

“Our answer is to do a whole portfolio of funds,” says Sara, with a click of the television display – revealing an entire family of other crowdsourced websites.

“Ugh,” says Cuban, clearly disgusted with the expansion concept.

honeyfund on sharktank sara josh - Honeyfund: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

Sara and Josh, unruffled by Cuban’s criticism.

As the camera pans to the display, we can see an array of future funds or fund concepts, including:

  • Anniversary Fund
  • Birthday Fund
  • Baby Fund 
  • Grad Fund 
  • Mazel Fund

Kevin digits into Plum Fund a little deeper to get an idea of the likelihood of success for these other, future funds. Over the course of 12 months, Plum Fund has generated $400,000 in transaction sales and $10,000 in revenue.

When the sharks say that it’s clearly a great idea but that they’re not totally sold, Sara takes the presentation in yet another direction. “I’ve got another idea,” she says, and a new slide appears on the television display. “Fondo de Miel.” (That’s Spanish for Honeyfund.) “There are 53 million Spanish speakers in the United States alone,’ she says. This could double our business over the next few years. 

The Bidding

Lori is first to drop out, though she praises their idea to expand into other countries and capture the Spanish-speaking market. “I think crowdfunding is crowded. For that reason, I’m out.”

Kevin seems interested, but it still obviously skeptical. “If I fund you today, how do I get my $400,000 back?” Sara responds that they’re planning on scaling the business quickly, over five years, and come to dominate the crowd-gifting space.

“Guys, just what you said right there, does not make sense,” interjects Cuban. “There’s no such thing as scaling quickly over five years. By bringing in all these other options, you’re saying you’re not dominating the space you’re supposedly already dominating.”

“We already do dominate this space – we have 30% market share in this space.”

“You’ve got a nice little business, and again, bravo,” says Cuban. “But when a business starts looking everywhere else, it suggests to me that it’s on autopilot. If it was growing so fast, and becoming so profitable, you’d be telling us you need this capital just to keep up with it. But that’s not what’s happening here. For that reason, I’m out.” And with that, Cuban is out.

After Cuban and Lori drop out, the Honeyfunders receive three offers in rapid succession from the other sharks.

First, Robert Herjavec offers $500,000 for 50% equity. He says they’ve done a phenomenal job creating transaction value, and that transaction value is where they should focus (not on brand extensions). 

Next, Kevin proposes a more complex, “Mr. Wonderful”-style deal: $400,000 with no equity interest in return for one-third of their transaction revenue until he recoups $1.2 million (or three times his original investment).

Last, Barb Shark jumps in to undercut Robert, offering $400,000 for 30% equity. Robert quickly tries to match her, but to no avail.

After running the numbers on stage, Sara and Josh agree to Kevin’s terms.

Final Deal: $400,000 for 1/3 transaction revenue until $1.2 million recouped

Honeyfund After Shark Tank: Where Are They Now?

So just how successful was this appearance, and what has Honeyfund been up to lately? Well, let’s start with the immediate repercussion of this episode. On the night that Honeyfund debuted on Shark Tank, their average daily visitor count skyrocketed from 150 to 5,000.

That growth has since leveled out, but the company still sees an average of 45% more web traffic than they did prior to their appearance on Shark Tank. 

Since their appearance on Shark Tank, they’ve processed $514 million in gifts. They’ve branched out into travel giftcards and are partnering with retailers to create universal gift registries, so that travel or experiential packages are no longer the only thing a wedding guest can fund via someone’s Honeyfund page.

While their other sites they envisioned – the various ‘funds’ like Babyfund and Gradfund, etc – have all been umbrellaed under  Plumfund, which has sextupled in size since the couple appeared on Shark Tank. 

And of course, since every true success story is now reflected and amplified through social media, it goes almost without saying that the Honeyfund Instagram account is massively popular, with more than 5,000 followers, while the Honeyfund Facebook page boasts more than 24,000 fans and followers.

They’ve received glowing writeups in The New York Times, Vogue, BRIDE magazine, and countless other media outlets.

In short, Honeyfund was a smashing success, and their appearance on Shark Tank was one of the best decisions they’ve ever made. Years of hard work and months of rehearsing their presentation paid off more than the couple ever imagined.

For Honeyfund, it seems, dreams really do come true.

Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is strictly informational; Seo Insights is not affiliated with Honeyfund, SharkTank, or any of its subsidiaries.

0 comment
1 FacebookTwitterPinterest
Grease BagsShark Tank

Grease Bags: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

by Kate Sparks
written by Kate Sparks

The Basics

  • Company: Grease Bags
  • Owner: LaTangela Newsome
  • Product: Compostable bags for disposing of kitchen grease
  • Asking Price: $75,000 for 25% equity
  • Final Deal: $75,000 for 50% equity
  • Shark Who Took The Bait: Barbara Corcoran (aka Barb Shark)
  • Season/Episode: Season 8, Episode 13

Grease Bags Before Shark Tank

LaTangela Newsome – a sassy, sharp-dressed entrepreneur from Allen, Texas –  auditioned for Shark Tank on a spontaneous impulse, after she heard that Shark Tank was doing a casting call near her town. At the time of her audition, she hadn’t sold any of her Grease Bags (compostable bags for disposing of kitchen grease), but she had confidence and drive.

