Limited Edition Price Premium and Implications?

Support Customer Support
1

Dear Jimmy Joy,

I’m very curious about your future Plenny Shake pricing strategy?

Is it safe to assume that the Coconut flavor is priced at premium simply because it is a limited edition?

I understand that you will be resizing all Plenny Shakes from 535g to 500g to fit into your new 100g meal scheme. Is that correct?
If so will the price per gram of the Plenny Shake be changed, or can we expect the price per bag to decline?

If my understanding and maths are correct …
The current lowest cost for a pack of Coconut is 7.5 euros for 500 g (or 1g = 0.015 euro) which is at a pice premium per gram versus the normal shake at 6 euro for 535g (or 1g = 0.011 euro). If the normal shake was packaged in 500g sizes I would expect the price to be reduced from 6 euro down to 5.6 euro, and not increased to 7.5 euro.

I’m sure you don’t intend to increase Plenny Shake price from 6 to 7.5 euro for less product, but could you please confirm what the price implications will be when you reduce the quantity per bag and you shift to your new 100g meal model?

Thank you very much.

1 Like
2

Heja Justiin!

Exactly, the limited edition is more expansive since we only produce it once, making the cost higher compared to an productie which is being produced on a weekly base.

Yes, we are planning to resize the regular and vegan to 500 gram sizes, but this is something for 2018. We are planning to keep the prize the same BUT this gives me room to play with new and better ingredients (because of ingredient prize vs. selling prize game) , little example: we are working on more ground oats for a more smoother mouth feel, gluten free oats, adding oil to our powder meal, better vitamines and minerals, working towards cleaner label.

The prize for coconut is based on the small production size, this makes the special ingredients for the coconut plenny shake more expensive since we only buy once and in small quantities.

With much love,

Karel

1 Like
3

Please make more coconut :wink:

2 Likes
4

haha great to hear that you like it! Be prepared for the next insane flavor :smiley:

5

Blueberry? Wait, no… Blueberry muffin!!!

1 Like
6

haha maybe? But I can give a little heads up: 3 more flavors coming -> a spice flavor, a nut flavor and a berry-type flavor…

5 Likes
8

ouuuuuuh sounds great ! You will release them all together or one by one to keep the suspense?

9

one by one they will get released!

1 Like
10

Whoa, I’ve been waiting for some new flavors for a while now. I can’t wait to see what they are :smiley:

11

As long as we’re expressing flavor wishes: how about a good peanut butter flavor (my favorite pb is Calvé original) or caramel?

1 Like
12

@Bloempje Somewhere februari maybe :sunglasses:

1 Like
13

Back to the original post…

I think you guys need to align in the way you communicate and price your products. It’s currently confusing.

You’ve already confirmed that JimmyJoy will be increasing their prices when the new smaller packages arrive. Thank you for confirming (not for the price hike).

Plenny Shakes currently come in 525 g bags. This is for three meals (175 g per meal). Three meals = one full day = 2100 kcal. About right for an average person.

The new smaller bags will contain 500 g per bag. This is 5% less product., with fewer nutrients and fewer total calories. Not enough for the average person! The limited edition bags already come in this new smaller size.

In the new bag, Marketing is describing meals as being 100 g of powder (instead of 175 g), but increasing the number of meals per day from three to five.

The order page for the normal shakes say "3 meals / 1 bags [sic] / €2 per meal / €6 per bag"
The order page for the limited editions say "5 meals / 1 bags [sic] / €1.5 per meal / €7.5 per bag"
This is confusing, as the limited edition flavors appear to be cheaper than the normal flavors (€2/meal vs. €1.5/meal). They are not cheaper. You’ve changed the definition of a “meal” and are now comparing apples and oranges, and this is not good for the customer experience.

Also, I see your new claim of “(€0,94 per 400 Kcal meal)” but 400 kcal is only one full meal if you eat more than five of them per day! This is not the case for your normal Plenny Shakes as of today.

Your FAQ states, “We pack Plenny Shake in bags of one day’s worth of nutrients.” So your smaller bags - containing less powder, fewer nutrients, and fewer calories - will either change the definition of “one day’s worth of nutrients” or you will be forced to remove this statement from your FAQ. Right now you offer both 500 and 575 g bags on your web site, so you’re already in sketchy territory.

The new smaller bags will no longer meet my body’s daily needs. I’m not looking forward to having to calculate using 1.05 bags per day just so you can charge us more for the same product. Disappointed.

