# Extractor-less honey by Flow Hive



## cg3

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Haha. Good one.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Michael Bush is quoted on that site as saying ...



> “Mind Blowing...It's not very often something is so revolutionary as to blow my mind...Saving 20% of harvest labor is not trivial, 40% is amazing, 60% is revolutionary. But 95%, that’s Mind Boggling!”


Since the only way that Honeyflow offers more information is if you give them your _email address_,:no: perhaps we could get Michael to confirm that he actually made the quoted comment, and offer us a few more details?


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I saw it and checked the calendar to make sure it wasn't April 1st. Would love to see it, my guess is that it will be wicked expensive.


----------



## cg3

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Oh, I'm pretty sure they'd like some of your money.


----------



## Dominic

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

That reeks of a scam.

I've fiddled with the idea many times. "Wouldn't it be nice if we could extract the honey without removing the comb from the supers?" The reverse operation would be just as appealing: "wouldn't it be nice if we could fill combs with feed directly?"

I don't believe this would be possible without some kind of pump and absurdly think and expensive frames. They don't show any of this, through the glass we can see what looks like completely normal frames.

Continuous drip also seems like a dubious claim, leading me to suspect they simply had a bottle of honey inside slowly pouring through their tap. First of all, they show some kind of timelapse where the jars fill up, completely open, for what appears to be hours. And _nothing gets in_! I scrape just a tiny bit of honey comb in my apiaries and within minutes it's a humming ball of bees or yellow jackets. They leave out honey for hours and not a single bee goes in the jar? Furthermore, bees don't harvest honey, they harvest nectar! Continuous-drip would suggest that whatever the bees put in the frames would flow, and flow right away, but that's obviously ripened honey in the video as it's very thick.

When they speak in front of the hive, the window seems to suggest there's a lot of bees on the frame behind it. If you actually stare at it while they talk, the bees don't move, except in just one shoot. Looks like they just slid a picture of a frame of bees behind there.

On the window that shows the sides of the comb, that looks awfully tight, doesn't look like there is bee-space between the comb.

They did give out a bunch of references one can easily contact, though. The professor's email, if someone wants to ask her if she was indeed talking about their product, is: [email protected]

Michael Bush is also on BeeSource, so I'd expect him to be able to comment on it.


----------



## burns375

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Interesting. I would like to see the components. The way I see this working is the foundation is removed allowing the honey to drain. Does the process attract robbers.


----------



## jhirsche

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Honey would have to be properly cured and capped. I suspect a frame matrix on which the comb is built that is somehow able to be opened/ broken. Like if the inner foundation could be broken by slight movement once the time was right, therefore breaking the cell walls and allowing the honey to ooze down the inside middle of the frame, into a screened collection area...


----------



## Vance G

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Why this is revolutionary! With this we can feed the world without top bar hives and crush and strain! And save the bees too.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'll bet all the commercial guys are going to jump on this. lol


----------



## Dominic

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

If you need to manually remove some kind of foundation to allow the honey to flow, frame by frame, and then wait days for it to actually flow, you are most definitely not saving 95% of your labor costs. I'd actually imagine it to be more expensive than how things are currently done.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I would call myself cautiously pessimistic on this one. If it works, but it costs 50 a frame not including any other necessary plumbing it is a huge fail. If you could outfit a hive for $100 you would probably get some backyarders, but commercial folks don't use telescopic covers, can't imagine they would want this piece of kit.


----------



## BeeAttitudes

*Honey On Tap Straight From the Hive?*

Watch the video:

New Invention - Flow: Honey on Tap Directly From your Beehive: http://youtu.be/0_pj4cz2VJM


----------



## JTGaraas

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

The unfortunate thing is that some people will believe anything that is pretty packaged -- and it is on the internet, so it must be true.

These people did not remember that open containers (to include plates of pancakes) will attract bees, but these open containers only attracted smiling people in on the scam!

A reasonable inference from the absence of any foraging bees on the exposed liquid: it is not honey! Bees do not lie, nor would they be lazy as suggested by their absence.

I suggest the exquisite website and video are either (1) a scam to get money from the unwary, or (2) someone's marketing attempt to attract attention. To create the expectation that honey flows out of the hive in this manner should never come from a reputable honey equipment merchant.


----------



## jamneff

*Flow Hive- this look interesting*

This was posted to my Face Book thought it looked wild http://www.honeyflow.com/


----------



## Hiwire

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I would consider a couple different things...1) because of the number of people involved, if it was me, I MIGHT use an empty hive for illustation purposes, thus explaining the absence of bees around the product....2) I dont think, with his reputation and respect, Mr Bush is going to allow his name on something like this without an explanation pretty quick.
It doesnt actually say there is no labor involved. What about uncapping, then putting frames in to a series of drains? Could this just be uncapped frames draining? No extractor needed. Im very curious but hanging on to my money.
Ray


----------



## Dominic

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Seems like someone found their patent application and put it on their facebook page.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20140370781.pdf

Might be legit. I remain skeptical on how economic a solution it would be, however. Seems like the mechanics slide the cells against each other, opening them all. Sounds messy.

The video is obviously staged, they concept might work but for most of the shots it looks like they used an empty hive so that we don't see any stinging or robbing. The patent also doesn't seem to promote this "put a jar in front of the hive" application, but tubes with bulk containers that are bee-tight.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I grew up on a dairy farm and used to show cows at a local fair when I was a kid. a classmate named roger used to show brown swiss. a local dealer used to give free milk to the kids. roger got about 15 pints of chocolate milk put it in a milking machine and milked his cow. he waited for some city people to come along and dumped a couple of gallons chocolate milk into a pail and explained brown cows gave chocolate milk. maybe ya had to be there but the same people would sign up for this great invention.


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Imagine if Beesource existed in the mid-1800's and L.L Langstroth posted that he had invented a way to keep bees, manage bees, collect honey and pollen, and he could do all of this without destroying the combs in the hive. Imagine the nay-sayers, "gotta be a scam" , "that's impossible", "can't be cost effective", "maybe for the hobbyist but not folks with dozens of skeps". lol


----------



## Hiwire

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I can just imagine the pushback there was the first time someone said "Lets make foundation out of plastic!". Im sure there will be people that try this. It may be worth the cost for the experimental and amusement value, especially if its not too expensive, but for now I think I want more info. Im actually very curious. I cant wait to see what it really is. Maybe my buddy up the road will invest in this system and I can see how it works before I spend my money.
Ray


----------



## Dominic

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Eddie Honey said:


> Imagine if Beesource existed in the mid-1800's and L.L Langstroth posted that he had invented a way to keep bees, manage bees, collect honey and pollen, and he could do all of this without destroying the combs in the hive. Imagine the nay-sayers, "gotta be a scam" , "that's impossible", "can't be cost effective", "maybe for the hobbyist but not folks with dozens of skeps". lol


It's not because it's been done a certain way for a long time that it can't be improved, but it's also not because it's new that it's better.

When something new has a lot of marketing efforts behind it, grand claims, and yet offers no technical explanation whatsoever, nor prices, it is clearly just trying to create hype and you _should_ be skeptical.


----------



## nackep

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

It showed up on mine too. I watched the video. I'm just wondering now how it works! Lots of questions.


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

If not for Langstroth, we'd all be practicing SKEPticism lol


----------



## beekuk

*Re: Honey On Tap Straight From the Hive?*

...


> “Mind Blowing...It's not very often something is so revolutionary as to blow my mind...Saving 20% of harvest labor is not trivial, 40% is amazing, 60% is revolutionary. But 95%, that’s Mind Boggling!”
> 
> Michael Bush - USA


http://www.honeyflow.com/


----------



## snl

*Re: Honey On Tap Straight From the Hive?*

Amazing? We'll see.


----------



## beekuk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

....http://images1.freshpatents.com/imageviewer/20140370781-p20140370781


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It looks to me like they've patented the idea that you can cut hexagonal comb vertically into slats that, when every other slat is shifted upwards, turns it into channels that (in theory) drain downwards. So they have a patent on that idea. Then with a lot of money kick-started to them, they can explore the rest of the problem of how to extract honey by waving a wand over a closed box.


----------



## Harley Craig

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Kofu said:


> It looks to me like they've patented the idea that you can cut hexagonal comb vertically into slats that, when every other slat is shifted upwards, turns it into channels that (in theory) drain downwards. So they have a patent on that idea. Then with a lot of money kick-started to them, they can explore the rest of the problem of how to extract honey by waving a wand over a closed box.


I read the patent I looks like they plan to imbed a heating element to help liquify the honey to get it to flow down through the channels, in theory it would warm up prior to opening them and would be too warm for the bees so they would leave the comb and not get squished in the process of sliding the cells. It's pretty ingenious if it works, but I fear heating honey comb and breaking it open will set of one heck of a robbing frenzy


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'm curious how it would work with bur comb, propolis and what not. I think that you could get it to work initially, but like Harley said, once you extracted you would probably kick off a robbing frenzy. It seems like you would have to plumb this thing to work it as well. With it all plumbed it would be difficult to tell when they capped the comb. I would like to see the finished product, but I'm thinking the demo will work a lot better than an actual product.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

One of my Landowners where I have had an apiary for a number of years has a brother who invented combs that would drain from the base of each cell so one could do what it like what is seen in the video. I don't think he ever got a working model or prototype build.

What I find interesting is how clean the honey looks as it drains into the jars. And also that there are no bees around those jars or the jars being held up while the Father and Son are talking. Maybe there is a strong nectar flow on. I don't know. Just seems fishy. But if this works it will become well known soon enough.


----------



## Harley Craig

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

it appears to have a window to see when it's capped......but that doesn't mean the inside frames will be..... which leads to another problem....honey with too high of a water content that needs post harvest drying ................which is starting to sound like more work than harvesting the traditional way, in other words its a solution looking for a problem.


----------



## Stephenpbird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I think it's a great idea. Good luck to them.

The market they are probably looking at is Bee havers with a hive at the bottom of the garden, the ones that are going to save the bees single handedly, pollinate their apple tree and harvest 1/2 a ton of honey a month, oh and all that treatment free. Think of the time and money saved if one doesn't have to crush and strain at harvest time.

Me, I think they are on to a winner.:applause:


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



sqkcrk said:


> ... a brother who invented combs that would drain from the base of each cell ... I don't think he ever got a working model or prototype build.


In the new patent application, they do mention that approach as one that was suggested earlier -- and theirs is presented as a big improvement. It's in the verbiage, which is sort of interesting if you think about what they're trying to do -- make money out of hyping effortless extraction, and at the same time corner the market on a general idea that might, at some point, be feasible.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'm naturally skeptical about something like this working or working well. Short cuts don't always save one much. But it will be interesting to see if it really works. It's all over Facebook Beekeeping Pages.


----------



## Dominic

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



sqkcrk said:


> I'm naturally skeptical about something like this working or working well. Short cuts don't always save one much. But it will be interesting to see if it really works. It's all over Facebook Beekeeping Pages.


No kidding, look at the page's history. It's only existed for a month, and all but a tiny portion of its "likes" come from the last 24h.


----------



## Vance G

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Wow! Put some moonbeam genetics in that hive and you will really have something!


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Yes, it actually works. They sent me six to test. It seems impossible, but it's not.


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Can you share any thoughts Michael, other than, "It works" ? G


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>I read the patent I looks like they plan to imbed a heating element to help liquify the honey to get it to flow down through the channels

They thought that might be an issue. It was not. It does not have any heat and it flows just fine. Bee hives tend to be 93F or more all summer.

>When with a lot of money kick-started to them, they can explore the rest of the problem of how to extract honey by waving a wand over a closed box.

This is all working. You have to modify the box a bit so you can remove a panel to "throw the switch" and hook up the tubes, but it's not that hard. They seem to be the type to continue to try to improve things, but it works quite well right now.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>Can you share any thoughts Michael, other than, "It works" ? G

Well, I have to make sure they have already publicly revealed anything I talk about since I signed a non-disclosure agreement. Anything they haven't made public I have to be careful about what I say...


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> >Can you share any thoughts Michael, other than, "It works" ? G
> 
> Well, I have to make sure they have already publicly revealed anything I talk about since I signed a non-disclosure agreement. Anything they haven't made public I have to be careful about what I say...


Understood. I thought that may be the case. Interesting to hear that it works, I guess we will now just have to wait and see how user friendly so forth and so on. Thanks. G


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



Vance G said:


> Wow! Put some moonbeam genetics in that hive and you will really have something!


I sense a tinge of sarcasm there Vance.......... . Guess we will wait and see.......... G


----------



## Harley Craig

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> >Can you share any thoughts Michael, other than, "It works" ? G
> 
> Well, I have to make sure they have already publicly revealed anything I talk about since I signed a non-disclosure agreement. Anything they haven't made public I have to be careful about what I say...




Thanks, It's one to follow for sure. Like I said in my original post it seems ingenious but looks like all the kinks weren't worked out. Can you tell us if you plan to continue to use them after the trial period, or will we just have to watch the for sale forum and watch for you to post an extractor for sale?


----------



## debcst5823

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Yes it looks very interesting wondering if you have to buy the whole hive or is it frames? Looking forward to more information coming soon!


----------



## Dunkel

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

That's how most people think honey is made any way. Just run out and turn on a valve.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>Thanks, It's one to follow for sure. Like I said in my original post it seems ingenious but looks like all the kinks weren't worked out.

Well, as I see it, the kinks are worked out, although they keep trying to improve things.

I thought it was impossible when I first saw it. I actually wondered if it was a spoof or if it was real. But after seeing how it works and watching them do one frame in the open live on skype while I could see the entire frame and talk to them and after they sent me a box worth of them to test, I can assure you it works. My test of it so far is too small and over too short of a time to be sure what I think of it in practice, but I can't imagine that I'm going to find too many disadvantages. My issue now is, I'm not sure how I will manage my hives using them as it changes several things I have always done. First, I run all eight frame mediums and these are deeps, so I'll have to buy some deeps (which I already did). Second, it makes a hive much more static in size when you can empty the combs without even opening the hive really. No need to stack the supers up so high when you can just drain them periodically without having to clean up the extractor and all the equipment and the kitchen every time. Just draining it into a bucket eliminates all of that mess. The queen won't lay in them because they are too deep so you don't need an excluder (which I don't use, but some people do). You don't have to run the bees out to harvest so you eliminate all of that part of harvesting as well. In recent years I've had all the same size boxes and I try to leave them honey for winter. This may change my view of some of how I determine what to leave them since these are deeper combs and can't be used for brood I don't think I want them to cluster in them over winter. So I'll have to work out the details of how I will use them as far as when to put them on, take them off, drain them, how many mediums to have on below them etc. In other words, I'm pretty sure I'll be using them, it will just be too useful not to, but exactly how that impacts my total system I'm not really sure, until I've tried to work those details out.

When I first saw it I thought of this story from "Mastering the Art of Beekeeping" by Ormond and Harry Aebi:

" 'I want to buy one of your beehives' he said. 'I want you to bring it to me tomorrow at eleven in the morning and I want you to set it up on top of a ten foot pole that I'll have set up by that time. And I want you to come over every Thursday afternoon and drain out the honey so that I can have fresh honey every week.'... 'I can't place a beehive up on a pole like that,' I said. 'And even if I could, I couldn't work it to take off the honey.' 'Why not? I shall expect you to install a spigot at the bottom of the hive. All you'll have to do is open it and drain off the quantity of honey I require.' 'Beehives don't work that way,' I told him. 'I can't possibly do as you ask.'..."

And now beehives can work that way...


----------



## HeritageHoney

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

So does this qualify as "natural" beekeeping?


----------



## TalonRedding

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

VERY interesting. I would have to see the inner workings myself before I got one, but if it works like you say it does Michael, then I may consider it just for the sake of having one. I guess the cost of the product was also included in the disclosure agreement?


----------



## Guinnesses

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

So honey is capped, and drained. Will the bee know when what's behind the cap becomes empty?


----------



## Harley Craig

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

wow that is pretty cool thanks for sharing Michael


----------



## Harley Craig

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Guinnesses said:


> So honey is capped, and drained. Will the bee know when what's behind the cap becomes empty?



I can't answer for Michael, but looking at the patent, it' looks like the cell splits which would break the caps


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

In the FAQ's on their web-site they say it takes the bees a day or so to uncap the empty cells for refilling.


----------



## New Bee

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Eddie Honey said:


> If not for Langstroth, we'd all be practicing SKEPticism lol


I thought of that pun too earlier today. Then I thought about honey and puns for morning tea and went off and had some.


----------



## New Bee

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

The Australian patent application can be seen here: http://pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/ols/auspat/applicationDetails.do?applicationNo=2012357650 

If that link does not work you can do a search at ipaustralia.gov.au using the patent app number 2012357650 

it is far more detailed than the Fresh Patents listing.

So far as I can tell the patent has not been granted by IP Australia. But they have not fallen behind with filing fees etc.

Having been involved (peripherally) with a few patents applications myself I would say they must feel that they are on to something because getting a patent granted in Australia is no get rich quick shortcut. That is you can't get an Australian patent easily.

My alma mater is the University of Newcastle. It is not some tinpot rube diploma mill. It is ranked in the top 3% in the world (Times HER). I am pretty sure that they do not allow academic staff to use their connection with the university in product endorsements without some internal investigation of the credentials of the product etc.

I am amazed at the reactions of some of the Beek groups on Facebook in particular (not so much here). I suspect that it's a bit of an outbreak of "Not Invented Here" syndrome judging by the spite and malice displayed.

Let's wait and see.


----------



## newbury

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Eddie Honey said:


> Imagine if Beesource existed in the mid-1800's and L.L Langstroth posted that he had invented a way to keep bees, manage bees, collect honey and pollen, and he could do all of this without destroying the combs in the hive. Imagine the nay-sayers, "gotta be a scam" , "that's impossible", "can't be cost effective", "maybe for the hobbyist but not folks with dozens of skeps". lol


After reading Michaels response it seems viable.
However since I have not actually kept a hive in over 40 years. I'm setting up 2 or three this spring. BUT I do have 3 of those 300 gallon IBC totes pictured in the patent.
How many hives will I need to fill an IBC tote? 



New Bee said:


> <snip>
> Let's wait and see.


Time will tell.


----------



## JDMoodie

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Definitely workable. The concept itself is pretty simple but coming up with a design to be able to make both the cell movement hands free and the honey transport work well would the the catches. 

The way the patent is written would allow them to do everything from manufacture a turnkey setup to selling the rights to OEM and avoid some of the hassle with trying to warranty such a setup directly. They've also covered most of the alternate possible configurations and material types so nobody can just produce a knock off by changing one or two simple aspects to sidestep their patent... I suppose that is the whole point though. 

The internet is even mentioned... maybe Apple can pick up on it and produce the iHoney or iBee

Jeff.


----------



## SRatcliff

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

"Just add HFCS!"

Kidding. I wish them the best. I remember reading a really old ABJ or Gleanings article about something like this.


----------



## Beregondo

*Re: honey tap*

Don't see any problem with open honey jars in a beeyard, do you?

I mean as long as triggering robbing and getting bees in your honey jars don't bother you.


----------



## trapperdirk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

This could no doubt be a game changer for smaller operators.

If it becomes a standard practice in honey production, I am sure the wax market will be effected!!! Might have trouble getting foundation for the deep brood frames. 

Obviously it would really need to catch on well before wax supplies became an issue.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It all depends on cost.


----------



## tsmullins

*Re: honey tap*

Honey Taps are what most distant family and friends think come standard with all hives...


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>Will the bee know when what's behind the cap becomes empty?

Bees have a lot of perception of what is going on. They quickly figure out the combs are empty and uncap them.


----------



## redmcc

*Re: honey tap*

“Mind Blowing...It's not very often something is so revolutionary as to blow my mind...Saving 20% of harvest labor is not trivial, 40% is amazing, 60% is revolutionary. But 95%, that’s Mind Boggling!” 


Michael Bush - USA

Author of Beekeeping Naturally and one USA’s most famous beekeepers

Really!!!!


----------



## New Bee

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

This is the text of the email they have just sent out:

_Thanks so much for your interest in the Flow hive. We (Cedar, Stu and our whole beekeeping family) are so excited to be letting you and the world know about the invention we have been working on for over a decade. The response has been quite overwhelming, thanks for all the amazing comments. We are working as fast as we can to complete a video that will show you all the details about the technology.

We want to tell you a little more about the Flow frames/hives, how they work, what we think this will mean for beekeeping and where we are at with producing them.

How do the Flow™ frames work?

The Flow frame consists of already partly formed honeycomb cells. The bees complete the comb with their wax, fill the cells with honey and cap the cells as usual. When you turn the tool, a bit like a tap, the cells split vertically inside the comb forming channels allowing the honey to flow down to a sealed trough at the base of the frame and out of the hive while the bees are practically undisturbed on the comb surface.

When the honey has finished draining you turn the tap again which resets the comb into the original position and allows the bees to chew the wax capping away, and fill it with honey again. The Flow frames are inserted into standard bee supers (boxes) in much the same way as standard frames, however the box itself is modified by cutting two access doorways in one end.

When the frames are inserted, the ends of the frames now form the end of the super. This allows access to the operating slots and honey pipe outlets.

You can see into the hive

Each Flow frame is designed with a unique transparent end allowing you to see into the hive. This means you can watch the bees turning nectar into honey and see when each comb is full and ready. Both children and adults get excited seeing the girls at work in their hive. Importantly you will be able to keep an eye on colony numbers thus giving you early detection of any problems within your hive.

Please note: it’s important to check the hive for disease and look after your colony as per usual. This does require keeping an eye on your bees and opening the hive and inspecting the brood if there are signs of pests or disease. Beekeepers usually check their brood once or twice a year. If you are new to beekeeping you will need to seek help from experienced beekeepers.

It’s a fantastic learning curve.

The extraction process is not only easier but much faster with a flow hive

The whole harvesting process ranges from 20 minutes to two hours depending on the viscosity of the honey.

Usually the bees don’t even discover you at the back of the hive. If you notice that the bees have discovered the collecting jar or bucket you can always cover the extracting pipes or make a lid with a hole for the pipe/s.

There is no more heavy lifting

The harvesting happens right at the hive without moving the super boxes at all. No more injured backs!

Undisturbed bees makes a happier, healthier hive

Because the hives are not regularly opened and pulled apart to be harvested, the bees are relatively undisturbed and they experience less overall stress. Although this may seem trivial, bee stress is a significant factor contributing to the strength of a bee colony.

Opening a hive also risks potential introduction of pests and disease. It’s nice not to squash bees in the process of honey harvesting.

The risk of stings is lower

Because the bees are going about their normal business while you are harvesting the honey from the back of the hive. We have found that the bees usually don’t even notice that you are there.

We still recommend you use a bee suit or veil if you are inexperienced, don’t know the particular hive or have a grumpy hive. A hive that is usually calm can be grumpy at times when the nectar flow is very slow.

Where to from here?

After many years of prototypes we now have a robust design that we have been testing for the last 3 years with beekeepers here in Australia as well as in America and Canada.

Now we want to share it with you.

The official launch of the Flow hive is on the 23rd of February

We are launching on the popular crowdfunding site Kickstarter.com.

Through our launch we hope to raise the funds to get this project off the ground and start producing and delivering these hives to you within the next four months.

Apparently, if a lot of people pledge early, then the whole thing snowballs. Conversely, if the pledging goes slowly then the project is less likely to fly. In our case we hope many people who want a Flow super to add to their beehive or who want a whole Flow beehive (the bees have to be obtained locally) will pledge on the 23rd or 24th giving us a chance to reach our target and start production.

The early pledges get an additional ‘early bird’ discount off the already discounted price giving an extra incentive to pledge quickly.

We’ll send you a reminder when the Kickstarter crowd-funding time begins on February 23rd, and we will be putting some more videos on our Facebook page and website soon.

We are also making a FAQ page on our website to answer all the great questions that are flooding in.

All the best!_


----------



## gezellig

*Re: honey tap*

I can't wait to the the actual mechanics of how this works.


----------



## jamneff

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I gave them my email for more info this is a copy of the email I received today
Hi!

Thanks so much for your interest in the Flow hive. We (Cedar, Stu and our whole beekeeping family) are so excited to be letting you and the world know about the invention we have been working on for over a decade. The response has been quite overwhelming, thanks for all the amazing comments. We are working as fast as we can to complete a video that will show you all the details about the technology.

We want to tell you a little more about the Flow frames/hives, how they work, what we think this will mean for beekeeping and where we are at with producing them.
How do the Flow™ frames work?

The Flow frame consists of already partly formed honeycomb cells. The bees complete the comb with their wax, fill the cells with honey and cap the cells as usual. When you turn the tool, a bit like a tap, the cells split vertically inside the comb forming channels allowing the honey to flow down to a sealed trough at the base of the frame and out of the hive while the bees are practically undisturbed on the comb surface.

When the honey has finished draining you turn the tap again which resets the comb into the original position and allows the bees to chew the wax capping away, and fill it with honey again. The Flow frames are inserted into standard bee supers (boxes) in much the same way as standard frames, however the box itself is modified by cutting two access doorways in one end.

When the frames are inserted, the ends of the frames now form the end of the super. This allows access to the operating slots and honey pipe outlets.

You can see into the hive

Each Flow frame is designed with a unique transparent end allowing you to see into the hive. This means you can watch the bees turning nectar into honey and see when each comb is full and ready. Both children and adults get excited seeing the girls at work in their hive. Importantly you will be able to keep an eye on colony numbers thus giving you early detection of any problems within your hive.

Please note: it’s important to check the hive for disease and look after your colony as per usual. This does require keeping an eye on your bees and opening the hive and inspecting the brood if there are signs of pests or disease. Beekeepers usually check their brood once or twice a year. If you are new to beekeeping you will need to seek help from experienced beekeepers.

It’s a fantastic learning curve.

The extraction process is not only easier but much faster with a flow hive

The whole harvesting process ranges from 20 minutes to two hours depending on the viscosity of the honey.

Usually the bees don’t even discover you at the back of the hive. If you notice that the bees have discovered the collecting jar or bucket you can always cover the extracting pipes or make a lid with a hole for the pipe/s.

There is no more heavy lifting

The harvesting happens right at the hive without moving the super boxes at all. No more injured backs!

Undisturbed bees makes a happier, healthier hive

Because the hives are not regularly opened and pulled apart to be harvested, the bees are relatively undisturbed and they experience less overall stress. Although this may seem trivial, bee stress is a significant factor contributing to the strength of a bee colony.

Opening a hive also risks potential introduction of pests and disease. It’s nice not to squash bees in the process of honey harvesting.

The risk of stings is lower

Because the bees are going about their normal business while you are harvesting the honey from the back of the hive. We have found that the bees usually don’t even notice that you are there.

We still recommend you use a bee suit or veil if you are inexperienced, don’t know the particular hive or have a grumpy hive. A hive that is usually calm can be grumpy at times when the nectar flow is very slow.
Where to from here?

After many years of prototypes we now have a robust design that we have been testing for the last 3 years with beekeepers here in Australia as well as in America and Canada.

Now we want to share it with you.

The official launch of the Flow hive is on the 23rd of February

We are launching on the popular crowdfunding site Kickstarter.com.

Through our launch we hope to raise the funds to get this project off the ground and start producing and delivering these hives to you within the next four months.

Apparently, if a lot of people pledge early, then the whole thing snowballs. Conversely, if the pledging goes slowly then the project is less likely to fly. In our case we hope many people who want a Flow super to add to their beehive or who want a whole Flow beehive (the bees have to be obtained locally) will pledge on the 23rd or 24th giving us a chance to reach our target and start production.

The early pledges get an additional ‘early bird’ discount off the already discounted price giving an extra incentive to pledge quickly.

We’ll send you a reminder when the Kickstarter crowd-funding time begins on February 23rd, and we will be putting some more videos on our Facebook page and website soon.

We are also making a FAQ page on our website to answer all the great questions that are flooding in.

All the best!

Stu and Cedar Anderson


----------



## JRG13

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It says how it works, but here's how I envisioned it. The comb is not solid, when you turn the crank it moves the pieces which open the cells on the bottom side only and the honey drains out that way. Turn the crank back to reset and reseal. I figured they used a membrane or something as the bottom of the cell before reading this where you could put a vaccuum on the inside of the frame to pull the honey out through the membrane but this is even simpler. I will try one just to support the company and see how it works, even if it's just a novelty or a way for my landowners to go get their own honey for a change...


----------



## Mr.Beeman

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Laughed my rear off as soon as I saw it!


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



Mr.Beeman said:


> Laughed my rear off as soon as I saw it!


me too.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

wait until a frame granulates and ya have to figure out what to do next. at least the inventers are smart enough to get other people do the investing. lol


----------



## jwcarlson

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Regarding a similar setup here:
http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2014...-accident-waiting-to-happen/?intcmp=obnetwork



Michael Bush said:


> I don't believe it exists nor has it ever had bees in it. Obviously it is designed by someone who knows virtually nothing about bees. A flower for them to forage on? A spigot for the honey? It is ridiculous.


http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...ping-Taken-Too-Far&highlight=Hive+kitchen+tap

Would be pretty darn cool if it works though.


----------



## ymcg

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Hi all, I'm a friend of the inventors, we've just put up a FAQs page to try and answer some of your questions:
http://www.honeyflow.com/faqs/p/22

There's a heap of info there, our biggest issue right now it dealing with demand, its totally blown us all away, so we can't possibly reply to all emails, we're doing all we can to keep people updated until the big reveal, Feb 23 on Kickstarter.

As Michael says, its already fully operational and in limited production, I dare say (not sure though) that Michael's frames might even be an earlier prototype to the one being made now. Cedar and Stu do love to tinker with getting it just right.

Yari

---

What are Flow™ frames?
“Flow™” is the name for our new invention that allows honey to be harvested directly from the hive without opening the hive and with little disturbance to the bees. The Flow frames are the beehive frames that make this possible.

What is a Flow™ Hive?
A Flow Hive is our term for a standard beehive using a brood box with one or more Flow Supers for honey storage and extraction. A honeybee hive is usually made up two boxes; the brood box where the queen bee lays eggs, and the ‘super’ with honeycomb for the storage of honey. A ‘Flow Super’ is a beehive box using Flow Frames that the bees store honey in.

How do the Flow™ frames work?
The Flow frame consists of already partly formed honeycomb cells. The bees complete the comb with their wax, fill the cells with honey and cap the cells as usual. When you turn the tool, a bit like a tap, the cells split vertically inside the comb forming channels allowing the honey to flow down to a sealed trough at the base of the frame and out of the hive while the bees are practically undisturbed on the comb surface.

When the honey has finished draining you turn the tap again in the upper slot resets the comb into the original position and allows the bees to chew the wax capping away, and fill it with honey again.

How do I stop the bees getting to the honey while it’s draining out of the Flow hive?
Quite often we can drain the honey out without the bees even noticing us at the back of the hive but sometimes they do and you will need to cover the the jars or better still, make a sealed system. This can be achieved by simply by making a hole in the lid of a jar for a tube to go into. Or if you are using a bucket, you can put many holes through the lid of a bucket or make up a manifold.

Do I need a Flow box for the brood box too?
No, the brood box stays the same as it always has been. You can simply replace the honey supers on a standard beehive with one or more Flow Supers. 

Can I fit the Flow frames into my existing beehives?
We want this to be as affordable as possible so we have designed it so you can use your own boxes. The Flow frames are designed to fit Langstroth size deep boxes and are inserted into standard bee supers (boxes) in much the same way as standard frames. The box itself is slightly modified by cutting two access doorways in one end. When the frames are inserted, the ends of the frames now form the end of the super. This allows access to the operating slots and honey pipe outlets.

Does the Flow Super fit an 8 or 10 frame Langstroth hive?
The flow frames will fit either an 8 or 10 frame Langstroth. A full “8 frame, deep” Super would take six Flow frames, and the 10 frame super would take 7 Flow frames as they are wider than traditional frames. It is also possible to have a combination of traditional Langstroth frames and Flow frames in the one Super.

Can I put a Flow Super on a UK National?
Yes, this can be done in two ways: 
1/ Use an adaptor from UK National to Langstroth size box. This can be made or bought so that the more common Langstroth size box can be used. 
2/ The Flow frames are available in lengths to suit a UK national. Eight Flow frames fit across a UK national box. However UK National boxes and frames have different depths than Langstroth. The box walls height can be adjusted by adding a strip of wood to the bottom of the box.

Can I put a Flow Super on a top bar hive?
Yes and it will be up to you as to how to adapt and join the two. As long as the bees have good access to the Flow frames and sense that they are a part of their hive they will fill them with honey.

Do the bees willingly fill the Flow comb compared to the traditional wax comb?
In many years of testing we have found the bees readily wax up and fill the Flow frames. We have done quite a few experiments putting Flow frames in the middle of a standard supers with wax foundation frames either side. The bees have shown no preference either way and readily start building on, and filling the Flow frames at the same time as the traditional ones.

How long does it take before I can drain the honey from the Flow hive?
This depends on the amount of nectar available for the bees and how strong the colony is. We have had Flow Supers that have filled in a week during peak times of the flowering season, however a super usually fills well within a month during the spring and summer.

How long does it take for the honey to drain out?
Anything from twenty minutes to over two hours depending on the temperature and the viscosity of the honey. It is OK to leave it draining overnight (if it is secure from nocturnal animals). When you have finished draining the honey remember to return the frames to ‘cell closed’ position so that the bees can seal the broken cells and recommence filling them with more honey.

How much honey comes out of a Flow super?
About three kilos per frame (more if the bees really build each frame out), if you have seven frames in your super box then you can expect to harvest at least 20 kilos when every frame is full.

Can the Flow frames come out of the super, like the standard frames do?
Yes. This is important for inspections and because this is how most hives in the world work. However there is no need for this in the normal operations of extracting honey.

What extra equipment will I need to get the honey?
You will need a container to collect your honey. You will also need some pipe to connect your jar or bucket to the honey drain points on the hive. You will also need a bee suit and gloves or at least a bee veil in case your bees get aggressive. You will also need to open the hive to inspect it for health as usual which you will need a bee suit, smoker and hive tool for. If you are new to beekeeping you should link up with an experienced beekeeper to get to know how to care for your bees.

How do I know when to harvest/drain the hive?
The ends of the Flow frames are visible by taking the cover off one end of the hive box. It is worth having a look at the bees regularly through this window as you’ll get to know your hive and it doesn’t disturb the bees. You will see the bees depositing honey in the cells and, when the cells are full, they seal them with a wax capping. You can rob a frame as soon as you see that it is full, although there is no hurry, the sealed honey will keep until it is convenient for you to drain it out of the hive.

Do I need to smoke the hive?
No, not when you are operating the flow comb or just viewing the bees. Smoke is usually used to calm the bees when the hive is opened. However, bees do react to the hive being jolted so it’s a good idea to have a smoker on hand in case the bees do start getting aggressive. A little smoke puffed into the entrance of the hive and some puffed around the hive itself will tend to calm them down. You will still need a smoker to do the routine inspection of the brood nest.

Do I need to wear a bee suit, bee veil or gloves when I drain the honey out?
We do recommend you wear a bee protective suit, especially if you are new to beekeeping or have a new, unknown hive. Some beekeepers just use a veil as being stung on the face - particularly up the nose is painful and inconvenient!

We have found we can work at the back of the hive without the bees seeming to notice our presence, however we highly recommend that you wear a bee suit or at least a veil until you get to know your bees. Sometimes, for many reasons, bees can be quite aggressive so you need to be prepared for that.

After a few inspections you will know whether it is safe to approach your hives without any protection.

Is there a best time of day to rob the hive using Flow?
It is possible to harvest a Flow hive at any time of the day or night because the hive is not opened. There is not the concern of chilling or disturbing the bees on cold or windy days.

We have found the bees are calmest in the late afternoon, and at this time the honey in the hive is likely to be warmest and runs easily, therefore we tend to rob at this time.

How often do I need to check the brood?
This depends on your location. In our area it is normal to inspect the brood nest of each hive twice a year for disease. In some areas beekeepers check more frequently. If the hive is weak it should also be inspected. Our invention changes the honey harvesting component of beekeeping. All the rest of the normal beekeeping care for the hive still applies. Beetles, mites swarm control etc. The flow hive clear end frame observation does assist with allowing you to look into the hive and gauge the strength and health of the colony.

How many Flow boxes (supers) do I need per hive?
One Flow super per hive is the simple answer as you can keep tapping off the honey which gives the bees room to keep working and making more honey. However if you live in areas with a very high nectar flow or if your existing beehives are particularly large we would recommend you use two Flow supers or more. The Flow hive is new and we are interested in your feedback as to how many Flow supers you need in your situation

Do I need to leave some honey in the hive for the bees?
Yes, this applies to all beekeeping, your bees need honey to get them through the times when there is no nectar available. The number of frames of honey that you leave depends on your climate, you should consult local beekeepers as to how much they leave their colonies over the winter. The Flow frames make it a lot easier to see how much honey is in your frames at any time, so you can learn to manage how much honey to harvest and how much to leave for the bees. Watching the honey level change everyday is quite fascinating and I personally feel more in touch with the bees and cant help but look on a daily basis. You can also take just a small amount of honey if you choose, by draining one frame or part of a frame. Some Beekeepers do feed sugar syrup to their bees to help them get through the cold winter months. They rarely use honey for feeding as this could spread disease and is a lot more expensive than sugar.


----------



## HeritageHoney

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Again, I ask is this "natural"?
It's a great novel concept--well not novel, as others have thought of it before--but at least these guys spent time, effort and money to make it happen.
Here's the problem: The media's outpouring of misinformation the past 10 years since the first reports of CCD (??) have gotten a lot, and I mean a lot, of people interested in honeybees. Many have good intentions to become beekeepers to help repopulate the world with bees. However, many of these people jump into getting bees, because it "looks easy to do it naturally." They don't understand the amount of work and management that goes into keeping "domesticated livestock." Somehow, they want to ignore that last statement. This is one more gadget, although neat in design, that will allow people to "keep bees more easily" but it will further remove people from taking responsibility, putting in the time, and understanding that bees require work. And it's being marketed to these people with the "it stresses the bees less" line. 
They are quick to point out all the benefits, and yes there are some, without pointing out all the issues that we all as beekeepers know will occur. 
Hey, maybe I'll patent the idea of making one of these into an observation hive with a few modifications so it can sit on the kitchen table and we won't have to walk as far to get the honey for our pancakes........


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Are any hives that are manipulated by man natural? What does that even mean?


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>Author of Beekeeping Naturally and one USA’s most famous beekeepers

The first part is definitely true. 

>Again, I ask is this "natural"?

I think it's obvious that anything plastic in a hive is not natural. As most any useful thing in beekeeping it has to work with the bees natural instincts.

>wait until a frame granulates and ya have to figure out what to do next

I thought of that. But I only rarely have that problem now and it's mostly because I wait until it turns cold to harvest. With this I would harvest early and often so it's less likely to happen. However, if it did, I'd probably treat it like I treat the HSC and PermaComb. Uncap it with a hackler honey punch and extract it. Then you could rinse it in reasonably hot water and put it back in the hive.


----------



## bevy's honeybees

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

After reading all the posts, I think it sounds incredible, and extremely possible. I am excited because I often worry about what happens when I get too old to lift hives/supers (when I go back to hobbyist) and still want to keep bees? I see this as a very nice way of not interfering with the bees and still get honey. Many of my questions were answered in post #70 and Michael's #79 post. He is after all, my favorite most famous beekeeper.


----------



## gww

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Micheal
You run unlimited brood nest. I am a untried (dumb) bee keeper, as I have never done it.
Are their any worries of pollen or brood in the flow frames? Also, will the expence of the frames be low enough to replace the labor factor and do they seem durable for long term use? Will you be using a queen excluder now?
Thanks
gww


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I agree that if Michael has tried it and liked it it probably worked.
The question will be the cost of setting up or converting. Also it will be interesting to see how many seasons the system is reusable for.
Personally I would love to try it. Shipping hives from Australia to Canada will only serve to increase the cost.


----------



## IsedHooah

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

This is a pretty cool idea, but I will be curious to see how far this makes it. I believe that it would be neat to own one as something new and different, but I'm not sure how practical these would be on a large scale operation.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

If they work well I would expect they would be much more practical than collecting frames, getting bees off them, transporting to a honey house, uncapping the frames, extracting the frames and transporting them back to the hives, again opening the hives and replacing the supers. The commercial folk pay people to do that. Much simpler to send someone out to set a bucket, turn a knob and return later to turn the knob and collect the honey. On a large operation by the time you finish opening the tap on the last hive you would likely be able to go back to hive one and shut off the knob and put the collected honey on the truck. The only lifting is grtting the honey from the hive onto the truck.




IsedHooah said:


> This is a pretty cool idea, but I will be curious to see how far this makes it. I believe that it would be neat to own one as something new and different, but I'm not sure how practical these would be on a large scale operation.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>You run unlimited brood nest. 

Yes.

>Are their any worries of pollen or brood in the flow frames? 

They are the wrong diameter for a worker and the wrong diameter for a drone and the wrong depth for brood. The queen will not lay in them. If there was pollen in them it would get short of smushed in the process which would probably break it loose and the bees would have to decide what to do with it after that. 

>Also, will the expence of the frames be low enough to replace the labor factor and do they seem durable for long term use?

Time will tell. I don't know the retail price and I haven't had them for several years which would have to happen to find out their durability.

> Will you be using a queen excluder now?

No. With these no one has any reason to use an excluder for honey production. The queen will not lay in them.

These guys have really thought this out...


----------



## gww

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Michael
Thank you for your responce.
gww


----------



## bdouglas

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It looks like they will be using Kickstarter for fundings. I guess that means no one is interested in investing.
It will be interesting to see how many people donate.:scratch:


----------



## snl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> These guys have really thought this out...


You do know Michael, with all this hype and basically your endorsement of this , your name might change to "Mush" if this does not pan out :lookout:


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'm not so sure about that Wbvc, it seems like commercial folks don't use stuff that backyard folks use like inner covers and telescoping tops, part of reason is time and space savings, other part cost savings. They already have sunk costs in honey houses and they have to pay for the labor anyway. If it meant that they could reduce the workers maybe it would make sense. It really is going to come down to the cost of the equipment more than anything I would think for commercial folks. It is kind of like fast food and minimum wage. Raise the minimum wage high enough and you will see more kids without jobs, at some point the machines become more economical than the humans. It will be interesting to see if it works well and if they are affordable.


----------



## IsedHooah

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



WBVC said:


> If they work well I would expect they would be much more practical than collecting frames, getting bees off them, transporting to a honey house, uncapping the frames, extracting the frames and transporting them back to the hives, again opening the hives and replacing the supers. The commercial folk pay people to do that. Much simpler to send someone out to set a bucket, turn a knob and return later to turn the knob and collect the honey. On a large operation by the time you finish opening the tap on the last hive you would likely be able to go back to hive one and shut off the knob and put the collected honey on the truck. The only lifting is grtting the honey from the hive onto the truck.


I was thinking somewhere in the neighborhood or 200+ hives in my definition of a "large scale operation". I'm not saying one way or the other on practicality (which is why I said I'm not sure) as I manage only a handful of hives in comparison. It will be interesting to see if anything comes of this project and the plethora of side products or management techniques it's bound to spur. I hope it does work out, as I think it really would be a neat experiment for a hive or two in my "hobbyists" realm.


----------



## HeritageHoney

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

"Are any hives that are manipulated by man natural? What does that even mean?"

Exactly my point!


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



bdouglas said:


> It looks like they will be using Kickstarter for fundings. I guess that means no one is interested in investing.
> It will be interesting to see how many people donate.:scratch:


I don't see it that way at all. Using Kickstarter means you get to dictate the terms of the investment to a _far_ greater extent than with professional venture capital. And if things don't work out, it hasn't really cost you anything other than some time.

Of course the often casual nature of Kickstarter projects can backfire as well, and you end up with people having no idea how to handle a large chunk of invested money and/or how to handle a very large volume of orders. 

Having a great idea/prototype and having to build/ship/support 10,000 orders are two completely different things. I hope they have some very competent people on staff to handle manufacturing, logistics, and customer service.

Back to the product itself, I'm super intrigued, and I'll be awaiting 24 Feb with bated breath. Some random questions buzzing around in my amateur brain:


Can the Flow Frames be disassembled and serviced by the end user?
Does their wax foundation ever need to be "refreshed?"
Would the bees ever think, "Hey Sally; this part of the hive is defective. Stop putting honey over there."
What's the honey production vs. a traditional approach?
How do the vegans feel about this now? Just kidding!!!!


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

> I guess that means no one is interested in investing.

My impression has been that KickStarter was their plan all along.

>You do know Michael, with all this hype and basically your endorsement of this , your name might change to "Mush" if this does not pan out 

It was not my intention to tie my name to this. I just tried it and said what I thought. I have no stake in it. I wish I did! No one will know how durable they are until they have used them for some years. I'm sure every disadvantage will be kicked around by beekeepers and maybe using them will discover some more, but all the objections I could come up with they had already thought of and covered. So, all I am saying is that it is well thought out and it's real and it is the first truly revolutionary beekeeping gadget to come along in a century... I will buy some more and see how it goes. As with anything bee related, I would recommend a reasonably small experiment to see what you think first. I won't convert all 200 of my hives right off, but I probably will do ten or so.

>Of course the often casual nature of Kickstarter projects can backfire as well, and you end up with people having no idea how to handle a large chunk of invested money and/or how to handle a very large volume of orders. 

I can see that they could get overwhelmed by the volume of orders as this really is revolutionary. My impression is that's part of the reason they went with KickStarter. You can't afford to invest a lot of money in a huge inventory only to find out no one believes it even works and the concept is far fetched enough that is a possibility. On the other hand you may get overwhelmed with orders and this gives you the capital to meet them. They are already manufacturing them so it's a matter of scaling that up. 

But as to the rest, they seem to have a good head on their shoulders and I get the impression they have a plan for how to manage things.


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Sounds pretty cool and I wouldn't mind trying a few of the frames out, modifying boxes or making a few special boxes is within my set of skills. From the description it sounds like a great way for someone with less than 20 or 30 hives max to harvest honey (I personally hate harvesting honey) however it doesn't sound feasible for sideliners or commercials. I'm just going off what the aussie guy said in the previous post and don't have any experience with their product. It looks like I'll only be running 6 production hives this year and there's a spring flow I need to 'tap' into so hey, if you Honey Flow guys need a second opinion...  I still feel like a kid when something comes in the mail for me


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>however it doesn't sound feasible for sideliners or commercials.

If a milking machine is feasible for a dairy farmer, I don't see why not... For a sideliner it still saves 95% of your labor harvesting. For a commercial guy, you could harvest honey off of the bees that are pollinating without disturbing them and ship the honey home or sell it locally and save paying the shipping to the next pollination location. The hard part is just the up front cost. But you wouldn't have to do that all at once. You could do a share every year until you get them all.


----------



## snl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> >You do know Michael, with all this hype and basically your endorsement of this , your name might change to "Mush" if this does not pan out
> 
> It was not my intention to tie my name to this.


That may have not been your attention, but from all your posts on this, it sure "sounds" that way. I do hope it pans out..........


----------



## bdouglas

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Sorry, I didn't consider Kickstarter an "investment". From what I have seen in the past, it's either a donation or a pre-purchase that you may or may-not get if the product is developed. On the 24th, if I see something like pledge $10,000.00 and you get 1% of first 5 years gross sales then I will say it would be an "investment".


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



snl said:


> That may have not been your attention, but from all your posts on this, it sure "sounds" that way. I do hope it pans out..........


I hate to be a stick in the mud, but if every time Michael Bush has an opinion on a product it becomes an official endorsement or condemnation with the associated fanfare, then he'll be _less_ likely to review things in the future, and that would be a shame.

I am reading his posts as the opinion of one beekeeper who has tried this product. Granted he's got a fair amount of credibility behind his name, but he's still one beekeeper, and YMMV. 

I look forward to reading any other details he's willing and able to share, but I'm even more looking forward to trying this out myself.


----------



## quattro

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I have spent the last 10 years in marketing for a major corporation. If this organization is just 1/10th as good at engineering and supply chain as they are at marketing, I would bet heavily that this product will be a success. They have done everything right so far, from convincing a respected influencer before the announcement, to staging the funding as an event, to managing chatter in a very credible way. They should next study the negative comments to fully understand objections and it looks like they may be doing that as well. I like this organization already and I do not know the first thing about them. Heck, my first packages do not arrive until March and I already I want to use their product. What makes this worse is that I wanted to make comb honey...

This has been really fun to watch from a purely analytical point of view.

Enough of that - thanks to all the contributors to this site, I have learned so much in a short time and realize how much more I need to learn!

Edit: I saw the post above me and I agree 100%. Mr. Bush is respected for a reason and his credibility should not be tied to an individual product that may or may not be a commercial success.


----------



## Vance G

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Mr. Bush is an adult and I doubt that children nattering about a product he happened to use is going to have much of an effect on him. Sounds like we have some prepaid gossiping firing up.


----------



## Riskybizz

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

So don't they watch "Shark Tank" in Australia? What would Mr. Wonderful think?


----------



## Ross

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

How do you know when to harvest your out yards that you don't see every week? How do you keep them from getting packed and swarming under those conditions? No more stacking on a few supers and walking away for a few weeks.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I doubt you would get shark tank type of interest. Crowd sourcing is legit, and the way to go for something like this. 

The question will be can they get the product on market and corner the market before someone comes along, changes this or that and puts out a new and improved version for 10 percent less. That, and it proves reliable over time.


----------



## mac

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

still don't see how you can tell when the frames are capped looking at one end doesn't let ya know about the center or front end being capped. When can we order one ???


----------



## Tim KS

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Who wants to do away with the fun part of beekeeping? I want to enjoy every moment of it.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I have seen all kinds of new products come and go in the last 50yrs. the bees will be the final judge for its survival in the market. they are not as easily influenced as new beekeepers. wonder where shb will fit in? lots of unanswered questions.


----------



## snl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Tim KS said:


> Who wants to do away with the fun part of beekeeping? I want to enjoy every moment of it.


For me, extracting is the least amount of the fun in beekeeping................


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

This new item is unique and for lack of a better term, cool. It isn't going to make Maxtant go out of business and cause us all to toss our extractors and decappers out a window (which I personally would infinitely enjoy). It looks like a godsend for someone who has a few hives and doesn't necessarily want to buy and store an extractor. On a sideline scale, lets say 100 hives, for one 10 frame super we would have 8 of these frames which are... deep? lets say theyre mediums so lets just assume the super is holding 35 pounds of honey. So for each of these supers you would need a bucket and a lid with holes and maybe another lid to seal it up when full. Plus food grade tubing that attaches to a spigot, which since the inventors are aussies is in metric units? So for 100 hives I would need 100 buckets (for the sake of time), plus 2 lids, plus tubing. That's about $600 not including how ever much 800 frames cost each plus 100 modified boxes. That aside I don't really see any real time savings, I see a potential for spilled honey and robbing, but using them exclusively sidelining, not even as a commercial, just doesn't make sense to me if only from the standpoint of time spent. I've helped pull supers off a 40 hive yard, 3 high, and it took 3 of us less than 2 hours. It doesn't sound like something thats going to speed up my operation or save on labor. For people with small numbers of hives though, I'm jumping up and down thinking about never extracting again. I really want to have a box of these frames to see how they make my life easier and/or better if only for the novelty but on a commercial scale it doesn't seem reasonable.


----------



## gww

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

rw
Are the buckets you mentioned really extra, What do you use now?
gww


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

No, im just saying you would need a bucket to drain each super into to "extract" with this system in my hypothetical scenario.


----------



## gww

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

rw
But you wouldn't then need that same bucket when you used the extracter cause it would already be in the bucket. I am a hobbiest and have no experience and surly don't have an ideal of how the commercial guys do it. They may extract strait to jars for all I know, but if not it is just a shifting of cost and not a new cost, expecially for some one who is a startup comercial guy. I could be way out of my knowlage depth though.
Thanks
gww


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

RW is quite correct. It certainly doesn't appear to have any commercial potential. Thats not to say that it isn't a good product that may well have a sizable market. Time will tell.


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

And I'm not bashing the product, its a great idea and actually looks like it has the potential to be a great product, and I definitely would want a super or two full of these frames. I just cant imagine using them on my 20+ hives except the two hives I have near the back door of my house, where I would definitely use them. If only to impress the ladies


----------



## awebber96

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I can't believe no one has mentioned the one obvious and undisputable drawback: no comb honey with this gadget!


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>I am reading his posts as the opinion of one beekeeper who has tried this product. 

Thank you. That is how I intend it. I can't foresee all of the issues that will come up or how I will deal with them. I've had it less than a year and am still trying to work out the details of how I will use it. My main point is that it works and it is really as simple as it looks (despite some of the silliness of taking your pancakes to the bee yard...).

>How do you know when to harvest your out yards that you don't see every week? How do you keep them from getting packed and swarming under those conditions? No more stacking on a few supers and walking away for a few weeks.

I've been contemplating the same thing. Right now I stack the supers on in my outyards. These are probably going to be too expensive to put several on each hive so that would require me to harvest more often and, as you say, how do I know when to do that? I'm not sure. At first, of course, I'll just use them in the home yard where I can check on them easily. That will probably give me a better idea of how to picture what I would do in the outyards.

>still don't see how you can tell when the frames are capped looking at one end doesn't let ya know about the center or front end being capped.

Yes, it's true, but the center is usually capped before the outside, so the outside is a pretty good indicator.

> When can we order one ???

As I understand their intention is to have them available for the honey season this year in the US. Of course that may be now in Florida... I'm not sure how contingent that is on the KickStarter campaign. We will have to read what they post on their KickStarter page on the 23rd to see what they plan is. 

>I have seen all kinds of new products come and go in the last 50yrs. the bees will be the final judge for its survival in the market. they are not as easily influenced as new beekeepers.

True.

> wonder where shb will fit in? 

So do I. And I probably won't be able to find out as I don't have SHB issues. Someone in a SHB area will have to figure that out. Off hand, though, I don't see any more places for a SHB to hide than in any other plastic frame.

>lots of unanswered questions.

Always. I'm sure it will take some time to work out how best to use this.

>I can't believe no one has mentioned the one obvious and undisputable drawback: no comb honey with this gadget!

There is another. No cappings to get wax either.


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Assuming there aren't any ideal egg laying cavities for shb, I would think an advantage of this unit would be that it dosent foster them as, typically, they rear their ugly heads in hives that have been disrupted.


----------



## D Coates

*Tap for extracting honey directly out of the hive?*

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2015...-invention/?intcmp=obmod_ffo&intcmp=obnetwork No idea if it works, or how it works. But I do look forward to learning more about it.

Michael Bush is quoted on there. “Mind Blowing...It's not very often something is so revolutionary as to blow my mind...Saving 20% of harvest labor is not trivial, 40% is amazing, 60% is revolutionary. But 95%, that’s Mind Boggling!” 

Michael, can you elaborate?


----------



## Ross

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Thanks Michael. As I have for the last 15 years, I'll wait for your reports on how best to manage them. As most of my producer hives are 50 miles away, right now I don't see how to incorporate them.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

> I would think an advantage of this unit would be that it dosent foster them as, typically, they rear their ugly heads in hives that have been disrupted.

It think you are right. Opening hives seems to make SHB worse and this would avoid some of that.


----------



## TalonRedding

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> > I would think an advantage of this unit would be that it dosent foster them as, typically, they rear their ugly heads in hives that have been disrupted.
> 
> It think you are right. Opening hives seems to make SHB worse and this would avoid some of that.


SHB would definitely be my biggest concern. If the bees can't clean up the comb in a couple days, that would be a huge risk in my opinion. However, SHB has been present in Australia for more than a decade now. Perhaps the inventors could go into detail about how SHB does or doesn't affect this new fangled doohickey. I'm still interested in trying one out.


----------



## D Coates

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



snl said:


> For me, extracting is the least amount of the fun in beekeeping................


Ditto. It's hard and requires you to get the supers off extracted and replaced when done before ants or SHB's find the unguarded supers. Combine this with setting up the equipment, cleaning it when done and then putting it back into storage and you've got a hard weekend down the drain.

Will this work? Not sure, but it appears logical. Depending on the cost (+/-$100 per super?) I'd be willing to run a few hives with it to see if it works for me. To me, time is more valuable than money. If this effectively saves me time I'd seriously consider this for the bulk of my hives. I'd still have a few hives that I'd run without for comb honey.


----------



## Vance G

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

What happens when the goldenrod or sunflower honey crystalizes hard as a brick in your shiny toy? I hope this works great! But I have been bit by the early user bug for the last time! If it is fun----you do it!


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>What happens when the goldenrod or sunflower honey crystalizes hard as a brick in your shiny toy? I hope this works great! But I have been bit by the early user bug for the last time! If it is fun----you do it!

I figure it will be slightly better than what happens now when that happens, because the shift will stir all that crystallized honey and break it loose. Then I may have to use a hackler honey punch and extract it. But it seems less likely to happen as I'm more likely to harvest early and often. I can see the possibility, since I've experienced it with HSC and PermaComb of having to deal with it somehow, though.


----------



## Dominic

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Vance G said:


> What happens when the goldenrod or sunflower honey crystalizes hard as a brick in your shiny toy? I hope this works great! But I have been bit by the early user bug for the last time! If it is fun----you do it!


Wear and breakage, I would fear. The frames have partly-built plastic cells. I can't foresee any other result when grinding these against hard crystallized honey.


----------



## Matt F

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I wonder whether you can use those specialized frames in an extractor if you get in a bind with the "flow" method and need to get the honey out to clean/fix it?


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>Wear and breakage, I would fear. The frames have partly-built plastic cells. I can't foresee any other result when grinding these against hard crystallized honey.

I don't see that being so much of a problem as if it's so solid it won't move.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>I wonder whether you can use those specialized frames in an extractor

It probably depends on the extractor, but I see no reason you can't depending on how the frames are held in the extractor.


----------



## GGTilton

*Re: Tap for extracting honey directly out of the hive?*

Its a bit early for April 1, but this is as entertaining as the "run your car on water" videos ;-)


----------



## Vance G

*Re: Tap for extracting honey directly out of the hive?*

I still can't wait to get my Moonbeam bloodlines working in this superhive.


----------



## HIVE+

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Honey thieves will no longer have to steal your hives, just go to your outyard with a bucket. 
And what does the poor wax making juvenile do with her idle time? Swarm prep?


----------



## Redbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I wonder what the cost is for say...one hive?


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>Honey thieves will no longer have to steal your hives, just go to your outyard with a bucket. 

Yes, I can see that once people figure that out, it could be an issue... but they could have thrown the supers in the truck and left too...

>And what does the poor wax making juvenile do with her idle time? Swarm prep?

It will be interesting to see, but that is an issue that you sort of started when you started extracting...


----------



## Matt F

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



HIVE+ said:


> Honey thieves will no longer have to steal your hives, just go to your outyard with a bucket.


Or a stack of pancakes!!


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

This site has better photos:
http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2015/02/honey-on-tap/

I can't tell if that is a 6 frame hive or if the honey frames are wider and the 6 frames are in an 8 frame box. I think from the photo you could tell if the ends of the frames were capped, and if they were you should be good to extract them. Plus it looks like you extract a single frame at a time. I was thinking the frames were all plumbed together from the video.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



shannonswyatt said:


> This site has better photos:
> http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2015/02/honey-on-tap/
> 
> I can't tell if that is a 6 frame hive or if the honey frames are wider and the 6 frames are in an 8 frame box. I think from the photo you could tell if the ends of the frames were capped, and if they were you should be good to extract them. Plus it looks like you extract a single frame at a time. I was thinking the frames were all plumbed together from the video.


Here's the "money shot":

http://www.thisiscolossal.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/honey-3.jpg


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>I can't tell if that is a 6 frame hive or if the honey frames are wider and the 6 frames are in an 8 frame box.

Six frames fit in one eight frame box. They are thicker than a regular frame, partly to keep the queen from laying in them (cells are too deep) and probably partly to save money because you don't need as many frames. I haven't tried, but I would suspect that eight fit in a ten frame box.

>Here's the "money shot"

There's a comparison I would not have thought of...


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> >I can't tell if that is a 6 frame hive or if the honey frames are wider and the 6 frames are in an 8 frame box.
> 
> Six frames fit in one eight frame box. They are thicker than a regular frame, partly to keep the queen from laying in them (cells are too deep) and probably partly to save money because you don't need as many frames. I haven't tried, but I would suspect that eight fit in a ten frame box.
> 
> >Here's the "money shot"
> 
> There's a comparison I would not have thought of...


Honey == Money


----------



## peterloringborst

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I have a copy of the patent here in my hand and it reads

[0258] The invention provides many advantages to the collection
of honey from a hive. These may include:
[0259] A beehive that allows the honey to be removed
from the hive without opening the hive. At the flick of a
switch, or turn of a lever, honey comes flowing out of a
tube connected to the hive.
[0260] A system that allows you to rob the honey from an
entire apiary at the flick of a switch
[0261] A beehive that is built of plastic with all parts
spaced perfectly and locked in position with no places
for pests to hide and no spaces for brace or bir comb to be
built.
[0262] A beehive that that includes all the known pest
control methods. eg. Mite brush in entrance and beetle
and mite traps on the bottom board.
[0263] A folding landing board that gives more room for
landing and also acts as a closure for transport.
[0264] A beehive where the bees are hardly disturbed
when the honey is robbed. Almost no bees die.


This last part is most telling. "Almost no bees die." The comb base is shifted and the honeycomb is essentially shredded, all the honey runs out. How many bees are crushed or drowned? How would we even know? -- because we are extracting the honey from a remote location with the "flick of a switch." 

PLB


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

My understanding is that happens behind the cappings, so no bees would be killed. The bees would remove the cappings later.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>This last part is most telling. "Almost no bees die." The comb base is shifted and the honeycomb is essentially shredded, all the honey runs out.

Of course you can't see what's in the center, but assuming you wait until the outside frames are capped it seems reasonable that the inside frames are capped and if they are, the caps are not even broken when harvesting so there is no reason for a bee to be in it until they realize it's been drained and they uncap it. Now assuming you get impatient and run it when the outside frames aren't all capped, then it's hard to say if there are bees with their heads in the cells.


----------



## peterloringborst

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



shannonswyatt said:


> My understanding is that happens behind the cappings, so no bees would be killed. The bees would remove the cappings later.


Then why does it say right in the patent that "almost no bees die"? Doesn't that imply that the bees_ do die? _ One person's almost none is another person's way too many.


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Any time I do any kind of manipulation no matter how careful I am or how trivial the manipulation is, bees die.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



peterloringborst said:


> Then why does it say right in the patent that "almost no bees die"? Doesn't that imply that the bees_ do die? _ One person's almost none is another person's way too many.


Because if you claim that "no bees die" and then someone takes a photo of one dead bee within 45' of this product, then the entire Internet will blow up with claims of false advertising, malfeasance, corruption, fraud, bigotry, and apostasy. 

Safer to claim "almost" and avoid an internet apocalypse.


----------



## BeeHopper

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Its actually quite simple how it works. Cant believe nobody hasn't thought of it prior. The "switch" activates a cam above each frame that pushes down on the foundation, the foundation is made up of movable vertical slats (like siding on your house but vertical) that divide in the middle of the hexagon and splits the cells so they form sort of a crooked pipeline that drains into the tap pipe. Sorta like the plumbing in your house.

This product will never be used in a commercial environment. Its made for the hobbyist, the guy that has one or two hives, and the beginner. Manufacturing cost will be threw the roof. I wouldn't be surprised to see retail cost of $250 plus. You will have to use their frames and boxes because the way its designed. If the frames were made to interchange with existing hive designs too where a person could just drop them in an go without having to cut and hack his boxes then I could see the potential use in a commercial setting. Its a fad, its just something shiny and new that will eventually wear off. It's definitely not a product that I would be endorsing or speaking very highly of every time someone mentioned "Flow hive" because it doesn't "disturb bees" and its more "natural". Get a grip hippies.

Wont be surprised if you see these on late night infomercials or "As seen on TV".

"Mmmm pancakes"


----------



## peterloringborst

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Hi all
The foundation is cut into strips, which when moved, shear the combs. Any bees in the cells would also be sheared. Which is fine, if you like bee guts mixed in with your honey. Imagine what it would be like to be half in, half out of an elevator, when the elevator went down.


----------



## Ross

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'm pretty sure their are bee guts every time I extract.


----------



## peterloringborst

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Ross said:


> I'm pretty sure their are bee guts every time I extract.


You give honey a bad name. Most honey houses are scrupulously free from bees (at least in "civilized" countries). When I take off supers I make sure the bees are not in there, before they go inside. Then we have a holding area with a bug zapper. Any bees do not make it to the extracting area. Maybe you should put guts on the label as an ingredient, I don't have to. Mine's just honey.


----------



## JDMoodie

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I expect that the shearing is not fast, the bees have lots of time to pull their heads out.... but if it's capped, they won't be in the cells anyway.

Jeff.


----------



## Harley Craig

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



peterloringborst said:


> You give honey a bad name. Most honey houses are scrupulously free from bees (at least in "civilized" countries). When I take off supers I make sure the bees are not in there, before they go inside. Then we have a holding area with a bug zapper. Any bees do not make it to the extracting area. Maybe you should put guts on the label as an ingredient, I don't have to. Mine's just honey.


hey the " organic" folks will pay extra if your label says " may contain bee parts"


----------



## Redbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I think if you take a good 10x lens and look at a honey sample even if it was strained, you would see a lot of little things. It's all well and good because I know it's the real thing.


----------



## Ravenseye

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Ross said:


> I'm pretty sure their are bee guts every time I extract.


Me too. Doesn't mean that all bee parts end up in my honey but there's plenty of spare parts that I strain out.


----------



## Vance G

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Some folk should just prepare to starve. There are critters inside of critters inside every single think that they choose to eat. This does not absolve me as a food producer of the duty to be as cleanly as possible in moving my honey from the beehive to the food chain. The total idiots who chose to talk about the possible contaminants in honey should be sure to only purchase Chinese honey which they are very careful to strain of any possible particle and chemically precipitate out illegal ag chemicals.


----------



## woodsy

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Is this how easy it could be to extract honey ?
http://www.thisiscolossal.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/bees-1.gif


----------



## gww

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

What are the odds of just using a fume board and transfering the whole super to a honey room and doing the exstraction as you would with an extractor only strait into your honey jars?
Would this get rid of some of the extra equipment cost and robbing issues?
Cheers
gww


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>What are the odds of just using a fume board and transfering the whole super to a honey room and doing the exstraction as you would with an extractor only strait into your honey jars?

Well, it adds back in half of the work, but yes that can and has been done in order to demonstrate how it works.


----------



## mlmihlfried

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

sounds interesting but does raise questions. Assuming it works and more importantly the mechanism holds up to propolis sticky honey and wax, If you managed swarming by checkerboarding that will no longer be viable. Also they say you modify the box and can actually see the frames. That is great for a southern beekeeper that never gets below freezing but what about northern beekeepers. In the winter the super obviously can be removed, but unexpected frosts and freezes happen all the time managing the addition of the super and taking it off and maybe replacing with a traditional super in time for the bees to fill for winter will have to be timed pretty closely. Just a few thoughts.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It is interesting to see the amount of input on this thread. Folks are obviously intrigued by this concept.
I think the only thing stopping everyone who has posted to, or simply read, this thread from ordering one or more of these to try is the anticipation of an unpallitable cost. If these were free for the first week...limit one per customer...I expect sales would be through the roof
I certainly am interested and would love to give it a go...but cost plus shipping from Australia ...will likely make it impractical for me..even just to try.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

the easiest way to scam people is to play off their greed. In this case the greed is nobody wants to extract. these people should learn to make comb or cut comb honey. I suspect when the price comes out there will be fewer posts.


----------



## mlmihlfried

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

greed? Why WOULDN'T you want an easier way to extract without disturbing the bees? Why is that greedy? Not everyone wants comb or cut honey. Too many people are trying to prove how savvy they are by calling this a fail before they even know the concept and how it works.

I have no dog in the fight and probably won't be the first to try it, or every buy one depending on the price, but why can't I be intrigued by it without being greedy.


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



WBVC said:


> I think the only thing stopping everyone who has posted to, or simply read, this thread from ordering one or more of these to try is the anticipation of an unpallitable cost. If these were free for the first week...limit one per customer...I expect sales would be through the roof


Not everyone. I maintain a strong sense of doubt it can even work, and if by chance it does, will be any better than my current extraction process. I don't need to know the cost because I know I won't be ordering one, and frankly wouldn't take it if they gave it to me..

People will line up for any give-away, whether they need it or not. They just want "stuff", any "stuff".

There will be takers for this thing, that's for sure, and I wish them them much good luck . 
Hopefully, it will not be another expensive lesson.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> My main point is that it works and it is really as simple as it looks (despite some of the silliness of taking your pancakes to the bee yard...).


Nope, you can't automate anything it beekeeping ... you must intervene.

Michael I am thankful you kept and open mind and gave it a chance.

I do have a question for you though, When I first extracted I just let the honey run out of the frames and I remember people saying it wouldn't come out by gravity. Why does it with this system? It is my understanding that the wax cap is not removed until after the cell has drained.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Seems to me (based on my limited understanding of the product) that it could be run backwards and used as way to feed a cluster in the cold.

I find the knee jerk negativity interesting (here and 9n other forums/lists). You can alwas count on Peter Borst to pan a product he has never seen, tout a study he has never seen, or review a book he has nevery read. If only we could all be as smart as Peter it would save us all a lot of time.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>I do have a question for you though, When I first extracted I just let the honey run out of the frames and I remember people saying it wouldn't come out by gravity. Why does it with this system? It is my understanding that the wax cap is not removed until after the cell has drained.

This product is like you took some plastic comb (not foundation) and cut it into strips down the center of the cells and then after the bees have fixed the cracks you slide every other one down an half of a cell. This makes a zig zag path all the way to the bottom with air coming in the top. The flow of honey actually pulls the honey above it and the air fills the space. So basically there is a path 3/4" by 1/4" for the honey and the air to follow from top to bottom.

When you uncap honey lay it on its side and wait for it to run out, there is no way for the air to get in. You have one hole about 1/4" in diameter with no way for the air to get in the bottom. It's the viscocity and the surface tension keeping it from working. If you had a bigger hole it would overcome the surface tension and it would work. If you had a way for the air to get in it would work. But you have neither. Of course if the honey was thin enough it would run out of even 1/4" cell, but then it would ferment if it was that thin.

>seems to me (based on my limited understanding of the product) that it could be run backwards and used as way to feed a cluster in the cold.

Once you crack it open everything runs out. When you put it back there is a seam in every cell that needs to be "fixed" in order for it to hold. I don't really know how that would pan out. Perhaps there would be enough wax to seal it somewhat and the bees could clean things up as fast as anything ran out. Perhaps not. If it would, then yes, I think you could dunk it in syrup, run the action, and have it full of syrup.

Spraying into HSC would probably be better. Too bad someone doesn't make fully drawn comb in a 3/4" deep cell that is 7mm in diameter. You could probably get the syrup to run in then with some agitation. Certainly with some spraying.

>I find the knee jerk negativity interesting (here and 9n other forums/lists). You can alwas count on Peter Borst to pan a product he has never seen...

Isn't it scientific to condemn something you've never seen?... after all you haven't scientifically proven that it works yet? And as we all know anything that hasn't been scientifically proven yet, does NOT work.


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Well, a guy I know in Canada who has absolutely no interest in bees or beekeeping just posted a link to the Honey Flow frames on my Facebook page. Looks like the Honey Flow guys not only hit their target audience but went above and beyond with their marketing campaign. I hope it turns out to be a quality product that can benefit those who choose to use it. I, personally, am burned out on talking about it and want to see a price for the item and some real world experience with it from more than one source. I would suspect the first year verdict should be in after the fall honey flow.


----------



## jbeshearse

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

While I can see some potential problems with this system over time, I think it will really appeal to new hobby beekeepers. When you look at the bee supply magazines and the adds for new equipment. Compare that to what many small hobbiest keepers are willing to spend at start up for one or two hives, I don't see price being an issue unless these are $100 per frame. If they are $20.00 per frame, that is $200 per super verses $25 per super for a standard frame with foundation(self assembled). If someone is willing to spend $500.00 for a new starter hive, why would they not spend a like amount on a hive that is shorter (less boxes), less intrusion on the bees, easier to manage since you don't need to tear it apart to harvest. I imagine that the new beekeepers will be the early adopters. I can already envision this being placed in a window, tap side in. That way it functions as both an instant honey source in the house and an observation hive.

Since I take Michael at his word, this is a no brainer (dang you Michael for convincing me to run all mediums). Also, for those that have run observation hives, you know that there is less reason to go in and do frame by frame inspections of the brood area as you can pretty much already see how the bees are doing.

As for SHB and Wax moth, it is the pollen and brood that they are most after. Honey frames without any cocoons is not attractive to either. Unless the hive succombs completely, then the SHB wreck the honey frames. But since it has windows, there is less chance of allowing this to happen. If you see the hive starting to succumb, simply drain the honey out (ready or not) and deprive the SHB of the chance.


----------



## Riverderwent

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'm "skep"tical.


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Maybe one test will be, How much will these 'honey flow' frames sell for, _used_, 2-3 years from now?

If they work great and everyone loves them, then we can expect scarcity and high prices probably for as long as the patent holds.

If a lot of people new to beekeeping buy them thinking that somehow they'll make everything easier, they may run into unanticipated difficulties and want to offload the fancy equipment they bought. Pennies on the dollar. And I suppose that's when a lot of the skeptics will take an interest, get in and figure out how best to use them most effectively.

Anyway, that would be an objective measure of whether they work the way they're being hyped right now.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> This product is like you took some plastic comb (not foundation) and cut it into strips down the center of the cells and then after the bees have fixed the cracks you slide every other one down an half of a cell. This makes a zig zag path all the way to the bottom with air coming in the top. The flow of honey actually pulls the honey above it and the air fills the space. So basically there is a path 3/4" by 1/4" for the honey and the air to follow from top to bottom.


You have seen it I have not. Trust me nothing excites me more than ingenuity. I would love to see it. If the cells are not split up close to the wax cap there will be a cavity that is no different than a frame that is uncapped turned upside down. The cells have that 13 degree angle so air can get into the cell. It is a matter of viscosity and if we are talking about fresh honey, most honeys will not have viscosity like grape jelly.

Think about what these inventors have come up against. All the negativity of old beekeepers. My hat goes off to them.:thumbsup:


----------



## burns375

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Have they released the cost? What are you willing to spend? $4/frame

What happens if brood is layed in these frames?


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>Also, for those that have run observation hives, you know that there is less reason to go in and do frame by frame inspections of the brood area as you can pretty much already see how the bees are doing.

You may have to modify the hive though. The frames are wide Six just fits in a 13 3/4" eight frame box with a thin sheet of plexi for the window. They are out on the hive so I can't measure them easily right now, but they must be almost 2". A proper observation hive would be 1 3/4" to 1 7/8". I admit, though, my Darpe has 2 1/4" between the glass so it would fit in that and with some modification could have a hose on it. But then I never thought in terms of harvesting from an observation hive. By the time it's got honey the population has exploded so much I have to pull some brood out to set them back and while I have it open, I may as well put the honey in some other hive.

>If the cells are not split up close to the wax cap there will be a cavity that is no different than a frame that is uncapped turned upside down. 

It's all the difference in the world. Honey staying in because of surface tension will come out if you let air behind it.

>The cells have that 13 degree angle so air can get into the cell.

Here are some upside down sloped cells in my observation hive and the honey stays in it just fine:
http://www.bushfarms.com/images/BurrOnGlass.JPG
http://www.bushfarms.com/images/BurrOnGlass2.JPG

I watched the bees put the honey in these cells and push it up the sides. It stays.


----------



## gww

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



> What happens if brood is layed in these frames?


Michael answered earlier that they won't lay brood cause the cell size of the frame is wrong size for brood.
Cheers
gww


----------



## crabbcatjohn

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Questions i wonder about. Is the plastic BPA free? Is there bee space around the outside of the frames or do they fit tight against the hive wall? I'm wondering how easy it will be to retrofit a hive body... 
I'm assuming its a set amount so how much honey do you get out of each frame?


----------



## jbeshearse

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> >Also, for those that have run observation hives, you know that there is less reason to go in and do frame by frame inspections of the brood area as you can pretty much already see how the bees are doing.
> 
> You may have to modify the hive though. The frames are wide Six just fits in a 13 3/4" eight frame box with a thin sheet of plexi for the window. They are out on the hive so I can't measure them easily right now, but they must be almost 2". A proper observation hive would be 1 3/4" to 1 7/8". I admit, though, my Darpe has 2 1/4" between the glass so it would fit in that and with some modification could have a hose on it. But then I never thought in terms of harvesting from an observation hive. By the time it's got honey the population has exploded so much I have to pull some brood out to set them back and while I have it open, I may as well put the honey in some other hive.


But I am thinking on the terms of using a full sized hived mounted with a large observation window in one end, basically. Pretty much make the end facing the house(inside) almost all plexi, leaving just enough wood to lend stability to the boxes. SO you would manage it just as you would any other hive that you have "flow frames" in. I would be concerned about swarming, probably more than anything else on these hives. Since the flow box is not suited for brood, it will be more restrictive on what area there is available for the queen to lay in. These will definitely require modifications to how we normally keep bees. I am sure there will be a learning curve, probably more of a problem for seasoned beekeepers than new ones.

I imagine that it the internet was around 100 years ago when Lanstroth built his first hives, there would have been plenty of naysayers. as one said earlier, I bet they were "skep"-tical.


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Wow!

have I ever seen so much interest in an item?
Personally I think it is great to see Australian innovation at work ( think Emlok, Hills Hoist..) and I have every intention of getting at least one. I give most things a go. If the postage to the US is too much there is one solution...move to OZ!
Time to think outside the box, mate!


----------



## rsjohnson2u

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

So, if I give them a $150.00 tomorrow, will I get a coupon for $10.00 Off my purchase? (And) more importantly, feel free to send me your "like new" radial extractor after you buy in. I'm still new to beekeeping, and extract with a well used hand crank two framer.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>...there would have been plenty of naysayers

There were, and some of the complaints were somewhat valid. People were losing Langstroth hives who had kept bees just fine in skeps. Turns out you have to change your management style with a Langstroth. All of a sudden you can find every scrap of honey in the hive and you have to be careful to leave them enough. With a skep you almost always left them enough accidentally...

Almost any new innovation requires some adjustment to your methods...


----------



## melliferal

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Harley Craig said:


> hey the " organic" folks will pay extra if your label says " may contain bee parts"


  

JDMoodie is right; I wouldn't expect too many bees inside of capped honey. Most if not all of the Organic™ bee parts that have ended up in my honey after extraction are from the few bees that have accidentally been crushed or injured while removing frames/supers, or managed to stowaway or otherwise sneak into the supers or equipment between the shake and arrival at my gara-err, honey house. 

I'm a big fan of modern science and technology when it comes to beekeeping. Of course anything new should be scrutinized and it's healthy (and GOOD) to be skeptical of claims; especially wild ones, like special frames that can cut 95% of the labor of harvesting. That's a tall order to say the very least, and people need to be taking hard looks and making sure that it's not some kind of scam or flash-in-the-pan gimmick. But if it works, it works - I say, go for it.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

There is another video showing some frames being harvested. Seem to work pretty good. They put plastic wrap over the tops to keep bees out. Maybe tomorrow we will have a better idea of the costs when the kickstarter kicks off.