“I wasn’t ready [for the show], but I was like, ‘If I don’t make it, I’ll try again,'” she says. “I went out there and stood for hours and hours and hours, but it was worth it.”

She eventually landed on Season 8, Episode 13 of Shark Tank, to pitch her innovative kitchen waste disposal product and hopefully get a sizeable investment from one of the sharks.

Grease Bags On Shark Tank: A Quick Recap

Newsome takes center stage in a crisp white suit and heels and introduces herself with trademark Texan charm. Her accent is thick, her hair is curly, and her smile is enormous. She’s here in front of the sharks today seeking $75,000 for a 25% equity in her company, Grease Bags. She’s a  woman of many talents, most notably her home cooking. When it’s time to clean up, what to do with all that grease? Cities are wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars on pipeline replacements due to fats, oils and grease. Grease clogs from people who pour their unused kitchen grease down the sink can result in costly damages and repairs to home kitchens. Surely, Newsome thinks, there must be a better way.

Enter Newsome’s product: convenient, disposable bags for safe cooking oil disposal. Even the packaging, Newsome points out, is compostable. She demonstrates the product by pouring a frying pan of liquid grease into one of her grease bags. “I am now the only person with an eco-friendly product for at-home grease disposal,” she says. A bold claim, and one that captures the sharks’ attention.

Newsome hands out samples of chicken wings along with her prototype bags so the Sharks can test the product first-hand. Barb Shark wants to know what happened to the grease when she poured it in the demo bag. “We have a blend of all-natural oil-absorbing ingredients,” she says.

She then demonstrates the impressive oil-absorbing power of the bag’s ingredients. In a glass of oil and water, she pours the proprietary blend into the glass and watches as it absorbs the oil. She then pours the water into another glass, and the water pours clear – the oil has been completely absorbed by the blend. “Oh, wow,” says Cuban. “Good for you.” It’s clear from the reactions off-camera that the sharks are impressed.

Running the Numbers

Barb Shark is first to ask about financial details. “I need to know the price,” she says – and Newsome is happy to oblige.

  • Retail price: $12.99 for set of 3 bags
  • Cost of production: $2.34 for 3 bags
  • Profit margin: 82%
  • Sales-to-date: none yet (still in production/prototype phase)

Newsome is careful to mention that she’s not entirely sure what all of her costs will be yet, once she starts selling the product. So she’s tried to ratchet the retail price up enough to cover anticipated costs.

The Bidding

Lori is first to drop out, saying that (surprise, surprise) she’s never fried anything in her life and has zero knowledge about this industry. Fair point.

It’s here that Barb Shark interjects with a critical question – can she pour hot grease directly into the bag? “As of now, the bag isn’t heat-tempered,” she says. “That’s a huge problem,” says Kevin. And it’s true. Having to wait to let your grease cool, instead of pouring it directly into the bag, is a major drawback that definitely hurts the product’s marketability.

Mark Cuban asks if the heat-tempering can be fixed. Newsome assures him that it can, but that doing so would make the bag non-compostable. So there’s an inherent conflict and a tradeoff happening here – she can make the bag heat-tempered and capture the hot grease market, but in doing so, she would lose the ecofriendly marketing angle and forfeit her environmentally-conscious customers.

Mark Cuban is insightful in pointing out that the eco-friendly, environmentally conscious demographic typically aren’t doing as much frying in the first place – so her main marketing demographic may not actually exist. For that reason, Cuban is out.

“I give you an 8.62 out of 10 for presentation,” says Kevin, “but I would never actually use this product. I cook bacon, so this solves nothing for me. I’m out.”

“I give you a 10 for presentation, amazing job,” says Robert. “But this is a tough one.” She tries to sell him again and Kevin urges her to lay off for a minute while he makes up his mind. “There’s just too much unknown with the product,” says Robert, after a moment. “I’m out.”

With all the sharks out, Newsome looks heartbroken. “So is that everybody?” she says.

“I went out so fast earlier…let’s pretend it didn’t happen,” says Barb Shark. All heads swivel in shock toward Barb. Barb runs the numbers with Newsome one more time and then asks if there’s any way she could bring the retail price down from $12.99 to $6.99 – cutting the price (and her profit margin) in half. Each bag is only $0.78 cents to make, though, so Newsome agrees it’s doable. “I’ll give you the money on that contingency, that you lower the price down to $6.99 – but I want half the company,” says Barb. Instead of Newsome’s original offer of 25% equity, Barb Shark is demanding 50%. Newsome takes a moment to mull it over, and then happily agrees to Barb’s offer.

“I can’t believe it,” says Newsome in the segment’s final moments. Through happy tears, she confesses how much she appreciates the offer and the fact that Barbara believes in her. “I think she’s going to be an awesome partner,” says Newsome.