14

Firstly, I report that the .pdf for the vegan version has an error. If you look at the “neutral” flavor label on page 2, you see the ingredients tab is for… cappuccino instead of neutral (and it contains whey even if these are labels for vegan products). I don’t know if there are other errors:

Secondly, the standard diet is built around 2000 calories, not 2100. That was ■■■■■■■’s choice to provide a little extra, but it’s entirely subjective.

If loosing 100 calories each bag is the price to pay to keep current prices and improving the recipe, then I’d be all for it. Though it would be nice if they opened a bit the process and discussed more with the community what could be considered an improvement.

Jimmyjoy has some weak spots. Mainly too many carbs due to maltodextrin, and a probable too high GI as a result. Protein is also already quite high, and there’s not enough fat. So in my opinion an improvement could be reducing maltodextrin/carbs overall, change the ratio within carbs by replacing at least SOME maltodextrin with isomaltulose, then lower the amount of soy/protein (just 15-20g total, nothing crazy), and replace what’s missing in those carbs and protein by adding some healthy fats instead.

That would produce a better macro profile overall, and lowering soy protein might also mitigate some excesses in the micros as well. Also, by giving a second look at the fats and increasing them, they’d also have the possibility of improving the omega3/6 ratio.

(the slower absorption of carbs due to reduced maltodextrin/addition of isomaltulose, plus the increase of good fats would also likely compensate the “filling” aspect due to the decrease of protein)

Then remove added fluoride that is completely pointless. And maybe push up some of those vitamins and other micros that are known to be too low in the guidelines, like vitamin D, calcium and potassium (for example).

That’s something I’d consider an “improvement”, but looking at the changes for example for the new chocolate caramel I’m not sure that’s a good direction (protein and fibre pushed to insane levels, but at least it seems the label shows isomaltulose now, so that’s good).

I just wish there was more of an open conversation about where the product is going, or the risk is that the, much delayed, upcoming changes might even not be good ones (at least subjectively or for the knowledge I have).

1 Like
15

Totally agree that more transparency would be a good thing. Enacting a price hike with the promise of delivering a better-refined recipe but not providing specific details is unsettling. I, too, would be happy to pay a bit more if the product were to head in the right direction. Many of abalieno’s points are a great start!

I’d just like to point out that 2000 calories is most certainly not enough for me or the average male. Use any calculator you like:
http://www.calculator.net/calorie-calculator.html


2000 calories is only enough to sustain children and postmenopausal women.

So while I was already not getting enough calories with the current 2100 bags, the announced decrease (of all nutrients and vitamins, as well!) is certainly not what I’d consider JimmyJoy heading in the right direction.

16

Hi Josh!

Thanks for circling back to the original post. Let me try and clear some things up.

We’re planning to move towards bags of 500 grams of powder, containing exactly 2000 kcal. This means every 100 grams of powder will be a 400 kcal meal. Compared to the current Plenny Shake formula this will mean about 3 kcal less per 100 grams. The plus side is that the product becomes more flexible, calculating how much Plenny Shake you’ll need to get the exact amount of calories your body needs (at a particular moment or day or on average). They’re nice round numbers: 100 grams, 400 kcal, 500 grams, 2000 kcal.

As Karel mentioned, because of this the pricing will increase somewhat. Instead of getting 2067 kcal for 6 euros (or 5 euros if you buy bulk) you’re getting 2000 kcal for 6 euros. However this will give us some room to keep improving the product.

Of course everyone is free to have as many or few meals as they would like, but our current recommendation is to consume 5 days over the course of a day instead of 3. That’s why we’ve started communicating in 5 meals instead of 3. But again, it’s just a recommendation.

Hope this helps! Let me know if you have any other questions.

17

Hi @abalieno. Thanks for your response, great points!

Thanks so much for pointing out that mistake with the Neutral ingredients, I’ll make sure we get right on it.

I agree that we could listen more to what the community has to say, but as you can see from this thread as well, the community has rather different ideas of what would be the right direction. But I can tell there’s definitely common ground, and a more balanced mixture of our company’s vision and the community would absolutely be a step in the right direction.

Thanks so much for the feedback, we really do appreciate it.

1 Like
18

I love the better ingredients with a slightly higher price idea but I have to agree with people who prefer the current higher calorie bags. Having 3 meals instead of 5 is much easier and the if you stick to the old ± 175 grams per meal you’ll have to use 2 bags per day. I would much rather just have the calories stay the same and the price to rise a little to compensate. But I do understand your point: some competitors advertise with cheap meals that are 400 kcal per meal instead of your 700 kcal. And smaller portions means that it actually looks cheaper.

Having bulk bags would make it A LOT better though :stuck_out_tongue:
Customers can do whatever they want portion wise with 1-5kg bags and not have to worry about the hassle of using 2 bags per day.

2 Likes