----------



## SRatcliff

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

The crowd funding is already over $225,000 in just a few min...


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Well, the fund me site is up. The frames are $50 a pop (ouch!).

They exceeded the goal rather quickly, they were looking for 70k and it is at 226k right now. If you click refresh you can see it continuing to rise.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/flow-hive-honey-on-tap-directly-from-your-beehive

I wonder how many of the folks buying these frames don't have bees today?


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

266k a minute later. Crazy!


----------



## melliferal

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> Michael Bush has one and he says it works. Where is the skepticism? That is like having your ass kissed in Macy's window.


Hmm. I've heard of a "Michael Bush"; I believe he posts on that internet forum I read a lot. Never actually met him...

The mechanics of the device as described sound pretty credible. But I'm betting it's going to be little pricey - like others here, I don't see this being practical for a sideliner and definitely not a commercial operation. But I don't see any reason why this can't work for that guy or gal who wants to put a hive in their veggie garden. Practically manna from heaven for those brave, miserable few who are into urban rooftop beekeeping.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



melliferal said:


> I don't see this being practical for a sideliner and definitely not a commercial operation.


This makes me laugh. My line of thinking is if a commercial doesn't buy into this concept they will be toast (those that produce honey). I know how they harvested maple syrup when I was a kid and the way they do it now is like 1/10 the labor. Trust me this one is huge.


----------



## melliferal

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> This makes me laugh. My line of thinking is if a commercial doesn't buy into this concept they will be toast (those that produce honey). I know how they harvested maple syrup when I was a kid and the way they do it now is like 1/10 the labor. Trust me this one is huge.


I don't think so, but there are few things I would be as happy to be wrong about.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Right now the costs are way too high for commercial folks I would think. They have a lot of money sunk in their extraction gear, and this isn't proven yet.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> My line of thinking is if a commercial doesn't buy into this concept they will be toast (those that produce honey).


I think that may be a premature assumption. There remain too many "unknowns" regarding the impact this would have on management practices in commercial operations. I'm no expert, but I can think of several hurdles that would need to be crossed.


----------



## TalonRedding

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



shannonswyatt said:


> Right now the costs are way too high for commercial folks I would think. They have a lot of money sunk in their extraction gear, and this isn't proven yet.


Not to mention the logistics that a comm operator would have to go through. Lol....can you imagine setting up 10 jars per colony for say, 1000 colonies?! That would be a nightmare! And, the robbing that would ensue is even more of a nightmare! Also, it's mechanical, which means it will break sooner or later. The more working parts you have, the more you will have to break. If One 100 frame extractor has an issue, it's only one issue that needs to be fixed. If 100 flow frames break, it's 100 issues that need to be fixed. 
If a comm operator was to invest in this, I would think that it would be out of novelty and fascination with an interesting invention.


----------



## gasdoc

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



shannonswyatt said:


> I wonder how many of the folks buying these frames don't have bees today?


They sold out of their "early (June) delivery" honey super kit in a matter of minutes--200 units. Six Honey Flow frames for a Langstroth 8 frame super or seven frames for a 10 frame super.

Looking at the counts of what's being sold, the next highest demand item is standard delivery on the full kit which includes base, brood box, honey super and roof. "...all you need is bees". That has sold out of 500 units as I wrote this post.

I'm guessing that this kit is being bought by people without existing hives. Timing of starting that hive in September might be tough.


----------



## gasdoc

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



TalonRedding said:


> Not to mention the logistics that a comm operator would have to go through. Lol....can you imagine setting up 10 jars per colony for say, 1000 colonies?! That would be a nightmare! And, the robbing that would ensue is even more of a nightmare! Also, it's mechanical, which means it will break sooner or later. The more working parts you have, the more you will have to break. If One 100 frame extractor has an issue, it's only one issue that needs to be fixed. If 100 flow frames break, it's 100 issues that need to be fixed.
> If a comm operator was to invest in this, I would think that it would be out of novelty and fascination with an interesting invention.


On their newest video they show tubing connecting up multiple hives all having the honey pumped out via a pneumatic system. Pretty cool if the technology can be proven over time.


----------



## melliferal

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It is definitely an interesting invention. I'm very happy that these folks' 10 years of work on a piece of _beekeeping equipment_ has made them over a half a million dollars in a matter of an hour or two - that's astounding. Although they're going to be _very_ busy for the next while; by my count so far they've already got over 13,000 frames to build and ship.


----------



## mlmihlfried

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I wonder if you could modify a deep to accommodate 4 or 5 of the flow frames. Add some type of sheeting like plywood to maintain bee space? Then would 4-5 frames be able to keep up with the flow if you drain as soon as a frame is filled? What do you think Michael bush.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I don't know why ... but I seem unable to shake images of the "Matrix".


----------



## Scpossum

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'll bite when they make an app to start the process that I can control with my iphone or ipad.


----------



## melliferal

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



mlmihlfried said:


> I wonder if you could modify a deep to accommodate 4 or 5 of the flow frames. Add some type of sheeting like plywood to maintain bee space? Then would 4-5 frames be able to keep up with the flow if you drain as soon as a frame is filled? What do you think Michael bush.


I'm not sure why you'd want to bother using only 4 or 5 in a deep; since you don't need to handle them very much, you wouldn't really save any kind of labor by shorting the super and having to fill the box with extra wood to close up the space.

I'm not sure that one deep with even a full complement of six or seven frames would be enough all by itself for a hive to keep up with a flow. Because you can't extract as soon as the frames are full - you've got to wait for the bees to cure and cap it, and in the mean time the flow keeps going.


----------



## mlmihlfried

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

just thinking of saving money a deep with 5 of those frames would cost less than a deep with 7 of those, but if you couldn't keep up with the flow it is a moot point.


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

The flow hive

I did not count the number of e-mails I received about this invention. 

It is indeed an amazing invention and will spread beekeeping far and wide. People love things “on tap” and this promises to do exactly to do this with honey.
This seems a very attractive proposition for backyarders and good luck to them all.

I sell nuc's and I should be pretty busy 

I really think this is an incredible ”out of the square” thinking invention which we don’t see very often.

But I’m not rushing in buying one just yet.

I have a few reservation:

Plastic

Many years ago a Brisbane firm came up with the idea of plastic frame ends. It meant that you could buy ( or make up) simple sticks as bottom bars and top bars and assemble them – cheap and easy. I still have a few around for “show and tell” but I have disposed of all of them from my hives. Reasons ; the SHB arrived and the reinforcing on these end bars made from plastic where SHB heaven.
Like some plastics can and do the end bars would bend and could not handle any heat. 
In my hives you will now find: WOOD ( mostly Hoop Pine which is local), SSTAINLESS STEEL for the wire and 100% BESWAX. Call me old fashioned but we love it.
So, it will take a while for me to use plastic again.
I have dated wooden frames from 1978. Will the plastic frame still be around in 30 years? Plastic and SS is often not a good combination - one will break.

Cost

Various options are offered. I realise this is a new product and with the interest shown ( some option where sold out in less than an hour) the price makers.
I expect that the price will drop, the design will change/improve and they don’t need any extra encouragement at this stage.
Maybe later. It is too expensive for me at this introductory stage.


SHB and diseases

The inventors suggest that you can safe by not needing protective gear, tools and a smoker.
Far from.
I’m concerned that some excited buyers will rush out and set up a Flow Hive ( or maybe have somebody else set one up for them) and think they can forget about it – other than turning the tap from time to time.
If this happens we will have epicentres of SHB populations. In our area, at least during the warmer months, I need to check on SHB at least every 3 weeks. Populations can explode very quickly.
I also make sure that I checked my brood for the various diseases and I wonder if the “honey on tap” beekeepers will do this?


The fun element

My wife and I actually enjoy “doing the honey” together. We are a well oiled team and have been working together for many years. We enjoy each other’s company and I hope that we can continue for a while yet.
Turning the tap together would not be quite the same!

There are other issues but I will stop here.
I’m not an early adopter ( still don’t have a mobile phone) but I like inventions and inventiveness and wish the team only the best.

I will catch up one day


----------



## Vance G

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Do you want to also "double your honey yield with the Honeymaster no swarm cluster frames as advertised in the March 1980 ABJ in front of me? 
You could have done better buying Paul Peirce's hard plastic foundation and frame for 70cents each delivered. I still have a couple of those. 
Not a carniolan queen or bee for sale and just a few caucasian and or starlines. It will be interesting to see what happens here but I don't think it will matter much. Ain't this fun?


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It is terribly fun to watch all the hide-bound old fogies going through the 5 stages of acceptance...

they started with denial, the first comments were along the lines of hoax, joke, gullible, blah blah blah but then Michael posted and shut them right up (mostly).
we passed through anger fairly quickly.
and are now into bargaining with such comments as 'lets just see how this all really works first'...
probably wont see the depression because they will just not post during that time.
acceptance? some are faster than others to the tune of almost a million USD in a couple hours.

will it turn out to be a fad?
new technology sometimes stumbles but it NEVER goes away.
if this version doesn't work, somebody will make one that does.
nobody drives Model A Fords anymore but that doesn't mean the car was a fad.
the genie is out of the bottle.

on the other hand, there is no big hurry, if it works as well as I think it will, springtime a year or two from now will be just about right for me...


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

wow this might be bigger than moon beam queens. lol


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'm not going to knock this product because I havent seen it and any opinion I might have would be nothing more than speculation. My guess is if it works as advertised it's primary market will be as a novelty for the backyard beekeepers that can afford it. 
What I can say with absolute certainty, though, is that the unit I am seeing advertised has no large scale commercial application and those that think that it may, simply dont have a grasp of how a commercial operation works and how much more efficient new extracting equipment has made them in recent years. Many commercials (myself included) have begun phasing out of 55 gallon drums in favor of 260 gallon totes. The last thing they are going to want to do is to start filling up a multitude of small containers, and having to do so out in the beeyard.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

But Jim, you're not thinking like a modern entrepreneur! 


Following on Acebird's excellent maple syrup business plan - you could run 'honey' lines to each of your hives, and just pump the honey directly into a tanker truck parked in the yard! 








photo credit

Think Big!! :lpf:

No drums, no totes, don't even need a warehouse forklift - except to handle all the ca$h on its way to the to the bank!


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Do they have SHB in Australia? If the honey gets "slimed" will we not know it until we eat our pancakes?


----------



## Scpossum

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Eddie Honey said:


> Do they have SHB in Australia? If the honey gets "slimed" will we not know it until we eat our pancakes?


Oh SNAP! Hope they have a plan for that one.

SNL....I am thinking they hit the 2.5-3 mill mark in less than two weeks. The question is: can you stay up that long?


----------



## SRatcliff

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Yep, start a Honey Utilities Company. Turn a valve and pump honey straight from the hive to your subscribers!


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>The frames are $50 a pop (ouch!).

By my calculation they are $58.40 a frame (it takes six in an eight frame box and seven in a ten frame box). Steeper than I had hoped for. Over $1.1 million now...


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> >The frames are $50 a pop (ouch!).
> 
> By my calculation they are $58.40 a frame (it takes six in an eight frame box and seven in a ten frame box). Steeper than I had hoped for. Over $1.1 million now...


Including postage? This is about as much as nuc costs in Australia. And BTW, yes we we have SHB.
I bet they wish they could turn the tap off now for a while.


----------



## melliferal

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'll say. That's 22,000 frames to ship, and counting.


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

This is going to get interesting..................G


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Dang snl, I thought you would keep it going all night long. 1.7 mil.

The problem with pumping honey through a tube versus maple syrup is the maple syrup is more like nectar out of a tree than honey. I think that it take something like 20 or 30 gallons of the syrup from the the tree (sap?) to be boiled down to a single gallon of syrup. That has got to run through the pipes easier than honey. And you don't have to pull off the tubes and what not to inspect. Running tubing to the hives for extraction wouldn't make sense, since it would only be used every once in a while, whereas tree sap runs for a while. 

Definitely sideliner stuff. I would say backyard beeks, but my guess is a bunch of people that purchase these will have bees for one season and then lose them over the winter, and the stuff will end up either on Craigslist or in disrepair.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Mike Gillmore said:


> but I can think of several hurdles that would need to be crossed.


Yeah, like how to hide the profits from the government with a 50% plus drop in labor.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



jim lyon said:


> My guess is if it works as advertised it's primary market will be as a novelty for the backyard beekeepers that can afford it.


Of course that is what it was targeted for. Who the heck wants to try and convince a commercial beekeeper to do something different? That is like bashing your head against the wall. Once the tooling costs are paid for (and it looks like it already has) these frames will be under 2 bucks a piece. You do realize this concept eliminates the honey house. What is that costing you?


----------



## chr157y

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Is anyone else still speechless at the fact that a "complete hive" is $600???!!! Aside from the crazy expensize flow frames, people are paying $250 for a bottom board, deep brood box and frames, inner cover, and outer cover. I can get a full hive for $130, and that includes a "normal" super. A-gah! I have no doubt this product works. Heck, I was signed on at 7 pm ready to buy, but it was just crazy expensive. I can't justify that for a novelty item.

Someone created a FB group for Flow Hive Beekeeping (Not anyone related to the product). Most of the people purchasing do not currently have bees, and don't know too much about beekeeping. I feel like they were completely taken advantage of when they were sold the complete hive at a "discount price."


----------



## mahobee

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'm a classic backyard beekeeper, generally willing to overpay a little for something different. I was on their email list, waiting for the launch. If this is the earlybird discount for financing their operation, I'll take a pass. At these prices, I can afford to wait (I wouldn't get them in time for this season anyway). What's the rush? let everyone else rush and get the kinks out. 
Having said that, it is an impressive launch!


----------



## dsegrest

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

I finally took a look at the basics of the system. It seems to me like a novelty gadget. I'm sure it probably works, but unless it was installed on every frame, the honey would still need to be extracted. Can you imagine for several hives with several supers?


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> You do realize this concept eliminates the honey house. What is that costing you?


You asked at a good time Brian, having just waded through a lot of numbers in preparing my tax form.
Assuming a $250,000 original outlay gives you a brand spanking new extracting system sitting in a multi use honey house that can be used for anything from extracting to wood working and that said building and equipment have a lifespan of 20 years, a capacity of 500,000 lbs. per year and a residual value of 50% then per lb. extracting expenses as I have experienced them would go something like this. 
Building and equipment .005 (cents per lb.) depreciation is deductible of course
Honey removal and extracting labor .05
Utilities .025

Total .08 per lb. 

But wait, I get a wax crop too. approximately $4.00 worth of bees wax for about every 58 lbs. means I gain back almost .07 per lb. in beeswax inventory!

Total net extracting cost .01 per lb.!!!!!!!!!!!!!
From a commercial standpoint, I cant imagine being interested if the frames were free.
Now how much do you figure its going to cost you for the far more labor intensive task of hauling the additional bulk of hundreds of thousands of jars back and forth to all your outyards? Then there is marketing.....dont get me started on that.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Hey Jim....what a great post.

I'm curious about one (significant) aspect....the capacity (as you call it).

Those numbers were based (I think) on 500,000/lbs/year.

How many years out of 10 are you 'at capacity'? 

If you have a good year and there is potential for more Tha your capacity, do you have a way to add a 3rd shift, outsource, or 'expand quickly' to accomodate extra crop (or is the capacity limited by number of supers rather than the extracting line)?

Regardless....if the numbers you present come even close to your setup, then you have built a very fine system.


----------



## Richard Cryberg

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> Of course that is what it was targeted for. Who the heck wants to try and convince a commercial beekeeper to do something different? That is like bashing your head against the wall. Once the tooling costs are paid for (and it looks like it already has) these frames will be under 2 bucks a piece. You do realize this concept eliminates the honey house. What is that costing you?



Many years ago I had a wonderful stock broker. The man was a true marvel. He made me lots of money once I figured out the formula to work with him. The formula turned out to be dirt simple. He was always wrong. All you had to do was the exact opposite of his idea and you did fine.

In the 40 years since I had that broker I have never had the experience of finding another person who was always wrong until I encountered your posts of BS. I must say, I wonder if you are related to my former broker. Like him you are always wrong. Like him you always have an opinion based on zero facts or thoughtfulness.

Flow frames are a joke. They are not going to work very long before they fail in a whole variety of very predictable ways. No commercial guy will ever buy even one. The market is for people who have one hive and are afraid to work the hive. People like you. Those people will spend a bunch of money on this crappy idea, have dead bees and no longer functional flow frames in a couple of years and try to sell the junk hardware they have left. That assumes that any flow frames actually get delivered to start with and these snake oil promoters do not just take the money and run for the hills.

Thank you for the confirming tip off that this was the scam of the decade. If you had any reservations about it I might think there was some chance this crap would work. As you are convinced it is a gift from god and are always wrong I can be sure it is crap.


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Dean: Those numbers are pretty accurate based on how we operate, I didn't skew them at all. My example is a 5,000 hive outfit making a 100lb. per year average which is certainly realistic. An approximately $100,000 system manned by two very capable hard working people will extract a ton an hour. A third "swing person" will speed it up a bit more and significantly ease the load on all. Hauling honey in also requires 2 to 3 pretty capable individuals to keep the honey house supplied. Our extracting season is typically 3 months, so a little math will tell you that in a perfect world more could be done. In the real world, though, honey hauling conditions are not always ideal, minor breakdowns happen, workers need some breaks from the drudgery and if honey flow conditions are good we may well shut the honey house down for a day or two to do some catch up supering (those are the fun days).


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I would like to know who advised them and set up their launch campaign.
Given that talk of this honey collection system only hit Bee Source, and seemingly other medis sources, a very short while before their " launch" it was a very well orchestrated build up to the launch date.
If you look at the promotions it is a hive reminiscent of a picturesque swiss cabin set in pristine hills with a glass porch to set the equally pristine jars on. Clear skies, green grass, no bees seen anywhere in the feature photo.
The folks collecting the honey are mainly women...who look like they have never been on a farm in their lives and children. That is who they have targeted...and wisely...as one by one these folk have plunked down their money to one of those magical self running hives in their professionally cared for back yards.
The wonder of the flow hive is the wonder of a beautifully or hestrated launch campaign.
Kudos to those who did it.
If this proves to be a robust and viable system I expect it will work its way into commercial operations.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I asked on a separate thread but got no response...how does Indiegogo work? If a launch is done through them do they get a % of the initial launch goal, monies above that or nothing?

Is there any protection for those that have purchased if they don't get their product?

If these flow folks were hoping to make 70,000 in orders and now have close to 2 mil and will likely go beyond that are they set up for that type of production in a timely fashion while maintaining quality control.
Although some may think it very exciting for them it may be a nightmare. What if their initial demand is in the millions, they expand to accomodate that and the ongoing product demand fails.


----------



## Stephenpbird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Nearly 2 million 2,687% of target, a few products sold out including the full hive at 600 bucks. Plus the first day is not over yet. I think they are beyond caring what people think of their business. 
I wish them luck, as WBVC pointed out this could turn into a nightmare very quickly if they don't have competent people on board. Judging by their progress so far, I recon the champagne is out and someone is slipping this well planed business into first gear.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I haven't figured it out, but this is probably the least biased account:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiegogo

Looks like they will make this list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest_funded_crowdfunding_projects

It goes down to #77 at $1.0 million and they are already at almost $1.9 million which puts them up around #44 right now.


----------



## Stephenpbird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



WBVC said:


> I asked on a separate thread but got no response...how does Indiegogo work? If a launch is done through them do they get a % of the initial launch goal, monies above that or nothing?


It’s free to sign up, to create a campaign, and to contribute to a campaign.* When your campaign raises funds, Indiegogo charges a 9.0% fee on the funds you raise. If you reach your goal, you get 5.0% back, for an overall fee of 4.0%

It looks like the site has gone down, maybe too much traffic.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

when I got out of the service I worked with engineering at a plastics company. the mold for the frames is complex and expensive. they probably have very few and trying to fill large orders will be a huge bottleneck.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

If it hasn't been noted yet on this thread, the almost $2 million is not for the purchase of products. The $2 million is a donation to the cause. Free money, for which they have zero liability to provide anything. It's not stock, and the "early bird" discount is the only perk you get. 

The purchases are separate, and will add to the total once they deliver. 

I'm very impressed with the whole launch. Time will tell whether or not the product works and holds up to regular use over time. It's much too expensive for me at this time in addition to being too new to evaluate. The few that have been tested seem to work but prototypes aren't typically the same as mass-produced products.

I hope the thing works as advertised and is a success. The world loves winners.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



jim lyon said:


> Total .08 per lb.
> 
> But wait, I get a wax crop too. approximately $4.00 worth of bees wax for about every 58 lbs. means I gain back almost .07 per lb. in beeswax inventory!


You feel a 40K savings per year isn't worth considering?

Wax harvesting is another topic. For the health of the hive you would not want to have just flow frames in your hive. You will have to do something in the hives for the bees to draw wax. Cost savings are not always all or nothing. I am sure you could figure out a way of not collection jars of honey from each hive. Does a commercial guy bring jars of syrup to the hives when they feed?

I also feel your overall need of bee box equipment would decrease and likely the need of a wood shop. According to Mr Cryberg I am always wrong. I think he doesn't know me and will be one of the ones that go down with the sinking ship.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>If it hasn't been noted yet on this thread, the almost $2 million is not for the purchase of products.

Perks? They look like products. Are you sure?

> The $2 million is a donation to the cause. Free money, for which they have zero liability to provide anything. It's not stock, and the "early bird" discount is the only perk you get. 

They list a bunch of perks... and the early bird ones have been gone for some time now... the rest are slated for October through December.

>The purchases are separate, and will add to the total once they deliver. 

I don't understand how it works. Is there somewhere that explains all of this clearly?


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> According to Mr Cryberg I am always wrong. I think he doesn't know me and will be one of the ones that go down with the sinking ship.


More like he isn't going to be in a passenger car on one of your many train wrecks.

"As you are convinced it is a gift from god and are always wrong I can be sure it is crap." :applause: :lpf:
Well said Cryberg, well said.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> I don't understand how it works. Is there somewhere that explains all of this clearly?


Here's a link to the indiegogo faq on how the thing works. 

http://go.indiegogo.com/playbook/contributing

My reading is that in exchange for your contribution you get a "perk" of buying a Flow product at a discounted price.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

But I'm thinking they are saying the $50 a frame is the discounted price.


----------



## Stephenpbird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

They have nearly 9 million dollars of perks on offer, I wonder if they can increase that amount before the 42 days are up.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Pretty sure the answer is yes. They can add additional packages.


----------



## rweaver7777

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I sure hope the bees know not to visit rape fields. Them putting that honey in a frame where it will crystallize will cause some hijinks when it comes time to turn the spigot.


----------



## melliferal

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry Digman said:


> If it hasn't been noted yet on this thread, the almost $2 million is not for the purchase of products. The $2 million is a donation to the cause. Free money, for which they have zero liability to provide anything. It's not stock, and the "early bird" discount is the only perk you get.
> 
> The purchases are separate, and will add to the total once they deliver.


Are you sure? I had gotten the impression from the website that certain amounts of money were getting you some actual products, not just discounts on future product purchases. I could be 100% wrong about that but if I am, I reckon I'm not the only one; and I hope there aren't too many people out there who donated $600 and are expecting a Honey Flow hive in the post for it.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>My reading is that in exchange for your contribution you get a "perk" of buying a Flow product at a discounted price.

That's not what I see.

"Before claiming a perk, check out the perk details so you know what to expect. Here are some things to look for:

The stage of perk development (some perks are prototypes instead of finished, market-ready products)
Expected delivery date
Additional shipping costs
If you want, you can contribute more money than the perk amount displayed. Perk amounts are the minimum contribution necessary to claim that perk. If you want to contribute $20 while claiming a $5 perk, you can change the contribution amount during the checkout process."

This sounds like you can expect to receive the perk for the contribution. So, for instance, 
"$340USD Featured
Flow Light 4 frames - with Box
Includes: 4 Flow frames, tool and tubes + custom-made Flow Box to fit 10 frame Langstroth hive. Place the 4 Flow frames in between four standard frames in the new Flow Box. Harvest up to 26lb (12kg) at once. Put the Flow Box directly onto the brood box of your existing hive and in time enjoy honey on tap. The Flow box will come flat-packed for you to assemble and paint. Shipping paid separately prior to dispatch.
Estimated delivery: October 2015
96 out of 2000 claimed"

This sounds like the perk you are claiming is the frames. Not a discount on the frames... I'm not saying I'm right, having no experience at this, but that's how it reads to me.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

that gives indiegogo over 80k for using their web site to sell the product.


----------



## beemandan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Maybe this has already been asked and answered but, if so, I missed it. 
I wonder if any of the celebrity spokespeople are compensated or have a financial interest.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



melliferal said:


> Are you sure?


Nope, not 100%. But that's the way I'm reading it. I don't see a clearer explanation posted on the indiegogo site and the email wasn't perfectly clear either.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Amazing that something with a lot of unknowns and legitimate concerns raised in this thread, that the funds just roll right in. There's a message there. I sure hope this isn't another repeat of another "to good to be true" episode we had here not too long ago that produce much weeping and gnashing of teeth.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>I wonder if any of the celebrity spokespeople are compensated or have a financial interest.

I'm not sure who you are referring to, but if it's me, I don't consider myself a "celebrity" or a "spokespeople" and I definitely have no financial interest other than they gave me one box of frames to test which was free. So I guess at the going rate I got $350 worth of the product to test. I had no idea it would sell for that much...


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> I don't consider myself a "celebrity"


Well, we do.


----------



## bdouglas

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I hope everyone realizes some potential issues with importing. Is this door to door shipping or port to port and you would need an import broker? Will the product be shipped with an invoice or not since it is a "perk". No invoice "could" subject this to seizure. Is the product for commercial or personal use. Commercial use has more restrictions (country of origin, etc.). 

I once had a package seized because of the way it was described on the invoice. I later sent the same product and marked the invoice as "laboratory samples for analysis" and went thru with no problem.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

mb why else would they want your endorsement?


----------



## Kofu

*Flow™ Hive management question*

Okay, so what happens in the first winter?

Let's say I get my new Flow™ frames in June, and I cut the box to hold the frames in the middle. I install a package or a nuc, in June, and I let the bees collect all the honey they can before winter. I think ahead, and decide not to 'turn the crank,' so they can keep all the honey they collect this year.

So will they have enough to get them through next winter? Maybe I should feed?

Also, if they move into the upper box, eating the honey that's stored there, what happens with the brood nest? The artificial comb is too big for raising brood. Maybe I should move the Flow™ frames to the sides of the upper box, and put other frames of honey comb in the middle of the box for the brood nest? Um, but the nooks cut in the top of the upper box are in the middle... Maybe I should get another box, cut nooks at the sides for the Flow™ frames, use that instead and hope the bees don't come up on one side or the other.

Or should I put in a queen excluder, and hope the bees don't move up during the winter and leave the queen below?

(All this is hypothetical, for me, but a host of new beekeepers are going to want to know, if they're thoughtful enough to think ahead to next winter.)


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> This sounds like the perk you are claiming is the frames. Not a discount on the frames... I'm not saying I'm right, having no experience at this, but that's how it reads to me.


You're both sorta correct, based on my previous experience backing Kickstarter projects, and assuming that indiegogo operates substantially similarly. 

Yes, "contributors" are expecting to receive actual product, and they shouldn't have to pay anything more than what they've contributed, except for shipping that has already been explicitly excluded.

And yes, HoneyFlow actually has no legal obligation to deliver anything. 

In this way it's like an investment--if they do well, "contributors" get a fancy newfangled product before their neighbors do. If they fail, no one gets anything, and the contributors lose any claim they have to any perks.

So it's a leap of faith; no question about that. Personally, I find the idea intriguing enough to have "invested" $460 for a complete 7-frame box and frames. We'll see what happens.

But their crossing the $2M mark in funds makes this project very interesting, and the outcome depends on what kind of people they are and how well they're organized. The math works out to around $386 per contributor, and I think that works out to roughly 4-5 frames per contributor, depending on how many boxes they sold and whether anyone "donated" without claiming a perk. 

So they're sitting on $2M in funds, and needing to ship ~25,000 frames within the next ~6 months. Given the extraordinary response it wouldn't surprise me if they stretched their delivery schedule out significantly. But in any case, we're looking at ~25,000 units shipped over, say, 6-9 months, or somewhere around 2,500 to 4,000 units shipped per month. 

That doesn't sound like a big hurdle for a well-run manufacturing company, even a small one. I'm a manufacturer of electronic gizmos, and we're not at this production level yet, but it doesn't sound that scary to me, especially since they essentially have one product. As far as I can see, every Flow Frame is the same model, so they just need to crank out 25,000 identical widgets.

The boxes are excluded from this calculation, but they're sold unassembled anyway, so those are easy (if they've picked a good fabricator and high sufficiently tight tolerances).

Their initial goal was $70,000 which they means they were originally planning to bootstrap the operation--get tooled up, make/ship a few units, use the proceeds to expand, lather, rinse, repeat. Now they have $2M in the bank, so they can really think strategically. With $2M they can choose to some or all of the following:

Improve the product by adding features, specifying better materials, tightening tolerances, improving packaging, removing compromises, perform more testing, etc.
Improve their manufacturing by adding/selecting better fabricators and/or by adding staff.
Scale up their manufacturing by adding more fabricators and/or more machines and/or more staff and/or more shifts.
Add "extras" to increase customer satisfaction and loyalty. I backed the Exploding Kittens card game, and the founders have _significantly_ upped their offerings at each contribution level as the total funding level has blown by key milestones.
Engineer out every last penny of cost to make the greatest possible profit before people realize they've been had.
Spend it all on hookers and blow.

If I were the founders, I'd wait for my champagne headache to wear off, and then hire on a really good plastics manufacturing engineer, either as an employee or as a consultant. But I'd want someone with real-life experience building and shipping at least 100,000 units of something. There are a gazillion things that can go wrong in volume manufacturing, and you don't want to discover these after you have built/shipped 10,000 units. This is not the time to be heroic and think, "Bob, you and I are really smart guys! We'll figure this out together!" You have the money to pay for industry-proven expertise; it would be your wisest investment.

They're riding a tidal wave of enthusiasm and goodwill. The last thing they want to do is screw it up with a botched launch, recall, quality problems, etc.

I'm sure their business plan was marginal at the $70,000 funding level. At $2M, and at the prices they're charging, their gross margins should be insanely great. They should think quality, quality, quality, and customer satisfaction. 

As a backer/customer myself, I'd rather wait a few months and get a better product. After all, it will make very little difference to me if I get my Flow Box in December rather than September, because there's nothing to collect in a Los Angeles September anyway.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> If they fail, no one gets anything, [snip]
> 
> 
> Spend it all on hookers and blow.


 If they fail, the givers of money get nothing. They've (honeyflow) gotten plenty either way!


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

waterbug>>

"What on earth have I gotten myself into?"

may well be reiterated many times in the next year or so.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I registered so I could ask the questions that would clear up the "perk" thing, but you can't post publicly unless you contribute. Someone who has ponied up can ask whether the contribution allows you to purchase at a discount or whether it actually buys the product.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*

>Let's say I get my new Flow™ frames in June, and I cut the box to hold the frames in the middle. I install a package or a nuc, in June, and I let the bees collect all the honey they can before winter. I think ahead, and decide not to 'turn the crank,' so they can keep all the honey they collect this year.

This is a case where you have to adjust your management methods. I don't think it's an option to leave them on. The cluster is liable to end up in those combs. Since the cells are too deep for the queen to lay in and since the workers can't trim them to size, the queen will not be able to lay. I don't think this is acceptable. So I think you'll have to collect the honey and do something else to make sure they have food. Either honey from another hive (on standard combs) or feed them.

>Or should I put in a queen excluder, and hope the bees don't move up during the winter and leave the queen below?

No. The exlcuder will not stop them. The bees will simply move up and leave the queen behind.

You need to harvest the Flow frames, remove them for winter and make other arrangements for winter stores.

It is all going to come down to timing. And your timing is going to have to improve with these. Another issue of timing... someone pointed out to me that a new beekeeper may think that "I can go out and just drain off some fresh honey whenever I like". But that won't really work. You have to wait until it's capped for two reasons: 1) so it will be ripe and will not ferment and 2) so there are no bees with their heads in the cells to get crushed when you run the action on this. I think you'll have to keep an eye on things too, because if you don't harvest as soon as it IS capped they are likely to backfill the brood nest and swarm. So, to recap, no, you can't just drain it whenever you want some honey and yes you have to drain it when it's full if you want to keep them from swarming... Bottom line, this means you don't get to harvest whenever you feel like it... Still harvesting will be much simpler.

Winter is similar in that you pretty much have to take the Flow box off before the fall flow is over so the rest gets backfilled enough to get them through the winter, or, if the fall flow fails or you forget to do it in time, you'll have to feed enough to get through the winter. So timing becomes more important.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*

I wish people who are asking their 'friendly' questions would go do some research first.
Most (although not all) of the 'friendly' questions being asked have already been asked and answered in the FAQ and other places.
Even if you think this is all just a big joke, you wont get dirty if you go to their website and research the subject before offering up your 'friendly' advice.

You notice how politely Michael (the rock star of beekeeping whether he likes it or not LOL) asks and answers questions?

I particularly like the guy who asks if the flow hive is CCD and SHB proof... (PROOF was his word, not mine)(I think it was a him, my sexism is showing)(I hope sexism isn't considered a swear word here)
CCD proof? SBH proof?
wow...just wow...
Bill


----------



## SRatcliff

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry Digman said:


> I registered so I could ask the questions that would clear up the "perk" thing, but you can't post publicly unless you contribute. Someone who has ponied up can ask whether the contribution allows you to purchase at a discount or whether it actually buys the product.


I see nothing on indiegogo that says its for a discount. However, here's an article that explains the legal obligations(or lack thereof) for creators using crowd funders like Kick starter and Indigogo.

"Kickstarter fits into both the pre-purchase and rewards models. This means if pledging users offer money to a project, they are not legally owed a final product in return; rather, in accordance with Kickstarter's rules they are simply promised a separate reward for their pledge. Backers have not entered into an investment contract by donating toward a project, and because contributors are offered no financial return of any kind the legal implications of an investment contract are non-existent, says Bradford."

http://www.polygon.com/gaming/2012/...ckstarter-funders-can-expect-when-they-pledge


Products are not considered a financial return, only consumable. It is my understanding that if people don't end up with a product, at best they can make a case and try to sue them


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

maybe you know something many of the "old fogies" don't. care to elaborate?
Oh yeah, over the years the k.i.s.s. principle has worked very well for most seasoned beekeepers.



kholmar said:


> It is terribly fun to watch all the hide-bound old fogies going through the 5 stages of acceptance...
> 
> they started with denial, the first comments were along the lines of hoax, joke, gullible, blah blah blah but then Michael posted and shut them right up (mostly).
> we passed through anger fairly quickly.
> and are now into bargaining with such comments as 'lets just see how this all really works first'...
> probably wont see the depression because they will just not post during that time.
> acceptance? some are faster than others to the tune of almost a million USD in a couple hours.
> 
> will it turn out to be a fad?
> new technology sometimes stumbles but it NEVER goes away.
> if this version doesn't work, somebody will make one that does.
> nobody drives Model A Fords anymore but that doesn't mean the car was a fad.
> the genie is out of the bottle.
> 
> on the other hand, there is no big hurry, if it works as well as I think it will, springtime a year or two from now will be just about right for me...


----------



## Stephenpbird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

There seems to be allot of trust with this, for eg. 

SHIPPING: Shipping will be charged prior to delivery at the best rates possible. There has been an overwhelming response to Flow which will probably mean setting up more manufacturing in America. If this comes about, shipping prices will be much reduced for America and Europe.

The price of these frames was a great deal more than I was expecting (but perfectly acceptable, it seems to the 5,383 funders) , and even if I wanted to pledge/buy I don't think I would just because of the unknown price of shipping. What would it cost to ship a whole hive or frames from Australia to Europe?


----------



## leonphelps

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Could someone please tell me if the water content of the harvested honey with this contraption was measured and what it was? 

should put some questions of mine to bed.


----------



## beemandan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> So I guess at the going rate I got $350 worth of the product to test.


It isn't a problem for me. It's just that if I allowed some unknown entity to use my name, photo and promotional quote....an unproven entity that, as has already been pointed out, has no contractual obligation to deliver anything.....I would be cautious. They rip the $2+ million on fast cars, gambling, hookers and blow....where's that leave Michael Bush?


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



clyderoad said:


> maybe you know something many of the "old fogies" don't. care to elaborate?
> Oh yeah, over the years the k.i.s.s. principle has worked very well for most seasoned beekeepers.


the point is neither they nor I have any personal experience with these (yet) but you wont see me making such bold sweeping statements such as:
NO COMMERCIAL BEEKEEPER WILL EVER EVER EVER NEVER EVER EVER USE ONE OF THESE ... EVER... (ok, yeah, I exaggerated that just a bit but not really too much, except for a lot of extra EVERs, it's almost a direct quote)

people like this used to say that heavier than air flight would never ever ever work and that automobiles and televisions were nothing but a fad.

and yes, I do know something that 'old fogies' don't.
SOMETIMES new technology comes along and changes everything.

here is my sweeping statement: "This looks interesting as heck. I got out of beekeeping 35 years ago because it was a pain in the neck to extract honey" (I wish I had known about top bar hives then)
"If this works as well as I think it might, beekeeping might just become fun for me again."
"also, I love to tinker and build things, I am already building a TBH that is sized to allow a Flow Hive (or any 8 frame lang) on top of it."
"THIS IS GOING TO BE FUN even if I fail miserably."
"old, conservative, hide-bound FOGIES who never ever ever want to ever ever ever try anything new get on my nerves and I'm not all that young myself"

anyway, that's my gripe.
GIVE IT A CHANCE...
billy


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beemandan said:


> It isn't a problem for me. It's just that if I allowed some unknown entity to use my name, photo and promotional quote....an unproven entity that, as has already been pointed out, has no contractual obligation to deliver anything.....I would be cautious. They rip the $2+ million on fast cars, gambling, hookers and blow....where's that leave Michael Bush?


right back where he started from, a highly respected beekeeper who has only said one really concrete thing:
--->they gave him some free frames and they worked as advertised but he wont know about any potential problems until he has used them for some time" (paraphrasing the heck out of him, sorry if I didn't get that exactly right but that is how I took his statements.)

bill


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

"They rip the $2+ million on fast cars, gambling, hookers and blow....where's that leave Michael Bush? 
beemanden.
The inventors are honest, hard-working Australians. We don't have fast cars, we don't gamble..and what is a "hooker"?


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beeware10 said:


> that gives indiegogo over 80k for using their web site to sell the product.


beeware. I can hear you thinking...buy shares in indiegogo


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I thought you purchase a perk...whereby you eventually actually get the product perk you purchased...either by June or October...depending on if one purchased the early bird or regular perk. It seems there were also options to give a staright up donation...don't know if that converts to anything real over time.
Personally I think most of the money raised would be related to the actual perk items listed.




Barry Digman said:


> Here's a link to the indiegogo faq on how the thing works.
> 
> http://go.indiegogo.com/playbook/contributing
> 
> My reading is that in exchange for your contribution you get a "perk" of buying a Flow product at a discounted price.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>Could someone please tell me if the water content of the harvested honey with this contraption was measured and what it was? 

This is unrelated to the contraption. It's related to how humid your climate is and if you wait until it's capped. In my location if you wait until it's capped (and the outside frame which is visible is a good indicator of that) then it's usually about 17% regardless of how you got it.

>It isn't a problem for me. It's just that if I allowed some unknown entity to use my name, photo and promotional quote....an unproven entity that, as has already been pointed out, has no contractual obligation to deliver anything.....I would be cautious. They rip the $2+ million on fast cars, gambling, hookers and blow....where's that leave Michael Bush?

Right here I suspect. I'm not selling it. I'm not endorsing it. I've only said it works and talked about the details they have worked out that I'm aware of and what I see as things we won't know until it's been out a while. Was I supposed to insist on getting paid for telling them the truth about their product? Refuse to talk about it? I have no stake in it. But you have to admit it's about the coolest beekeeping thing to come along in a very long time. Now that they have priced it, I don't see me buying any until and unless the price comes down. But I guess they picked the right price. They are having no problem getting it. Maybe they should have charged more...


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Your excitement about this is hilarious.

It is not an item that lends itself to sideline or commercial beekeeping, and the comment you quote is not as bold as you think it is.
On one point I can agree: sometimes technology comes along and changes everything. The operative word is sometimes.


naiveté gets on my nerves (we all have our pet peeves) and I'll pass on giving it a try.



kholmar said:


> the point is neither they nor I have any personal experience with these (yet) but you wont see me making such bold sweeping statements such as:
> NO COMMERCIAL BEEKEEPER WILL EVER EVER EVER NEVER EVER EVER USE ONE OF THESE ... EVER... (ok, yeah, I exaggerated that just a bit but not really too much, except for a lot of extra EVERs, it's almost a direct quote)
> 
> people like this used to say that heavier than air flight would never ever ever work and that automobiles and televisions were nothing but a fad.
> 
> and yes, I do know something that 'old fogies' don't.
> SOMETIMES new technology comes along and changes everything.
> 
> here is my sweeping statement: "This looks interesting as heck. I got out of beekeeping 35 years ago because it was a pain in the neck to extract honey" (I wish I had known about top bar hives then)
> "If this works as well as I think it might, beekeeping might just become fun for me again."
> "also, I love to tinker and build things, I am already building a TBH that is sized to allow a Flow Hive (or any 8 frame lang) on top of it."
> "THIS IS GOING TO BE FUN even if I fail miserably."
> "old, conservative, hide-bound FOGIES who never ever ever want to ever ever ever try anything new get on my nerves and I'm not all that young myself"
> 
> anyway, that's my gripe.
> GIVE IT A CHANCE...
> billy


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



Michael Bush said:


> You need to harvest the Flow frames, remove them for winter and make other arrangements for winter stores.


Assuming these are at the top of the hive I am wondering if you could wait for a dearth empty these frames of honey and let the bees clean them up and then deny access and leave them on the hive?


----------



## SRatcliff

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beemandan said:


> It isn't a problem for me. It's just that if I allowed some unknown entity to use my name, photo and promotional quote....an unproven entity that, as has already been pointed out, has no contractual obligation to deliver anything.....I would be cautious. They rip the $2+ million on fast cars, gambling, hookers and blow....where's that leave Michael Bush?


They sent him the product. He tried it out, liked it, and said something good about it. I don't see how this will affect Michael at all.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*

>Assuming these are at the top of the hive I am wondering if you could wait for a dearth empty these frames of honey and let the bees clean them up and then deny access and leave them on the hive?

Mine are in a box on top of the cover with another cover on that box. And they have access, as in they can clean them up, but not from their hive. They would have to fly outside and into the top box. I just don't want them to move into them and not be able to raise brood in the spring. Plus IF they managed to raise brood in it, it would make a mess of cocoons that would interfere with it working. So I don't want it on the hive for winter.


----------



## beemandan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



SRatcliff said:


> I don't see how this will affect Michael at all.


People plop down four or five hundred bucks....in part because they trust the spokesperson.....someone whose photo, name and comments grace the front page of their website....and the outfit rips 'em off....and you don't see how that effects the spokesperson's reputation..... at all? OK.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> But you have to admit it's about the coolest beekeeping thing to come along in a very long time.


Indeed it is. Even if it turns out to be more of a novelty than a practical application it's very innovative and one of those inventions that completely breaks the mold and provides impetus for even more creative ideas. 

I distinctly remember walking into the driver's hall when I was running a wholesale milk route in 1971 with a hand held Texas Instrument calculator and being laughed out of the room. When I started finishing my route faster and faster it didn't take long for everyone to figure it out. 

edit: maybe it was '72...


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



clyderoad said:


> Your excitement about this is hilarious.
> 
> It is not an item that lends itself to sideline or commercial beekeeping, and the comment you quote is not as bold as you think it is.
> On one point I can agree: sometimes technology comes along and changes everything. The operative word is sometimes.
> 
> 
> naiveté gets on my nerves (we all have our pet peeves) and I'll pass on giving it a try.


I AM excited about it but not because I am a moron.
I get that it is nothing but a fancy super and everything else about beekeeping applies.
I also get that it might not be as cool as it seems but I WILL be giving it a try and I will NOT be crying about it if it does not work as well as I hope it will.

One last time I shall try to illustrate the difference between us.
I will give it a try. I will have fun giving it a try.
If you wont 'give it a try' then that's your choice but please stop coming in and calling those of us with the courage to try new things names like 'naive' and 'hilarious'.
please...
the newbies came here to talk about something new with experienced beeks but for the most part they are getting bashed just for having the courage to 'give it a try'.


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



kholmar said:


> the point is neither they nor I have any personal experience with these (yet) but you wont see me making such bold sweeping statements such as:
> NO COMMERCIAL BEEKEEPER WILL EVER EVER EVER NEVER EVER EVER USE ONE OF THESE ... EVER... (ok, yeah, I exaggerated that just a bit but not really too much, except for a lot of extra EVERs, it's almost a direct quote)
> 
> people like this used to say that heavier than air flight would never ever ever work and that automobiles and televisions were nothing but a fad.
> 
> and yes, I do know something that 'old fogies' don't.
> SOMETIMES new technology comes along and changes everything.
> 
> here is my sweeping statement: "This looks interesting as heck. I got out of beekeeping 35 years ago because it was a pain in the neck to extract honey" (I wish I had known about top bar hives then)
> "If this works as well as I think it might, beekeeping might just become fun for me again."
> "also, I love to tinker and build things, I am already building a TBH that is sized to allow a Flow Hive (or any 8 frame lang) on top of it."
> "THIS IS GOING TO BE FUN even if I fail miserably."
> "old, conservative, hide-bound FOGIES who never ever ever want to ever ever ever try anything new get on my nerves and I'm not all that young myself"
> 
> anyway, that's my gripe.
> GIVE IT A CHANCE...
> billy


Too bad you got out 35 years ago billy. A lot of pretty remarkable extracting advances have been made since you quit and the ones that work are pretty quickly adopted by the industry, even "hide bound old foggies" like me.  I have seen brilliant ideas and some really dumb ones and my opinion is that this one has elements of brilliance (assuming it works as advertised) but its core market will probably be almost exclusively to backyard beekeepers. I dont happen to think thats a criticism but apparently you do. From a commercial perspective its a solution in search of a problem. By far my biggest concern in commercial honey production isnt how I will harvest it but rather IF I have anything to harvest. Solve that problem and you will, truly have discovered the "holy grail" of beekeeping.


----------



## SRatcliff

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beemandan said:


> People plop down four or five hundred bucks....in part because they trust the spokesperson.....someone whose photo, name and comments grace the front page of their website....and the outfit rips 'em off....and you don't see how that effects the spokesperson's reputation..... at all? OK.


I think you can endorse a product without endorsing the company. If the product is terrible and doesn't do what Michael Bush describes, yes I think it could affect his reputation. If the Flow Hive company doesn't provide the product or spends the money on fast cars and gambling, Michael shouldn't be affected at all.


----------



## beemandan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



SRatcliff said:


> If the Flow Hive company doesn't provide the product or spends the money on fast cars and gambling, Michael shouldn't be affected at all.


I'm not going to make this dialog my life's work but I'll go one more round.
If Michael Bush independently stated that he'd tried this gizmo and it seemed to work as advertised. OK. 
But if he's allowed his face, name and comments are used by the company to promote their product....then he is tied to that company in most customers' minds. 
If they ripoff those customers....MB will be associated with that because he allowed them to use his reputation to sell their product.
If you disagree....so be it.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



jim lyon said:


> Too bad you got out 35 years ago billy. A lot of pretty remarkable extracting advances have been made since you quit and the ones that work are pretty quickly adopted by the industry, even "hide bound old foggies" like me.  I have seen brilliant ideas and some really dumb ones and my opinion is that this one has elements of brilliance (assuming it works as advertised) but its core market will probably be almost exclusively to backyard beekeepers. I dont happen to think thats a criticism but apparently you do. From a commercial perspective its a solution in search of a problem. By far my biggest concern in commercial honey production isnt how I will harvest it but rather IF I have anything to harvest. Solve that problem and you will, truly have discovered the "holy grail" of beekeeping.


I got out because I became a gypsy, LOL.
Now I am settled on some acreage.

I don't really know what the commercials will do, I just do not like statements with 'never' or 'ever' in them, history has proven that people who use those kinds of words are 'always' wrong...ROFL

I'm not really sold on the Flow Hive yet, gotta try it first.
I will bet you that SOME new commercial honey producers will try something SIMILAR to this if not this exactly in years to come.
I can see the argument that a large established commercial will not throw everything they already do away, of course not.

My plan is to get a hive established in a Top Bar hive and not mess with them much this season (unless it is a lot wetter in Texas this year than usual).
I also plan to build another TBH that is sized to accept an 8 frame Langstroth (or a Flow Hive) on top of it and give that a try NEXT season.
I hope to attempt to split my first hive (assuming it does well) to hive the new one with.
so yes, I know the Flow Hive is just a fancy honey super and I know that all the rest of beekeeping and bee maintenance is required.
any thoughts?


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

the goal of every commercial beekeeper is to make money. as I said before the best way to make money is to play on peoples greed. In this case not wanting to extract is the greed. the price of a couple of these units would buy a nice extractor. It for a very select market.


----------



## JRG13

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It's a novel idea for the backyard, save the bees type, and makes grabbing a jar or two of honey pretty straight forward which is why it's hot. I've seen this thing pop up all over Facebook since I like bees, everyone has been linking this too me. I will try it out, just for fun and when I want some fresh honey in a jar w/o firing up the 18/9. That being said, I see this as a 2-3 hive limited basis, with 1 max per yard so I could grab the landowner's some honey anytime they want. Other than that, it's a novelty, plain and simple. The frames have lmited usefulness to serious beekeepers and the old fashioned way is still more economical in the long run.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Cenario: A hive with AFB and honey flow system. 
How to sterilize the frames? How to eliminate the spores? Must the flow frames be burned?


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

A discussion has differing points of view offered and all are welcome, yours and mine. 

My choice of wording is a direct result of your choice of wording: re read your posts and how you refer to others.
It's one of those "what's good for the goose, is good for the gander". 

Should everyone who responds to this thread be pro flow? and keep patting each other on the back?
Amazing to me how defiant and victimized some people get when a contrasting opinion is voiced.




kholmar said:


> I AM excited about it but not because I am a moron.
> I get that it is nothing but a fancy super and everything else about beekeeping applies.
> I also get that it might not be as cool as it seems but I WILL be giving it a try and I will NOT be crying about it if it does not work as well as I hope it will.
> 
> One last time I shall try to illustrate the difference between us.
> I will give it a try. I will have fun giving it a try.
> If you wont 'give it a try' then that's your choice but please stop coming in and calling those of us with the courage to try new things names like 'naive' and 'hilarious'.
> please...
> the newbies came here to talk about something new with experienced beeks but for the most part they are getting bashed just for having the courage to 'give it a try'.


----------



## Haraga

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



JRG13 said:


> It's a novel idea for the backyard, save the bees type, and makes grabbing a jar or two of honey pretty straight forward which is why it's hot. I've seen this thing pop up all over Facebook since I like bees, everyone has been linking this too me. I will try it out, just for fun and when I want some fresh honey in a jar w/o firing up the 18/9. That being said, I see this as a 2-3 hive limited basis, with 1 max per yard so I could grab the landowner's some honey anytime they want. Other than that, it's a novelty, plain and simple. The frames have lmited usefulness to serious beekeepers and the old fashioned way is still more economical in the long run.


You are mistaken if you believe that you can "grab the landowner some honey anytime they want".


----------



## crofter

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I suspect that once you crack it it will not reseal till empty and the bees get in, clean up and wax over the cracks.


----------



## ken5400

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I just hope that this doesn't bring lot of newbees into beekeeping that are only concerned about getting honey and not the well being of the bees.
Keeping their hives healthy should be on the top of their list.


----------



## New Bee

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



bdouglas said:


> I hope everyone realizes some potential issues with importing. Is this door to door shipping or port to port and you would need an import broker? Will the product be shipped with an invoice or not since it is a "perk". No invoice "could" subject this to seizure. Is the product for commercial or personal use. Commercial use has more restrictions (country of origin, etc.).
> 
> I once had a package seized because of the way it was described on the invoice. I later sent the same product and marked the invoice as "laboratory samples for analysis" and went thru with no problem.


Australia has a "Free Trade Agreement" with the USA. There should be no bar on the shipping of the products to the US (other than overriding quarantine restrictions etc).


----------



## New Bee

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



max2 said:


> "They rip the $2+ million on fast cars, gambling, hookers and blow....where's that leave Michael Bush?
> beemanden.
> The inventors are honest, hard-working Australians. We don't have fast cars, we don't gamble..and what is a "hooker"?


Mate -given a "hooker" is the player (usually very fugly) in the middle of the front-row of a Rugby League or Union scrum I don't reckon the inventors will want to be spending any of this motza on them.


----------



## New Bee

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Eduardo Gomes said:


> Cenario: A hive with AFB and honey flow system.
> How to sterilize the frames? How to eliminate the spores? Must the flow frames be burned?


In NSW at least if you have foulbrood in your apiary you are required to get the hiveware irradiated.

So far as I know burning is not an option.

http://www.steritech.com.au/content/agriculture-and-pet


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Thank you New Bee.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



jim lyon said:


> By far my biggest concern in commercial honey production isnt how I will harvest it but rather IF I have anything to harvest.


Farmers are gamblers aren't they. Your concerns are like everyone else's concerns but that can change. If one farmer buys a tractor and the other one plows his fields with an oxen the way he has always done it he finds himself at a disadvantage. Especially when the product he sells falls in price because it is cheaper to produce with the tractor.


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beemandan said:


> ..But if he's allowed his face, name and comments are used by the company to promote their product....then he is tied to that company in most customers' minds. If they ripoff those customers....MB will be associated with that...


Remember the RRussell fiasco? Bush would be a pariah by association. I certainly hope that doesn't happen and don't think it will. Its the first go round and if the Aussies are smart they'll keep some of the capital they raised for Honey Flow V2, the debugged version. I still think its the coolest thing since sliced bread and at the same time know these frames would be a source of aggravation if I used them in my small operation. Like they say, you get what you pay for


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

They may be "gamblers" with things they can't control (weather, etc.), but I've always known farmers to be able to cut through the fluff and separate the wheat from the chaff.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry said:


> They may be "gamblers" with things they can't control (weather, etc.),


That is my point Barry. You can't control whether it is going to be a good honey harvest or a bad one but you can control the cost of labor and overhead to such a point that you have an advantage over the next guy.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

But I think you missed my point in the second half of my sentence.


----------



## crabbcatjohn

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Is the plastic BPA free? Nobody has answered this question.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

OK, forgive me, but this thread is destine for the record books.


----------



## JWChesnut

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Cedar Anderson had a "online" photo sharing site using the handle BeeInventive ( https://instagram.com/flowhive/ ). 

Two items worried me, both posted in early January 2015 (pre-PR). One showed "the bottom" of the flow hive, where the bees had built a massive wild, serpentine comb. https://instagram.com/p/xoJSH8FMhN/?modal=true

The other was a pix of clean white wild (swarm?) comb, that Cedar said they had collected to add bees to a Flow hive. https://instagram.com/p/xrJEZWlMnR/?modal=true

Cedar's comment on the wild burr comb was enthused by the pattern, and was unaware and/or unconcerned about issues with the wild comb in a hive. In general, its not certain how much beekeeping experience is at work. He's been at this a while, as the hive image with the narrow horizontal slot is dated 2013. At least three or four separate hive bodies can be identified from images. The horizontal slot, the shiplap planked roof, the tin peaked roof, the Newcastle hive in the yard of brother Gabriel Anderson and wife.

The idea that they were populating hives with blown bees in January (summer in Australia), while the pix of bees in the Flow hive windows were posted later chronologically to the site, raises the concern on how sustainable the bee population is in the hive and how much photo-dressing is occuring.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry said:


> OK, forgive me, but this thread is destine for the record books.


What kind of Record would that be?


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



sqkcrk said:


> What kind of Record would that be?


X2. G


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Certainly not Number of Posts.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

That's yet to be determined.


----------



## melliferal

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



kholmar said:


> people like this used to say that heavier than air flight would never ever ever work and that automobiles and televisions were nothing but a fad.


No. Those are things that people who are very excited about new ideas that are met with skepticism like to _claim_ were said about heavier than air flight, or automobiles, televisions and other innovations; but it isn't actually true.


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



New Bee said:


> Mate -given a "hooker" is the player (usually very fugly) in the middle of the front-row of a Rugby League or Union scrum I don't reckon the inventors will want to be spending any of this motza on them.


Got it! I have never shown much interest in RL or Union. The term does not appear in Tennis!


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



New Bee said:


> In NSW at least if you have foulbrood in your apiary you are required to get the hiveware irradiated.
> 
> So far as I know burning is not an option.
> 
> http://www.steritech.com.au/content/agriculture-and-pet


Burning or irradiation is the go in Qld.
( I used to live in Wenty, years ago)


----------



## crofter

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



melliferal said:


> No. Those are things that people who are very excited about new ideas that are met with skepticism like to _claim_ were said about heavier than air flight, or automobiles, televisions and other innovations; but it isn't actually true.


Trying to reduce their buyers remorse and rationalize their dreams maybe.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>Two items worried me, both posted in early January 2015 (pre-PR). One showed "the bottom" of the flow hive, where the bees had built a massive wild, serpentine comb. https://instagram.com/p/xoJSH8FMhN/?modal=true

The picture appears to be some comb that got built in a telescopic cover. Not sure of the sequence of events. It kind of looks like it was propped up to make room to feed something. His comment is just on how cool it looks. What about that is offensive? I have similar pictures on my site from when they moved into a feeder:
http://www.bushfarms.com/images/BroodNestInFeeder.JPG

I think it looks cool too... But I'm not recommending you keep bees in a feeder... would you assume this picture implies that?

>The other was a pix of clean white wild (swarm?) comb, that Cedar said they had collected to add bees to a Flow hive. https://instagram.com/p/xrJEZWlMnR/?modal=true

It reads like he caught a swarm in a swarm trap. You never caught a swarm in a swarm trap that had no frames?

>Cedar's comment on the wild burr comb was enthused by the pattern, and was unaware and/or unconcerned about issues with the wild comb in a hive. 

I think it's pretty cool too. What is your problem with it? That he didn't say it wasn't on purpose? I don't understand what you are worried about.


----------



## JWChesnut

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> I don't understand what you are worried about.


Both photos indicate the hives are prepped for the photo-shoot. I think there is an element of Mad-Men style pumping in that.


----------



## papabear

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

yea I agree commercial is in it to make money. I wonder if any commercial people signed up. 
If this works out I can see commercial trucks in almond yard with one big milk looking trucks with a big hose and pump filling up truck with almond honey sell for 15 dollars a pound


Stumpy lake bee farm


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



Michael Bush said:


> > Or should I put in a queen excluder, and hope the bees don't move up during the winter and leave the queen below?
> 
> No. The excluder will not stop them. The bees will simply move up and leave the queen behind.
> 
> You need to harvest the Flow frames, remove them for winter and make other arrangements for winter stores.


The sales pitch is misleading, including the video, etc. An 8-frame, 2-deep set-up is not enough for a colony to overwinter in, _especially_ if the novice beekeeper removes the upper box. How many people are buying into this project, not realizing what else they'll need to do for the bees to survive?

It's like "Starter" kits sold in the catalogs, or the CNC-generated plywood topbar hives — too small, so they either become swarm-machines or they die in winter, or both.

I'm noticing that most of the Mann Lake kits have room for overwintering. One that doesn't says explicitly in the blurb: "Once your colony is established, you will need to add another brood chamber and then supers when nectar flows occur."



Michael Bush said:


> It is all going to come down to timing. And your timing is going to have to improve with these. [...] Bottom line, this means you don't get to harvest whenever you feel like it... Still harvesting will be much simpler.
> 
> Winter is similar in that you pretty much have to take the Flow box off before the fall flow is over so the rest gets backfilled enough to get them through the winter, or, if the fall flow fails or you forget to do it in time, you'll have to feed enough to get through the winter. So timing becomes more important.


This sort of information ought to be given front and center. Otherwise there will be a lot of dead bees this time next year.

Their slogan: "It is so much easier on the beekeeper and so much easier on the bees." Hmmm... ($2,424,728 USD raised of $70,000 goal.)

(I realize, Michael, that you're not directing their publicity campaign. The situation now is simply that a lot of newbie beekeepers, sold on the idea of a "new" way of beekeeping, are going to need help. This has often been true for beginning beekeepers, but in the social media/Indiegogo environment, the problem is at a different level of magnitude.)


----------



## Jim Brewster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I think it's a cool idea. 

Friends who know I'm starting with beekeeping email it to me, or post it on my Facebook page. My answer is the same: 1) I'm just starting out and want to keep things simple; I don't want to be on the bleeding edge of innovation right now, 2) I personally don't want to put a bunch of plastic gizmos in my hives, except maybe a few beetle traps, but no judgment on those who might find it useful, and 3) I'm cheap, and until this becomes a commodity-market thing it's probably not for me.


----------



## crofter

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*

It is all so professionally orchestrated; they cover all the bases of emotional appeals to peoples hopes, fears, dreams to sell an expensive and complicated device. Exactly like 99% of commercial advertisment we are bombarded with so why discriminate against them. Tacit or implied product endorsement is a common ploy. Business as usual! Adds to the GNP! That has to be good, doesn't it?


----------



## rweaver7777

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*

All those "bee-havers" out there will learn after one or two seasons, that "bee-keeping" is not such a hands-off proposition as they are being told. The 80% that quit (see the Newbie thread for that #) will have a bit of equipment to sell.

I think I'll wait for the craigslist ads for these frames being sold for $5 or less...


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*

I'm pretty sure it isn't the sellers responsibility to say everything you will need to do to be successful to be a beek. If they were required, Dadant would have to do the same thing whenever they advertise a knockdown box. In a perfect world everything that is advertised would work as advertised, but this isn't a perfect world. I have no doubt now that these will work fine for some folks, and not at all for others, but is that the sellers responsibility? 

Every watch beer adds? They make it seem like it is all fun and you will be with a ton of smoking hot girls. Should they be sued if you end up a drunk in a gutter? 

Caveat Emptor and all of that.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*

>This sort of information ought to be given front and center. Otherwise there will be a lot of dead bees this time next year.

Agreed. That's just an equipment thing and often it is regional. What I find the most misleading with this is the pancake video. The whole idea that you can go turn a tap and honey comes out anytime you want it. Yes, you could turn the tap anytime and if there is a flow something will come out. But is it ripe?

But when I bought a starter kit it was one deep ten frame box and two shallows. Not enough to winter in Nebraska. No instructions from Dadant on what was needed. I had to buy beekeeping books to find that out. I didn't feel like they were being purposefully dishonest, but it was twice as much money as I had planned on by the time I was done...

>All those "bee-havers" out there will learn after one or two seasons, that "bee-keeping" is not such a hands-off proposition as they are being told. 

You still have to learn to be a beekeeper.

>Wait for the craigslist ads for these things being sold for $100 or less after 95% of those who purchase them want out.

Good plan.


----------



## Waggle

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



Kofu said:


> The sales pitch is misleading, including the video, etc. An 8-frame, 2-deep set-up is not enough for a colony to overwinter in, _especially_ if the novice beekeeper removes the upper box. How many people are buying into this project, not realizing what else they'll need to do for the bees to survive?


Don't tell my bees this. I have some of my bees overwintering in 8 frame single boxes. They do just fine like that around here. I bet they would do fine like that in much of australia as well. Remember, beekeeping varies greatly by location.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



Michael Bush said:


> This is a case where you have to adjust your management methods...
> 
> ...It is all going to come down to timing. And your timing is going to have to improve with these.


Michael is apparently the only one who has seen and touched this thing, so this is important. I think he nails the issues with this product. I think it's really innovative, but in reading the comments on their Indiegogo page it's clear that MANY of those who are lining up for these things that have never kept bees. I suspect they're in for a lot of disappointment. 

Clearly a person needs some experience in how a colony functions and the timing of certain events within the hive to get this thing to work. 

That doesn't mean it won't do what is claimed, only that "your mileage may vary" depending on how much experience you have.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



melliferal said:


> No. Those are things that people who are very excited about new ideas that are met with skepticism like to _claim_ were said about heavier than air flight, or automobiles, televisions and other innovations; but it isn't actually true.


"Professor Goddard...does not know the relation of action to re-action,
and the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to
react....he only seems to lack the knowledge ladled out daily in high
schools." 
-- 1920 New York Times editorial on Robert Goddard's rocket work. 
[The New York Times printed a retraction to this---in 1969, when
the Apollo 11 astronauts were on their way to the Moon.]


"Landing and moving about on the moon offers so many serious problems for
human beings that it may take science another 200 years to lick them." 
-- Science Digest, 1948


"You'll never make it -- four groups are out."
-- Anonymous record company executive to the Beatles, 1962


"While theoretically and technically television may be feasible,
commercially and financially I consider it an impossibility, a development
of which we need waste little time dreaming." 
-- Lee De Forest, 1926


"Television won't matter in your lifetime or mine."
-- R.S. Lambert, Canadian Broadcaster, 1936
[Hey, give him credit: he was right!]


"The actual building of roads devoted to motor cars is not
for the near future, in spite of many rumours to that effect."
-- Harper's Weekly, 1902


"The ordinary 'horseless carriage' is at present a luxury for the wealthy;
and although its price will probably fall in the future, it will never, of
course, come into as common use as the bicycle." 
-- Literary Digest, 1899


"Rail travel at high speed is not possible because passengers, unable to
breathe, would die of asphyxia." 
-- Dr. Dionysus Lardner, 1793-1859


"What can be more palpably absurd than the prospect held out of
locomotives travelling twice the speed of stagecoaches?" 
-- Quarterly Review, 1825


"Railroad Carriages are pulled at the enormous speed of 15 mph by engines
which, in addition to endangering life and limb of passengers, roar and
snort their way through the countryside, setting fire to the crops,
scaring the livestock, and frightening women and children. The Almighty
certainly never intended that people should travel at such breakneck
speed." 
-- Martin Van Buren


"Our future discoveries must be looked for in the sixth decimal place."
-- A. A. Michelson, 1894
[On the occasion of the dedication of a physics laboratory in Chicago,
noting that all the more important physical laws had been discovered] 


"I can accept the theory of relativity as little as I can accept the
existence of atoms and other such dogmas."
-- Ernst Mach (1838-1916)


"Physics, as we know it, will be over in six months." -- Max Born, 1928


"Even originally well-defined pencils of cathode rays from the Sun cannot
reach the Earth. For Birkeland's theories to be correct, the existance of
such cathode rays is clearly presupposed to be necessary...and this
assumption is untenable." 
-- Arthur Schuster, on Kristian Birkeland's theory of what causes 
aurorae. The "cathode rays" are now called the solar wind.


"It seems as if we may also be forced to conclude that the supposed
connexion between magnetic storms and sun-spots is unreal, and that the
seeming agreement between periods has been a mere coincidence."
-- Lord Kelvin, 1892


"X-rays will prove to be a hoax."
-- Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895


"Radio has no future."
-- Lord Kelvin


"Heavier than air flying machines are impossible."
-- Lord Kelvin


"Flight by machines heavier than air is impractical and insignificant, if
not utterly impossible." 
-- Simon Newcomb, Director, U.S. Naval Observatory, 1902


"Aerial flight is one of that class of problems with which man will never
be able to cope." 
-- Simon Newcomb, 1903


"The resistance of air increases as the square of the speed and works as
the cube [of speed].... It is clear that with our present devices there
is no hope of aircraft competing for racing speed with either our
locomotives or automobiles." 
-- William H. Pickering, Director, Harvard College Observatory, 1910


"The popular mind often pictures gigantic flying machines speeding across
the Atlantic carrying innumerable passengers in a way analogous to our
modern steam ships. . . it seems safe to say that such ideas are wholly
visionary and even if the machine could get across with one or two
passengers the expense would be prohibitive to any but the capitalist who
could use his own yacht." 
-- William Henry Pickering, Astronomer, 1910


"A popular fantasy is to suppose that flying machines could
be used to drop dynamite on the enemy in time of war."
-- William H. Pickering, Director, Harvard College Observatory, 1908


"Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value." 
-- Marechal Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de
Guerre


"The aeroplane is the invention of the devil and will never play any part
in such a serious business as the defence of a nation." 
-- Sir Sam Hughes, Canadian Minister of Defence, 1914


"By no possibility can the carriage of freight or passengers through
mid-air compete with their carriage on the earth's surface. The field
for aerial navigation is then limited to military use and for sporting
purposes. The former is doubtful, the latter is fairly certain."
-- Hugh Dryden, 1908


"The [flying] machines will eventually be fast; they will be used in
sport but they should not be thought of as commercial carriers."
-- Octave Chanute, 1910


"The director of Military Aeronautics of France has decided to discontinue
the purchase of monoplanes, their place to be filled entirely with
bi-planes. This decision practically sounds the death knell of the
monoplane as a military instrunent." 
-- Scientific American, 1915


"As far as sinking a ship with a bomb is concerned, you just can't do it."
-- Rear Admiral Clark Woodward, 1939


"Even considering the improvements possible...the gas turbine could hardly
be considered a feasible application to airplanes because of the
difficulties of complying with the stringent weight requirements." 
-- U. S. National Academy Of Science, 1940


"Although we are living in what may be termed the steam era and our Navy
is a steam navy, I have in this work wholly excluded the consideration of
steam power, as, owing to the great cost of coal and the impossibility of
providing stowage for it except to a limited extent, the application of
steam power for ordinary purposes must be strictly auxiliary and
subordinate and its employment in general service the exception rather
than the rule." 
-- Captain Alston, RN, Manual of Seamanship, 1859


"I do not believe in the commercial possibility of induced radioactivity." 
-- J. B. S. Haldane


"The energy produced by the breaking down of the atom is a very poor kind
of thing. Anyone who expects a source of power from the transformations
of these atoms is talking moonshine." 
-- Ernest Rutherford, 1930


"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will be
obtainable." 
-- Albert Einstein, 1932


"It can be taken for granted that before 1980 ships, aircraft, locomotives
and even automobiles will be atomically fueled." 
-- David Sarnoff, 1955


"They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance!"
-- Major General John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania Courthouse, May 1864


"Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys which distract our attention
from serious things. We are in great haste to construct a magnetic
telegraph from Maine to Texas; but Maine and Texas, it may be, have
nothing important to communicate." 
-- Henry David Thoreau


"I must confess that my imagination, in spite even of spurring, refuses to
see any sort of submarine doing anything but suffocating its crew and
foundering at sea." 
-- H. G. Wells, 1901


"People give ear to an upstart astrologer [Copernicus]...this fool wishes
to reverse the entire science of astronomy" 
-- Martin Luther


"I think there should be a law of Nature to prevent a star from behaving
in this absurd way!" 
-- Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington, on the Chandrasekhar limit


"[Of celestial bodies] We may determine their forms, their distances,
their sizes, and their motions---but we can never know anything of their
chemical composition; and much less, that of organized beings living on
their surface." -- Philosopher Auguste Comte, 1835


"Since the 40-inch objective of the Yerkes refractor and the 200-inch
mirror of the Palomar reflector have apparently reached the practical
construction limits for telescopes of their respective types, it is
extremely doubtful if a greater light-gathering eye of either kind will
ever again be built." -- A. Frederick Collins, 1942


"This foolish idea of shooting at the moon is an example of the absurd
length to which vicious specialization will carry scientists. To escape
the Earth's gravitation a projectile needs a velocity of 7 miles per
second. The thermal energy at this speed is 15,180 calories [per gram]. 
Hence the proposition appears to be basically impossible"
-- A. W. Bickerton, 1926


"I am bold enough to say that a man-made Moon voyage will never occur 
regardless of all scientific advances."
-- Lee De Forest, "the father of electronics"


"There is no hope for the fanciful idea of reaching the Moon because of 
insurmountable barriers to escaping the Earth's gravity."
-- Forest Ray Moulton, astronomer, 1932


"Space travel is utter bilge."
-- Richard Woolley, Astronomer Royal, 1956


"All this stuff about traveling around the universe in space 
suits---except for local exploration which I have not discussed---belongs
back where it came from, on the cereal box." 
-- Edward Purcell, Harvard radio astronomer, 1960


Space is clearly the great breakthrough of human knowledge---for centuries
to come...We have a long and undistinguished record of America failing to
anticipate the promise and potential of each new age of science,
invention, and discovery...Even so far-sighted an American as Woodrow
Wilson spent time denouncing the automobile. The steamboat, the
locomotive, the airplane, all brought prophecies of doom and gloom. We
have learned a lesson we surely do not need to be be taught again. 
-- Lyndon Baines Johnson, June 1963


"Fooling around with alternating currents is just a waste of time. Nobody
will use it, ever. It's too dangerous. . . it could kill a man as quick
as a bolt of lightning. Direct current is safe." 
-- Thomas Edison


"Just as certain as death, [George] Westinghouse will kill a customer
within six months after he puts in a system of any size." 
-- Thomas Edison


"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons." 
-- Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949
[This is actually right: computers these days usually do weigh no
more than 1.5 tons.]


"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." 
-- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943


"I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with
the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that
won't last out the year." 
-- The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957


"But what ... is it good for?" 
-- Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968,
commenting on the microchip


"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." 
-- Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment
Corp., 1977 [DEC went on to founder in the PC market.]


"This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as
a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us." 
-- Western Union internal memo, 1876


"The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay
for a message sent to nobody in particular?" 
-- David Sarnoff's associates in response to his urgings for investment
in the radio in the 1920s


"The concept is interesting and well-formed, but in order to earn better
than a 'C,' the idea must be feasible." 
-- A Yale University management professor in response to Fred Smith's
paper proposing reliable overnight delivery service [Smith went on
to found Federal Express Corp.]


"Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" 
-- H. M. Warner, Warner Brothers, 1927


"I'm just glad it'll be Clark Gable who's falling on his face and not Gary
Cooper." 
-- Gary Cooper on his decision not to take the leading role in "Gone
With The Wind" 


"A cookie store is a bad idea. Besides, the market research reports say
America likes crispy cookies, not soft and chewy cookies like you make." 
-- Response to Debbi Fields' idea of starting Mrs. Fields' Cookies


"We don't like their sound, and guitar music is on the way out." 
-- Decca Recording Co. rejecting the Beatles, 1962


"If I had thought about it, I wouldn't have done the experiment. The
literature was full of examples that said you can't do this." 
-- Spencer Silver on the work that led to the unique adhesives for 3-M
"Post-It" Notepads


"So we went to Atari and said, 'Hey, we've got this amazing thing, even
built with some of your parts, and what do you think about funding us? Or
we'll give it to you. We just want to do it. Pay our salary, we'll come
work for you.' And they said, 'No.' So then we went to Hewlett-Packard,
and they said, 'Hey, we don't need you. You haven't got through college
yet.'" 
-- Apple Computer Inc. founder Steve Jobs on attempts to get Atari and
H-P interested in his and Steve Wozniak's personal computer


"You want to have consistent and uniform muscle development across all of
your muscles? It can't be done. It's just a fact of life. You just have
to accept inconsistent muscle development as an unalterable condition of
weight training." 
-- Response to Arthur Jones, who solved the "unsolvable" problem by
inventing Nautilus


"Drill for oil? You mean drill into the ground to try and find oil? 
You're crazy." 
-- Drillers who Edwin L. Drake tried to enlist to his project to drill
for oil in 1859


"Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau." 
-- Irving Fisher, Professor of Economics, Yale University, 1929


"Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction". 
-- Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872


"No one will ever be able to measure nerve impulse speed."
-- Johannes Muller, German Physiologist, 1846


"The abdomen, the chest, and the brain will forever be shut from the
intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon". 
-- Sir John Eric Ericksen, British surgeon, appointed
Surgeon-Extraordinary to Queen Victoria, 1873


"We are probably at the limit of what we can know about astronomy." 
-- Simon Newcomb, 1888


"That the automobile has reached the limit of its development is suggested
by the fact that during the last year no improvements of a radical nature
have been introduced." 
-- Scientific American, 1909


"Everything that can be invented has been invented." 
-- Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899


"Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for
future improvements." 
-- Julius Frontenus, 10 A.D.


"640K ought to be enough for anybody." 
-- Bill Gates, 1981


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I didn't read all of these, but a bunch of them have to do with invention. A crap load of stuff that has been invented has never made it into production. Remember the spruce goose?


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

"It is well for the heart to be naive and the mind not to be." - Anatole France


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*

If folks can overwinter single, or double, nucs then with feed provided they could over winter 2 x 8 frame brood boxes.

It is interesting to follow this thread...human nature undressed. Those that are excited to see how something very new pans out over time and those that for whatever reason why it is no good. Just a cross section of humanity.

Personally I am very intrigued. I can only trust it is not a scam and I wish them well with their effort.

My thoughts are that more, perhaps even the nay sayers, would be trying this out for themselves if the price was within their comfort zone.



Kofu said:


> The sales pitch is misleading, including the video, etc. An 8-frame, 2-deep set-up is not enough for a colony to overwinter in, _especially_ if the novice beekeeper removes the upper box. How many people are buying into this project, not realizing what else they'll need to do for the bees to survive?
> 
> It's like "Starter" kits sold in the catalogs, or the CNC-generated plywood topbar hives — too small, so they either become swarm-machines or they die in winter, or both.
> 
> I'm noticing that most of the Mann Lake kits have room for overwintering. One that doesn't says explicitly in the blurb: "Once your colony is established, you will need to add another brood chamber and then supers when nectar flows occur."
> 
> 
> 
> This sort of information ought to be given front and center. Otherwise there will be a lot of dead bees this time next year.
> 
> Their slogan: "It is so much easier on the beekeeper and so much easier on the bees." Hmmm... ($2,424,728 USD raised of $70,000 goal.)
> 
> (I realize, Michael, that you're not directing their publicity campaign. The situation now is simply that a lot of newbie beekeepers, sold on the idea of a "new" way of beekeeping, are going to need help. This has often been true for beginning beekeepers, but in the social media/Indiegogo environment, the problem is at a different level of magnitude.)


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*

In regards to the pancake advert. If you are using the golden liquid right away perhaps it doesn't have to perfectly cured to meet your taste. What I would wonder is can you turn on enough for a pancake and then shut it off again. Without the bees coming in and sealing the rent in the open cells does it simply keep on leaking.
However that is not a legal point as they don't say or suggest what happens after the pancake has enough syrup. That is up to the viewers imagination...do they then fill a jar with the rest or do they turn off until the next breakfast.
As I said before...I wish I knew who developed and executed their advert campaign ...it is good.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*

From the rules:



> Quoting. Don't quote back entire messages in your reply. While this board allows you to "quote" (i.e. include) messages when you reply to them, very rarely do you ever need to quote the entire message from a previous post. Simply quote the relevant portion and cut out the rest. Never include images in your quote.