Final Deal: %75,000 for 50% equity in Grease Bags

Grease Bags After Shark Tank

Even though Newsome and Barb Shark reached a deal on air, the deal ultimately fell through. It turned out that Newsome’s cost of materials was just too high to sustain the $6.99 price cut. In anticipation of the notorious boost in sales that all businesses receive after appearing on the show, Newsome tried to prepare for a jump in orders. She paid out of her own pocket for materials — then didn’t have the money to get her customers’ preordered purchases shipped on time. Understandably, some of those customers weren’t thrilled, and her customer service suffered. But she quickly regained stability and kept the business afloat.

The product now sells for $8.99 – a convenient middle ground between her original retail price and the price Barb Shark suggested.

All in all, Newsome is grateful for her appearance on the show and the struggles that pushed her to streamline her business. “I think if I hadn’t gone on Shark Tank it would have been one of those things where when the going got tough, we wouldn’t have pushed ourselves.”

The Grease Bags are available for purchase online, and the Grease Bags site is still up and running as of July 2020.

Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is strictly informational; Seo Insights is not affiliated with Grease Bags, SharkTank, or any of its subsidiaries.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterest
Social Media

Can Social Media Stop Anti-Asian Harassment?

by Kate Sparks
written by Kate Sparks

Disclaimer: This blog is an information piece that discusses racism and sensitive political issues surrounding the covid19 pandemic. It is not representative of Seo Insights’s views as a company, but merely an educational post intended to inform, examine, and hopefully, entertain.

A few weeks back, in a Pew Research Center survey from July, Americans exposed a disturbing trend – a trend that, sadly, is not entirely new, but one that has been gaining significant momentum in recent weeks: Anti-Asian harassment. This trend is not new in America by any means, but as the coronavirus has spread from China across the globe, Anti-Asian harassment, tragically, has skyrocketed.

A whopping 58 percent (more than half) of all English-speaking Asian-American adults reported that racist or bigoted views about Asians had become more commonplace since the coronavirus pandemic began. More than 30 percent (nearly a third) said they had witnessed or experienced slurs or racist jokes firsthand in recent weeks, while 26 percent (more than a quarter) said they feared for their physical safety, and were frightened of assault, threats, or attack, purely because of their race. For the record, that’s a higher percentage than for Black and Hispanic adults.

Then, just this week, Anti-Asian harassment made the front page of the New York Times, thanks to a new public service announcement highlighting the surge of harassment Asian-Americans have faced in recent weeks and months.

The PSA, which debuted last Tuesday, shows testimony from a nurse, a firefighter, an artist, a driver, the celebrity chef Melissa King and others, who all describe – like something out of an ’80s true-crime movie – being told to “go back to China” or sometimes even having people spit in their path.

The ad was produced by the nonprofit Advertising Council and Emmy-winning writer Alan Yang. It closes with a powerful request: “Fight the virus. Fight the bias.”

21Virus Asians 02 articleLarge - Can Social Media Stop Anti-Asian Harassment?

Ever since the coronavirus was first detected in Wuhan, China, months ago, the pandemic has fueled bigotry, irrational fears, and xenophobia toward Asians and Asian-Americans. A coalition of civil rights groups recorded more than 2,100 incidents of anti-Asian harassment over the course of just three months (coinciding with the pandemic’s outbreak and subsequent spread across the globe). To make matters worse, a list of recent cases gathered by the Anti-Defamation League reports “surging reports of xenophobic and racist incidents.” Asian-owned stores have been vandalized and defaced with racist graffiti, Zoom calls and video chats have been disrupted by anti-Asian remarks, and Asian Americans have been beaten, spit at, and denied entry to businesses on no other basis than that of their Asian ethnicity.

In light of President Trump’s repeated descriptions of the coronavirus as the “Chinese virus” and “kung flu,” it would seem that correction or curative action, as a society, is going to have to come from somewhere other than government or federal leadership-by-example (seeing as, you know, we have none). If anything, the sitting president’s inflammatory statements have exacerbated racist behavior, and given dangerous, racist ideas a thin veneer of legitimacy in the current fear-based climate. 

Since the president refuses to do anything about it, the righteous fight against pandemic-related harassment of Asian-Americans has fallen predominantly on civil rights groups, marketing agencies, nonprofit organizations, and – most importantly – social media accounts. Hashtags like #IAmNotCovid19, #RacismIsAVirus, #HealthNotHate and #MakeNoiseToday have multiplied and proliferated across the internet.

While it’s always tempting to resort to our default cynicism mode – to assume that social media and hashtag activism have no effect – it might be time to set aside our social vanity, reassess that cynicism in the name of justice, and reconsider just how powerful social media has become. Acting as a sort of positive counter-pandemic to the pandemic, this social media movement seems to be one of the only things with the kind of sustained virality and momentum capable of matching the natural virality of racism, hatred, and bigotry. (After all, is there anyone in America who doesn’t recognize the #metoo hashtag, and possess at least a cursory knowledge of its meaning?)

