←back to thread

280 points RyanShook | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.225s | source
Show context
zahirbmirza ◴[] No.45144523[source]
Connected thermostats are great in theory! But they should not have to rely on a cloud connection. A local network with the option of internet connectivity would be awesome; but, it seems, no company is going to become uber successful if there isn't the option of forced upgrades and cloud subscriptions. Look at Ring...
replies(8): >>45144548 #>>45144575 #>>45144606 #>>45144681 #>>45144736 #>>45144819 #>>45145083 #>>45148418 #
throwway120385 ◴[] No.45144819[source]
If you're VC-funded then the valuation is the most important thing. The only way to juice your valuation is to get recurring revenue, because it comes with an 8x to 10x multiple. So you don't want to be in the hardware game, you want to use hardware to get a foothold in someone's home and then get them to pay you a subscription to maintain that hardware.

I think the valuation thing is what drives 90% of this stuff. Whereas an established company like Honeywell is more interested in building products and selling a lot of them, so they're going to charge you 5-10x of the cost of a Nest for the same feature set but with a local-first implementation instead of a cloud-first implementation.

I don't think I would ever buy a hardware product from a company billing themselves as a VC-backed startup.

Also, FWIW the Nest is a perfectly functional thermostat even if you never hook it up to their app. We found the scheduling and learning features to be really annoying so we turned them all off and never connected ours to the cloud.

replies(3): >>45144880 #>>45145119 #>>45145642 #
1. j45 ◴[] No.45145119[source]
Just because someone found them annoying doesn’t mean others do.

Nests performed well in unique spaces with different heating and cooling profiles, not to mention different kinds of shoulder seasons.