And entire pages of quotes are probably unnecessary when one or three and a link to the rest will do. It makes for a smoother thread.


----------



## crofter

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*

kholmar, that is a slick selective search of examples where people were *wrong* about proposed new ideas. If a search could be done to collect the list of *correct* predictions about _sure to fail proposals_, that would fill many books. That too is a common ploy.


----------



## crofter

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



WBVC said:


> .<Snip> As I said before...I wish I knew who developed and executed their advert campaign ...it is good.


It is good; I would say professional!


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

A few years ago I let a stock broker talk me into buying some shares in Globalstar. They had the hottest new phone technology. It was up and running and it clearly worked. It was direct phone to satellite communications that worked all over the world. It was the latest greatest thing, no dependence on cell phone towers to worry about. No dead zones in valleys. Just pick up the phone and call. It was "can't miss" technology. Seems like I bought a few shares for around $30.....and sold them for about .25 a couple of years later as it was declaring bankruptcy. 
Did it work? Heck yes it did, by all accounts it worked great. They had some savvy marketing ideas as well. They passed phones out to large money managers who were so enamored with this new technology that they didn't hesitate to buy shares in the company. Was it commercially viable? Well that turned out to be the problem. Cell phone towers sprung up all over the world and offered cell service to the masses for a tiny fraction of the price while the cost of putting a single satellite in orbit made Globalstar's service largely unaffordable. Last I heard they reorganized and were still plugging away, barely solvent, and offering service to fringe markets like ocean going ships and globe trotting news reporters. 
However before we decide if the Flow Frame's marketability more closely resembles cell technology or satellite technology we must first answer the biggest questions which are. Does it work as advertised and does it really make beekeeping simpler? At this point we don't even have an independent field test to give us any answers. Just some beekeeping "experts" who looked at it and thought it was a pretty cool idea. It's going to be interesting to see how they, and anyone else that buys one feels about it a year from now.


----------



## pomicultorul

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



Barry Digman said:


> ...it's clear that MANY of those who are lining up for these things that have never kept bees. I suspect they're in for a lot of disappointment.




Of course the non-beekeepers will be buying it, they are the target audience! (I thought that the professional marketing firm made that quite clear; they gave up even on the hobbyists the moment they got with their pancakes near that hive.)

The "system" (did you really think that word will not come up in their commercial?) is a gadget that will have too many non-beekeepers and a few gullible beginners kill tons of bees. It is prohibitive by price and that is not all of it. The company will not engage in a dialog (if ever) addressing the many challenges one faces implementing such "system" until it had its fill. For now, you should be satisfied with "amazing, honey on tap", "amazing... on tap", "easy to use... little disturbance", "that drizzle... fresh as it can be" (whenever was that a concern among... well, anyone?). 

That marketing campaign is an insult to the intelligence of anyone who has kept bees for even a year, I would keep my distance from them. As Carlin said (about suspicious food) "I don't like it, you like, you eat it"
Thank you.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



Kofu said:


> . . . I'm noticing that most of the Mann Lake kits have room for overwintering. One that doesn't says explicitly in the blurb: "Once your colony is established, you will need to add another brood chamber and then supers when nectar flows occur."
> 
> This sort of information ought to be given front and center. Otherwise there will be a lot of dead bees this time next year.


Well, yes, sorta. IMNSHO it's incumbent on the buyer, so long as reasonable caveats are provided by the mfr/seller. And it's there:



> If you are new to beekeeping, *you should link up with an experienced beekeeper* to get to know how to care for your bees.





> Our invention changes the honey harvesting component of beekeeping. *All the rest of the normal beekeeping care for the hive still applies*. Beetles, mites, swarm control etc. The flow hive clear end frame observation does assist with allowing you to look into the hive and gauge the strength and health of the colony.





> *You should consult local beekeepers* as to how much they leave in their colonies over the winter.





> BEE ENTHUSIASM: If you are new to beekeeping, welcome to the exciting new world. As a new beekeeper it is important to be fully informed about all aspects of what is involved in caring for bees. Some of these answers can be found on our website and in our FAQs. *We also strongly recommend you join your local beekeeping club for additional support*.
> FLOW HIVE DOES NOT PROVIDE THE ACTUAL BEES: The Flow Hive provides the frames (Flow Lite) or entire Hive (Flow Flow), but does not supply the bees. *You will need to connect with your local beekeeper or club to source your own bees*.


Emphases mine.

Should they have highlighted those sections with bold font and <BLINK> tags? Maybe, but I won't condemn them for not doing so. Think about 3D printers; they're notoriously difficult to use, and the vast majority of printers ever sold will end up making one tchotchke, and then end up collecting dust in the garage. That's not really the fault of the individual manufacturers; it's more an effect of the state of the industry. It's in its early stages, and these "products" are more like prototypes.

I see the Flow Hives in the same vein. They're prototypes of a new way of collecting honey. My guess is that a "flow hive" (generically speaking, and not necessarily from these guys) will look different 10 years hence, but will be inspired by what ships in the next 12 months, and will have tons of lessons learned from all us pioneers with arrows or stingers in our backs.

Granted, the bar should be higher here because we're dealing with living, breathing beings that should be cared for appropriately, but anyone who thinks about adopting a box of 30,000 stinging insects without doing at least some cursory reading and research needs to have their head examined.


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> It's incumbent on the buyer, so long as reasonable caveats are provided by the mfr/seller.


The caveats you quoted just say to consult with people who know more. Meanwhile, e.g., on facebook, a lot of people sold on the Flow™ Hive idea are so determined that it'll be "so much easier on the beekeeper" that they don't want to hear the voice of experience. What do we "know" anyway, if none of us (just one of us) has even seen these things?


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



jim lyon said:


> does it really make beekeeping simpler?


Many restless nights ahead for Maxant!


----------



## Barry

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> My guess is that a "flow hive" (generically speaking, and not necessarily from these guys) will look different 10 years hence, but will be inspired by what ships in the next 12 months, and will have tons of lessons learned from all us pioneers with arrows or stingers in our backs.


They way this has worked in history is that someone else will come along and use this technology or idea and develop something that really changes the world. Rarely is it the first go around that does it.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry said:


> Many restless nights ahead for Maxant!


They could get busy on a machine that separates wax, honey and bee parts like that European model does. Jim Lyon has a point about wax harvesting and I think the hives that use this honey flow technology will need regular frames so the wax makers can get rid of their wax.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



Kofu said:


> *The caveats you quoted just say to consult with people who know more*. Meanwhile, e.g., on facebook, a lot of people sold on the Flow™ Hive idea are so determined that it'll be "so much easier on the beekeeper" that they don't want to hear the voice of experience. What do we "know" anyway, if none of us (just one of us) has even seen these things?


I personally think that's the best possible advice they can give. If there were to give actual beekeeping instruction, there'd be a different group of beeks on this very thread, with torches and pitchforks, criticizing their advice as arrogant, irrelevant, not region-specific, etc. 

"Consult your local beekeeping club about what works best in your area" really is excellent advice. But you can't make people take advice.


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> > The caveats you quoted just say to consult with people who know more.
> 
> I personally think that's the best possible advice they can give. [...] "Consult your local beekeeping club about what works best in your area" really is excellent advice.


On the question about over-wintering the colony and not letting the cluster move up into the box of Flow™ frames where they might want to raise brood, they're in the best position to say something, up front. But instead, calling it the "Full Flow" hive or some-such name, as a 'perk' for a sizable contribution, they offer two 8-frame deeps (including the Flow™ frames) and imply that that's all you'll ever need.

I don't even know how likely it is, but that's one scenario that might bring down many new beekeepers. Is this such a "local" issue that the individual clubs will know what works best in their area?


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*

I think a lot more people get into bees because of a magazine article than people putting down $300 or more for a flow hive. I'm really not that concerned what other people want to do with their money, it isn't my thing, but it isn't the end of the world either, and if I can get some used for pennies on the dollar I will probably try them. 

What is the percentage of people that get into bees and then get out within the first full year. I doubt the flow hive will change that statistic. It may actually increase the longevity of newbies since some folks will decide that they are in it for a grand, they may as well throw another package at them to give it a shot a second year.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



Barry Digman said:


> From the rules:
> 
> 
> 
> And entire pages of quotes are probably unnecessary when one or three and a link to the rest will do. It makes for a smoother thread.


My apologies, in this particular case I thought the length of the list was germane to the point.
What I keep forgetting is that people who follow dogma will not be swayed by facts. (I don't mean you)

I shall not repeat my mistakes.
Bill


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



crofter said:


> kholmar, that is a slick selective search of examples where people were *wrong* about proposed new ideas. If a search could be done to collect the list of *correct* predictions about _sure to fail proposals_, that would fill many books. That too is a common ploy.


my point is not about whether or not the Flow Hive will work or not.
my point is that all too often, dogmatic individuals refuse to even ACCEPT the possibility of something new.
there is a large group here that says things like "I will not be giving it a try" because, I am guessing, they have already decided that, without even seeing one, it cannot possibly work as advertised.
I believe this to be shallow thinking.
I am not here to argue about whether or not the Flow Hive will work or not work or whatever.
I am here to argue against dogmatic rejection of new things just because they are new.

there is another fairly largish group that is quietly and politely saying, "gee, that looks cool, maybe I will give it a try".
those people are getting bashed unmercifully and I don't care for that behavior.

I am new here, if it is acceptable behavior to bash newbies and people who like new things, please let me know and I will go somewhere else.
I don't believe this to be the case, Barry seems to be a firm but fair moderator.

as for your assertion, you are probably very much correct but it entirely misses my point.

I am hopeful that this product will work as advertised. 
I am aware that it is nothing but a fancy honey super.
I am aware that bee hives are complex organisms that need to be monitored and cared for.
I happen to like doing it and I am hopeful that this product might make at least one aspect of it a bit easier.

peace
bill


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



Barry said:


> They way this has worked in history is that someone else will come along and use this technology or idea and develop something that really changes the world. Rarely is it the first go around that does it.


I suspect that this is the closest thing to the truth that has been uttered on this thread!
Bill


----------



## jbeshearse

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



kholmar said:


> I am new here, if it is acceptable behavior to bash newbies and people who like new things, please let me know and I will go somewhere else.
> I don't believe this to be the case, Barry seems to be a firm but fair moderator.
> 
> as for your assertion, you are probably very much correct but it entirely misses my point.
> 
> peace
> bill


Often is what happens here is that new members show up espousing new better beekeeping methods while telling those that are offering sage advice are accused of being old stuck in their way curmudgeons. Their advice is chalked up to being opposed to new ideas. 

I am sorry if you feel you have been bashed. New ideas are almost always greeted with healthy skepticism by the established community. I share your hope that this system works, especially for those who have purchased "perks". 

Please stick with us, we are not all old curmudgeons, lots of good advice here and also some bad. 

Cheers

Jeb


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*

Leastwise some of us aren't Jeb. I agree. What does it cost us to sit back a watch what happens with the Flow? Nothing. Whereas the bashing shows a poor image of the ones spewing all of the negativity. 

Curmudgeons Unite!!


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



jbeshearse said:


> Often is what happens here is that new members show up espousing new better beekeeping methods while telling those that are offering sage advice are accused of being old stuck in their way curmudgeons. Their advice is chalked up to being opposed to new ideas.
> 
> I am sorry if you feel you have been bashed. New ideas are almost always greeted with healthy skepticism by the established community. I share your hope that this system works, especially for those who have purchased "perks".
> 
> Please stick with us, we are not all old curmudgeons, lots of good advice here and also some bad.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Jeb


Not me personally and I came here for the sage experience.
I may be causing trouble in THIS thread but I am reading a LOT of other threads and learning a ton. =)

I know it's not all or even a majority, I am sorry if I seemed to imply that.
Bill


----------



## snl

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



jbeshearse said:


> Please stick with us, we are not all old curmudgeons, lots of good advice here and also some bad.


Not all are curmudgeons. Acebird is well ... you'll see but Rader Sidetrack (as you'll soon discover) is very much a skeptic and will remain so!


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

*Re: Flow™ Hive management question*



sqkcrk said:


> What does it cost us to sit back a watch what happens with the Flow? Nothing.


:thumbsup: I'm already sitting Mark.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry said:


> Many restless nights ahead for Maxant!


This looks like it's going to be my year for a new extractor. 

Maybe Maxant will be putting some of their extractors on sale with all this going on. The timing couldn't be better.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Yeah, let me know what Jake has to say.


----------



## beecuz

*Flow Hive - I bought one - anyone else?*

I took a chance and donated to the Flow Hive through Indiegogo. I've not had much luck with investments in the past, but this looked promising. I had a few doubts at first blush, but saw that Michael Bush had good things to say about it...so, what the heck? I am hoping they have a real winner with their design and looking forward to delivery in October of this year. Has anyone else taken a leap of faith???

beecuz

"...for breath is sweeter taken even as the last in places dear...
with gardens, fields and dogwood trees...in forest stands of bamboo shoots and
ginger root...and honey bees."


----------



## Harley Craig

*Re: Flow Hive - I bought one - anyone else?*

I MAY try one.......once people start unloading them on craigslist for .20 on the dollar because they didn't realize they would actually have to work bees


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Flow Hive - I bought one - anyone else?*

I might some frames in the future. Just for the sake of seeing it for myself. It will be interesting to see how the whole project pans out. I dont expect they were looking for the overwhelming amount of orders they got. Hope they can keep up. Good luck with it. G


----------



## Beeman95

*Re: Flow Hive - I bought one - anyone else?*

I thought about getting some frames, but wasn't sure I wanted to lay out that kind of money. My bro-in-law bought one so I will see what it's like before I buy one.


----------



## melliferal

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



kholmar said:


> "Professor Goddard...


*(long list of apocryphal and completely unsourced quotes of people who were allegedly wrong about things removed)*

People have been wrong about things in the past, and they will be wrong about things in the future. However, the fact that people have expressed skepticism about the usefulness of an invention, still is not a validation of the invention's usefulness.

It's a strange argument to push considering that nobody actually seems to be questioning that the thing works as described, but rather are just dubious about things like practicality and cost-effectiveness to large-scale commercial beekeeping.


----------



## Acebird

*Management changes for flow hive*

I would like to discuss the management changes that will be necessary using this flow hive so when people get them they will have a better chance of success. Anything that is automated requires changes in practices from the user in order for it to succeed. The design could be perfect but the execution of how it is used causes failures. Don't I know.

I do not want to discuss whether this device will work or not. Lets take the forums experience and identify what will have to change and how to do it.

Michael Bush to my knowledge you are the only American that has seen and used this device. Will the inventors let you photograph the device and let all of us see how it works since they have already released it. Most likely this is patented and all of that has to be reviled in the patent anyway. What are your plans for future use.


----------



## quattro

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



> once people start unloading them on craigslist for .20 on the dollar


As a beginning beekeeper, where does everyone have these wonderful Craigslist experiences? I have been watching it for months and I never see anything better than junk being advertised for prices higher than I can buy it new online. I have been using searchtempest with a 400 mile radius and I have seen squat.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



quattro said:


> As a beginning beekeeper, where does everyone have these wonderful Craigslist experiences?


Craigslist works best local so it will depend on your local community. However, I did drive to CT to buy a couple of flail mowers. The guy was so sure I wasn't going to show up.


----------



## Beregondo

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

It seems fairly obvious.

It will require not pulling supers mid flow toi empty them and make room for more honey.

If the manufacturer report is accurate, the bees will umcap.and refill the empty comb.

I suspect some my find a screen around the tap and container helpful to keep bees.out of the honey/container.

This all assumes it all.works reliably as represented.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



Beregondo said:


> It seems fairly obvious.


Michael has expressed that it isn't obvious and it does work and the frames are too deep to raise brood during winter. This would be a problem for the frame anyway so something has to be done to avoid the problem. I am sure any fool can figure out a way to keep the bees out of the collection container.


----------



## chickintexas

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

We recently came across the Flow hive in a magazine and I want to share it with our beekeeping group at our next meeting. Only problem is that I can't remember which magazine. Could anyone tell me which mag it was in? Thanks!


----------



## melliferal

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

Going from the way the advertisement demonstrates the product, I'd hazard management goes something like this: Establish a new colony in the usual way (or use an established colony); add Flow at the beginning of the, well, flow. Assuming Mr. Bush's observation that the comb won't be looked at twice for brood-rearing is accurate, it's pretty much fire-and-forget. Check the side panels every so often until you see the side frames capped (or mostly capped), then drain. Repeat as warranted. 

In a strong flow I anticipate some difficulties. The bees will bring in nectar and fill the Flow frames, which then have to be dried before the bees cap them. In the meantime, if the flow continues strongly, steps need to be taken to make sure the bees have enough space - either by stacking more Flow supers or using traditional ones - in order to avoid a honeybound or swarm situation, which is also a good idea anyway if you intend on harvesting any wax whatsoever or if you'd like to retain a few frames of honey for whichever purposes. I would also venture to expect that careful hive management _before_ the Flow super is installed is imperative, because it's evidently a deep super and taking that thing off to work the brood chamber is going to be a bear during a flow. 

I would remove it completely during the winter for cleaning and preventative maintenance.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

How would one "clean" it. From the sounds of it scraping off the wax bit that the bees build..I imagine kind of like how they build up on plastic Queen cell bases...would have the potential of damaging the plastic and clogging it up with wax bits.

What "preventative" maintenance do you invision? And what are you preventing?
Is wax moth infestation and shb going to be an issue? If you have them on these frames how best to clean them up? Is there access to the drainage channel?
I certainly hope they send detailed instructions with the frames. Do they have issue with those pests in Australia.
I wish some folks were setting it up today so we could start getting answers to our multitude of Questions.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

>It is interesting to follow this thread...human nature undressed. Those that are excited to see how something very new pans out over time and those that for whatever reason why it is no good. Just a cross section of humanity.

Apparently some people already know it will fail and it will be all my fault when it does... 

>Michael Bush to my knowledge you are the only American that has seen and used this device. 

I don't know that one way or the other.

>Will the inventors let you photograph the device and let all of us see how it works since they have already released it.

I think they have some pretty good pictures don't they? I admit I didn't go through all their pictures and videos as I already had some. I would have to ask, as I have a non-disclosure agreement and would not want to violate that in any way.

> Most likely this is patented and all of that has to be reviled in the patent anyway. 

I agree.

>What are your plans for future use.

I will use the one I have, of course. If I can talk them into a price break, I might buy some more. Surely in the long run there will be some kind of commercial pricing, I would hope.

As far as management, I think the essentials are the same as with regular supers except at this cost you'd probably only put one box on the hive and you'd have to harvest it more frequently and keep an eye on it so it's capped when you harvest but doesn't stay all full for long enough for them to swarm.

Winter would be the next issue. I think you need to pull it probably when a conventional beekeeper would pull the supers, in the early fall and let them backfill the brood nest some before winter and have them out of the super so they don't cluster in it and get stuck with no brood because the queen won't lay in it.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



Acebird said:


> Most likely this is patented and all of that has to be reviled in the patent anyway.


Yes, it will be reviled by some.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

Michael I have already lost several times in this thread so I do not know if this question has already been answered: what is the reason for the queen do not lay on the super flow? Cells dimensions?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



Barry Digman said:


> Yes, it will be reviled by some.


Now Barry. Be nice. You know what he meant. :lpf:


----------



## papabear

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

could not afford to take the leap of faith. I do hope things work out.
I would be interested in buying drawn comb deeps and med. if it works out for you all.


Stumpy lake bee farm


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



Eduardo Gomes said:


> Michael I have already lost several times in this thread so I do not know if this question has already been answered: what is the reason for the queen do not lay on the super flow? Cells dimensions?


Ok I find it :"The queen won't lay in them because they are too deep" Michael Bush #48
Has anyone mention this drawback: if the cells are deeper bees will take longer to dehydrate the honey. Am I wrong?

I however hope it all works out. With these advances beekeeping can be modernized. In the house of honey many new technologies have emerged to help us, but the field is still all very similar to what was at the time the Reverend Langstroth .


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

Ever see a comb of honey that is three inches thick? They cap those just fine.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

I would like to have seen more in my hives but I have seen already some. Mostly of my medium supers have 8 frames and I see many thick frames. In this device the frames have 3 inchs from side to side. Thanks for the info shannonswyatt.


----------



## Steadfast

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

A few things about this "On Tap Hive"....



The add alone tells you these guys have no problem morally deceiving naive folks by "selling them a dream".
The add is rife with BS targeted only to get money out of the hands of the new bee keeper wanna be...
Those who have kept bees for longer than a year can see clearly through this adds many fantasies... 
The add is unethical.... so... in what other ways will these people be unethical too?


One thing is for sure, this gimmick will get many more clueless people into bees...
These people will start buying nuks and packages... driving up the price.
Great for those with big enough operations to be selling bees. 
Bad for those beginners who want to start beekeeping the right way.

some of the clueless folks who buy this will mess up by just pouring a package of bees directly into the "on Tap" hive and in essence use it not as the honey super it was meant to be, but as a deep hive home....

Then they will cry when they find out the hard way that most new bee keepers (with no mentor)
have a high chance of their hive dyeing in the first year...
especially when they rob all the honey from their bees just before winter and kill all the larva that pour out with it.


Those smart enough to buy a normal deep hive super (OR 2) with normal frames, (which acts as a proper hive home) will realize they wont get any extra honey for at least 1.5 - 2 years
while their bees amass the population and draw out enough comb to support that extra honey...

They will loose their patience and abandon their bees or just let them swarm...
and we who actually keep bees and have a clue how they function
will find tons of opportunities to collect these swarms for FREE...
which we sold as nuks and packages to these people in the first place.

Finally these hives will end up being given away on Craig's list...
by those poor suckers who bought them, learned a thing or two about their bees in the real world enough to understand what a mistake they had made by buying this thing...


Then there is what happens when this contraption catches a disease...
I rather get stuck having to burn an ordinary $60 medium honey super than one of these colossally expensive tap hives.

as for the "window":
bees HATE sunlight pouring into their hive...
Within a week they will blot that window out with propolis....


next: one word.... "Robbing" -cool, hive violence on tap-
go ahead pour that honey onto your pancakes..... 
then RUN... because they will be coming to get-it-back.

and then there are the Varroah mites living in the bottom of the cells...
and the other critters which should have been killed by freezing and filtered out
swimming about in the honey... so prettily taped out...

For me, the only possible question this thing might offer worth exploring is this:
If this thing is used correctly by real bee keepers, is it possible that it could produce a slightly larger honey flow due to repeat taps, then the standard mediums, which frames are collected and spun once or twice a year...? 
and is this extra flow worth the investment price???
I would try it just to explore this one and only possible practicality... "Try" not buy...

I hate to be a nay sayer.....
but Nay Nay Nay and gain I say.... Nay


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Seems like someone so profusely verbal would know how to spell "ad", as in "advertisement". Not "add", as in "additional". Since you enjoy criticism so much.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Now Mark . Be nice. You know what he meant. :lpf:





... see post #363 ...


----------



## Steadfast

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

having dyslexia is a pain :applause:
mark... besides my grammar what say you?


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

From the Forum Rules:



> Language/Profanity. It is not acceptable to infer the use of a profane word by an acronym, or using **** or $^@*!. By the use of such characters it's being acknowledged by the user that the word implied isn't acceptable. Do not use language that is lewd, vulgar, coarse, off-color, crass, derogatory, or obscene. Respect the sites desire to not have any form of suggestive language used in its forums.


----------



## wishthecuttlefish

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

I think Steadfast (and others) brings up some very good points. Let me relate a discussion I have been having with a colleague about this to give Steadfast's opinion a little more context/weight.
I kept/had bees successfully for 10 years before my two hives died for mysterious reasons that I am unclear on, but I admit were at least partly due to some bad decisions on my part. With that said, I started discussing beekeeping with my colleague at work who had always been interested but never taken the plunge, and we both decided to start new hives this spring. We ordered bees, and he ordered his supers and frames, etc. etc. He is learning, but he has *zero* hands-on experience keeping bees and like anyone new to it, he has many misconceptions. 

And then the advert for the Honey Flow Hive showed up. My colleague was immediately captivated by the idea after watching the advertisement, was ready to plop down cash for this thing. I think if he could have ordered one of the lower-cost options and been assured of it arriving in time for this spring, he would definitely have gone all in. And that is the problem with this advertisement: it completely plays upon the misconceptions and ignorance of people like my colleague with an interest, but who have never kept bees before and have no clue about the intricacies of it. 

I don't think I am going out on a limb when I say the vast majority of beekeeping equipment, even new devices, is purchased by existing commercial and hobbyist beekeepers, not by those just getting started. That is the biggest chunk of the market, and it stands to reason that if I had a truly viable piece of equipment that was a "game changer", it would be those people who I would be marketing this device to. But that is not the market they are targeting here, clearly.

Follow the money and ask yourself "Why are they not providing the full range of information that would convince the large market of experienced beekeepers to buy this thing, such as maintenance requirements, wintering info, pest and disease management, etc. etc.?"


Answering this question for myself, the advertisement betrays that the device is at best an expensive novelty, and at worst an unscrupulous scam.


----------



## GaSteve

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

"I however hope it all works out. With these advances beekeeping can be modernized. In the house of honey many new technologies have emerged to help us, but the field is still all very similar to what was at the time the Reverend Langstroth"

I've always thought beekeeping was way behind technologically especially compared to other parts of agriculture given GPS field plots, self-driving farm equipment, etc. I'd love to eventually see a "high-tech" apiary -- whatever that may look like that requires less back-breaking work and less labor in general - not lazy but I do like efficiency.

I'm starting to hear a lot of talk from non-beekeepers about this honeyflow hive. They all seem to have the impression that with this hive, they can keep bees and never have to open the hive. They are all saying if this works they'll get a hive, harvest honey, and won't have to get stung. I don't think the inventors ever made that claim, but that seems to be the opinion of a lot of folks.


----------



## Steadfast

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



Barry Digman said:


> From the Forum Rules:


You got it barry... my mistake...


----------



## Morris Forbes

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

I had half a dozen hives until I moved a couple of years ago. At my wife's suggestion (she misses the honey) I decided to set up two, walking distance from home. I was planning to go cut comb and crush/strain to keep things easy, but after looking over this device, I ordered a super's worth to try. It'll either work well for me or you'll find it on Craigslist one day. Meanwhile, I go hopeful. I do think that these Flow folks have bitten off a lot more than they expected and sincerely wish them the best.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

there are two types of beekeepers today. you have one group that does conventional beekeeping using proven methods. then you have a newer group wanting to keep bees not caring if they make money. they call their bees girls, do foundationless, treatment free etc. this new hive fits the later group best. most people that doubt if it is practical like myself have more real world experience. I enjoy bees but want to sell a good product and make money. back in the 70's beekeeping went thru a similar cycle during the hippie natural food movement.


----------



## Steadfast

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Like I said before...

For me, the only possible question this thing might offer worth exploring is this:
If this thing is used correctly by real bee keepers, is it possible that it could produce a slightly larger honey flow due to repeat taps, then the standard mediums, which frames are collected and spun once or twice a year...? 
and is this extra flow worth the investment price???

I would be willing to explore and honestly document this... "Try not Buy"
hey, Morris Forbes, maybe you could document this factor...

If this factor alone could ethically draw and additional 1/3 more honey per flow... 
these guys would have a viable marketable point for experienced bee keepers with many hives.

Perhaps, they could even invent a solar powered "tap timer" and a closed jar system to make it work better...

but hey... their secrecy makes me think the "additional 1/3 more flow" is not the case...
Probably not even close...

heck... even 1/4 more flow would be enough...


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

I'm in for $460 and a full 7-frame super. Then again this is a fun hobby for me, and I'm not trying to make any money. I just want to teach my kid (and myself) about bees, have some honey to eat and to give away at Christmas, and generally to get closer to these fascinating little buggers.

I'm under no illusions that I'll ever save money or make money doing this. I'm more of the $64 Tomato crowd. 

So if it works, great! It'll be something to show the neighbors. If it doesn't, I'll be warier of the next gadget that comes along, but I won't be bitter. From what I've seen thus far this is _not_ a scam; it's a well-marketed attempt to bring a decade of tinkering to fruition. I don't begrudge them their price because it's a completely voluntary purchase/donation. I hope they make a lot of money in the long run, because if they make it in the long run it'll be because it's a good product, if even only for a small segment of the market.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Alrighty then beeware10. Glad you cleared up the only two types of bee keepers.

I think there are only two types of bee keepers, but mine is different, those that have hives that have died, and those that are going to have hives that have died.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>I don't think the inventors ever made that claim

From their site (which a lot of you should read as you keep right on making wrong assumptions both about how it works and about what they have claimed) Emphasis is mine:
http://www.honeyflow.com/faqs/p/22

"How often do I need to check the brood?
"This depends on your location. In our area it is normal to inspect the brood nest of each hive twice a year for disease. In some areas beekeepers check more frequently. If the hive is weak it should also be inspected. *Our invention changes the honey harvesting component of beekeeping. All the rest of the normal beekeeping care for the hive still applies. Beetles, mites, swarm control etc. *The flow hive clear end frame observation does assist with allowing you to look into the hive and gauge the strength and health of the colony."


----------



## wishthecuttlefish

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



shannonswyatt said:


> I think there are only two types of bee keepers, but mine is different, those that have hives that have died, and those that are going to have hives that have died.



I think we are about to have a whole lot more of the latter soon.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Actually it is correct to say there are only two kinds of beekeepers. There are beekeepers who divide beekeepers into two groups and beekeepers who don't.


----------



## Steadfast

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



shannonswyatt said:


> Alrighty then beeware10. Glad you cleared up the only two types of bee keepers.
> 
> I think there are only two types of bee keepers, but mine is different, those that have hives that have died, and those that are going to have hives that have died.


ha ha ha ha


----------



## wishthecuttlefish

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> >From their site (which a lot of you should read as you keep right on making wrong assumptions both about how it works and about what they have claimed)


Point well taken, MB. For what it is worth, my colleague is satisfied with the catch all statement saying "All the rest of the normal beekeeping care for the hive still applies."

He says "Oh, it's just marketing, they wouldn't go into any serious detail about the maintenance requirements in an ad for a new car."


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> Actually it is correct to say there are only two kinds of beekeepers. There are beekeepers who divide beekeepers into two groups and beekeepers who don't.


Why don't we have a like button!


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



Michael Bush said:


> Apparently some people already know it will fail and it will be all my fault when it does...


Yeah there are those that think that way. I wouldn't worry about that Michael.


> I think they have some pretty good pictures don't they?


I haven't seen the internal workings as to how the cells are split and what might jam it up when you try to close the cells. Photos from the outside don't tell much.



> Surely in the long run there will be some kind of commercial pricing, I would hope.


They can't keep the price where it is China will ignore the patent and just start making them. You will be able to buy knock offs at 1/10 the price.



> As far as management, I think the essentials are the same as with regular supers except at this cost you'd probably only put one box on the hive and you'd have to harvest it more frequently and keep an eye on it so it's capped when you harvest but doesn't stay all full for long enough for them to swarm.
> 
> Winter would be the next issue. I think you need to pull it probably when a conventional beekeeper would pull the supers, in the early fall and let them backfill the brood nest some before winter and have them out of the super so they don't cluster in it and get stuck with no brood because the queen won't lay in it.


melliferal has a good point. There could be some issues with varring flows. Too strong and they might not cap the frames. Too weak and they won't completely fill the frames which means they won't be capped. Did you have any issues like this with the one you have?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



Steadfast said:


> having dyslexia is a pain :applause:
> mark... besides my grammar what say you?


I don't know much about dyslexia. I didn't know it made one misspell simple words.

What say I? Give the Flow Hive a chance to fail or succeed on its own. Certainly it will.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

It won't fail or succeed on its own. It requires many people either way. This is part of the process to failure or success.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Maybe it will be a DeLorean.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



Barry said:


> It won't fail or succeed on its own. It requires many people either way.


Well said Barry. Which is why I would like to discuss what problems are there that could be avoided using this device. Some people have purchased the unit. I think it is distasteful to bad mouth the device by someone that hasn't seen it or used it and imply that those that have purchased the unit are suckers for doing so. Shows ignorance in my book.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



sqkcrk said:


> Maybe it will be a DeLorean.


Cars are like clothing. People want change. Beekeepers are the opposite. They don't what change. So the comparison has to be something that failed because people don't like change. There has to be a million of those in the beekeeping world.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

mb a few years ago james tew from bee culture was the main speaker at our meeting. he started by saying it was harder for him to give a talk as now there are old school and new new school beekeepers. I stand by my original statement.


----------



## zig.zag

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



> Maybe it will be a DeLorean.


This.

I have enjoyed the last couple of days observing all of the back-and-forth about this device. The hype and build-up leading to the unveiling, and the discovery of just how little it actually is intended to do, makes me think of the anti-climactic unveiling of the Segway. A REALLY cool device that performs a fairly mundane task in an innovative manner. I am most curious to see how this device will have affected the beekeeping industry 5 years from now.

Thanks for the good time. Back to lurking.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



Acebird said:


> I would like to discuss what problems are there that could be avoided using this device. Some people have purchased the unit.


Only one that I know of who is posting here. Right now we are all going off whatever information we can glean from their website. We temper that with our real world experience and try to draw conclusions. Until there are a bunch of people that have kept bees in this hive in various conditions, how can we really discuss problems to avoid? Premature in my thinking.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



zig.zag said:


> Back to lurking.


Did you just zig, or zag?


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



Michael Bush said:


> As far as management, I think the essentials are the same as with regular supers except at this cost you'd probably only put one box on the hive and you'd have to harvest it more frequently and keep an eye on it so it's capped when you harvest but doesn't stay all full for long enough for them to swarm.


This is the part I can't get my head around yet. I'm not sure how it is anywhere else, but in this area when the flow is on the bees need to spread the nectar out over several supers and then dry it before capping. They don't work on just one box at a time. If they were restricted to one super, swarming issues would be a very serious problem.

The only way I could see this working would be to have "at least" 2 deep honey flow supers over the brood to handle the incoming nectar during a heavy flow. If the prices I've seen are accurate then that's $900.00 minimum "per colony". Wow!

The only other option I can think of is to have the combination of a single Honey Flow super along with traditional supers. But you would still need an extractor. What would really be gained with the $450.00 per colony investment?

I'm not being critical of the mechanics or functionality of the unit. It appears to be a revolutionary idea. But I am not able to piece together how this would be profitable for anyone beyond a small backyard beekeeper with one or two hives. At least at the current prices.

If there's something I'm missing, I'm all ears.


----------



## challenger

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

Mark this date please. I am agreeing with Ace one ONE item. Well, maybe more but this is definitely one.
He is correct that china will copy the design or concept or whatever they will call it to try to make large coin. I suspect this will be the case if the system works or not (read-sells and stays in business long term ot not). China will do anything for money. The attitude in china is if something makes money it is OK to do.
As for the Honey Flow device/system I'll make the claim that it will not succeed. I will not bash them. 
My main problem is the funding. If a company wants to produce something let the company find the money. Let the company "Beeinventive" go out and get the investors and ditch the whole "kickstart". I will admit to some ignorance with the way kickstart works but, and please correct and educate me if I am wrong, the businesses that look to kickstart for funding set a goal for the amount of money they want/need to raise from kickstart. If they do not reach the goal they get no kickstart funding. Is this correct? How long are they given to raise the kickstart money?
In my cynical mind this appears to be a company that is tapping into, no pun intended, the warm and fuzzy beekeeping noob/wannabee/frustrated hippie/dirt worshiping crowd. If they want to fund this company I say let them. It just doesn't seem the way a company should be funded. They want $48,000,000.00??? Really? Id like 48 million too please and thank you. What in the heck are they going to do with 48 million? Heck, they could take that money to china and get them to do the whole project and still walk away with 45 million.
This seems like a couple of dudes with their hands out. Maybe I'm wrong.
I see no point in trying to blow the product to bits here though either. That really serves no purpose does it?
Let the process play out.
And the suckers will be unhappy. Suckers may be those that bought, or those that wish they did.
Then there is the pricing


----------



## pskoskiewicz

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

This might be the first time that a lot of people on Beesource are exposed to a sourcing campaign like this via sites like Kickstarter or Indigogo, etc. Before making assumptions about their advertisement and disparaging the idea as a gimmick, it would pay to simply read the rules of these sites. And they are very clear - people choose to contribute money *fully* aware that there's a huge chance that they'll either never see it back or the idea they supported will not make it. It's called free marketplace. But to jump from an idea to "clueless" is a stretch. Wait and see, then pontificate.

There are thousands of mobile apps funded this way; some more successful, some less. Funding for physical products is rarer still - sourcing campaigns are very popular with software developers, because the upfront costs are so low and there's a chance that a given app will appeal to just enough people willing to shell out $1 to download it that the logistics work out for everybody.

I for one don't see any misrepresentation and to assume that those who have contributed are newbies or don't know what they are doing is just wrong. I'm a hobbyist beekeeper for many years, and spend about as much money as what they are asking on my hobby yearly. And do it gladly, because it's fun and I can afford it. If this works out, even if it's in limited configurations, great. I don't buy the old adage that bees have been doing this for millions of years and we should just let them. We've semi-domesticated bees long time ago and I for one applaud the Aussies for their willingness to put this idea out for everyone to judge. Internet critics love to tear new ideas apart, :-( I predict that we will have a lot more to talk about in the fall, when the first reports will come from people using them. Till then, let's give them a chance.


----------



## newbury

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Just one question


Steadfast said:


> <snip>
> chance of their hive dyeing<snip>


What color do they become?


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



challenger said:


> It just doesn't seem the way a company should be funded. They want $48,000,000.00???


It's interesting that, other than the "perk", those who pony up the money will receive nothing in return. If you believe in a company's products and management you buy stock and at least have a chance of getting your money back. If things go well, you actually make money. This new model of just handing over money is odd.

I'm not sure where the $48 million amount comes from. Their Indiegogo states that the goal is only $70,000. Has something changed that?


----------



## snl

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Do you all realize that the total now raised is over 3............million!


----------



## beekuk

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



Barry Digman said:


> This new model of just handing over money is odd.


That is the bit that strikes me as rather a strange thing to be doing.

Found this blog site with a few extra views on the subject.

http://blainenay.blogspot.co.uk/


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

I think that's what I said. lol


----------



## trobo

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

Hi, I am a newbee and just looking at getting into beekeeping.. am strongly considering the new Honey Flow especially that is is BPA free confirmed.
After reading all (Yes all 21 pages of comments)  and lots of other comments that I have seen on the internet, I think the 1 biggest benefit which has been overlook was posted by someone in another forum.
_
"My mate the bee keeper reckons it could open up a market for beekeepers to service hives for a fee. They come in a couple of times a year to check the hive for disease or beetle and any other maintenance it needs. Would suit a retired beekeeper or a hobbist"_

I think this would bee an ENOURMOUS opportunity for the existing commercial/active/retired & semi pro hobbiest communities (like most members of this forum) As the inventors even state on the website ans as was mentioned in this forum multiple times.. the Flow Hive is just about the process of gettgin the honey.. ALL other elements of beekeping remain such as inspections/advice/hive health/swarming/list goes on and on.... I think if thousands and thousands of new (urban and semi urban) beekeeps arrive on the scene then there will be a huge market in supporting this...
Just my 2 cents..


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

Sounds good in theory, but the cost would be higher than people would want to pay. It seems like if you want honey buy it from a local beek, it will be way, way cheaper in the long run than purchasing a hive and then paying someone to do all the work. Put another way, if you purchase a Flow hive from them and then purchase the other stuff (bees, tools, suit, etc) you are going to be up close to 1k in costs. Maybe you live in a great area and end up with 3 gallons of honey from that hive, you spent 1k on 3 gallons of honey. It would take a lot of years with no lose to recoup your investment. If you are paying Bob the beek to inspect your hives my guess is you would never come close to breaking even. Sure, the flowers would be nicer, but you can do that for a lot less money.


----------



## trobo

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



shannonswyatt said:


> Sounds good in theory, but the cost would be higher than people would want to pay. It seems like if you want honey buy it from a local beek, it will be way, way cheaper in the long run than purchasing a hive and then paying someone to do all the work. Put another way, if you purchase a Flow hive from them and then purchase the other stuff (bees, tools, suit, etc) you are going to be up close to 1k in costs. Maybe you live in a great area and end up with 3 gallons of honey from that hive, you spent 1k on 3 gallons of honey. It would take a lot of years with no lose to recoup your investment. If you are paying Bob the beek to inspect your hives my guess is you would never come close to breaking even. Sure, the flowers would be nicer, but you can do that for a lot less money.


agree the cost would bee up and maybe doesnt make financial sense, but neither does growing your own vegetables these days or much else... I think there are enough people in the big cities of the world that would just like thier own fresh honey 'on tap" and to assist the bee population and also maybe help pollinate the veges etc. lots that wouldnt but many who would. and prob enought o build a small industry around...


----------



## trobo

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

My background is in business strategy and outside looking in here is what I think this invention will do to the Industry. (May or may not but just my thoughts)
*Urban/Social beek* ("I like the idea of bees, want to have a hive, want fresh honey but dont have time to care for them") = New market which Flow Hive will open right up and will also generate the new support industry
*Casual Hobby *( As above, but I like to tinker, do mods to box and care for bees myself") = Many will adopt Flow hive and love the convenience but many will stay with Langs/Warre/Top B just because they like and enjoy the process as much as outcome
*Serious hobby/market garden* ("I have several hives and its one of my biggest passions") = Some will switch 100% to Flow hive\some will adda few frames or a hive or 2 and some wont...")
*Commercial* ("This is my profession and I need to make money from it") = Most would be "fast followers" due to the high equipment cost however over time I would see a great many eventually switching to this or more likely similar "Industrial" strength designs utilising pumps to speed process/auto honey level monitoring (more advanced than the hove weight systems of today) etc. So in essence I would see this particular invention being the catylist for more innovation in the commerical space rather than the answer itself. Of course there will be also many that either through cost outlay, years left in the industry or reluctance to change (not always a bad thing) that will never change.. and that is fine...
So all in all I think the biggest change is the opening of a completly new market (and a support industry) + the evenutual disruption of the commerical space but over longer time...


----------



## mlmihlfried

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

for those of you who want to see it work, there is a short video showing the cells opening with the turn of the crank now posted.


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



snl said:


> Do you all realize that the total now raised is over 3............million!


Let's pretend it costs them $25 from manufacturing to dropping the frame off at your front door per frame. That would be 1.5 mil profit. A commercial I've worked for spit numbers at me one day so: A truck, trailer and (bee) forklift $150k. His honey house equipment $200k. The building $100k. I could get 400 packages for about $85 per package delivered $34k. Hive bodies, frames, foundation, covers, bottom boards, feeders, HFCS etc for 400 hives$80k - $120k (conservative est.). Five years operating costs $400k  

Point is I could go to serious sideliner status in a heartbeat with that kind of money and have a whole lot left over. But would I use my own flow frames? Nope. Well maybe in one yard that I let people visit so I could let them ooooh and aaaah my product. Props to them for what they've accomplished, I'm glad I got to see it happen. I too will be watching craigslist for them starting in August lol

Now where to put 400+ hives? The nightmare begins...


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

One of my friends has a delorean...he loves it. I think it is a very weird vehicle.



sqkcrk said:


> Maybe it will be a DeLorean.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

Where did it say they want to raise 48 mil. I the goal was 70k


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



shannonswyatt said:


> Sounds good in theory, but the cost would be higher than people would want to pay. It seems like if you want honey buy it from a local beek, it will be way, way cheaper in the long run than purchasing a hive and then paying someone to do all the work. Put another way, if you purchase a Flow hive from them and then purchase the other stuff (bees, tools, suit, etc) you are going to be up close to 1k in costs. Maybe you live in a great area and end up with 3 gallons of honey from that hive, you spent 1k on 3 gallons of honey. It would take a lot of years with no lose to recoup your investment. If you are paying Bob the beek to inspect your hives my guess is you would never come close to breaking even. Sure, the flowers would be nicer, but you can do that for a lot less money.


What is a lot of $ to some is very little to others. We tend to judge what folks will, will not, pay based on our own knee jerk reactions. I think, as mentioned in another post, that some will think this idea is "fun"... Something neat to show their friends and colleagues at a garden party. Some folks have pools, tennis courts, golf links, cars, horses etc...the list goes on. They pay folks to look after their homes, gardens, stables...why not a bee hive. There are already folks who charge a seasonal fee for putting a hive in someone's yard and tending it for the season. They take it away over the winter. The folks are happy because they can tell others they are helping the environment.
The amount of money raised to get this product manufactured shows there are a kot of people out there that aren't bothered by the cost. Thanks to them eventually others will get feedback on how practical this system is for the back yard hobbiest or those seriously collecting honey.
Just my 2 cents.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



mlmihlfried said:


> for those of you who want to see it work, there is a short video showing the cells opening with the turn of the crank now posted.


Link, please?


----------



## trobo

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Just to add a final thought for discussion following my previous post.
I think the only category of beek that will remain largley untouched and may have a backlash (over time) against this invention will be the 
"Natural"/permy/ethical group, based on the following points.
1) The use of plastic combs (Even if they are BPA free) ps. they 'may" have a point here?
2) The standard cell size (upsetting "balance" of hive??)
3) no controls plus added convenience in robbing the bees of all food. (Could argue that for existing methods and beginner?)
I think the only way this category of keepere will adopt will be if somehow a 'similar' automated method could be adopted for a warre style foundationless hive and therfore forgoe the plastics etc... but this seems a much bigger chalange.... im thinking you would need some auto scraper system in the hive to remove the back of comb or something. sounds very messy though. maybe another alternate would be replace plastic for another "healthier" material and then having only the Honey Flow system on a Warre brood box (Or Lang) i.e. make this only a partial part of system. Comb/wax etc could occasionaly be taken from the other boxes and other boxes also left for bees to use for food etc??


----------



## pdave

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

As a fairly new beek I won't be an early adopter of this, but for the sake of conversation, let's say this actually works and shows long term durability. Would if be feasible to run a 3 box hive by placing 2 deeps or 3 mediums, if you are into that, above the flow box. This would make checking the brood fairly easy throughout the year since you wouldn't need to lift the supers to get to the hive bodies. You would be able to take your honey off throughout the season so you would only need 1 super/flowhive on the bottom. I know this might be an issue for those that need to go weeks without checking the hive. 

When the bee start prepping for winter you could simply remove the bottom box or maybe just put some type of divider between if and the hive bodies and let them backfill the top of the hive. Since this is where they will end up anyway, I see this arrangement as more natural to how they operate in a tree.

What are everyone's thoughts on this type of management?


----------



## nater37

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

I may be missing something. I watched video and saw that the outside edge of frame was visible and the inside was not. My biggest concern would be harvesting uncapped honey in the middle of frame that has to much moisture and it fermenting. Of course I only have 11 hives and I enjoy getting in the hives and checking them for issues and looking at brood and honey. I think if it was all automated I would not be interested at all. Then again if I had 1000 hives I would not be able to check them all anyway; so why not attach a hose and harvest all the honey with the push of a button or a flip of the switch.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

bees work up. they will not put honey below brood.


----------



## nater37

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



beeware10 said:


> bees work up. they will not put honey below brood.


What are you saying?


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

I was responding to pdave. sorry


----------



## pdave

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Beeware10, I have heard that, but I thought that was because of the way we keep them. I was under the impression that in the wild, bees build their comb down from the top so in the wild, does the queen move the nest down as they fill the comb with honey rom the top?


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

they have to start building at the top where there is something to fasten to. they cant start in the middle in open air. there is no difference in wild or kept bees. bees are bees. they store honey above the brood nest.


----------



## trobo

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



beeware10 said:


> they have to start building at the top where there is something to fasten to. they cant start in the middle in open air. there is no difference in wild or kept bees. bees are bees. they store honey above the brood nest.


But in a Warre hive you add the "Super" to the bottom with the thought is that it is a more "natural" instinct for the bees to build down? Is this not generally agreed amongst beeks?


----------



## pdave

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Ok thanks for the info, as to not hijack this thread I'm going to start another with a few questions I have.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

trobo II don't know anything about a warre or topbar hive. I have made a living 50 plus years from bees and only know what works to make honey. bees work up. they work down when there is no choice. honey is stored above the brood nest.


----------



## max2

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

""My mate the bee keeper reckons it could open up a market for beekeepers to service hives for a fee. They come in a couple of times a year to check the hive for disease or beetle and any other maintenance it needs. Would suit a retired beekeeper or a hobbist"
trobo - did you have to spill the beans We have been thinking like this for the last few days. I sell bee gear and nuc's and offer beekeeping workshops . Would you like to buy into my business? I'm open to offers. Established with a good record.


----------



## max2

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



shannonswyatt said:


> Sounds good in theory, but the cost would be higher than people would want to pay. It seems like if you want honey buy it from a local beek, it will be way, way cheaper in the long run than purchasing a hive and then paying someone to do all the work. Put another way, if you purchase a Flow hive from them and then purchase the other stuff (bees, tools, suit, etc) you are going to be up close to 1k in costs. Maybe you live in a great area and end up with 3 gallons of honey from that hive, you spent 1k on 3 gallons of honey. It would take a lot of years with no lose to recoup your investment. If you are paying Bob the beek to inspect your hives my guess is you would never come close to breaking even. Sure, the flowers would be nicer, but you can do that for a lot less money.


Don't you believe it. The kudos, magic of having a hive in the yard is huge.
I have clients who pay me much more to take care and harvest the honey than the honey is ever worth retail.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



max2 said:


> ""My mate the bee keeper reckons it could open up a market for beekeepers to service hives for a fee. They come in a couple of times a year to check the hive for disease or beetle and any other maintenance it needs. Would suit a retired beekeeper or a hobbist"
> trobo - did you have to spill the beans We have been thinking like this for the last few days. I sell bee gear and nuc's and offer beekeeping workshops . Would you like to buy into my business? I'm open to offers. Established with a good record.


That's a Beehive CSA, Community Supported Agriculture. Or a Hive Lease where a beekeeper owns and manages a hive in your name and you get a portion of the production of that hive and it may be kept on your property, all for a fee. Nothing new. You just have to live where people are willing to pay you for what it's worth.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

>This is the part I can't get my head around yet. I'm not sure how it is anywhere else, but in this area when the flow is on the bees need to spread the nectar out over several supers and then dry it before capping. They don't work on just one box at a time. If they were restricted to one super, swarming issues would be a very serious problem.

I am wondering the same thing, but then I've never tried to run a hive with one super, so I'm not sure how that will work. Certainly in a lot of wild hives I've seen they had pretty limited space and still made honey, but they often swarmed too. But then no one was managing them. This year I'll hopefully I'll have more time to spend on my one Flow hive and see how that goes.

>The only way I could see this working would be to have "at least" 2 deep honey flow supers over the brood to handle the incoming nectar during a heavy flow. If the prices I've seen are accurate then that's $900.00 minimum "per colony". Wow!

I thought of that, but it's not financially practical even if one super would work...

>My main problem is the funding. If a company wants to produce something let the company find the money. Let the company "Beeinventive" go out and get the investors and ditch the whole "kickstart".

But they just raised $3mil... it seems to work fine for them.

>They want $48,000,000.00??? Really?

No. Their goal is $70,000. Really.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

When it comes to the funding, people are jealous of success.


----------



## cg3

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



sqkcrk said:


> When it comes to the funding, people are jealous of success.


And if it's a hustle all I can say is 'Well Done!'.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



Barry said:


> Until there are a bunch of people that have kept bees in this hive in various conditions, how can we really discuss problems to avoid? Premature in my thinking.


like the next post Barry. It is not premature thinking it is forward thinking. You take all the experience on beesource and discuss what you feel might be problems because of what you know. Then you put your thinking cap on and find solutions before the problem ever exist. We did not get to the moon by shooting at it and then fixing the problems later.



Mike Gillmore said:


> This is the part I can't get my head around yet. I'm not sure how it is anywhere else, but in this area when the flow is on the bees need to spread the nectar out over several supers and then dry it before capping. They don't work on just one box at a time. If they were restricted to one super, swarming issues would be a very serious problem.


Mike it doesn't seem probable on a hobby scale but in the commercial field it would be no hurdle at all to harvest the nectar and dry it commercially. That is what you do with maple syrup. What you can't realistically do is mechanize going to every flower and collecting the nectar. But you can do a bang up job of drying it.

So on a hobby scale what are the options besides filling a hive with these frames? There is no point of looking at the price of the frames now because that will change rapidly. Question for the experienced. With multiple boxes of nectar in a strong flow which ones will they cap first? The top box or the one closest to the brood?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



cg3 said:


> And if it's a hustle all I can say is 'Well Done!'.


Free will.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

I thought about the whole single super as well I assumed you would want to super over them with at least one medium. I think that swarming could be a big issue in them, but I could be wrong. Maybe you get around that by harvesting individual frames like you would in a top bar to give them more space.


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



Acebird said:


> Mike it doesn't seem probable on a hobby scale but in the commercial field it would be no hurdle at all to harvest the nectar and dry it commercially. That is what you do with maple syrup. What you can't realistically do is mechanize going to every flower and collecting the nectar. But you can do a bang up job of drying it.
> 
> So on a hobby scale what are the options besides filling a hive with these frames? There is no point of looking at the price of the frames now because that will change rapidly. Question for the experienced. With multiple boxes of nectar in a strong flow which ones will they cap first? The top box or the one closest to the brood?


Sure it can be done but I consider honey house drying to be pretty much a last ditch option to solve a screw up and something I would probably hire someone else to do for me. Here is my order of progression when dealing with potentially uncured honey.
#1. When in doubt "cool your heals for a few days and don't pull anything until some dryer air moves in.
#2. If you are out of extracting supers and have bees desperate for room. Start pulling honey but be selective on what you take. Space the stacks in your hot room and keep lots of air movement through them. 
#3. Make a trial run and make ye olde refractometer your best friend.
#4. If what flows into the tank is anything over 18%, don't panic. Wait until you are barreling honey and retest. If it's even close to 18.6 then only fill the drums about half full and set them aside. When you get some dryer honey in your tanks then use that to top off the drums, leaving a bit more head room than you might normally. A bit of top to bottom stirring action with a hoe will blend it nicely. Then retest before sealing. We routinely label all drums with moisture content. 
If you didn't do any of this stuff, before shipping it somewhere to have it dried I would suggest offering it to some honey buyers at a discount to be blended. Their ears will usually perk up if there is a bargain to be had. 
But back to the subject at hand. Yes, capacity and honey curing would be one of the first major concerns I would have of this system. In a strong flow, bees will spread the nectar out to facilitate drying. When we anticipate a strong flow we will usually put on 3 mediums. I have seen times these 3 boxes would be almost full of nectar, yet very little is actually capped. When that "problem" presents itself, you just say "woo hoo", smile, throw on another couple boxes and check back in a week or two. With the "flow box" more than one would seem to be mandatory and even then, the exact harvest timing would be critical. Dropping the handle is a bell that can't be "unrung", do it too quickly and you've got wet honey running out, a couple days later you may well have a hive full of swarm cells. Now take that issue times 1,000 or 5,000 or more and factor in you may, at best, be able to get to a location every couple of weeks and you start to get an idea of how unworkable this system would be for a commercial operation. Now factor in the hauling of lots and lots and lots of jars and lids and tubes.....and we haven't even addressed the issue of whether they even work properly or can ever even approach the cost of a standard medium super which in a good extracting system can be extracted at the rate of a little better than a box a minute.


----------



## kanikka

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Does anyone know who in Canada has been testing this hive? Can we hear from this person how it is working and what changes to process are necessary to deal with winters?


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Kanikka, no way you would leave these on during the winter. The queen can't lay in them. You would need to pull them mid/late summer. And in winter you probably would need to have more than a single deep to over winter, I think (could be wrong.) Don't worry, no one in Canada will have them in time this year to use them, maybe next summer they will have some they can figure out the best way to manage them.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



jim lyon said:


> Yes, capacity and honey curing would be one of the first major concerns I would have of this system. In a strong flow, bees will spread the nectar out to facilitate drying. When we anticipate a strong flow we will usually put on 3 mediums. I have seen times these 3 boxes would be almost full of nectar, yet very little is actually capped.


Thank you Jim, that's exactly what I was referring to. 




Ace said:


> Mike it doesn't seem probable on a hobby scale but in the commercial field it would be no hurdle at all to harvest the nectar and dry it commercially


Ace. What is the cost of "drying" honey commercially?


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



trobo said:


> But in a Warre hive you add the "Super" to the bottom with the thought is that it is a more "natural" instinct for the bees to build down? Is this not generally agreed amongst beeks?


I thought with Warre you add boxes below. Then bees occupy the boxes below, put the brood in the lowest box and honey above.
As a newish bee keeper I am then confused because I also thought that bees constructed cells for honey storage to slightly different dimensions than brood. I guess they modify things to their needs at the time. However I digress and am off topic. Sorry.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

John Gates in BC



kanikka said:


> Does anyone know who in Canada has been testing this hive? Can we hear from this person how it is working and what changes to process are necessary to deal with winters?


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

The lady that was first tp purchase is in Kelowna. Apparently she will receive a full hive in time for this season.




shannonswyatt said:


> Kanikka, no way you would leave these on during the winter. The queen can't lay in them. You would need to pull them mid/late summer. And in winter you probably would need to have more than a single deep to over winter, I think (could be wrong.) Don't worry, no one in Canada will have them in time this year to use them, maybe next summer they will have some they can figure out the best way to manage them.


----------



## Jim Brewster

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



WBVC said:


> I thought with Warre you add boxes below. Then bees occupy the boxes below, put the brood in the lowest box and honey above.
> As a newish bee keeper I am then confused because I also thought that bees constructed cells for honey storage to slightly different dimensions than brood. I guess they modify things to their needs at the time. However I digress and am off topic. Sorry.


Here's a simplified version as I understand it:

In an empty tree cavity or Warre hive (i.e. no comb or foundation) the bees will tend to build from the top down. They will tend to build smaller worker cells in the center and larger drone cells toward the periphery. As the workers build comb downward, the queen lays more eggs, and the brood above grows, is capped, and hatches, the brood nest follows the downward direction. The bees will then backfill the comb above with honey. In the fall they cluster over the brood nest, which should be near the bottom of the comb, and slowly work their way upward through the honey stores through the winter.

As someone pointed out, they do not put honey below brood, and if they find it there (like from reversing boxes), they will move it up. They also tend to fill empty space above the brood and stores. These different behaviors and reactions can be manipulated to allow the various types of hives and management practices beekeepers employ.

I don't think they would naturally build different size cells for honey, though they may modify comb, especially making it deeper for honey if they have the space. It's more a matter of the queen's instinct to only lay eggs in cells of certain dimensions. If she doesn't perceive it to be one of three types of cell: worker, drone, or queen, she won't lay an egg in it. Beekeepers can manipulate this instinct by offering comb of different dimensions, and if the queen doesn't lay an egg in it the workers will still fill it with nectar. Looks like one of the things the Flow Hive creators have done by making the cells deeper.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Warre are we going with this "Flow Hive" Thread?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

http://www.milkwood.net/…/going-flow-flow-hive-actually-go…/


----------



## D Coates

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

I'd have gone with the $470 as a novelty at my home for me to try myself. But, when I saw it won't show until December and I'd be in charge of freight (from Australia) I passed. Invariably there will be things found and improved upon from the first generation and there will be distribution (or even production) set up here in the US. I'll wait for a year or two but it appears like it would work and be right in the wheelhouse for beekeepers with one or two hives who don't want to commit to extracting equipment or as a cool novelty. Time will tell.


----------



## rweaver7777

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



trobo said:


> *Urban/Social beek* ("I like the idea of bees, want to have a hive, want fresh honey but dont have time to care for them") = New market which Flow Hive will open right up and will also generate the new support industry


This is why there'll be craigslist posts with these frames. These hives will die out or abscond due to an uncontrolled Varroa load.


----------



## mlmihlfried

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*

it is the video on the indiegogo site the video is 6 minutes the portion showing the cells break apart is about 2 minutes in.


----------



## estreya

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Jeepers. I've only read the first three pages, and so far, i'm fascinated.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Just wait till you get to the last three pages!


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



trobo said:


> But in a Warre hive you add the "Super" to the bottom with the thought is that it is a more "natural" instinct for the bees to build down? Is this not generally agreed amongst beeks?


Trobo if you put one of these flow hive thingy's on a warre, you would put it on top where the bees will put the honey.

The only reason warres are often supered at the bottom is because they are a foundationless top bar hive which makes it too hard for the bees to build a new box if it's added on top because of the big space between the bee cluster and the new top bars. So even though adding new supers at the bottom is not ideal, it's the way it has to be done with warres to avoid the beekeeper having to use much skill in terms of adding the bees a ladder. Abbe Emile was trying to keep it simple, don't have to use your brain but you do have to use your back. Course, he had a team of Monks for the lifting. But with the flow hive plastic combs this would not apply the bees would get straight to them if put on top. 
Probably pay to use a queen excluder though, another foreign concept for warres I guess.


----------



## trobo

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



Oldtimer said:


> Trobo if you put one of these flow hive thingy's on a warre, you would put it on top where the bees will put the honey.
> 
> The only reason warres are often supered at the bottom is because they are a foundationless top bar hive which makes it too hard for the bees to build a new box if it's added on top because of the big space between the bee cluster and the new top bars. So even though adding new supers at the bottom is not ideal, it's the way it has to be done with warres to avoid the beekeeper having to use much skill in terms of adding the bees a ladder. Abbe Emile was trying to keep it simple, don't have to use your brain but you do have to use your back. Course, he had a team of Monks for the lifting. But with the flow hive plastic combs this would not apply the bees would get straight to them if put on top.
> Probably pay to use a queen excluder though, another foreign concept for warres I guess.


Thanks Oldtimer... makes lots of sense.
I think it is interesting to speculate how one could integrate this system in the different hive designs. From reading all the comments it seems that the approach to incorporating into Lang, Warre or Top bar will all be very different. I also read on the Flow Hive website that the cells were not right for the Queen to lay so this might void the need for Queen excluders in all systems plus alter the design/management?


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

I don't even understand why you would put them in TBH's or Warre's. Seems counter to the whole idea of those hives. The Warre is known as the people's hive since it was inexpensive to make. Adding a self extractor mechanism seem to counter that. I guess then it becomes the rich peoples hive.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

How does one keep ants, moths and beetles etc from setting up home in the tubes? The bees seem to have access to the cells but not the collection tubes. I thought it was the presence of bees that keep unwanted insects, molds etc out of the hive.
Perhaps Michael Bush has the answer to this.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



WBVC said:


> How does one keep ants, moths and beetles etc from setting up home in the tubes? ...
> Perhaps Michael Bush has the answer to this.


Or maybe you could look at the photos and videos that are posted. The tubes are only attached when extracted, at least that is what it looks like. I sure hope those Aussies slip MBush some cash, it seems like anytime someone finds a supposed fault with the system they blame Bush. They sound like the current administration.


----------



## snl

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



shannonswyatt said:


> I sure hope those Aussies slip MBush some cash, it seems like anytime someone finds a supposed fault with the system they blame Bush.


Well, he is heavily promoting it.............


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

He is? I just went to his web site and couldn't find anything on the home page? How is he promoting this?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

He isn't. He will answer some questions about it, but he isn't promoting it.


----------



## snl

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

All you need to do is read all the posts he's published here on this........


----------



## snl

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



sqkcrk said:


> He isn't. He will answer some questions about it, but he isn't promoting it.


The following is not promoting it?



Michael Bush said:


> I thought it was impossible when I first saw it. I actually wondered if it was a spoof or if it was real. But after seeing how it works and watching them do one frame in the open live on skype while I could see the entire frame and talk to them and after they sent me a box worth of them to test, I can assure you it works.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



snl said:


> Well, he is heavily promoting it.............


No, he isn't.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

I think that he was responding to another persons question. If he had a post that started like "Peeps! You have got to see these super new cool frames! Run out and buy them while you still can't!" that would be promoting. If I say my son has had success with his Warre hives I'm pretty sure that I'm not promoting Warre's.


----------



## snl

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



Barry Digman said:


> No, he isn't.



verb (used with object), *promoted, **promoting.*1.to help or encourage to exist or flourish; further:_to promote world peace._


2.to advance in rank, dignity, position, etc. (opposed to demote ).

3._Education. _to put ahead to the next higher stage or grade of a courseor series of classes.

4.to aid in organizing (business undertakings).

5.to encourage the sales, acceptance, etc., of (a product), especiallythrough advertising or other publicity.

6._Informal. _to obtain (something) by cunning or trickery; wangle.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

It's Pretty Thin Gruel.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-1.html

1) I am not 100% sure it is ok to post links to other websites so if not, sorry.
2) This article will SEEM to be not related to this thread but I assure you that if you read it, it actually is (the first part, before he gets into the meat of the AI discussion).

here is a short excerpt from part 1 of that article:

Our own experience makes us stubborn old men about the future. We base our ideas about the world on our personal experience, and that experience has ingrained the rate of growth of the recent past in our heads as “the way things happen.” We’re also limited by our imagination, which takes our experience and uses it to conjure future predictions—but often, what we know simply doesn’t give us the tools to think accurately about the future. When we hear a prediction about the future that contradicts our experience-based notion of how things work, our instinct is that the prediction must be naive. If I tell you, later in this post, that you may live to be 150, or 250, or not die at all, your instinct will be, “That’s stupid—if there’s one thing I know from history, it’s that everybody dies.” And yes, no one in the past has not died. But no one flew airplanes before airplanes were invented either.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

I assure you I have seen the video that is what prompted my question. There are tubes that one attaches but there also appears to be Tube...or channel if you may...that travels below the cells and empties into the detachable tube.
I could well be wrong but it was that channel under the cells that I had concerns about.

It is not a crictism of, or blame placed upon, Mr Bush. As he is the only person I know of on this list that has actually used the hive I merely asked if he could comment on my question.



shannonswyatt said:


> Or maybe you could look at the photos and videos that are posted. The tubes are only attached when extracted, at least that is what it looks like. I sure hope those Aussies slip MBush some cash, it seems like anytime someone finds a supposed fault with the system they blame Bush. They sound like the current administration.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



WBVC said:


> I assure you I have seen the video that is what prompted my question. There are tubes that one attaches but there also appears to be Tube...or channel if you may...that travels below the cells and empties into the detachable tube.
> I could well be wrong but it was that channel under the cells that I had concerns about.
> 
> It is not a crictism of, or blame placed upon, Mr Bush. As he is the only person I know of on this list that has actually used the hive I merely asked if he could comment on my question.


In the photos I have seen, there is a removable cap that you take out before putting in the tube and presumably put back in to seal the chamber when you are finished with the tube.
Bill


----------



## Slugga

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

As a hobbyist and school teacher, one of these frames stacked on top of my classroom observation hive would be very practical.... Hope it all works out- Time will tell I guess!


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



snl said:


> Well, he is heavily promoting it.............


Isn't this the pot calling the kettle black?


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



snl said:


> Well, he is heavily promoting it.............


He is not. He was asked and he gave his hands on opinion. Isnt that what this place is for? The sharing of Ideas. Funny how the one *Clearly Promoting* (and selling) a varroa treatment style as his tag line has an issue with a proven treatment free beeks sharing of experience. Come on Man.:waiting: G


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

on the company web site mb is one of 9 people endorsing their product. what would you call that?


----------



## snl

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



beeware10 said:


> on the company web site mb is one of 9 people endorsing their product. what would you call that?


Thank-you.

http://OxaVap.com Your source for the Varrox Mite Killing
OA Vaporizer "One of the highest ranked" by R. Oliver


----------



## snl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Not really, I was responding to those who say he is not promoting it when he clearly is. I have no issue at all with him doing so, I wish them all well.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



snl said:


> The following is not promoting it?


Larry, do you really consider a testament such as that which Michael wrote "heavily promoting it"? He answered someone question and gave his impression. He didn't go on "Good Morning America". Not yet.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



beeware10 said:


> on the company web site mb is one of 9 people endorsing their product. what would you call that?


I wouldn't call it "heavily promoting".


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

mark your right. its only 1/9 of a promotion. lol


----------



## snl

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



sqkcrk said:


> I wouldn't call it "heavily promoting".


When his picture is on the front page of the website introducing the product you wouldn't call it "heavily promoting" Jeez! :scratch:


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

It wasn't a promotion. It was an answer to a question. He wasn't being paid to promote the product.

If you ask me what I think of my new truck and I respond positively, is that being heavily promotional? Or is that answering someone's question. How can Michael answer questions about the Flow Hive and not fall prey to someone saying he's pushing it?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



snl said:


> When his picture is on the front page of the website introducing the product you wouldn't call it "heavily promoting" Jeez! :scratch:


Is it? Is his picture on the front page of the website? And does he say that he endorses the product?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



snl said:


> When his picture is on the front page of the website introducing the product you wouldn't call it "heavily promoting" Jeez! :scratch:


Larry, I think you over exaggerated things when you used the word "heavily". To me, "heavily" implies over and over, not once or twice stating his opinion on something.


----------



## snl

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Mark...........look at the website and you tell me.........


----------



## snl

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



sqkcrk said:


> Larry, I think you over exaggerated things when you used the word "heavily". To me, "heavily" implies over and over, not once or twice stating his opinion on something.


Mark.........look at all his comments on this thread..... Frankly, I could care less that he is promoting it (I think it's great that he's promoting an invention that he believes is very good) but to deny that he is not heavily promoting it when he is posting here and has his picture on their website with the wording 
"_“Mind Blowing...It's not very often something is so revolutionary as to blow my mind...Saving 20% of harvest labor is not trivial, 40% is amazing, 60% is revolutionary. But 95%, that’s Mind Boggling!” 

If that's not "heavily promoting," what is?_​


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Okay.


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It would be much more accurate to say Mr. Bush is endorsing it rather than promoting it. It seems like he fell into a bit of a trap on this one. They asked his opinion and he offered it, apparently without qualification. Given his "mind blowing" and "mind boggling" descriptions and the manufacturer's use of his image and resume' to promote their product and raise lots and lots of money, it's hard to dispute the fact that Mr. Bush will,fairly or unfairly, be linked to some degree with the success or failure of this product.


----------



## snl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Jim,
By endorsing a product, are you not in effect promoting it?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I just saw a photograph of Michael Busch with a Flow Hive Jacket emblazoned with their Logo. At first I thought it was for Nascar, but then I saw it was just the way the jacket looked and it wasn't for Nascar after all. How about that?


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I didn't even know a thread could have OCD...


----------



## snl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



sqkcrk said:


> How about that?


What's your point? There is no comparison to what you thought you saw to what is actually on the Honey Flow website.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

mark thanks for being fair. Its starting to be a long winter. what would we be talking about if this flow hive had not come up?


----------



## snl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry Digman said:


> I didn't even know a thread could have OCD...


Your right Barry, this is crazy. G'nite all.


----------



## zig.zag

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

From what I've read in this thread, Michael Bush is neither promoting nor endorsing this device. He has freely given his opinions about its operation and usefulness based on his experience with it. His rock star status may give the appearance of endorsement since his opinion carries so much weight, but my take on his comments is that he is offering his honest opinions about his experience with it and is leaving it to you to determine whether it will fit into your own method of beekeeping. That is neither endorsement nor promotion. It is simply generous honesty and helpfulness. Which is to be respected rather than ridiculed.


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



snl said:


> Jim,
> By endorsing a product, are you not in effect promoting it?


Perhaps, but I don't think a debate of semantics really furthers this discussion. Let's just folks decide for themselves how they want to define Mr. Bush's roll in this.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



sqkcrk said:


> If you ask me what I think of my new truck and I respond positively, is that being heavily promotional?


[
Mark, if your name and photo was shown on the Ford Transit (van) website and you were quoted as saying exuberant things about the Transit van, couldn't a reasonable person say that you were _promoting _the Transit van?

And if you allowed Ford to use your name and photo and words on the Transit website without compensation, I'd still think you were promoting the Transit van, but I might wonder about your business acumen in do so without a fee.


----------



## Jim Brewster

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

C'mon let's be fair and call it a qualified endorsement. His "mind-boggling" comments came from a place of previously being deeply skeptical of the whole concept. He's been very honest about some of the potential limitations and the management adjustments that will probably be needed. He isn't saying that everyone should buy in. As far as I've seen he isn't recommending it to newbees. Even the inventors aren't explicitly targeting newbees, though everyone must realize they are the ones most likely to buy in.


----------



## crofter

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

When your name becomes iconic, merely smiling when something walks by, is taken as highly meaningful. Just the way it is.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



snl said:


> What's your point? There is no comparison to what you thought you saw to what is actually on the Honey Flow website.


Race car drivers highly promote. They literally wear what they endorse on their sleeves. They obviously get paid to do so. Saying the same about Michael Bush seemed a gross exaggeration to me. Now, after you showed me, it simply seems an exaggeration.

And I'll add, So what?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beeware10 said:


> mark thanks for being fair. Its starting to be a long winter. what would we be talking about if this flow hive had not come up?


And for the Flow Hive we should be thankful.
And for the Flow Hive we should be thankful?

There were a couple of years when Barry closed beesource , was it Christmas eve to January 1st?, for reasons someone else could explain. Maybe he should do so again only with anything Flow Hive related.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



Rader Sidetrack said:


> [
> Mark, if your name and photo was shown on the Ford Transit (van) website and you were quoted as saying exuberant things about the Transit van, couldn't a reasonable person say that you were _promoting _the Transit van?
> 
> And if you allowed Ford to use your name and photo and words on the Transit website without compensation, I'd still think you were promoting the Transit van, but I might wonder about your business acumen in do so without a fee.


I see your point. To your last point, me too.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



Jim Brewster said:


> C'mon let's be fair and call it a qualified endorsement. His "mind-boggling" comments came from a place of previously being deeply skeptical of the whole concept. He's been very honest about some of the potential limitations and the management adjustments that will probably be needed. He isn't saying that everyone should buy in. As far as I've seen he isn't recommending it to newbees. Even the inventors aren't explicitly targeting newbees, though everyone must realize they are the ones most likely to buy in.


And do you suppose that Michael isn't defending himself here to us in this Thread because there is no winning should he try? 

It seems to me as though those who see Michael's appearance in the Flow Hive video and literature lowers his stature, brings him down a notch. Is my perception wrong?


----------



## beemandan

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



sqkcrk said:


> It seems to me as though those who see Michael's appearance in the Flow Hive video and literature lowers his stature, brings him down a notch. Is my perception wrong?


Only if the product fail to work as promised or they fail to deliver it. Otherwise he's good.....in my opinion.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

It isn't like the man has changed his signature line to something like by the Oa Vaporizor or some such non-sense. I find it interesting since Michael tells people not to purchase his own book. He gave them the rights to use his first impression of the product.


----------



## snl

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

There is_* NOTHING*_ negative about what Michael is doing................but to deny that he_* IS*_ promoting and endorsing the product, is to deny what you are reading and seeing.........
The only negative that *MAY* happen is that Michael is associated with promoting and endorsing a product that does not live up to its hype.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



beemandan said:


> Only if the product fail to work as promised or they fail to deliver it. Otherwise he's good.....in my opinion.


And if they don't or it doesn't, what then?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Larry, just curious, reading your tag line, which I haven't consciously paid attention to before, does that mean that Randy Oliver highly promotes the OA Vaporizer? And is it only one of which he highly ranked?


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Management changes for flow hive*



Mike Gillmore said:


> Ace. What is the cost of "drying" honey commercially?


How could I answer this and not be wrong. To a layman if you dry something naturally vs. commercially it will cost you less because you will consume energy. Think of your mother hanging out cloths vs. using a cloths dryer. Now ask yourself how many people dry their cloths on a line today? The equation swings the other way when you understand that time = money. With a cloths dryer you can dry cloths 10 times faster.
How Jim Lyon is perceiving drying honey is not the way I am thinking. Honey can be dried in minutes not days in a continuous drying oven. It is conceivable that this would not be done by the beekeeper but by someone like Nabisco, or Sysco who would get the nectar in tanker trucks and not barrels. The beekeeper would collect nectar in barrels or vats and pump that into the tankers.

The jar thing is a laugh. Only a select few will be collecting honey in jars one at a time.

Can we stop with the baby poop back and forth?


----------



## beemandan

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



sqkcrk said:


> And if they don't or it doesn't, what then?


It would impact his credibility, especially to those who plunked down money for a product that didn't work as advertised or wasn't delivered. 
There's nothing wrong with making product endorsements as long as one knows the company and product or that endorsing person is willing to risk a dent in their reputation. 
Just my opinion.


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

JMO Had some of the comments by MB in this thread been submitted to the flow people, instead of the one quoted, his picture and name would not be found anywhere on that site.




snl said:


> Mark.........look at all his comments on this thread..... Frankly, I could care less that he is promoting it (I think it's great that he's promoting an invention that he believes is very good) but to deny that he is not heavily promoting it when he is posting here and has his picture on their website with the wording
> "_“Mind Blowing...It's not very often something is so revolutionary as to blow my mind...Saving 20% of harvest labor is not trivial, 40% is amazing, 60% is revolutionary. But 95%, that’s Mind Boggling!”
> 
> If that's not "heavily promoting," what is?_​


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

I take his statements to be specific to a frame that can self extract, unless there is an endorsement of the company that I didn't see. He seems pretty specific about what he is referring to, and that is the labor savings involved in extraction. 

The guy that says it is the holy grail of beekeeping must have never heard of the Varroa mite.


----------



## beekuk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Don't know if this has been posted, recently posted on one of our UK forums.

Patent for a 1940s Flow hive ...reminds me a bit of something in this thread.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/2223561.pdf
United States Patent US2223561
http://www.google.co.in/patents/US2631307



> This invention relates to a device adaptable to any type of hive, for extracting honey automatically from combs, without necessity of taking out the combs from the hive, said combs being populated and at full internal and external work, when the honey extraction takes place, the operation causing no damage to the life and natural working habits of the bees, but on the contrary, offers the best and more ample condition of comfort and adaptation to the peculiar character of these insects. Moreover, according to the practice of industrial and productive bee keeping it is known that only the ripe honey should be extracted; with this device it is impossible, even if desired, to crop unripe honey, for only the ripe honey of sealed cells is extracted, while with common extracting method by centrifugal force, ripe honey is extracted inevitably mixed with unripe honey. The more peculiar quality of this device is that it replaces instantaneously and automatically the empty store (super with empty combs), ready to be used as deposit for the neotar gathered by bees. The operations this device does in the hive are: extracting, filtering, bottling honey and replacement of empty combs. All these operations are done automatically, without the need of openin the hive, thus obtaining the product aseptically and without making bees angry. Furthermore, this device is applicable to any type of hive.


http://ventilatedbeesuit.com/web_beekeeping/sys/dat/02223561.pdf


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

What color was the dress that those two llamas were wearing while on the loose yesterday?


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



beemandan said:


> It would impact his credibility, especially to those who plunked down money for a product that didn't work as advertised or wasn't delivered.
> There's nothing wrong with making product endorsements as long as one knows the company and product or that endorsing person is willing to risk a dent in their reputation.
> Just my opinion.