Asiancy, a Portland-based ad agency, posted a video in May about anti-Asian discrimination and its ripple effects across society. Meanwhile, the Los-Angeles-based marketing firm IW Group called on designers, actors, musicians, and – wait for it – social media influencers to participate in their #WashTheHate social media campaign – a campaign designed and implemented specifically to counteract Anti-Asian harassment.

The Ad Council, which worked with Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York this month to create a face mask initiative, will roll out the new anti-Asian harassment campaign through multiple media formats, including online and television.

socialjustice hashtags 1024x648 - Can Social Media Stop Anti-Asian Harassment?

In recent years, social media platforms have exploded in popularity, with membership, user bases, and ad revenues expanding exponentially across the globe, every fiscal quarter posting record gains and shattering world-records for membership. (Instagram alone has more than 1 billion monthly users – that’s more than the entire religion of Buddhism worldwide.) Social media enables us to be more connected to each other than ever before, and along with that connectivity comes a hyper-virality of information, an ability for social justice movements to spread like wildfire in a matter of hours. Hashtags can quickly catch on and carry a movement around the world in less than a day. Entire societies can be reshaped, thanks to social media, over the course of a few years of consistent online activism and digital pressure.

Activists in civil rights, LGBTQ rights, environmental protection, and – perhaps most famously – the sexual violence prevention movement have all used social media campaigns and hashtags, specifically, to start vital conversations. Hashtag activism has ignited long-overdue examinations and reflections about social norms and societal values, and inspired necessary, crucial work across the globe. Work that, in time, creates a culture shift, a societal transformation, and has the power to reshape our legal and ethical systems.

From a marketing standpoint, perhaps it helps to remember that posts that incorporate a hashtag receive, on average, 20% more engagement than those that don’t.

If you’d like to incorporate some good old fashioned hashtag activism into your online life, we here at Seo Insights have put together a handy dandy hashtag list for you, a short-and-sweet collection that encompasses some of the  most popular, most pertinent, and most powerful social media movements of this post-COVID world:

  1. #metoo – sexual harassment, abuse of power as a tool of sexist, patriarchal societies
  2. #aufschrei – sexism in German society and culture (“aufschrei” means “outcry” in German)
  3. #niunamenos and #niunamas – “not one woman less” and “not one woman more” – Latin American femicide resistance movement
  4. #blacklivesmatter or #blm – support for black Americans suffering from generations of police brutality and systemic racism, support for civil rights and police reform
  5. #sayhername – justice for Breonna Taylor, support for arresting the police officers who murdered her in March of 2020
  6. #love – an evergreen hashtag, always popular, can be applied to any social justice movement or activist cause. generally used in association with LGBTQ and civil rights movements.
  7. #IAmNotCovid19, #RacismIsAVirus, #HealthNotHate, and #MakeNoiseToday – current anti-harassment hashtags, supporting public health and anti-harassment social movements during the covid19 pandemic

So now that we know how it works, we know that it’s needed, and we know how to use it – it’s time to get to work. Get out there and start hashtagging. And remember: social change can start with just one person, in just one tiny corner of the world. With enough momentum and the right hashtags, we can build a more peaceful, less hateful and less fearful world.

0 comment
1 FacebookTwitterPinterest
PMS BitesShark Tank

PMS Bites: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

by Kate Sparks
written by Kate Sparks

The Basics

  • Company: PMS Bites
  • Owner: Tania Green
  • Product: Specialty snacks for women, designed to treat PMS symptoms
  • Asking Price: $50,000 for 20% equity
  • Final Deal: No Deal
  • Season/Episode: Season 7, Episode 29

PMS Bites: Healthy Snacks for Women

Tania Green saw a need for a healthy alternative to the sugary, unhealthy snacks that women tend to crave as part of PMS symptoms. With more than 150 different PMS symptoms, women experience a range of aches, pains, and cravings during their particular time-of-the-month. The snacks available to them are limited and counterproductive, with sugar and fat leading to more bloating, more cravings, and discomfort. Tania knew from personal experience that she tended to crave sugar and salt the most, but she also knew she had a solution.

So she set out to create a vegan, gluten-free, and wholesome snack product – PMS Bites – branded and marketed exclusively toward women.

PMS Bites On Shark Tank

While most contestants launch into their product with minimal acting, Tania has a talent for playing it up. She takes center stage and sighs, her face visibly pained and her pretty eyes dulled by fatigue.  “Hi Sharks,” she says, grimly. “I’m Tania, I’m from Boston, and I’m seeking $50,000 for 20% of my company.” She looks pointedly at the sharks. “I know. I don’t look excited to be here at all. I am on the inside,” she says. And here the act begins to show. “It’s just that my back is killing me, I’m so bloated this dress may pop off, and I’m exceptionally hot,” she says, and fans herself with both hands. “That’s right, Sharks. I’m talking about PMS.”

Tanya lists off some disturbing statistics, informing the sharks (and the viewers at home) that a shocking 90% of women suffer from one or more of 150 known symptoms of PMS. According to Tanya, those symptoms can last an average of 7-10 days out of each month. “Thank about that number, Mr. Wonderful,” she says, addressing the most diabolical shark, Kevin O’Leary. “That’s a third of your year where you’d be even crankier than usual.”

