TL;DR: Three months ago, I outlined a path to ultra-low-cost, nutritionally complete meals. Since then, the project has moved into professional R&D and institutional pilots. My thinking has updated: rather than hard-locking a commodity price upfront, we’re sequencing toward it via a cross-subsidy model that can sustain scale and resilience.

What’s changed since the last post

• Production-grade R&D: I’ve contracted Thinking Forks (India’s leading food consultancy) to move beyond DIY prototyping. We are currently refining a formulation that balances 100% RDA completeness, extreme palatability, and shelf stability.
• Institutional engagement: Active discussions are underway with Rise Against Hunger India and other humanitarian buyers for pilots.
• Execution footing: Early operations are self-funded; legal and operational setup for initial markets is planned and underway.

The belief update

My earlier framing emphasized a fixed $1/day ($0.33/meal) target for everyone. I now think that anchoring on any single number this early, whether $0.33, $0.50, or something else, is a mistake.

The right objective is not the lowest imaginable sticker price, but a price that most people can afford comfortably in their local context, while allowing the system to reliably subsidize whatever gap remains for those who cannot. 

The model: cross-subsidy by design

Rather than compromising the product to meet a least-common-denominator price, we’re pursuing a tiered model.

• Market tier: Sales to urban consumers, CSR programs, and  NGOs at prices that reflect real value, notably deleted dependencies such as no water, fuel, prep, or refrigeration.
• Impact tier: Surplus from the market tier funds zero-cost or subsidized distribution for extreme poverty and disaster contexts.

This is not philanthropy bolted on to a business. It is one system: shared manufacturing, different pricing, unified impact.

Where I’m looking for leverage

The near-term path is executable as-is. The long-term ceiling, however, depends on whether the operating system is world-class.

I’m therefore interested in connecting with a peer-level operational partner, someone who finds satisfaction in building durable supply chains, pricing architectures, and P&Ls, and who wants to apply that skill to a long-horizon public-good machine rather than a marginal product improvement.
 

This is not a call for volunteers or advisors. It’s about architectural leverage.

If this model works, it will be copied. Left to default market forces, the outcome is predictable: optimization for margin over access. The goal is to design a system whose incentives resist that drift before scale locks it in.
 

If this resonates, I have a short private brief describing the partnership shape and principles. I’m happy to share it with interested parties or with anyone making introductions.

Why this may be relevant to EA

This sits at the intersection of:

• Global health: micronutrient adequacy at population scale
• Resilient foods: shelf-stable nutrition that functions when infrastructure fails

The aim is a system that works both in normal markets and when the normal world stops.