The only thing I have read that MB has posted on this thread or any others I have seen, is, They sent him some to test, and to his surprise, they worked as advertised. Other than that, I did see a sense of amazement at the high cost. I didn't see him telling people they should buy them, I didn't see him telling people they shouldn't buy them. I read him say that he may get some and try to incorporate them. Once the prices were out, I think I recall reading him saying that he would tinker with the 6 he had, until the prices came down. Someone suggested earlier, that having his name and quote on the website without getting paid, may be a poor reflection of business sense. With that I agree. Whether he got paid or not does not matter to me. Regardless of the outcome of the FH business venture, MB was here before they came, and will remain here whether they succeed or fail. Funny that those you claim may see his reputation as "dented" should things go wrong, will still be searching the pages of his book which he shares for free for everything that is right. G


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

As a backyard beekeeper at the 3-5 hives level, now going into my fifth year, I really appreciate Michael Bush's generosity with his time and his readiness to tap his experience and knowledge for others. If I have questions and post them here, I'm often happy when he comes in with a reply. I asked here about over-wintering on Flow™ frames (Barry somehow transplanted that post to this thread) and Michael Bush was quick to respond in a way that exposed an important handicap in the Flow hive approach. So I'd say we can count on his honesty and integrity, and the quote they have on the Flow™ hive website was his honest reaction on the question of labor savings in harvesting. Whether you call it "promoting" is just semantics. I think most of us marvel at the ingeniousness of the new invention, and we're interested to see how it pans out. 

Beekeeping in general will benefit from having him as one of the first to field-test it outside of the close circle in Byron Bay, Australia. The inventors, too, have benefited, but their choosing him was meant in the larger spirit. (They probably didn't expect this to be the Indiegogo sensation that it has become, and in the $70K scenario, Michael Bush would have been part of a more gradual testing and expansion of the product.)


----------



## mahobee

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



biggraham610 said:


> The only thing I have read that MB has posted on this thread or any others I have seen, is, They sent him some to test, and to his surprise, they worked as advertised. Other than that, I did see a sense of amazement at the high cost. I didn't see him telling people they should buy them, I didn't see him telling people they shouldn't buy them. I read him say that he may get some and try to incorporate them. Once the prices were out, I think I recall reading him saying that he would tinker with the 6 he had, until the prices came down. Someone suggested earlier, that having his name and quote on the website without getting paid, may be a poor reflection of business sense. With that I agree. Whether he got paid or not does not matter to me. Regardless of the outcome of the FH business venture, MB was here before they came, and will remain here whether they succeed or fail. Funny that those you claim may see his reputation as "dented" should things go wrong, will still be searching the pages of his book which he shares for free for everything that is right. G


AMEN


----------



## RobWok

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Just want to add my 2 cents. I’m looking at it more from a pragmatic view. Just to show where I’m coming from: 15 years beekeeping experience, averaging about 10 hives at any one time, all natural, all organic beekeeper. My bees all come from cutouts and wild swarms. I have managed a business where I do live bee removal from some very difficult locations in Richmond.
However, I don’t put on a headdress made of wildflowers and pretend to talk to my bees. I wear deodorant, and I have never smoked pot. I have used plastic foundation, and for my honey supers, prefer that. For the brood, I’m a fan of natural comb on foundationless frames, but use the plastic frames for spinning out honey into an extractor. 
So, my take on this is not from the bee’s point of view, but from a pragmatic, inventors point of view. I have designed and built my own observation hive, and think I have come up with a good option to super it with a special bee escape – even though I haven’t figured out how to manufacture that part yet. This Flow bee hive has been crowdfunded at 4,000%. That is really over the top. First, I don’t think they’ll be able to meet demand. 2nd, they got their money up front through hype and a couple promotional videos, not because there was a lot of “buzz” because it worked so well. So, I think they’ll be way behind in shipping orders, and then they’ll have to deal with customer service. Bees don’t follow the beekeeper’s rules. Any beekeeper worth his or her salt knows about breach comb and propolis. The bees don’t propolize much in the honey super, but it still happens. Bees also hate plastic foundation. I don’t know anyone who has had much success with plastic honeycomb. The closest anyone can get to bee acceptance is plastic embossed, sprayed with wax. I have used all kinds of plastic embossed over the years, and even 100% plastic frames, foundation, wired foundation, and foundationless. I have run 2 top bar hives for years.
Here is what I think will happen: These guys (and I think their intentions are great, and they mean no harm) will sell a ton of these things. The buyers will be gimmick places like organic food stores and year round farmer’s markets, and hipsters, and some beekeepers. Then, people will try to put some bees in these hives. A lot will install packages and they’ll have problems and blame it on this hive. Some of these hives will sit in people’s garages or the back yards, unused. The folks that get bees to stay in the hive will have some success, and maybe a bunch of cross comb. If the bees don’t take to that comb, and refuse to use it, they’ll swarm because they don’t have room to expand. You’ll also have robbing, ants, and possibly hive beetle issues. Also, I believe the inventors are from Australia, which has no Verroa mite, so they already have a huge leg up on the rest of the world (they do have the small hive beetle in areas though). These hives for the most part will also be pretty poorly managed. There are few commercial beekeepers or even honey producers that will want to buy hundreds of these things. The main buyer is the small guy, or even the non beekeeper who wants honey, and feels like they’re assuaging their environmental guilt by putting a hive in the back yard, but don’t really want to get into the hobby.
It all remains to be seen.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Rob, that wasn't "two cents". More like 50 bucks. I find such densely packed text difficult to read, so I don't. Just FYI. (not in the way Jimmy Fallon might mean FYI.)


----------



## zig.zag

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

Kofu: well spoken. I totally agree.

Now let's get back to speculations about the device's future rather than MB's future.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



RobWok said:


> Here is what I think will happen: ... ... ... ... ... ...



I agree with you, Rob. 


(And while a few more paragraph breaks might have been easier to to read, at least your _content _made sense. I've seen plenty of _other _posts that don't fit that criteria.)


----------



## crabbcatjohn

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

My concern over the use of toxic plastic. Personally i don't buy any bottles or storage containers that aren't BPA free. If you think about it the amount of plastic surrounding the honey is massive and will most likely come into contact with every single drop. Ad the warm temps in a hive and leaching could be massive. I know most of the honey bottles are now made with BPA free plastic. Here is a response they made today about toxic plastic.

Flow Hive We will be doing a lot of research into plastic in the coming months and years, looking for ones that are strong and durable enough and are completely non toxic. We will also look into non plastic materials.

They also commented on"working" on deals with DHL for shipping. As far as i know DHL does not ship to residences in the US and does not operate at all in areas outside major cities. 


Personally i think its a cool idea, but the more they talk the more red flags come up for me.


----------



## Morris Forbes

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

From the Flow Hive FAQ:

Are the Flow frames made from BPA free plastic?
Yes, the Flow™ frames are made from high quality, food-grade, BPA-free plastic.

I do agree with many of the concerns but will be trying them out, regardless. Unless they don't work as advertised, I suspect I will find them useful for my backyard hives.


----------



## RobWok

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*



sqkcrk said:


> Rob, that wasn't "two cents". More like 50 bucks. I find such densely packed text difficult to read, so I don't. Just FYI. (not in the way Jimmy Fallon might mean FYI.)


ha, you got me. Stream of conscious. 

Let's try again: Neat idea, media over hyped, probably not sustainable once we see it in real world situations year over year. (like, what happens if a bear knocks it over, or someone steals your jar full?)

Rob


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Flow Hive- this look interesting*

I am no marketing guru. Michael Bush, and others, have been videoed giving their response after trying the hive. I wonder if others spoke less favourably and didn't get their video clip put on the site.

When I think of active promotion I think of someone saying...you should go out and purchase because....I did not hear that phrase. Perhaps I simply missed it.

I think this thread is fortunate to have someone like Michael Bush chiming in as he has hands on experience...albeit for period...with this device.




beeware10 said:


> on the company web site mb is one of 9 people endorsing their product. what would you call that?


----------



## MissJohnnie

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Michael Bush.....Now that it is 2015 do you still use this and if so what are your thoughts.


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



MissJohnnie said:


> Michael Bush.....Now that it is 2015 do you still use this and if so what are your thoughts.


Maybe you should peruse the thread............................ G


----------



## Jim Brewster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



MissJohnnie said:


> Michael Bush.....Now that it is 2015 do you still use this and if so what are your thoughts.


Michael Bush is in Nebraska. I don't imagine he's had much time to use his Flow frames yet this year. Give him a few months...


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I think he watched in on Skype. Although he has also received a flow hive to look at he has been away from his own bees for I think 2 years.

But he has no reason to lie, like everyone else I had my doubts about this product, but when I saw the comments from Michael Bush, that put my mind to rest, and I suspect that will be a major part of the reason why their fund raising has gone so well also.


----------



## MissJohnnie

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



biggraham610 said:


> Maybe you should peruse the thread............................ G


Well actually I did, I just looked at the wrong side of the page for a date reference. Sooo.... lets pretend I didn't post this and please except my apologies.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

A rather rude introduction for a new member asking what to her was a reasonable question, MissJohnnie I apologise for the rather high handed response you were given.

The worst thing is when people are afraid to ask questions. Don't apologise if someone else thinks your question is not "good enough", if anytime anyone asked a question the response was Why don't you go search for it, there would be little point having the forum t all.

I have asked some pretty dumb questions myself on occasion.


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



MissJohnnie said:


> Well actually I did, I just looked at the wrong side of the page for a date reference. Sooo.... lets pretend I didn't post this and please except my apologies.


Im sorry if that came off as rude, that was not my intention. There's tons on this thread with Michael and his thoughts. Oldtimer, I wasn't trying to be rude, but it is honorable coming to the defense of a lady. Kudos. I was simply saying the answer was in the thread. Welcome MissJohnnie. G


----------



## beemandan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> I have asked some pretty dumb questions myself on occasion.


What's the old adage? The only dumb question is the one unasked.
Stick around MissJohnnie and ask anything you'd like. You might get some short answers...but sooner or later you'll get a good one too.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

BigGraham I follow your other posts as you have some interesting insights, and have noticed you are normally generous and gracious. I wish I had your good manners.

The particular post here I am sure was not meant quite how it was taken but if someone with just 2 posts is driven to feel the need to apologise for a question I just thought a little reassurance could be in order.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

This thread is so long now it needs a summary at the top to keep it straight. Not as long as the swarm list, but pretty long!


----------



## JRG13

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Up to 3.5 million in funds, pretty amazing, I will have to give an A+ to their marketing team/strategy. I'm still contemplating whether or not to fund around the $340 to get a box and some frames, wasn't expecting to have to pitch in that much.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



JRG13 said:


> wasn't expecting to have to pitch in that much.


Then wait it out. It is expensive to be first.


----------



## PicnicCreek

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I meant to do an introduction for a first post, but  this will have to do.

To all those fussing about Michael Bush *endorsing* or *promoting* the product, I'll add my two cents: I didn't see it that way. 

What I saw was a respected beekeeper sharing his personal experience. If you, personally, find that an endorsement then that's on you. I didn't see it that way. I saw it as feedback about the product (including what I read on the website). I found the first-hand independent information he provided to be helpful.

He no doubt was well aware that many of you would be incredulous about this product, ridicule it, call it a sham or a fraud. So it takes a certain amount of backbone to calmly answer questions and not be defensive while all of that is going on. Kudos to him.

It's hard to accept change or even be open to it.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



PicnicCreek said:


> Kudos to him.


If you have not met Michael Bush in person you should do so. He is not like any old beekeeper you will every meet. Seriously, I mean it.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I suspect that now mb wishes he had never heard of a flow hive. looks like he got a jacket and some plastic parts while the company grossed 3 1/2 million. they made out well on their investment in mb and he takes the heat if it fails.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beeware10 said:


> I suspect that now mb wishes he had never heard of a flow hive.


I think you are wrong. I think you have never met the guy. My impression is he could care less about how much money someone else makes and he is honest as the day is long. When you are honest you could care less about what someone else thinks of you. You only care about what you think of yourself and honesty puts you pretty high up on humanity.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

ace-- as usual your wrong. I have met mb at the Syracuse bee meeting a few yrs ago and have talked.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beeware10 said:


> I have met mb at the Syracuse bee meeting a few yrs ago and have talked.


Hmm, Apparently you didn't listen.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

The only complaint I have about this product is that everybody I know has sent me an email about it. Awful lot of replies I'll have to make.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It should be in future marketing text books.


----------



## honeyman46408

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I just read on our club face book page some one who does not have bees yet has ordered one and will not receive until December and the cost? 600 bux :lookout:


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>> 600 bux

But think of all the labor saved! :lpf: It will revolutionize beekeeping!! :shhhh:


Tulip Mania in 1637



... hopefully you can see my sarcasm ...


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> The only complaint I have about this product is that everybody I know has sent me an email about it. Awful lot of replies I'll have to make.


Ignoring e-mails isn't something you do in NZ? Who says you have to answer every e-mail you get? Politeness? Can't you make a blanket statement and send it to all who wrote you?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Thats what 'BCC" is for. 

'BCC' = Blind Carbon Copy. The multiple recipients can't see that you sent the same email to everyone at once. Your email client most likely can do BCC, but you may have to look at 'help' to see how if it isn't shown on your normal email interface/screen.


----------



## Myron Denny

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I am taking what he said as his reply to my inquiry.
Myron Denny


----------



## MissJohnnie

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Looks to me like you do not need their box. If you are ok with power tools or know someone who is, save the money. They give you directions for making the cuts needed. I ordered the 6 frame set first then ordered the box..shipping is gonna kill me.


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



MissJohnnie said:


> Looks to me like you do not need their box. If you are ok with power tools or know someone who is, save the money. They give you directions for making the cuts needed. I ordered the 6 frame set first then ordered the box..shipping is gonna kill me.


Did they say when it would be delivered? G


----------



## MissJohnnie

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



biggraham610 said:


> Did they say when it would be delivered? G


Funny thing....the box is August and the frames October. if I am understanding the timing thing correctly I wont be using them till 2016.


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



MissJohnnie said:


> Funny thing....the box is August and the frames October. if I am understanding the timing thing correctly I wont be using them till 2016.


Well, by then Im sure you will have a strong colony ready to put them to good use. Then, you can give us a review of your own. All the best. G


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

This looks interesting. Somebody should look into it a bit deeper

United States Patent US2223561


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Yes thanks for the email advice re the BCC thing, that's what I'll do.

Now that this flow hive contraption is all over Facebook, seems like everybody who knows a beekeeper wants to ensure they let the person know about this revolutionary new device that will change the world for beekeepers. 

Max is a patent from 1940 still valid? I thought they had an expiry date?


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

"Max is a patent from 1940 still valid? I thought they had an expiry date? 
I gather back then it was 17 years. Interesting - one of the cross section looks quite similar.


----------



## beemandan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> The only complaint I have about this product is that everybody I know has sent me an email about it. Awful lot of replies I'll have to make.


I've been getting them too. I made a standard Word reply and saved it....and as I accumulate a few I do a copy and paste from it for my reply.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



max2 said:


> "Max is a patent from 1940 still valid?


No it should mean that anyone can manufacture and sell this device.

Edit: It should also mean that another patent using the same concept cannot be granted.


----------



## beekuk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Seems to be very much like this device.... wonder why it never caught on.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beekuk said:


> Seems to be very much like this device.... wonder why it never caught on.


Frames are metal?


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> The only complaint I have about this product is that everybody I know has sent me an email about it. Awful lot of replies I'll have to make.


 I know, people send it to me like I have never heard of them.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beemandan said:


> I've been getting them too. I made a standard Word reply and saved it....and as I accumulate a few I do a copy and paste from it for my reply.


One word should suffice, don't ya think? "Thanks."


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



sqkcrk said:


> One word should suffice, don't ya think? "Thanks."


Thats been my approach. G


----------



## bison

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> My impression is he could care less about how much money someone else makes and he is honest as the day is long. When you are honest you could care less about what someone else thinks of you.


Not quite. You're confusing "could care less" with the correct "couldn't care less". If he could care less, it means that he cares.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Yes you are correct. I don't say things right.


----------



## beemandan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



sqkcrk said:


> One word should suffice, don't ya think? "Thanks."


Most, I'm afraid are asking what I think about it. So, one word, 'thanks' wouldn't work. I tell them that it looks pretty pricey and if I were considering it, I think I'd wait a season or two and see how it works for others and also see if the price came down.


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



max2 said:


> This looks interesting. Somebody should look into it a bit deeper
> 
> United States Patent US2223561


A quick read of the claims of USPN 2,223,561 ( http://pat2pdf.org/patents/pat2223561.pdf ) shows that honey is drained from the comb cells by moving the bottom of the cell away from the cell, allowing the honey to flow out the bottom of the cell. Various ways of moving the bottom of the cell away from the cell to allow the honey to drain are described.

From their website. the Flow Hive works by "the cells are split vertically inside the comb forming channels." Consequently, the mechanism to drain each cell in the Flow Hive is not exactly the same as the mechanism in the '561 patent.

I have no idea whether the Flow Hive inventors intend to pursue a patent, but whether the Flow Hive mechanism is patentable over the '561 patent will depend on whether the Flow Hive mechanism is an "obvious" variation of the '561 patent. In the patent world, the term "obvious" is a term of art heavy with legal meaning and 100 years of case law interpreting it. In other words, what a lay person thinks is "obvious" has little bearing on a formal obviousness determination done by the Patent Office.

Patentability aside, I think the more interesting question is "why didn't the '561 mechanism achieve commercial success"? Could be that it was just ahead of its time, or that the '561 mechanism didn't work all that well, or that it was too expensive to manufacture, etc. 

I also wonder if the Flow Hive inventors were aware of the '561 method of draining honey from cells. Perhaps someone has simply reinvented the wheel? I don't think anyone knows until the product is available and people start using it and reporting the results.

JMHO




.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> Yes you are correct. I don't say things right.


Don't feed us straight lines...


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



shinbone said:


> I have no idea whether the Flow Hive inventors intend to pursue a patent, but whether the Flow Hive mechanism is patentable over the '561 patent will depend on whether the Flow Hive mechanism is an "obvious" variation of the '561 patent. In the patent world, the term "obvious" is a term of art heavy with legal meaning and 100 years of case law interpreting it. In other words, what a lay person thinks is "obvious" has little bearing on a formal obviousness determination done by the Patent Office.


When you apply for a patent you have to do a patent search and not a google search and list all the prior art that resembles what you are doing. (You have to do it the patent office will not do it for you) If they find something similar and you didn't list it in your filing it gets denied. If you find something similar you have to make a case as to why it is different. If you find something as similar as this '561 patent I wouldn't go any further with a patent because now anyone can literally use the art that is no longer in effect. Essentially you might be granted a patent but it is useless protection.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry Digman said:


> Don't feed us straight lines...


I don't know what you mean.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

OK, Ace, if it comes from _me _perhaps it will be more clear to you ...



Acebird said:


> I don't say things right.




:lpf:


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> When you apply for a patent you have to do a patent search and not a google search and list all the prior art that resembles what you are doing. (You have to do it the patent office will not do it for you) If they find something similar and you didn't list it in your filing it gets denied.


It may appear this is how patenting works, but this is not correct.


----------



## cg3

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry Digman said:


> Don't feed us straight lines...





Acebird said:


> I don't know what you mean.


This is America. Talk American.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



shinbone said:


> It may appear this is how patenting works, but this is not correct.


What is missing?


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> Yes you are correct. I don't say things right.





Barry Digman said:


> Don't feed us straight lines...


"Straight lines" are what the straight man in comedy says — lines that weren't meant to be funny, but the funny guy makes a joke of it.




Acebird said:


> When you apply for a patent you have to do a patent search and ... list all the prior art that resembles what you are doing. ... If they find something similar and you didn't list it in your filing it gets denied. If you find something similar you have to make a case as to why it is different.


In the Flow™ frames patent application, they do list a couple of prior efforts along the same lines. I'm not going back through it now, but I think they were more recent patents, like in the '60s or so. Reading the patent makes it pretty clear they did put a lot of effort into doing it right, reviewing prior work and trying to preempt knock-offs and spin-offs. Aside from Craigs List, the other place to watch in the next 1-2 years is eBay for Chinese knock-offs. How quickly, and what happens next?


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Kofu said:


> Reading the patent makes it pretty clear they did put a lot of effort into doing it right, reviewing prior work and trying to preempt knock-offs and spin-offs.


Have you seen a patent that was granted for this flow hive?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



bison said:


> Not quite. You're confusing "could care less" with the correct "couldn't care less". If he could care less, it means that he cares.


What are you doing correcting someone's grammar? That's my job.


----------



## beekuk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> Have you seen a patent that was granted for this flow hive?


Only seen the application.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20140370781.pdf


----------



## cg3

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Anyone interested in seeing the patent application should check out the thread "Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive"



Dominic said:


> Seems like someone found their patent application and put it on their facebook page.
> 
> http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20140370781.pdf
> .


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> What is missing?


1) The Applicant is not required to do any kind of search.

2) The Patent Office does indeed do their own search.

3) Failing to list a relevant piece of prior art does not, by itself, preclude patenting.


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> Have you seen a patent that was granted for this flow hive?


I haven't done any kind of search, myself.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



shinbone said:


> 1) The Applicant is not required to do any kind of search.
> 
> 2) The Patent Office does indeed do their own search.
> 
> 3) Failing to list a relevant piece of prior art does not, by itself, preclude patenting.





Acebird said:


> When you apply for a patent you have to do a patent search and not a google search and list all the prior art that resembles what you are doing. (You have to do it the patent office will not do it for you) If they find something similar and you didn't list it in your filing it gets denied.


Quite a contrast in opinions.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beekuk said:


> Seems to be very much like this device.... wonder why it never caught on.





Acebird said:


> Frames are metal?


Yes, the use of plastic was still in it's infancy then, remember those (now collectors item toys) such as tin soldiers, tin toy cars etc. A big effort was made during the second world war on development of plastic and by the end of the war technology existed to make it worth large scale manufacture of things made from plastic, but it was still not as advanced as today. 

So the 1940 patent was a metal product and perhaps did not get off the ground purely because of the technical requirements needed to actually build one.

Re the Chinese knock offs, personally if they come I'd be very careful about buying one. Apart from that you would never really know what the plastic is or might contain, best I can tell the genuine product is high quality and built to last, I could bet you the knock off will start to crumble / malfunction.


----------



## PicnicCreek

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



shinbone said:


> A quick read of the claims of USPN 2,223,561 ( http://pat2pdf.org/patents/pat2223561.pdf ) shows that honey is drained from the comb cells by moving the bottom of the cell away from the cell, allowing the honey to flow out the bottom of the cell. Various ways of moving the bottom of the cell away from the cell to allow the honey to drain are described.
> 
> From their website. the Flow Hive works by "the cells are split vertically inside the comb forming channels." Consequently, the mechanism to drain each cell in the Flow Hive is not exactly the same as the mechanism in the '561 patent.
> 
> I have no idea whether the Flow Hive inventors intend to pursue a patent, but whether the Flow Hive mechanism is patentable over the '561 patent will depend on whether the Flow Hive mechanism is an "obvious" variation of the '561 patent. In the patent world, the term "obvious" is a term of art heavy with legal meaning and 100 years of case law interpreting it. In other words, what a lay person thinks is "obvious" has little bearing on a formal obviousness determination done by the Patent Office.
> 
> Patentability aside, I think the more interesting question is "why didn't the '561 mechanism achieve commercial success"? Could be that it was just ahead of its time, or that the '561 mechanism didn't work all that well, or that it was too expensive to manufacture, etc.
> 
> I also wonder if the Flow Hive inventors were aware of the '561 method of draining honey from cells. Perhaps someone has simply reinvented the wheel? I don't think anyone knows until the product is available and people start using it and reporting the results.
> 
> JMHO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


They have spoken about this older patent on their site, and there are some differences.



> The main difference between our invention and the Juan Bizcarro patent is that his removes the rear wall of the cell and leaves the rest of the hex intact. Ours splits every cell vertically forming large channels inside the comb.
> 
> We tried things similar to this http://www.google.com/patents/US2223561 and found they didn't work. The surface tension and viscosity of honey means that honey wont flow from hexagon cells, even when the rear wall is removed from the cell. It was a good try though, and credit to him for getting that far.


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



PicnicCreek said:


> They have spoken about this older patent on their site, and there are some differences.


If the new invention works where the older design did not work, that should overcome any obviousness argument made by the Patent Office. However, it is hard to understand why someone would expend the money to patent a design that doesn't work, not to mention that it is not legally permissible to patent a non-working design, and consequently a patent on a non-working invention would have been issued in error and thus invalid. In other words, patenting a non-working invention is a huge waste of time and money for multiple reasons. 

Obviously, I have no experience in working with the flow frame of the '561 patent and have no idea whether it works well or works poorly or doesn't work at all. And I am not intending to second guess any statement made by the inventors of the Flow Hive.

I hope the Flow Hive works well and the inventors have good marketing success, since it would be great to harvest honey from a hive with having to open it up and remove frames etc. Having looked at their patent application, it looks like a very complicated design with lots of moving parts, and I would be concerned that it will be quite expensive, especially since you need 10 or 20 or more per hive. (No doubt this has already been mentioned by other posters in this huge thread)




.


----------



## PicnicCreek

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



shinbone said:


> If the new invention works where the older design did not work, that should overcome any obviousness argument made by the Patent Office. However, it is hard to understand why someone would expend the money to patent a design that doesn't work, not to mention that it is not legally permissible to patent a non-working design, and consequently a patent on a non-working invention would have been issued in error and thus invalid.


I can't speak specifically to bee-equipment patents, but in the medical device world, there are a LOT of patents filed before the technology is proven (or not proven). Many do it to protect their idea before development is completely finished ... and then sadly come to realize that it simply won't work. 

The US Patent office did, at one time, require working models when submitting a patent - but that requirement was dropped a long time ago. There is always the off chance that they'll ask (think 'perpetual motion machine'), but it's rare.


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



PicnicCreek said:


> I can't speak specifically to bee-equipment patents, but in the medical device world, there are a LOT of patents filed before the technology is proven (or not proven)


An inoperative device is unpatentable (this is not the same as an un-built device). 

If someone files for a patent before they have finished conceiving a working design, then they have not completed the invention process and are not yet eligible for a patent. Note that an actual working device is not necessary, only that the design is fully conceived and will work. A complete description of a fully conceived device is called a "constructive reduction to practice." CRTP is different from "actual reduction to practice," where a working version of the invention is actually made. For an application to be considered complete and thus examin-able by the PTO, the description of the invention must be complete enough that one of ordinary skill in the relevant technical art can read the application and achieve ARTP without undue experimentation. However, ARTP is not required to get a patent. 

Further, after an application is filed, the Applicant is not allowed to go in and add new material. Consequently, if what is filed turns out to not work, the Applicant can't make modifications to the invention-as-filed. He would then have to file a new application.

Think of it this way: If I "patent" a car with gasoline engine that gets 200 MPG while pulling a 10,000 lbs trailer, but it doesn't actually work, what happens to the guy who later does invent such a vehicle where it does actually work? Is the second person - the one who actually created the successful device - going to lose out on the patent to the first guy who couldn't get it to work?





.


----------



## PicnicCreek

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



shinbone said:


> An inoperative device is unpatentable (this is not the same as an un-built device).
> 
> If someone files for a patent before they have finished conceiving a working design, then they have not completed the invention process and are not yet eligible for a patent. Note that an actual working device is not necessary, only that the design is fully conceived and will work. A complete description of a fully conceived device is called a "constructive reduction to practice." CRTP is different from "actual reduction to practice," where a working version of the invention is actually made. For an application to be considered complete and thus examin-able by the PTO, the description of the invention must be complete enough that one of ordinary skill in the relevant technical art can read the application and achieve ARTP without undue experimentation. However, ARTP is not required to get a patent.
> 
> Further, after an application is filed, the Applicant is not allowed to go in and add new material. Consequently, if what is filed turns out to not work, the Applicant can't make modifications to the invention-as-filed. He would then have to file a new application.
> 
> Think of it this way: If I "patent" a car with gasoline engine that gets 200 MPG while pulling a 10,000 lbs trailer, but it doesn't actually work, what happens to the guy who later does invent such a vehicle where it does actually work? Is the second person - the one who actually created the successful device - going to lose out on the patent to the first guy who couldn't get it to work?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


No argument from me whatsoever. I was only pointing out that there are lots of patents out there for non-working devices. That early patent may very well fall into that category.


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



PicnicCreek said:


> I was only pointing out that there are lots of patents out there for non-working devices.


I am not saying what you describe is not happening, however, a patent attorney who files a patent application for an invention that he knows is not yet complete enough to work would be guilty fraud on the patent office would be subject to disbarment. Those patent attorneys will eventually lose their license to practice patent law.

Additionally, the inventors are required to sign the patent application, and by doing so they are certifying that the application contains a complete description of the invention with sufficient information to allow others to make and use the invention, and that the application also reveals the best existing version of the invention. Those two requirements would not be met if the invention was inoperative, and thus the inventors would be defrauding the U.S. government and would themselves liable for sanctions.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

for someone in fla or if someone has fresh comb you can see if this design even works. cells go down at a 13 degree angle. uncap a frame and tip it to 26 degrees and see if any honey comes out. this should simulate their design. I know some will come out but doubt if even 1/2 will drain. to turn the crank and have some come right out seems impossible to me. maybe setting overnight but I think most will stay in the cells.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It isn't the same. If they cut the cells in half longways it would be the same. It isn't like the back of the cells is being pulled out, the cells are shifted.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

ok so they split the cell lengthways somehow. Is that right?


----------



## mac

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Apple should pay attention to these guys. New marketing for them. Anyone going to buy an I-watch this year or wait for Craigs list in a couple of years. Ya'll are missing the I GOT TO HAVE IT NOW mind set. These guys rock and it's good for the economy. RON CO pay attention I love my fishing magician.


----------



## snl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



mac said:


> Apple should pay attention to these guys. New marketing for them. Anyone going to buy an I-watch this year ...


I sure hope so, I got stock in Apple!


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beeware10 said:


> ok so they split the cell lengthways somehow. Is that right?


Something like that. If you read through the post someone has a link to the patent submissions.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> A big effort was made during the second world war on development of plastic and by the end of the war technology existed to make it worth large scale manufacture of things made from plastic...


Ah, yes. Plastics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dug-G9xVdVs


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

thanks. I guess the only way to duplicate would slit the cells to the middle after uncapping. just not worth the trouble. It was just a thought.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beekuk said:


> Only seen the application.
> 
> http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20140370781.pdf


Thank you, thank you, thank you, this is what I was looking for. They are splitting the cell and not just shearing off the bottom of the cells. Details are everything. After skimming through the application they are definitely looking at commercial applications. Thanks Beekuk.

Shinebone you sound like a lawyer. Bla, bla, bla, and then there is reality. Show me a utility patent that was granted with out a prior search, without acknowledging prior art and one that doesn't have a working model in the 21st century. It ain't gonna happen.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

If you watch this video again and freeze it around 2:18 and then step it to 2:21 you'll be able to see exactly how the cells are split:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbMV9qYIXqM


----------



## Tilopa

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> The queen won't lay in them because they are too deep so you don't need an excluder


This I don't understand. Can someone explain this to me. So the reason the queen won't go up into this top honey super and lay eggs is because it is deep box (9.x inches)?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

No, its not a reference to the size of the _box_. MB is referring to the respective size of the individual honey/brood _cell(s)_.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

There are only (I think) 7 frames per box spread over a 10 frame area meaning the cells are quite deep like the honey area in a wild hive.

So the theory is the queen cannot lay eggs in them. Not sure that's always true in reality, but that's the thinking.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Chinese knockoffs are rarely as good quality as the 'original' and sometimes the quality isn't good enough to be functional...
I just tried a Chinese 'beekeeping suit'. I figured $6.85 including shipping was worth the risk.
It was bed sheet cotton and the veil hangs against my face...
My daughter gets to wear that one... ROFL

Bill


----------



## beekuk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry Digman said:


> If you watch this video again and freeze it around 2:18 and then step it to 2:21 you'll be able to see exactly how the cells are split:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dug-G9xVdVs


Barry, that video you linked to seems to show the "plastics " one again, think you mean this second video they made, which shows the plastic comb splitting vertically at 2:18.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbMV9qYIXqM


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Thanks, beekuk! I went back and corrected that.


----------



## EastSideBuzz

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



rwurster said:


> This new item is unique and for lack of a better term, cool. It isn't going to make Maxtant go out of business and......I see a potential for spilled honey and robbing, .....


Robbing. I see a potential for a Bear Attractant. Fish and wildlife came out and wanted to fine me for having some sugar feeder bottles in the driveway. Having a field of open honey bottles whisking that smell into the air. That would surely be trouble. This might work for a city hive where no wild animals roam.



Acebird said:


> Once the tooling costs are paid for (and it looks like it already has) these frames will be under 2 bucks a piece. You do realize this concept eliminates the honey house. What is that costing you?


Just wait until they are copied in China 2 buck could happen quicker then we think.



Eduardo Gomes said:


> Cenario: A hive with AFB and honey flow system.
> How to sterilize the frames? How to eliminate the spores? Must the flow frames be burned?


You mean flow-melted.


----------



## Tilopa

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> There are only (I think) 7 frames per box spread over a 10 frame area meaning the cells are quite deep like the honey area in a wild hive.
> 
> So the theory is the queen cannot lay eggs in them. Not sure that's always true in reality, but that's the thinking.


Oh, I get it now. they are making there own plastic foundation that can split in half, by some mechanism, and allow the honey to ooze out to the bottom. Pretty cool idea... I guess. 



HeritageHoney said:


> So does this qualify as "natural" beekeeping?


Definitely not if they are using plastic foundation. Natural beekeeping is foundationless.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Tilopa, it is the foundation but also the cell walls are made of plastic too. The cells split all the way down to let the honey flow out.

You are a beekeeper in Fiji? Hi from New Zealand. 


Here is a pic of the parts


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

[0258] The invention provides many advantages to the collection of honey from a hive. These may include:

[0259] A beehive that allows the honey to be removed from the hive without opening the hive. At the flick of a switch, or turn of a lever, honey comes flowing out of a tube connected to the hive.

[0260] A system that allows you to rob the honey from an entire apiary at the flick of a switch.

[0261] A beehive that is built of plastic with all parts spaced perfectly and locked in position with no places for pests to hide and no spaces for brace or bir comb to be built.

[0262] A beehive that that includes all the known pest control methods. e.g.. Mite brush in entrance and beetle and mite traps on the bottom board.

[0263] A folding landing board that gives more room for landing and also acts as a closure for transport.

[0264] A beehive where the bees are hardly disturbed when the honey is robbed. Almost no bees die.

[0265] A beehive with a bee feeder built into the lid. The feeder can also be used for medication.

[0266] Method for heating the honey to flow easily and more quickly.

[0267] A system allowing an entire apiary to stay on a truck or trailer allowing it to be easily moved without the manual labor of shifting the hives on their own.

[0268] A control unit allowing the honey production of each hive to be monitored. This gives early detection of weak or diseased hives.

[0269] 90% (or more) less labor. No need to open hives, smoke bees, remove frames, transport to processing shed, cut off capping, extract with centrifuge, transport back to hive and put the frames back, and then clean up.

[0270] Less equipment needed. No need for the honey shed, decapping machine and extracting machine.

[0271] No mess and no waste.

[0272] Fewer pest problems.

[0273] More production as bees don’t have to make as much wax or do as much repair work from damage during traditional robbing. Bees use 7 kg of honey to make 1 kg of wax.

[0274] Can rob from a distance at the flick of a switch or automated avoiding the need for a smoker and bee suit and avoiding stings.

[0275] Robust, all frames are locked firmly in place for trouble free transport.

[0276] Automatable. Can run on auto pilot. Systems can be set up to send a message to the honey tanker when the honey tank is full for collecting. Web cams to monitor the system may also be provided.

[0277] Measurable. Load cells can give information on honey production and therefore hive condition.

[0278] Hive can be robbed more often and automatically as soon as full, increasing production and negating the need for tall stacks of hives.

[0279] Can rob any time of day in any weather.

[0280] Higher return on investment then current beekeeping.


----------



## beemandan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry said:


> [0258] The invention provides many advantages to the collection of honey from a hive. These may include:


What's not to love?


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Or put another way, what's to love about conventional beekeeping as we know it?  Soon, you'll be able to do all things beekeeping from the comfort of your recliner.


----------



## snl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry said:


> Or put another way, what's to love about conventional beekeeping as we know it?  Soon, we'll be able to do all things beekeeping from the comfort of your recliner.


Is there an "app" for that ? :shhhh:


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

So how much money did you '_invest_' in this system, Barry?


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



snl said:


> Is there an "app" for that ? :shhhh:


Evidently, how else would you, at the flick of a switch, rob the honey from an entire apiary, have early detection of weak or diseased hives, rob from a distance, and run on auto pilot, sending a message to the honey tanker?



> [0239] Data from these sensors may be collected and transmitted via the control unit *132* across the Internet to a remote database, for example running on laptop *135* or mobile device *134*.
> 
> [0240] All this information can be sent to a data collection point which may be an apiarist's PC, IPhone or web-box (non-limiting examples). This allows an apiarist to monitor hive health (pest and diseases) and when to harvest honey. This applies whether the bee-keeper has one or thousands of hives.
> 
> [0241] All of this information could be sent to local, state, federal or international monitoring bodies who can then geographically monitor (non-limiting examples):
> 
> [0242] Pollen and nectar flows, including types of flower and relationship to weather/climate
> 
> [0243] Disease spread and containment
> 
> [0244] Pest spread and containment
> 
> [0245] Success/failure of hive health and disease prevention startegies
> 
> [0246] Actual honey production and the possibility of identifying adulterated or contaminated honey


I'm thinking the state of Florida may be looking into this system so they can control AHB statewide.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Rader Sidetrack said:


> So how much money did you '_invest_' in this system, Barry?


Zero. I just recently bought about 200 wood frames that will require me to physically inspect for pest and disease, cut with a knife to get any honey out and risk getting stung!


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

That sounds a lot like _intervention_!  :lpf:


----------



## snl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

With the cells made of plastic, it will be interesting to see how the bees take to filling them with nectar. Anyone who has ever used Permacomb (has fully drawn plastic comb) has found that unless coated with beeswax (and even then), the bees almost despise it.


----------



## odfrank

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



snl said:


> With the cells made of plastic, it will be interesting to see how the bees take to filling them with nectar. Anyone who has ever used Permacomb (has fully drawn plastic comb) has found that unless coated with beeswax (and even then), the bees almost despise it.


They are in Australia probably with heavy eucalyptus flows. The plastic will be problem with slow flows. I just tried to extract a super in which the honey had granulated soon after collection. That will be a nightmare with Honey Flow frames.


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Ok, I swore this thread off a couple days ago but in perusing the testimonials I do have one question that probably only Mr. Bush could answer (perhaps he is done with it as well) and then, again, I'm done with this until I actually can read first hand accounts from consumers.
To properly quote these experts without any ........ before or after the quotes suggests to me that this was the entirety of their testimonial. If some had reservations it wasn't reflected in the way that they were quoted and if that is the case it would be both misleading and unfair to them for the manufacturer to take these quotes out of context.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry Digman said:


> If you watch this video again and freeze it around 2:18 and then step it to 2:21 you'll be able to see exactly how the cells are split:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbMV9qYIXqM


Thanks Barry. This is the detail I could not find on their site. I think they very much have a winner and working with commercial beeks too. Must be the Aussie's are more forward thinking.


----------



## beemandan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



jim lyon said:


> it would be both misleading and unfair to them for the manufacturer to take these quotes out of context.


 If so, shame on the manufacturer for taking them out of context.....and shame on those quoted for allowing it....in my opinion.


----------



## snl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



jim lyon said:


> To properly quote these experts without any ........ before or after the quotes suggests to me that this was the entirety of their testimonial. If some had reservations it wasn't reflected in the way that they were quoted and if that is the case it would be both misleading and unfair to them for the manufacturer to take these quotes out of context.


Jim, I agree. If that is/was the case, those whose quotes were taken out of context should speak up. However, I don't believe (or want to believe) that was the case...


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'm not saying this is the case, but how many times has a movie critic said something like "This is the best movie ever made, except for all the other movies ever made before" that was turned into "...This is the best movie ever made..."


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> I think they very much have a winner and working with commercial beeks too.


Doubt it will happen for many / any commercial beekeepers, even though some of their material would suggest that.

Still, I've been wrong before.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> Thanks Barry. This is the detail I could not find on their site. I think they very much have a winner and working with commercial beeks too. Must be the Aussie's are more forward thinking.


I think they've created something pretty innovative, and one that will be interesting in backyards, but I think it's a long way from being viable in a commercial operation. Not that I know anything about commercial operations, but I'm not clear on where the savings in time/labor/money are to be found.

Plumbing up hundreds of hives in the field, monitoring them constantly, and then transporting the honey to a facility to be further processed and bottled seems more labor intensive than moving supers.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Actually just thinking about it, Flowhive could in theory anyway possibly work for some Australian commercial beekeepers. 

Some of them spend the season progressively trucking their hives from flow to flow across Australia. They park up & let the bees do their thing, then extract and put boxes back on, and move on. If they used Flowhives they could maybe leave the flowhive on all season and just drain them before each move, only having to finally remove the flowhive frames at seasons end.

But would have to talk to an Aussie commercial to find out if that could really work.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry Digman said:


> Plumbing up hundreds of hives in the field, monitoring them constantly, and then transporting the honey to a facility to be further processed and bottled seems more labor intensive than moving supers.


I know very little about commercial operations, but don't most of them move their colonies around? How much additional labor and moving costs would be required to disconnect and then reconnect all the plumbing and ancillary equipment at the new location? It would be a logistical challenge, not as simple as off loading pallets of hives and adding supers.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry said:


> Or put another way, what's to love about conventional beekeeping as we know it?  Soon, you'll be able to do all things beekeeping from the comfort of your recliner.


and yet in their own words:
Our invention changes the honey harvesting component of beekeeping. All the rest of the normal beekeeping care for the hive still applies. Beetles, mites, swarm control etc. The flow hive clear end frame observation does assist with allowing you to look into the hive and gauge the strength and health of the colony.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

many previous inventions would have worked if it had not been for the bees. they will be the final judge, not beekeepers.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I know, kholmar, there was a healthy dose of sarcasm in mine and Dan's post.


----------



## Tilopa

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> You are a beekeeper in Fiji? Hi from New Zealand.


Hi Oldtimer, if your ever over here in Fiji look me up.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry said:


> I know, kholmar, there was a healthy dose of sarcasm in mine and Dan's post.


oh...OH...ok, sorry, LOL. my bad. I get jokes!
I keep reacting to people who ask leading negative questions who obviously haven't even read the FAQ.
I dunno why I even care, I'm just one of those grouchy old men I sometimes refer to...


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Thanks Tipola it will be interesting. 

About maybe 2 years ago I was talking to a guy in Takapuna Auckland, worked in Dick Smith, who told me his relation was starting a bee venture in Fiji, said they send the gear over from NZ, Ceracell I think. Is that you?


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Mike Gillmore said:


> I know very little about commercial operations, but don't most of them move their colonies around? How much additional labor and moving costs would be required to disconnect and then reconnect all the plumbing and ancillary equipment at the new location? It would be a logistical challenge, not as simple as off loading pallets of hives and adding supers.


It may not fit all commercial operations. Migratory is done for pollination contracts. Supposing you never removed them from the trailer. You wheel them in and wheel them out. Supposing you didn't move your hives around maybe you just sell honey. Michael Bush has already stated that the management of these hives will change. If you are not willing to change what you do it is a safe bet that you won't invest in these hives at any price. Some say they would take them for free. Not everyone feels like that. What you think beekeeping should be today may not be what it is tomorrow.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry Digman said:


> but I'm not clear on where the savings in time/labor/money are to be found.


Jim Lyon laid out some cost of collecting honey. I know he is big but a 40,000 dollar cost savings is not minuscule.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Perhaps you're thinking of someone else. It doesn't sound like Jim is enthusiastic about the commercial applications.




jim lyon said:


> I'm not going to knock this product because I havent seen it and any opinion I might have would be nothing more than speculation. My guess is if it works as advertised it's primary market will be as a novelty for the backyard beekeepers that can afford it.
> What I can say with absolute certainty, though, is that the unit I am seeing advertised has no large scale commercial application and those that think that it may, simply dont have a grasp of how a commercial operation works and how much more efficient new extracting equipment has made them in recent years. Many commercials (myself included) have begun phasing out of 55 gallon drums in favor of 260 gallon totes. The last thing they are going to want to do is to start filling up a multitude of small containers, and having to do so out in the beeyard.


----------



## ScienceGirl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Pro: Makes connection with the honey bees unnecessary.
Con: Makes connection with the honey bees unnecessary.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> What you think beekeeping should be today may not be what it is tomorrow.


I agree. But by the time they get this dialed into commercial applications I'll be long gone and nothing more than a memory.

The Amish around here still use horses and plows very successfully, guess I'll stick with my extractor.


----------



## ScienceGirl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

This was posted to the HoneyFlow facebook page by someone else. It's a different take on the HoneyFlow.
https://naturalbeekeepingtrust.wordpress.com/2015/02/26/the-deeper-message-of-the-flow-hive/


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

they hit 4 mil today.


----------



## arnaud

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



ScienceGirl said:


> This was posted to the HoneyFlow facebook page by someone else. It's a different take on the HoneyFlow.
> https://naturalbeekeepingtrust.wordpress.com/2015/02/26/the-deeper-message-of-the-flow-hive/


It's a take from folks who talk about "bee guardianship" rather than "beekeeping", and who use skeps (sorry, "sun hives") because they refuse Langs, Warres, or even TBHs.

So their criticism requires some context.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Good point Arnaud, it is surprising the whole gamut of different perspectives have got so involved in the Flow Hive they feel the need to put long articles all over the net debunking it and on some sites lots of non beekeepers chipping in with strong opinions.

Thing is in advertising, negative publicity is still publicity. This thing has gone truly viral.


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Thing is in advertising, negative publicity is still publicity. This thing has gone truly viral. 
OLDTIMER - you mentioned a while ago that everybody is writing to you about the FLOW hive.
I can tell you that I'm not leaving the house anymore because everybody wants to TALK about the Flow hive


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Typical "over-flow" I'd say...


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Mike Gillmore said:


> The Amish around here still use horses and plows very successfully, guess I'll stick with my extractor.


Is beekeeping a religion? After using a tractor I would not give it up for a horse. You have an extractor what if you didn't?

Jim I suspect a pump is involved in filling those 250 gal totes. Once you have the pump the container can be anything.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Here's a surprise, I was reading one of those sites where everybody was saying what a terrible thing the FlowHive is.

Then along comes Phil Chandler, the famous top bar hive guru and the guy who believes langstroth hives are the source of all problems bees have. I'm expecting to see another horribly negative stuff, but instead he says this, which I have cut and pasted -

Phil Chandler People keep asking me what I think of the new 'Flow Hive', so FWIW here are my thoughts.
First, it is not a new hive, but simply an add-on to a conventional hive - really just a set of special frames, and only for honey, not brood. This removes many objections on the grounds of 'propolis jamming it up' and 'eggs laid in plastic foundation' - they are simply not going to happen if it is used correctly.
Do I approve of it? Only insofar as I approve of any conventional beekeeping, which I don't very much. I don't like plastic in hives - particularly plastic foundation - and I don't like unnecessary disturbances in the lives of bees, BUT- this device actually reduces such disturbance, as well as removing the need for a centrifugal extractor and other extraction/bottling equipment, so from that point of view, it is 'greener', provided it has a long life, which it should have, given that the moving parts only move infrequently and with little load stress.
As a piece of thoughtful engineering I think it is remarkable. I was invited to look at it and contribute my thoughts about 6 months before the launch, and while I expressed some reservations - particularly about crystallization of honey in the combs - I could see that, for some people, this was what they had been waiting for to take up beekeeping.
Given that most people live in urban locations, the storage problems generated by conventional equipment are considerable, especially when much of it is only used occasionally. Add to this the fact that bees can become very defensive when whole supers of honey are removed from their hives, which can put people off keeping them in populated areas or near their own house, then this device could be a boon to the backyard beekeeper who wants to disturb her bees as little as possible.
There have been accusations of 'exploitation' and even 'cruelty' associated with this product, but I suggest it is rather less exploitative or cruel than the violent methods currently used by commercial beekeepers to take honey - such things as bee-blowers result in the deaths of millions of bees during the honey-taking operation. This device enables honey to be taken in modest quantities without opening the hive.
Lastly, there is the question of 'attitude': promoters of the Flow Hive have been accused of 'callousness' and having a 'mindset of casual exploitation'. I must say that this is not borne out by my correspondence with the inventors, who appear to have bee welfare very much at heart.
Used correctly and with due care, this device may well increase people's awareness and appreciation of the lives of bees, and reduce the casual disruption promoted by so many beekeeping organizations. By enabling the removal of some of the honey at the right times, bees are able to top up the cells without having to suffer the violent removal of honey supers and the collateral damage this entails.
'Attitude' is not something that is derived from or dependent upon any particular device. A tool is a tool: an axe can be used for chopping wood or for killing someone. If people are of a mind to exploit nature, then they will find ways to do so. If they learn to appreciate the natural world, then they will treat it with respect, regardless of the tools they happen to be using.
I still prefer to do my beekeeping in top bar hives, because of their simplicity of construction and use and bee-friendly design, but given that many people prefer to use movable-frame hives, I see this device as a possible alternative to the 'box-removal and centrifugal extraction' method that may appeal to some beekeepers. UNQUOTE.

To actually win over someone like Phil Chandler, is a feat I would not have believed possible. Those Aussies must be _propogandists supremo_!


----------



## Dominic

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Phil Chandler said:


> There have been accusations of 'exploitation' and even 'cruelty' associated with this product, but I suggest it is rather less exploitative or cruel than the violent methods currently used by commercial beekeepers to take honey - such things as bee-blowers result in the deaths of millions of bees during the honey-taking operation.


Bee blowers do send a lot of bees in the air... but that's the first time I hear of them "killing millions of bees". I've not actually used one, but they seem no more violent than using a brush, just quicker and without any physical contact.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Skunk figures how to crank the FlowHive.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I use the bees blower and what I notice is that they are so surprised with the blow, that they stay static for a few minutes which allow us to continue to harvest with more tranquility.

At the time I know that most bees do not die because I see it with my eyes. Later, after 1 or 2 days, when I put the supers on the hive again, I found the nests crammed with bees. If bees dies in such large quantities with the blower was not expected it to be verified with the naked eye at that moment, two days after?


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Dominic bees do get killed during bee blowing operations, mostly by getting stood on afterwards. But you are right, a brush would likely kill more.

The "killing millions of bees" statement is just the normal sensationalism that comes from this sector and why I was so surprised he took a positive view on the FlowHive.


----------



## Jim Brewster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Dominic said:


> Bee blowers do send a lot of bees in the air... but that's the first time I hear of them "killing millions of bees". I've not actually used one, but they seem no more violent than using a brush, just quicker and without any physical contact.


Plenty of hyperbole to go around in this debate.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> To actually win over someone like Phil Chandler, is a feat I would not have believed possible.!


having read quite a bit of Phil Chandler's writings, I am not the least bit surprised.
He has an open mind and is open to try new things.
He is also open to trying OLD things. LOL


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Hmm.. open minded. Well he don't like Langs. His dislike of Lang hives being so strong is why I was surprised he was endorsing something pretty much designed to go on a Lang hive, and also containing plastic, etc, being all things he normally goes off about.

Anyhow this thread is not really about Chandler I just quoted him as a curiosity, to show the ubiquitous appeal of the flowhive.


----------



## Cloverdale

*He bought a flow hive!*

Well, the owner of the property of an out apiary that I use bought a flow hive. $600.00 and will be ready December 2015. He knows nothing about honeybee's whatsoever! :waiting::s


----------



## Harley Craig

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

he sees all that honey you are making and can now get his own without ever messing with a bee


----------



## BeeGora

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

If you build it they will come..........:doh:


----------



## AL from Georgia

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

I am curious to see if this thread will last, as Barry seems a little tired of the honey flow threads.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

I see _consolidation _in the future.  


---------------

Update, for those of you confused by following the _bouncing ball_, posts #638-#642 were previously seen in a separate thread, and as a result of Barry's _wizardry_, are now seen here. 


:shhhh:


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

>How does one keep ants, moths and beetles etc from setting up home in the tubes?

I'm certain the wax moths cannot get access, there are no openings big enough. I would hesitate to assert that ants cannot as some ants are pretty small and I'm not certain whether they could or could not. I don't tend to have ant problems so Nebraska may not be the best test for this.

>>Well, he is heavily promoting it.............
>He is? I just went to his web site and couldn't find anything on the home page? How is he promoting this?

I'm not. Not at all, let along "heavily"... I'll give you my opinion of my old Ford van and my Mann Lake extractor too, but I'm not promoting them either... People keep asking questions. I keep answering them. They haven't ask any about my old Ford van or my Mann Lake extractor lately... But just so you know, I had a half million miles on the Ford van before I retired it and I had been driving it for 40 years... maybe I should get Ford to pay me to say that...

>All you need to do is read all the posts he's published here on this........

So responding to questions is promoting now???? To be clear. I am not selling these. I am not promoting these. I am not endorsing them. I do not make any money from them. I am merely answering questions since I'm one of the few people who has actually seen one, I seem to be the most qualified at the moment to address the questions...

>In the photos I have seen, there is a removable cap that you take out before putting in the tube and presumably put back in to seal the chamber when you are finished with the tube.

And I'm sure that cap will stop the ants in that direction. The part I'm not as sure of is where the cells, when open, dump into the channel at the bottom. I don't know what the largest crack is when it is closed and if an ant can get through that. I will know more when I've had more of them for longer, but as I said before, my experience in Nebraska may not be the same. We certainly have ants, but I seldom have problems with them. A place where ants are generally an issue would be a better test for that question.

>And do you suppose that Michael isn't defending himself here to us in this Thread because there is no winning should he try? 

As with most weekends, I'm off at a bee conference...

>They also commented on"working" on deals with DHL for shipping. As far as i know DHL does not ship to residences in the US and does not operate at all in areas outside major cities. 

I got a DHL package yesterday... and I don't live in town. I don't think that's true but I have not researched exactly what DHL will do. I think they will ship pretty much from anywhere to anywhere in my limited experience with them. I know they will ship from Kabul Afghanistan to my house out in the country...

As far as plastic, they have said it's food grade BPA-free plastic. The parts that make up the comb are the same material as HSC and PermaComb (food grade polypropolene). I can understand wanting to avoid plastic. I prefer to avoid it. However, living in a world that seems to be made of it, that has been difficult. So I just go with the flow. Plastic is a fact of life.

>Michael Bush.....Now that it is 2015 do you still use this and if so what are your thoughts.

There will be no opportunity to use it again until spring. I will use it, yes. I have a lot of experimenting to do...

>looks like he got a jacket

I did not get anything. I didn't get a jacket. I'd love one, but I didn't get one... 

>This I don't understand. Can someone explain this to me. So the reason the queen won't go up into this top honey super and lay eggs is because it is deep box (9.x inches)?

No. Because the cells, not the box, are deep. A brood cell is typically 11mm (on a 5.4mm cell). Honey cells are often much deeper. They made these much deeper. It takes only seven of these to fill a ten frame box. These cells are more like 22mm (I did not measure them but I think that's a fairly accurate guess as the math works out). And then the diameter is between a worker and drone cell to further discourage the queen.

>I do have one question that probably only Mr. Bush could answer...

Looking for a question mark or a question and I don't see one. I'll make an assumption on the question... I'm sure that's not all I said, but I doubt at the time I said anything negative they were cutting out...


----------



## D Coates

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

Michael,

No matter how many questions you answer, you can't seem to catch a break. Hang in there. Some of clearly understand you're giving us your impression of the product derived from your limited 1st hand experience... others?, not so much. It reminds me of the Dutch boy who's trying to plug holes in a dike (questions) with his fingers and toes (answers). No matter how many holes he plugs, he's forced to plug new ones...


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*



Michael Bush said:


> So I just go with the flow.


You know that using the word "flow" will be construed as "heavily promoting", don't you?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*



Barry Digman said:


> You know that using the word "flow" will be construed as "heavily promoting", don't you?


Only if the flow is heavy.

Michael, beesource and the flow are getting some "love" on our Sister bee forum. In case you didn't know and care.


----------



## deknow

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

Reading Bee-L these days is like sitting next to the old guys at McDonald's getting their free coffee and complaining about everyone in town who isn't an old guy getting free coffee.

The term 'jumping the shark' comes to mind. There are not many of the old "-L" listserves around, and Bee-L is managing to make itself less and less relevent.

Why someone that claims to be able to develop a smartphone app that can acoustically detect bee race, disease, aND pesticide exposure (especially someone at a university full of young social media addicts) can't figure out how to crowd source, and instead wants a grant from the USDA to further develop their product is beyond me.

Adding in edit: ....and complains about those that don't ask the government to fund their profit seeking enterprise and instead allow people to spend their disposable income on whatever the heck they want.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

Michael:
I very much appreciate all your answers/comments/promotions/heavy flows.
peace!
Bill


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

Michael Bush,

Just wondering - will those attending your beekeeping camp this year get to see the Flow Hive you have? And, please share as your experience with the hive grows. Looking forward to learning more about it. 

You lucky guy you.


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

The owner of the property I have an out hive on called me this AM and told me he bought a Flow Hive. $600.00 and he'll get it in December. He has no experience with bees at all and is somewhat nervous when they fly around him. He didn't ask us to help him manage them. 
http://youtu.be/xUQX5kfCT9U Looks interesting though.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*



deknow said:


> Reading Bee-L these days is like sitting next to the old guys at McDonald's getting their free coffee and complaining about everyone in town who isn't an old guy getting free coffee.


Whew. I thought it was just me. I admire Barry's continuing efforts to keep abreast of changes in tech and to evaluate when and where Beesource might head in order to remain the premier destination for beekeepers.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



beekuk said:


> Barry, that video you linked to seems to show the "plastics " one again, think you mean this second video they made, which shows the plastic comb splitting vertically at 2:18.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbMV9qYIXqM&t=2m18s


I modified that link so that it starts playing at 2:18. I also used an online converter to make a 2-second GIF:


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*



deknow said:


> Reading Bee-L these days is like sitting next to the old guys at McDonald's getting their free coffee and complaining about everyone in town who isn't an old guy getting free coffee.
> 
> The term 'jumping the shark' comes to mind. There are not many of the old "-L" listserves around, and Bee-L is managing to make itself less and less relevent.
> 
> Why someone that claims to be able to develop a smartphone app that can acoustically detect bee race, disease, aND pesticide exposure (especially someone at a university full of young social media addicts) can't figure out how to crowd source, and instead wants a grant from the USDA to further develop their product is beyond me.
> 
> Adding in edit: ....and complains about those that don't ask the government to fund their profit seeking enterprise and instead allow people to spend their disposable income on whatever the heck they want.


That's great Dean. I wish I could write like that. When will you Post that on bee-L?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*



Barry Digman said:


> Whew. I thought it was just me. I admire Barry's continuing efforts to keep abreast of changes in tech and to evaluate when and where Beesource might head in order to remain the premier destination for beekeepers.


But don't you think beesource should be Moderated? (a tongue in cheek comment)


----------



## kholmar

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

new video from them today:

"We pulled this frame out of a Flow™ Hive just to show you how it works up close. Note. It's not necessary to remove the Flow™ frames from the hive to harvest the honey..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryWC92NT2Eo&t=15


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*



Barry Digman said:


> You know that using the word "flow" will be construed as "heavily promoting", don't you?


 G

Thanks for your opinions Michael.


----------



## pdave

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

When the bees uncapped the empty flow hive frame to begin refilling it, do they use the wax in other places in the hive or does it just get dumped on the floor of the hive and eventually carried out?


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

Enjoyed the video Kholmar. 

Got to admit it is a well designed product. One good feature about those guys is they have spent 10 years tweaking it instead of rushing to market after 2 years with a beta version with problems, admire them for doing it right so good luck to them!


----------



## deknow

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*



sqkcrk said:


> That's great Dean. I wish I could write like that. When will you Post that on bee-L?


Thank you for the kind words, but no thanks.

I've sat through time share presentations to get something much more pricey than a free cup of coffee....but sitting at that table the way it has devolved is really unplesant.

Besides, what do you think they are reading around that table that has them so upset about Beesource?


----------



## deknow

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

I would gladly offer it to either bee culture and/or Abj (or any other journal) with the one provision....that it be reprinted in its current, edited state, weird caps aND all. No one need ask permission if that provision is followed...it is granted. ...as long, of course,as beesource.Com has a mention (you d9nt have to keep the typos on that).

Letter to the editor, or however you want to present it.tv


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*



deknow said:


> Besides, what do you think they are reading around that table that has them so upset about Beesource?


One person mentioned what Michael Bush wrote about the flow hive and another person more or less wrote "Consider the source."


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

>Just wondering - will those attending your beekeeping camp this year get to see the Flow Hive you have?

Now that it's public and I'm not under a non-disclosure agreement, sure.  The camp will occur two weeks before the main flow though, so I don't know if it will have any honey in it yet at that time.

>When the bees uncapped the empty flow hive frame to begin refilling it, do they use the wax in other places in the hive or does it just get dumped on the floor of the hive and eventually carried out?

In a flow the floor is always covered in wax bits that fall from the bees. My guess is you won't notice the difference, it will just be wax from the cappings and the once they are producing will get used to cap it again.

"This is my experience during "active storing," and the wax scales are to be found on the bees just the same whether they are furnished with foundation or not; and I can arrive at no other conclusion than that arrived at by Mr. S.J. Youngman, when he says on page 108: 'The bees secrete wax during a honey flow, whether they are building comb or not; and if they are not employed in building comb, this wax is most certainly lost."--G.M. Doolittle ABJ Vol 20 No 18 pg 276

> One good feature about those guys is they have spent 10 years tweaking it instead of rushing to market after 2 years with a beta version with problems, admire them for doing it right so good luck to them!

That was one of the things that struck me. All of my objections (which are similar to the ones people have posted here) they had worked on and resolved already. They tweaked it. They tested it. They were showing me last night when I brought up the objection to bees getting caught how they made enough gap and shaped the gaps so that bees wouldn't get their legs caught. More detail than I would have expected. They also made sure bees would not get squished if they had their head in the cell. They get trapped for a bit, but when you close the action they get loose. It's the details that make things work well. I have no doubt as the scale of use increases they will continue to find things to tweak.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*



Michael Bush said:


> I brought up the objection to bees getting caught how they made enough gap and shaped the gaps so that bees wouldn't get their legs caught.


I heard that in the video but I am trying to envision if the half cells do not fit tight to each half then why wouldn't they leak all the time? The bees can't be filing in any gaps or there would be wax in the honey when you harvest. So how can they do both, leave space so their legs don't get caught and not leak?


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

For all the new beekeepers this invention seems to be attracting, they need to understand how to deal with shb, how to keep a colony strong enough to defend against them, otherwise they could be harvesting some extra protein on some of the hidden from view combs. Pancakes anyone? lol


----------



## Dominic

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*



Eddie Honey said:


> For all the new beekeepers this invention seems to be attracting, they need to understand how to deal with shb, how to keep a colony strong enough to defend against them, otherwise they could be harvesting some extra protein on some of the hidden from view combs. Pancakes anyone? lol
> 
> View attachment 16374


Eww


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

Perhaps they won't be a problem because the cells are plastic unless they are attracted to the honey or capping's?


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*



Acebird said:


> I heard that in the video but I am trying to envision if the half cells do not fit tight to each half then why wouldn't they leak all the time? The bees can't be filing in any gaps or there would be wax in the honey when you harvest. So how can they do both, leave space so their legs don't get caught and not leak?


Apologies for the huge screen capture, but here's a still from the video with the cells closed:








and with the cells open:









It looks like there's a sizable gap in the cells when they're closed, which means the bees must be filling them in. I don't know why more wax doesn't come out with the honey. 

Maybe there's more wax bits than shows up in their promo videos, and maybe no one cares because wax is OK 

I'm a bit curious about the force required to open the cells for harvest. In their newer video he inserts two keys, though he says one would be sufficient. It doesn't look like he's applying too much torque, though it's hard to tell on video.

Michael, could you comment on how much force is required to open the cells?

Closing the cells (08:05, same video) appears to require less force, which isn't surprising. 

I'm not worried about the human burden, because I'm a big, hulking he-man ; I'm worried about mechanical stress and wear on the parts. If more force is required to move the action, there will be more fatigue and wear on the parts. How many cycles will it take for the key to start wearing a "channel" in that action plate?

I'm also curious about the wires used to hold the frame together. How much tension are they under, and will they loosen up over time?

I'm almost tempted to buy an extra frame, just so I can tear it apart.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*

His arm/hand was shaking so it seems there is some force required.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> I'm worried about mechanical stress and wear on the parts. If more force is required to move the action, there will be more fatigue and wear on the parts. How many cycles will it take for the key to start wearing a "channel" in that action plate?


Are you familiar with polypropylene? It is conceivable they will out last you. 

He use two tools so the force was balanced and didn't tip the frame over. If the frame was in a hive it would be locked in and there would be no concern.

I do not see a continuous gap all the way to the bottom of the cell. It doesn't make sense that there could be because the cell walls would be flapping in the breeze.


----------



## ScienceGirl

*Re: He bought a flow hive!*



Michael Bush said:


> >It's the details that make things work well. I have no doubt as the scale of use increases they will continue to find things to tweak.


I really appreciate their attention to detail.

I think it's an innovative invention, however it's use has both pros and cons.


----------



## ScienceGirl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

What keeps the wax cappings from breaking when the channels are formed?


----------



## Joel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Even if did work, it would take a half hour to fill a gallon jar sitting by the hive....how would you control the robbing??


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Come on now Joel - some of the more _forward thinking_ posters above just have that honey pumped directly from the hive into the tanker truck sitting in the yard. No robbing at all! :lpf:


----------



## Joel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Stupid me, but then I'm not one of the most famous beekeepers in America!


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



ScienceGirl said:


> What keeps the wax cappings from breaking when the channels are formed?


the bees extend the comb slightly so the cap is not directly on it.
that being said, some of the shallower caps DID break.
watch the video, this was shown.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Joel said:


> Even if did work, it would take a half hour to fill a gallon jar sitting by the hive....how would you control the robbing??


this has been addressed in at least 1 video and in the FAQ.
they 2 suggested methods and a couple more spring to my mind without a whole lot of thought.
if your questions are sincere, read the FAQ and watch the videos...


----------



## Joel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Kohlmar , thanks for your suggestion...might I suggest you read the other 3376 posts I"ve done here over the past decade before you make some off the cuff statement about me in a thread questioning my sincerity.i'm sure you have tons of time to read the hundred or so posts here everyday, I am a full time beekeeper in two states selling in16 markets in New York CitY so my time is limited. I will take a look at the FAQ and video, appreciate the point.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I have to say that I am surprised that it doesn't seem faster to figure out that there are dozens of ways to seal a jar with a tube running into it than it is to assume that such an approach is somehow difficult or not obvious?

How do beekeepers solve problems....or even figure out how to take their pajamas off before getting into the shower?


----------



## odfrank

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



deknow said:


> I have to say that I am surprised that it doesn't seem faster to figure out that there are dozens of ways to seal a jar with a tube running into it than it is to assume that such an approach is somehow difficult or not obvious?How do beekeepers solve problems....or even figure out how to take their pajamas off before getting into the shower?


You could say that for a substantial percentage of questions asked.


----------



## Joel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

OK deknow, sharpen your pencil
Some days we harvest as many as 100 hives. Leave a hundred hoses coming out of hives each with a teaspoon of honey dripping out and a hundred thousand forgers and then let's think about those Jammy's in the shower. Ever bottle cool or cold honey through an inch and a half gate? Pretty slow and not much fun. I run a $1500 honey pump that has trouble op moving cold honey and as Most honey harvests happen during cool periods please share with us skeptics the easy solution to getting it to flow through a much smaller hose cold. now lets talk about sealed jars and just for grins lets toss in some physics 101. If your jar is sealed how does honey flow in without displacing air? Well so much for the sealed jar theory. Since air has to escape for honey to enter so does aroma, since bees forage on aroma, robbing at every hive by tens of thousands of foragers at your sealed jars during the at least half hour or so to extract a gallon or less, if that is even possible. Ever stand in a yard with a couple 10 thousand bees robbing? Sometimes simple solutions are just more simple than solution. This may be the second coming, If it's not let's sort that out here, I just hate to see a few hundred or more novice beekeepers,get cheated out of their money buying a Rube Goldberg, I hope you would too.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Hmmnm.....it took me 12 seconds to come up with a second hose that vents into the hive so that robbing isn't induced.

As far as you other (newly expressed) objections, they are simply time wasters. You aren't actually interesTed in using such a system....and it is not (at this stage of development) appropriate or economically feasible for your needs....and no one ever claimed it was.

I just don't understand why some here (not just you) have decided to use such a silly assumption (that it is hard to run a hose into a jar, tote, bucket, or bag without exposing honey to open air) as a way to trash a product that you (in this case it does seem to be you specifically) haven't bothered to read about.

I don't get it.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

...or you could run it at night.


----------



## zig.zag

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

This device, like any device, will only be useful to those who find a way of making it useful for them. It will not, in and of itself, solve all of a beekeeper's problems. Per MB, it will require a change in the way you manage your system.

It seems to me that it will be most useful to back yard hobbyists rather than professional outfits.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Joel said:


> Stupid me, but then I'm not one of the most famous beekeepers in America!


Dang! No time to read the previous posts, but plenty of time to rip on "one of the most famous beekeepers in America". Stay classy!


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Joel said:


> OK deknow, sharpen your pencil
> Some days we harvest as many as 100 hives.


Joel if your questions are sincere you would have to change your thinking and most likely what you do. Venting a jar, any container so bees couldn't access it is well within your capabilities. Warming a vat or any container so you can pump the honey I think is also within your capability. Coming up with the logistics on how to position hives and not make it a daunting task to plum these hives to a common vat will require thought on your part because very few people here know what you are doing now. These inventors are not fools. I am sure they recognize the potential of their invention. They are working with commercial beekeepers not against them and I will just say it. These commercial beekeepers will have the upper hand being on the ground floor of this technology.

Now here is some food for thought: Supposing your hives were always placed in the same spot. Structure could be built and the land graded such that the hive were on the second floor and the first floor was the collection room. No pumping involved. Traveling through NYS I see hundreds of barns where the farmer has access to the second floor with his tractor. The farmers do this for a reason. Beekeeping could follow suit.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Some years ago I read a patent that showed a device that used negative pressure to "extract" the honey from the combs. For commercial use one could combine the flow hive frame design with vacuum to speed up the process.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

You run the potential of sucking in the caps and then the bees. Speed is of no concern if it doesn't involve manual labor.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Of course speed matters. Did you never harvest canola/OSR honey?! Better be quick.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> Warming a vat or any container so you can pump the honey I think is also within your capability.





Acebird said:


> Structure could be built and the land graded such that the hive were on the second floor and the first floor was the collection room.


So your _forward thinking_ vision is to either run electrical power to _EVERY HIVE_, or to build a _dedicated building_ for hives at EVERY location where a commercial beekeeper has hives? :scratch:

Really?!?!? :lpf:


----------



## Joel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Ace, I appreciate actually presenting an alternate idea platform that at least, although futuristic, gives a plausable solution not just some vague reference without any real answers. Your scenario works in a very similar context to our 275 tap maple syrup operation we ran years ago, that intrigues me. 
De know, for you make a lot of assumptions. I started getting e-mails on this couple of weeks ago from the beekeepers we serve. I've watched the video 10 times, read what I can find about it and one thing stands out that you just don't seem to get that many others did. All the pictures with the open jar of honey or the pancakes or the little girl standing next to the hive there is not a single bee flying around. If you actually keep bees I challenge you to take an open jar of honey and set it next to a hive on a sunny day when it is warm enough to flow and count how many seconds it takes to have bees on and around the jar. iThat makes the video deceptive to me , I read other post that oicked up the same thing. I ever bashed the product, I never said it didn't work, my questions relate to how, none of which you have given a single well thought out answer to just vague references that you have it all figured out. catagorically dismissing valid issues that apply in every apiary by saying it is a waste of time does not advance the conversation.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>The bees can't be filing in any gaps or there would be wax in the honey when you harvest.

It doesn't take much wax and it's stuck to the plastic. It only gets torn open, not removed other than what breaks loose, and I'm sure a little bit does, but less than you have in the honey when you extract by a huge amount.

>Some days we harvest as many as 100 hives. Leave a hundred hoses coming out of hives each with a teaspoon of honey dripping out and a hundred thousand forgers and then let's think about those Jammy's in the shower.

I bought hoses that were quite tight in the frames and it took me a whole minute to cut a hole in a five gallon bucket lid that was beetight to put the hose in. There is no honey dripping out.

>Ever bottle cool or cold honey through an inch and a half gate? Pretty slow and not much fun. I run a $1500 honey pump that has trouble op moving cold honey and as Most honey harvests happen during cool periods please share with us skeptics the easy solution to getting it to flow through a much smaller hose cold.

I'd harvest this on a hot summer day if I can... but you could use a pump. I just used one hose as I was only experimenting, but I bought the stuff to make a manifold that will do all six (I have eight frame boxes) at a time and run them into one hose into the bucket. It takes about 20 minutes. I know it will vary by temperature and by nectar source and by water content but basically it comes to 20 minutes with no pump. 

>Now lets talk about sealed jars and just for grins lets toss in some physics 101. If your jar is sealed how does honey flow in without displacing air? Well so much for the sealed jar theory. Since air has to escape for honey to enter so does aroma, since bees forage on aroma, robbing at every hive by tens of thousands of foragers at your sealed jars during the at least half hour or so to extract a gallon or less, if that is even possible. 

Yes the air has to escape the bucket (or jar or whatever). I see no issues in a flow. In a dearth they might smell it. There is no way for them to get to it if you do it right.

>Ever stand in a yard with a couple 10 thousand bees robbing? 

Unfortunately, yes.

>Sometimes simple solutions are just more simple than solution. This may be the second coming, If it's not let's sort that out here, I just hate to see a few hundred or more novice beekeepers,get cheated out of their money buying a Rube Goldberg, I hope you would too.

It is much too expensive to be practical at the moment. But how could you not want to play with one?


----------



## snl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> It is much too expensive to be practical at the moment. But how could you not want to play with one?


Now that's a great statement! You're right, it would be fun to tinker with one..........


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It appears the economics of this design, as of now, don't pan out for existing commercial beekeepers. Perhaps guys just getting into a commercial setup could gear up for such a process, but to change over to it after the fact sure seems it would hit the pocket book big time.


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



deknow said:


> ...or even figure out how to take their pajamas off before getting into the shower?


Now you tell us...


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



snl said:


> Now that's a great statement! You're right, it would be fun to tinker with one..........


X2 ..:thumbsup:...................and wait for the prices to drop, to maybe play with a few more.................... G


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>> ...or even figure out how to take their pajamas off before getting into the shower?



Barry Digman said:


> Now you tell us...


Hey - a _forward thinking_ person might see that as a time saving system of getting your PJs washed at the _same time_ you wash your body. Just think of the benefits - get rid of the washing machine, double use of the hot water from the shower, save on laundry detergent, no sorting of laundry .... :lpf:


----------



## Barry Digman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I have no doubt that this clever piece of gear is here to stay. We'll figure out how it fits into our style of keeping bees, or we'll adapt our style to take advantage of it. Not everyone, of course, but enough of us over time to validate it.


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry Digman said:


> I have no doubt that this clever piece of gear is here to stay. We'll figure out how it fits into our style of keeping bees, or we'll adapt our style to take advantage of it. Not everyone, of course, but enough of us over time to validate it.


Agreed. G


----------



## Joel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Thanks Michall for jumping in with solid answers. I get up front it is not ready for commercial use, most of my interest at this point is the viability for the hobbyists we serve and giving accurate guidance, I know you must be fielding a ton of questions with yours as well. I think if this is workable for hobbyist, even if pricey, would sell well in the NYC applications I deal with. Our NYC beeks for the most part actually prefer raw honey with wax, we charge a premium for that same product, of course,with no bees. I am assuming you do or will have a unit, units at some point perhaps make up a video or tutorial? Is there a timeline for distribution yet?


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>I am assuming you do or will have a unit, units at some point perhaps make up a video or tutorial? 

I have considered if that is a good idea or not. I am not promoting it and I can't convince anyone of that even though I have nothing on my web site about it and have only been answering questions... but I was thinking maybe I could avoid some of the storm of email by posting something...

>Is there a timeline for distribution yet?

I have no idea. If there is it would be on their web site. Currently they are only doing the crowd-sourcing and I don't see anywhere that it is just available to buy, but I imagine that will happen after they catch up...

I'm just the Beta test consumer...


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I think this shows a lack of creative thinking.

What do you think folks would pay for a half pound jar they get to "harvest" themselves?



Barry said:


> It appears the economics of this design, as of now, don't pan out for existing commercial beekeepers. Perhaps guys just getting into a commercial setup could gear up for such a process, but to change over to it after the fact sure seems it would hit the pocket book big time.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Mega dittos. All these petty little distractions are nothing compared to what has actually been accomplished. Eish. No need to assume it won't work, nor that sponsors need protection or are stupid or being cheated, to feel better about not having invented it ourselves. With luck the price will come down in future, and more people interested in beekeeping will be able to use it if they so choose. I am glad to have this in the world and look forward to it. It has so much potential - we should be using our potential to be as creative and innovative as the Aussies were. Be positive. Find solutions, not problems.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Next up.....60 Minutes examines why the Swedish womwn volleyball team doesn't show up in a powerboat when a 6 pack of ice cold Budweiser is opened...stay tuned!


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

MB tested one and found that it works. Now, the only question to viability is cost.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Well, we know what the CURRENT cost is... the question is when and how much it will come down eventually.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

What has not really been touched on in the discussion over the last couple pages is the practical reality for a large beekeeping operation.

It has almost been forgotten that far more management is done on a hive than just taking the honey off. A flow hive changes none of that, it would still be the same, except at supering time flowhves instead of normal frames would be put on. But let's say a large beekeeper did this, and then harvested it by the drip method. After that, he still has to remove those supers when prepping the hives for the winter. While this is little labor for someone with a dozen hives, for a large number of hives backed by an efficient extracting plant, the fact the flowhive frames have to be removed and trucked anyway would kill a good bit of the economics of it, and factoring in the cost of the flowhives would render any savings (if their were any) to be outweighed.

Some have said the cost of flowhives will go down once being mass produced. Maybe, maybe not. They are not a toy they are a high quality production and expecting a massive price reduction is probably not realistic. They would have to drop in price a lot before they could be anywhere near economic for a large beekeeper even if he could set up an efficient way to harvest.

My opinion, they will be great fun for hobbyists and I wouldn't even mind one near the bar-b-que myself for when friends come around. But I honestly cannot see it adopted by large beekeepers at this point. With the disclaimer that I have been wrong before!


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> Some have said the cost of flowhives will go down once being mass produced. Maybe, maybe not. They are not a toy they are a high quality production and expecting a massive price reduction is probably not realistic.


Not to mention they have a patent. If their patent is well-written, and no one finds a way to work around it, they will have a de facto monopoly on this particular approach to honey collection for a good long while. From the look of things, they will be selling every unit they can make, so there is zero incentive to reduce the price.