On stage right, beside Tanya, is a table of pretty and delicious-looking snack treats with names like Coconutty, All Kinds of Nuts, and Plain Crazy. These delectable snacks are bite-sized, healthy, and contain a blend of herbs and nutritional supplements that can be effective in treating PMS symptoms – particularly bloating, cramping, and irritability.

Tania hands out samples of the delicious bite-sized treats, explaining that the main ingredients are dates, almond butter, and gluten-free oats.

PMSBites SharkTank2 HighRes - PMS Bites: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

Running the Numbers

While the sharks chow down on tasty samples, Tania dives into the financial details of her business.

  • Total sales to date: $13,400.07 “Every penny counts, Mark”
  • Revenue streams: Independent retailers, Equinox gyms
  • Time in business: 7 months
  • Wholesale price: $4.50
  • Retail cost: $7.00
  • Cost of production: $1.55
  • Profit margin: 66%

The sharks, clearly doing math in their heads, smell blood in the water. “Why isn’t it selling?” says Cuban. Mr. Wonderful himself pipes up from this throne of despair. “You’re the princess of small numbers,” he says.

Tania fights back. She says it’s not an issue with the product, but rather, with funding. She makes them, packages them, and delivers them herself on her bike. As someone who experienced debilitating PMS herself, Tania is passionate about the product. But Kevin is quick to point out that the product isn’t medicinal – it contains no actual medicine or pharmaceutical benefits, just a blend of herbs which could easily have no effect at all. “It’s just a bon-bon, right?”

Kevin also takes issue with the fact that she’s called the product PMS Bites, and marketed them exclusively toward women – thus eliminating half her potential market (excluding men and children). Tania counters that if she’d called them Tania’s Vegan Cookies, she wouldn’t even be standing in front of them today. The PMS angle is a marketing play, and one that clearly works.

Tania wraps up her defense by stating that she has prior experience leading marketing departments and branding departments for major companies – so she knows she can do the work – but she was never passionate about “selling someone else’s dream.” This is her dream, it works for her, and she knows other women will love it.

pmsbites on sharktank - PMS Bites: Shark Tank Updates in 2020

PMS Bites are made with dates, almond butter, and gluten-free oats.

The Bidding

Lori Greiner repackages Kevin’s earlier point in a prettier box, stating that her marketing demographic is just too narrow to be a safe investment. She gets why she markets exclusively to women, but she’s not comfortable with cutting out men and children from the potential customer base. She’s the first to drop out.

Robert Herjavec chimes in next, saying that he loves the marketing slogan and disagrees with Lori. He sees the value in her marketing strategy, and thinks she stands out as unique in the crowded healthy snacks market. But sadly, the numbers are just too small. He’s out. 

Barbara, likewise, doesn’t get a sense that Tania is really selling her product, doesn’t see the drive or ambition needed to generate big revenue and huge sales numbers. “I hear the words, but not the music,” she says, and drops out.

Kevin reiterates his earlier message, stating that Tania is the “princess of small numbers, but needs to be the queen of sales.” He doesn’t see that happening, so unsurprisingly, he’s out.

Mark Cuban drops out with some good advice and insightful analysis of Tania’s failings so far: he says the product should be heavily branded online, using social media as its main weapon of promotion. The product is a product marketed for women, and women are huge users of social media – so this product has viral potential. Where is that angle? Tania is missing that opportunity, clearly, and her misguided marketing focus makes Cuban hesitant about the entire business.

“You made a strategic mistake in focusing on retail,” says Cuban. “It’s inconceivable to me that you didn’t focus your marketing efforts online, in the viral arena. To do this, it would need to be an investment – not tuition. And it feels like tuition. So for those reasons, I’m out,” says Cuban.

Tania walks away with no deal – but her head held high, vowing to work harder than ever. 

Final Deal: None

PMS Bites After Shark Tank – Where Are They Now?

Tania Green left the sharks without a deal, but the experience made a lasting impression on her. She took the lessons learned on Shark Tank with her, and following the show’s air date, has been more determined than ever to make her brand a success.

Fascinatingly, her appearance on Shark Tank was not the last time she saw a shark. On vacation in Miami, after the show filmed, Green happened to run into shark Kevin O’Leary at a hotel pool bar. “I sent him a round of drinks with a note, which said, ‘Mr. Wonderful, it was such a pleasure pitching in front of you last season. You’re the best one. Please enjoy this round of drinks on me. Sincerely, the Princess of Small Numbers,'” she says. “He was like, ‘Did I really tell you that you were the princess of small numbers?’

(Apparently, he has no memory of his own reaction to Tania’s product, which is fitting, given that he most likely goes into a fugue state during filming. It wouldn’t surprise this reporter if Kevin O’Leary routinely forgets the scathing, soul-crippling remarks he makes to contestants who pitch their life’s work on the show.)

While PMS Bites are still available and the website is still up and running -with product available to sell – Tania says she is no longer trying to grow the business or expand marketing. She’s happy simply with where the product stands today.

