What are your main challenges as a food and drink business owner when it comes to manufacturing and creating new product lines? Do you prefer to invest in capex and produce these products in-house or would you contract manufacture them? If you do contract manufacture them would you own the IP yourself or would the manufacturer own the IP?

Hey, I'm Adam — I run Whamburg. Like a lot of people in the food world, coming up with new product ideas is the fun part. We're always messing around with wild flavours and formats, seeing what sticks. But turning one of those experiments into something you can actually mass-produce and sell? Whole different beast. The biggest headaches usually fall into a few buckets: Scaling up without ruining it: Making a killer sauce or patty in a test kitchen is one thing. But then you try to make 5,000 of them and suddenly it's not the same. Texture changes, flavour shifts, machines mess with stuff — quality control becomes a full-time job. Packaging + shelf life: We're big on fresh ingredients, but that can backfire if something spoils fast or doesn't hold up during shipping. You have to find the balance — what keeps it fresh, but also won't fall apart on the shelf two weeks in. Costs: New product lines aren't cheap. Between sourcing ingredients, packaging, lab tests, nutrition panels, marketing — it adds up faster than you'd think. You can burn a lot of cash fast if you're not careful. When it comes to manufacturing, we kind of split it. The main Whamburg stuff? We do that in-house. We know the process inside out and don't want to mess with it. But if we're testing a new product — something limited or offbeat — we'll sometimes go with a contract manufacturer. It keeps things flexible, and we're not stuck buying a bunch of equipment for a one-off launch. One thing we don't compromise on: IP. If we're working with a partner, we still own the recipes, branding, and everything else. That's non-negotiable. We built Whamburg on originality — weird ideas that somehow work — and we're not about to hand that over to someone else. Bottom line: whether we make it ourselves or partner up, if it doesn't taste amazing and feel very Whamburg, it doesn't leave the kitchen.

We once spent weeks trying to find a copacker for our chocolate tea. The idea seemed simple: we make chocolate, and the shells from our roasted cocoa beans are perfect for steeping like tea. We thought we could partner with someone to scale it. But every potential partner came with trade-offs—minimum order quantities that didn't make sense for a seasonal product, limited flexibility on ingredients, or production facilities hundreds of miles away. It became clear: outsourcing would mean losing control over the very things that made the product special. So instead, we bought a small-scale tea bagging machine. It wasn't a massive investment, but it was a meaningful one. By bringing the process in-house, we didn't just gain more control—we gained a whole new revenue stream. What started as a byproduct of chocolate making became its own product line. Now, our chocolate tea brings in new customers, reduces waste, and opens up collaboration opportunities that never would've happened if we'd outsourced production. As a food business owner, I've learned that while capital expenditures are intimidating, they often create more value in the long run than outsourcing ever could. Especially when your brand is rooted in process. For us at Harvest Chocolate, that means investing in the tools and knowledge to make everything ourselves—from bean to bar, and now bean to brew. Here's my advice to founders weighing the same question: if the product depends on craft, process, or storytelling, keep it close. You don't have to start with industrial-scale equipment—sometimes a $300 machine can unlock $30,000 in opportunity. And sometimes, doing it yourself is what reveals the next big idea hiding in plain sight.

As the owner of Edi Gourmet Spice, one of the main challenges in developing new product lines is maintaining consistent quality while scaling production. In the food and spice industry, subtle differences in sourcing, blending, and packaging can significantly impact the final product, making quality control a top priority. While in-house production allows for greater oversight, it also requires significant capital investment and operational bandwidth, which can be a constraint for a growing business. For that reason, I lean toward contract manufacturing with clearly defined quality standards and processes. However, retaining full ownership of the product IP is non-negotiable—it's essential to protect brand integrity and ensure long-term value creation. Strategic partnerships can support growth, but only if control over formulation and branding remains with the business.

As a food and drink business owner, the main challenges in developing new product lines include: Product Development: Creating recipes that meet customer preferences while aligning with our brand identity. Quality and Consistency: Ensuring every batch meets high standards for taste, safety, and presentation. Cost and Efficiency: Managing production costs without compromising on quality, especially during scaling. In-House vs Contract Manufacturing We typically invest in CapEx and produce in-house when the product is central to our brand and requires tight control over ingredients and quality. This allows us to maintain consistency and safeguard proprietary recipes. However, for experimental or seasonal product lines, contract manufacturing can be a more efficient option. It reduces upfront investment and speeds up time-to-market. In such cases, we ensure to retain intellectual property (IP) rights, especially for unique formulations and branding elements, to maintain long-term control and brand protection. Learn more about our approach: Thoothukudi Cafe (https://www.thoothukudicafe.com/)

In the early stages, I prefer working with contract manufacturers. It saves on capex, speeds up the go-to-market process, and lets us test demand without overcommitting. But we're always careful to retain ownership of our IP - formulations, processes, branding, all of it. That's non-negotiable. The manufacturer is just executing, not owning. Eventually, if the product line gains traction and volumes justify it, we might look at producing in-house. But till then, it's about staying lean, agile, and protecting what's ours.

As someone deeply involved in the intersection of sustainability and beverage innovation, one of the primary challenges I see in developing new product lines is maintaining consistency and quality while staying true to eco-conscious values. Whether it's a bottled cocktail or a line of mixers, sourcing seasonal, organic ingredients at scale—without compromising flavor or sustainability—is a constant balancing act. Another major challenge is navigating regulatory hurdles and shelf-life constraints, especially when working with natural, preservative-free ingredients. Small changes in formulation can significantly affect everything from labeling requirements to distribution logistics, making R&D both time-consuming and costly. When it comes to manufacturing, my preference usually leans toward contract manufacturing, especially in the early stages. It allows for faster go-to-market timelines and reduced capital expenditure (capex), which is critical when you're testing a new concept or operating within tight margins. That said, choosing the right manufacturing partner is everything—I look for ones who align with my sustainability goals and can ensure transparency in sourcing and production. As for IP ownership, I always insist on retaining it. The recipe, the process, the brand—those are the heart of the product and the business. Licensing it to a manufacturer is fine, but I strongly believe that founders and creators should own their intellectual property, especially when building a long-term, values-driven brand. It's the only way to ensure both creative control and ethical integrity as the product scales.