Re: commercial beeks, what could happen is that the several million dollars rolling into their coffers could be used to develop a commercial version of this product that addresses some of the major issues. How? Dunno! If I knew I'd have made the millions instead of them!


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Joel said:


> Is there a timeline for distribution yet?


You might want to read further on how Honey Flow has set up their business. This is an IndieGoGo startup, which means they have floated their idea, along with opinions and testimonials from several well-known beeks, to the general public on a crowdfunding website. 

Customers/investors/suckers (depending your POV) pay/contribute/invest some amount to the company in exchange for the promise of receiving a finished product in ~6 months or so.

But at present they have no manufacturing and no distribution to speak of. They have several prototypes and early production units, but at last news they hadn't even decided whether to manufacture in North America or not. I'm sure they had plans for everything, but they've raised nearly $5,000,000 vs. a target of $70,000, and they still have a full month remaining to raise more funds, so I'm sure all their plans are being re-written right now.

Whatever timeline they had for distribution of a few hundred units certainly won't work for distribution of tens of thousands of units.

I'm a customer/investor/sucker, so I'm certainly hoping they succeed and ship my order, but at present this is a speculative endeavor.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



deknow said:


> I think this shows a lack of creative thinking.
> 
> What do you think folks would pay for a half pound jar they get to "harvest" themselves?


At first I thought this was a great idea, but after thinking through it, it's got issues. You'd be relying one someone who knows nothing to tap the hive successfully, wait long enough for it do drain thoroughly, and the restore the frame properly. If they screw any of this up, you could have serious problems.

They'd also have to suit up, just for liability reasons.

If someone screws up at pick-your-own-strawberries, you lose a few strawberry plants. If someone screws up at tap-your-own-honey, you lose a hive.

I'm willing to babysit my friends and neighbors while they tap my hive, but I'm not going to do that for someone paying $12, especially if it takes 30 minutes.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



deknow said:


> I think this shows a lack of creative thinking.
> 
> What do you think folks would pay for a half pound jar they get to "harvest" themselves?


Not enough to pay the cost of switching over and having a honey house sit empty and hundreds or thousands of people showing up at your out yards with their jar in hand, I don't believe.

Regarding the girls not showing up in a powerboat for Budweiser, that's easy to understand! Yuck!


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>At first I thought this was a great idea, but after thinking through it, it's got issues. You'd be relying one someone who knows nothing to tap the hive successfully, wait long enough for it do drain thoroughly, and the restore the frame properly. If they screw any of this up, you could have serious problems.

They made it pretty foolproof. You can't put the cap back in if you don't reset the comb first... but the problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so ingenious...


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> >At first I thought this was a great idea, but after thinking through it, it's got issues. You'd be relying one someone who knows nothing to tap the hive successfully, wait long enough for it do drain thoroughly, and the restore the frame properly. If they screw any of this up, you could have serious problems.
> 
> They made it pretty foolproof. You can't put the cap back in if you don't reset the comb first... but the problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so ingenious...


Yup! An unsupervised customer is likely to just leave the caps off and walk away.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



shinbone said:


> MB tested one and found that it works.


It hasn't been out long enough to be tested, tested. MB isn't a commercial beekeeper either. A commercial test would be a testers test.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry said:


> Not enough to pay the cost of switching over and having a honey house sit empty and hundreds or thousands of people showing up at your out yards with their jar in hand, I don't believe.


Actually I'm warming up to this as a supplement to traditional harvesting. Imagine a traditional retail display with jars of honey for sale, _plus_ a wall of Flow frames behind the counter, ready to tap. These have been removed from the hive and placed in a specially built display case.

Customers pay $$LOTS$$ for the privilege of selecting a frame, inserting the hose, placing a jar with their name on it, and turning the key. Then, while they wait ~20 minutes for it to drain into their jar, they stay inside your store buying more stuff. Meantime, the Flow frame is behind the counter where you can monitor it and close it up properly afterward.

There's no labor savings, but you get more revenue. 

This would be awesome at the LA County Fair. You could probably get people to pay $50 for a jar. Heck, they're already paying $12 for a hot dog.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I think we should all start complaining that the regular bee supply houses sell starter kits....that are not appropriate/economical for commercial beekeeping...after all, that papers to be the criteria used to evaluate this product.

If one is going to criticize a product, how about every beginners kit that comes with an entrance feeder. I know of no beekeeper that would use or recommend this for new beekepeers (they are fine for water).


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Or the hive is ouside and the tube runs inside. You could charge enough to discourage sales and still have an awsome display/attraction.

I also don't see (at current prices) anyone "supering" with more than one box of these per hive....why not "extract" when full and let them fill it up again.

I'm shocked by the lack of imagination and the attitide that anything new must not change how people are used to doing things on the largest of scales.

I can buy a small chicken feeder that is useful for my few chickens that would be completely useless for a commercial chicken/egg producer.



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> Actually I'm warming up to this as a supplement to traditional harvesting. Imagine a traditional retail display with jars of honey for sale, _plus_ a wall of Flow frames behind the counter, ready to tap. These have been removed from the hive and placed in a specially built display case.
> 
> Customers pay $$LOTS$$ for the privilege of selecting a frame, inserting the hose, placing a jar with their name on it, and turning the key. Then, while they wait ~20 minutes for it to drain into their jar, they stay inside your store buying more stuff. Meantime, the Flow frame is behind the counter where you can monitor it and close it up properly afterward.
> 
> There's no labor savings, but you get more revenue.
> 
> This would be awesome at the LA County Fair. You could probably get people to pay $50 for a jar. Heck, they're already paying $12 for a hot dog.


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'm wondering why this product has so many staunch defenders when none, except one, has ever tried it?
Starting to think it's just alot of hot air and hope it doesn't continue until these things are actually in use in 2016 when the
real story will be told.



deknow said:


> I think we should all start complaining that the regular bee supply houses sell starter kits....that are not appropriate/economical for commercial beekeeping...after all, that papers to be the criteria used to evaluate this product.
> 
> If one is going to criticize a product, how about every beginners kit that comes with an entrance feeder. I know of no beekeeper that would use or recommend this for new beekepeers (they are fine for water).


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



deknow said:


> If one is going to criticize a product, how about every beginners kit that comes with an entrance feeder. I know of no beekeeper that would use or recommend this for new beekepeers (they are fine for water).


Well Dean, there are plenty of Beesource threads where newbees are advised to skip the entrance feeders - but often they have purchased those feeders as part of a 'kit' - which are also typically discouraged by Beesource 'evaluators'.

Even by Michael Bush: 

{*Which beekeeping starter kit is the best?*}​


Michael Bush said:


> IMO, none of them:
> 
> http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnewbees.htm
> 
> Basically there is NOTHING in a typical beginners kit that I would buy. At all.


different thread ...


Michael Bush said:


> The idea of a boardman feeder is defective... putting tempting syrup right by the door... but most of them are designed with that defect, that there is access without even rounding the corner of the door.


I can post lots more examples if you need them! :lpf:



(click the blue arrow in the quote box to see the original post/thread)


----------



## Joel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Tons of new beeks use entrance feeders, have for a couple of decades successfully and will continue, no idea why a new beekeeper couldn't or would've use one, I totally don't see any logical tie to the arguments about starter kits and commercial beeks. Michael has the most, only accurate knowledge, he confirmed my conclusions and is honest about saying it is still an experiment to be field tested. I also think Barry's point about commercial viability is spot on. That is a no hype realm we can all work in. The video was fun and interesting but no beekeeper with any experiance could watch it and not see the contradictions. A great new idea...what fun to have a better mouse trap. Been a few, aluminum foundation that would last forever, composite plastic hives that would never need painted, the world F's,uos mite solution, one piece frames and foundation, honey super cell, to name a few. What happened to those miracles. Whatever the outcome of this idea I sure would like to hire these guys to do my PR. Not a single unit in production and they have raised money, created a worldwide buzz, started an in depth discussion about new frontiers in beekeeping and hey, at least they don't have to and honey supers. I'm impressed. I have a gained a great deal from this discusssion to share with our customers and am confident as more comes to light Michael will keep us up to date. What fun!


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

...but no one has suggested that the fact that supplier X is scamming new beekeepers by selling such a kit which is 9f no use to a commercial beekeeper with or without the entrance feeder.....and the entrance feeders are almost useless for any purpose.


----------



## SWM

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

My prediction is this will go the way of the No-Swarm Cluster Frames from the 1970's. At some point in the future, POOF... they will disappear.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



shinbone said:


> MB tested one and found that it works. Now, the only question to viability is cost.


MB tested *six*. If, by chance, MB would like me to test one of his six on his behalf .... 

Plus this hive went to people around the world, including reputable research universities, for testing also.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



deknow said:


> I also don't see (at current prices) anyone "supering" with more than one box of these per hive....why not "extract" when full and let them fill it up again.


Why not? The answer would only be known to people who have owned a hive strong enough to require more than one super. That's to accommodate the bees, and allow room for spreading & drying nectar.




deknow said:


> I think we should all start complaining that the regular bee supply houses sell starter kits....that are not appropriate/economical for commercial beekeeping...after all, that papers to be the criteria used to evaluate this product.


This comment misses the context. Commercial beekeepers have not been "complaining" that the flowhive is not suitable for small beekeepers. The critique has actually been the other way around, with posts from yourself telling a commercial beekeeper how he should be running his business, with ideas such as having people come around with jars to drain honey out of the hives. This would be very appropriate for a small beekeeper or someone running a store. But in a large scale commercial setting, about the only likely positive outcome might be a great movie clip to show on Americas Funniest Videos. 

I'm happy you like the Flowhive. But I've seen a few comments in this & other threads recently telling commercial beekeepers how to do their jobs & some of the thinking is not real world.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



SowthEfrikan said:


> Plus this hive went to people around the world, including reputable research universities, for testing also.


Are there any reports out yet from these research universities? 
I probably missed them, the only comments I've seen so far are from MB.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>Are there any reports out yet from these research universities? 

If you go here:
http://www.honeyflow.com/

There are a variety of people including researchers whose comments they posted. I don't know if there is a way to contact them and get any more details on their opinions. Most are in Australia...


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

And talking about that, only in Australia would you have a serious business web site with a comment on 
the front page reading and I quote - " F%#$ That's the Holy Grail of Beekeeping " 

LOL


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

OT...sure they are....they are saying it is a scam, that the product is misrepresented, and that it is bad for beekeeping in general.

My cmoments in the other thread regarding commercial beekeepers is in a specific context...which is Randy Oliver's quote that tries to show the damage done to populations by package drings that are untreated. Another BS member posted the quote in order to discredit TF beekeeping.

My comments are in response to this narritive..and points out (quite accurately) that these exact problems are bigger problems when the package bees are treated, fed, kept alive, propogated, and managed by commercial beekepers.....and I think you agreed with at least some of that.

The best analogy I can think of is someone like elliot Spitzer or jim baker.....wanting to shame and punish other people for sins and problems when in fact the self righteous accusers are hiring prostitutes themselves and causing more harm than the average John that they publicly ridicule.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I don't like or dislike the flow hive. I didn't contribute or purchase, and it is not on my list of something I even want to play with.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



deknow said:


> OT...sure they are....they are saying it is a scam, that the product is misrepresented, and that it is bad for beekeeping in general.


I don't think that is a truly honest statement. Those comments have mostly been made by *non* commercial beekeepers.

At a treatment free beekeeping site I'm a member of you can get kicked off the site for talking about the Flowhive! 

But hey, after all the argument, and bashing commercial beekeepers for not immediately wanting to convert their operations to flowhive extraction, turns out you don't like, dislike, want to purchase or even play with one!

You one out of the book Deknow!


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

How many do I have to cite in order to be publicly accused of being honest?


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Cite away. Just don't imply commercial beekeepers have been complaining about the flowhive not being suitable for hobbyists in the same way as you have been trying to argue a commercial beekeeper into having to change the way he does his job, to using flow hives, before you eventually reveal that you yourself would not even play with one. Cos most of the anti flow hive comments have been from *non* commercial beekeepers.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

To try and put a perspective on it you may be better able to relate to, if a treating commercial beekeeper came along (and this may have happened to you) and told you that you should change your operation and start treating your bees with chemicals, you would probably resist on the basis that you have built your business over a number of years based on certain principles, and are not going to suddenly upend it based on what someone says who you probably don't think has your level of understanding.

That's how a guy with a successful business feels, being told he should go flowhive, by you.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

nearly all commercial beekeepers started out as hobby beekeepers. no hobby beekeepers have a clue to the commercial side. most in the hobby people think commercial guys are responsible for their mite or other problems. the guy making a living from bees has to do it right or he goes broke. as an inspector in ny I know most problems are started by new people before they gain experience. there are many very good hobby people but there is such a flood of people wanting to help bees lowers the quality. anyone that thinks the flow hive could be used commercially does not have a grip on reality.


----------



## ScienceGirl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



kholmar said:


> the bees extend the comb slightly so the cap is not directly on it.
> that being said, some of the shallower caps DID break.
> watch the video, this was shown.


I understand that the comb is built off of the plastic guides, so when the guides move, wouldn't the connected comb slide and warp?


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I have never told anyone they should use the flowhive. I have only pointed out that many of the knee jerk objections are silly.

Honesty requires quoting me or apologizing.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



deknow said:


> I have never told anyone they should use the flowhive.


Wordplay & you know it. You argued why he should use the flowhive, why deny, everybody can see through that. Wouldn't have commented other than that you seek an apology? 

I have apologised a number of times on Beesource, but it's generally when I'm actually guilty of something.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

"Imagine a world in which we are all enlightened by objective truths rather than offended by them."Neil Tyson

Nice tag line.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> But let's say a large beekeeper did this, and then harvested it by the drip method. After that, he still has to remove those supers when prepping the hives for the winter.


Well I think that is what they are doing now for a traditional hive but explain to me why it would have to be done for a flow hive system. Right now for what I can see the only thing that has to be done is deny the bees access to these frames. I leave my boxes of extracted frames right outside in the winter. The freezing cold kills anything that might be a pest to the bees. Come spring I put these boxes of empty drawn frames right on the surviving hives for them to use. If the bees cannot get to these frames they could stay right on top of the hive right through winter.


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



deknow said:


> OT...sure they are....they are saying it is a scam, that the product is misrepresented, and that it is bad for beekeeping in general.


I'm afraid the winter of 14/15 is starting to get to Dean. . Are you suggesting all commercial speak with one voice? If so, you might want to reread my comments. On second thought given the length of the thread I'll save you the effort. I said I have no idea if the flow hive works as advertised but if it does it's primary market will be the backyard beekeeper with means because it has no commercial application that I can see. Isn't that pretty close to your stance as well Dean?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

"People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe."- Andy Rooney

"Imagine a world in which we are all enlightened by objective truths rather than offended by them."Neil Tyson

In a World where two people from opposite sides of the Planet spar over a device and what it means.


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



deknow said:


> I have never told anyone they should use the flowhive. I have only pointed out that many of the knee jerk objections are silly.
> 
> Honesty requires quoting me or apologizing.


The knee jerk objections are silly but the knee jerk adoption of this contraption is not.
Now I understand.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

OT I think you have posted somewhere on Beesource that you are no longer work for a commercial beekeeper and you are now a hobbyist. If this continues for a 10 year span do you think commercial beekeeping will be exactly as you remember it? The average person that retires hasn't a clue what the industry is doing 10 years later they remember what they did not what is current. Now I would guess that is not been the case with beekeeping. So I hope you and I are around ten years from now so we can discuss what commercial beekeepers are doing then.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Ace,
I missed it somewhere, what commercial beekeepers have seen the light and are lining up to purchase this system?


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

ace I can't believe you made a comment about not having a clue. you must not have a mirror. lol


----------



## waynester

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

4.8 mil on indie gogo come on beeks there are some smart people here on bee scource lets think of the next great bee thingy we all no we need 
an make barry some $
i will go hide now


----------



## ScienceGirl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> Actually I'm warming up to this as a supplement to traditional harvesting. Imagine a traditional retail display with jars of honey for sale, _plus_ a wall of Flow frames behind the counter, ready to tap. These have been removed from the hive and placed in a specially built display case.
> 
> Customers pay $$LOTS$$ for the privilege of selecting a frame, inserting the hose, placing a jar with their name on it, and turning the key. Then, while they wait ~20 minutes for it to drain into their jar, they stay inside your store buying more stuff. Meantime, the Flow frame is behind the counter where you can monitor it and close it up properly afterward.
> 
> There's no labor savings, but you get more revenue.


How could a consumer resist something that's begging for them to touch it?

I'm not sure how well it would work in a bee supply store, however, as most customers there are beekeepers with hives producing honey - they don't need any more! Still, how fun as a "do it yourself" option, with credit to the bees, of course.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



ScienceGirl said:


> I understand that the comb is built off of the plastic guides, so when the guides move, wouldn't the connected comb slide and warp?


some did...still haven't watched the video have you...


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



clyderoad said:


> The knee jerk objections are silly but the knee jerk adoption of this contraption is not.
> Now I understand.


this comment is entirely disingenuous...nobody has ADOPTED it yet as it has only been slightly available to a few 'beta' testers.
perhaps I misunderstood your comment, if so, my apologies. sarcasm doesn't always carry well in text.
a lot of us are willing to TRY it out and see if/how it will work.

the people who kill me are the ones who come here with their endless list of 'negative' questions that have already been answered or a question that is so simple as to not even need to be ASKED by a super duper experienced beekeeper with 10,307 years of experience with 212,223 hives scattered all over these 247 United States.

there was a question asked early in this thread that asked if the Flow Hive would prevent CCD...
THAT'S the kind of question that gets me riled up.

besides, I like to stir the pot and then step back and watch 4 pages of yelling.
the only thing that truly astonishes me is the level of editing that occurs to my posts.
the first one surprised me as the removed word is not even banned during prime time teletubbyvision.
the second edit astonished me.
however, your house, your rules, not complaining, just ... intrigued ...
*stir stir stir*
Bill


----------



## ScienceGirl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I researched when I first heard of the FlowHive and have continued to stay up to date on all the information regarding the Flow Hive from the Flow Hive's website, including FAQs and videos.

As Michael Bush is the only one with hands-on experience and the only eyewitness that has engaged in the conversation thus far, I believe he may be the only one who can answer my question.

Michael Bush, might you provide insight on this?

Q: I understand that the comb is built off of the plastic guides, so when the guides move, wouldn't the connected comb slide and warp?


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



ScienceGirl said:


> As Michael Bush is the only one with hands-on experience and the only eyewitness that has engaged in the conversation thus far, I believe he may be the only one who can answer my question.


ah, my apologies, I thought your follow up question was directed at me. my bad!
I think he answered it a couple posts back but perhaps not, there is a wall of text to wade through.
Bill


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Joel said:


> Kohlmar , thanks for your suggestion...might I suggest you read the other 3376 posts I"ve done here over the past decade before you make some off the cuff statement about me in a thread questioning my sincerity.i'm sure you have tons of time to read the hundred or so posts here everyday, I am a full time beekeeper in two states selling in16 markets in New York CitY so my time is limited. I will take a look at the FAQ and video, appreciate the point.


Jeol,
I apologize for hurting your feelings.
I had no idea how important and busy you were.
peace!
Kholmar (or if that's too hard to type)
Bill


----------



## ScienceGirl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

One beekeeper is going to have opinions that differ in some way from another beekeeper - that's to be expected. However, if one person will not be swayed, no accusation from the opposer is going to change that. Even if they're wrong. Change is caused by encouragement, not force.

As a beekeeping community, beesource seems to be the perfect place for a friendly, perhaps heated, debate. Each person can bring their individual experiences, perspective, and ideas to a discussion. Perhaps we'll agree, perhaps we won't. But we'll have a variety of solutions to choose from, pros and cons to weigh, and others to support us as we experiment, troubleshoot, and research.

In our discussions and debates, we may never reach a consensus. And that's okay.

We are united in our keeping of bees. We may keep them differently, but our desire for their existence and welfare is the same.


----------



## ScienceGirl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Kholmar,

>>there is a wall of text to wade through

"A wall" is the perfect way to describe it. I'm in the process of reading through it. Perhaps I'll finish this weekend... If I find it, I'll be sure to post it.


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



kholmar said:


> this comment is entirely disingenuous...nobody has ADOPTED it yet as it has only been slightly available to a few 'beta' testers.
> perhaps I misunderstood your comment, if so, my apologies. sarcasm doesn't always carry well in text.
> a lot of us are willing to TRY it out and see if/how it will work.
> 
> the people who kill me are the ones who come here with their endless list of 'negative' questions that have already been answered or a question that is so simple as to not even need to be ASKED by a super duper experienced beekeeper with 10,307 years of experience with 212,223 hives scattered all over these 247 United States.
> 
> there was a question asked early in this thread that asked if the Flow Hive would prevent CCD...
> THAT'S the kind of question that gets me riled up.
> 
> besides, I like to stir the pot and then step back and watch 4 pages of yelling.
> the only thing that truly astonishes me is the level of editing that occurs to my posts.
> the first one surprised me as the removed word is not even banned during prime time teletubbyvision.
> the second edit astonished me.
> however, your house, your rules, not complaining, just ... intrigued ...
> *stir stir stir*
> Bill


adoption: : the act or process of giving official acceptance or approval to something

29 posts and already 3 apologies, what gives?


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> OT I think you have posted somewhere on Beesource that you are no longer work for a commercial beekeeper and you are now a hobbyist. If this continues for a 10 year span do you think commercial beekeeping will be exactly as you remember it?


In that particular comment you are quite correct Ace, there's always new stuff coming out and when I go to meetings and hang with commercial guys sometimes I have little idea what they talking about.
I'm kind of moving full circle though my little hobby has grown & now I'm just selling bees to commercial guys. But it's a very simple business, luckily bees haven't changed I don't do honey or not much and have no fancy equipment or anything that I need more than a garage for. Just the core of the part I enjoy.


----------



## ScienceGirl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

On the Indiegogo HoneyFlow site: ( https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/flow-hive-honey-on-tap-directly-from-your-beehive )
>>"But don’t worry, we haven’t taken all the fun away... You still get to use your smoker and bee suit and do all the normal and necessary things to keep your bees healthy. Eg, inspecting the brood nest for disease, swarm prevention, mites, beetles, etc. You still need to pull your hive apart to do this and you will still get stung by your bees….
The brood box stays the same and needs the same care as it always has."

To a non-beekeeper, the HoneyFlow might have appeared to be a beekeeper replacement. After all, it's advertised as "honey on tap".
In this section, however, they explicitly say that the HoneyFlow super system is not a beekeeper replacement, but a tool for harvesting honey.

If consumers are doing their research before they buy (or at least reading the site they are buying from), the additions to their site seem to revise the potentially misleading message of the HoneyFlow.

>>you will still get stung by your bees….

Might they consider "No pain, no gain" as an advertising slogan? 
Or perhaps it could be the rallying point for the opposing side.

>>You still need to pull your hive apart to do this

Those HoneyFlow supers are heavy!
In a 10 frame box: 7 frames x 3 kilos (6.61 lbs) = 21 kilograms (46 lbs)
In an 8 frame box: 6 frames x 3 kilos = 18 kilograms (40 lbs)

A shallow honey super filled with 10 standard frames weighs about 25 lbs when full.

From the FAQs on HoneyFlow.com
>>you can shorten the frames to suit any hive

From the pictures, it appears that the bottom of the frame is composed of the honey channel. How would the frames be shortened?

Additional thoughts?


----------



## JRG13

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I think it's designed that only the back of the cell moves, not the walls, that's how I thought of it working anyways.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

jrg13 that's what I thought at first but all the cells split In half depth wise. Im sure the bees are not fond of that.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Shrug....

I'm kind of sick of having to defend myself from your false serial accusations. I think my postings here have been pretty clear....I've answered what seem to me to be objections based on poor assumptions and willful ignorance.

I try to help people the best I can....even when they are doing things I think are very problematic (using fumidil....ive posted several times since the fall about eric mussen's claim that nosema c. produces more spores when treated but those treated hives have better survival despite the resulting high spore count. I've tried to help folks clarify how they are making their own OA vaporizer. I give good advice on feeding to those that feed).

I don't care at all who uses or doesn't use the flow hive... I don't see how anyone could read anything I've written (here or anywhere) as telling anyone they should buy or support it. I've only tried to point out where some of the objections don't make sense to me.

I'm not sure what your problem is.....but it is clearly your problem, I refuse to let it become mine.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I'm sure you are quite correct.
.


----------



## trobo

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

IMO

Sales could go
Version 1 (Being sold now) = 70% new to beekeeping, 25% tinkering hobbyists, 5% tinkering commericals
Version 2 the upgraded "bugs" ironed out version = 40% new, 50% hobbyists, 10% commercials
Verison 3 The Pro industrialised version = 5% new, 30% hobbyists, 65% commercial

What do I think the version would look like? (Obviosly if I really knew I would have invented) but good fun guessing. 
If you like these ideas. feel free to invent away... just remember me someday 

Version 2 = They use 'something' other than plastic in manufacture. which brings in the the Permaculture and hormone worried set on mass.
They create a web enabled iphone *app + sensor *to monitor a)the honey ripeness b)presence of varroa mite/SHB, c) volume of honey in frame d) pollen content of honey, hive temprature & hive accoustics linked to an algorithm which senses pre swarming

Version 3 = They take version 2 above and a) mass produce to reduce cost b) Industrialise the materials to ensure robustness c) provide the manifold style setup MB spoke of, d) have a sealed honey collection vat attached (With option for small cheap solar pump for cold weather or hard honey) e) they take the web/internet app to next level by enabling web/internet harvesting of ripe/ready honey to attached vat. f) they have small (Cheap now) GPS trackers on the Vats & hives to prevent theft g) they only have to visit the hives if there is an issue which shows up on the app and to drive past and collect the vats, leaving the Flow Frames attached

You just never know... :shhhh:


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



clyderoad said:


> adoption: : the act or process of giving official acceptance or approval to something
> 
> 29 posts and already 3 apologies, what gives?


adoption
: the act or process of adopting a child
: the act or process of beginning to use something new or different
: the act or process of giving official acceptance or approval to something

cherry picking at it's finest.
when I read your post, the second version is the meaning that I read from your 'tone'.
my APOLOGIES...
not all of my apologies are sincere...

having fun yet cuz I'm laughing my shirt off?


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



ScienceGirl said:


> To a non-beekeeper, the HoneyFlow might have appeared to be a beekeeper replacement. After all, it's advertised as "honey on tap".
> In this section, however, they explicitly say that the HoneyFlow super system is not a beekeeper replacement, but a tool for harvesting honey.
> If consumers are doing their research before they buy (or at least reading the site they are buying from), the additions to their site seem to revise the potentially misleading message of the HoneyFlow.


100% agree, from the research I did before I 'purchased' my frames, I concluded that these are just 'fancy honey supers' (my words).



ScienceGirl said:


> >>you can shorten the frames to suit any hive
> From the pictures, it appears that the bottom of the frame is composed of the honey channel. How would the frames be shortened?
> Additional thoughts?


this is a guess but I think they didn't mean 'shortened', I think they meant 'narrowed' to fit however many frames your particular sized application warranted.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



ScienceGirl said:


> Kholmar,
> 
> >>there is a wall of text to wade through
> 
> I'm in the process of reading through it. Perhaps I'll finish this weekend... If I find it, I'll be sure to post it.


It is a job for Rader's search fingers. It shouldn't take him more than a minute or two.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Just an FYI (Rader, close your ears), the contents of any web page can be searched with the 'Find' function (command F) in your menu. I assume a PC has this function as well. Type in your search words and they will be found and highlighted starting at the top of the page. 'Find Again' and it will search right down the page.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



beeware10 said:


> but all the cells split In half depth wise. Im sure the bees are not fond of that.


How would the bees know until all the honey is gone out of the cells. Do you think the bees are fond of you ripping their house apart (exposing them to robbing) breaking all the propolizing they have done, either shaking them off the frames or blasting them with 200 mph wind velocity. Even the most skillful beekeeper is going to kill some bees.

This is where I think deknow hits the nail on the head. You thump your chest about being a NYS bee inspector and make the most unintelligent comment about keeping bees.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>I understand that the comb is built off of the plastic guides, so when the guides move, wouldn't the connected comb slide and warp?

I have not disassembled one, perhaps I should. It would be interesting to see more of how it goes together. My experience is very limited. I have had one in hand only since about July and have not had a lot of time with it and I have not tried to take one apart. However it appears one could disassemble it and see how it works exactly. As far as how it doesn't break the cappings, their earlier attempts were all a level surface and according to them, the cappings did break and still not much honey ran out. But they preferred not to have them break, so they made very other one of the pieces inset so the bees would draw a bit of wax wall on every other piece. The ones connected solidly to the plastic stay put. The ones with a bit of wax between the cappings and the plastic break at the walls so the surface stays in one piece. If some of the cappings do break it really doesn't matter much. The one I have has the inset pieces. I have no experience with the previous models and am only passing on what I was told.

>Q: I understand that the comb is built off of the plastic guides, so when the guides move, wouldn't the connected comb slide and warp? 

The ones connected solidly stay put the ones connected by a short wax wall break.

>From the pictures, it appears that the bottom of the frame is composed of the honey channel. How would the frames be shortened?

As I said, I have not disassembled one, but apparently you can remove the ends leaving the top and bottom piece and a series of strips that form the cells. If you cut the top and bottom to length and remove the appropriate number of the strips, apparently (according to what I have read, but have no experience doing) you can cut it down for a BS or other hive of different length. but there is no easy way to change the depth of the frame, so you would have to build a box of whatever size you need at 9 5/8" deep in order to use it on a BS or a Warre'. This is not bases on any experience I have, just on what I have seen written. I have not attempted this and don't foresee that I will unless I get some for free or cheap that I would try it. They are more valuable to me in Langstroth size...

I would like to reiterate, I have not had these very long and I have only had one. I have a very limited experience with them. I only know that it works. I do not know how well on a larger scale or over a longer period or time or how it will change my management or what problems will come up. What I do know is that all the objections I brought up (many of which the rest of you have as well) were answered and that they spent 10 years working out those issues. That there will be other issues, I'm sure. That they will be issues we already face, is likely. The issue of crystallized honey is not new, I face it on my HSC and PermaComb and even on wax combs. I'm sure I can deal with it the same way I already do and I'm sure I can usually avoid it. No doubt, as with many issues, it will be somewhat different from place to place. If you have OSR or Heather you will no doubt have more issues with crystallization than with other honeys. But you may actually have less than with other methods as part or the property of crystallized honey is that when you move it, it becomes more liquid. So this may even help, even if it won't drain quickly. I'm sure sooner or later I (and others) will have a comb webbed up by the wax moths. I think you could powerwash this without taking it apart, but you could also take it apart. Again, this is not unique to the Flow system. I have that issue with the PermaComb and have to brush the webs off. Again, you could probably disassemble it and make cleanup easier. I say probably because I have not attempted it. No doubt there will be issues none of us have foreseen. But probably less than some people think because they have worked on these issues for a decade already. I wonder about really tiny ants. I wonder what if a just hatched small hive beetle larvae could find a way into the chamber where it drains at the bottom. But since I don't have SHB issues, I may not find that out until someone uses it in a place where they do have SHB issues.

Bottom line: I'm sure there will be things we have to work out. There were things people had to work out when they went to hives with frames, and plastic foundation, and extractors, but they worked them out. What I really don't understand is the emotional reaction to this, especially the negative ones. I've seen people comparing it to battery boxes for chickens or making references to how the bees are more enslaved or it makes the bees into automatons. It does no mind control on the bees. The only way in which it resembles a battery box is that the battery box lets the egg roll out without removing the chicken from the cage... but a battery hen can't do anything but stand up, sit down, eat, poop and lay eggs. A free range chicken has a social structure and can go where it wants. All of my bees are "free range" with or without a Honey Flow super. They have a social structure which is not being interfered with. So I fail to see the comparisons. I also fail to understand the irrational negative reactions to a new concept. I understand a certain amount of skepticism. A lot of things look good at first sight but don't work out quite that way in reality. A year from now we will know much more about how well this works over a large variety of climate and beekeeping skill. I'm sure just like plastic foundation, and Langstroth hives, there will STILL be people who love it and hate it, but at least it will be based on actual experience instead of knee jerk emotion.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> >I understand that the comb is built off of the plastic guides, so when the guides move, wouldn't the connected comb slide and warp?
> 
> What I really don't understand is the emotional reaction to this, especially the negative ones.
> 
> Sour grapes. Pure and simple.


----------



## Joel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> Wordplay & you know it. You argued why he should use the flowhive, why deny, everybody can see through that. Wouldn't have commented other than that you seek an apology?
> 
> I have apologised a number of times on Beesource, but it's generally when I'm actually guilty of something.


You are right on the mark Oldtimer, it is a thin veil when we offer arguments by dismissing someone's opinion with virtually no logical support other than something is silly or wasting time. I have been fortunate to have learned a great deal from brother and sister beekeepers here and take any opportunity to share what I know with others. Like you, (and many others) I have had to apologize for my comments off mark as well at times over the years. I enjoyed this debate and learned a great deal for those who offered logic, data and valid arguments. That's what we do here. I look forward to the next phase of learning about this.

I am assuming they must have already had an injection mold made which would be a major part of the expense or did they somehow modify frames in a shop?


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>I am assuming they must have already had an injection mold made which would be a major part of the expense or did they somehow modify frames in a shop?

As I understand it (and I am not privy to all that they are doing so I could be wrong) they have limited production set up in Australia already and will probably expand that. They want to set up production in the US and I think that was the primary purpose of the crowdfunding project--to get enough orders and advance money to do that. The molds are made and they can already produce them.


----------



## waynester

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

i have found the perfect idea for this 
remember bee houses always wondered how the deal with honey
idea.... get 10 put 5 on each side of a trailer then a barrel in the middle walla
no need to open hive on the honey flow


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Joel said:


> I am assuming they must have already had an injection mold made which would be a major part of the expense or did they somehow modify frames in a shop?


I am not sure what they did but it could have been a good use of a 3D printer, test, tweak, print, test, tweak ect. and then cut metal for a prototype mold (single cavity). Probably some more testing and tweaking and now they are in position for a production mold, and that will take some tweaking. The production mold will bring the price down considerably. And the more they pound out the cheaper it will get. Until you get close to the material cost then the cost will level out.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> I am not sure what they did but it could have been a good use of a 3D printer, test, tweak, print, test, tweak ect. and then cut metal for a prototype mold (single cavity). Probably some more testing and tweaking and now they are in position for a production mold, and that will take some tweaking. The production mold will bring the price down considerably. And the more they pound out the cheaper it will get. Until you get close to the material cost then the cost will level out.


How smooth/regular does the wall of a cell need to be for a bee to accept it as "good"? One of the things 3D printers are relatively poor at (at least today) is making smooth surfaces, especially along the Z-axis.

I have no doubt that someday we'll be able to 3D-print a countersunk metal screw and tapped hole that forms a gas-tight seal, but that's a few years off.

I'm amazed at the precision bees are able to achieve in their construction. Do they demand similar precision in synthetic cells?


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> I'm amazed at the precision bees are able to achieve in their construction.


With you there, I get even more amazed at their construction work as the years go by.




IAmTheWaterbug said:


> Do they demand similar precision in synthetic cells?


No, it's surprising what they will accept. I am using a jenter unit for queen cell raising, I don't bother putting the plastic cover on the back of it and the bees happily store both nectar and pollen in the exposed back ends of the cell plugs, even though they look nothing like a honeycomb.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> With you there, I get even more amazed at their construction work as the years go by.


I have a piece of old comb at home that fell out of a brood frame during The Apocalypse. I left it out in the sun for a few days, and all the wax melted away. What's left is (I think) old cocoons, loosely adhered together in a perfect hexagonal grid. I can gently pull the cells apart and see the perfectly constructed pieces, including the back wall where the two sides of the comb meet.

I'll take some pictures when I get home. It's amazing.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> >I am assuming they must have already had an injection mold made which would be a major part of the expense or did they somehow modify frames in a shop?
> 
> As I understand it (and I am not privy to all that they are doing so I could be wrong) they have limited production set up in Australia already and will probably expand that. They want to set up production in the US and I think that was the primary purpose of the crowdfunding project--to get enough orders and advance money to do that. The molds are made and they can already produce them.


With the crowd funding and the interest data these guys can approach real investors and say "We have this much money and this much interest. Would you like to buy half the company for $X.XX?" Seems to me.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



sqkcrk said:


> With the crowd funding and the interest data these guys can approach real investors and say "We have this much money and this much interest. Would you like to buy half the company for $X.XX?" Seems to me.


But that would run counter to all of their goals. The primary reasons for "selling half the company for $X.XX" are to 1) cash out, and/or 2) retire, or 3) raise money to fund growth.

These guys already have all the money they need to pay themselves very healthy salaries and to fund their growth. So why would they give up any ownership of their company (and the associated control) to get more money that they don't need?


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

"These guys already have all the money they need to pay themselves very healthy salaries and to fund their growth. So why would they give up any ownership of their company (and the associated control) to get more money that they don't need?"

Based on what? The over 4 million dollars raised? That's not much these days.

When has anyone ever had "more money that they don't need"? Are they altruistic religious monks? Or already independently wealthy?


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> One of the things 3D printers are relatively poor at (at least today) is making smooth surfaces, especially along the Z-axis.


I have seen some pretty exceptional results and you can always do a secondary process if the surface required it. The point is a printer allows you to change the design at will with no tooling cost invested. Once you think you have what you want then you cut metal. And usually that is a soft mold (prototype).


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



sqkcrk said:


> "These guys already have all the money they need to pay themselves very healthy salaries and to fund their growth. So why would they give up any ownership of their company (and the associated control) to get more money that they don't need?"
> 
> Based on what? The over 4 million dollars raised? That's not much these days.
> 
> When has anyone ever had "more money that they don't need"? Are they altruistic religious monks? Or already independently wealthy?


Based on their initial fundraising goal of $70,000. They're at $4.9M right now, or 70x their original goal.

They have an order book a mile long, and to-do list that's even longer than that. More money won't make that to-do list any shorter. I'm assuming that they are beekeepers at heart, and that their goal is to bring a new harvesting tool to market. And make some money at the same time.

If that's not their primary goal, and their real goal is to make a gazillion, then they'd be better served to finish out the launch, ship $2-3M worth of working product, and _then_ sell the business (or half the business). 

As a "real investor"* I'd pay a much higher price for a proven business than for the promise of a business, which is really all they are right now.

* and I'm business finance guy during the week, when I'm not fretting about my bees.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Okay. Trumped.


----------



## ScienceGirl

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Michael Bush, thank you for your answers and help!

I saw in the most recent Flow Hive video that there is a groove to allow bees to clean up honey after harvesting. It appears that this groove is constantly open, so while harvesting, honey is flowing both inside the hive and outside to the jar. This dripping can also be seen in the video. (It is minor dripping.)

An additional question I have (though the creators have probably thought of this and have devised a way to prevent it) is whether the gap between the cells (allowing bees to not get their legs or wings caught) also allows nectar/honey to drip through to the cells below and on to the honey gate (where the tube is inserted). If the honey does drip, then you've got a 24/7 flowing Flow Hive, no key required.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

In a week I head off to a bee seminar. One of the speakers has tried the hive and will discuss it. Should prove interesting


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



ScienceGirl said:


> If the honey does drip, then you've got a 24/7 flowing Flow Hive, no key required.


Sounds like a mead Flow Hive


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



ScienceGirl said:


> ...gap between the cells ...the honey does drip,...


Bees complete the cell with wax before filling it with honey. So nothing will drip until that wax seal is cracked up.

In a German forum it is discussed, that this sort of invention will draw many hipsters into "beekeeping" which otherwise would be shy to keep bees because of the stinging. The flow hive is widely discussed in social media outside the beekeeping community. Some people will and do think there is no real work in keeping bees. Just place the hive on a balcony and just use the tap to get the honey.

Not a problem of the invention itself but a possible misuse/abuse of it.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

This will be an interesting business venture to follow.

The initial advertising and launch has been huge...but folks are buying a dream.
It is like purchasing performance horses...many youngsters sell high because someone believes they are going to be the winner. If that horse does excel, and stays sound, it then is worth even more ...the person who purchased it hit the jackpot. However many more young hopefuls don't fullfill the dream and are then worth very little.

With the flow hive a large number have purchased the dream. If the dream proves to be something folks want more of then sales will continue. However it is possible this item will be a one time wonder and once folks have one they won't be keen on getting another and will tell the world why that is the case.
If you had 5 mil in start up money how much of that would you invest into the company before you knew how long this product feeding frenzie would last? 
I for one will follow this with curiosity over the following years.
Are we witnessing a one time rush of dreams or the start of something that will flourish long term...only time will tell the tale.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

The only part I can't figure out about this design is how they kept what they were doing for 10 years a secret.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

latest update from the Flow Hive folks:

Hi everyone,

Wow! The ongoing response to Flow™ is amazing, and it’s so great to see that there are so many people out there that love bees as much as we do.

During all these years of development we have dreamt of Flow™ blossoming like this. Thanks so much for helping us make this a reality.

We’re getting a lot of questions about how we’re going to get enough Flow™ Hives built to satisfy the incredible demand that has sprung up almost overnight.

We just wanted to check in and let you know that the manufacturing process is well underway in Brisbane, Australia. In a few weeks we’ll be able to fulfil about a thousand orders a month and are working flat-out to expand that capacity as quickly as possible.

The Early Bird Early Delivery orders will be our first priority. Then we’ll be fulfilling perks in the order in which the pledges were made.

We’re also putting a lot of energy into providing the most cost-effective delivery options that we can as we gear up to the end of the campaign and start shipping your Flow™ hives.

We are confident we will fulfil the orders according to the “perk” timeframes on Indiegogo and if all runs smoothly we may be able to deliver even earlier than promised.

We have been lucky to have so many talented friends, family and industry experts able to drop what they were doing and work around the clock to get the ball rolling with Flow™. 

There has been so many great questions and we are expanding the FAQs all the time at www.honeyflow.com and uploading videos to our YouTube channel. One of the most popular has been a bench test of a Flow™ Frame showing you how it all works and a close up view of what happens when the honey is harvested: 

Watch on Indiegogo

We have also added some great “How it Works” diagrams to the Indiegogo page.

Thanks again everyone! We’re really excited to be bringing Flow™ Hives to the world.

Cedar, Stu, and the Flow™ team


----------



## trobo

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Link to the new youtube update
http://youtu.be/ryWC92NT2Eo


----------



## beekuk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



trobo said:


> Link to the new youtube update
> http://youtu.be/ryWC92NT2Eo


Nothing escapes the inquisition, already been posted four days ago.
http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...ney-Flow-quot-Flow-Hive&p=1227689#post1227689


----------



## trobo

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Oops sorry. Must have missed it and just got the email then from flow with with link.. The more you look at it the more you see how much thought has gone in. Like the fact cap won't go on until frames locked etc


----------



## trobo

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Beekuk. I just realised the YouTube link you referred to from 4 days ago seems to be the original video? The one I sent was the new one I think that is where he gives the detailed walk through.. Unless I am missing something?


----------



## beekuk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



trobo said:


> Beekuk. I just realised the YouTube link you referred to from 4 days ago seems to be the original video? The one I sent was the new one I think that is where he gives the detailed walk through.. Unless I am missing something?


You are correct, trobo... i don't know what jiggery pokery has gone on there, as the one you linked to was done four days ago as well, Published on Mar 3, 2015, i see that is now running down the side with the other you tube vids, and the post that Barry did is back to being the plastic man...sorry, a mystery.


----------



## Joel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Not to start anything, but wouldn't it be fun to have the 2015 Beesource Bee Comvention with these guys in Austrailia. I bet if we all chipped in Barry could get us some rockin travel packages for a few thousand Beesource beekeepers! I'm just sayin, if we were to have a convention this year! Imagine being on a plane for 18 hours with "us". We could do a cruise ship but the thought of what would happen with a bunch as full of it as you all are might end up epic in a clogged cruise ship potty kinda way.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I'll offer up _Bee Mine_ for the event!


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Love the name.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Barry, the _Bee Mine _sure seems to spend a _lot_ of time sitting on that dock. We never see it in the _water_ .... are you sure its seaworthy enough to make it to Australia? :lookout:

.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I had it out last summer off the Florida Keys with my son and his wife.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I didn't realize that you offered charters of the _Bee Mine_ through a broker ... 
http://www.northropandjohnson.com/yacht-charter/index.htm


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Barry said:


> I had it out last summer off the Florida Keys with my son and his wife.


Thats the life......... hats off. :thumbsup: G


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Well when it's through the broker they have to watch Universal but dealing direct through Barry, Beesource is piped in.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



biggraham610 said:


> Thats the life......... hats off. :thumbsup: G


It's nice, but no fishing poles or beer!


----------



## Joel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Ok Ace...you might be a ******* if....
I would park the canoe to do a few days on BeeMine.....nice Branding Barry.


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I want to see a pic of Barry's VW hooked up to that sucker.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

OK, OK back to beekeeping ...


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Ace, didn't you notice the '_bigscreen_' on Barry's closeup photo of the _Bee Mine_? 




... the Beesource channel is always the choice of _discriminating connoisseurs_ ... and always 'on topic' 

:shhhh:


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

If there is an outbreak of AFB in a flow hive will people need to burn their $600.00 hive?


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I expect they could put through an Iotron and irradiate it.



Eddie Honey said:


> If there is an outbreak of AFB in a flow hive will people need to burn their $600.00 hive?


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

There is always the irradiation option. Not sure of the cost, but it's probably less than the cost of the equipment. Anyone know the cost of gamma irradiation?


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I know it's probably unlikely to get AFB but with all the new beeks this thing is attracting and the demand for bees that's soon to hit the market there may be a spike.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Eddie Honey said:


> If there is an outbreak of AFB in a flow hive will people need to burn their $600.00 hive?


For the wooden parts yes but spores will not penetrate the plastic so I think there is a possibility of steam cleaning or autoclave.


----------



## PicnicCreek

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Eddie Honey said:


> If there is an outbreak of AFB in a flow hive will people need to burn their $600.00 hive?


To be clear, the $600 is for a complete hive setup, if you don't already own all the components. The Flow frames are the cost ($350 for six frames to fit in an 8-frame hive). Since those are plastic, I expect those could be cleaned. The woodenware, you'd deal with the same as an outbreak in any hive. 

I bought a couple sets of frames and am looking forward to trying them out. But I didn't buy any woodenware, since I already have that. I'll need to modify a super so that I can insert the tools, but that's easy enough to do.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



> spores will not penetrate the plastic so I think there is a possibility of steam cleaning or autoclave.





> Since those are plastic, I expect those could be cleaned.


I'm staying out of this one.


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

LOL. Future Craigs List Ad: "For sale; Flow Frames recently infected with AFB but they've been cleaned $$.$$" Who's buyin'?!


----------



## BeeCurious

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Mike Gillmore said:


> Anyone know the cost of gamma irradiation?


I looked into it a few years ago when someone on the forum suggested that they had some used Honey Super Cell frames for sale really cheap. The radiation treatment was far more expensive than buying new HSC...

Add on the cost of shipping the heavy boxes of frames to and from the facility and it was crazy expensive!


----------



## odfrank

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I looked into irradiation of woodenware and it was more expensive than replacement equipment. Plastic does not respond favorably to steam cleaning so hot washing would be the only hot water alternative. Any use of a solar melter or steam melter quickly distorts plastic into pretzel shape. Some honey here stored by the bees from October to February granulates solid in the comb.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Mike Gillmore said:


> Anyone know the cost of gamma irradiation?


http://www.montcobeekeepers.org/Pages/Irradiation.aspx


> Q: What are the costs and who do I contact?
> A: Please contact Mark Antunes if you have hive equipment that you wish to process at Sterigenics. Without exception, all expected processing costs for prepared pallets must be prepaid before equipment is transported to Sterigenics. A certified bank check or money order made out to Sterigenics International, Inc. is required as payment.
> 
> •	Minimum cost per run is $1,065.40 for 1 to 7 pallets
> •	$152.20/pallet 2015 pricing (full or partial) based on a full capacity equipment run of 7 or more pallets
> •	Payment in full for all pallets you deliver must be with a certified bank check made out to "Sterigenics International Inc". This is required before or upon drop off of pallets at Sterigenics.
> 
> Contact Information:
> Mark Antunes
> e-mail: [email protected]
> cell: 484-955-0768


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



odfrank said:


> Plastic does not respond favorably to steam cleaning so hot washing would be the only hot water alternative.


You may not be able to autoclave it but you should be able to steam clean it.

http://www.babygreenthumb.com/p-122-safe-plastic-numbers-guide.aspx


> Plastic #5 - Polypropylene (PP) is a thermoplastic polymer. It is strong, tough, has a high resistance to heat and acts as a barrier to moisture.
> Where is Polypropylene found?
> •	Yogurt & margarine tubs
> •	Plastic cups & baby bottles
> •	Kitchenware, microwavable plastic containers and lids
> Health Concerns
> Most PP are microwavable safe and dishwasher safe. NOTE: microwavable/dishwasher safe only means that the plastic will not warp when heated. It does not imply that it is a healthy practice. A better alternative is using glass containers to heat foods and to hand wash plastic instead of using the dishwasher.
> - See more at: http://www.babygreenthumb.com/p-122-safe-plastic-numbers-guide.aspx#sthash.H80yLnKW.dpuf


----------



## BeeCurious

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

The Honey Flow Frames are interesting but I'm saving up for one of these.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I bet we could get at least 5 pages of discussion on that one.


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



BeeCurious said:


> The Honey Flow Frames are interesting but I'm saving up for one of these.


Why do I feel like I just wasted 26 seconds of my life?.............................:scratch: G


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I've got an old issue of popular mechanics where someone setup an electric lawnmower to unwind around a central pole (with the power outlet)......when it ran out of cord it rolled itself into a shed and unplugged itself.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

....now I want to make a gas powered unplugger.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Nothing like good old fashioned American ingenuity.


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Mike Gillmore said:


> There is always the irradiation option. Not sure of the cost, but it's probably less than the cost of the equipment. Anyone know the cost of gamma irradiation?


Irradiation equipment loves plastic!


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>The Honey Flow Frames are interesting but I'm saving up for one of these. 

That is so cool! Useless... of course... but cool.

>....now I want to make a gas powered unplugger.

Yes. It would be so much more practical... 

>steam cleaning...

The poplypropolene (what the core is made of) will take 220 F before it melts, but after that, it does melt... I don't know the melting point of the ends, top and bottom. At $60 a comb I don't think I want to experiment with them to find out...


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> >steam cleaning...
> 
> The poplypropolene (what the core is made of) will take 220 F before it melts,


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polypropylene

The low point should be 266 F.


----------



## BeeCurious

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> The low point should be 266 F.


So... what can one do with that morsel of Wikipedia knowledge? 

Having very expensive frames deformed / melted would certainly be a low point in a Honey Flow-er's day... 


Melting would be very very bad. 

Deformed plastic would be very bad. 

I would want to avoid both... 

I would trust Michael Bush's recommendation.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> You may not be able to autoclave it but you should be able to steam clean it.





Acebird said:


> The low point should be 266 F.


The actual MELTING point of polypropylene is not really important with regard to "steam cleaning" Flow Hive frames with AFB spores. The Flow Hive frames will be quite *useless *once the polypropylene merely DEFORMS under heat. The temperature that deformation occurs in polypropylene depends on the pressure applied, but keep in mind that a another term for "steam cleaner" is "*pressure *washer"! 

According to the page linked:
http://www.matweb.com/reference/deflection-temperature.aspx
using a relatively common test of 0.46 MPa (°C), polypropylene deflection starts at 100 degrees C which is 212 F.

After spending hundreds of $$$ for Flow frames, *steam *cleaning them seems pretty risky. But maybe that's just me.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Yup, this is what happens if you put Mann Lake PF120 plastic frames into boiling water:


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Excellent timing with that photo!  The classroom thanks Bernhard for bringing the visual aid today.  


How is your _back _feeling today, Bernhard?


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

My back is fine. Just feel a bit hungry. Guess I go and eat some of my words. :thumbsup:


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>The low point should be 266 F.

When I was dealing with PermaComb it did fine up to 220 F. After that it didn't turn into a puddle, but it did deform.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> >The low point should be 266 F.
> 
> When I was dealing with PermaComb it did fine up to 220 F. After that it didn't turn into a puddle, but it did deform.


Ok then the question is what is PermaComb made of or better yet is it made of polypropylene like the flow hive which should take 212 without permanent distortion? I am sure the thought of AFB came across the minds of these inventors. They must have an answer.

Rader also keep in mind that if you use a pressure washer the plastic will not reach 212 degrees.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

212 F (100 C) is not hot enough to kill AFB spores. However lye solution at 212 F seems to be pretty effective.


----------



## beekuk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> I am sure the thought of AFB came across the minds of these inventors. They must have an answer.


A strong bleach solution is used on poly hives against AFB spores, so possibly the same treatment could be used for these frames if needed.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

When it comes to finding AFB in a hive that has the flow hive super and box on it thoroughly washing the plastic parts should remove spores well enough to reuse them.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> Rader also keep in mind that if you use a pressure washer the plastic will not reach 212 degrees.



A *BOLD * statement, Ace! Would you care to provide a reference? Here is mine ...


> Features:
> - Pressure Washer PSI: 1200 - 3000
> - Pressure Washer GPM: 2.4
> - Pressure Washer Temperature: 165 °F
> - Steam Cleaner PSI: 250 or 500
> - Steam Cleaner GPM: 1.0
> - [HIGHLIGHT]Steam Cleaner Temperature: 319 °F[/HIGHLIGHT]
> - Advanced Temperature Control System
> 
> 
> _Read the rest here:_
> http://www.ultimatewasher.com/steam-cleaner-pressure-washers.htm


Lets see, the _steam cleaner_ specs show steam at 319 degrees F, but you claim the plastic will not even reach 212 degrees Fahrenheit? :scratch: :s





... is this a continuation of 'Bees don't heat the hive'?


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



beekuk said:


> A strong bleach solution is used on poly hives against AFB spores, so possibly the same treatment could be used for these frames if needed.


I read this too. What I was thinking is pressure wash the parts into a pit that would be buried and then dunk the parts in a bleach solution. Although I don't think there would be many spores left on the plastic compared to wooden components that didn't even have an outbreak of AFB. It would depend on the parts themselves as to whether there were sharp corners that would harbor the spores. It is always best to have rounded corners in plastic molds and given that bees are not fussy I would think the mold designers took this liberty.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Rader Sidetrack said:


> Lets see, the _steam cleaner_ specs show steam at 319 degrees F, but you claim the plastic will not even reach 212 degrees Fahrenheit?


That temperature can only be achieve under pressure. Once it leave the nozzle it goes to atmospheric and will drop like a rock as the distance from the nozzle is increased. Then there is the issue that plastic is more of a heat insulator so it would take a constant steam blast at a point to get it to 212 degrees. Most people would not use a steam cleaner in that fashion (well maybe one would). They would let the steam fan out to cover more area because all they are trying to achieve is get the wax and propolise off the frames. The disinfection comes later.

What do you think would happen if the steam was 319 degrees when used to pressure wash vinyl siding? Think about it.


----------



## BeeCurious

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> Ok then the question is what is PermaComb made of or better yet is it made of polypropylene like the flow hive
> Snip


An article in the November 7, 1985 issue of New Scientists says that the Perma-comb is made from *high-density polyethylene. *

https://books.google.com/books?id=BeA7E-RPHGkC&pg=PA31&dq=Perma-comb&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Szr-VNflJMjIsASY44LIAQ&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAA


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

A _fine_ reference you provided there to support your claim, Ace! :lpf:



> ... so it would take a constant steam blast at a point to get it to 212 degrees.


Yes, *you *were the one that specified a "_steam cleaner_" (post #818) to clean the Flow Hive frames.


I'm going to do you a _favor _here, Ace, and _NOT _ask you to explain this statement ...


> Then there is the issue that plastic is more of a heat insulator ...


:lpf:


:gh:

.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



BeeCurious said:


> An article in the November 7, 1985 issue of New Scientists says that the Perma-comb is made from *high-density polyethylene. *
> 
> https://books.google.com/books?id=BeA7E-RPHGkC&pg=PA31&dq=Perma-comb&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Szr-VNflJMjIsASY44LIAQ&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAA


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-density_polyethylene



> High-density polyethylene, unlike polypropylene, cannot withstand normally required autoclaving conditions.


So there is a time issue with HDPE.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



BernhardHeuvel said:


> Guess I go and eat some of my words. :thumbsup:


Bernhard, you enjoying your lunch?


----------



## MAXANT

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

This is exciting to see! 
Very unique, and I think it will be a hit!


----------



## gfbees13

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Ok, I might be a little lazy here , but not wanting to read all 43 pages of this thread, (is this a new record?), I'd like to know: Is the Flow Hive mainly getting a yay or nay from the Beesource community? In fact, I think I'll start a poll...


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Two answers: ingenious, yes. Otherwise, no from me. I think the word management has been missed in their ads, and I don't have that "good" feeling in my gut.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>In fact, I think I'll start a poll...

So you want everyone to judge something they have never seen... sounds completely scientific and unbiased to me.


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> >In fact, I think I'll start a poll...
> 
> So you want everyone to judge something they have never seen... sounds completely scientific and unbiased to me.


:lpf: good one. G


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> >In fact, I think I'll start a poll...
> 
> So you want everyone to judge something they have never seen... sounds completely scientific and unbiased to me.


Polls are usually opinions aren't they? :lookout:


----------



## Cabin

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I may be willing to buy ONE frame to hang on the wall. Sort of a start for a 'bad idea that sounded good' collection.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



gfbees13 said:


> Ok, I might be a little lazy here , but not wanting to read all 43 pages of this thread, [HIGHLIGHT](is this a new record?)[/HIGHLIGHT]


Yes. 

The previous winner in the the thread 'post count' race was Treatment Free Commercial Beekeepers which currently has 846 posts. So now this thread beats that record.

This issue came up in the 1000 Guests thread in 2013, which is a _fun_ read all by itself! Here is a post I made to that 1000 Guests thread:



Rader Sidetrack said:


> > What is the most posts ever on a single thread.
> 
> There are 3 "sticky" threads with larger post counts (bloom dates, honey prices, and swarm dates), but otherwise, the granddaddy of them all is:
> 
> Treatment Free Commercial Beekeepers
> 845 posts with 39,800 views as of this posting. Last post is by _Tim Ives_. :lookout:


(click the blue arrow in the quote box to see the original post/thread)



Of course, since Tailgator posts aren't included in my count, Mark B may disagree with me :lpf: but then Mark was _wrong_ about this Flow Hive thread way back at post #288:
http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...&p=1224973&highlight=record+books#post1224973

k:


... pot stirred sufficiently for now ...


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> So you want everyone to judge something they have never seen...


Beekeepers _never _do that ...


----------



## Tilopa

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> So you want everyone to judge something they have never seen...


So, you can't have an opinion about something if you have not seen it, even if you have a detailed description of it?


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

This thread is about 22 pages. The old main PermaComb thread was more than 50...


----------



## cg3

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Tilopa said:


> So, you can't have an opinion about something if you have not seen it, even if you have a detailed description of it?


Reigion belongs in Tailgater.


----------



## Tilopa

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I can't believe the hype around this thing. I've had a dozen people email me about this talking like it was the greatest invention to ever come along. As if it will cure cancer or something. 

I don't get it. They're using artificial comb in a contraption they suggest will revolutionize beekeeping. 

Experience and my gut tell me the real flaws of this system have not presented themselves yet.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> This thread is about 22 pages. The old main PermaComb thread was more than 50...


In the current Beesource _vBulletin _forum/database, there are no threads exceeding 840 posts other than the ones mentioned in post #852. Certainly it could be that there _was _a thread with more posts in a different forum software at one time, but unless you know of a secret archive it does not seem to be available/accessible.




... does a tree falling in the forest make a noise if there is no one around to hear it?


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Someone with a bit of sense getting a hair of coverage about the flow hive on cnn in their money subforum.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/03/11/smallbusiness/bees-flow-hive-fundraising/index.html?iid=HP_River


----------



## njlynch1925

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

There is also a company called lotron industries they sterilize medial equipment , food equipment plastics etc that will do bee hives. from what I'm told the electrical beam sterilizes everything in a flash but does not melt the bees wax. this may be a good way to clean the frames fro AFB there address is 4394 E park 30 columbia city IN. 260-212-1722


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Inside Man was kind of incomplete. I didn't see anything about the Flow Hive. Maybe it was in the first half hour that I missed or during the part when I fell asleep.


----------



## DanielD

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

OK, I want to be included on the biggest thread. I feel better now. Go honey flow.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

You were in missouri until you did that, weren't you DanielD?


----------



## BeeCurious

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



BeeCurious said:


> The Honey Flow Frames are interesting but I'm saving up for one of these.





MAXANT said:


> This is exciting to see!
> Very unique, and I think it will be a hit!




Were you commenting on the device that I mentioned in my post? 

It is unique, I only wish that it had a longer power cord....


----------



## beekuk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



BeeCurious said:


> It is unique, I only wish that it had a longer power cord....


I liked that, but obviously only built for use by hobbyists, i also think with a longer power cord it could be of more use to commercial/business users.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

...but with a gas engine the unit could unplug itself even if it was further from the outlet than your extension cords.:scratch:


----------



## MAXANT

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Yes,
I have already placed my order for 50 cord unplugging robots!


BeeCurious said:


> Were you commenting on the device that I mentioned in my post?
> 
> It is unique, I only wish that it had a longer power cord....


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



MAXANT said:


> This is exciting to see!
> Very unique, and I think it will be a hit!


Twice now, in my list of subscribed threads, Maxant has had the last word in this thread for a couple of days... Isn't that a little bit funny? :lookout:

But seriously, the longer this goes, the more it seems the Flow™ frames will settle into a fairly limited niche market. A gizmo sold in the catalogs, in the same section as honey extractors.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Maybe the maxant facility will make a SS fitting to connect a cow milking machine to a standard 10 frame box. Add a cream separator and you can get royal jelly at the same time.


----------



## MAXANT

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

We tried, didn't work. 


deknow said:


> Maybe the maxant facility will make a SS fitting to connect a cow milking machine to a standard 10 frame box. Add a cream separator and you can get royal jelly at the same time.


----------



## mgolden

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



deknow said:


> Maybe the maxant facility will make a SS fitting to connect a cow milking machine to a standard 10 frame box. Add a cream separator and you can get royal jelly at the same time.


:applause: And get creamed honey!


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I was at a bee convention this weekend and had the pleasure of speaking to someone that has a flow hive in his bee yard.
He was very enthusiastic about it and the folks that developed it. 
He said at first he was very skeptical about the whole thing but after setting it up and trying it he realized it worked as it is advertized to do. His bees worked it without hesitation. Set up and harvesting was as easy as advertized. The folks that developed were very passionate and open about the system and beekeeping in general. He felt they were genuine and down to earth. They are somewhat overwhelmed by the response.
He is looking forward to a second season with the unit. What he is really excited sbout is the ability to harvest single frames as they fill so he can taste the nuances of flavour as his bees work different plants. This can be done with traditional hives but takes more effort. Apparently you can turn it on for a moment for a taste and turn it off again if you don't want to empty the frame at that time. He also said the honey really does have different taste compared to standard extraction methods...he now thinks that standard extraction does impact upon flavour.
It will be interesting to chat with him again after a second with the system.
Apparently they went with Indiegogo not Kickstarter as Indiegogo had such faith and entusiasm for the product they guaranteed them the $70,000 goal even if they didn't achieve it. Seems Indiegogo knows a good thing when they see it.


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I thought the Flow Hive was not inpoduction yet? How did your friend get one?


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

He was approached by the company to try it and they sent him one to use


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



WBVC said:


> He was approached by the company to try it and they sent him one to use


I really hope the inventors are on the up and up with this; they received so much money! And I do find this Flow Hive uniquely inventive too. Did he mention any honey bees bothering him when the honey was " flowing" out the frame into the jar or did he do this inside somewhere?


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Rader Sidetrack said:


> Yes.


Barry forced this to happen by denying anyone from starting new threads and combining new threads that were started previously.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Here's a newsflash for you, Ace ... Barry _owns _Beesource! :lpf: ... and can do _anything _he thinks is appropriate!



FYI, its only the _inappropriate _threads (like the one _you_ started - after being told not to) that got combined. To wit, a Flow Hive thread: 
http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?308655-Do-I-need-to-buy-bees


:gh:

.


----------



## rwlaw

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I have not been following this thead so I don't know if this situation has been mentioned. I just got a call from a friend of a friend. 
The conversation went along the lines of "How much does it cost to get set up with a hive that the honey drains out the back?" After a few questions, I got the whole thing she was getting at.
She had no idea that there was a colony of bees needed to make the honey to "flow out the back". She thought that you set the box in the yard and bees go after her flowers, magically deposit in the box and she comes along and puts the jar under the pipe "like they show in the advertising". 
When I'm having a bad hair day, I'm going to remember her and get a chuckle.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

He said he has no doubt they are on the up and up.

He did not mention issues when collecting honey but as a very learned and experienced beek I expect he collected through a lid portal.




Cloverdale said:


> I really hope the inventors are on the up and up with this; they received so much money! And I do find this Flow Hive uniquely inventive too. Did he mention any honey bees bothering him when the honey was " flowing" out the frame into the jar or did he do this inside somewhere?


----------



## Agis Apiaries

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

They look interesting. Perhaps I'll try one, but I'll give it a few years. By that time, all of the current non-beekeepers who have watched Flow-hive's horribly misleading videos will realize that just buying the hive, setting it in your yard, and grabbing a bottle of honey every weekend won't work. These videos are terrible. They make no mention about what is involved in beekeeping and ensuring the survival of a colony. Give it a couple of years. The market will be flooded with Flow-hives that have been abandoned by new folks who have given up and at cheap prices!


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I wish I didn't, but I'm afraid I agree 100% Agis. For those that keep bees, its obvious, for those that don't, its a "dream come true". Magical even........... G


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Be aware the videos were shot in Australia. 

There are no varroa mites, and winter by USA standards does not exist. If it's anything like my country before mites came, hives were permanent, they didn't die, unless the beekeeper actually killed them. they did not go queenless in winter, that's all since varroa arrived.

The Australians operate in an environment where skilled beekeepers can do well, but completely unskilled beekeepers can also get a decent harvest plus never lose hives. I don't think the videos were designed to be misleading, rather, they were made in a place where the beekeeping can be easy, and the videos themselves were designed to promote the Flowhive, rather than be a complete _treatise_ about all aspects of keeping bees. People can refer to Beesource for that.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

OT, do Aussies use conventional bottom boards? The videos I have seen make me wonder because it looks like the hive is sitting across an empty super with some sort of flexible sheet as a landing board. Did anyone else notice that?


----------



## odfrank

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>They make no mention about what is involved in beekeeping and ensuring the survival of a colony. Give it a couple of years. The market will be flooded with Flow-hives that have been abandoned by new folks who have given up and at cheap prices!

So true. This can be said about all hobby beekeeping equipment. In the last eight years everybody and the housewife next door has become a beekeeper, and Craigslist is already flooded with almost brand new equipment for sale. Yesterday I saw adds by guys selling brand new assembled painted deeps they were manufacturing, for $12 and $15. Where is the profit?


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

The only ones I've seen in Aussie are standard basic solid bottom boards. Maybe one of the Aussie members could chip in with more info.

One commercial outfit in New Zealand use a 1/2 depth box with holes in the sides, instead of a bottom board, don't know why they do it that way.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Off topic - Frank, care to post a link to those deeps? I hate painting!


----------



## Stephenpbird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

So Flow hive is just short of 7 million or 1000% over target, at $ 6,800,845. I wonder how many years a "regular" commercial beekeeper has to work to get that sort of turnover? Of course they have raised that in less than a month. Are they the most successful beekeepers of all time (in dollar terms)? 

I don't think I will buy anything from them, but I really do respect what they have achieved so far.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

What exactly have they achieved? Does it speak more about their product or about the people who parted with their money? It all feels pretty bazaar to me. Something feels way out of balance.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

They have developed a product, that at the moment is unique to them, that apparently a lot of people want and are willing to part with their money to get. It is something new and different. That is enough to draw in many people, others seem to think it makes keeping bees more fun and/or easier. They have managed to capture the imagination of many. The question remains as to what will happen with this product in the long run. Is it a huge flash in the pan or something that over time will change the face of bee keeping.


----------



## Stephenpbird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

They have decided to start a business with a product designed and produced themselves (farther and son team :thumbsup that takes guts and is an achievement in it self. 

They then decided on a business plan which launched their product, raised nearly 7 million dollars, created a huge amount of awareness worldwide. That's an achievement.

They have encouraged many new beekeeper to take up beekeeping. Some here seem to think that is a betrayal of the old ways, but even if only 1% of those new beekeeper carry on for a few years and introduce others or more importantly children to beekeeping. That is and will be a very important achievement.

Spending time with Dad/Son beekeeping as a hobby for over ten years. Coming up with a beekeeping invention. Starting their own business. Raising nearly $7 million. Introducing many people to beekeeping worldwide. WHATS not to admire. Seems very balanced to me.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Don't mean to throw a wet towel on this, but I wonder what unintended consequences might be felt by new beekeepers and the beekeeping community in general if this ends up being a complete failure in real life. With all the publicity and exposure this is getting, what would the public's perception of the beekeeping industry be then. In the end, would it help or hurt beekeeping?

The other 99% who buy the product and "don't" carry on because they did not fully understand what else is required to keep bees .... I wonder if they might believe they were taken advantage of.

My hat's off to this father and son team. They have accomplished a remarkable feat. But I have a gut feeling this whole phenomenon is racing forward way too fast, and will eventually prove to be one of those ingenious inventions that unfortunately is not at all practical in the real world. I hope I'm totally wrong, and one day someone can say to me ... "told you so".


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I don't think they have delivered a frame yet to a customer (M. Bush got his free!). So they may end up with 8 million by time the campaign is over, but they will need to deliver 8 million dollars worth of sales. Not sure how much profit they built into the price, but they have a decent amount of startup costs that are going to hit them really quick, and if they don't have the right people helping them spend that money wisely they could be bankrupt in a year. 

I do admire them though. They came up with an idea and have marketed it successfully. Now on to fulfillment. That reminds me, where is my free shipping stuff from Kelly's!


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Barry said:


> What exactly have they achieved? Does it speak more about their product or about the people who parted with their money? It all feels pretty bazaar to me. Something feels way out of balance.


:thumbsup:

It seems out of balance to me too. Im not bashing anyone, I wish them well, and think its an interesting idea. My concern would be, when one seeks 70,000 for startup, and winds up with 8,000,000, that's 1000+ times the plan one had or support they counted on. With the right business partnership, it should be able to be handled, but I think that family business is out the window, they are going to have to start a whole lot bigger than they anticipated if they don't want to destroy customer service from jump street. I imagine there has been more than a few hours of sleep lost once this scope was realized. I wish them all the best. G


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Well, that is approximately *100*+ times the original plan ...


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



WBVC said:


> The question remains as to what will happen with this product in the long run.


Well here is the thing about a very good idea. If they don't do something with it some one else will because it doesn't change the fact that it is a good idea.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shannonswyatt said:


> So they may end up with 8 million by time the campaign is over, but they will need to deliver 8 million dollars worth of sales.


Of for God's sake with 8 million dollars you could have 100,000 unites in 6 months. They had no idea this would take off the way it did. They are beekeepers not pin striped suits on wall street.


----------



## Ian

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I viewed a video on facebook the other day. What a neat idea! Hats off to those boys, make a fortune! 

Best of luck to them... Right guys...?


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> doesn't change the fact that it is a good idea.


It's an idea. It's not a fact that it's a good or bad idea. Only time will reveal that once it's in the hands of a lot of beekeepers and put through the paces. Your feeling about it doesn't make it fact for anyone else.


----------



## honeyman46408

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I think time will reveal that some one made a bunch of money and split JMO

http://article.wn.com/view/2015/02/24/Fresh_honey_on_tap_Beehive_invention_nets_2_million/


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Rader Sidetrack said:


> Well, that is approximately *100*+ times the original plan ...


Thanks Rader, my finger must have got stuck on the 000000000 button. Well, that way I don't have to blame it on my brain. Premise still remains the same.(only 10x less) G


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Barry said:


> It's not a fact that it's a good or bad idea.


Sure it is. That is what a fact is, something that can be proven true or false. Whether you recognize it as a good idea doesn't change the fact that it is. There are always people who are apprehensive when a good idea stares them in the face. Then there are those that are not.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Fact: a thing that is indisputably the case
Idea: a thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action, a concept or mental impression, an opinion or belief

Since there's a lot of disputing going on, we know it's not a fact! :digging:


----------



## trapperdirk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I know this has been their baby, that they have nursed along for ten long years. But unless they want Flow Hive to become their entire life, I would not be surprised if this invention, the patent, or just rights to manufacture and market are sold to another entity.

I certainly would not want the additional headaches of getting overwhelmed with an overnight international enterprise. In fact, I would be surprised if they have not already been approached with such an offer.

BTW, I think it is novel, ingenious, great for the backyarder/hobbyist, and shows potential for commercial development. Keep in mind that I kept bees over 30 years ago in high school and quit when college and military service came around. I am just getting back into it, so my opinion doesn't count for a whole lot!!!! 

Oh and another thing, none of my new equipment had instructions on how to keep bees in this new era of beekeeping, I've had to find mentors, buy some books, and get a lot of info here on Bee Source. So those who are saying the Flow Hive guys are not giving the Whole picture about keeping bees the "right" way, had better start a new thread about *ALL* bee supply companies withholding their info too!!!!

And no, I have not purchased any of their product.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



> So those who are saying the Flow Hive guys are not giving the Whole picture about keeping bees the "right" way, had better start a new thread about *ALL* bee supply companies withholding their info too!!!!



You make a good point about traditional suppliers not making instructions readily available on beekeeping methods and procedures describing how to properly use the equipment they are selling. I guess we should not assume the manufacturer of this product be required to do anything differently.

New beekeepers should ask questions or take the time to do their own research before they take the plunge into beekeeping. As you mentioned, there are many resources at our fingertips to learn about beekeeping. Most traditional and new equipment has been field tested and complete instructions are readily available for someone interested in doing a little research. 

Other than the advertising, what information is available on this product? Where is the field trial data? A few individuals tested the units during "part" of last year and verify that it mechanically functions as advertised. We still don't even have a full season of data to review, if I'm not mistaken. Everyone is purchasing these units with no comprehensive field data yet, "assuming" that it will work for them. I find that odd and curious.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Mike Gillmore said:


> Everyone is purchasing these units with no comprehensive field data yet, "assuming" that it will work for them. I find that odd and curious.


Has anyone ever gotten any field data on a brand new model car they bought? That doesn't usually happen until the second owner researches the recall log on that model. And very few people do that.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

New Car? 

The one where you turn the crank and honey comes out? :scratch:  
What car model is that, Ace? :lpf:


:bus


----------



## Mike Gillmore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

This is brand new untested technology, Ace. 

Cars have been around for decades, we have a little bit of history on them. If suddenly there was a car on the market that ran on water, but had no real historical data available on performance, and sold for $100,000 would you run out and buy one on faith ... hoping it works as advertised?


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

End of day, they decided after working on it ten years it was time to go to market.

Their goal of an initial $70,000 shows that they were not expecting to take the world by storm. But people liked it & are buying.

I'm pretty certain that in a couple of years people will find the product has worked as described, provided the hive has been run properly. As with getting any decent honey crop it will be necessary to have a strong healthy hive on a good nectar flow. 

Some people will not have run their hives properly thinking the bees will perform miracles that they cannot, so there will be negative reviews. Others will be claiming success.


----------



## Stephenpbird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



biggraham610 said:


> :thumbsup:
> My concern would be, when one seeks 70,000 for startup, and winds up with 8,000,000, that's 1000+ times the plan one had or support they counted on.


 Once you hit your target the % you pay indigo goes down, so it makes sense to set your target lower than the amount you hope to raise. But I agree 1000% must have been a big surprise.
With people now paying for shipping, this amount is included in the total amount raised. So the total amount raised could jump up more than 1/2 million just for shipping.


----------



## Mr.Beeman

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I saw another video where the frame of honey was extracted and ALL the wax capping remained in tact covering the cells. The manufacturer stated that the bees will remove all the cappings, fill with nectar and reuse the wax cappings to seal off the honey when it is ready.
My take is that the bees will think there is capped honey behind the cappings and leave the cappings in place. One would have to remove the cappings the old fashioned way then. Not to mention reusing the wax over and over must harbor trace amounts of pesticides/herbicides/pollutants (from the bees over time) to the point it would be harmful to the bees and humans?


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I'm not worried about them reusing capping. They can't use it all for sure, and besides, you will have to pull these in the winter. Clean them for next year. Not exactly sure how that is done though.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Easy to clean....just place it on an anthill.


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

LOL








Just a joke...go easy lol


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

If the inventers truly stated that bees reuse cappings it shows how little they know about beekeeping. makes ya wonder.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

When I spoke with the owner of one of these hives he says it only takes a few moments for the bees to realize something is different. They then open the cells and refill.




Mr.Beeman said:


> I saw another video where the frame of honey was extracted and ALL the wax capping remained in tact covering the cells. The manufacturer stated that the bees will remove all the cappings, fill with nectar and reuse the wax cappings to seal off the honey when it is ready.
> My take is that the bees will think there is capped honey behind the cappings and leave the cappings in place. One would have to remove the cappings the old fashioned way then. Not to mention reusing the wax over and over must harbor trace amounts of pesticides/herbicides/pollutants (from the bees over time) to the point it would be harmful to the bees and humans?


----------



## odfrank

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Here is an article about the tax consequences of crowdfunding. Does Australia have income tax? 

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Entrepreneurs-can-get-tripped-up-by-taxes-on-6146376.php


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



odfrank said:


> Does Australia have income tax?


It's Australia, not another planet. 

From your link about the woman with the diaper bag - “We didn’t even think twice about how the taxes would affect us,” she said.

Someone starting a business via crowdfunding or any other means, will hit problems if they forget to take into account income tax.

I doubt those Aussies would be that foolish.

Even in Australia various signs of western civilisation can be found. One of those being a breed of people called "accountants".


----------



## beemandan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> It's Australia, not another planet.


We know....but....it's on the wrong side of the planet


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

It's much closer if you take the tunnel.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Don't live in Aussie myself but my daughter does, here is a pic of one of my very cute granddaughters checking out the kangaroos that move through their back yard sometimes.


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Right on two fronts Oldtimer, those are definitely Kangaroos, and you have a very cute Granddaughter. Congratulations. G


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Agree with biggraham! Great picture of her, she is a very pretty little girl. You must miss them.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

HoneyFlow has just partnered with a furniture maker to build a Premium Flow Hive to be given away as part of a raffle to support Vanuatu Cyclone Relief:










It looks pretty spiffy! I just bought one ticket for $5.00. Raffle draws in 3 days.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

And now starts another round of fund raising!


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Barry said:


> And now starts another round of fund raising!