The PMS Bites Instagram has a few thousand followers, but her social media presence has failed to generate the viral buzz Mark Cuban had hoped for.

“I see [the company] as my baby,” she says. “I hustled, I fought, I scratched for it, I really did. I can say to my grandkids that I was in Forbes [as part of a Shark Tank article]. It was really fun. I would totally do it again.”

Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is strictly informational; Seo Insights is not affiliated with PMS Bites, SharkTank, or any of its subsidiaries.

0 comment
1 FacebookTwitterPinterest
FacebookPolitics

Should Facebook Remove Political Ads?

by Kate Sparks
written by Kate Sparks

Disclaimer: This blog is an opinion piece that discusses various angles of a political issue. It is not representative of Seo Insights’s views as a company, but merely an educational post intended to inform, examine both sides of a civil argument, and hopefully, entertain.

Two insiders at Facebook have revealed, speaking anonymously, that the social media goliath is considering a new temporary ban on political advertising. The ban, if adopted, would take effect in the last days leading up to the U.S. election in November. In recent weeks, the company has been forced to contend with a large advertising boycott, widespread employee unrest, and massive public backlash regarding its policies on misinformation and its staunch refusal to address inaccurate campaign speech.  No final decision has yet been reached, according to the insiders, but internal debate continues to rage at a fever pitch.

Arguments both for and against the banning of political ads on Facebook have swarmed across media outlets, with Trump campaign officials and traditional conservatives tending to come down on the side against the ban. In an interview with the Washington Post, Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh let his feelings on the matter be known, saying that the ban would constitute “an egregious stifling of political speech,” and that such a ban would be especially unfair is Facebook allowed news organizations to run ads “while campaign speech is silenced.”

The American Bar Association has also made a sweeping, eloquent argument against such bans, and in favor of free speech’s expansion to include private companies.

On the other side of the debate, tending to support the ban, are civil rights groups, lawmakers, a majority of Facebook’s own employees, and broad public support. Grassroots campaigns, civilians, and major corporations have all condemned Facebook for allowing misinformation and hate speech to take root on the site. In June, the Biden presidential campaign said it would urge its supporters to demand that Facebook tighten its policies concerning misinformation. And just this month, hundreds of companies, from Ford to Coke-a-Cola to Unilever, participated in a month-long boycott of Facebook advertising. (And yes, Ben & Jerry’s chimed in.) 

facebook ad boycott - Should Facebook Remove Political Ads?

In the event that Facebook imposes the temporary ban on political advertising, it would constitute a startling departure from standard Facebook policy. Last year, Facebook made it clear that it would allow campaign-related speech of any kind to proliferate on its platform. Politicians on all sides were free to spread information – true or not – without fear of being fact-checked or censored.

Case in point: Mr. Zuckerberg has repeatedly stated his support for what he calls “free speech,” and shirked responsibility for misinformation by claiming that Facebook is not “an arbiter of truth.” He evades action on this issue or accountability for damage Facebook has caused in the political arena by claiming that Facebook must let sleeping dogs lie, in essence – that all campaign speech must be left alone, preferring everything to fall under the comforting umbrella phrase of free speech.

It’s crucial to note here that the First Amendment, historically, limits free speech only when it concerns governmental actors – local, state, and federal. Private companies are allowed to censor and limit free speech as they wish, in keeping with American law. In 2018, a federal district court in Texas dismissed a lawsuit filed by a private individual against Facebook, using the state action doctrine. The court ruling explained that “the First Amendment governs only governmental limitations on speech.”

Zuckerberg’s laissez-faire attitude, and his continuous efforts to brand misinformation control as a violation of free speech, have created a firestorm of public scrutiny and civil backlash.

Josh Constine, writing at Tech Crunch, made an eloquent case last November for why Facebook should, indeed, ban political ads and why such a ban is long overdue in these troubled historical times:

“Permitting falsehood in political advertising would work if we had a model democracy, but we don’t. Not only are candidates dishonest, but voters aren’t educated, and the media isn’t objective. And now, hyperlinks turn lies into donations and donations into louder lies. The checks don’t balance. What we face is a self-reinforcing disinformation dystopia.” 

Facebook, and social media in general, has permanently altered the way most Americans get their news. You’ve heard of the information vacuum? Well, that information vacuum is amplified and magnified tenfold across Facebook’s platform, especially when it comes to the hyper-manipulated arena of political speech. Once Facebook’s algorithm identifies a certain political leaning or preference, its advertising begins to show users an ever-narrower slice of the information pie, curating news custom-designed to appeal to the user’s tastes, buying habits, and  – most dangerously – voting habits.

facebook bans political ads free speech - Should Facebook Remove Political Ads?

On Facebook, it’s possible for a user to be exposed exclusively and continuously to content that aligns with pre-existing political views, never balancing that information with information from other outlets. This doesn’t just happen on the right (although the problem is notably worse with the right.) It happens at both ends of the political spectrum, with extreme liberal and conservative fake news sources proliferating across the platform. You see what you want to see, hear what you want to hear. And your ability to think critically and make well-informed, responsible decisions about politics goes down the drain as your information vacuum grows stronger and more powerful.

