Below is a recap of the April 27, 2012 episode of the ABC show Shark Tank. If you are unfamiliar with Shark Tank, the concept is simple – entrepreneurs pitch their ideas to a panel of investors and the investors have to provide at least the amount the entrepreneur is seeking for a deal to be completed.

Tonight Barbara Corcoran was replaced by QVC product creator Lori Greiner. Other sharks include: Mark Cuban, Kevin O’Leary, Damond John and Robert Herjavec.

Don’t forget to check out our previous Shark Tank recaps.

Pitch #1 – Duality Cosmetics

First up into the Shark Tank was Barbara Lampugnale seeking $50k for 20% equity in Duality Cosmetics. Basically her product is an all-in-one nail polish bottle.  Instead of having a bottle of nail polish, bottle of nail polish remover and a nail file, Barbara’s product combines them all into one unit. She makes the bottles for $3/each and sells them for $15. Barbara has invested $300k of her own money into the company.

Lori made an offer of $50k for 51% of Duality Cosmetics. Kevin came back with $50k for 40%. Kevin and Lori went back and forth about why each offer is better than the other. Damond enters the conversation with, “a piggy bank with 2 coins in it makes a lot more noise than a full piggy bank”. Lori counters with the same offer as Kevin at $50k for 40% and Barbara accepts the offer.

Update – Talbott Teas

Last season Kevin signed a deal with the founders of gourmet tea company Talbott Teas. The update explains that the deal actually went through with Kevin, Damond and Barbara. The company was bought by Jamba Juice and the teas will be in Jamba Juice stores later this year.

Pitch #2 – Debbie Brooks Handbags

Up next into the tank were husband and wife Paul D’Auriac and Debbie Brooks pitching for $540k for 20% of Debbie Brooks Handbags. Basically the product line was a set of purses and handbags that allow for magnetic faceplates to allow a woman to easily change the look of the bag. The company had $1.2 million in sales last year. Unfortunately the couple left without a deal.

Pitch #3 – Try My Tank

This one was a quick in and out no deal. Lindsay Johnson and Nicole Bilsky entered the tank seeking $57k/30% of their business Try My Tank which creates customizable tank tops for women. So the idea is that the shirt part and the straps parts of the tank top are separate and you can mix and match which shirt goes with which straps. The shirts retail for $35. Unfortunately the two entrepreneurs left without a deal.

Pitch #4 – Lollacup

Last into the Shark Tank were husband and wife Mark and Hanna Lim with their new style of sippy cup. The couple was seeking $100k for 15% of Lollacup.  Kevin O’Leary called it, “the new sippy cup”. I think it was one of the nicest looking products and packages to ever come into the Shark Tank.

Kevin made an offer of $100k for 50% but it was contingent on moving manufacturing to an offshore location to drive down the cost to produce the Lollacup. Damond comes in with the same offer as Kevin but with a contingency that they can remove their new sales rep. Mark Lim comes back at $100k for 40% and Mark Cuban seemed to accept. Damond dropped his offer to $100k for 30% but due to back-and-forth, Damond went out. Mark and Hanna accepted a deal with Mark Cuban and Robert for $100k for 40% of Lollacup.

While I don’t own many Apple products, I know the feeling that they give me when I use them. I like my Android tablet but for some reason the iPod Touch just seems to give me a better feeling when I use it. For years I’ve called it the, “white headphones effect”. There are lots of brands that provide the same feeling while you are using them. Another great example is Whole Foods. Here in Austin there is another healthy supermarket, Central Market. Both stores are excellent but, for me, there is just a better feeling walking around Whole Foods than there is when inside Central Market.

We’ve seen tons of blog posts and meetups around the importance of design. And more recently many have spoken about how critical design is when it comes to our startups and products.

As I’ve been working on switching my food intake to a fully raw foods plan, I’ve been looking at buying some kitchen appliances. The first item I want to purchase is a blender. As I look around on internet sites and in stores at the huge variety of blenders, two brands always seem to be at the top: Vitamix and Blendtec. Both blenders cost between $350-500. Every time I see a Vitamix blender on shelves or in food videos, I’ve wondered if product design and “feeling” is really that important? For purposes of this conversation, we will assume both blenders provide the same quality blending output.