Yeah, but HoneyFlow won't get any of it. The video says "every penny of your donation" will go to cyclone relief. From that I'd assume they're donating the guts of one Flow hive, and this furniture guy is donating his time and materials. They're partnering with Oxfam, which is a pretty reputable NGO.


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> Don't live in Aussie myself but my daughter does, here is a pic of one of my very cute granddaughters checking out the kangaroos that move through their back yard sometimes.


They look like western grey and your GD is a real cute one...but then they grow up. 
I'm inland from Maroochydore and the picture could be taken not too far from here. If you visit her, drop in.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



max2 said:


> but then they grow up.


Ha Ha ain't that the truth. Went through it with my own kids, couldn't walk down the street without people stopping us to say what a great looking bunch of kids. Then they grew up LOL!

Actually should say it's not all that bad, they all now have lovely happy families of their own.

That's a very kind invite Max, I'm planning a trip this winter, but it's Melbourne. Would have enjoyed a visit with you though would have been great!


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Melbourne!
Yes, mine are 18 and 19 and not interested in bees anymore. They both where when they where smaller.
Maybe the FLOW hive will bring them back

One day you may make it a little further North. I plan to hang around a bit longer.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> HoneyFlow has just partnered with a furniture maker to build a Premium Flow Hive to be given away as part of a raffle to support Vanuatu Cyclone Relief:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It looks pretty spiffy! I just bought one ticket for $5.00. Raffle draws in 3 days.


Well, they just crossed $8M in support (with another 4 days to go).

There are close to 22,000 'supporters' and I suspect the vast majority are naive and enthusiastic aspiring newbie beeks.

Still, an impressive campaign and these guys deserve kudos for firing the populations imagination and bringing so many aspiring beekeepers across the transome and into the world of beekeeping (even if many/most of then end up petering out after a season or two).

Also, looks like your ticket didn't end up getting drawn since the Premium Flow Hive winner is Jason A. of Washington DC, but if you've got deep enough pockets, it appears that they are going to be selling the Premium Flow Hive as well: http://www.honeyflow.com/shop/premium-hive/p/95


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I really don't think those dove tails are going to work out in an exterior environment.


----------



## trapperdirk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I don't see why a dovetail joint would have any problems. It is essentially the same as a finger joint on most standard hives, just cut at a fitted angle to add strength.

The only problem I would have would be my reluctance to paint and cover up the beautiful woodwork.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

The way they have done it the finger is not equal and the dovetail is cut right through instead of being a pocket with less exposed end grain.
People put fine furniture in storage and make the mistake of covering it in plastic. This holds the moisture in and causes the dovetail joints that are pocketed to split out. Of course all the table legs loosen up also. A dovetail joint is no stronger than a finger joint in soft wood.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>> make the mistake of covering it in plastic.

So who is going to cover their dove-tailed Premium Flow Hive with _plastic_ sheeting? :scratch: :kn:


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I don't suppose anyone will but they might consider putting it in their living room to keep the rain off it.


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

The Premium Flow Hive is a beautiful piece of equipment. I could never afford one, but it is beautiful nonetheless.


Maybe this has already been mentioned, but, speaking of costs, I just noticed that they are pricing the Flow Hive frames at $280 for 4 frames, which is not a surprise since the cost to manufacture such intricate pieces of plastic must be hive. However, at $700 AUS (about $530 US Dollars) to fill out a 10-frame box, it appears that only wealthy hobbyists are going to be using this technology.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shinbone said:


> The Premium Flow Hive is a beautiful piece of equipment. I could never afford one, but it is beautiful nonetheless.
> 
> 
> Maybe this has already been mentioned, but, speaking of costs, I just noticed that they are pricing the Flow Hive frames at $280 for 4 frames, which is not a surprise since the cost to manufacture such intricate pieces of plastic must be hive. However, at $700 AUS (about $530 US Dollars) to fill out a 10-frame box, it appears that only wealthy hobbyists are going to be using this technology.


First, the Flow Frames are 2" wide, so a 10-frame box holds 7, not 10.

Second, they are selling (or rather 'perking'  a set of 7 frames for $400, not $490.

And third, all of the pre-launch pricing was established when their goal was to raise $70,000 to manufacture approximately 1000 of these frames. Now that they have recieved over $8M and need to tool up to deliver close to 15,000 Flow Frames by late this year, their cost of goods and the prices at which they can sell these frames is likely come to way down (well below half).

Despite the appearance of being exceedingly intricate, these Flow frames are based on 2 clear plastic endbars, 2 small clear plastic plugs, and 2 yellow plastic comb pieces that are needed for ever 1/2" depth of comb (all held together with a piece of wire). All of those clear plastic bits, the wire, and the labor to assemble the frame will cost something, but the cost of goods will be dominated by the 35 inner and 35 outer vertical 'slices' that make up a stanadard 18" Langstroth-depth frame. In high volume, cost of those inner and outer slices will be dominated by the quantity of plastic they contain and plastic foundation provides a good proxy for where prices can go if these Flow Frames ever become mainstream.

A single deep frame of plastic Ritecell foundation is priced at about $1 in volume (meaning the manufacturing cost was below that) and just eyeballing it, a single frame looks like a reasonably good proxy for the amount of plastic needed for about 8 of these inner or outer slices (or about 4"-worth of frame depth). So all of the yellow plastic slices needed to make up a standard Langstroth-depth Flow Frame are likely to cost less than $5.

In High volumes I suspect the all-in manufacturing cost of these Flow Frames is likely to be below $10 which would mean they could easily be priced below $20, meaning less than $140 for a full Lang deeps-worth of frames.

You are certainly correct that at currently-proposed pre-launch pricing, this is a product for deep-pocketed and primarily inexperienced beeks, but if the technology works as promised and doesn't get clogged, or break, or wear out after a few seasons, I believe they will easily be able to reach pricing that makes their products attractive to the entire hobbiest community, rich and miserly alike.

There are other more important challanges than just cost for the commercial market, but if throughput and cost of extraction (as well as the reliability concerns raised above) can be proven over the course of 5-7 years to be comparable or possibly even lower than conventional extraction, the capital investment for a deep box full of 7 of these Flow Frames at commercial scale can probably approach $50 per box ($7 per frame)...


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

There is one thing you have left out. Selling the parts and let the customer assemble the frames. China is doing very well at this game (some assembly required). Beekeepers have all the time in the world to assemble these frames themselves.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> There is one thing you have left out. Selling the parts and let the customer assemble the frames. China is doing very well at this game (some assembly required). Beekeepers have all the time in the world to assemble these frames themselves.


I had thought of that but overlooked to include it. Kits for the commercial beeks would probably not be terribly attractive, but for the typical DIY hobbiest beek, it would make a lot of sense.

In kit form, the manufacturing cost for all the plastic bits and the wire is probably close to $5 in volume, meaning a hobbiest kit price of $15 should be very doable.

As another reality-check, deep frames of Honey a Super a Cell fully-drawn combs cost $7 each in lots of 20. The HSC combs are 1" wide (1-3/8 w/ endbars) while the Flow Frame combs are 1-5/8" wide (2" w/ endbars), meaning the a Flow Frame probably contains less than twice the plastic of a frame of HSC. In kit form, the cost of the plastic itself will dominate cost of goods, meaning it should eventually be possible to purchase Flow Frames for less than $14 in lots of 20.

21 Flow Frames for under $300 would translate into $100 to outfit a hive with 7 a Flow Frames. If the work as advertised and are available in kit-form at that price, I suspect they would take the hobbiest beekeeping community by storm and would certainly outsell frames of Honey Super a Cell...

$70 for a deep box's worth of 10 frames of HSC compared to $100 for a deep box's worth of 7 Flow Frames would be a pretty easy decision (again, assuming the in-hive extraction method delivers as advertised .


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Well, Flow Hive just extended the IndieGoGo campaign for another two weeks to April 19th: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/flow-hive-honey-on-tap-directly-from-your-beehive#activity

They have been pretty consistently reeling in about $100K in contributions per day and if they maintain that pace through to the end, they will certainly surpass the $9M mark and have an outside shot of reaching $10M.

They are at $8.2M from close to 23,000 'Funders' as of today...

They have already set the IndieGoGo record for the most successful crowd funding campaign ever and reaching the $8.8M level will make them the 8th most successful crowd funding campaign of all time on any platform (the majority of the top ten being on Kickstarter). This last fact has no doubt contributed to IndieGoGo's motivation to extent the campaign by two weeks.


----------



## sqkcrk

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> I really don't think those dove tails are going to work out in an exterior environment.


Why not?


----------



## BMB

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Any thoughts on getting the Bee Suit they are offering. Seems like a pretty good price for suit, gloves and hive tool. 

http://www.honeyflow.com/shop/bee-suits/p/96

Now only if they would ship the suits with the Flow Hive that would be great! I really do not want to have to pay another shipping charge from Australia


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



BMB said:


> Any thoughts on getting the Bee Suit they are offering. Seems like a pretty good price for suit, gloves and hive tool.
> 
> http://www.honeyflow.com/shop/bee-suits/p/96
> 
> Now only if they would ship the suits with the Flow Hive that would be great! I really do not want to have to pay another shipping charge from Australia


The suits not a bad deal, but you can only get it once you pay shipping on a flow hive perk (which means you have first donate at least $230 to be _eligible_ to order the suit...).

How much have you already donated?


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> In kit form, the manufacturing cost for all the plastic bits and the wire is probably close to $5 in volume, meaning a hobbiest kit price of $15 should be very doable.


It is not the cost of the pieces it is the cost of shipping half way around the world or setting up an assembly plant in the US. But there are plenty of injection molding houses everywhere in the US. So they could be making these parts in a month over here and not have to invest in an assembly plant or contract for assembly and then again shipping is more expensive assembled then unassembled.


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> First, the Flow Frames are 2" wide, so a 10-frame box holds 7, not 10.
> 
> Second, they are selling (or rather 'perking'  a set of 7 frames for $400, not $490.
> 
> And third, all of the pre-launch pricing was established when their goal was to raise $70,000 to manufacture approximately 1000 of these frames. Now that they have recieved over $8M and need to tool up to deliver close to 15,000 Flow Frames by late this year, their cost of goods and the prices at which they can sell these frames is likely come to way down (well below half).
> 
> Despite the appearance of being exceedingly intricate, these Flow frames are based on 2 clear plastic endbars, 2 small clear plastic plugs, and 2 yellow plastic comb pieces that are needed for ever 1/2" depth of comb (all held together with a piece of wire). All of those clear plastic bits, the wire, and the labor to assemble the frame will cost something, but the cost of goods will be dominated by the 35 inner and 35 outer vertical 'slices' that make up a stanadard 18" Langstroth-depth frame. In high volume, cost of those inner and outer slices will be dominated by the quantity of plastic they contain and plastic foundation provides a good proxy for where prices can go if these Flow Frames ever become mainstream.
> 
> A single deep frame of plastic Ritecell foundation is priced at about $1 in volume (meaning the manufacturing cost was below that) and just eyeballing it, a single frame looks like a reasonably good proxy for the amount of plastic needed for about 8 of these inner or outer slices (or about 4"-worth of frame depth). So all of the yellow plastic slices needed to make up a standard Langstroth-depth Flow Frame are likely to cost less than $5.
> 
> In High volumes I suspect the all-in manufacturing cost of these Flow Frames is likely to be below $10 which would mean they could easily be priced below $20, meaning less than $140 for a full Lang deeps-worth of frames.
> 
> You are certainly correct that at currently-proposed pre-launch pricing, this is a product for deep-pocketed and primarily inexperienced beeks, but if the technology works as promised and doesn't get clogged, or break, or wear out after a few seasons, I believe they will easily be able to reach pricing that makes their products attractive to the entire hobbiest community, rich and miserly alike.
> 
> There are other more important challanges than just cost for the commercial market, but if throughput and cost of extraction (as well as the reliability concerns raised above) can be proven over the course of 5-7 years to be comparable or possibly even lower than conventional extraction, the capital investment for a deep box full of 7 of these Flow Frames at commercial scale can probably approach $50 per box ($7 per frame)...



I was just going by the info on their website. If it is incorrect, they should fix it. Also, if it takes only 7 of their frames to fill a 10-frame box, they should make that clear on their website.

Everything in your post about the price dropping is speculation.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shinbone said:


> I was just going by the info on their website. If it is incorrect, they should fix it. Also, if it takes only 7 of their frames to fill a 10-frame box, they should make that clear on their website.
> 
> Everything in your post about the price dropping is your speculation.


Absolutely - complete speculation. If enough people want to keep paying $600 + shipping for a modified Lang Deep and 7 of these frames, the price is very likely to stay close to that (though commercial use of the Flow technology is far less likely at that price point, or at least wil take far longer to adopt).

I have not spent much time on their website but found this pretty easily: http://www.honeyflow.com/faqs/p/22?tag=25

If you click on thethe second FAQ regarding Langstroth hives and Flow a Frames you will see this:

"The Flow™ Frames will fit either an 8 or 10-frame Langstroth. Six Flow™ Frames fit into a full “8 frame, deep,” and the 10-frame super takes 7 Flow™ Frames as they are wider than traditional frames. It is also possible to have a combination of traditional Langstroth frames and Flow™ Frames in the one Super."


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> It is not the cost of the pieces it is the cost of shipping half way around the world or setting up an assembly plant in the US. But there are plenty of injection molding houses everywhere in the US. So they could be making these parts in a month over here and not have to invest in an assembly plant or contract for assembly and then again shipping is more expensive assembled then unassembled.


If you are correct, the same economics would apply to the Honey Super Cell frames. In following the same manufacturing flow (including shipping) as HSC uses, they should able to sell in kit form below 2X the price of an HSC frame once manufacturing volumes are similar (if they want to .

I don't know if HSC frames are molded here on the states or molded in Asia and shipped here, but whatever it is, is provides a decent proxy for an upper limit on lowest possible high volume costs of manufacturing...


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> As another reality-check, deep frames of Honey a Super a Cell fully-drawn combs cost $7 each in lots of 20. The HSC combs are 1" wide (1-3/8 w/ endbars) while the Flow Frame combs are 1-5/8" wide (2" w/ endbars), meaning the a Flow Frame probably contains less than twice the plastic of a frame of HSC. In kit form, the cost of the plastic itself will dominate cost of goods, meaning it should eventually be possible to purchase Flow Frames for less than $14 in lots of 20.
> 
> 21 Flow Frames for under $300 would translate into $100 to outfit a hive with 7 a Flow Frames. If the work as advertised and are available in kit-form at that price, I suspect they would take the hobbiest beekeeping community by storm and would certainly outsell frames of Honey Super a Cell...
> 
> $70 for a deep box's worth of 10 frames of HSC compared to $100 for a deep box's worth of 7 Flow Frames would be a pretty easy decision (again, assuming the in-hive extraction method delivers as advertised .


Unlikely they will be asking you to be their finance manager, they probably want to remain in business.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> Unlikely they will be asking you to be their finance manager, they probably want to remain in business.


Every business I've involved in has been profitable and sustainable, so I think that's not the key point.

The key point is what business.

Higher volumes = lower manufacturing costs.

Lower manufacturing costs = able to sell profitably at lower prices.

Lower prices = higher volumes of sales.

It's a virtuous cycle if you can achieve it, so the real question is what you are aiming at and how well you understand the market opportunity you are going after (and especially the elasticity of that market).

At current pricing, it is very unlikely these Flow Frames will be widely adopted by the mainstream beekeeping industry (or at least, wide penetration will take a very, very long time...).


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

With almost 24,000 donors, I would guess their market penetration is wide enough for them not to care about late adopters.


----------



## SallyD

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Just curious....I have not read every post on this thread but so far I have not seen any mention of cost. What does one of these cost?


----------



## PicnicCreek

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



SallyD said:


> Just curious....I have not read every post on this thread but so far I have not seen any mention of cost. What does one of these cost?


It varies with what you purchase. Six flow frames fit a standard 8-frame box, seven flow frames fit a standard 10-frame box.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



SallyD said:


> Just curious....I have not read every post on this thread but so far I have not seen any mention of cost. What does one of these cost?


The short answer is $400 + $88 shipping to the U.S. for 7 Flow Frames (which are enough to fill a single 10-frame Lang deep since they are 2" wide).

Or about $60-70 per frame (w/ w/o shipping to US)...


----------



## SallyD

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I know someone who is not a beekeeper and has asked me to check this item out and order one for him. The thing is ...it looks like a complete hive is $600. I assume they come unassembled? Also, what about shipping? But with that many donors....I cannot imagine you would be able to get one for this season?


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



SallyD said:


> I know someone who is not a beekeeper and has asked me to check this item out and order one for him. The thing is ...it looks like a complete hive is $600. I assume they come unassembled? Also, what about shipping? But with that many donors....I cannot imagine you would be able to get one for this season?


A full 8-frame hive is $600 + $88 shipping. I believe that is unassembled brood box and super, bottom board, English-style (peaked) top cover, 8 unassembled foundation frames for the brood box, and 6 assembled Flow Frames for the deep honey super.

If your friend will want a 10-frame set-up, an unassembled 10-frame honey super and 7 Flow Frames is $460 + shipping or a set of 7 Flow Frames alone is $400 + shipping.

The product is supposed to ship by December, so not for this season.

Also, if your friend does want an 8-frame set-up, Mann-lake is selling an assembled 8-frame hive for $85 and an 8-frame box and 6 Flow Frames is $410, so that is a bit less expensive than the full hive kit for $600 and also easier since the basic hive and frames come preassembled... (Still have to assemble the honey super).


----------



## SallyD

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



fafrd said:


> A full 8-frame hive is $600 + $88 shipping. I believe that is unassembled brood box and super, bottom board, English-style (peaked) top cover, 8 unassembled foundation frames for the brood box, and 6 assembled Flow Frames for the deep honey super.
> 
> If your friend will want a 10-frame set-up, an unassembled 10-frame honey super and 7 Flow Frames is $460 + shipping or a set of 7 Flow Frames alone is $400 + shipping.
> 
> The product is supposed to ship by December, so not for this season.
> 
> Also, if your friend does want an 8-frame set-up, Mann-lake is selling an assembled 8-frame hive for $85 and an 8-frame box and 6 Flow Frames is $410, so that is a bit less expensive than the full hive kit for $600 and also easier since the basic hive and frames come preassembled... (Still have to assemble the honey super).


Thanks! I did not realize Mann Lake was selling the Flow Hive. Actually I am encouraging my friend to wait until next year because I really want to see how these are working for beekeepers. The only one I know on Beesource that has had one is Michael Bush - he seems impressed- which is very encouraging. I would take care of the hives at an urban garden for my friend- so I want to make sure they are what they say they. Thanks again!


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



SallyD said:


> Thanks! I did not realize Mann Lake was selling the Flow Hive. Actually I am encouraging my friend to wait until next year because I really want to see how these are working for beekeepers. The only one I know on Beesource that has had one is Michael Bush - he seems impressed- which is very encouraging. I would take care of the hives at an urban garden for my friend- so I want to make sure they are what they say they. Thanks again!


Sorry, no, didn't mean to cause confusion.

Mann-Lake DOES NOT sell the Flow Hive.

Mann-Lake DOES sell a basic one-box 8-frame Lang hive set-up for $85 (assembled).

The 1-box Flow Frame honey super can be added to that for $410 (+ shipping), so you end up with a full 8-frame hive with Flow Frame honey super for under $500 instead of $600 (and also don't need to bother with assembly of the basic hive and frames).

The other reason to consider going this route is that you are not waiting for Flow to get the colony established. Start with a nuc or a swarm this season and you should have the Flow frames before next spring's honey flow.

I spoke to MB about the Flow Frames and he says they deliver as advertised. Concerns are first and foremost the cost and second the long-term reliability & lifetime of these intricate frames. It'll be years before we know if these Flow Frames hold up over time & use or not, so the only reason to hold off taking Flow up on the current offer is cost.

If your friend is serious about getting into bees, think about getting him started with a basic hive this year. If he will need a honey super, you could either lend him one or he could purchase a kit from Mann-Lake for under $15 and modify it for Flow Frames prior to assembly. I have exchanged emails with Flow and the modifications will be published this summer (two straightforward cuts).

If you wait until next spring, he will be starting a new colony and is unlikely to get much honey until 2017. If you get him started this season, you'll be able to add Flow Frames by next Spring and his overwintered colony is likely to give him a nice honey crop.

Of course there is the risk of successfully getting the colony through winter to consider, but when it comes to newbies interest in bees, I am generally a 'strike while the iron is hot' kind of beek 

If money is a problem, you may want to hold off and see where pricing for these Flow Frames goes as they work through the IndieGoGo campaign ( my prediction is down ), but if your friend has $688 to throw into this initiative, you can order the 6-frame set for $350 + $50 shipping and purchase an assembled 8-frame hive from Mann-Lake for $85 plus a budget deep super for $15, so all-in you save him $188 which is more than enough to pick up a package of bees and get started in advance of next spring...


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Flow hive opinion from an Aussie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ScDMIakxd4


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> Flow hive opinion from an Aussie
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ScDMIakxd4


He raises a lot of very good points - most of which may or may not be valid, but we won't know for at least 18-24 months...

But in any case, I believe it is exceedingly likely that there will be a large number of Flow Frames available on Craig's List in 2017...

These Flow Frames are not going to teach anyone how to master the challanges of beekeeping, and of the varios challanges involved, harvesting honey is nowhere near the top of the list.

Cool concept though, and if they function as advertised, their value as a glorified observation hive and a way for visitors (and especially kids) to harvest a bit of honey 'on the fly' is compelling and unique. I'll probably end up getting a boxes-worth of frames just for that alone...


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



fafrd said:


> He raises a lot of very good points


 they are concerns that he has not understanding the system.



> But in any case, I believe it is exceedingly likely that there will be a large number of Flow Frames available on Craig's List in 2017...


That is a common thought that I don't hold. What I think is more likely to happen is these hives will set in the back yard unattended and every once in a while they will try to harvest. Most likely they will be swarming. There could be some future legislation in the AHB states that puts restrictions on their use.
I don't think someone is going to spend 5-6 hundred on something and then decide to give it away on CL for a hundred the next year. There will be some people that take it seriously and learn to manage the hive just like what is happening now with a standard Lang. Do you see a lot of Lang hives going for next to nothing on CL? I don't.


----------



## Phoebee

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

As of this morning, Indiegogo shows they've raised $8,582,520 of the originally stated need of $70,000. At some point, shouldn't this be shut off early?

I can see this mechanism managing to crack comb and drain a frame. But then they show going out and just draining enough for a piece of bread ... I think it is all or nothing on a given frame.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I spoke to a fellow that has one. It is not all or nothing. He likes being able to taste the flavour of each frame. Not sure how it works or at what point they uncap and fill again.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Phoebee, at this point they extended the campaign. I think they did this so they could try to be ranked in the top ten or something like that of crowd sourced products. I think they won't make it much past 9 million. (which doesn't suck, I would like 9 million!)


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>I spoke to a fellow that has one. It is not all or nothing. He likes being able to taste the flavour of each frame. 

You could certainly drain them one frame at a time. It's just that it's hard to tell when everything is capped if you don't do it around the same time.

>Not sure how it works or at what point they uncap and fill again.

They will start uncapping within a day or so.

>Phoebee, at this point they extended the campaign. 

You are right. At some point I saw there was only 3 or 4 days left and now it's 13. Not sure when that was or how much, but they have extended it.

>I think they did this so they could try to be ranked in the top ten or something like that of crowd sourced products. I think they won't make it much past 9 million. (which doesn't suck, I would like 9 million!)

According to the last wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest_funded_crowdfunding_projects

They would now be #9 right now and will likely make it to #7. #1 is out of the question as it's over $78 Million.


----------



## Phoebee

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Heck, I know a fusion project that has a proposal out for 30 million for their next phase of research. Its incredible to think that crowd-sourcing can generate this kind of money. I need to get off my keister and work on my hive instrument package some more.


----------



## arnaud

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Phoebee said:


> As of this morning, Indiegogo shows they've raised $8,582,520 of the originally stated need of $70,000. At some point, shouldn't this be shut off early?
> 
> I can see this mechanism managing to crack comb and drain a frame. But then they show going out and just draining enough for a piece of bread ... I think it is all or nothing on a given frame.


Why should it be shut off early? If they decide that amount or more will allow them to expand and be successful, why not? Who are you to suggest it should be "shut off early"? They are in charge. Indiegogo probably has a say in the process, but they also get a cut. In the end, both the Flow Hive and Indiegogo want this to succeed. Maybe you could give those people some credit.

The discussion about whether that particular video can be misleading has been occurring every other page in this thread already. There is so much material on their website that I don't think any newbee can pretend they've been mislead if they ordered this thinking they could do a drop-by-drop, anytime extraction.

As far as I'm concerned, if this can generate more interest among the public about beekeeping (and in my community it certainly has), and possibly even motivate new beekeepers, I'm all for it.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

They probably extended it to try to milk Indie for everything they can cos once that closes, that's probably their budget for the next year or two. It's so well publicised that every beekeeper on the planet is aware, and those keen have bought in. As far as more income goes once they close this campaign they slip of the radar somewhat and might be on slim pickings for a while.

The 9 million does not go in their pocket they now have to supply product to over 23,000 customers. The rest of the potential customers will then be awaiting feedback from owners, which will be a while coming, and some people hanging out to buy second hand, future earnings will probably sustain a family business but for now, the sensible thing to do is make hay while the sun shines.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> They probably extended it to try to milk Indie for everything they can cos once that closes, that's probably their budget for the next year or two. It's so well publicised that every beekeeper on the planet is aware, and those keen have bought in. As far as more income goes once they close this campaign they slip of the radar somewhat and might be on slim pickings for a while.
> 
> The 9 million does not go in their pocket they now have to supply product to over 23,000 customers. The rest of the potential customers will then be awaiting feedback from owners, which will be a while coming, and some people hanging out to buy second hand, future earnings will probably sustain a family business but for now, the sensible thing to do is make hay while the sun shines.


My read is much like yours.

This campaign has been so successful that they will get rich, pay for all of the molds and the rest of the production pipeline, and spend this year getting through the deliveries they have promised (sort of ).

Then they are going to have a decision to make: keep this as a high-priced hobbiest/ enthusiast product that they manufacture in lots and hold in inventory while they slowly sell out to new orders (which should be enough to 'sustain a family business', as you say). Or, if they are serious about trying to change the beekeeping industry and go after the commercial market, that is going to mean an entirely different level of investment and commitment and they are likely to need every penny of the IndieGoGo money they have raised.

My prediction is they will probably coast for a few years on the hobbiest/enthusiast market - I mean, the founder/inventor just had his first child and deserves to enjoy the feeling of being on the top of the world for a spell...

At an average price of $50 per frame (actual is no doubt higher), $10,000,000 raised translates into delivering something like 200,000 Flow Frames (actual is probably closer to 150,000, but close enough for Jazz ). They will probably tool up to manufacture something like 20,000 - 30,000 per month and I would guess that all-in, they will be able to deliver all of the IndieGoGo frames for a small fraction of the moneyed they have raised.

At $70,000 to manufacture 1000 Flow Frames, this might have been a break-even business proposition. At $10,000,000 for 200,000 of these Frames, they will have a kitty to invest in a much R&D (including a full-blown research Apiary), marketing, or expansion as they would like.

'Making hay while the sun shines' is a good way to put it.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> According to the last wikipedia entry:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest_funded_crowdfunding_projects
> 
> They would now be #9 right now and will likely make it to #7. #1 is out of the question as it's over $78 Million.


Actually, #5 on that list, Ubuntu Edge, was unsuccessful (they set a target of $32M and failed, 'only' raising $12.8M, which probably means that the funds were sent back).

So at $8.65M raised (where they are right now), Flow is already the 7th most successful crowd funding project of all-time, and once they get over $8,782,571 (a target they are likely to reach within the next 48 hours on their current course and trajectory), Flow will be the 6th most successful crowd-funding project ever.

Reaching #5 on the list is probably out of reach since it would require raising over $10.25M, a figure they are unlikely to reach without a further extension...

Since IndieGoGo's primary competitor, Kickstarter, dominates the list of most successful crowd-funding campaigns (7 of the top 10, 10 of the top 13), IndieGoGo had a major motivation to help Flow break deeply into the top 10...


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> Actually, #5 on that list, Ubuntu Edge, was unsuccessful (they set a target of $32M and failed, 'only' raising $12.8M, which probably means that the funds were sent back).
> 
> So at $8.65M raised (where they are right now), Flow is already the 7th most successful crowd funding project of all-time, and *once they get over $8,782,571 (a target they are likely to reach within the next 48 hours on their current course and trajectory)*, Flow will be the 6th most successful crowd-funding project ever.
> 
> Reaching #5 on the list is probably out of reach since it would require raising over $10.25M, a figure they are unlikely to reach without a further extension...
> 
> Since IndieGoGo's primary competitor, Kickstarter, dominates the list of most successful crowd-funding campaigns (7 of the top 10, 10 of the top 13), IndieGoGo had a major motivation to help Flow break deeply into the top 10...


Wow, they made it there in a bit over 24 hours. 25,000 supporters, close to $9M in donations, and the 6th most successful crowd-funding project ever.

And with 10 days more to go, breaking above $10M looks possible if they continue to maintain their recent momentum...


----------



## brac

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

The price puts this way out of the range of "I'll get one to try out". I see a few problems with it right from the get go, not the least of which is their video gives the impression that you don't have to ever open the hive. We all know how that would work out. I think there will be alot of unhappy people when all is said and done, but who knows maybe I'm wrong. I see Michael Bush has one, I wonder how many he would have, if he was buying them at $700 per hive.


----------



## PicnicCreek

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

One really nice side-effect of this campaign is the increase in number of people who are now asking me about my bees - even a neighbor who previously was worried that he'd be dealing with bee stings (noooo) was delighted yesterday to see I was installing another hive on the property. 

There is a lot of positive curiosity about bees and beekeeping because of all the publicity. And while I was initially worried that there would be a whole bunch of new beekeepers thinking it was just a 'turn the tap and go' thing, I've been pleasantly surprised over the friends who have ordered Flow Hives, that are reading & taking classes, and (best of all  ) volunteering to help me until their Flow Hives arrive, so they can learn more.

All in all, a great outcome.


----------



## PicnicCreek

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



brac said:


> The price puts this way out of the range of "I'll get one to try out". I see a few problems with it right from the get go, not the least of which is their video gives the impression that you don't have to ever open the hive. We all know how that would work out. I think there will be alot of unhappy people when all is said and done, but who knows maybe I'm wrong. I see Michael Bush has one, I wonder how many he would have, if he was buying them at $700 per hive.


$700/hive is picking the most expensive option, including all the woodenware besides the Flow Hive. I would suspect most experienced beeks would just install 3 FlowFrames in the center of existing supers, letting the bees have the outer frames, and operating that way. A MUCH cheaper option than buying an entire hive setup.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



PicnicCreek said:


> One really nice side-effect of this campaign is the increase in number of people who are now asking me about my bees - even a neighbor who previously was worried that he'd be dealing with bee stings (noooo) was delighted yesterday to see I was installing another hive on the property.
> 
> There is a lot of positive curiosity about bees and beekeeping because of all the publicity. And while I was initially worried that there would be a whole bunch of new beekeepers thinking it was just a 'turn the tap and go' thing, I've been pleasantly surprised over the friends who have ordered Flow Hives, that are reading & taking classes, and (best of all  ) volunteering to help me until their Flow Hives arrive, so they can learn more.
> 
> All in all, a great outcome.


I have to agree - getting 25,000 new beeks started is an achievement, and if they are engaging with the more experienced beeks near them, it will result in some worthwhile increase in the hobbiest beek community, no matter how well these Flow Frames end up working out.

In case anyone is interested, the inventors will be available online in 3 hours (5pm Eastern) to answer 'any and all' questions:

======================================

Hi everyone,


We are less than nine hours away from going live on Reddit for our AMA (Ask Me Anything)

You can ask us about Flow™ Technology, bees, inventing, or really anything that takes your fancy.


If, like us until a couple of days ago, you have no idea what a Reddit AMA is, it’s all outlined nicely here:http://bit.ly/1CP1ZKI


We will be taking questions from 8.30am, Australian Eastern Standard Time (AEST), Friday 10 April at http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/, and will be answering as many as we can from 9am until 10am.

If you’re not sure what time this is in your area, here are some of common timezones:

North America:

EDT Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 7pm

PDT Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 4pm

Europe:

CEST Friday, April 10, 2015 at 1am

United Kingdom:

London: BST Thursday, April 9 at Midnight

Australia:

AEST: Friday, April 10, 2015 at 9am

AWST: Friday, April 10, 2015 at 7am


For all other timezones please visit: http://bit.ly/1CP10do


We look forward to answering your questions.


Cedar & Stuart


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> Wow, they made it there in a bit over 24 hours. 25,000 supporters, close to $9M in donations, and the 6th most successful crowd-funding project ever.
> 
> And with 10 days more to go, breaking above $10M looks possible if they continue to maintain their recent momentum...


Now at over $9M and 25.4K supporters with 10 days left to go... If they maintain this pace through the to the end, they will break past $10M


----------



## Agis Apiaries

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



brac said:


> The price puts this way out of the range of "I'll get one to try out".


Give it a couple of years. I forsee finding them for sale on Craigslist and other sites for cheap after those folks who didn't realize they still have to open them for inspections and such lose their colonies and want to get rid of them.


----------



## arnaud

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Agis Apiaries said:


> Give it a couple of years. I forsee finding them for sale on Craigslist and other sites for cheap after those folks who didn't realize they still have to open them for inspections and such lose their colonies and want to get rid of them.


You must be fun at parties.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

:banana:


arnaud said:


> You must be fun at parties.


Mega dittos. So glad the Aussies did not know it could not be done, would never work, was not really beekeeping, would appeal only to the inept, would be too expensive, had no commercial use, would be a passing fad, have no market penetration, would just be a get-rich quick marketing gimmick, or that they should be stopped (how dare they be successful?) ... No wonder there has been no progress in beekeeping for more than 100 years. I absolutely celebrate their success. Yay for them. And they seem like really salt of the earth people, too. :applause: :thumbsup: :banana:


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> Now at over $9M and 25.4K supporters with 10 days left to go... If they maintain this pace through the to the end, they will break past $10M


Just think what the mailing list alone would be worth to Dadant, Mannlake etc!


----------



## max2

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



SowthEfrikan said:


> :banana:
> 
> Mega dittos. So glad the Aussies did not know it could not be done, would never work, was not really beekeeping, would appeal only to the inept, would be too expensive, had no commercial use, would be a passing fad, have no market penetration, would just be a get-rich quick marketing gimmick, or that they should be stopped (how dare they be successful?) ... No wonder there has been no progress in beekeeping for more than 100 years. I absolutely celebrate their success. Yay for them. And they seem like really salt of the earth people, too. :applause: :thumbsup: :banana:


That is the Aussie spirit, mate!


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



max2 said:


> That is the Aussie spirit, mate!


Sheila, china.  My brother and his wife are now Aussie and the country has been very kind to them. They certainly have adopted the Aussie spirit.


----------



## ChilePrepper

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I have to comment on the civility here on this board regarding the Flow Hive and this thread. Thumbs WAY up to you all!

So many other groups/boards/blogs/whatever contain nothing but lambaste and arguments instead of reasoning and good conversations. Some groups have banned any discussion and delete anything that may pop up- even a brand new person wondering what beekeeping is like and how to get into because they 'heard' about the FlowHive.

While I don't think it should be marketed to complete n00bs, having them believe there is no work required to keep and care for bees, I love the innovation. ...and I bet NOBODY would have thought their crowdfunding would have done so well. It's amazing.

Has ANY topic or product caused such a stir in the beekeeping community recently? Maybe CCD or Africanized bees, but those are widely spread topics seen in the mainstream news occasionally. It seems the FlowHive has become a topic that splits the entire beekeeping world in two! Some are so adamantly opposed and yet others embrace the experience and will give 'Flow' it's due process of time and trial. Some I suppose are on the fence, and rightly so.

Personally, I got in on the early bird delivery so I can try some this summer (Southwest USA). I don't plan to stack these on every hive, nor feel like I'm doing a disservice to bees because I placed some plastic in a hive. I will still inspect, care for and have the same child-like wonder for my bees, only with a new 'gadget' added into the mix.


Ian.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



ChilePrepper said:


> Personally, I got in on the early bird delivery so I can try some this summer (Southwest USA). I don't plan to stack these on every hive, nor feel like I'm doing a disservice to bees because I placed some plastic in a hive. I will still inspect, care for and have the same child-like wonder for my bees, only with a new 'gadget' added into the mix.


So jealous. It was a week or so before I stumbled upon it - by then they were heading towards $3M. Would have so early-birded, too. You can always reroute your gadget to me, if you're feeling generous.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Good to meet someone who has actually ordered one ChilePrepper. I have been wondering where those 24,000 people actually are!


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Hilarious! Someone in California, land of fruit and nuts, is offering to "educate" newbees - right down to telling Flow Hive buyers where to put their bees in. Bwahahaha. I can think of a place this person can put their bees.
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/if-you-purchased-a-flow-hive-you-need-to-read-this


----------



## ChilePrepper

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> ...I have been wondering where those 24,000 people actually are!


I believe the rest are on Facebook! LOL

I didn't even know it existed until I was explaining to a co-worker I had bees... then he asked me if I had heard of the Flow Hive, blah blah blah ... I'm sure I looked quite confused as I asked what on earth he was talking about.

I had to go look it up! I studied it closely, watched videos and read all the people bickering back and forth, and within minutes of receiving an email that the campaign had begun I was already in with an order. I bought the 'lite' for a 10 frame (4 frames), early bird delivery and the full flow (7 frames) for December delivery.

With this setup, I figured I could try it out (and see it up close) sooner than later, and if it worked as I hope, I'll have more for next year. If it sucks, I have some more to sell for next year... LOL

I have a whole list of gripes compiled from various sources and was hoping to review them- and report back once I had a chance to try it out for myself.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

That will be interesting.


----------



## ChilePrepper

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

..and a question for Oldtimer...

Do you welcome beekeepers to stop by and visit your apiary on occasion? I am doing a project that will take me around the globe visiting with beekeepers, collecting photos, stories, and methods.. I don't have a contact in NZ yet! (Although I know a few Kiwis, but sans-bees)


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Absolutely, I'm based in Auckland, just drop me a line closer to the time & we will tee it up.

Just be aware I am now basically retired and only have a few hundred hives which is obviously not a full time occupation, hence the post count on Beesource LOL. 

And oh, a lot of people come out with me, I generally expect them to get dirty and help.


----------



## ChilePrepper

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> ... be aware I am now basically retired and only have a few hundred hives which is obviously not a full time occupation... I generally expect them to get dirty and help.


That's perfect!  Thanks!


----------



## odfrank

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



arnaud said:


> You must be fun at parties.


>Give it a couple of years. I for see finding them for sale on Craigslist and other sites for cheap after those folks who didn't realize they still have to open them for inspections and such lose their colonies and want to get rid of them.

I think Agis has made a realistic projection and that there is no reason to ridicule him for doing so. There are two sides to every story. A wise man ponders them both.


----------



## DanielD

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



odfrank said:


> >Give it a couple of years. I for see finding them for sale on Craigslist and other sites for cheap after those folks who didn't realize they still have to open them for inspections and such lose their colonies and want to get rid of them.
> 
> I think Agis has made a realistic projection and that there is no reason to ridicule him for doing so. There are two sides to every story. A wise man ponders them both.


I think one way or another they will be found much less expensive, either on Craigslist or in large production after the hype goes away, depending on which way the invention goes and I have no guess how it will end up. Right now it looks like people are paying a huge price to be the first ones to have it, and later the price should go down. Many many new inventions go that way.


----------



## Hallatauer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Been reading thru this thread since I started to get the FlowHive shares on FaceBook to my page from friends. I'm remaining skeptical on the long term prospects... the costs doesn't make it viable to me as a small scale beekeeper. I'm perfectly happy to wait about 3 years and see where this has gone. Does the equipment hold up to time and use or do they become clogged or break down mechanically? Will the cost come down significantly enough to make it worth investing in them? I'll let someone else be the guinea pigs basically. If it works and is durable, awesome! But I can't invest several thousands of dollars and see it go to waste.


----------



## VanIslander

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'm a backyard beek -- restricted by our community to 3 hives.

The estimated price for frames for one deep honey super full of flow frames converts to about $600 (or more) Canadian (including shipping and tax). So assuming we can sell honey for approx $7 per pound, it'll take approx 85 pounds of honey to pay for itself. That doesn't seem totally unreasonable -- assuming the bees would refill it two, maybe three times per season (in my area). Maybe four or more times in others. And this is without all the work of dismantling the hive, enraging the bees, buying and using an extractor, and cleaning up the mess. No heavy lifting. And if I understand correctly, you'd only need the one honey super per hive -- not three or four to alternate.

I'm in no hurry and will wait until late 2016 to read the reports and learn whether they really work. If they do (and I hope they do) -- I'll buy them at that price.


----------



## Harley Craig

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



DanielD said:


> Right now it looks like people are paying a huge price to be the first ones to have it, and later the price should go down. Many many new inventions go that way.


Ha Ha can you say Betamax tapes ? Couldn't give one away now. VHS is almost there as well, but you can still get 1-2 bucks out of them at yard sales.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> Actually, #5 on that list, Ubuntu Edge, was unsuccessful (they set a target of $32M and failed, 'only' raising $12.8M, which probably means that the funds were sent back).
> 
> So at $8.65M raised (where they are right now), Flow is already the 7th most successful crowd funding project of all-time, and once they get over $8,782,571 (a target they are likely to reach within the next 48 hours on their current course and trajectory), Flow will be the 6th most successful crowd-funding project ever.
> 
> Reaching #5 on the list is probably out of reach since it would require raising over $10.25M, a figure they are unlikely to reach without a further extension...
> 
> Since IndieGoGo's primary competitor, Kickstarter, dominates the list of most successful crowd-funding campaigns (7 of the top 10, 10 of the top 13), IndieGoGo had a major motivation to help Flow break deeply into the top 10...


Wow. They just hit $10M (and close to 28,000 supporters). That means over $1.3M raised in under a week and they still have 7 days to go.

It's pretty much a done-deal that Flow will be the 5th most successful crowd-funding campaign ever and it's likely they will make it well past $11M by the time the dust has cleared...

30,000 new beekeepers around the world taking the plunge because of your idea and your promotional efforts is an impressive result regardless of the longer-term impact.

I taught a beekeeping class to 17 newbies yesterday and 4 of them had bought the Flow Hive and wanted to start learning about beekeeping and caring for bees in standard Dadant hives well in advance of getting their FlowFrames.

I took that as an encouraging sign.


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

fafrd - You seem to be quite the enthusiastic booster of the Flow Hive. Including wildly optimistic predictions about huge future price drops. I am not trying to be rude or inappropriate, and this is just my personal opinion, but it almost seems like the behavior of a "shill." Are you related to the inventors? Own stock in the company? Applied to distribute the product in the U.S.? On the company payroll? Any other behind-the-scenes connection that would sway your opinion of a product that isn't even being manufactured, yet?

If you just like the idea, that's cool. But, for someone who hasn't even seen an actual Flow Hive or frame, let alone used one, you certainly seem very attached to talking up the company and the product.





fafrd said:


> Wow. They just hit $10M (and close to 28,000 supporters). That means over $1.3M raised in under a week and they still have 7 days to go.
> 
> It's pretty much a done-deal that Flow will be the 5th most successful crowd-funding campaign ever and it's likely they will make it well past $11M by the time the dust has cleared...
> 
> 30,000 new beekeepers around the world taking the plunge because of your idea and your promotional efforts is an impressive result regardless of the longer-term impact.
> 
> I taught a beekeeping class to 17 newbies yesterday and 4 of them had bought the Flow Hive and wanted to start learning about beekeeping and caring for bees in standard Dadant hives well in advance of getting their FlowFrames.
> 
> I took that as an encouraging sign.





fafrd said:


> Now at over $9M and 25.4K supporters with 10 days left to go... If they maintain this pace through the to the end, they will break past $10M





fafrd said:


> I have to agree - getting 25,000 new beeks started is an achievement, and if they are engaging with the more experienced beeks near them, it will result in some worthwhile increase in the hobbiest beek community, no matter how well these Flow Frames end up working out.
> 
> In case anyone is interested, the inventors will be available online in 3 hours (5pm Eastern) to answer 'any and all' questions:
> 
> ======================================
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> 
> We are less than nine hours away from going live on Reddit for our AMA (Ask Me Anything)
> 
> You can ask us about Flow™ Technology, bees, inventing, or really anything that takes your fancy.
> 
> 
> If, like us until a couple of days ago, you have no idea what a Reddit AMA is, it’s all outlined nicely here:http://bit.ly/1CP1ZKI
> 
> 
> We will be taking questions from 8.30am, Australian Eastern Standard Time (AEST), Friday 10 April at http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/, and will be answering as many as we can from 9am until 10am.
> 
> If you’re not sure what time this is in your area, here are some of common timezones:
> 
> North America:
> 
> EDT Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 7pm
> 
> PDT Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 4pm
> 
> Europe:
> 
> CEST Friday, April 10, 2015 at 1am
> 
> United Kingdom:
> 
> London: BST Thursday, April 9 at Midnight
> 
> Australia:
> 
> AEST: Friday, April 10, 2015 at 9am
> 
> AWST: Friday, April 10, 2015 at 7am
> 
> 
> For all other timezones please visit: http://bit.ly/1CP10do
> 
> 
> We look forward to answering your questions.
> 
> 
> Cedar & Stuart





fafrd said:


> Wow, they made it there in a bit over 24 hours. 25,000 supporters, close to $9M in donations, and the 6th most successful crowd-funding project ever.
> 
> And with 10 days more to go, breaking above $10M looks possible if they continue to maintain their recent momentum...





fafrd said:


> Actually, #5 on that list, Ubuntu Edge, was unsuccessful (they set a target of $32M and failed, 'only' raising $12.8M, which probably means that the funds were sent back).
> 
> So at $8.65M raised (where they are right now), Flow is already the 7th most successful crowd funding project of all-time, and once they get over $8,782,571 (a target they are likely to reach within the next 48 hours on their current course and trajectory), Flow will be the 6th most successful crowd-funding project ever.
> 
> Reaching #5 on the list is probably out of reach since it would require raising over $10.25M, a figure they are unlikely to reach without a further extension...
> 
> Since IndieGoGo's primary competitor, Kickstarter, dominates the list of most successful crowd-funding campaigns (7 of the top 10, 10 of the top 13), IndieGoGo had a major motivation to help Flow break deeply into the top 10...





fafrd said:


> My read is much like yours.
> 
> This campaign has been so successful that they will get rich, pay for all of the molds and the rest of the production pipeline, and spend this year getting through the deliveries they have promised (sort of ).
> 
> Then they are going to have a decision to make: keep this as a high-priced hobbiest/ enthusiast product that they manufacture in lots and hold in inventory while they slowly sell out to new orders (which should be enough to 'sustain a family business', as you say). Or, if they are serious about trying to change the beekeeping industry and go after the commercial market, that is going to mean an entirely different level of investment and commitment and they are likely to need every penny of the IndieGoGo money they have raised.
> 
> My prediction is they will probably coast for a few years on the hobbiest/enthusiast market - I mean, the founder/inventor just had his first child and deserves to enjoy the feeling of being on the top of the world for a spell...
> 
> At an average price of $50 per frame (actual is no doubt higher), $10,000,000 raised translates into delivering something like 200,000 Flow Frames (actual is probably closer to 150,000, but close enough for Jazz ). They will probably tool up to manufacture something like 20,000 - 30,000 per month and I would guess that all-in, they will be able to deliver all of the IndieGoGo frames for a small fraction of the moneyed they have raised.
> 
> At $70,000 to manufacture 1000 Flow Frames, this might have been a break-even business proposition. At $10,000,000 for 200,000 of these Frames, they will have a kitty to invest in a much R&D (including a full-blown research Apiary), marketing, or expansion as they would like.
> 
> 'Making hay while the sun shines' is a good way to put it.





fafrd said:


> He raises a lot of very good points - most of which may or may not be valid, but we won't know for at least 18-24 months...
> 
> But in any case, I believe it is exceedingly likely that there will be a large number of Flow Frames available on Craig's List in 2017...
> 
> These Flow Frames are not going to teach anyone how to master the challanges of beekeeping, and of the varios challanges involved, harvesting honey is nowhere near the top of the list.
> 
> Cool concept though, and if they function as advertised, their value as a glorified observation hive and a way for visitors (and especially kids) to harvest a bit of honey 'on the fly' is compelling and unique. I'll probably end up getting a boxes-worth of frames just for that alone...





fafrd said:


> A full 8-frame hive is $600 + $88 shipping. I believe that is unassembled brood box and super, bottom board, English-style (peaked) top cover, 8 unassembled foundation frames for the brood box, and 6 assembled Flow Frames for the deep honey super.
> 
> If your friend will want a 10-frame set-up, an unassembled 10-frame honey super and 7 Flow Frames is $460 + shipping or a set of 7 Flow Frames alone is $400 + shipping.
> 
> The product is supposed to ship by December, so not for this season.
> 
> Also, if your friend does want an 8-frame set-up, Mann-lake is selling an assembled 8-frame hive for $85 and an 8-frame box and 6 Flow Frames is $410, so that is a bit less expensive than the full hive kit for $600 and also easier since the basic hive and frames come preassembled... (Still have to assemble the honey super).





fafrd said:


> Well, Flow Hive just extended the IndieGoGo campaign for another two weeks to April 19th: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/flow-hive-honey-on-tap-directly-from-your-beehive#activity
> 
> They have been pretty consistently reeling in about $100K in contributions per day and if they maintain that pace through to the end, they will certainly surpass the $9M mark and have an outside shot of reaching $10M.
> 
> They are at $8.2M from close to 23,000 'Funders' as of today...
> 
> They have already set the IndieGoGo record for the most successful crowd funding campaign ever and reaching the $8.8M level will make them the 8th most successful crowd funding campaign of all time on any platform (the majority of the top ten being on Kickstarter). This last fact has no doubt contributed to IndieGoGo's motivation to extent the campaign by two weeks.





fafrd said:


> I had thought of that but overlooked to include it. Kits for the commercial beeks would probably not be terribly attractive, but for the typical DIY hobbiest beek, it would make a lot of sense.
> 
> In kit form, the manufacturing cost for all the plastic bits and the wire is probably close to $5 in volume, meaning a hobbiest kit price of $15 should be very doable.
> 
> As another reality-check, deep frames of Honey a Super a Cell fully-drawn combs cost $7 each in lots of 20. The HSC combs are 1" wide (1-3/8 w/ endbars) while the Flow Frame combs are 1-5/8" wide (2" w/ endbars), meaning the a Flow Frame probably contains less than twice the plastic of a frame of HSC. In kit form, the cost of the plastic itself will dominate cost of goods, meaning it should eventually be possible to purchase Flow Frames for less than $14 in lots of 20.
> 
> 21 Flow Frames for under $300 would translate into $100 to outfit a hive with 7 a Flow Frames. If the work as advertised and are available in kit-form at that price, I suspect they would take the hobbiest beekeeping community by storm and would certainly outsell frames of Honey Super a Cell...
> 
> $70 for a deep box's worth of 10 frames of HSC compared to $100 for a deep box's worth of 7 Flow Frames would be a pretty easy decision (again, assuming the in-hive extraction method delivers as advertised .





fafrd said:


> First, the Flow Frames are 2" wide, so a 10-frame box holds 7, not 10.
> 
> Second, they are selling (or rather 'perking'  a set of 7 frames for $400, not $490.
> 
> And third, all of the pre-launch pricing was established when their goal was to raise $70,000 to manufacture approximately 1000 of these frames. Now that they have recieved over $8M and need to tool up to deliver close to 15,000 Flow Frames by late this year, their cost of goods and the prices at which they can sell these frames is likely come to way down (well below half).
> 
> Despite the appearance of being exceedingly intricate, these Flow frames are based on 2 clear plastic endbars, 2 small clear plastic plugs, and 2 yellow plastic comb pieces that are needed for ever 1/2" depth of comb (all held together with a piece of wire). All of those clear plastic bits, the wire, and the labor to assemble the frame will cost something, but the cost of goods will be dominated by the 35 inner and 35 outer vertical 'slices' that make up a stanadard 18" Langstroth-depth frame. In high volume, cost of those inner and outer slices will be dominated by the quantity of plastic they contain and plastic foundation provides a good proxy for where prices can go if these Flow Frames ever become mainstream.
> 
> A single deep frame of plastic Ritecell foundation is priced at about $1 in volume (meaning the manufacturing cost was below that) and just eyeballing it, a single frame looks like a reasonably good proxy for the amount of plastic needed for about 8 of these inner or outer slices (or about 4"-worth of frame depth). So all of the yellow plastic slices needed to make up a standard Langstroth-depth Flow Frame are likely to cost less than $5.
> 
> In High volumes I suspect the all-in manufacturing cost of these Flow Frames is likely to be below $10 which would mean they could easily be priced below $20, meaning less than $140 for a full Lang deeps-worth of frames.
> 
> You are certainly correct that at currently-proposed pre-launch pricing, this is a product for deep-pocketed and primarily inexperienced beeks, but if the technology works as promised and doesn't get clogged, or break, or wear out after a few seasons, I believe they will easily be able to reach pricing that makes their products attractive to the entire hobbiest community, rich and miserly alike.
> 
> There are other more important challanges than just cost for the commercial market, but if throughput and cost of extraction (as well as the reliability concerns raised above) can be proven over the course of 5-7 years to be comparable or possibly even lower than conventional extraction, the capital investment for a deep box full of 7 of these Flow Frames at commercial scale can probably approach $50 per box ($7 per frame)...





fafrd said:


> Well, they just crossed $8M in support (with another 4 days to go).
> 
> There are close to 22,000 'supporters' and I suspect the vast majority are naive and enthusiastic aspiring newbie beeks.
> 
> Still, an impressive campaign and these guys deserve kudos for firing the populations imagination and bringing so many aspiring beekeepers across the transome and into the world of beekeeping (even if many/most of then end up petering out after a season or two).
> 
> Also, looks like your ticket didn't end up getting drawn since the Premium Flow Hive winner is Jason A. of Washington DC, but if you've got deep enough pockets, it appears that they are going to be selling the Premium Flow Hive as well: http://www.honeyflow.com/shop/premium-hive/p/95


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shinbone said:


> fafrd - You seem to be quite the enthusiastic booster of the Flow Hive. Including wildly optimistic predictions about huge future price drops. I am not trying to be rude or inappropriate, and this is just my personal opinion, but it almost seems like the behavior of a "shill." Are you related to the inventors? Own stock in the company? Applied to distribute the product in the U.S.? On the company payroll? Any other behind-the-scenes connection that would sway your opinion of a product that isn't even being manufactured, yet?
> 
> If you just like the idea, that's cool. But, for someone who hasn't even seen an actual Flow Hive or frame, let alone used one, you certainly seem very attached to talking up the company and the product.


Michael Bush came out to teach a queen-rearing workshop that I helped him coordinate and over dinner afterwords (with Odfrank), we discussed the Flow Hive and Michael shared his view that it was something new and pretty much delivered as advertised in his very limited experience with the Frames (meaning no idea yet about reliability, lifetime, maintenance, etc...).

That is the extent of my relationship with Flow - i only really started looking into them following that discussion with MB in late March and have since traded a few emails with them regarding my own questions regarding the product (pollen, brood, crystallized honey, cleaning, etc...).

I'm an entrepreneur myself and have an interest in crowd funding so the Flow Hive is a rare opportunity to combine my professional interest in entrepreneurship and funding of early-stage companies with my hobbiest interest in beekeeping.

No nefarious intent, no relationship, but interested and somewhat awe-struck. 

But I also happen to be of the opinion that many of these well-intentioned newbie-backers will probably end up getting out of beekeeping in 2-3 years and many of the 200,000 Flow Frames that will be shipped as perks to these 28,000 backers probably will end up on Craig's List.

And I also believe I have enough understanding of manufacturing and manufacturing costs to know what it will mean if these two Aussies are serious about trying to revolutionize the beekeeping industry (as opposed to serving an enthusiast/hobbiest market) and 'prices increasing' ain't it.

What they have already achieved is very impressive and I give them credit for that.

Where they go with this initiative from here is anyone's guess, but I will be interested to track how the story unfolds.

Eventually I will want one of these Flow supers in my backyard apiary because it looks like it would make a fantastic observation hive and I really like the idea of trying single-frame honey harvesting to see if there are actually distinctive flavors from frame-to-frame (as is claimed for comb honey).

I mentor newbie beekeepers and one of the ones in the class I taught yesterday has purchased the frames and asked me help him in using them, so I should have the luxury of gaining some experience with Flow Frames a year from now without having to throw 100's of $$$'s into the wind on a hope and a prayer.

Really nothing more to it than that.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

What do they say about crystallised honey?


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> What do they say about crystallised honey?


They say that crystallized honey will not prevent the mechanism from working but that the crystallized honey does not flow out. But the cappings get cracked and so the bees clean out the crystallized honey.

I'm not convinced this has been well-tested yet - a few cells of crystallized honey is not going to provide anything like the resistance an entire frame of well-crystallized honey will...

But on the other hand, dissemble and cleaning seems straightforward, so it appears to be low-risk that crystallized honey will result in a ruined frame...


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> What do they say about crystallised honey?


They say that crystallized honey will not prevent the mechanism from working but that the crystallized honey does not flow out. But the cappings get cracked and so the bees clean out the crystallized honey.

I'm not convinced this has been well-tested yet - a few cells of crystallized honey is not going to provide anything like the resistance an entire frame of well-crystallized honey will...

But on the other hand, dissemble and cleaning seems straightforward, so it appears to be low-risk that crystallized honey will result in a ruined frame...


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Just ran into this: http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/30166-3-reasons-to-go-against-the-flow-hive#

(three reasons to go against the flow hive)


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Was interested to see what the 3 reasons against flow hive would be so read the article.

Turns out they are emotive bunk, and although the author is a beekeeper, I don't think she knows much about bees.

Here's my comments on her 3 reasons.

Reason 1. *Non-Existent Communion Between Bees & Beings* - She argues that the flow hive removes the main purpose of beekeeping, being communion between bees and beekeepers, because the beekeeper no longer has to do much in the hive. 
If she knew much about beekeeping she would know that most beekeeping tasks are done in the brood area, and there is never much point doing much in the honey area. Me, once honey boxes go on I never do anything in them till it's harvest time. So a flow hive would change my beekeeping not a jot. The only input a hive needs is in the brood area.
She also states that commercial beekeepers would be intrigued because a flow hive would remove all the "messy hard work". If she thinks a flow hive would remove that, she has never been a commercial beekeeper.

Reason 2. *Plastic Comb* - she uses the usual arguments that bees don't like plastic comb, nor do organic beekeepers. Etc. So what. Plenty beekeepers use plastic comb. Long as there is a decent flow bees are fine with it. Bees even store honey in the back of the plastic cell cups in my jenter unit, and that looks nothing like a comb. I will concede it will be less successful if there is a light or no flow, but most beekeepers do poorly then anyway and have to feed the bees, if the bees store nothing in the plastic cos there is not enough to get them up there, they need it in the broodnest anyway.

Reason 3. *"Expensive Gimmick"* - Expensive, yes, Gimmick, well let's see how people go. She complains about the cost and how much profit she thinks they will make (even though she really has no idea of their costs). She's probably jealous.


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> They say that crystallized honey will not prevent the mechanism from working but that the crystallized honey does not flow out. But the cappings get cracked and so the bees clean out the crystallized honey.


A long soak in some hot-ish water might do the trick too once disassembled. It would probably take less time than cleaning my extractor  At this time next year we should have some good ideas as to the pros and cons of this contraption


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

There will be success stories, and horror stories. I think it is destined to become a device that some will swear by, and others will swear at.


----------



## beemandan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> There will be success stories, and horror stories. I think it is destined to become a device that some will swear by, and others will swear at.


And those whose opinions are already fixed will remain devoted to their side....regardless.


----------



## ChilePrepper

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

If someone is fascinated with the invention or the way they funded their endeavor, how is that a problem? Why is it anyone's concern what other people 'think' about it?

I'm on the fence about the Flow system, but also have the funds to 'try it out'.

Actually, I'm excited to try something new but that doesn't mean it will work out... It also doesn't mean they will be garbage, either. 

We'll see, but I will certainly test them in an open, objective manner.



beemandan said:


> And those whose opinions are already fixed will remain devoted to their side....regardless.


It seems they take their stand with a vengeance as well, talking down others, name-calling like 6 year olds, calling shill, scam, and generally not being very nice to one another... For or against.

On a side note, if you look at everyone's interactions (where 'conversations' have gotten out of hand) as a micro-society, it represents the general problem with humanity as a whole.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>Reason 1. Non-Existent Communion Between Bees & Beings

I don't understand how robbing them by brushing or blowing all the bees is communion with the bees while quietly draining the honey is bad. Would you rather come home to find your bike is gone or have someone break into your house, hold you at gunpoint and take it. It seems like that is the real difference here. How is the disruption of harvesting "communion" with the bees and how does this prevent it. Oldtimer is right. Once I put the supers on, I'm done with the brood nest and the next time I come back it's for the honey.

>Reason 2. Plastic Comb

Aesthetically I can't say I care for plastic in my life or my bee hives, but I live in a world where plastic is ubiquitous. There is no way to avoid it. The bees work plastic comb all the time. Fully drawn plastic comb has been around since the 70s.

>Reason 3. "Expensive Gimmick" 

Of course it is. So are power windows and automatic transmissions and power brakes on your car.


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

The old guys are back at mcDonalds for their free coffee and gripe sessions.

Jim Fisher posted a sane response (something he is capable of and sometimes does).
http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A2=BEE-L;61fe2ba3.1504


----------



## ChilePrepper

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> ...So are power windows and automatic transmissions and power brakes on your car.


Hey wait a second, some of my favorite cars growing up didn't have power anything... 


Seriously, I appreciate unbiased testing and appreciation for the innovation. Hopefully mine work out as I think they will. It won't make me lazy, it won't make me stop inspections or ensuring they have stores for winter.

I will still sit on the picnic table and watch the bees in wonder as I always have.

As I stated before, they simply need to be used responsibly.


----------



## ChilePrepper

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



deknow said:


> The old guys are back at mcDonalds for their free coffee and gripe sessions.
> 
> Jim Fisher posted a sane response (something he is capable of and sometimes does).
> http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A2=BEE-L;61fe2ba3.1504


Interesting read! Thanks for sharing.


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

A friend will be buying a Flow Hive when they become available. Her reason; opening a hive and doing an inspection or manipulation is intimidating to her, especially pulling frames for extraction. The hope is a Flow Hive will allow harvesting honey while avoiding opening the hive to pull frames.

In other words, her reason for buying a Flow Hive is not convenience, as most would assume, but comfort level. I bet a lot of hobbyist beekeepers have similar feelings.





.


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> Reason 3. *"Expensive Gimmick"* - Expensive, yes, Gimmick, well let's see how people go. She complains about the cost and how much profit she thinks they will make (even though she really has no idea of their costs).
> 
> She's probably jealous.


A shorter version of her critique: "Hey, back off! Those are _*my*_ suckers."

She's one of those who made the 2009 _Vanishing of the Bees_ documentary. If you follow some of the links in her article you can see she's not uninvolved in beekeeping. In one blog entry she says she "first started researching the disappearance of the honeybee back in 2007." In this latest article, "I keep bees because I love having them around." But in a way that's another reason to wonder. If she's been involved fairly closely for eight years, and if she's been paying attention, she wouldn't repeat the notion that keeping bees with the Flow™ frames would keep you at arms length from the bees.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I wonder how this thread would have evoved if the flow hive frames were 1$ each and everyone felt comfortable with the cost.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



WBVC said:


> I wonder how this thread would have evoved if the flow hive frames were 1$ each and everyone felt comfortable with the cost.


They would have lost money at that price and they appear to be much smarter than that.

I've already shared my views that in high 'commercial beekeeping' volumes, these Flow Frames can be much less expensive than $50-70 each, but increased demand would have overwhelmed them. It already has. They set out to raise $70,000 to tool up for delivery of 1000 of these frames so they could keep manufacturing that kind of volume every month or so, and they raised 150 times that target without lowering their prices and now need to deliver over 150,000 of these frames before the end of this year.

They are at $10,335,000 as I type this, solidly establishing themselves as the 5th most-successful crowd funding campaign ever. Mainstream media exposure is taking note which is probably accelerating the viral effect in the final days: http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/13/smallbusiness/bees-flow-hive-fundraising-record/

The top 10 list of most successful crowd funding campaigns is dominated by video games, so I feel that we as beekeepers should be rejoicing in this achievement, regardless. I'd rather have a world with 30,000 peploe ready to donate money to try out some new-fangled idea to promote beekeeping than to develope yet another video game.

The 4th most successful crowd funding campaign was for 'Coolest Cooler', which was a consumer product that raised $13.3M a year ago. Flow still has 6 days left, but that threshold is out of reach unless they extend the campaign. If I was them, with exposure, and momentum, and daily sales increasing, I would strongly consider continuing the campaign until they get signs of fatigue and the daily influx slows down.

The difference between manufacturing 150,000 and 250,000 of these frames over the next 9 months is far smaller than the difference between manufacturing 1500 and 150,000...

With the massive increase in volume, there will be a significant decrease in manufacturing costs and customers would be justified in requesting lower prices or a discount. But as long as another 500 people around the world materialize each day willing to plunk down the original $600 asking price for a hive, why should they lower their price and why shouldn't they just keep going...


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>I'd rather have a world with 30,000 peploe ready to donate money to try out some new-fangled idea to promote beekeeping than to develope yet another video game.

Exactly.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> They would have lost money at that price and they appear to be much smarter than that.
> 
> I've already shared my views that in high 'commercial beekeeping' volumes, these Flow Frames can be much less expensive than $50-70 each, but increased demand would have overwhelmed them. It already has. They set out to raise $70,000 to tool up for delivery of 1000 of these frames so they could keep manufacturing that kind of volume every month or so, and they raised 150 times that target without lowering their prices and now need to deliver over 150,000 of these frames before the end of this year.
> 
> They are at $10,335,000 as I type this, solidly establishing themselves as the 5th most-successful crowd funding campaign ever. Mainstream media exposure is taking note which is probably accelerating the viral effect in the final days: http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/13/smallbusiness/bees-flow-hive-fundraising-record/
> 
> The top 10 list of most successful crowd funding campaigns is dominated by video games, so I feel that we as beekeepers should be rejoicing in this achievement, regardless. I'd rather have a world with 30,000 peploe ready to donate money to try out some new-fangled idea to promote beekeeping than to develope yet another video game.
> 
> The 4th most successful crowd funding campaign was for 'Coolest Cooler', which was a consumer product that raised $13.3M a year ago. Flow still has 6 days left, but that threshold is out of reach unless they extend the campaign. If I was them, with exposure, and momentum, and daily sales increasing, I would strongly consider continuing the campaign until they get signs of fatigue and the daily influx slows down.
> 
> The difference between manufacturing 150,000 and 250,000 of these frames over the next 9 months is far smaller than the difference between manufacturing 1500 and 150,000...
> 
> With the massive increase in volume, there will be a significant decrease in manufacturing costs and customers would be justified in requesting lower prices or a discount. But as long as another 500 people around the world materialize each day willing to plunk down the original $600 asking price for a hive, why should they lower their price and why shouldn't they just keep going...


Odd response. I meant would folks have been so cynical if the price was within their personal comfort zone. I did not mean would the crowd funding and manufacturing have been feasible.


----------



## ChilePrepper

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> >I'd rather have a world with 30,000 peploe ready to donate money to try out some new-fangled idea to promote beekeeping than to develope yet another video game.
> 
> Exactly.


Agreed.  It's got everyone talking!


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> I'd rather have a world with 30,000 peploe ready to donate money to try out some new-fangled idea to promote beekeeping than to develope yet another video game.


Those are the only two choices?


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Kofu said:


> She's one of those who made the 2009 _Vanishing of the Bees_ documentary. If you follow some of the links in her article you can see she's not uninvolved in beekeeping. In one blog entry she says she "first started researching the disappearance of the honeybee back in 2007." In this latest article, "I keep bees because I love having them around." But in a way that's another reason to wonder. If she's been involved fairly closely for eight years, and if she's been paying attention, she wouldn't repeat the notion that keeping bees with the Flow™ frames would keep you at arms length from the bees.


Yes I looked her up and discovered those things before saying what I did about her article.
And yes, she was involved in making a documentary about the beepocolypse. Does that really translate into knowing a whole lot about looking after a beehive? Not in my opinion. I'm pretty sure if she tried her hand at making a living from bees (I mean actual bees, not films, blogs, and BS about them), ie, she tried commercial beekeeping, she would fail at running bees to their productive potential and I would give her 2 years to bankruptcy.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shinbone said:


> A friend will be buying a Flow Hive when they become available. Her reason; opening a hive and doing an inspection or manipulation is intimidating to her, especially pulling frames for extraction. The hope is a Flow Hive will allow harvesting honey while avoiding opening the hive to pull frames.


Ok sorry to hear there are people who actually think that, you need to wise her up Shinbone before she wastes her money.

If using a flow hive, all work we do in hives will have to continue unchanged. The only point of difference being that when it's time to put honey supers on, we put on a flowhive not an ordinary super. No other management aspect of the hive will get any easier or less work.

Extracting will be different, but actual work in the hive will be the same, if anyone is intimidated by that a flow hive is not going to mean they don't have to do it.


----------



## ChilePrepper

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I guess these are a few questions directly for Michael Bush, unless anyone on this thread has also used the frames:

EDIT: I am going through past pages of this thread, finding what has already been posted. I'll delete these questions as I find answers. My Q's aren't too 'technical' anyway, just general ideas.

How did you like them 'overall'?

Did the bees readily know the cells had been emptied and jumped right in to clean up and start over?

Did you use a queen excluder? (Some are wondering what to do if brood is laid in them.) 

Does it seem like they'll hold up well?

And, is the idea/implementation really as neat & useful as I think they may be?


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> . . . you need to wise her up Shinbone before she wastes her money.


Ha! Me, (a man) tell a woman what to do? I learned that lesson a long time ago.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*


----------



## Beepants

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I thought this article was interesting today. "Don't Go with the Flow, Go with the Wax."

Excerpt:



> To risk belabouring the point, for the Flow™ hive's creators to claim that little disturbance is parted upon the bees simply due to gimmicky extraction methods is a deceit of the highest sort, since the hive's replacement of its wax comb with a prosthetic plastic comb is quite possibly the largest disturbance that the honeybee superorganism can experience. In essence, the Flow™ hive is the continuation of perceiving nature in a mechanistic manner, with the honeybee as machine that can be manipulated at will. The estrangement of beekeeping from actual honeybees is taken to a whole new level, with the Flow™ hive essentially transforming the honeybee into the latest incarnation of the Chia Pet for the Toys "R" Us crowd.


Hope this isn't a repost. I did search around. I don't have enough of an opinion yet since I am a beenoob (or "bee haver" as greghargett85 said), so I am just linking for now.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



WBVC said:


> Odd response. I meant would folks have been so cynical if the price was within their personal comfort zone. I did not mean would the crowd funding and manufacturing have been feasible.


My apologies - I thought you were talking about the vitriol coming from the people who thought it was absurdly priced (which it is if they truly want to revolutionize the beekeeping industry as they claim).

I came onto this thread very late so I missed any of the cynicism expressed in the first 45 pages.

If you're the type that believes this father-and-son team of Aussies would go to all this crowd funding effort to take the money and run, you should probably have your head examined.

Cynicism (or skepticism) about the products performance, reliability, etc... are all justifiable at this early stage but will dissipate (or grow) with experience.

Cynicism that they say they are doing it for the benefit of the bees and it is actually damaging to the hive? There are many experienced beekeepers out there very set in their ways, but anyone who has any reasonable level of experience with these critters knows how fantastically flexible and adaptable they are. I use Permacomb and Honey Super Cell frames right alongside my 1-1/4" foundationless frames and my bees make use of everything I give them.

Cynicism that what appears to be great for beekeeping may actually turn out to be disasterous is the one criticism I am personally most sympathetic to. All these beekeepers jumping into the hobby naively and then suddenly municipalities are overwhelmed with swarms and a large number of mid-managed colonies, possibly a resurgence of Foulbrood in urban areas, there are many things that can go wrong if a large number of dimwits get bees without really having what they are getting into, enticed by this fantastic Flow marketing campaign.

But I guess I feel like we should give our fellow man the benefit of the doubt and also have confidence in the fantastic ability of the honey bees to sell their own charms. And that is the reason I found the newbie beekeepers who attended my most recent class because they had purchased a Flow Hive promising sign. If even a quarter of those 30,000 new beekeepers who have supported Flow are as thoughtful and as effective in their approach to their new adventure in beekeeping as the couple I encountered in my class, I think this is going to work out well (even if the Flow Frames turn out to only be a fad).

If there is other types of cynicism you had in mind, you will have to explain, but for that last type (for which I come closest to having any sympathy), the short answer is that no, I don't think the high price had anything to do with it


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> They say that crystallized honey will not prevent the mechanism from working but that the crystallized honey does not flow out. But the cappings get cracked and so the bees clean out the crystallized honey.


If you are watching the hive and you extract shortly after the cells are capped why would there be crystallized honey?


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> Extracting will be different, but actual work in the hive will be the same, if anyone is intimidated by that a flow hive is not going to mean they don't have to do it.


I may be wrong but I think robing the honey from the bees is when the hive is most intimidating. You can't help but spill honey and you are doing it when the hive is at maximum strength and you have to get all the bees off the combs and keep them off. What ever method you use it tends to rile them up. When you are not steeling honey and just looking into the brood nest it doesn't seem to rile them so much and usually there is a lot less of them. So I think there is a big difference intimidation wise in a flow hive system.


----------



## Ziva

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

We will not know how the Flowhive works in various real world conditions for another 1 1/2 - 2 years when the feedback from users is in. I can wait and am very interested to see what the outcome will be.

My problem with the Flowhive is the same as it's been from Day 1 -----The (false) Marketing.

They started selling a fantasy of no-work-no-stings-endless-easy-honey that was "less stress" for the bees. It wasn't until AFTER they had raised a few million$, and AFTER getting criticism, that they FINALLY started putting up a blurb about still needing to "check the hive" and connect with a "local bee association". After further criticism, they started adding more to their site about the need to do all the regular hive maintenance. Then they started selling beesuits/gloves. This caused confusion among those early buyers who said, "Why are you selling armour? I thought we didn't need it because there's no stings!" "Why are you selling suits? We don't need to even open the hive!". Fortunately, many non-beek buyers are aware they need to take classes/learn about bees which they're now doing or planning to.

But it was too little too late for others. Even TODAY I'm still seeing (countless) posts saying, "I'm allergic to/afraid of bee stings so never had a hive before. Now with the Flowhive I can! I love honey!", another (countless) comment is, "This hive is AMAZING! It will save the bees! Save the World!". Along with various (countless) comments such as, "I just bought a Flowhive. Where do I get a queen to start the hive?", "I bought a Flowhive because there's a lot of bees on my flowers. Now they have a place to put the honey. I love honey!", "Can you make the Flowhive in a smaller size so it fits in my kitchen so I can get fresh honey when I'm cooking?", "You beekeepers against the Flowhive are just jealous. Instead of being a hater why don't you take one of your spare queens and a few drones and put them in a Flowhive and see all the honey for yourself!", "Awesome, a hive that I can just set up and forget about then come back at the end of the season to tap my honey with less equipment than standard hives.", "blah, blah, blah, beekeepers, blah, blah, blah. It's the honey! Duh!", "How many bees will the box hold? I'm assuming you don't want to many", "Do the hives come with one of those frames with a hole in to keep the queen out? I hope so!". Etc., etc., etc.

Along with many other comments such as the ones above, is a total attack on beeks who try to clarify how bees and hives actually work. We get told the same thing over and over, "You're just jealous cuz they made a lot of money", "You old-school beekeepers just don't like new things. If you had your way we'd still be using horse and buggies instead of cars". "You're just afraid of losing your honey sales because now everyone can make their own honey!"

*sigh*

So, the (especially initial) fantasy advertizing with the infomercial from the Flowhive guys, is what got so many clueless people to buy these hives. The outcome for them is predictable. They're only interested in "easy honey", so they won't last as "beekeepers". That's where all the cheap Flowhives on craigslist will come from.

For the others, it's wait and see, since the Flowhive has not been field tested in various conditions/environments. Of course, that's to be expected for anything new.

My gripe is still with them selling a fantasy, which people are still falling for evidenced by the comments STILL coming in.

Also, regarding the initial price of $600/hive dropping; the Flowhive guys have said MORE than once, that the hives being sold on the Indiegogo campaign are the DISCOUNT prices and the price will go UP once the campaign is over and they start selling from their website (TBD).


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Ziva said:


> "I bought a Flowhive because there's a lot of bees on my flowers. Now they have a place to put the honey. I love honey!"


Surely whoever said that was joking?

If not, they need to leave whatever crazy web site it is they are posting on, and connect with some proper information on Beesource.


----------



## Ziva

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> Surely whoever said that was joking?
> 
> If not, they need to leave whatever crazy web site it is they are posting on, and connect with some proper information on Beesource.


That was on the FlowHive site! I'm serious, and there were so many comments equally disturbing. That's why I posted here. To vent my frustrations with seeing insane comments like that. There's many more of them!


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Hmm.. Maybe someone like Mike Bush who carries some weight with them should have a word with them about moderating their site.

The other thing I'm wondering, is if someone malicious is deliberately posting comments like that in order to discredit...

It is hard to believe there is really somebody out there who would think they see bees on their flowers so they get a flowhive and the bees will fill it with honey for them. It is so stupid you have to wonder if it is intentionally malicious.


----------



## Ziva

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Oldtimer, The problem is that I'm seeing this consistently on various legit sites, like the Flowhive FB page. And on the FlowHive video comments. The Flowhive people don't seem to respond to these comments, as well as to "difficult" questions on the "reddit" site. Here's a similar comment to the one I already quoted. This was posted <24 hours ago on the Flowhive Indiegogo site: "Is it really that easy? Just putting a Flow Hive in your backyard waiting for the bees to come and at the right time opening the faucet and the honey flows?". This was asked by someone who sent them $600+ so I don't think they're being malicious.

At least the person said it as a question instead of a statement, but he still got no response.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

jhminkas 11 points 4 days ago "Did you test this hive in the United States?"

FlowHive[S] 7 points 4 days ago Stu: "Yes we tested in the US, principally with Michael Bush."



Michael Bush said:


> My test of it so far is too small and over too short of a time to be sure what I think of it in practice


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I just finished building a top bar hive that I am going to hive in a couple days.
I designed it to accept an 8 frame lang on top (a flow hive super).
I will let you know next summer if it work(s) or if I am going to try to sell the flow frames on e-bay. LOL
I was a lang beek when I was a teen and I LOATHED the harvest process...
I THINK I am going to enjoy harvesting comb from my new top-bars and if the flow hive works even half as well as they advertise, I am going to really enjoy it.
Either way, I miss keeping bees and can't wait to get going again.
Picking up package number 1 next Wednesday!
I know I helped stir up trouble and emotions in this thread but I truly appreciate all the advice and discussion on this and countless other threads I have read.
wish me success!
Billy


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

There's a few issues getting top bar hives to work supers. Please post a pic of it with the lid off (showing the top bars) so if it's not going to work people can give suggestions.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Ziva said:


> Day 1 -----The (false) Marketing.