This spiraling vortex of misinformation and propaganda was further confirmed this week by the official release of a two-year audit of Facebook’s political speech and misinformation policies. The audit, performed by lawyers and civil rights experts chosen specifically by the company’s top brass, found that Facebook had failed uniformly to protect users on its platform from misleading ads, misinformation, and discrimination. Their audit made a special note to point out that Facebook had been especially eager to let politicians run rampant with propaganda, and that the company had been disturbingly lenient with the Trump campaign, in particular. “One post allowed the propagation of hate/violent speech and two facilitated voter suppression,” they wrote, just by way of example. “In all three cases, Facebook asserted that the posts did not violate its Community Standards.”

Voter suppression is a serious issue facing America today, and in an election season, it stands to reason that all reasonable efforts should be made to prevent it in whatever form it takes – be it the suppression of mail-in voting ballots, voter fraud,  and yes, possibly, even the misinformation on Facebook that facilitates it.

Businesses are free, obviously, to support whatever political causes they choose, to take a stand or not to take a stand on whatever issues may be pertinent to their business, their customers, and their overall brand identity. At Insignia, we recognize the tremendous power of digital marketing, and with it, the responsibility for accurate, truthful information that keeps public interest and civil discourse at heart. This issue is a fascinating examination of the way free speech has evolved with the explosion of private companies that have as much or more power as governments, that operate as public forums disseminating speech of all kinds across the globe. Free speech is our constitutional right, and so is our right to a fair and unbiased democratic election process – a process that is intrinsically jeopardized by misinformation. To say the issue is complex is a bit of an understatement.

Perhaps the Facebook audit report says it best. “Elevating free expression is a good thing, but it should apply to everyone,” the report concludes, in a heartbreaking plea for action. “When it means that powerful politicians do not have to abide by the same rules that everyone else does, a hierarchy of speech is created that privileges certain voices over less powerful voices.”

0 comment
1 FacebookTwitterPinterest
Macaron QueenThe Profit

Macaron Queen: The Profit Updates in 2020

by Kate Sparks
written by Kate Sparks

The Basics

  • Company: Macaron Queen
  • Owners: Nina Chteoui and Finia Jahangard (Co-Founders)
  • Product: High-end macaron cookies
  • Problem: Lack of growth
  • Marcus’s Offer: $500,000 for 50% equity
  • Season/Episode: Season 7, Episode 5

Life Before The Profit

Macaron Queen began as a tiny startup in the dessert space, with a colorful kiosk booth set up in Atlanta’s Perimeter Mall. The founders of this traditional French dessert company are a mother-daughter team with mixed Iranian and European heritage – but not a lick of French between them. This disconnect between the product’s cultural origins and their own ancestry doesn’t necessarily mean trouble, but it certainly doesn’t help their brand authenticity. Nonetheless, as Marcus finds out, their cookies are excellent.

Macarons are often called “the impossible cookie,” notoriously difficult to get right. Macaron Queen founder Finia Jahangard perfected her own macaron recipe over the years through careful study and a couple of cooking classes in old Paris. In 2017, Finia underwent heart surgery and since then she’s been struggling to maintain the business. Her daughter Nina has taken over much of the business in an effort to help her mom and keep the small-but-mighty bakery business from going under.

Marcus can see that Macaroon Queen has a strong business model on a small scale, but he thinks the business’s true untapped potential lies in its scalability as a national, direct-to-consumer product. He thinks the product can be a wholesale success, too, and considers himself the right man for the job, as he’s something of a “Macaron Snob.”

Macaron Queen makes dozens of delectable macaroon flavors, including red velvet, key lime, champagne and french raspberry (to name just a few). 

 First Impressions

Marcus sits down with the Macaron Princess and the Macaron Queen for a taste test. After a few bites of the colorful cookies, he makes a bold assessment: “These are the best macarons I’ve ever had,” he says. (And this coming from a self-professed Macaron Snob.) 

macaron queen the profit marcus - Macaron Queen: The Profit Updates in 2020

Running the Numbers

Since Finia’s heart attack, Nina was forced to make a drastic career change and leave her former life to come help out in the family business. Nina’s background is in fashion design and international fashion distribution. She came into the bakery business to help her mother, essentially, which is sweet – but perhaps ultimately unsustainable. She’s quick to assure her mother that she doesn’t miss her old life too much – that her mother’s passion is her own. But Marcus can see the toll it’s taking on the mother-daughter duo.

He sits down with Nina and Finia to go over the numbers of their business. Most importantly, he wants to show them which retail stream is more profitable for them: retail or wholesale.