Take a look at the image on the right – that’s a Vitamix blender. To me it is amazingly ugly — it looks like it from 1950, it’s huge, it’s not appealing looking, it has clunky buttons and even the blending container is ugly. Just compare the product design of this Vitamix blender to the iPod Touch.

Even with the ugly, clunky, non-appealing design of the entire Vitamix line, their blenders are amazingly popular. Look at any of their products on Amazon and the reviews are all nearly perfect. Check out the videos you YouTube where people would rather divorce their spouse than give up their Vitamix. My nutritionist packs the Vitamix in her luggage when she travels around the country!

Then there’s the Blendtec – also an amazingly popular machine. You probably know the Blendtec machines from their popular “will it blend” Youtube series. The reviews on Amazon for their blenders are also very close to perfect. To me the Blendtec machine looks way more appealing. The machine on the right has a digital keypad, a digital timer, a more refined design. The Blendtec also has a jar that fits under a counter and just looks more modern. I don’t think it is “apple-level design” but certainly is a nicer looking machine than the beast above.

It’s easy to say that a blender doesn’t need good design and a “feeling”. But the more I am getting into this new healthy lifestyle, the more it seems everyone uses their blenders more than just once a day.

I guess Vitamix doesn’t need to look at creating a modern design with “feeling” if their current units keep selling like hotcakes. But I wonder how many more blenders they would sell if they created a blender that has the power of their current models with a design that is more appealing. Or maybe instead of entering the TV market, Apple could create the iBlend?

I haven’t decided on a blender yet but I am leaning heavily towards the Blendtec because of the “feeling”. So maybe the answer to the title of the post is yes, for me product design always matters.

Check out some of the latest web technology and business jobs posted for April 23, 2012 on the CenterNetworks Job Board. Subscribe to the CN Jobs feed and get all of the latest Web industry jobs delivered directly to you.

Featured Jobs:

• Chief Operating Officer at Indochino Apparel
• Director of Software Engineering at Bloom Health
• Software Designer at Viddler

More Jobs:

• Senior Web Software Engineer at Kareo
• Front End Developer at Soli
• Senior Software Engineer at OkCupid Labs
• Software Engineer at Causes

Employers – Join other top companies on the CN Job Board. Post your jobs today – only $10!

I’ve never been a heavy Facebook user — I’ve had an account for a very long time but I mainly used it to share posts from CN and to “friend” people who request that I friend them. Over the years I’ve changed my personal settings to be able to see the different types of ads that are displayed. Up until this month I’ve never had a profile picture and have appeared as women and men of all different ages.

Whenever I take a look at the main feed on Facebook, it’s mostly content imported from Twitter. I’ve written about this before and wish that Facebook allowed you to turn off certain sites from displaying in your feed (e.g Twitter, pinterest, etc.).

(As an aside, I have noticed that techies seem to like and share content a LOT less than people in other demographics.)

So why I am using Facebook more often than I ever have? Simple, the people that I am now interested in following and interacting with are on Facebook and don’t use the other networks, Twitter and Google+, as often or at all.

Some of you know that I am working on my health in a big way and I have been studying and researching all sorts of health and fitness topics across the web and in print. Most of the people and brands I want to interact with have popular Facebook pages. For example, my nutritionist has a very popular Facebook page and she does a good job of interacting with the people who like and comment on her content.

Whether I am looking to interact with people around a Vitamix blender, a Breville juicer or why candida is bad for you, there are pages on Facebook with people who are willing to reply and provide feedback when needed. What’s great is that unlike Twitter where you just talk to talk, on Facebook you expect to have a conversation.

The only area I’ve noticed so far that needs serious work is the search function and specifically with regards to Facebook Groups. Here is a sample of the search results for the term “fitness” – notice that every single result is exactly the same – and it is like this on every page of the results. I want to join groups but where do I even begin when every single one looks identical?!? Groups search should function in a similar fashion to how Meetup.com works.