All marketing is false. In every case you are trying to paint a picture in the consumers mind that isn't real.


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Barry said:


> jhminkas 11 points 4 days ago "Did you test this hive in the United States?"
> 
> FlowHive[S] 7 points 4 days ago Stu: "Yes we tested in the US, principally with Michael Bush."


...or this quote from Mr. Bush's post on the subject(#643)

"So responding to questions is promoting now???? To be clear. I am not selling these. I am not promoting these. I am not endorsing them. I do not make any money from them. I am merely answering questions since I'm one of the few people who has actually seen one, I seem to be the most qualified at the moment to address the questions"


----------



## BadBeeKeeper

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> It is hard to believe there is really somebody out there who would think they see bees on their flowers so they get a flowhive and the bees will fill it with honey for them. It is so stupid you have to wonder if it is intentionally malicious.


OT, I used to think that people (in general) could not possibly be as stupid as they seemed...but in the ten years or so that I spent busting stock scams I came to learn that there are an awful lot of incredibly stupid people out there, who will believe just about anything anyone tells them no matter how ridiculous it might be. I place a lot of the blame for that on organized 'religions' that condition people to believe things that can't possibly be true, to accept on 'faith' things for which there is absolutely no evidence and which lack any credibility in reality, or things for which available evidence points to the exact opposite.

They are conditioned to turn off the rational part of their minds, and to ignore the voice of skepticism that should be warning them. It is one of the reasons that 'propaganda' works so well, when someone who appears (to them) to be in a position of power tells them that they should believe what they say. Just look at the anti-neonic crowd who continue to parrot their schtick despite evidence to the contrary.

Yes, there really -are- people -that- stupid out there.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>How did you like them 'overall'?

It's the coolest invention for beekeeping in a hundred years, but it's hard to say how they will work out in the long run. I've only had them on the bees for a couple of months before the flow was over so I have too little experience with them to have broad conclusions on what I think of them in a bigger context of using them on more of my hives and what issues will come up.

>Did the bees readily know the cells had been emptied and jumped right in to clean up and start over?

Yes, bees know when cells are empty.

>Did you use a queen excluder? (Some are wondering what to do if brood is laid in them.) 

I did not. But then I have a lot of drone comb in my brood nest. Cedar says on at least one occasion they got some drone brood in them when they did not use one. I did not see any, but the Andersons have been experimenting with them for a decade. I've only had one hive with them for a couple of months.

>Does it seem like they'll hold up well?

I haven't had them long enough to tell. The comb is the same material as Honey Super Cell and PermaComb. I've had PermaComb for more than a decade and it has held up very well. But the frame is something else, and I have too little experience with that to say.

>And, is the idea/implementation really as neat & useful as I think they may be?

It is certainly mind blowing to insert a couple of "cranks" into a comb, turn them and run honey out... pretty mind blowing. How useful it will be will take more experience to decide. At the current price, I can't see it. They do overplay the "honey on tap" thing. You still have to make sure it's all capped and you would at least drain one entire comb at a time if not the whole hive. If you were doing to do just one comb you would have to keep track of things so you don't end up draining an unripe one that isn't capped yet... I don't see how you can just run out enough for your pancakes and then leave and have that work out well.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



BadBeeKeeper said:


> Yes, there really -are- people -that- stupid out there.


While I agree that the way some folks dicuss against neonics is not right, the underlying matter certainly is no fantasy. The European Commission has recently reviewed 350 studies on bees and neonics, from which 100 studies are newer than 2012. I read a lot of them myself (wrote a review) and sure there are huge questionmarks on how this stuff possibly could be used safely. However. Actually there is more evidence on the anti-neonic side of this shiny coin of truth.

What this got to do with the Flow Hive or with naevity of people concerning honeybees I don't know. :s 

To add a nice, more or less ontopic story on stupid people, I once was called by an "orchard owner" to bring bees for pollination of his apples. Turned out he just planted two(!) apple trees, maybe four foot high. Ten blossoms each. :scratch: 

Someone else - he was a beekeeping beginner - asked me, if he should move his bees closer to the fruit trees, so they can find them. His bees were 20 yards from the fruit trees. So yes, basicly a lot of people have not the slightest clue on honeybees. (And neonics...) Even if they pick up keeping bees. And to be honest: I did not know myswelf what I was starting when I took on beekeeping...


----------



## Ziva

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> All marketing is false. In every case you are trying to paint a picture in the consumers mind that isn't real.


Showing a child putting honey on her bread direct from the hive, and an even younger child putting her finger in flowing honey direct from the hive, both wearing no protection, is beyond just false marketing-----it's IRRESPONSIBLE!!


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Oh Please. Leaving your child in a car is irresponsible where as letting your child enjoy a calm hive is just an experience. Both have been done more times then you can count.


----------



## Ziva

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> Oh Please. Leaving your child in a car is irresponsible where as letting your child enjoy a calm hive is just an experience. Both have been done more times then you can count.


So you have teaching hives set up at an Elementary School like I do? I've seen more children around a calm hive than YOU can count.

Want to hear some stories...........??????


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Hmmmm... Off topic nastiness.


----------



## BeeGhost

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Get the camera phone out...........its gonna get nasty!!


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Ziva said:


> So you have teaching hives set up at an Elementary School like I do?


God bless you but I said "your" child not 20 uncontrollable brats.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> There's a few issues getting top bar hives to work supers. Please post a pic of it with the lid off (showing the top bars) so if it's not going to work people can give suggestions.


I haven't modified the bars yet but the plan is to rout the bars to provide a 'bee-space' gap between several of them and set the super directly on top of the bars.
I want to have the honey flow box in hand before I mod the bars and re-design the lid so I can get the dimensions exact.
When I stated "I designed it to accept an 8 frame lang...", I only meant size wise.
My plan for this season is to just run it like a normal top bar and let the bees get established and remember how to bee a beek. =)
I really don't give a hoot if the honey-flow thing works or not, I'm gonna have fun building hives and playing with the bees!
I appreciate the support, when I get the thing in hand I will come back for some advice before I start modifying the bars.
Bill


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

OK sounds like you know what you doing.

In some past threads, people with top bars have complained their bees won't work the super, then it turns out all they have is a tiny hole the bees are supposed to go through into the super, this has happened several times so must be some psychological reason people think it would work.

But in fact you need enough access space that the bees see the whole thing including the super as one hive. So if you routed the top bars so you had gaps similar to what there is with lang top bars, ie, plenty of access to the box above, they will work it.


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> I found the newbie beekeepers who attended my most recent class because they had purchased a Flow Hive promising sign. If even a quarter of those 30,000 new beekeepers who have supported Flow are as thoughtful and as effective in their approach to their new adventure in beekeeping as the couple I encountered in my class, I think this is going to work out well (even if the Flow Frames turn out to only be a fad).


How does this fit in the larger picture? Does anyone know? 

"*30,000 new beekeepers.*" How many new beekeepers are there in an average year? What's the spread internationally? And how does this Flow™ Frame 'fad' compare with trends in the last 8-10 years, say, since CCD got people's attention? And how does _this_ 'fad' (and the general trend in the last few years) compare with longer-term trends — other times when interest levels jumped, in the last century? Are there any books or articles (or web pages?) that give that sort of background information, in specific numbers?

It would seem at least the bee supply companies would be interested in this sort of thinking. Maybe researchers? Who else is looking at this phenomenon with a vested interest?

I'd start a new thread with these questions, but Barry's been consolidating all Flow Hive discussion into this one thread. We have our own record numbers (Replies / Views) to push up to stratospheric levels. 

.
Oh, and it looks like this thread has been tucked away, now, in the Equipment/Hardware section rather than the general-interest Bee Forum. :shhhh:
.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Just have put two and two together.

For a full hive, you pay 600 US$. Right.
You pay another 116 US$ shipping (to Europe). Right.

Plus, the German custom duty take an impost worth of 135 US$

Plus a bee package worth of 150 US$.

Good grief, 1,000 bucks for hive you can't winter bees in. Still you need to buy foundations and other stuff. 

You can buy a lot of honey for that money. 

That flow thing is for people that fear bees and fear hard work. 

HARVESTING YOUR HONEY USED TO BE A REAL LABOUR OF LOVE

Yeah right. And it is supposed to be that way. Work is love made visible.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Not to worry, the Flow Forums are soon to arrive!


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



BernhardHeuvel said:


> For a full hive, you pay 600 US$. Right.
> You pay another 116 US$ shipping (to Europe). Right.
> Plus, the German custom duty take an impost worth of 135 US$
> Plus a bee package worth of 150 US$.
> 
> Good grief, 1,000 bucks for hive you can't winter bees in.


$1,001, by my count. Nice to have a number, and for those who might pay less on some of these costs, yes, there are others to be added in as well.

By the way, do U.S. buyers (perkers? perk-ees?) have to pay customs? Whew, that might upset a few people! Or if it's a "perk" maybe it doesn't count as having real value? :scratch:



BernhardHeuvel said:


> You can buy a lot of honey for that money.
> 
> That flow thing is for people that fear bees and fear hard work.
> 
> HARVESTING YOUR HONEY USED TO BE A REAL LABOUR OF LOVE
> 
> Yeah right. And it is supposed to be that way. Work is love made visible.


Very profound! :applause: It does help sometimes to step back to get better perspective on these sorts of things. "Work is love made visible." :thumbsup:


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

The customs question is a valid one. Do folks pay taxes, customs and brokerage fees on "perks" or is the Physical perk a freebee thankyou of no value?


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



WBVC said:


> The customs question is a valid one. Do folks pay taxes, customs and brokerage fees on "perks" or is the Physical perk a freebee thankyou of no value?


Yeah! All of a sudden the discussion about what the price will be on the open market becomes real.

Is it overpriced in order to collect start-up money for a deserving cause, or is it underpriced as a special inducement for the early supporters to buy in? Someone recently quoted the Flow™ Frame people saying they plan to sell at a higher price later. It was meant to reassure their contributors, perhaps, but it might come back to bite them... inch:


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

OK well now the penny drops why no commercial beekeepers on Beesource think it will fly commercially.

Although my own opinion is even if it was free it would still not fly commercially.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> OK well now the penny drops why no commercial beekeepers on Beesource think it will fly commercially.


Because it is a completely different way of managing a business and that would be uncomfortable for anyone who is used to doing things a certain way. The change will come slowly most likely by way of sideliners that grow into commercial as the existing commercials get out of the business.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

any sideliner that would go to a flow hive system will never reach the commercial level.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> Because it is a completely different way of managing a business.


In terms of running a hive, it's not much different.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Kofu said:


> Someone recently quoted the Flow™ Frame people saying they plan to sell at a higher price later. It was meant to reassure their contributors, perhaps, but it might come back to bite them... inch:


Maybe, maybe not. I'm an early contributor, and if my $640 set of stuff dropped to $400 a year after I get mine, I won't feel cheated in the slightest. I know I'm paying for early access, just as I would for lots of other scarce products.

Their early business plan probably bears little resemblance to their situation today. Planning to build 2,500 of something and planning to build 250,000 of something makes the math just completely and utterly different. Tooling that would be unthinkable at 2,500 becomes a no-brainer at 250K. Same with automated assembly. Raw materials can be purchased by the ton instead of the pound. I would not be at all surprised if their incremental unit costs are now 1/3 to 1/2 of what was in their original plans.

They also need less gross margin, because they have what's called "operating leverage," e.g. once their fixed overhead has been covered, you don't need to make as much on additional units sold.

Now if the Flow folks want to reward early contributors with some extra stuff, I wouldn't complain at all! But I'm not expecting it, and I don't feel entitled to anything more than what I've "purchased." As a corollary, the original iPhone 8GB went to market at $599, and then Apple dropped it by $200 just over 60 days later. There was weeping and gnashing of teeth, and then Apple offered "early adopters" a $100 gift card to mollify them. I think that was good PR, and it mostly resolved the hullabaloo. From the business's side, a $100 credit or gift card doesn't necessarily cost them nearly $100.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Kofu said:


> Yeah! All of a sudden the discussion about what the price will be on the open market becomes real.
> 
> Is it overpriced in order to collect start-up money for a deserving cause, or is it underpriced as a special inducement for the early supporters to buy in? Someone recently quoted the *Flow™ Frame people saying they plan to sell at a higher price later. *It was meant to reassure their contributors, perhaps, but it might come back to bite them... inch:


I agree that representation was disingenuous and one of the only things I've seen out of these folks that has set off warning flags.

While at the beginning when they trying to raise $70,000 to build 1000-2000 Flow Frames, that position may have had some justification, as soon as this thing took off and it was clear they were going to be manufacturing in far higher volumes than they had anticipated, they should have stopped stating that (but they have not).

When the dust has cleared, an Apple-like additional perk to their early supporters would be a honorable gesture following the rush of this IndieGoGo campaign.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> I agree that representation was disingenuous and one of the only things I've seen out of these folks that has set off warning flags.
> 
> While at the beginning when they trying to raise $70,000 to build 1000-2000 Flow Frames, that position may have had some justification, as soon as this thing took off and it was clear they were going to be manufacturing in far higher volumes than they had anticipated, they should have stopped stating that (but they have not).
> 
> When the dust has cleared, an Apple-like additional perk to their early supporters would be a honorable gesture following the rush of this IndieGoGo campaign.


I don't find it disengenous; I find it out of date. I really do believe that they had smaller dreams back then, because they didn't know how the world would react. Else they would have set their initial target much higher, with loftier goals for capital investment. $70,000 doesn't buy a lot of molds. $10M buys several iterations of molds to get it just right, and then a few dozen sets to ramp up volume manufacturing in multiple locations. And a pony.


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> I agree that representation was disingenuous and one of the only things I've seen out of these folks that has set off warning flags.


Actually I was wondering, when customs and inspections people assess the value of the Flow™ equipment when it crosses the border, what do they look at? Perhaps what people paid? But if it's worth even more than that, and early supporters are getting a discount price, then the assessed value would be higher.

Supposedly China charges import duty of 100% of the assessed value. (How many Indiegogo contributors are there in China?) Of course, they can make their own... :lookout:


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



beeware10 said:


> any sideliner that would go to a flow hive system will never reach the commercial level.


Lets be honest you don't believe a sideliner will ever become a commercial unless they do it your way.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

ace It's way beyond your background to talk about sideliners or commercials. (that was being honest)


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Maybe but it is not way beyond my background to talk about innovations that change how things are done in the future. I am sure it is for you though.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Consider this, _beeware10_: Acebird is the creative _innovative _genius behind the Aqueous Hurricane Hive Holddown[SUP]®[/SUP]™.

What brilliant idea will he come up with next? :lpf:

:gh:


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

scares me. lol


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> Maybe but it is not way beyond my background to talk about innovations that change how things are done in the future.


Could you come up with an innovation that allows you (Brian) to open your hive and manage it?


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> Maybe but it is not way beyond my background to talk about innovations that change how things are done in the future. I am sure it is for you though.


I.E. You're an advice troll of epic proportions. We started at the same time and I have 30 healthy hives and yours is :s Countless people have tried to help you over 4 years and you're still below the level of a beginner? Trolling is obviously what you enjoy, not beekeeping.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Rader Sidetrack said:


> Consider this, _beeware10_: Acebird is the creative _innovative _genius behind the Aqueous Hurricane Hive Holddown[SUP]®[/SUP]™.
> 
> What brilliant idea will he come up with next? :lpf:
> 
> :gh:


Radar I just coughed up my drink!


----------



## Colobee

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I read a few of the first pages of this thread. Now this one. Did I miss anything _meaningful_ in the middle?


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> Because it is a completely different way of managing a business and that would be uncomfortable for anyone who is used to doing things a certain way. The change will come slowly most likely by way of sideliners that grow into commercial as the existing commercials get out of the business.


This is an interesting view, and one that is quite common. 

However as someone who actually once was commercial, what I've seen is this. Most changes are in fact made, or come from, hobbyists, sideliners, or whatever they are called now. Cos there are a lot more of them and they do a lot of thinking plus some of them consider themselves pretty smart and able to think outside the box. But changes that actually work or improve things, mostly are adopted or come from, commercial beekeepers. They tend to have the knowledge to spot the ones that are not going to work and avoid them, even though they may be enthusiastically embraced by less experienced or brand new beekeepers.

Ace, can you tell me a useful innovation that is not adopted by commercial beekeepers cos they are unable to change? Just don't say treatment free beekeeping, it's a different discussion, and it would be financial suicide for most commercial beekeepers at this time, therefore not being a useful innovation for them.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Over $11M with 3 days remaining...

Over 31,000 supporters and 1400 Flow Hives remaining to sell - they could just make it over $12M if the interest level sustains...


----------



## beesquad15

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Looks really Cool!! But I am very skeptical! I am going to hang on to my money ,and what till some one gets it and posts there findings on Beesource! Love this site!


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I just love these Ausies. To bits. Check this out. :applause:

"We’re really proud that Flow™ has been embraced by so many new and existing beekeepers worldwide.

For the hobbyist beekeeper, honey is a delicious bonus. But there is so much more to it, and “newbees” really have a treat in store in getting to know their hives.

But beekeeping, like all animal husbandry, is not without its challenges. For beginners, there’s much to learn and we’ll be making sure that when your hive arrives, you won’t be on your own. 

Flow Community

In the coming months, we’ll be rolling out an online education and community portal.

Among other features, we’ll be including instructional videos and articles, and forums where the Flow community of experience and new beekeepers alike can exchange tips and ideas, images and success stories.

We’ll continue to stay in contact as we work on the portal and soon will ask for your input regarding what you would like to see there.

Beekeeping Associations Directory

As you know, we’ve always encouraged new beekeepers to get involved with their local beekeepers’ groups to learn as much as they can before their Flow™ Hives and Frames arrive.

So, the first task for the community portal is creating a Beekeeping Associations Directory. We’re still working on the design, but the directory is ready to be populated now.

If you’re already part of a group, or know of one near you, please fill out the form here: http://community.honeyflow.com/find-a-bee-club/join-us-form/p/95 so that other beekeepers can make contact when the directory goes live in a couple of weeks.

That way, new beekeepers will have plenty of time to get involved and learn as much as they can before they get started on this endlessly fascinating and rewarding hobby.

Let the learning begin!

Cedar, Stu, and the Flow team."

:applause:


----------



## BeeGhost

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I think the creators of the flow hive have done nothing other than copied American dairies!!! 

Coming soon to a commercial outfit near you: Imagine, a whole inline system of pipes and hoses out in the bee yard with a central collection tank, like a dairy, or better yet, like a maple syrup farm!!! Heck, cut out the whole extraction line and just start bottling right in the field, its that easy!!!

Honestly, i think there are going to bee a lot of ticked off hobbyists when the honey doesn't flow like it says, or, one heck of a robbing session will start happening!!


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

They will have their hands full running their own educational site, just attempting to moderate and steer in the right direction thousands of new beekeepers, and they would have an obligation to remove or edit wrong or misleading posts, would be a nightmare. 

Their lives would be easier if they cooperated with Beesource and got a flow section going here. Then as the flowhive keepers progressed and got interested in the other aspects of beekeeping such as say, queen breeding, all the info would be right where they could find it.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> They will have their hands full running their own educational site, just attempting to moderate and steer in the right direction thousands of new beekeepers, and they would have an obligation to remove or edit wrong or misleading posts, would be a nightmare.
> 
> Their lives would be easier if they cooperated with Beesource and got a flow section going here. Then as the flowhive keepers progressed and got interested in the other aspects of beekeeping such as say, queen breeding, all the info would be right where they could find it.


The problem would be the flood of "Flow hive sucks!" postings and other drama, just as we've seen in 54 pages of this thread. And the Flow guys would have no ability to moderate it. Even if Barry were to give them restricted mod privileges over a sub-forum, having a 3rd-party moderate any part of Beesource for commercial purposes would compromise the objectivity and reputation of the entire site.

Just look at the crud Michael Bush received just for saying, "Yeah, I tried it and it worked."

So it's better for Flow to have their own forum that they can moderate. There's nothing to stop them from liberally linking to relevant threads over here 

I'm a Flow supporter/investor/customer/sucker, so I intend to sign up and participate over there. And to link liberally to here.


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> The problem would be the flood of "Flow hive sucks!" postings and other drama, just as we've seen in 54 pages of this thread. And the Flow guys would have no ability to moderate it. Even if Barry were to give them restricted mod privileges over a sub-forum, having a 3rd-party moderate any part of Beesource for commercial purposes would compromise the objectivity and reputation of the entire site.
> 
> Just look at the crud Michael Bush received just for saying, "Yeah, I tried it and it worked."
> 
> So it's better for Flow to have their own forum that they can moderate. There's nothing to stop them from liberally linking to relevant threads over here
> 
> I'm a Flow supporter/investor/customer/sucker, so I intend to sign up and participate over there. And to link liberally to here.


What perk did you end up supporting?


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



fafrd said:


> What perk did you end up supporting?


$460 for "Flow Full" box with 7 frames, plus $57 for shipping. I already have everything else I need (including the bees ).

I plan on converting from deep-medium to double-deep next season, so after they fill their second deep I'll put the Flow box on top and roll the dice!

By that time my second colony (now just a newly-installed package) should be producing as well, so I'll have a backup honey source if it fails miserably.


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I think having a Flow Hive section on BeeSource is a great idea in spite of the curmudgeons on here.:lookout:


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



SowthEfrikan said:


> I just love these Ausies. To bits. Check this out. :applause:


It sure doesn't look like they are scoundrels that plan on cutting and run with the loot. The more people bad mouth them the more I think they will succeed not only with hobbyist but a complete overhaul of beekeeping in general. They are doing everything right.


----------



## beesquad15

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I wonder what would happen if brood got in the flow frames?? Probably a mess lolol


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

She won't. The bottom of the cell is too deep. Think of it like a really fat honey comb.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

55 pages and we are covering the same objections...


----------



## BeeCurious

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Acebird said:


> 55 pages and we are covering the same objections...


Here's a new one:

There's no breakeven point in purchasing / using the device. It's completely impractical, it's a novelty that will provide fewer laughs than Pet Rocks... at a much higher cost.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Yeah, yeah, yeah, bury your head in the sand.


----------



## AHudd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

A month or so ago I was reading their FAQ page. At one point they stated the flow frames could be modified to fit any hive, then someone asked why it was not available in Australia. The answer was because it would not fit the Au. national standard, or some such something. So I went to an Au. bee supply website and it seems they sell the same things that are sold in the US. Very confusing. Then I started thinking about propolis and lawyers and how hard it would be to get money back from someone who lives in another country, especially money you gave to someone of your own free will.
That being said, I hope they are on the up and up and that the thing works better than advertised.


----------



## arnaud

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



BeeCurious said:


> Here's a new one:
> 
> There's no breakeven point in purchasing / using the device. It's completely impractical, it's a novelty that will provide fewer laughs than Pet Rocks... at a much higher cost.


I got news for you: for hobbyist beekeepers, there generally isn't a breakeven point either. We don't do this for the money.

It's actually pretty much true of just about any hobby.

As for professional use, it's a bit early to tell, but it looks like those guys might make a decent living - like many companies - just targeting the hobbyist market.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



AHudd said:


> A month or so ago I was reading their FAQ page. At one point they stated the flow frames could be modified to fit any hive, then someone asked why it was not available in Australia. The answer was because it would not fit the Au. national standard, or some such something. So I went to an Au. bee supply website and it seems they sell the same things that are sold in the US. Very confusing. Then I started thinking about propolis and lawyers and how hard it would be to get money back from someone who lives in another country, especially money you gave to someone of your own free will.
> That being said, I hope they are on the up and up and that the thing works better than advertised.


Not long now until a lot of folks will be trying, and hopefully writing about, the flow hive.
The fellow I chatted with that had used it last year was amazed by how well it worked. He had thought it would not work...and it worked very well.


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



shannonswyatt said:


> She won't. The bottom of the cell is too deep. Think of it like a really fat honey comb.


Flow Hive recommends using a queen excluder between the brood nest and the honey box. They've had queens go up and lay drones in the flow frames.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrRzp78NHcc


----------



## fafrd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> Over $11M with 3 days remaining...
> 
> Over 31,000 supporters and 1400 Flow Hives remaining to sell - they could just make it over $12M if the interest level sustains...


The IndieGoGo campaign is in it's final hours with over $12M raised from more than 35,000 supporters.

Impressive, wherever things go from here...


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

The campaign couldn't be over soon enough for me.
I dread where it goes from here.


----------



## challenger

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Sorry if this has been asked. A friend saw this product on a television news show. They told me the company stated it was worth $40,000,000.00? Forty million dollars for a company that has no sales history other than this initial push to get started? 
Perhaps my friend was misinformed about what he was watching? 
Liberals say that conservatives have their head in the sand. 
Conservatives say liberals have their head up their *****.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>Sorry if this has been asked. A friend saw this product on a television news show. They told me the company stated it was worth $40,000,000.00? Forty million dollars for a company that has no sales history other than this initial push to get started? 

They have the patent on the coolest beekeeping invention of the last century if not longer, and raised $12 million dollars while greatly overpricing the product at a time when beekeeping is in the middle of a huge upswing. What could they sell once they cover their setup costs and get into real production at a reasonable price? I have no idea who "valued" the company. As far as I've heard, it isn't for sale.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

It really is the most awesome beekeeping invention - my hands get clammy with excitement at the thought of tinkering with it. Can't wait to see where it goes from here. Congrats guys on making $12M.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

40 million doesn't seem that far fetched. When a valuation of a company is made it is not solely on the products that it has sold. If you look at a lot of the .com's there are a whole bunch that have been around for a decent amount of time and don't make money. They now have commitments for 12 million in orders in just a few months and have almost nothing in but the time of a few people in this project so far. They own the patents, so until they expire they can charge confiscatory rates, and it looks like people are willing to pay that already. How long that model will last is the 40 million dollar question. You can argue that the patents will give them such a lead over everyone that they will become the dominate player in the industry. Or you can argue that they will use their patents as a weapon until it isn't useful and some company that has a better supply chain or managers will run circles around it. Either of those two are speculative. The only thing at this point that isn't speculative is the $12 raised with almost no effort. If they can generate sales the end of the year of $15 million then the valuation of the company will climb higher than $40 million. But it is all academic if they don't plan to sell. 

It will be interesting to see what happens now that crowd funding is over. Unfortunately we will probably never see another sales figure from them.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shannonswyatt said:


> Unfortunately we will probably never see another sales figure from them.


I think it's fortunately.


----------



## DanielD

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Barry said:


> I think it's fortunately.


I'm with you there.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I say unfortunately since we have seen the explosive interest up front, but now we will only see what they want us to see.


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Do you plan on using the invention of the century in your hives now that you have "tested" it?
Is it practical? as in ThePracticalBeekeeper?
clyde



Michael Bush said:


> They have the patent on the coolest beekeeping invention of the last century if not longer, and raised $12 million dollars while greatly overpricing the product at a time when beekeeping is in the middle of a huge upswing. What could they sell once they cover their setup costs and get into real production at a reasonable price? I have no idea who "valued" the company. As far as I've heard, it isn't for sale.


----------



## beeware10

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

the only thing I know for sure is they made more money than the average beekeeper. lol


----------



## Ziva

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> ......raised $12 million dollars while greatly overpricing the product....What could they sell once they cover their setup costs and get into real production at a reasonable price?


According to them, they don't plan on selling their greatly overpriced product at a "reasonable price". They plan to sell it at a HIGHER price than on the Indiegogo campaign, which, according to them was a "discount" price.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



SowthEfrikan said:


> It really is the most awesome beekeeping invention - my hands get clammy with excitement at the thought of tinkering with it. Can't wait to see where it goes from here. Congrats guys on making $12M.


Just to clarify--these guys aren't "making $12M." 

They have effectively booked $12M in pre-orders, and they now have to tool up, staff up, build product, ship product, and educate and service a lot of people in a lot of countries, plus invest in future growth and future products.

They might even have to deal with a bunch of folks who think they're the worst thing to happen in beekeeping since varroa destructor.

I have no doubt that these guys will keep a decent chunk of that $12M, but they're not keeping all of it, and there's going to be a ton of stress and sweat to go along with it.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I wouldn't want to walk in their boots!


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>They might even have to deal with a bunch of folks who think they're the worst thing to happen in beekeeping since varroa destructor.

They already are dealing with them... But if someone isn't angry about what you are doing, then it probably isn't really revolutionary...

>Do you plan on using the invention of the century in your hives now that you have "tested" it?

I'll keep the one box of it I have going, yes. Will I buy more? If it's available and if the price comes down I will certainly consider it.

>Is it practical? as in ThePracticalBeekeeper?

Not yet.

>According to them, they don't plan on selling their greatly overpriced product at a "reasonable price". They plan to sell it at a HIGHER price than on the Indiegogo campaign, which, according to them was a "discount" price.

If that is the discounted price then it is never going to be practical. I can see them not bringing it down until the demand drops off, but I can't see it staying that high forever.


----------



## camero7

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Keep an eye on Craig's List in the next few years, there will be lots of it for sale.


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

With all the international publicity they have garnered, they are probably close to saturating their market at their current price. Still, $12,000,000 in sales is an absolutely huge number for beekeeping gear, so, saturating at 12M$ is quite an achievement and not a bad position to be in.

At $400 or $600 or whatever they are charging per super of frames, it is just too expensive to be practical for commercial beekeepers to use regardless of how well it may work. Meaning, the only way to move beyond the now-saturated hobbyist market will be to drop the price enough so it is practical for the commercial beeks. However, it appears a price drop is not in their marketing plan, but who knows what they will do once reality overtakes them.





.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shinbone said:


> However, it appears a price drop is not in their marketing plan,


Plans are just plans, it wasn't in Apple's either.


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

_"Plans are just plans, it wasn't in Apple's either."_



shinbone said:


> . . . . but who knows what they will do once reality overtakes them.


Exactly.


----------



## VanIslander

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

There have been a few snarky comments about HoneyFlow not providing their sales figures in the future. Please provide examples of other privately owned companies that open their books to the world. It's none of our business...!

Such is the nature of the free enterprise system. Any of us could have had the idea for these frames, hired someone of make them, tested them for ten years, and put them on a Indygogo site to raise capital. But we didn't -- HoneyFlow did. Fair dinkum....!

There have also been lots of comments about the price of these frames. One of the toughest things a company must do, is set the selling price of their products. It is not based on cost -- i.e. cost plus x% -- it is based on what their research suggests people will pay for their product. One huge factor in establishing pricing is competition, which HoneyFlow doesn't have -- *YET*. I retired from a high tech company that was constantly upgrading their products -- patents are slow, expensive, and useless. We tried to avoid having our products copied, by making them obsolete a year or two after they were launched.

The greatest danger to HoneyFlow is someone copying them. When they ship their first frames, some will almost certainly find their way to China, where there are zero scruples about reverse engineering and copying a product. If and when that happens, we'll likely see some adjustment of the prices, but that's still a couple of years away.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

The eventual Chinese version may look similar, but my gut is if you want a product that will last the distance and will not contaminate your honey, go with the genuine.


----------



## Dominic

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shinbone said:


> With all the international publicity they have garnered, they are probably close to saturating their market at their current price. Still, $12,000,000 in sales is an absolutely huge number for beekeeping gear, so, saturating at 12M$ is quite an achievement and not a bad position to be in.
> 
> At $400 or $600 or whatever they are charging per super of frames, it is just too expensive to be practical for commercial beekeepers to use regardless of how well it may work. Meaning, the only way to move beyond the now-saturated hobbyist market will be to drop the price enough so it is practical for the commercial beeks. However, it appears a price drop is not in their marketing plan, but who knows what they will do once reality overtakes them.
> .


It'd be a bad move to lower prices when the product isn't even delivered to those who pre-ordered. It'd both be a loss of potential revenue for them as well as a really bad PR move, making their thousands of customers angry about being ripped off.

I'd rather suspect they'll start offering "packages" at great discounts, for commercial beekeepers, once chinese knock-offs arrive on the market.

This is all just speculation, though. While they probably have a number of plans depending on how things turn out, I doubt even they know where they'll be in five years.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shinbone said:


> With all the international publicity they have garnered, they are probably close to saturating their market at their current price.
> .


I haven't counted the number of folks that have purchased hardware from the campaign, but I guess they have sold them to less than 50,000 folks, and a large number of those folks have never had bees. I read someplace on the internet (has to be true!) that there are over 120,000 beeks in the US alone. And my guess is the folks that have purchased frames have purchased only enough for a single hive. My guess is they have a long way to go before saturating the market. 

The problem now is the cost is too high to get many folks interested in getting enough frames to retrofit all their hives. If they can get the production cost reasonable and they end up working well they could sell a whole lot more than they have.


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shannonswyatt said:


> The problem now is the cost is too high to get many folks interested in getting enough frames to retrofit all their hives.


In other words, they have saturated the market at their current price point.


----------



## Dominic

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shinbone said:


> In other words, they have saturated the market at their current price point.


I'd have to disagree with that. I didn't follow their crowdfunding campaign too closely, but every time I checked, they were getting more support. Despite the hype dying down a tad, on social media, the sales kept coming in. While their price is too prohibitive to attract larger operations to retrofit everything (I'm not even bothering with a single one myself), that doesn't mean that they've hit the ceiling with the initial target market. Had the crowdfunding continued, the sales would have continued to increase as well. I can only assume they'll try to find another medium to attract new customers now, easier to sell while there's a hype, after all, and the internet isn't flooded about (potentially) bad experiences relating to their (mis)use.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shinbone said:


> In other words, they have saturated the market at their current price point.


How do you figure? If anything they were raising more money at the end of the campaign then in the middle.


----------



## shinbone

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shannonswyatt said:


> How do you figure?


Obviously just speculation on my part, but, the Flow Frame has received 100 times more publicity with its crowd source funding campaign than bee equipment normally does. Anyone, who, either has not heard of the Flow Frame or is not interested, will not become informed/interested after the funding campaigns ends and the company goes back to the usual bee equipment advertising mechanisms. 

In other words, once the campaign ends, their audience will shrink by a 100 fold. The only people they will be reaching, then, will have already heard of the device and are not interested or will have already made their purchase. 

JMHO





.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> Just to clarify--these guys aren't "making $12M."
> 
> Just to further clarify, these amazing guys MADE more than $12M. Personal income and total revenue are two different things, but thank you for the insight.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shinbone said:


> In other words, once the campaign ends, their audience will shrink by a 100 fold. The only people they will be reaching then will have already heard of the device and is not interested or will have already made their purchase.
> 
> JMHO


Have you considered that this is not just everyday run-of-the-mill beekeeping equipment? It's also a LIFESTYLE product. That's a huge part of the appeal. They transcended a boundary. It may have been inadvertent, but there you go. History made.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



SowthEfrikan said:


> IAmTheWaterbug said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just to clarify--these guys aren't "making $12M."
> 
> 
> 
> Just to further clarify, these amazing guys MADE more than $12M. Personal income and total revenue are two different things, but thank you for the insight.
Click to expand...

And just to clarify even further, these guys were GIVEN more than $12M. They haven't MADE anything yet.


----------



## Ian

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Imagine the R and D that can come out of 12m 
Cheers!


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shinbone said:


> In other words, once the campaign ends, their audience will shrink by a 100 fold. The only people they will be reaching, then, will have already heard of the device and are not interested or will have already made their purchase.
> .


You are making the assumption that the frames don't work and all those folks fail as beeks. (which could happen!) But if the frames work well and some of those folks do stay in the game and they decide to get more hives they may decide to get more flow frames.

They have gotten a lot of publicity, but if they work well you could end up with an echo next year when folks start using them and start getting honey from their hives with the flow frames.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Barry said:


> And just to clarify even further, these guys were GIVEN more than $12M. They haven't MADE anything yet.


If I were to get picky and behave like an accountant, the only revenue they can book so far is the donations without perks. Any funds that were pledged for a perk would be correctly categorized as a "deposit", and would have to sit in a separate accrual account until the product ships. Revenue is typically recognized upon shipment.

Even though everything is officially a "donation with perks", most accounting authorities would view that as a sale.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I wonder if any of the folks who have slandered the living 'stuff' out of the Flow guys will apologize and admit they were wrong once the frames get delivered?
probably not, they will just cite reasons why 'they were right even though they were wrong'...


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



kholmar said:


> I wonder if any of the folks who have slandered the living 'stuff' out of the Flow guys will apologize and admit they were wrong once the frames get delivered?
> probably not, they will just cite reasons why 'they were right even though they were wrong'...


I wonder if the frames will get produced and delivered.
I wonder if they do get produced and delivered if the honey will flow out of the spigot.
I still wonder why anyone would be so hyped up about it.
I wonder why anyone would spend their money on it.
I wonder.


----------



## AHudd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



clyderoad said:


> I wonder if the frames will get produced and delivered.
> I wonder if they do get produced and delivered if the honey will flow out of the spigot.
> I still wonder why anyone would be so hyped up about it.
> I wonder why anyone would spend their money on it.
> I wonder.


I wonder where all the bees are while the honey flows.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shannonswyatt said:


> ...start getting honey from their hives with the flow frames.


It is not the hive that produces the honey but the bees. So you need bees to fulfill the task. If you are a complete beginner, you need to get your bees up and running first. Think of all the installation problems you find regularily in all bee forums around the World.

Of course those problems will not be extrapolated onto the Flow Hive. No...


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

They will be to a degree.

Most folks know that it's hard getting bees in spring to move up through a queen excluder into a newly placed box of plastic foundation. The bees don't want to budge until there is a fairly good amount of nectar being collected and they are forced to. 

I think it will be the same with flow hive frames. If the hive is weak or if there is not a solid nectar flow, the bees will be reluctant to go up there. In Aussie in some areas there are strong flows and big crops, and this would make the flow hive frames work pretty well. But it may not be the same everywhere so I'm expecting there will be complaints, people slap on a flow hive box, and the bees don't touch it. But more experienced beekeepers with knowledge of their seasons and flows, and realistic expectations of what bees can and can't do, will be more likely to report success.

Course not having even seen a flow hive that's just my guess LOL.


----------



## crofter

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



BernhardHeuvel said:


> It is not the hive that produces the honey but the bees. So you need bees to fulfill the task. If you are a complete beginner, you need to get your bees up and running first. Think of all the installation problems you find regularily in all bee forums around the World.
> 
> Of course those problems will not be extrapolated onto the Flow Hive. No...


I find it baffling that the concept is to replace something technically simple and easily home made with a mechanically complex one that cannot be home made. The concept seems to focus on rectifying the part of beekeeping that creates the least brain drain for the beekeeper. As Bernhard points out you still have to know how to keep bees alive and productive on top of learning to deal with the novel problems that will come with the flow frames. I see there is a current post on how to relieve distortions that occur in time with common flat plastic foundation.

It surely must cause some cognitive dissonance for someone to support the "natural", practical, and sustainable, and also embrace this invention; it appears however that we have become very clever at rationalizing such conflicts!


----------



## BeeCurious

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



clyderoad said:


> I wonder if the frames will get produced and delivered.
> I wonder if they do get produced and delivered if the honey will flow out of the spigot.
> I still wonder why anyone would be so hyped up about it.
> I wonder why anyone would spend their money on it.
> I wonder.


I wonder if someone will post a video showing a milky streak of crushed drone larva "juice" streaming into their honey jar? 

I wonder if Flow Hive frames are more easily accepted by bees than Honey Super Cell frames?


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



BeeCurious said:


> I wonder if someone will post a video showing a milky streak of crushed drone larva "juice" streaming into their honey jar?


What happens now when you harvest out of the brood nest? I wonder...


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> What happens now when you harvest out of the brood nest? I wonder...


Good question. If you are using an excluder then it's a moot point. If not and you are using an uncapper then it's up to the vigilance of the operator. I have reason to believe that bacteria plate counts go down in raw honey when good vigilance in avoiding uncapping brood is practiced.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



jim lyon said:


> If not and you are using an uncapper then it's up to the vigilance of the operator. I have reason to believe that bacteria plate counts go down in raw honey when good vigilance in avoiding uncapping brood is practiced.


Jim, this is my thought that it is happening right now with the present system of harvesting.


----------



## Ross

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

The thread that wouldn't die...................................


----------



## titankore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

As far as price is concerned I see it going something like this. The indiego price is discounted to the initial sales price afterwards, the overall high price is due mostly because each customer is ordering 3-6 frames and in general shipping/handling thousands of small orders really drives up the price. Over time factories will lower the price of building the units as a lot of the up front cost are the molds and they would much rather keep big contracts like this project. Eventually if/when the flowhive is shown to be reliable and useful the larger beekeepers will be willing to buy in bulk. So here is my timeline for the prices based on 5 years of factory/shipping work.

Current price per frame: $70-ish (actually around $60, but the price differences between the smaller and larger kits with extra stuff makes it hard to get an exact price per frame)
1 year after indiego campaign: $70-75
5 years after indiego campaign: $50+ (retail price) $40 (bulk price)

If they work as advertised for 5-10 years with only minor repair needed then I can see them becoming fairly wide used. Time will tell

Note: I personally think you need only 3 flow frames per a hive and since harvesting is so easy only harvest one every one to two weeks depending on local flow and end up with a lot more honey without as many flow frames.


----------



## challenger

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Who harvests frames with brood? Personally I wouldn't. When I've had brood, drone or worker, in a honey super I don't harvest the honey from these frames. I put the Queen down and put the frames with brood on the outside of the highest super. The brood hatches out and the bees back fill the cells with honey. 
If this isn't practical then I cut the drone brood out and discard it. If there is enough worker brood to be worth the effort I'll put it in deep frames and into a hive body below. 
I suppose large scale honey producers may take all super frames and decap and extract. If there is a little brood juice in the honey I doubt it would introduce unhealthy components into the honey. As a matter of fact I'll go out on a limb and suggest China has put an immeasurable amount of unhealthy components into honey than any brood extraction folk in the USA have.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I know that earlier it was mentioned that the queen may lay drone brood in the cells which is why you need to use an excluder. I think the point that was being made was that since you are not pulling the frame to extract you may have one with brood in it. But if you have an excluder it would only have brood if you had a laying working or if you had a second queen.


----------



## mcon672

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I've always gone with "tried and true". This seems very much like a gimmick to me. I would dismiss it totally if it were not for Michael Bush throwing his weight behind it. I have a hard time believing that after wax, honey and propolis build up on these frames that they will still work as intended. Looks like something to put in the closet next to your Popeil's pocket fisherman and robovac. I guess time will tell. I'll wait ten years and then see what everybody is saying.


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



kholmar said:


> I wonder if any of the folks who have slandered the living 'stuff' out of the Flow guys will apologize and admit they were wrong once the frames get delivered?
> probably not, they will just cite reasons why 'they were right even though they were wrong'...


So you think all the detractors are Democrats...........G.....:lpf:


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Hey, don't dis the Pocket Fisherman. A lot of fish were pulled in with those!


----------



## biggraham610

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shannonswyatt said:


> Hey, don't dis the Pocket Fisherman. A lot of fish were pulled in with those!


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I installed package number one in a top bar hive on Wednesday.
Direct released the queen.
They seem to be happily drawing comb but of course I can't see it yet but I can see the bees all hanging on each other in a loose cluster off of the guides.

I watched a worker drag a poor drone out onto the landing board, sting him to death and throw his butt overboard. LOL
It was interesting to watch.

I post this on this thread because I 'perkchased' some flow frames and hope to put them on top of a hive next spring or summer.
For the moment, I am reading and learning to be a beek.

Package number 2 in 20ish days in a self built top bar hive.

having fun!
Billy


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Wasn't it understood that the top doesn't even have to get popped on a flow hive super? You just empty it from the side. A little milky brood juice just adds to the flavor of one's "honey on tap"


----------



## titankore

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



rwurster said:


> Wasn't it understood that the top doesn't even have to get popped on a flow hive super? You just empty it from the side. A little milky brood juice just adds to the flavor of one's "honey on tap"


I am so tired of this BS comment being repeated over and over. One it is not very likely that the queen will go all the way up to the top super to lay a bunch of drones, another is most people have an queen excluder, a third is these things have a window to check out the side of the frames and see if there is a bunch of eggs/larvae. 

"This thing will not work because you might have to adjust your methods for optimal results!"

AKA the ever evolving art of beekeeping. This is potentially a great new tool and beekeepers who want to use it will have to adjust slightly, same with anything else.


----------



## BeeCurious

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



titankore said:


> I am so tired of this BS comment being repeated over and over. One it is not very likely that the queen will go all the way up to the top super to lay a bunch of drones, another is most people have an queen excluder, a third is these things have a window to check out the side of the frames and see if there is a bunch of eggs/larvae.


You seem to be speaking with some authority/wisdom...


----------



## Barry

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

According to their profile, "new to beekeeping"

I would think these flow hives would be a big hit in third world countries where they have limited resources and can't afford the whole extraction stuff. Oh, but I suppose they won't be able to afford the cost of the frames either!


----------



## Michael Palmer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



titankore said:


> a third is these things have a window to check out the side of the frames and see if there is a bunch of eggs/larvae.


You honestly think you can see brood from a window?


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



titankore said:


> AKA the ever evolving art of beekeeping. This is potentially a great new tool and beekeepers who want to use it will have to adjust slightly, same with anything else.


You must have missed the part of the thread that detailed an almost identical "great new tool" being patented in the 40's. The other thing that buzzed over your head was me being facetious which was accentuated with my smiley ---> 

As a new beekeeper, congrats  I bet these new flow frames will work, as Tony the Tiger says "GRRRRRREAT", in your TF top bar or warre hive 

Notice the smiley at the end of that statement  :gh:


----------



## Brissy Boy

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

My 2c - I'm willing to try most anything once. Might work, might not but you'll never know if it's right for you until you've had a bit of "hands on".

A guy at Buderim (just a couple of hours north of Brisbane QLD AU) posted an interesting view on these > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ScDMIakxd4

Gotta say I'm a little cautious - Avoiding Chalkbrood, AFB or a SHB slimeout is 98% good practice + stock but there's always that small chance that your $500 investment will need to be irradiated (assuming you can't scorch it). :lookout:

Suppose you could call me a fencesitter


----------



## clong

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

There has been much discussion on this thread regarding the pros and cons of the Flow Hive, and its potential impact on beekeeping. Perhaps some would like to hear from a newbie on this. 

I got started in beekeeping primarily due to the appeal of the Flow Hive. After seeing one of the early promotional videos the prospect of keeping bees, and especially harvesting, seemed much less daunting. I spent about a month reading everything I could about bees. It helps that my brother is a beekeeper in CA. 

I set up my first two hives and installed packages in early April, so as to be ready to harvest in spring 2016. (Provided the hives survive through winter). If the hives flourish, I might get the joy of harvesting the old-fashioned way this year. So far, I am thoroughly enjoying watching and working with the bees. I have to force myself to stay out of the hives. I am already encountering problems, but thanks to Beesource and other wise counsel, I am learning. Anyway, I am glad that the Andersons spent the time and effort to bring this innovation to beekeeping. I probably wouldn't be involved otherwise.

For those who are interested, it looks like the back door is open to the Forums on Honeyflow.com:

http://forum.honeyflow.com/tos


----------



## VikingJim

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I want this one







One flower and no bees
Maybe I'll just buy honey and put it in a water cooler


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Welcome clong. If you have purchased flow hive parts or a hive I would join the forum. People here would be interest in how it works for you.


----------



## clong

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> Welcome clong. If you have purchased flow hive parts or a hive I would join the forum. People here would be interest in how it works for you.



I bought two 6 frame set-ups with box. 

I'm not sure where this forum is. Can you point me to it?

If you can persuade them to ship by June, I'll be glad to give you a report this year.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Comon clong, you provided the link.


----------



## clong

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I joined it. I thought you meant a forum on beesource.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

be interesting to see how long it takes the "I HATE EVERYTHING NEW" trolls to clutter up their forum...


----------



## Ziva

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Well, now they have the Flowhives for sell on their website, $670.00 USD (plus shipping) for the full hive. 

http://www.honeyflow.com/shop/p/94

AND they're STILL misleading people. They say on their site about the "complete" hive; "This is our complete beehive with everything you need except the bees." Er....except they tell you to use a queen excluder (not included). And, for the (majority of) buyers that don't live in a year-round nectar flow area with no winter, like the "inventors" do, what about a feeder? (not included). Etc, etc. 

Also, since they finally admitted that, oh yeah, by the way you do actually have to work the bees, they're selling their "kit" of a full (hot) suit, gloves and hive tool for $150.00 USD. 

I can't believe the people who are buying into this aren't questioning this!


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

We recommend the use of a queen excluder as this ensures no drone or worker-bee eggs and larvae end up in the Flow™ frames.
Having said this, most of our experimental Flow™ hives did not use an excluder and we never found worker brood in them and very rarely found drone brood. We have designed Flow™ comb to have deep cells of a size that suits neither worker or drone brood.
Another factor that we believe helps ensure brood stays in the brood box is giving the bees flexibility in making the brood comb by providing them with open frames rather than foundation to build on. They will then build drone or worker size brood cells as they see fit, leaving the Flow™ frames for the honey storage. 

We do not have to use a queen excluder, that is a choice and is discussed as a choice. It could be that they worded it this way so that they did not have to supply a queen excluder with the kit. Are they selling bee brushes? Smokers? Other stuff we need except for the bees?

I'm sorry, I just can't be so literal, nor get my knickers in a knot about how mislead I have been.

Roll on December. Can't wait.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

They're not providing Benadryl or Epi-pens, either! Oh, the humanity!


----------



## Stephenpbird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Maybe there is something else happening here.
Perhaps the old fashioned way of beekeeping, just doesn't meet the needs of the modern bee haver.
The Flow hive does a very good job of fulfilling those needs, that is it enables one to harvest honey from your own hive easily, even just one or two hives, with a simple management strategy, at a very affordable price. Wow, when the honey is ready to harvest you can even extract just one frame at a time.
I remember when desk top publishing first came about, we all thought that would never catch on... now smart phones are more powerful than the computers we had then.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>...finally admitted that, oh yeah, by the way you do actually have to work the bees

You mean they finally went from only saying it once in their FAQs to saying it more than three times in their FAQs? Apparently you didn't read them...


----------



## nobull56

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I love this thread!

When I first joined the bee source forum I thought I had found the fountain of wisdom. There is wisdom here, but this thread is an awesome example of the old adage "with a grain of salt". Even the moderators on be source are opinionated and abuse their vaulted position to belittle and discount us newbies. Don't get me wrong there are a few very dedicated open-minded contributors (Mr. Bush is a perfectly gentlemanly example), but the inability to see a glass half-full is disheartening.

The flow hive is new.. And while I've been doing cutouts and swarm removals in my area for a few years now; nothing has generated an interest in honeybees amongst the public the way the flow hive has! Not the vanishing of the bees. Not colony collapse disorder. Not the mighty Monsanto!
In the last month I've done three cutouts and one trap out and each of the homeowners wanted to talk about the flow hive. One old couple wanted to buy a flow hive for me to put their bees in!

I will wait and I will urge all my clients to wait. But I won't knock it till I try it!!

I don't see the flow hive as being much different than the debate between finger joints and rabbit joints on hive bodies! The old school will use finger joints forever and tell us why we are stupid to want to save time with different joinery. With new adhesives and fasteners some of us will only expose one quarter of the wood end grain using rabbit joints and not care about anyone's opinion but our customer.

I love this thread!


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



nobull56 said:


> this thread is an awesome example of the old adage "with a grain of salt".





nobull56 said:


> Even the moderators on be source are opinionated and abuse their vaulted position to belittle and discount us newbies.


Perhaps the second statement is an awesome example of the first statement.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Should say something about when I was new here. I got moderated a few times, had posts deleted, was issued a warning and got a couple snarky messages from a moderator.

Did I think it was cos I was new? No, I had the good sense to realise I had been rude, argumentative, or broken other rules. Figured it out & complied best I could and I'm still here. Never liked getting a warning but never was silly enough to think it was just cos I was new.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Shouldn't early purchasers be getting their hives in a few weeks.

For those on the list that are expecting theirs for this summer I hope you will post what it is like to set up and work with.


----------



## nobull56

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Oldtimer, Thanks for the notice. 

Was not talking about me getting any feed back from Mods. Was noticing that another newbie was called out for having a point of view & being new.
Go back a page or two and I think you will see what I was talking about.

To anyone else My humble Apology if you feel I had "had been rude, argumentative, or broken other rules".


----------



## nobull56

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Was there something other than the 'Flow Hive' that has the world talking BEES more then they are now??? I've read that this is one of the longest threads.

I would think that just the increased dialogue is worth part of the $12 Million.


----------



## lemmje

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

First thing anyone asks, when they find out i keep bees, is have i heard of that new beehive they've read about on Facebook or Pintrest. Certainly the FlowHive has generated a lot of conversation, but the volume could also be attributed to the newness and ubiquity of social media.


----------



## AHudd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

As someone who reads many of the posts' of newbies, I hear this comment many times," people need to learn to keep bees before they try TF beekeeping". I think this is true, especially with all of the added complications in modern beekeeping. 
I think a lot of people are buying into this because they think it is going to simplify beekeeping. The Flow may simplify gathering a bit of honey, but to my mind taking the honey has always been easy. Getting to the point where there is a surplus is the difficult part.
I'll admit the first time I saw this on FB, I scoffed at the Flow. The time is drawing near to when some of us will be eating crow or honey.

Alex


----------



## hypsin

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I am a relatively new beekeeper with only two hives and one winter under my belt so please feel free to take what I am about to say with a grain of salt.

Flow hive seems to be a very well thought out and cool invention with a lot of hype built up around it. It claims to change the (beekeeping) world overnight. And most beekeepers that get to use one are blown away by it, calling it revolutionary. A recipe for success for both - the consumers and the innovators, right?

But didn't we already go through a similar exercise in the early 2000s with Segway? Just like with Flow hive, celebrities were lining up behind claiming that it will change the world. Just like with Flow hive, it was a cool invention and fun to use. And just like with the Flow hive, it tried to solve a problem that did not exist for a ridiculous price. In the end, Segway was rendered useless by Chinese knock-offs with a third wheel and saw very limited adoption in the novelty markets.

I am not buying into it. Even for a small backyard beekeeper, like myself, there is little value-add apart from the "wow" factor from friends and family (which is then completely nullified by "wife-rolls-eyes" factor). On the other hand, Flow hive is more complex than traditional equipment with a lot more things that can go wrong. I can fix my wood frames and boxes with hammer and some nails. Can I do the same with a Flow frame? Nope... And please do note no mentions of any kind of warranty for the Flow hive. For a honey super costing $390 - that's a deal breaker.


----------



## challenger

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I agree that removing honey from the hive is the easiest part of harvesting. If folks want to get a flow hive thinking this will be easier then so be it. 
Personally it seems like a huge waste of money. 

I'd be interested to know if an apples to apples comparison between a flow hive and a conventional hive would produce different yields. Not a likely experiment of course.


----------



## MAXANT

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

BAM!!!!!



nobull56 said:


> I love this thread!
> 
> When I first joined the bee source forum I thought I had found the fountain of wisdom. There is wisdom here, but this thread is an awesome example of the old adage "with a grain of salt". Even the moderators on be source are opinionated and abuse their vaulted position to belittle and discount us newbies. Don't get me wrong there are a few very dedicated open-minded contributors (Mr. Bush is a perfectly gentlemanly example), but the inability to see a glass half-full is disheartening.
> 
> The flow hive is new.. And while I've been doing cutouts and swarm removals in my area for a few years now; nothing has generated an interest in honeybees amongst the public the way the flow hive has! Not the vanishing of the bees. Not colony collapse disorder. Not the mighty Monsanto!
> In the last month I've done three cutouts and one trap out and each of the homeowners wanted to talk about the flow hive. One old couple wanted to buy a flow hive for me to put their bees in!
> 
> I will wait and I will urge all my clients to wait. But I won't knock it till I try it!!
> 
> I don't see the flow hive as being much different than the debate between finger joints and rabbit joints on hive bodies! The old school will use finger joints forever and tell us why we are stupid to want to save time with different joinery. With new adhesives and fasteners some of us will only expose one quarter of the wood end grain using rabbit joints and not care about anyone's opinion but our customer.
> 
> I love this thread!


----------



## Bkwoodsbees

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Is if too good to be true? Time will tell, that is for certain. I bought a Maxant 1400pl today just in case. Call me old fashioned. ...or maybe better safe than sorry.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Time will tell. But let's say it is worth the money for the sake of the argument. A lot of guys like me love the simplicity of the beekeepers world! Mainly just bees, comb, wood, smoker, and a hive tool. Sure there are some other things but I love beekeeping for the slow down effect of it. Out of the rat race and step back into something artful, something old fashioned that still feels old fashioned. Sure there have been changes over the years, but there always will be. Call me old fashioned but the beekeeping way we have now is not broke to me.


----------



## bucksbees

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I am one of the people that read this thread, twice even. The idea of the Flow is something that peaked my interest. So I sat and read everything I could. Listen to people that have used it. Listen to the commercial guys that make a living. Listened to the sideliners, hobbyist, the purist, the elitist, and the dreamers about it. At the end of the day, I came to the conclusion that it is not for me. I am sure some will love it, but unless they give out grants to buy this in mass bulk, I don’t see it being main stream in my life time.

PS. I could not resist posting in a thread I have been following for 2 months.


----------



## Bkwoodsbees

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

For me the reward for money spent, hard work, consuming all the info I can, getting stung, hands in the hive learning, building equipment.....etc...etc ...is the honey. If I just set them in a box and turned on a faucet to get the honey when ready it not be an experience that I would get hooked on. I want to know the inner workings. Beekeeping to me is an Art that is not given nor for sale. It is learned and I am hooked on learning and not taking short cuts. I am not opposed to the honey flow. It is just not for me. I applaud the guys that came up with it. Just think if they sell like hot cakes and appear throughout suburbia , swarms will be numerous and us old fashion types can really expand.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Swarms? Just saw a news clip on our local TV, urban beekeeping in London (England) has increased to such an extent that swarms are becoming much more numerous than they had been and scaring the non beekeeping public by turning up unannounced at awkward locations. So great is the inconvenience this can cause that the bee friendly goodwill most people have had is beginning to wane for some, with bees starting to be seen as a public nuisance.


----------



## kholmar

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> Should say something about when I was new here. I got moderated a few times, had posts deleted, was issued a warning and got a couple snarky messages from a moderator.
> 
> Did I think it was cos I was new? No, I had the good sense to realise I had been rude, argumentative, or broken other rules. Figured it out & complied best I could and I'm still here. Never liked getting a warning but never was silly enough to think it was just cos I was new.


that may have been your experience but a few posts back, a persons opinion was disparaged by someone and a mod commented that their profile said 'new to beekeeping'...
makes no difference to me, I am here to learn, if my opinions are meaningless to some folks, that bothers me not in the least.

Oldtimer has been very friendly and informative to me (in a cantankerous sort of way) =) LOL

I installed package number two a couple of days ago.
package 1 is still taking sugar syrup about a half quart every other day or so but their comb production slowed a bit so I opened the brood nest with an empty bar. they are building that bar out quite fast!
package 2 is hardly taking any syrup at all but it doesn't have a window (no bee voyeurism on this one) so I wont know what they are up to for a few more days.
whether the flow frames work or not, they got me into beekeeping and I am learning to be a beek!
sorry I went off-topic, just so excited. LOL


----------



## Kofu

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> A lot of guys like me love the simplicity of the beekeepers world! Mainly just bees, comb, wood, smoker, and a hive tool. Sure there are some other things but I love beekeeping for the slow down effect of it. Out of the rat race and step back into something artful, something old fashioned ... the beekeeping way we have now is not broke to me.


Yay! That's how I feel, and it does seem vaguely insulting for the hype about Flow™ frames to say otherwise. The newbies who are sold on the hype (and maybe there is a decent product under all that fluff), think it's resentment. Some of them will learn to appreciate the art, the magic... Those who learn that dimension will probably get more out of the expensive toy that they bought.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Simplicity is certainly appealing.

"A comb honey beekeeper really needs, in addition to his bees and the usual apiary equipment and tools, only one other thing, and that is a pocket knife. The day you go into producing extracted honey, on the other hand, you must begin to think not only of an extractor, which is a costly machine used only a relatively minute part of the year, but also of uncapping equipment, strainers, settling tanks, wax melters, bottle filling equipment, pails and utensils galore and endless things. Besides this you must have a place to store supers of combs, subject to damage by moths and rodents and, given the nature of beeswax, very subject to destruction by fire. And still more: You must begin to think in terms of a whole new building, namely, a honey house, suitably constructed, supplied with power, and equipped.... 

"All this seems obvious enough, and yet time after time I have seen novice beekeepers, as soon as they had built their apiaries up to a half dozen or so hives, begin to look around for an extractor. It is as if one were to establish a small garden by the kitchen door, and then at once begin looking for a tractor to till it with. Unless then, you have, or plan eventually to have, perhaps fifty or more colonies of bees, you should try to resist looking in bee catalogs at the extractors and other enchanting and tempting tools that are offered and instead look with renewed fondness at your little pocket knife, so symbolic of the simplicity that is the mark of every truly good life."--Richard Taylor, The Comb Honey Book


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

While the idea of simplicity is certainly appealing, when RT talks about the only tool needed for up to 50 hive being a pocket knife, he should not have mentioned 50 hives, but rather the amount of honey he is referring to.

Because I would likely give up the hobby, if I had to deal with the honey from 50 of my hives, with a pocket knife.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



mac said:


> still don't see how you can tell when the frames are capped looking at one end doesn't let ya know about the center or front end being capped. When can we order one ???





Oldtimer said:


> While the idea of simplicity is certainly appealing, when RT talks about the only tool needed for up to 50 hive being a pocket knife, he should not have mentioned 50 hives, but rather the amount of honey he is referring to.
> 
> Because I would likely give up the hobby, if I had to deal with the honey from 50 of my hives, with a pocket knife.


Haha true. A extractor is not all that much these days. Especially for a beekeeper that can make honey.


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I think I would get a smoker and hive tool before I got the pocket knife!


----------



## challenger

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



shannonswyatt said:


> I think I would get a smoker and hive tool before I got the pocket knife!


Don't need any of these with a flow hive. That's the beauty of this invention.

Or maybe not. Time will tell.


----------



## lemmje

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



challenger said:


> Don't need any of these with a flow hive. That's the beauty of this invention.


You think you will never have to go into the brood? Really?


----------



## timbee

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



fafrd said:


> Just ran into this: http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/30166-3-reasons-to-go-against-the-flow-hive#
> 
> (three reasons to go against the flow hive)


I have to agree with the first ten people that commented under this article. The author that wrote it, didn't know squat about bees or beekeeping. The only absolute problems with the Flow Hive is the expense, along with the pay now, (including freight charges) and not receive it for 9-months to a year. Are you kidding me? When other people start producing frames that operate similarly, but different enough to work around the patent, the price will drop like a rock. Then I'll consider buying a few of the Flow Hives, or a few from their competition. Thank God for the free enterprise system. :applause:


----------



## challenger

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



lemmje said:


> You think you will never have to go into the brood? Really?


No I don't think that. 
I was being sarcastic but trying to be open minded. 
As I said we will see.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



challenger said:


> I agree that removing honey from the hive is the easiest part of harvesting.


I am pretty sure if that was the case this thread and the flow hive would not have made it past the second page.


----------



## AHudd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



challenger said:


> I agree that removing honey from the hive is the easiest part of harvesting. If folks want to get a flow hive thinking this will be easier then so be it.
> Personally it seems like a huge waste of money.
> 
> I'd be interested to know if an apples to apples comparison between a flow hive and a conventional hive would produce different yields. Not a likely experiment of course.


 I am not sure if Challenger is agreeing with my comment , but that is not what I said, this is what I said,
"I think a lot of people are buying into this because they think it is going to simplify beekeeping. The Flow may simplify gathering a bit of honey, but to my mind taking the honey has always been easy. Getting to the point where there is a surplus is the difficult part".

Alex


----------



## challenger

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



AHudd said:


> I am not sure if Challenger is agreeing with my comment , but that is not what I said, this is what I said,
> "I think a lot of people are buying into this because they think it is going to simplify beekeeping. The Flow may simplify gathering a bit of honey, but to my mind taking the honey has always been easy. Getting to the point where there is a surplus is the difficult part".
> 
> Alex


Well I agree anyway
Isn't beekeeping relatively simple any way you look at it? I mean, if I can do it then it HAS to be simple.
Simple is one thing and some may agree or disagree with or if it is indeed simple.
No getting away from the fact that it is **** hard work made exponentially harder by varroa and SHB IMO.
Prior to varroa beekeeping must have been so much more gratifying. It generally still is for me but there is a whole lot of heavy and hot work involved and at this time of the year the hours can be brutal.
I honestly don't see the flow hive as a means to help with these issues but then again I don't think folks that hump hives 14 hours a day seven days a week will be the target of their marketing.


----------



## AHudd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



challenger said:


> Well I agree anyway
> Isn't beekeeping relatively simple any way you look at it? I mean, if I can do it then it HAS to be simple.
> Simple is one thing and some may agree or disagree with or if it is indeed simple.
> No getting away from the fact that it is **** hard work made exponentially harder by varroa and SHB IMO.
> Prior to varroa beekeeping must have been so much more gratifying. It generally still is for me but there is a whole lot of heavy and hot work involved and at this time of the year the hours can be brutal.
> I honestly don't see the flow hive as a means to help with these issues but then again I don't think folks that hump hives 14 hours a day seven days a week will be the target of their marketing.


No problem, I just wanted to be clear. 

Alex


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



timbee said:


> The author that wrote it, didn't know squat about bees or beekeeping. The only absolute problems with the Flow Hive is the expense, along with the pay now, (including freight charges) and not receive it for 9-months to a year. :applause:


Ehmm. The only absolute problems? given it actually works, How do you intend to manage your bees while using one, or one like it?


----------



## hypsin

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



clyderoad said:


> Ehmm. The only absolute problems? given it actually works, How do you intend to manage your bees while using one, or one like it?


I am just saving up popcorn for all the drama about a year down the road when soon-to-be-beeks that bought into the hype get a reality check. I bet at least half of them will give up when they realize they still have to manage a hive. The other half will start trying to tap the hive two months after the install and will kill their bees in under a year.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Ha, a wry comment and likely some truth in it. 

Not sure they will ALL be failures though.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



hypsin said:


> The other half will start trying to tap the hive two months after the install and will kill their bees in under a year.


What do you think the success rate is for a standard Lang? I would assume it is close to 50% or even lower. The unfortunate thing for a newbie with a flow hive is there is no expert population that have used them previously. So they are on their own so to speak. OK so what is the success rate for a newbie with a standard Lang hive that is on their own? Starting to look pretty grim don't you think until you look at the numbers. If 25% of the newbies have success with the flow hive that will bring in a huge amount of new beekeepers into the fold compared to what has happened in the past.


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> What do you think the success rate is for a standard Lang? I would assume it is close to 50% or even lower. The unfortunate thing for a newbie with a flow hive is there is no expert population that have used them previously. So they are on their own so to speak. OK so what is the success rate for a newbie with a standard Lang hive that is on their own? Starting to look pretty grim don't you think until you look at the numbers. If 25% of the newbies have success with the flow hive that will bring in a huge amount of new beekeepers into the fold compared to what has happened in the past.


the problem is that new beekeepers, which everyone has been, do not yet understand bees. maybe you can relate.
look at the issues that come up regularly regarding the learning curve of using, or not using a queen excluder, or reversing, or pulling uncapped honey, or disease, or mites and shb and wax moth, etc., etc.
and now a new beekeeper, armed with this new gadget that may or may not even work, is expected to manage a colony of bees so that they produce a harvestable amount of honey? this is the problem.


----------



## hypsin

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> What do you think the success rate is for a standard Lang? I would assume it is close to 50% or even lower. The unfortunate thing for a newbie with a flow hive is there is no expert population that have used them previously. So they are on their own so to speak. OK so what is the success rate for a newbie with a standard Lang hive that is on their own? Starting to look pretty grim don't you think until you look at the numbers. If 25% of the newbies have success with the flow hive that will bring in a huge amount of new beekeepers into the fold compared to what has happened in the past.


Your analogy is flawed. Flow hive is not an alternative to Lang, but rather an add-on, a hi-tech honey super, thats all. If Lang success rate is 50% then success rates of a Flow hive will be a subset of that.

Another thing that you have to take into consideration is the instant gratification factor. A lot of people that bought into it have never even opened a beekeeping book or done any research on the subject. By the time they get their Flow equipment their will most likely lose interest and move on to other hobbies. The ones that do stick around will be discouraged when they find out that they will not be able to harvest honey until 2 yrs down the road.

Only the most dedicated newbies will stick around, and I seriously doubt their percentage will be measured in double digits. But on the other hand - yes, it is true that these will be new beeks that otherwise would have never gotten interested in beekeeping. Time will tell but I can pretty much guarantee an uproar once these newbies realize they got taken advantage of. Hence the popcorn.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



clyderoad said:


> and now a new beekeeper, armed with this new gadget that may or may not even work, is expected to manage a colony of bees so that they produce a harvestable amount of honey? this is the problem.


It is not a problem, some will stick with it and some won't same as before but the numbers are much greater because of it.


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> It is not a problem, some will stick with it and some won't same as before but the numbers are much greater because of it.


oh, I didn't realize the wording has you confused. let me clarify:

the _unfortunate thing_ is that new beekeepers, which everyone has been, do not yet understand bees. maybe you can relate.
look at the issues that come up regularly regarding the learning curve of using, or not using a queen excluder, or reversing, or pulling uncapped honey, or disease, or mites and shb and wax moth, etc., etc.
and now a new beekeeper, armed with this new gadget that may or may not even work, is expected to manage a colony of bees so that they produce a harvestable amount of honey? this is the _unfortunate thing_.


----------



## AHudd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I just keep thinking about moving parts inside a bee hive and propolis. I hope the thing works because I hate to think of that many people screaming, :ws:

Alex


----------



## Jim 134

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> What do you think the success rate is for a standard Lang? I would assume it is close to 50% or even lower. The unfortunate thing for a newbie with a flow hive is there is no expert population that have used them previously. So they are on their own so to speak. OK so what is the success rate for a newbie with a standard Lang hive that is on their own? Starting to look pretty grim don't you think until you look at the numbers. If 25% of the newbies have success with the flow hive that will bring in a huge amount of new beekeepers into the fold compared to what has happened in the past.


 Acebird,......,
You do realize 95 percent of all the bee hives in the United States I own only by 5 percent of the beekeepers.
IMHO These are people your after.Like or not commercial beekeepers hold the biggest market share for selling new beekeeping products to.


BEE HAPPY Jim 134


----------



## clong

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

According to Manufacturers Monthly, the Flow Hive begins production today.

http://www.manmonthly.com.au/news/production-begins-on-popular-flow-hive-crowdfunded


----------



## jwcarlson

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> What do you think the success rate is for a standard Lang? I would assume it is close to 50% or even lower. The unfortunate thing for a newbie with a flow hive is there is no expert population that have used them previously. So they are on their own so to speak. OK so what is the success rate for a newbie with a standard Lang hive that is on their own? Starting to look pretty grim don't you think until you look at the numbers. If 25% of the newbies have success with the flow hive that will bring in a huge amount of new beekeepers into the fold compared to what has happened in the past.


What's your success rate, Ace?


----------



## SowthEfrikan

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

>According to Manufacturers Monthly, the Flow Hive begins production today.

***Happy little dance***


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Jim 134 said:


> Like or not commercial beekeepers hold the biggest market share for selling new beekeeping products to.


In an ever changing world some will convert to a flow hive system. It takes time.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Ha Ha wanna put money on that?


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Oldtimer said:


> Ha Ha wanna put money on that?


I might not be around when it happens to collect the money.


----------



## LanduytG

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I feel flow hive is flawed in many ways. The thing I don't like is all the money that was raised for this project and the price is still way more than it should be. The only ones really and truly benefiting from this scam are the inventors and the fund raiser.

Greg


----------



## Agis Apiaries

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

In the 1950's, a new novel concept came out for cars. They had a fifth wheel that would drop down and make parallel parking a snap! So much more convenient! But, ya still see those around? I don't see this new novel concept in beekeeping to be much different.


----------



## BeeCurious

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



LanduytG said:


> I feel flow hive is flawed in many ways.


I would like to see closeup photos or a video of the cranking device and what it is inserted into. 

I wonder if the Honey Flow Frames can be repurposed? Perhaps we'll be seeing a really neat video on Instructables.com someday...


----------



## waynesgarden

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Agis Apiaries said:


> ... So much more convenient! But, ya still see those around? I don't see this new novel concept in beekeeping to be much different.


I don't believe the Honey Flow Hive was developed to help with your parking inability.

Or, do you mean that inventions that promote convenience are doomed to failure because one concept that you cite didn't catch on? Washing machines caught on. Chain saws caught on. Even those Langstroth hives caught on. 

Wayne


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

The hoopla around the Flow Hive, and its outrageous price, remind me of what it must have been like when aluminum foundation (i.e. aluminum instead of beeswax used in frame foundation) was first introduced. Can you imagine, in 1919 dollars, paying $6 for 10 sheets of aluminum foundation? Considering inflation since 1919, the product would have been way overpriced compared to wax unless it was promoted with 'miracle' claims.


This was in an era where prices for a 3lb package of bees was around $5-$6 and queens were $1 to $2. See the 1919 ads here: https://books.google.com/books?id=V...ge&q=bee culture foundation root 1919&f=false
Here's a thread on aluminum foundation for reference, including prices:
http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?194218-Aluminum-foundation

And a mention in 1920 Bee Culture that the Aluminum Honeycomb company is now bankrupt:
https://books.google.com/books?id=V...=Aluminum Honeycomb Company root 1919&f=false


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



BeeCurious said:


> I would like to see closeup photos or a video of the cranking device and what it is inserted into.


I believe that has been posted or linked to in this thread. I would expect this method to change for commercial applications.


----------



## challenger

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



LanduytG said:


> I feel flow hive is flawed in many ways. The thing I don't like is all the money that was raised for this project and the price is still way more than it should be. The only ones really and truly benefiting from this scam are the inventors and the fund raiser.
> 
> Greg


I am also troubled by this. Whether the flow hive is a winner or not I am still troubled by the funding operation. I think it was a brilliant and shrewd business move by the inventors. At the same time is feel it was a planned bilking of people that want to save the earth by having, not keeping, bees. How many folks will stand up in a crowd, knowing nothing about beekeeping, and state with utmost conviction that, "if the bees die then we die"?? I can offer a link from an Instagram from natgeo just today that has 5000 comments and I'd say 5% of the comments are of this nature. These are the folks that gave their cash away and I think they'll feel it was for a cause as opposed to a product. 
It's the exploitation of the ignorant people that crave that warm and fuzzy feeling they crave when they save the planet by getting bees into a flow hive. 
What other start ups are so massively funded with so little tangible return on their "investment"? Are the people that funded the campaign investors or customers or contributors. I'd love to know the answer to this question. People that threw money at flow can perhaps fall into two or even three of the above categories but what category were they picturing themselves when they sent the money. 
It really irks me that a company can go panhandle money for their dream/pet project. Flow should be ashamed in accept g the amount of money that the have. They themselves had an initial "goal". In my eyes everything above that amount is excess gravy. This is not some charitable entity. It is a business. People that gave them money should file a class action law suit demanding complete accountability for the funds that flow received. I personally would like to see how every dollar was used toward getting people the product.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I don't think any that purchased a perk have received it yet.


----------



## crofter

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Challenger, you are a way to pragmatic to enjoy those warm fuzzies! I suffer the lack sometimes too. I just feel bad that so many really needful things sorely lack funding while something relatively whimsical like this gets money thrown on it!


----------



## BeeCurious

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



BeeCurious said:


> I would like to see closeup photos or a video of the cranking device and what it is inserted into.





Acebird said:


> I believe that has been posted or linked to in this thread. I would expect this method to change for commercial applications.


You, as the highest poster on this thread should be aware of all of the perceived weaknesses. 

I have not read every post, but unlike yourself, I don't believe that there will be any commercial use of these frames. I believe that some commercial beekeepers may have given their opinions. 

I wonder if the aforementioned cranking/shifting device has gone through any serious repetitive testing? How many cycles should one expect before the frame set gets tossed out like an empty yogurt cup?


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



LanduytG said:


> I feel flow hive is flawed in many ways. The thing I don't like is all the money that was raised for this project and the price is still way more than it should be.
> 
> Greg


The producers have never said anything other than that this was an initial offer, and after that the price may go up.

In the light of this I have been surprised reading all the posts doing maths (with figures plucked from the air), and confidently predicting the price will drop to pennies. If anyone is disappointed later if the price doesn't drop, blame the armchair financial analysts for raising false hope, rather than the producers who did no attempt to mislead on this.


----------



## Jim 134

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Agis Apiaries

Check out this patent from 1940 for a hive. :w
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/2223561.pdf


I think you need to actually* read *the 1940's Patent ... 

There are three pages of prints/illustration with two pages of explanation what happens is the backside or the midrib (made from rubber with sufficient Shore hardness) of the foundation lifts up and down and down (opening and closing the back of the cell) the honey drains out the back side of the cell and yes it's is metal aluminum or alloyed.


BEE HAPPY Jim 134


----------



## clong

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



BeeCurious said:


> I wonder if the aforementioned cranking/shifting device has gone through any serious repetitive testing? How many cycles should one expect before the frame set gets tossed out like an empty yogurt cup?


What is the maximum number of times a Flow Frame will be opened in a season? Five, perhaps? My concern would be how well the plastic ages. Will they start to dry-rot after 5 years? If they last 7-10 years I will be satisfied. This is the first run. I'm sure the design will improve in the coming years.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



clong said:


> What is the maximum number of times a Flow Frame will be opened in a season? Five, perhaps? My concern would be how well the plastic ages. Will they start to dry-rot after 5 years? If they last 7-10 years I will be satisfied. This is the first run. I'm sure the design will improve in the coming years.


The bigger problem is how many products that are made from polypropylene end up in the ocean and won't degrade in 50 years. It might be a valid concern that the plastic pieces may break in use because of a design flaw but wear out? I can't see that happening in most people's life time.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Does anyone know how much a individual frame cost?


----------



## tanksbees

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I have a hard enough time spending $10 on a super, let alone $340.

We are going to have a lot of newbees on here of the worst kind. Most won't have any other equipment and will probably just dump the package of bees in the top, and wonder why nothing comes out in a few weeks when they open the tap.

Fancy cars have made turned people into horrible drivers.

Fancy hives will turn people into horrible beekeepers.

Mark my words...