  • Retail cost-to-fulfill: $1.39
  • Wholesale cost-to-fulfill: $0.10
  • Distribution: Perimeter Mall in Atlanta, GA; with wholesale distribution to Bubble Tea Retailers and Coffee Shops
  • Total annual sales, 2018: $369,000
  • Total net profit, 2018: $73,000

Marcus is ready and willing to invest, in $100,000 increments. At each level of investment, he wants to see certain production goals achieved, without compromising on quality. He’s willing to invest up to $500,000 – but for each $100k he invests, he wants 10% equity. They’re not obligated in any way to take the money, but it’s available to them if they need it. Ideally, he says, the business will make enough money that they won’t have to lean on his investments up to the full half-million threshold.

Nina and Finia barely need a moment to consider the deal. They are thrilled to accept Marcus’s offer.

macaron queen theprofit cookies 1024x538 - Macaron Queen: The Profit Updates in 2020

Cookies With Intercontinental Style

Joseph Trevino is an Executive Chef at the Intercontinental Hotel, and he’s looking for a macaron master. The Intercontinental Hotel, he explains, doesn’t have an in-house pastry chef or an in-house macaron specialist, so their outsourcing pastry costs are high. They’re looking for someone exactly like Macaron Queen to help them out. Nina and Finia bring samples of their delicious cookies, and Trevino (no surprise) is impressed. He’s open to a deal but wants to stay competitive with pastry pricing. Current costs for the Intercontinental Hotel are between $0.89 and $1.19 per cookie. Nina and Finia are agreeable, and the pair strikes a deal with their new hotel distribution partner.

In the kitchen, Marcus is only minorly alarmed at the fact that Finia keeps having to stop repeatedly and check her resting heart rate on a Fitbit attached to her wrist. If a heart attack is imminent, it surely can’t be more important than making a profit. This is NBC, after all.

They are finally forced to take a break when Finia’s heart rate skyrockets to 166. That’s more than a hundred beats per minute higher than it’s supposed to be.

After the gang is fully recovered, Marcus and Nina head to Manhattan for a meeting with Weight Watchers CEO Mindy Grossman.

A New York Minute

Catching up with Mindy in New York, the gang gets some valuable insight on how up their marketing game and really develop their brand’s unique voice and style. As usual, the macaron samples are a huge hit, and the tasters from Weight Watchers can’t quite believe how delicious the treats are.

On a video call with Finia (resting back home in Atlanta), the Weight Watchers team gushes over the product and tells Finia they’d love to be involved with making Macaron Queen a healthy, delicious option for their global network of clients. “That would be my dream,” says Finia. She’s clearly overjoyed, and the segment ends on a high note.

A Happy Ending for Macaron Queen

With distribution deals in progress at Intercontinental Hotels and Weight Watchers, things are looking up for Macaron Queen. Marcus and Finia let Nina have the stage in the episode’s final segment, asking her what she’d like to do. She gave up her life to help her mother, and they want her to know that that option is still on the table, if she so chooses. Is she ready to go back to her former life in high-fashion? Or is she going to stick it out in the family business? “I’m not a quitter,’ she says, a remark which brings tears to her mother’s eyes. “I’m going to see this through.” 

 

Where Are They Now? Life After The Profit

For Macaron Queen, business seems adequate, although the distribution deals alluded to in this episode of The Profit seem to have fallen through, and the retail sales they were hoping for don’t seem to have materialized.

The Macaron Queen website features a user-friendly shopping interface for online ordering and free overnight shipping on orders over $175.

The full Macaron Queen product line dazzles, even in webpage form, with delectable gluten-free treats such as:

  • French Mix Macarons – $27 – A classic selection of old favorites and French standbys, including Pistachio, French Raspberry, Crème de Lemon, Cappuccino, Coconut, Almond Croissant, Rose Lychee, Passion, Mango White Chocolate, Matcha Green Tea, Vanilla Strawberry, Lemon Raspberry, Raspberry Dark Chocolate, Double Dark Chocolate, Coconut Chocolate, Hazelnut Nutella, and Vanilla Bean.
  • Fruity Lovers Macarons – $27 – A random selection of fruit-filled macarons create a vibrant mix of French Strawberry, Raspberry Dark Chocolate, Strawberry Lemonade, Lemon Raspberry, Crème de Lemon, Mango White Chocolate, Passion Fruit White Chocolate, Raspberry White Chocolate, Vanilla Strawberry, Mix Berry Cheesecake, Key Lime Pie, Blueberry Citrus, Coconut, Love Potion, Raspberry Lemon, Rose Lychee, Strawberry Cheesecake, Strawberry Shortcake and Taro.
  • Chocolate Indulgence Macarons – $42 – A random selection of Double Dark Chocolate, Raspberry White Chocolate, Valentine-Decorated Red Velvet, Limited-Edition Raspberry Chocolate Truffle and Chocolate Grand Marnier.

As of July 2020, Macaron Queen is sold directly online and through distribution with Cafe Bene and Tiny Bubbles.

The business maintains a lively social media presence on Instagram, which boasts well over 4,000 followers.

This reporter, for one, is one macaron queen fan who hopes the future sweetens up.

Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is strictly informational; Seo Insights is not affiliated with Macaroon Queen, The Profit, or any of its subsidiaries.

0 comment
1 FacebookTwitterPinterest
Newer Posts
Older Posts