If I was in a management position at Facebook, I would certainly be asking why we haven’t created a YouTube competitor. So many of the health brands have tons of videos and they all live on YouTube yet the brand uses Facebook to promote their messaging.

It will be interesting to see if Google+ can draw more normals (both people and brands) into their network. I haven’t seen the health and fitness brands pushing their G+ pages (if they even have them).

This post written by Dan Lewis – he wants you to learn something new every day.

The news is behind the times.

Look at the bottom graph of the top picture. Relative to Twitter, there’s been virtually no news pickup of Tumblr.  It’s a flat blue line.  On the other hand, search volume shows that Tumblr’s been a “thing,” relative to Twitter, for almost two years. The news is two years behind.

The second picture is Tumblr v. Instagram.  Outside of the sale, Tumblr’s been crushing Instagram on search volume — steeper slope and everything.  And yet, until the sale, both “news” graphs were relatively flat. Instagram spiked — but only after the sale.

The third one show something different: Tumblr v. Pinterest.  Similar slopes, with Pinterest perhaps a bit steeper but with less staying power, it seems. The news noticed it… which underscores how invisible Tumblr is to them. But why’d they notice Pinterest? I have a few theories, none of which are flattering to the news industry.

Fascinating. And amazing.

On April 26, ten startups that are part of the “1 Semester Startup” program at the University of Texas will show off their new concepts to the world. The event is free for all to attend and will be held at the Lady Bird Johnson Auditorium in Austin.

Here’s the event overview:

Undergraduate students experienced entrepreneurship first-hand, learning from some of the most successful entrepreneurs in Austin. University of Texas students from many different departments including Computer Science, Engineering and Management started companies and were assisted with a semester-long program of startup acceleration: speakers, mentors, and supervised project work. Mentors are exceptional people who have successfully started one or more companies.

Each startup will get 6 minutes on stage and then you can go and talk to them afterwards. There will be numerous other leaders from the Austin entrepreneurial community in attendance as well.

In addition to the startup presentations, Dr. James Truchard will provide the keynote discussion. Dr. Truchard is the president, CEO and co-founder of National Instruments.

Course instructor and founder/angel investor Joshua Baer has also requested help for next semester. He notes:

1. We need more mentors. Stop organizing your wine collection and get a better hobby — help young entrepreneurs!
2. We need 2 TA’s to help us run the class.
3. We need the best student entrepreneurs at UT Austin who want to get credit for working on their startup and mentored by Bob Metcalfe, myself, and many others.

I am not sure what the requirements to be a mentor are as I applied last semester but never heard back. If you are in Austin, this is a great opportunity to help students become the next great entrepreneurs!

Register here »

Below is a recap of the April 13, 2012 episode of the ABC show Shark Tank (episode 307). If you are unfamiliar with Shark Tank, the concept is simple – entrepreneurs pitch their ideas to a panel of investors and the investors have to provide at least the amount the entrepreneur is seeking for a deal to be completed.

The sharks appearing on tonight’s episode are: Mark Cuban, Barbara Corcoran, Kevin O’Leary, Damond John and Robert Herjavec.

(Unfortunately ABC in my area decided to once again push Shark Tank to Sunday at 1am. I had to find an online stream and missed the first pitch. I will update this post after ABC posts the episode tomorrow. I think the pitch was from a cookie/blondie company)

Don’t forget to check out our previous Shark Tank recaps.

Pitch #2 – ViewSport

Ben Wood came into the Shark seeking $50,000 for 20% equity in his company ViewSport. The company provides “sweat activated technology” which gives you “motivation through perspiration”. The idea is that as you sweat, the shirt shows you a logo. Reminds me of those tshirts and jeans in the 80s that changed colors when wet! This year they have done $140k in sales. Ben quit medical school to start ViewSport. The company is hoping to license the technology to retailers and also create other apparel.