----------



## Agis Apiaries

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Jim 134 said:


> Agis Apiaries
> 
> Check out this patent from 1940 for a hive. :w
> http://www.freepatentsonline.com/2223561.pdf
> 
> 
> I think you need to actually* read *the 1940's Patent ...
> 
> There are three pages of prints/illustration  with two pages of explanation what happens is the backside or the midrib (made from rubber with sufficient Shore hardness) of the foundation lifts up and down and down (opening and closing the back of the cell) the honey drains out the back side of the cell and yes it's is metal aluminum or alloyed.
> 
> 
> BEE HAPPY Jim 134


And strangely enough, there are none available today on the market! Interesting, thanks for posting. Would be interesting to find out what the frustrations were with that one that resulted in it's demise.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Ouch 7 frames for that. Technology over simplicity. And how is this technology saving us time.... Not me it won't. Maybe one day I will have one for kicks probably go with by screened bottom boards.


----------



## AHudd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> Does anyone know how much a individual frame cost?


I think the first one cost about 15,000,000.00. 

Alex


----------



## hypsin

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> Does anyone know how much a individual frame cost?


Each frame costs about $5. On top of that expect to pay an additional $60 one time surcharge per frame for the privilege of "Saving the Bees with HoneyFlow(tm)".


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



hypsin said:


> Each frame costs about $5. On top of that expect to pay an additional $60 one time surcharge per frame for the privilege of "Saving the Bees with HoneyFlow(tm)".


Save the bees well in that case 65 bucks is a steal! Gee so a invention that is going save the bees can't be cheaper? We can't afford to save the bees!!!


----------



## waynesgarden

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



hypsin said:


> .... for the privilege of "Saving the Bees with HoneyFlow(tm)".


I missed that in their literature. Do they really claim that or are you making up quotes?

Wayne


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I am sure he is being very sarcastic.


----------



## WBVC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Has anyone that ordered an early delivery hive received one yet...they were to be delivered in June? I am curious to hear what folks that get them think of them.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I thought it was later than that but the only real test would be to have them on from the beginning of a flow through a whole season. Unless you were just speaking of the mechanics of the device.


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I haven't read through this whole thread but join the Flow Hive Forum. They have different groups relative to where you live.


----------



## rolftonbees

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Don't want to be the only one not to post this thread. LOL

I am amazed at the emotional connections people are making about this product. If this was a new, game machine, kitchen appliance, sex toy, or rifle magazine few would be as emotionally invested. 

So, a couple of dudes make a new type of bee hive, others pledge money to be early adopters by absorbing start up costs in their purchase. 

You either buy and try or not. I don't have a induction stove top, others do. I still sleep well a night. I like to can with a large AA pressure canner, and this is incompatible with induction top appliances. I don't like them anyway. My relatives and friends love theirs. Its all good. 

Buy FLow Hive or not, but go in peace.


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

rolftonbees>>I am amazed at the emotional connections people are making about this product. If this was a new, game machine, kitchen appliance, sex toy, or rifle magazine few would be as emotionally invested.>>

have you not heard of the Prius?


----------



## deknow

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

People make emotional connections to anything....or nothing.

http://junkee.com/reddits-diabolica...-button-is-setting-the-internet-on-fire/55078


----------



## clong

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



tanksbees said:


> Nevermind the reality that at best the flow hive is an extremely expensive gimmick that doesn't solve an actual problem.
> The flow hive is the Tesla of the beekeeping world.


You suggest the Flow Hive doesn't solve an actual problem. Why do so many use extractors? What problems do they solve? Crush and strain is still a valid harvesting method, especially for a backyard beekeeper with few hives.

Though the Flow Hive is expensive, isn't it simply another labor-saving tool?


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

No.


----------



## tanksbees

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



clong said:


> You suggest the Flow Hive doesn't solve an actual problem. Why do so many use extractors? What problems do they solve? Crush and strain is still a valid harvesting method, especially for a backyard beekeeper with few hives.
> 
> Though the Flow Hive is expensive, isn't it simply another labor-saving tool?


As of yet, the "Flow (tm)" hive has not saved any labor, for anyone, anywhere.

The used car salesmen who are marketing it to unsuspecting beginners have given their best sales pitch, but it did not hold any sway with me.

I think it is extremely likely that the product has at least one or more serious, uncorrectable flaw that cannot be worked around, that will not be apparent until it goes into production.

I have built various types of beekeeping equipment, and the law of unforeseen consequences always applies.

For example, I built a horizontal lang. It leaks water, it is hard to do oxalic treatments, the bees seem to not like building sideways on frames, it tends to warp which makes frames falling out, it needs more management to move capped honey outward and add new frames for brood, it takes up more space, etc.

None of which is impossible to resolve but all of which requires new forms of management and repeated refinements before the performance can match an established product like a vertical lang.

I find it funny that the environmental do-gooders who are buying the thing overlook the fact that they will now be responsible for the well-being of tens of thousands of animals. And if the beekeeping 101 forum is any indication, many of these animals will die in the making of this product, due to factors such as overheating, freezing, dehydration, mites, beetles, wild animals, starvation, etc.

I predict the majority of these will probably sit in a garage somewhere once the buyers realize how non-trivial beekeeping is. And the ones that are used will quickly become a novelty.


----------



## BeeBop

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I hope the folks who buy them also invest in good fencing because those frames are expensive to replace after the bears have half eaten them. 

I think it might be fun to have a Flow Hive to be able to compare it to a regular lang but I think I'll wait about 3 years until they start to show up cheap on craigslist. 'Cuz you know they will.


----------



## AHudd

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I'll Bet you don't have to wait that long.

Alex


----------



## bucksbees

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

I dont think so much as needing fences for bears as so much as needing them from humans. Hives have been stolen for a lot less reason. Add something you can sell on Craiglist, for 150 dollars that are being sold for 400-600. You have yourself fast cash.

Easy to spot folks with them, go to a bee meeting, see whom is bragging, and got your mark.

Then again, I like to think outside the box.


----------



## Ravenseye

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Let's keep the discussion on topic here since our choice in cars and politics are irrelevant in this thread.


----------



## Ross

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

What's the record for number of posts on one topic?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Ross, the maximum posts to a Beesource thread was addressed earlier, back in post #852 of this thread.


----------



## waynesgarden

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*

Glad to have this thread running, enormous in size and entertainment value.

The Flow Hive will be bought largely by surgeons, lawyers, engineers and a surprisingly large number of retired military if the demographics are actually somehow similar to the Tesla. (*)

Wayne

(*) From a quick observation of a demographics thread on a forum for Tesla owners.


----------



## challenger

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow" - Flow Hive*



clong said:


> You suggest the Flow Hive doesn't solve an actual problem. Why do so many use extractors? What problems do they solve? Crush and strain is still a valid harvesting method, especially for a backyard beekeeper with few hives.
> 
> Though the Flow Hive is expensive, isn't it simply another labor-saving tool?


Are you really putting the flow hive on the same level as an extractor from an innovation standpoint?
Crush and strain is a valid harvest option for very small operations like 1-2 hives IMO. Have you ever tried to crush and strain honey comb? It is a royal PIA and I am sure nearly all will agree with that even those that use this method.
I have nothing against crushing and straining but the limitations of it are beyond apparent.
Now a flow hive on par with an extractor? I can't begin to find a comparison of any sort between the two. Why? Because the flow hive isn't out yet. How can the performance of this thing be compared to an extractor when they are not even being used? This is just blindly buying into the idea that the flow hive will work.

In an attempt to keep things on topic let me say I'll take a tesla off of anyone that is too guilty to continue their ownership. I LOVE going fast.


----------



## huntsman

*Info on Honey Flow requested...*

Hi All - 

I hope this is posted in the correct spot, but please feel free to move it if not...

I spotted a very interesting article on what is apparently a new invention from Australia, called the Honey Flow system, and as someone totally inexperienced with bees, this seemed like a great way to get involved in helping bees and also perhaps in earning a - very welcome - income. 

From your own hive of experience, does this idea seem genuine, or am I being gullible? Anyone actually try this idea or something similar? :scratch:

Many thanks!


----------



## gnor

*Re: Info on Honey Flow requested...*

I think the key word here is Australia. We have a thing called Varroa Destructor here, which can kill a hive in a year if left unchecked. They don't have Varroa in Australia, or some of the other pests that afflict honey bees. Extracting honey is only one phase of beekeeping, and if you skip the others, IDK how you can be successful.
Even if it worked, and somehow I could just go up to it and turn a crank, and have the honey pour out, I would really, really miss one of the greatest joys in my life, which is understanding my bees.


----------



## Cub Creek Bees

*Re: Info on Honey Flow requested...*

Welcome to Beesource, Huntsman!

All discussion pertaining to you question is here... http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...quot-Flow-Hive&highlight=Flow+super+invention

Many opinions. Interesting reading. The mods have asked for no new topics on this subject, so fair warning to a newbie! Enjoy the forum - Glen


----------



## gnor

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



> They leave out honey for hours and not a single bee goes in the jar?


LOL. In a busy bee yard, the honey would probably disappear as fast as it flowed into the jar. Kind of a perpetual motion machine.
Of course, in Australia, they don't have Varroa, so maybe they can leave their hives un-managed for longer periods. In North America, the name for that is dead out.
I also wonder how easy they are to manage, over Winter, and so on. Sounds like an expensive way to kill bees.


----------



## DanielD

*Re: Info on Honey Flow requested...*

Never heard of it.


----------



## stan.vick

*Re: Info on Honey Flow requested...*

I would give it a year or two to let others try the system before investing in it. I checked it out and decided it would only serve the hobbyist that had more money than they knew what to do with. It is a neat invention and as usual I could be wrong about the economics of it, I hope that I am wrong. JMO


----------



## Andrew Dewey

*Re: Info on Honey Flow requested...*

The flow hive made a great deal of money for the inventors and has been criticized for unrealistic promotion videos (flowing honey from spigots from hives and no bees) and encouraging bee having instead of bee keeping. Like many things having to do with bees, the flow hive, will have regional significance. We harvest in shallows here where I am, and I never encourage taking honey from the brood nest. So no flow hive for me. I envision a bunch of these (in my area) on the used market fairly inexpensively once the marketing hype is shown to be false.

We have heard on BS from people who have worked with the flow hive under NDA and they report it works.

The people who report it working are bee keepers and aren't afraid to get in their hives and understand what is going on. The flow hive works for them in their environment. We have not heard anything about commercial usage. 

I'm extremely skeptical of it.

You'll find a great deal of discussion of the flow hive in the BS archives and on Facebook.


----------



## burns375

*Re: Info on Honey Flow requested...*



stan.vick said:


> I would give it a year or two to let others try the system before investing in it. I checked it out and decided it would only serve the hobbyist that had more money than they knew what to do with. It is a neat invention and as usual I could be wrong about the economics of it, I hope that I am wrong. JMO


my thoughts also. The commercial test must go well and it must be cheap enough for the average joe. If they can do that they stand to make alot of money


----------



## Ravenseye

*Re: Info on Honey Flow requested...*

See above regarding the thread that this should be posted to. Also, here's the link:

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...-less-honey-by-quot-Honey-Flow-quot-Flow-Hive


----------



## huntsman

Whoa!
I opened a can of wupass here for sure!

I'll be sure not to stir the pot though - 

As I mentioned in response to a private message I received from a member, my interest in bee-keeping was awoken by the thought of harvesting honey without requiring years of experience (I'm already 54) and without getting stung. If I could sell the honey, that would be a bonus, but I've read about the plight of the bees and that's really my main interest - I would seriously like to do something to help, however small.

Anyhow, I'll skim through this thread (not sure if I can do the whole 1250-odd posts!) and see if maybe there's a slot for me somewhere.

Thanks for all of the replies! :thumbsup:


----------



## Michael Bush

>...my interest in bee-keeping was awoken by the thought of harvesting honey without requiring years of experience...

Simple crush and strain in a double five gallon bucket does not require any experience and very little (if any) money...
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesharvest.htm#crushandstrain

AND it's extractor-less...


----------



## Oldtimer

Huntsman to address your thoughts on it, the issue is that harvesting the honey is done AFTER the hive has been successfully operated by the beekeeper through the season in such a way the bees will collect surplus honey. If a traditional honey storage box is used on the hive, or a flowhive box, does not change any of the need to properly care for the hive. Wild hives are not cared for, but they only produce honey for their own needs not a surplus, plus their life span can be fairly short.

In a way, it could be likened to a cow. They used to be milked by hand. Then milking machines were invented which greatly reduced the labour needed for milking. But milking machines had no effect or time saving for any other aspects of looking after cows such as calving, correct nutrition, animal wellbeing etc. If none of those were done properly the milking machine would be a waste of time because there would not be any milk, and maybe no cow. Same with a flowhive.

I encourage you to take up beekeeping it's a wonderful hobby and can be profitable also. But the focus must be on getting the skillset needed to run a productive hive, rather than on the means of removing the honey after it has been produced.


----------



## exalos

Dominic said:


> That reeks of a scam.
> 
> I've fiddled with the idea many times. "Wouldn't it be nice if we could extract the honey without removing the comb from the supers?" The reverse operation would be just as appealing: "wouldn't it be nice if we could fill combs with feed directly?"
> 
> I don't believe this would be possible without some kind of pump and absurdly think and expensive frames. They don't show any of this, through the glass we can see what looks like completely normal frames.
> 
> Continuous drip also seems like a dubious claim, leading me to suspect they simply had a bottle of honey inside slowly pouring through their tap. First of all, they show some kind of timelapse where the jars fill up, completely open, for what appears to be hours. And _nothing gets in_! I scrape just a tiny bit of honey comb in my apiaries and within minutes it's a humming ball of bees or yellow jackets. They leave out honey for hours and not a single bee goes in the jar? Furthermore, bees don't harvest honey, they harvest nectar! Continuous-drip would suggest that whatever the bees put in the frames would flow, and flow right away, but that's obviously ripened honey in the video as it's very thick.
> 
> When they speak in front of the hive, the window seems to suggest there's a lot of bees on the frame behind it. If you actually stare at it while they talk, the bees don't move, except in just one shoot. Looks like they just slid a picture of a frame of bees behind there.
> 
> On the window that shows the sides of the comb, that looks awfully tight, doesn't look like there is bee-space between the comb.
> 
> They did give out a bunch of references one can easily contact, though. The professor's email, if someone wants to ask her if she was indeed talking about their product, is: [email protected]
> 
> Michael Bush is also on BeeSource, so I'd expect him to be able to comment on it.



I think you were quick to doubt this. A very clear demonstration:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=177&v=ryWC92NT2Eo


----------



## Barry Digman

Oldtimer said:


> But the focus must be on getting the skillset needed to run a productive hive, rather than on the means of removing the honey after it has been produced.


It took 1,262 posts, but we finally arrived.


----------



## challenger

huntsman said:


> Whoa!
> I opened a can of wupass here for sure!
> 
> I'll be sure not to stir the pot though -
> 
> As I mentioned in response to a private message I received from a member, my interest in bee-keeping was awoken by the thought of harvesting honey without requiring years of experience (I'm already 54) and without getting stung. If I could sell the honey, that would be a bonus, but I've read about the plight of the bees and that's really my main interest - I would seriously like to do something to help, however small.
> 
> Anyhow, I'll skim through this thread (not sure if I can do the whole 1250-odd posts!) and see if maybe there's a slot for me somewhere.
> 
> Thanks for all of the replies! :thumbsup:


Huntsman - do yourself a favor and quit now before you get severely disappointed. I'm not criticising here mind you but to, "harvesting honey without requiring years of experience (I'm already 54) and without getting stung" is like trying to go surfing without getting sand in your breaches. Stings are a guarantee and honey harvests are not. JMOHO.
Save you money because you WON"T be saving the bees to even the slightest degree. Think of dropping a pea into outer space. That's about how your, and likely my own, contribution will be toward saving the bees. They don't need saving anyway IMO. They need proper husbandry. Too bad those most interested want to do this by placing hives on the roof tops of sky scrapers.


----------



## huntsman

Thanks Michael, but I'll have to file that for much later...

I'm still on the "How the heck do bees do this?!" stage...:lpf:


----------



## kholmar

so, they have begun shipping to the early bird adopters.
I am not going to go back through the thread to find them but there were several who stated categorically that this was all a scam and that they would take the money and run and that nothing would ever be shipped.
any of you willing to own it and admit you were wrong, at least on that point?
Bill

ps: two new packages installed in April and May. first one doing fantastic, second one slower to get going but seems to be growing slowly. I am having to 'help' them build more brood comb by opening the brood nest every other week or so but they fill the gap right up.

considering my part of Texas has gotten more rain in the last two months than all of last year and that I haven't done this for almost 40 years, it's a wonder they are doing anything at all...


----------



## AHudd

I'll own what I said.
I said, I don't believe this thing will work as advertised. I believe the outdoor demos were "dramatizations". I don't believe they were installed on living, working hive. I believe anything with moving parts inside a beehive is doomed to failure due to propolis.
I also said that I hope it does work, because I don't want to see this many people disappointed and disillusioned. Also go back one page and read what Old Timer wrote. He summed up nicely what a lot of people are saying. 
I admire the entrepreneurial spirit of innovators. Take Steve Jobs for instance. Apple makes products that people not only want, but work as advertised, as well.


Alex


----------



## kholmar

I'm with you on all of that Alex.
I personally bought some frames and I hope they work but I am under no illusions about the newness of it all.
We shall see.

I'm talking about the people who rather emphatically and unequivocally stated that they were scammers and would take the money and run.
They know who they are.

I read everything Old Timer posts, he and I disagree on some points but he has been very polite and helpful.

I'm not gonna cry if this thingy doesn't work because 'caveat emptor' but I do have the courage to try it without attacking the inventors as 'scammers' for having the audacity to have a new ideeer...
(I don't mean you, your opinion was offered politely and professionally and you have obviously actually looked into it.)

Billy

got my first sting today. I was too casual about pulling a bar from the brood nest to show it to a visitor without my suit on.
right in the neck, was kinda funny actually...LOL

PS: I won't be trying to actually USE the frames until next season.
I will put it on top of one of my hives at the time one would normally start adding regular honey supers.


----------



## AHudd

Khlomar, after thinking about this a while, I remember the first time this popped up on facebook, I thought, scam. I posted all the things I thought could go wrong and warned my non beekeeping friends to not fall for the hype. It was not going to save the bees by not disturbing them. Bee hives need to be inspected to keep pests at bay. The thing most troubling to me, although very subtle, was the conflict in the FAQ section on the Flow site. One Q was, can the Flow Hive be used on any hive. The answer was yes. Another Q was, is the flow hive available in Australia. The answer was no because it won't fit Australian equipment. So, I went to Australian bee supply websites only to discover they sell the same equipment that is available here. Why isn't something that is so great, available in its' country of origin? It seems to me that Australia would be a great place to test something new, given the absence of one of the major causes of colony failure, Varroa. This may have been changed, but I have not been following that closely, lately.

Good luck. I am looking forward to an honest assessment of the Flow.

Alex


----------



## KiwiLad

AHudd said:


> Khlomar, after thinking about this a while, I remember the first time this popped up on facebook, I thought, scam. I posted all the things I thought could go wrong and warned my non beekeeping friends to not fall for the hype. It was not going to save the bees by not disturbing them. Bee hives need to be inspected to keep pests at bay. The thing most troubling to me, although very subtle, was the conflict in the FAQ section on the Flow site. One Q was, can the Flow Hive be used on any hive. The answer was yes. Another Q was, is the flow hive available in Australia. The answer was no because it won't fit Australian equipment. So, I went to Australian bee supply websites only to discover they sell the same equipment that is available here. Why isn't something that is so great, available in its' country of origin? It seems to me that Australia would be a great place to test something new, given the absence of one of the major causes of colony failure, Varroa. This may have been changed, but I have not been following that closely, lately.
> 
> Good luck. I am looking forward to an honest assessment of the Flow.
> 
> Alex


Alex,

My reading of the website is that they make it very clear the frames are designed to fit the standard full-depth Langstroth boxes used in Oz and NZ. They include detailed instructions/plans on how to modify a full-depth Langstroth box to accommodate the access to the fames for draining/extraction.

The latest email update (23 June) from them states: "...and last night, we despatched hundreds of Flow kits from our factory in Brisbane, which are now on their way to Early Bird supporters in Canada, USA, Taiwan, Portugal, France, Australia and New Zealand."

Greg


----------



## AHudd

KiwiLad said:


> Alex,
> 
> My reading of the website is that they make it very clear the frames are designed to fit the standard full-depth Langstroth boxes used in Oz and NZ. They include detailed instructions/plans on how to modify a full-depth Langstroth box to accommodate the access to the fames for draining/extraction.
> 
> The latest email update (23 June) from them states: "...and last night, we despatched hundreds of Flow kits from our factory in Brisbane, which are now on their way to Early Bird supporters in Canada, USA, Taiwan, Portugal, France, Australia and New Zealand."
> 
> Greg


As I said, this may have changed.

Oz, now that's funny!:lpf:

Alex


----------



## Michael Bush

I have not disassembled any, but my understanding is that you can change the length by removing sections and it can be used in a British Standard hive (or other odd sized hive) by adjusting the length but the depth is not adjustable, so you would have to custom build a box the correct depth. Also the width is only adjustable in the number of frames so while you could add or subtract a frame, the frames take up about 2" (if I remember right) so it may or may not come out to a useful width for other than an eight frame or ten frame Langstroth or a BS.


----------



## kholmar

My understanding is that Australian Native Bees make a different type of comb in both size and configuration and wont produce in ANY equipment made for European Honeybees so I am not sure that holding that against them is fair.
It's kinda like a software developer making a conscious decision to write their app for an operating system that has bazillions of customers and not supporting an operating system that only has a few thousand customers.
It's a business decision to support European Honeybees rather than Australian Native Bees

Bill


----------



## clyderoad

kholmar said:


> so, they have begun shipping to the early bird adopters.
> I am not going to go back through the thread to find them but there were several who stated categorically that this was all a scam and that they would take the money and run and that nothing would ever be shipped.
> any of you willing to own it and admit you were wrong, at least on that point?
> Bill
> 
> ps: two new packages installed in April and May. first one doing fantastic, second one slower to get going but seems to be growing slowly. I am having to 'help' them build more brood comb by opening the brood nest every other week or so but they fill the gap right up.
> 
> considering my part of Texas has gotten more rain in the last two months than all of last year and that I haven't done this for almost 40 years, it's a wonder they are doing anything at all...


Such a staunch defender, Do you have someting to do with this Flow group?

what's this "own it" 
"and admit you were wrong" stuff?
are you prepared to keep score for every opinion and or comment that was voiced in this thread, yours included?
has anyone received their orders yet?

If you are pleased and comfortable with your decision to buy this thing no positive reinforcement should be necessary.

I hope BS is not inundated with buyers remorse posts as the anticipation period comes to an end.


----------



## AHudd

kholmar said:


> My understanding is that Australian Native Bees make a different type of comb in both size and configuration and wont produce in ANY equipment made for European Honeybees so I am not sure that holding that against them is fair.
> It's kinda like a software developer making a conscious decision to write their app for an operating system that has bazillions of customers and not supporting an operating system that only has a few thousand customers.
> It's a business decision to support European Honeybees rather than Australian Native Bees
> 
> Bill


I'm confused. http://www.qualitybeekeepingsupplies.com.au/index.php/faqs/26-sizes-of-supers


----------



## WBVC

How are the ones (one) you have working so far this year? Are the bees filling it well?


----------



## PicnicCreek

As an early supporter of FlowHive, I thought I'd post progress on their shipping.

My two Flow boxes arrived two days ago, well packaged. Instructions for assembly were clear and easy to follow. Even with the help of three curious labs, it took approximately 20 minutes to assemble each box. Good quality, everything fits tight. I expect the frames to arrive this coming week (shipped separately), which gives me time to get the boxes weatherproofed and let them sit for a bit outside to air out.

The communication from the Flow team has been outstanding, with frequent updates. If any of you have used Kickstarter or Indiegogo in the past, you know how rare it is for a project to come close to hitting a deadline, much less nail it. These guys nailed it. So far, I'm very pleased.


----------



## Oldtimer

Nice one, never doubted they would come through.

Please continue to update.


----------



## tanksbees

Oldtimer said:


> Nice one, never doubted they would come through.
> 
> Please continue to update.


All I see is a fancy wooden box, with hardware of dubious quality.

How are you supposed to lift the box?


----------



## Oldtimer

Yes agree, the box is over engineered. Point of Picnic creeks post though is that they have delivered.


----------



## tanksbees

Actually the box looks weak to me, with the big cutouts and spindly knobs and no handles.

Seems like it will be hard to lift for treatments or to add brood boxes, is that sized like an 8 frame deep?

I thought we were all supposed to use 8 frame mediums so the boxes are easier to move.


----------



## Oldtimer

Ha Ha, the discussion has progressed from "it's a scam" and "they will take the money and run"', to "the box looks weak to me, with the big cutouts and spindly knobs and no handles".

Progress of sorts, I guess. 

Picnic Creek, what is the purpose of those knobs, and the bit of wood on the end?


----------



## trinity

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> >I bought hoses that were quite tight in the frames and it took me a whole minute to cut a hole in a five gallon bucket lid that was beetight to put the hose in. There is no honey dripping out.


Michael, what size (diameter) hoses did you use?


----------



## PicnicCreek

tanksbees said:


> All I see is a fancy wooden box, with hardware of dubious quality.
> 
> How are you supposed to lift the box?


Probably the same way I lift other supers, with the recessed handles on either side ...


----------



## PicnicCreek

Oldtimer said:


> Ha Ha, the discussion has progressed from "it's a scam" and "they will take the money and run"', to "the box looks weak to me, with the big cutouts and spindly knobs and no handles".
> 
> Progress of sorts, I guess.
> 
> Picnic Creek, what is the purpose of those knobs, and the bit of wood on the end?


The knobs for the piece of wood on the side are for a cover for the observation window. On the end (facing) the bottom curved piece is removable and that is where you the frames are accessed for honey flow. There is a flat metal bar that runs under that, to keep the integrity of the box. The small narrow piece on the top is removed to open frames for harvesting honey.

The long piece in the middle, with their logo swivels - it keeps the top piece and the bottom piece firmly in place.


----------



## PicnicCreek

tanksbees said:


> Actually the box looks weak to me, with the big cutouts and spindly knobs and no handles.
> 
> Seems like it will be hard to lift for treatments or to add brood boxes, is that sized like an 8 frame deep?
> 
> I thought we were all supposed to use 8 frame mediums so the boxes are easier to move.


I guess we see what we want to see. It's not weak at all. There is an observation window on the side behind that big cutout, no loss of integrity there. On the front, a flat piece of metal runs the width of the box at the bottom, to keep it very solid and rigid. It is just as tough as any other box I have.

No handles? Where are you getting that from? It has recessed handles on either side. That's the same as my other supers.


----------



## PicnicCreek

Oldtimer said:


> Yes agree, the box is over engineered. Point of Picnic creeks post though is that they have delivered.


They have delivered exactly what they were supposed to deliver. I see everyone who was doubting that they would, is quick to give credit now.  That's great!


----------



## Morris Forbes

That looks like a cedar box from Bee Thinking, in Portland? They make nice stuff.


----------



## Oldtimer

With your nectar flow pattern are you going to be able to use them this season Picnic Creek? Will be interesting to follow.


----------



## PicnicCreek

Morris Forbes said:


> That looks like a cedar box from Bee Thinking, in Portland? They make nice stuff.


It came from the Bee Thinking address, so my assumption is that they contracted with them to manufacture the US orders, just to keep the shipping costs down.

And in fairness to them, they also post directions (both pdf with illustrations & measurements) and a video on their website, for those that want to modify an existing super and save the cost of buying a box. http://www.honeyflow.com/about-flow/modify-langstroth-box-for-flow/p/142


----------



## PicnicCreek

Oldtimer said:


> With your nectar flow pattern are you going to be able to use them this season Picnic Creek? Will be interesting to follow.


Well, prob not. _(making a sad face right now)_ I've been watching my hives carefully - with the drought, there just isn't much honey this year. I'm considering not harvesting anything and just leaving what honey there is on the hives this year. I doubt it's going to get better. My goal is to just keep everything healthy and hope for a gangbuster year next year. 

Ironic, isn't it? I get one of the first shipments and I probably can't use it.


----------



## Oldtimer

Oh well, hope someone can, will be interesting to see how they go.

By the way, it's a shame to put paint on a pretty box like that. But if you don't, give it a couple seasons it will look like crap.

Or if you want the natural look a marine varnish may do the job.


----------



## tanksbees

Good to hear they put metal on that side, that should hold it together nicely.

I was looking for handles on the end, didn't see them, didn't notice the cutout on the side.

I never said anything about them not delivering, I'm sure they will deliver considering the amount of money they raised vs what this thing costs to make.

At the end of the day I simply wonder if the product will work as advertised, and for enough seasons to make it worthwhile. Lots of bold claims including how they take to it just like any frame, won't raise brood in it, how the honey flows out easily, etc.

A lot of people seem to have issues with permacomb, similar concept to flow frames from the bees point of view. Michael Bush talks about dipping it in wax for acceptance, wonder what that would do to flow frames? Would they still move? Or crumble wax into your honey?

In practice, you can't just put one box of flow frames on a hive, they will need another box before the first box is dried out enough to "extract", so that still means 2-3 boxes per hive. So you either will need many flow frames or you will still have to deal with conventional frames.

I have a hard enough time paying $2 for a frame let alone 10x that. I would have thousands upon thousand of dollars tied up even in my tiny little apiary. It would be better to use that money to make increases. 3 nornal hives cost the same as one flow hive, and produce more honey and bees


----------



## PicnicCreek

If I had a commercial operation, it would be easier to justify the cost of extraction equipment - but this appears to be perfect for my small (currently 5 hive) apiary. I'll have two Flow Hives. one comb honey, and the other three are currently foundationless. The economics are different for me than they would be for someone with a lot of hives. I agree regarding a 2nd box for honey - but I always have a 2nd box, just consider that 'their box' for the winter. I can move frames between hives if I need to. Just a matter of changing up what I do a bit...

Since I have no issues with bees trying to raise brood in the half comb supers, I don't anticipate that they'd try to raise brood in the Flow frames either. We'll see how well they take to it - but since several people have first-hand experience and say it's not an issue, I'm going with that until I see differently.


----------



## Acebird

tanksbees said:


> How are you supposed to lift the box?


A thirty horsepower fork lift with extended forks so you don't need to get close. Isn't it obvious, the hand holds.


----------



## trinity

Very nice, PicnicCreek! I'm looking forward to hearing of your experience with the Flow Frames. I'm currently considering the possibility of using them in a Slovenian hive (constructed to fit U.S. Langstroth deep frames and Flow Frames, and using foundationless frames for brood). It seems to me that the two would go very well together.


----------



## tanksbees

PicnicCreek said:


> If I had a commercial operation, it would be easier to justify the cost of extraction equipment - but this appears to be perfect for my small (currently 5 hive) apiary. I'll have two Flow Hives. one comb honey, and the other three are currently foundationless. The economics are different for me than they would be for someone with a lot of hives. I agree regarding a 2nd box for honey - but I always have a 2nd box, just consider that 'their box' for the winter. I can move frames between hives if I need to. Just a matter of changing up what I do a bit...
> 
> Since I have no issues with bees trying to raise brood in the half comb supers, I don't anticipate that they'd try to raise brood in the Flow frames either. We'll see how well they take to it - but since several people have first-hand experience and say it's not an issue, I'm going with that until I see differently.


I constantly hear that logic, but it is seriously flawed, a honey extractor costs a lot less than a flow hive.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Large-T...444?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item27d63602dc

You could buy an awful nice extractor and a lot of extra bees for the $700 you spent on two flow hives.

I think it's a cool invention but right now it's a toy for rich people like a Lanborghini; anyone who thinks it makes any sort of economic sense whatsoever does not know how to do math, or is comparing apples to oranges.

I think at this point all the concerns about the flow hive are well documented. We'll see what unfolds over the next year. Hopefully the early adopters are aware of some of these concerns.


----------



## PicnicCreek

tanksbees said:


> I constantly hear that logic, but it is seriously flawed, a honey extractor costs a lot less than a flow hive.
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Large-T...444?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item27d63602dc
> 
> You could buy an awful nice extractor and a lot of extra bees for the $700 you spent on two flow hives.
> 
> I think it's a cool invention but right now it's a toy for rich people like a Tesla; anyone who thinks it makes any sort of economic sense whatsoever does not know how to do math, or is comparing apples to oranges.
> 
> I think at this point all the concerns about the flow hive are well documented. We'll see what unfolds over the next year. Hopefully the early adopters are aware of some of these concerns.


Yup. You nailed it. I've got a Tesla. One of the very first ones. Earned every cent to pay for it, too. And have enjoyed every mile in the last 4.5 years that I've driven it.  It's not just a toy for rich people, but this isn't the forum for that discussion and it's a discussion I'd rather have face to face.

I wasn't trying to justify the Flow Hive, was only saying it made more sense for a small set of hives rather than a commercial operation.

There are a lot of things in life that bring joy that are not about making economic sense.


----------



## BeeBop

I'm just so amazed at the controversy that this Flow Hive thing has created. Wow.
Out of all these posts, these 2 things ring true for me:



Oldtimer said:


> I encourage you to take up beekeeping it's a wonderful hobby and can be profitable also. But the focus must be on getting the skillset needed to run a productive hive, rather than on the means of removing the honey after it has been produced.


Yes. Even as a total newb I can recognize this truth. If you can't learn to manage the bees and keep them healthy then it doesn't matter how easy it is to harvest the honey because there won't be any. I'm still trying to figure out if I've got the talent for it, but as a first timer it makes more sense to me to start out using "tried and true" equipment and to not waste a lot of money on "fancy" until I get the hang of things. If I turn out to be a failure at bee keeping it keeps my losses to a minimum. So I opted for a standard Langstroth to start. 





PicnicCreek said:


> There are a lot of things in life that bring joy that are not about making economic sense.


Yes, this.^

I don't get why so many folks seem so concerned about how other people spend their money. I do lots of things that don't make good economic sense because... well.. I enjoy them.
If folks wanna buy Flow Hives it doesn't hurt me any. I'm kind of grateful to them. Early adopters of any new technology are the guinea pigs who spend their hard earned money to buy and test and review products so I can more easily decide if I want/need one.

I don't want a Tesla right now either, but if folks want to buy them I'm OK with that. They're helping to pay/pave the way for further technological advances and when the technology has matured enough and the prices drop enough then maybe I'll want one.

I bought my first audio CD player in 1982 for $600... 1/2 regular price as a "floor demo", list price was $1249. CD players evolved a long way since 1982 (and already been superceded by newer technologies) but if no one would have bought those first & second generation players the technology would have stagnated and never evolved.

Anyway, I salute the folks who buy the Flow Hives. If the technology fails it's no skin off my back, it's their time & money not mine. If the technology proves successful then improvements and advancements will be made and the price will drop and in a few years maybe I'll want one.

I'm going to patiently wait about 2 years until folks have had a chance to use them and then see what the reviews are before I pass judgement.


----------



## tanksbees

PicnicCreek said:


> Yup. You nailed it. I've got a Tesla. One of the very first ones. Earned every cent to pay for it, too. And have enjoyed every mile in the last 4.5 years that I've driven it.  It's not just a toy for rich people, but this isn't the forum for that discussion and it's a discussion I'd rather have face to face.
> 
> I wasn't trying to justify the Flow Hive, was only saying it made more sense for a small set of hives rather than a commercial operation.
> 
> There are a lot of things in life that bring joy that are not about making economic sense.


I changed my post above to Lamborghini. I never wanted to have a discussion about your Tesla. In fact I never knew you had one until this post! So stop talking about YOUR Tesla. Hopefully you don't have a Lamborghini.

To me, Tesla = Lamborghini = absurdly expensive novelty toy. And I don't judge those who buy them, I have a whole collection of toys, but I will argue if someone says they are somehow economical. In the same way that I would judge when someone says the flow hive is economical.


----------



## trinity

tanksbees said:


> a honey extractor costs a lot less than a flow hive.


I would rather have a couple dozen Flow Frames (I can get the woodenware separately) than an extractor. After watching an extraction demonstration (including a description of all of the hassle necessary to remove the bees from the super), I'll take extraction with Flow Frames, thank you very much. No room for an extractor or honey house, anyway.


----------



## tanksbees

trinity said:


> I would rather have a couple dozen Flow Frames (I can get the woodenware separately) than an extractor. After watching an extraction demonstration (including a description of all of the hassle necessary to remove the bees from the super), I'll take extraction with Flow Frames, thank you very much. No room for an extractor or honey house, anyway.


trinity, do you actually have any bees right now?


----------



## lemmje

trinity said:


> I would rather have a couple dozen Flow Frames (I can get the woodenware separately) than an extractor. After watching an extraction demonstration (including a description of all of the hassle necessary to remove the bees from the super), I'll take extraction with Flow Frames, thank you very much. No room for an extractor or honey house, anyway.





tanksbees said:


> trinity, do you actually have any bees right now?


My question also. I'm not taking sides, because i truly hope the Flow Hive is all it purports to be, but if one has a problem with "the hassle necessary to remove the bees from the super" then i think that one is a bee-haver, not a beekeeper. And, methinks, that is the demographic they are targeting at the moment. 

If it is indeed revolutionary and practical, then i will indeed purchase some number (zero is also a number.....), but until i am certain, i will stick with the tried and true, including using a simple shake and brush to get the bees off the frames i intend to harvest.


----------



## Acebird

Oldtimer said:


> But the focus must be on getting the skillset needed to run a productive hive, rather than on the means of removing the honey after it has been produced.


Unfortunately the majority of people that have purchased flow hives have no bee experience so I would expect a high number of failures due to lack of experience and not the flow hive design and how it works. You can expect many discussions to come on what was the root cause of the failures. I get a kick out of the term "economic sense". It makes no economic sense for a backyard beek to buy an extractor yet most do. Backyard beekeeping for most people doesn't make economic sense but it is still a wonderful hobby.


----------



## PicnicCreek

tanksbees said:


> I changed my post above to Lamborghini. I never wanted to have a discussion about your Tesla. In fact I never knew you had one until this post! So stop talking about YOUR Tesla. Hopefully you don't have a Lamborghini.
> 
> To me, Tesla = Lamborghini = absurdly expensive novelty toy. And I don't judge those who buy them, I have a whole collection of toys, but I will argue if someone says they are somehow economical. In the same way that I would judge when someone says the flow hive is economical.


But I didn't say either was economical. I only said the Flow Hive made more sense for a small group of hives than a large operation. Didn't say it made more economic sense than traditional methods. So glad we're not having an argument over nothing.


----------



## PicnicCreek

Acebird said:


> Unfortunately the majority of people that have purchased flow hives have no bee experience so I would expect a high number of failures due to lack of experience and not the flow hive design and how it works. You can expect many discussions to come on what was the root cause of the failures. I get a kick out of the term "economic sense". It makes no economic sense for a backyard beek to buy an extractor yet most do. Backyard beekeeping for most people doesn't make economic sense but it is still a wonderful hobby.


Amen. I've done a lot to avoid buying an extractor - renting one, borrowing one, solar extraction, comb honey, etc. I'm a backyard beek. It's a hobby. I don't try to make money at it. I grew up with a grandfather who was a naturopathic doctor and an early promoter of the benefits of local honey. I helped my grandmother with their hives. All sorts of reasons I keep bees - for the honey, a thriving garden, the tradition and connection to my past - but not to make money.


----------



## trinity

tanksbees said:


> trinity, do you actually have any bees right now?


Yes, I do. I have one hive so far.


----------



## lemmje

trinity said:


> Yes, I do. I have one hive so far.


I hope you continue to post your experiences with the flowhive once you are able to get it in action. I truly want to read first hand accounts.


----------



## trinity

lemmje said:


> if one has a problem with "the hassle necessary to remove the bees from the super" then i think that one is a bee-haver, not a beekeeper.


Seriously?? Look, I have NO problems working with my bees, getting into the hive, doing a full inspection, etc. After seeing demonstrations of both the Flow Frames and a traditional extractor, I just think that the Flow Frame method is better for the bees, better for me, at worst a wash in terms of long-term cost, and I don't have to have a honey house and storage for bulky equipment I'm going to use 3-4 times per year. I'm already convinced (from reports by Michael Bush and Phil Chandler) that it works as advertised. I truly don't understand why anyone would NOT choose the Flow Frame method unless they are already invested in traditional equipment (or they're just stubborn stick-in-the-muds).


----------



## lemmje

trinity said:


> I don't have to have a honey house and storage for bulky equipment I'm going to use 3-4 times per year


A honey house? I inherited my dad's four frame extractor and it fits very nicely into the corner of my garage, takes up maybe three square feet of floor space. No honey house for the hobbyist. And like you said, 3 or 4 times per year, and the cost of the flowhive over the cost of crush and strain?


----------



## trinity

lemmje said:


> I hope you continue to post your experiences with the flowhive once you are able to get it in action. I truly want to read first hand accounts.


Actually, it's PicnicCreek who already has a Flow Hive, not me. Unfortunately, I didn't have the finances to get in on the Indiegogo campaign, but I'm hoping to get some Flow Frames in time for next year's spring nectar flow. This is a new hive, so I'm leaving all of the honey for the bees this year, anyway.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Michael, what size (diameter) hoses did you use?

It was almost a year ago now, so I don't remember exactly the size. I pulled the plug on one of the frames and took it to the hardware store and bought some clear plastic tubing with an outside diameter that matched the plug for size. Then I bought some plumbers Goop and some 1 1/4" pipe and a bit that same diameter and a 45 degree "Ell", cap, reducer etc. to make a manifold to run all of them together at the same time. And drilled a hole with the same bit in the lid of a five gallon bucket for the tube to go in to drain the whole super into the bucket at the same time.


----------



## tanksbees

PicnicCreek said:


> But I didn't say either was economical. I only said the Flow Hive made more sense for a small group of hives than a large operation. Didn't say it made more economic sense than traditional methods. So glad we're not having an argument over nothing.


See below. You raised the economic issue. 



PicnicCreek said:


> If I had a commercial operation, it would be easier to justify the cost of extraction equipment..
> 
> The economics are different for me than they would be for someone with a lot of hives...


Then I responded:



tanksbees said:


> I constantly hear that logic, but it is seriously flawed, a honey extractor costs a lot less than a flow hive.
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Large-T...444?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item27d63602dc


I didn't bring up economics, you did.


----------



## lemmje

trinity said:


> I don't have to have a honey house and storage for bulky equipment I'm going to use 3-4 times per year


Also, when you do not have your honey super on -- the FlowHives -- you need a place to store them as well. Don't use space saving on a little four frame extractor be your argument.


----------



## Agis Apiaries

Michael Bush said:


> >Michael, what size (diameter) hoses did you use?
> 
> It was almost a year ago now, so I don't remember exactly the size. I pulled the plug on one of the frames and took it to the hardware store and bought some clear plastic tubing with an outside diameter that matched the plug for size. Then I bought some plumbers Goop and some 1 1/4" pipe and a bit that same diameter and a 45 degree "Ell", cap, reducer etc. to make a manifold to run all of them together at the same time. And drilled a hole with the same bit in the lid of a five gallon bucket for the tube to go in to drain the whole super into the bucket at the same time.


How long did it take to drain a super? The videos I have seen always have it sped up.


----------



## lemmje

trinity said:


> Actually, it's PicnicCreek who already has a Flow Hive, not me. Unfortunately, I didn't have the finances to get in on the Indiegogo campaign, but I'm hoping to get some Flow Frames in time for next year's spring nectar flow. This is a new hive, so I'm leaving all of the honey for the bees this year, anyway.


Sorry, there is a whole lot of traffic here, and i miss quoted you. And i hope you also post your experiences when you have them in operation.

Like i have said many times, i honestly hope this works, but the justifications being thrown around sound more like folks convincing themselves, which is fine, and if i were just starting out and had the cash, i might buy some frames also. Might still next year, to have that experience too.


----------



## tanksbees

trinity said:


> Seriously?? Look, I have NO problems working with my bees, getting into the hive, doing a full inspection, etc. After seeing demonstrations of both the Flow Frames and a traditional extractor, I just think that the Flow Frame method is better for the bees, better for me, at worst a wash in terms of long-term cost, and I don't have to have a honey house and storage for bulky equipment I'm going to use 3-4 times per year. I'm already convinced (from reports by Michael Bush and Phil Moreland) that it works as advertised. I truly don't understand why anyone would NOT choose the Flow Frame method unless they are already invested in traditional equipment (or they're just stubborn stick-in-the-muds).


I think you will find that the hard parts of beekeeping really have nothing to do with extracting honey. Extracting honey is lots of fun. 

If it works as they say I don't think it's a bad way to go for 1-2 backyard hives, i'm not a stick in the mud, I just choose not to give praise to an untested product. I have seen my share off new products that do not work as advertised, so I am always a skeptic.


----------



## lemmje

tanksbees said:


> I have seen my share off new products that do not work as advertised, so I am always a skeptic.


Speaking of which: I came up with a brilliant design for a new top feeder that can be used in spring with syrup and fall with granulated sugar, even fit a pollen patty and some kind of quilt to double as a quilt box. Five weeks into trying to make it work this spring i tossed it. 

Not comparing my thing to theirs, they obviously have put a lot more engineering into their design than i did mine.

This whole argument reminds me of this scene https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4Y0yyIOurc

And i agree with the Duke: "A man ought to do what he thinks is best."


----------



## PicnicCreek

Here's one more picture, hopefully making it a little easier to see how it was built to maintain integrity - two Flow boxes side by side, one closed up, the other with all the doors off. They're made of sustainably harvested North American Western Red Cedar, protected by three coats of tung oil, and really beautiful in person. (If you care about that kind of stuff.  )


----------



## PicnicCreek

tanksbees said:


> See below. You raised the economic issue.
> 
> 
> 
> Then I responded:
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't bring up economics, you did.


Hahah, you're right.  You need to learn to read the thought bubbles above my head! My intention was to say that the economics for me just aren't the issue - that for a large operation, putting in a bunch of Flow Hives would be pretty expensive. But when two Flow Hives + my love of cool engineering is weighed against the cost of an extractor, the Flow Hives win hands down.

Very poorly worded on my part.


----------



## lemmje

PicnicCreek said:


> Here's one more picture, hopefully making it a little easier to see how it was built to maintain integrity - two Flow boxes side by side, one closed up, the other with all the doors off. They're made of sustainably harvested North American Western Red Cedar, protected by three coats of tung oil, and really beautiful in person. (If you care about that kind of stuff.  )
> 
> View attachment 19570



Those are very attractive boxes, and now i see what those knobs and latch are for. 

My first few colonies it was important to me to have pretty boxes, then i started catching swarms and doing cutouts (very limited) and had more bees than supplies, so i just started using what i had before they were prettied up with the intention of swapping them out later, which i haven't done yet. 

But, this is a good problem to have, right?


----------



## PicnicCreek

You can always tell the hobbyists by the equipment .


----------



## trinity

lemmje said:


> Also, when you do not have your honey super on -- the FlowHives -- you need a place to store them as well. Don't use space saving on a little four frame extractor be your argument.


Actually, my plan is to use them in Slovenian AZ hives (top section of 3) and close that section off for the off-season.


----------



## trinity

Michael Bush said:


> >It was almost a year ago now, so I don't remember exactly the size. I pulled the plug on one of the frames and took it to the hardware store and bought some clear plastic tubing with an outside diameter that matched the plug for size. Then I bought some plumbers Goop and some 1 1/4" pipe and a bit that same diameter and a 45 degree "Ell", cap, reducer etc. to make a manifold to run all of them together at the same time. And drilled a hole with the same bit in the lid of a five gallon bucket for the tube to go in to drain the whole super into the bucket at the same time.


Thank you! That makes sense.


----------



## trinity

lemmje said:


> the justifications being thrown around sound more like folks convincing themselves,


Interestingly, I think the same of people's justification for traditional extractors. But since I don't have either one yet, I have the "luxury" of considering the pros and cons of both options and making up my own mind (although I have the cash for neither right now).


----------



## tanksbees

trinity said:


> Actually, my plan is to use them in Slovenian AZ hives (top section of 3) and close that section off for the off-season.


I think you are going to learn some very quick lessons about why the langstroth hive is in such widespread use.

Simple, effective, problem free. I would really advise against starting out with a hive like the Slovenian.

Might I suggest a long lang hive? Great hive for beginners, and it works with your flow frames. Trying to help you not make a big mistake in the most friendly way I know how


----------



## trinity

tanksbees said:


> I think you are going to learn some very quick lessons about why the langstroth hive is in such widespread use


Thanks.  I already have a Langstroth, and it's fine, but I do see some advantages (for me) to using the Slovenian AZ style. (They've pretty well proven themselves and been refined for longer than the Langstroth has been around.) I'll probably continue using the Lang, maybe for cut-comb honey, beeswax, etc.


----------



## lemmje

A friend of mine really wants to get into beekeeping, i'm trying to get him to help me with a cutout this weekend and may let him keep them since i am nearly out of equipment. We've talked a while about harvesting and i told him i'd lend him my extractor when he gets there. 

He just texted me asking about the Flowhive and i told him he should buy it so we can try it next year. He has enough disposable income, and this will give me some first hand knowledge too.

He has enough disposable income that he is telling me he is going to buy a 3D printer and print his own plastic foundation.


----------



## tanksbees

trinity said:


> Thanks.  I already have a Langstroth, and it's fine, but I do see some advantages (for me) to using the Slovenian AZ style. (They've pretty well proven themselves and been refined for longer than the Langstroth has been around.) I'll probably continue using the Lang, maybe for cut-comb honey, beeswax, etc.


So if I swapped a few words from your sentence:

"I do see some advantages (for me) to using *a horse and buggy*. (They've pretty well proven themselves and been refined for longer than the *automobile* has been around.)"

Would it be a compelling reason to use a horse and buggy?

I'm sure Rev. Langstroth was quite aware of the Slovenian beehive when he invented his system.

I'm also a little unclear as to the standardization of that system - it seems the only commonality to those types of hives is that they have a back door which leads to the interior of a bee hut, and the frames go in sideways. Personally I think that's a very, very, bad idea, unless you need to work hives in extreme cold and snow. In Texas? It will be like working in a sauna filled with angry africanized bees. Whom you are going to piss off as you squish them loading frames in sideways.

Anyway, this thread is about the flow hive. I wish you the best of luck! You will likely to be the first person on the planet to put flow frames in a slovenian beehive. It does seem like a perfect complement to fix all the obvious shortcomings of that type of hive.


----------



## trinity

tanksbees said:


> "I do see some advantages (for me) to using *a horse and buggy*. (They've pretty well proven themselves and been refined for longer than the *automobile* has been around.)"


LOL! Under certain circumstances, they might come in pretty handy.  Actually, I was addressing your implication that AŽ hives are unproven technology compared with Langstroths.



> Would it be a compelling reason to use a horse and buggy?


The ONLY compelling reason? Certainly not.



> I'm sure Rev. Langstroth was quite aware of the Slovenian beehive when he invented his system.


Maybe so, maybe not. It would be interesting to find out (I'm still in the early chapters of his book.)



> I'm also a little unclear as to the standardization of that system - it seems the only commonality to those types of hives is that they have a back door which leads to the interior of a bee hut, and the frames go in sideways.


Some have a bee hut in back, some are open. I haven't decided which way to go with that yet. Some even have air-conditioned bee huts on the back side (I probably wouldn't do that, though).



> Whom you are going to piss off as you squish them loading frames in sideways.


That's why the tops and bottoms of the frames have a convex cross-section--to avoid squishing bees. They're really good for older people, children, and others who have difficulty lifting a heavy super. And all of the sections stay closed except the one you're working on.



> Anyway, this thread is about the flow hive. I wish you the best of luck! You will likely to be the first person on the planet to put flow frames in a slovenian beehive. It does seem like a perfect complement to fix all the obvious shortcomings of that type of hive.


I agree--it seems to me that they would work very well together.


----------



## Oldtimer

PicnicCreek said:


> Here's one more picture, hopefully making it a little easier to see how it was built to maintain integrity - two Flow boxes side by side, one closed up, the other with all the doors off. They're made of sustainably harvested North American Western Red Cedar, protected by three coats of tung oil, and really beautiful in person. (If you care about that kind of stuff.  )
> 
> View attachment 19570


Do those bits have to come off to harvest the honey? This is a bit more involved than I thought, a smoker would have to be used, and that bottom piece could be well propolised and quite a mission to pull off?


----------



## clyderoad

Now that some buyers have parts of their purchase (the boxes) in their possession this thread is set to get very interesting.

Too bad this flow stuff wasn't delivered earlier in the Spring so N Hemisphere buyers could get using it, I'd hate to wait until next year for the excitement to begin. 
Maybe some folks south of the equator will report in when their flows kick in later this year.


----------



## Jim Brewster

Oldtimer said:


> Do those bits have to come off to harvest the honey? This is a bit more involved than I thought, a smoker would have to be used, and that bottom piece could be well propolised and quite a mission to pull off?


I don't think the bees have access to the wood in these boxes. The plastic flow frames fill the box tight, and the bees are inside the plastic (hopefully). At least that's how it looked in the videos...


----------



## PicnicCreek

That's right.


----------



## PicnicCreek

Oldtimer said:


> Do those bits have to come off to harvest the honey? This is a bit more involved than I thought, a smoker would have to be used, and that bottom piece could be well propolised and quite a mission to pull off?


The top bit in the front is remove so that a tool can be inserted into a specific frame & rotated to start the honey flowing. The bottom door could be a lot smaller (only to reach the honey flow at the bottom of the frame), but is also a good observation point.

The frames (six will fit in an 8-frame) fill it completely, so the bees are out of luck. No off-roading for them. 

Until I get to know how my bees fill the frames, I'll still pull them to take a quick look and make sure that they're capped. But if they are consistent with how they fill frames now, by the time they start capping at the end where I can see it, the rest of the frame will be capped. I'll verify that multiple times before believing it consistently .


----------



## Acebird

Jim Brewster said:


> I don't think the bees have access to the wood in these boxes. The plastic flow frames fill the box tight, and the bees are inside the plastic (hopefully). At least that's how it looked in the videos...


I had the same question OT had and if you are correct that the bees do not have access to the ends or the inside surface of the wooden parts then one could make a clear plastic sleeve in place of the wooden box. Then just paint the areas that you want to be opaque. It doesn't make sense to me to buy a wooden box and then cut it all up if this arrangement doesn't give the bees any bee space to travel.


----------



## PicnicCreek

Hard to explain without pictures - but Flow also provides plans for using regular frames with their frames - on either side. In that case, the opening in front is smaller, so that the traditional frames aren't exposed, just the Flow frames.

I believe the bees have access to either side, just not the front. They are able to move between the frames. It's a tight fit, but enough room for them - just not enough room to encourage burr comb.

A lot of people are just modifying existing boxes to hold Flow frames. They supply the plans, along with an instructional video, for anyone that wants to go that route. I suppose you could just make some type of clear plastic sleeve in place of wood for any hive, but there is an insulating quality that a plastic sleeve wouldn't supply. 

Once the frames arrive (several people have posted photos of their frames arriving today), I'll post a pic with frames in a super, including clearance.

Or you could just go to their website and look at some of their videos . www.honeyflow.com


----------



## trinity

Jim Brewster said:


> I don't think the bees have access to the wood in these boxes. The plastic flow frames fill the box tight, and the bees are inside the plastic (hopefully). At least that's how it looked in the videos...


Why would they not have access to the wood? These frames drop down into the super just the way standard frames do. The bees are NOT inside the plastic, but they do have access to the plastic foundation, just the way they do with any other foundation.


----------



## PicnicCreek

This video shows a super with both traditional frames and Flow frames - the Flow frames are up tight against the access window in the front (meaning no need for a smoker), but the bees can move between frames in the super.


----------



## kholmar

Oldtimer said:


> Ha Ha, the discussion has progressed from "it's a scam" and "they will take the money and run"', to "the box looks weak to me, with the big cutouts and spindly knobs and no handles".
> 
> Progress of sorts, I guess.
> 
> Picnic Creek, what is the purpose of those knobs, and the bit of wood on the end?


EXACTLY...


----------



## KiwiLad

Agis Apiaries said:


> How long did it take to drain a super? The videos I have seen always have it sped up.


This video gives you some idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryWC92NT2Eo


----------



## Acebird

PicnicCreek said:


> but there is an insulating quality that a plastic sleeve wouldn't supply.


How important is that for the honey super? Besides a foam board on the outside could be the opaque part of the sleeve.
Anyway it appears that the bees do have access to the sides it is just one end that is closed off. I noticed he did not pull a flow frame out in that video.


----------



## Agis Apiaries

KiwiLad said:


> This video gives you some idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryWC92NT2Eo


Nope, that video does NOT give any idea. It has had a LOT of time cut out. That's my point. None of the videos tell you how long it really takes to drain a frame or a whole super. It would appear to be painfully slow. Anyone who runs hives on a commercial or semi-commercial scale simply doesn't have the time to sit around waiting and waiting and waiting... :waiting:

Regular hives. Cheaper frames. Uncap, drop in an extractor, spin 'em, done. Much quicker and more economical. Hobbyists are welcome to try, but not me. :no:


----------



## KiwiLad

Acebird said:


> How important is that for the honey super? Besides a foam board on the outside could be the opaque part of the sleeve.
> Anyway it appears that the bees do have access to the sides it is just one end that is closed off. I noticed he did not pull a flow frame out in that video.


As I prepare to use a flow frame super in a climate where winter temperatures are frequently -20C, I anticipate removing the super in autumn after finishing harvesting -- so questions of insulation won't apply.

You can see a flow frame being removed in these videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryWC92NT2Eo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrRzp78NHcc


----------



## KiwiLad

Agis Apiaries said:


> Nope, that video does NOT give any idea. It has had a LOT of time cut out. That's my point. None of the videos tell you how long it really takes to drain a frame or a whole super. It would appear to be painfully slow. Anyone who runs hives on a commercial or semi-commercial scale simply doesn't have the time to sit around waiting and waiting and waiting... :waiting:
> 
> Regular hives. Cheaper frames. Uncap, drop in an extractor, spin 'em, done. Much quicker and more economical. Hobbyists are welcome to try, but not me. :no:


Watch & listen carefully. At 4:25 he says: "It's been about ten minutes". At this point it looks a bit more than 50% empty.


----------



## Agis Apiaries

He SAYS it's been about 10 minutes. Even if he is right, 20 minutes per frame? LOL! No thanks!!!! :lpf:


----------



## KiwiLad

Harvesting all frames simultaneously = 20-30 mins per super. That'll do me!


----------



## Agis Apiaries

KiwiLad said:


> Harvesting all frames simultaneously = 20-30 mins per super. That'll do me!


Wait until you have a LOT of supers to do. 20-30 mins per super will do you in!!!


----------



## gnor

> Hobbyists are welcome to try, but not me.


I just looked up the price, and WOW! It wouldn't take a lot of Flow Hives to equal the cost of a pretty good processing system. I bet the bees take one look at all those little doors and say: "OK girls, run out the 1/4 inch propolis, NOW!"


----------



## KiwiLad

Agis Apiaries said:


> Wait until you have a LOT of supers to do. 20-30 mins per super will do you in!!!


Check out the simultaneous multiple hive harvesting at 2:39...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbMV9qYIXqM


----------



## Barry

And at 2:45 while the commentary is still talking about a commercial operation harvesting multiple hives, we have a guy standing next to one of his many hives draining a single frame!  That's harvesting your whole apiary at once?


----------



## KiwiLad

Yup, that's the prototype in action. Doesn't take much imagination to extrapolate the system to multiple hives.


----------



## PicnicCreek

He's standing next to a single frame for demonstration purposes of how a Flow Frame works - he's not demoing a commercial operation. And obviously you could have multiple hives extracting at the same time (I feel silly even pointing that out).

Great that everyone is happy with their way of doing things. I'm looking forward to trying this out.


----------



## Barry

You're right, imagining is quite easy to do.


----------



## Barry

PicnicCreek said:


> He's standing next to a single frame for demonstration purposes of how a Flow Frame works - he's not demoing a commercial operation.


If you say so.


----------



## PicnicCreek

Not sure if you're deliberately casting this a certain way or if you just didn't understand the video. It's what you 'can do', not what he's showing. Clearly if you were harvesting an entire apiary, you'd have every single hive flowing into a container or bucket at the same time.

Isn't there room for another method? What's wrong with trying new things?


----------



## KiwiLad

Barry said:


> If you say so.


Again, it doesn't take very much imagination...


----------



## Barry

PicnicCreek said:


> Not sure if you're deliberately casting this a certain way or if you just didn't understand the video.


It's OK, I'm certain all the commercial beekeepers out there understand my posts.


----------



## PicnicCreek

I'd say most everyone understands your posts.


----------



## Agis Apiaries

PicnicCreek said:


> Isn't there room for another method? What's wrong with trying new things?


Because this one is NOT a "new thing"!!! It has been tried before, 75 years ago, with aluminum. And while a novel idea, it was overall a failure!!!

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/2223561.html

Not saying you can't try it, but they are being very misleading about how great it is and calling it a "revolutionary" change to beekeeping. It's just a revamped previous failure.


----------



## gnor

Barry said:


> And at 2:45 while the commentary is still talking about a commercial operation harvesting multiple hives, we have a guy standing next to one of his many hives draining a single frame!  That's harvesting your whole apiary at once?


I guess you could hook them all up with plastic tubing and a vacuum pump like the maple sugar guys do, but what gets me is the cost. At $670 each, 100 hives is an outlay of $67,000, quite a bit more than the equivalent in Langstroths plus a decent extraction setup. Then there's bears, tornados, hurricanes, and AFB. I have a picture in mind of a beek crying his eyes out watching his flow frames going up in flames.


----------



## Barry

Is there already such a cult following that a little levity over a portion of a video gets the venom Flowhiving! It is a verb, isn't it?


----------



## Agis Apiaries

Barry said:


> Is there already such a cult following that a little levity over a portion of a video gets the venom Flowhiving! It is a verb, isn't it?


I think so. Amazing how so many people can rave about the successes of a product they haen't even used yet! :lpf:


----------



## PicnicCreek

gnor said:


> I guess you could hook them all up with plastic tubing and a vacuum pump like the maple sugar guys do, but what gets me is the cost. At $670 each, 100 hives is an outlay of $67,000, quite a bit more than the equivalent in Langstroths plus a decent extraction setup. Then there's bears, tornados, hurricanes, and AFB. I have a picture in mind of a beek crying his eyes out watching his flow frames going up in flames.


Though the price isn't that high (I paid about $400 for a full setup of frames & box - and that was an early bird price), I agree with you - hence my earlier post that this seemed to make more sense for someone like me with a handful of hives, rather than a commercial operation. I've heard talk that there might be different pricing eventually for commercial folks, which is how the adoption curve for new technology usually plays out. 

And it is new technology. There are older patents out there for things that look similar, but there are some differences in the physical method. My understanding is the honey wouldn't flow through the channels, because of the design. All new tech is incremental. 

Right now I have two hives that will ultimately be Flow Hives, but the others will not be. I've got foundationless frames that have been drawn out nicely in some & others I'm trying out comb honey frames. I wouldn't just change everything up because something looks interesting.  But I'm willing to explore it.


----------



## PicnicCreek

Nice. So now anyone in the discussion who is open to Flow Hives is part of a cult, implying incapable of independent thought. Nice one. Or is that more of the levity?


----------



## KiwiLad

Simply the contrast between the enthusiasm of the early adopters and the curmudgeonliness of the conservatives.


----------



## tanksbees

"By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out."
--Richard Dawkins


----------



## KiwiLad

"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."
Albert Einstein


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

KiwiLad said:


> Simply the contrast between the enthusiasm of the early adopters and the curmudgeonliness of the conservatives.


Isn't the whole point of the "Flow Hive" the alleged ease of harvesting honey? Of the "early adopters" posting on this thread, how many of them have actually harvested any honey? From what I can tell, there is a grand total of (1), and that one person is Michael Bush.

All the rest of the "early adopters" seem to have _NO _experience with harvesting honey using the device that they are so passionate about. :scratch:  :s


----------



## Michael Bush

>I think so. Amazing how so many people can rave about the successes of a product they haen't even used yet!

... and how many condemn a product they haven't even seen yet...


----------



## Agis Apiaries

Mike, I'm not condemning the product. I think it will do exactly what they say it will do. I'm condemning the marketing technique, such as raving that it will revolutionize beekeeping when it has yet to be tested on a large scale. I'm condemning the suggestion that it makes beekeeping so simple, without mentioning to all of the prospective new beeks that there is so much more to beekeeping than dropping a box in your backyard, waiting a few weeks, and harvesting honey.


----------



## KiwiLad

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Isn't the whole point of the "Flow Hive" the alleged ease of harvesting honey? Of the "early adopters" posting on this thread, how many of them have actually harvested any honey? From what I can tell, there is a grand total of (1), and that one person is Michael Bush.
> 
> All the rest of the "early adopters" seem to have _NO _experience with harvesting honey using the device that they are so passionate about. :scratch:  :s


I'm thinking of it as more the case of the early adoption of an idea, rather than the reflexive just-because-it's-new dismissal that's characterised so much of the negative judgements expressed here. In addition, there seems to be good evidence the technology does what it claims, supported by the testimony of a respected long-time apirarist. How many such testimonials are required to be satisfied it functions?

Whether or not it will be a solution for extraction on a commercial scale -- especially from a cost-benefit perspective -- clearly remains to be seen, as with any new innovation in a business context. And the potential entry of many new beekeepers needing to learn the full nature of the husbandry involved creates the possibility for plenty of failures, but I don't think this invalidates the technology itself.

Thoughtfulness is required for any such step as investing in this. It's also required, I think, when getting stuck into to participants in this thread.


----------



## tanksbees

KiwiLad said:


> "The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."
> Albert Einstein












BTW, that quote from Einstein is fake.


----------



## Barry

It appears to me that there are elements in the videos that state claims that have yet to actually been tried. Is there a commercial operation setup with these hives where a whole apiary of hives have been extracted?


----------



## PicnicCreek

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Isn't the whole point of the "Flow Hive" the alleged ease of harvesting honey? Of the "early adopters" posting on this thread, how many of them have actually harvested any honey? From what I can tell, there is a grand total of (1), and that one person is Michael Bush.
> 
> All the rest of the "early adopters" seem to have _NO _experience with harvesting honey using the device that they are so passionate about. :scratch:  :s


Of course we don't. It has just been delivered (on time). No one is implying anything else.

I don't believe anyone (at least none that I've seen) are doing anything but reporting what they know to be true. For instance, I posted photos for those who have been sure this was a scam and nothing would ever be delivered. 

When FUD is posted, I like to point that out. I'll bet you do, too.  Most people don't like to see inaccuracies sit there unchallenged. 

I'll freely admit that I do have a passion for new technology, but please don't confuse that for 'blindly following' something. And don't make the common mistake that many people make of thinking that 'being critical of something' is the same thing as 'critical thinking'.

Unless people don't want to hear (and it kind of seems like maybe most don't want to hear) about how it's working out, I'll post progress. 

But it does seem that most people on this forum would rather just keep their opinion that the Flow Hive can't work, won't work and don't want any other information. Next thing you know, if I say 'hey, I got honey and it went just like the videos', then someone will say 'eh, she's just someone from the company pretending she just tried it ... it's a SCAM!!'.

So I'll leave it be.


----------



## PicnicCreek

KiwiLad said:


> Thoughtfulness is required for any such step as investing in this. It's also required, I think, when getting stuck into to participants in this thread.


Amen. The bruise on my forehead is large enough. I'm out. The 'levity' (which is how a moderator referred to his own negativity & snark) can continue unabated. 

Peace.


----------



## clong

PicnicCreek said:


> Though the price isn't that high (I paid about $400 for a full setup of frames & box - and that was an early bird price), I agree with you - hence my earlier post that this seemed to make more sense for someone like me with a handful of hives, rather than a commercial operation. I've heard talk that there might be different pricing eventually for commercial folks, which is how the adoption curve for new technology usually plays out.


The Flow Hive certainly seems better suited to the backyard beekeeper than a commercial operation. However, I am sure there will be commercial uses.

It seems like this was mentioned before, but what about a whole foods/health food store with a dozen of these mounted along a wall with the working end facing the customer. It could be in an outdoor location, or inside the store itself. A customer could request some fresh honey, and an employee would turn the tap. The customer could stand and watch or continue shopping as their jar filled up. I’m sure that some people would pay a premium for fresh honey that they saw flow straight from the hive.

I purchased two Flow Hives, so I guess that means I am a member of the Flow cult. Call me a Flow-er child.


----------



## Barry

> what about a whole foods/health food store with a dozen of these



> Beekeepers will be challenged to fight the temptation to overharvest and rededicate themselves to proper hive stewardship based upon sound beekeeping principles and an apicultural ethic that does not place their needs above the needs of the bees.


http://www.beeculture.com/flow-hive/


----------



## Agis Apiaries

clong said:


> It seems like this was mentioned before, but what about a whole foods/health food store with a dozen of these mounted along a wall with the working end facing the customer. It could be in an outdoor location, or inside the store itself. A customer could request some fresh honey, and an employee would turn the tap. The customer could stand and watch or continue shopping as their jar filled up. I’m sure that some people would pay a premium for fresh honey that they saw flow straight from the hive.


And once a frame or hive has been emptied, I would love to hear your guess as to how long you think it will be before the bees have refilled that frame for the next customer.

Well? What's your best estimate?


----------



## clong

Once a frame was emptied, it would be out of commission for several weeks at least. In most of the US, I wouldn't expect the same frame to be tapped more than a couple times per season.

I don't really know the answer, but I would love to find out.


----------



## Barry

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?226194-Forum-Rules

*Quoting.* _Don't quote back entire messages in your reply._ While this board allows you to "quote" (i.e. include) messages when you reply to them, very rarely do you ever need to quote the entire message from a previous post. Simply quote the relevant portion and cut out the rest. Never include images in your quote.


----------



## tanksbees

clong said:


> The Flow Hive certainly seems better suited to the backyard beekeeper than a commercial operation. However, I am sure there will be commercial uses.
> 
> It seems like this was mentioned before, but what about a whole foods/health food store with a dozen of these mounted along a wall with the working end facing the customer. It could be in an outdoor location, or inside the store itself. A customer could request some fresh honey, and an employee would turn the tap. The customer could stand and watch or continue shopping as their jar filled up. I’m sure that some people would pay a premium for fresh honey that they saw flow straight from the hive.
> 
> I purchased two Flow Hives, so I guess that means I am a member of the Flow cult. Call me a Flow-er child.


Seem like a good idea. 

Aside from issues related to cost, zoning, liability, complexity, health of the bees, foraging ability, customer demand, health issues, labelling requirements.

But yes, let's be open minded. It COULD work.

Although it would be easier to just put in an observation hive with a phony dispenser.


----------



## trinity

gnor said:


> At $670 each,


No. $670 is for a complete hive, not for retrofitting an existing hive with Flow Frames.


----------



## lemmje

PicnicCreek said:


> I'll freely admit that I do have a passion for new technology


Folks like you are necessary for the rest of the market to eventually decide if these kind of things are viable.


----------



## trinity

Agis Apiaries said:


> Amazing how so many people can rave about the successes of a product they haen't even used yet!


Amazing how so many people can rant about the failures of a product they haven't even used yet!


----------



## lemmje

clong said:


> but what about a whole foods/health food store with a dozen of these mounted along a wall with the working end facing the customer.....


There is a local grocery here that has hive boxes with a tap in the bulk section. Of course it is just a box with a plastic insert full of honey, but the effect is the same. I would hope that no store would ever have an actual working hive that customers could tap into. So many things are wrong with that. But your general idea is working here in Idaho anyway.


----------



## gnor

This is getting a bit rough, so I'm out. Me, I'll wait for everyone else to beta test this before I have a look.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

clong said:


> It seems like this was mentioned before, but what about a whole foods/health food store with a dozen of these mounted along a wall with the working end facing the customer. It could be in an outdoor location, or inside the store itself. A customer could request some fresh honey, and an employee would turn the tap. The customer could stand and watch or continue shopping as their jar filled up. I’m sure that some people would pay a premium for fresh honey that they saw flow straight from the hive.


Yup. That was me 

I'm unlikely to go into this business any time soon, seeing as though I've had one hive for 13 months and one hive for 3 months, and I've yet to harvest a single drop of honey yet (cutout honey notwithstanding).

So will the Flow Hive fix the drought here in Southern California?


----------



## clong

IAmTheWaterbug said:


> Yup. That was me
> 
> Great idea. I'm sorry I didn't give you credit.


----------



## RobWok

Yeah, good luck on the liability. People are only now slowly warming up to observation hives. I tried all the nature parks here in Richmond about 10 years ago. I designed and built a very functional observation hive, but no one would risk it. They gave me the story about someone near the LA zoo getting stung in their backyard and tried to sue the zoo. Couldn't prove it one way or the other, and the argument was nuts, but the zoo took down the exhibit. (just the story the park guy told me). Just thinking about where Whole Foods is in our area, you don't want 10 hives in a dense area during a summer dearth. Kids eating honey ice cream or something could cause a panic. Then there are the swarm situations. I do know that I've seen some beautiful honey houses (there's one in the documentary More than Honey) that are just beautiful. I could see something like that where you push the hive through an opening in the wall to work the bees. 

I personally am waiting for the flow hives to come out so I can modify my observation hive to take one. I didn't order one. I figure in 6 months I can get a bunch of them from frustrated beeks on the cheap.


----------



## clong

RobWok said:


> Just thinking about where Whole Foods is in our area, you don't want 10 hives in a dense area during a summer dearth. Kids eating honey ice cream or something could cause a panic. Then there are the swarm situations.


Since you live in Richmond,VA you may be familiar with Yoders Country Market towards Charlottesville. This is the sort of location I envisioned. Anyway, you and tanksbees make a good point about the liability. Perhaps someone will figure out how to make it work one day.


----------



## max2

PicnicCreek said:


> He's standing next to a single frame for demonstration purposes of how a Flow Frame works - he's not demoing a commercial operation. And obviously you could have multiple hives extracting at the same time (I feel silly even pointing that out).
> 
> Great that everyone is happy with their way of doing things. I'm looking forward to trying this out.


Don't ( feel silly) 
In my apiary I would have access problems as some of the hives are very close together.
My bees must be different, but if there is even a little honey exposed it takes mine about 15 seconds to find it. These open jars would be full of bees ( in my apiary?


----------



## Michael Bush

I had some broken combs I put out this spring during a flow. It took the bees about two weeks to get interested in them... I've seen some broken combs on the ground in a dearth and it took the bees about two seconds to get interested in them and two minutes for a frenzy to break out...


----------



## rolftonbees

I had a friend ho bought one of those fancy stainless steel hydroponic gardens that sit on the counter top. I had a client who had a fancy rack attached to thewall that had three of them. She had over 1000 dollars wrapped up in stuff so she could have a snazzy looking herb garden on her wall near the kitchen. 

Both of these people enjoyed walking over to their aerogardens and snipping fresh herbs while they drank a glass of wine and cooked dinner.

I dont think either of these people thought they were changing the world. Neither considered themselves farmers. 

I think the flow hive is like the aerogarden. Its a lifestyle product. 

I can see alot or suburbanites enjoying a small hive or two and filling a jar or two on honey here and there. Its not unlike having a fish tank or other hobby.


----------



## Acebird

rolftonbees said:


> I think the flow hive is like the aerogarden. Its a lifestyle product.


The way it is now I agree but I also think the concept has commercial value. Look at how farming has changed from a back breaking job to mechanized machines and operators. When you can no longer find someone that wants to break his back or the industry gets regulated to eliminate the back breaking tasks this concept could go beyond the flow hive inventor's dreams.


----------



## Michael Bush

I'm sure when the first milking machines were showed to the dairy farmers they all thought it was an expensive toy that was replacing something that was free...


----------



## clyderoad

I'm sure that any dairy farmer with any size herd of milkers knew that hand milking was a limiting factor in increasing the herd size.
The milking machine filled a need and allowed herd growth. The machine was adopted quickly because the need was a real one, not a imaginary one. Much like refrigeration.

Maybe you can use another analogy.


----------



## Acebird

LOL, Yeah Mike try doing a 1/2 acre garden without a simple tractor. Now they are the size of a house remote controlled by GPS.


----------



## Acebird

clyderoad said:


> The machine was adopted quickly because the need was a real one, not a imaginary one.


The need is like all needs in this country. You automate and become more productive or China will wipe your butt in the manual labor competition. Who would of thought that the pittens of labor that goes into an automobile would be enough of an incentive to build auto plants off shore for american automobiles?


----------



## Barry

Except the Flow Hive isn't potentially replacing something that's free. Honey extraction is already automated.


----------



## Michael Bush

The dairy farmers when I was growing up were still arguing whether or not milking machines were a good idea or not and I'm sure they had been around a few decades by then. Some of them thought they were really bad for the cows and some thought they did not get as much milk. But pretty much all of them were using them by then. The Flow Hive has been out for four months... and it's hard to say it's out since they only started being delivered for about a month or less...


----------



## Acebird

Barry said:


> Honey extraction is already automated.


Not at the hive Barry. Presently it is mechanized requiring a lot of labor prior to and during the process. You could think of it as pasteurization of milk after it was hand drawn from the cow. Now it goes from the cow to the bottle. "flow farming" Maple syrup, another type of flow farming.


----------



## clyderoad

Michael Bush>>Man, you must old. The pulsating vacuum milking machine as we know it has been around since the early 1900's!


----------



## Barry

So it won't require any labor? One simply sits in their truck, pushes a button and honey flows out of the flow hive right into an awaiting bottle? How does the bottle get there? How does the bottle move from the yard to the store? what happens when the bottle is full? Does the flow hive know when to stop?


----------



## trinity

Barry said:


> So it won't require any labor? One simply sits in their truck, pushes a button and honey flows out of the flow hive right into an awaiting bottle? How does the bottle get there? How does the bottle move from the yard to the store? what happens when the bottle is full? Does the flow hive know when to stop?


Really, Barry? Do milking machines require no labor at all?


----------



## jim lyon

Barry said:


> So it won't require any labor? One simply sits in their truck, pushes a button and honey flows out of the flow hive right into an awaiting bottle? How does the bottle get there? How does the bottle move from the yard to the store? what happens when the bottle is full? Does the flow hive know when to stop?


Yes Barry, alas.

A 
Long
Long
Time
Ago
In
A
Galaxy
Far
Far
Away (Post #211)

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?307501-Extractor-less-honey-by-Flow-Hive/page11

I tried to explain a few of the fundamental reasons why this system (even if it works exactly as the idyllic advertising shows) will never have any sort of large scale commercial application.


----------



## Oldtimer

Barry said:


> So it won't require any labor? One simply sits in their truck, pushes a button and honey flows out of the flow hive right into an awaiting bottle? How does the bottle get there? How does the bottle move from the yard to the store? what happens when the bottle is full? Does the flow hive know when to stop?


Oh really Barry, come on.

You walk around the site loading jars full and half full onto the truck to be taken back to the factory and tipped out by a team of elves. Then go back and ready hives for winter by attempting to drain whatever flow honey is left into more jars, disconnecting pipes etc and pulling flow boxes off and begin prepping hives for the coming spring pollination.

Definitely less labor than a modern commercial extracting plant. (grin)


----------



## Barry

Silly me, I totally forgot about Jim's real life numbers! Hey Jim, if you could get some of those elves Oldtimer's talking about, I think you would actually put money in the bank for every pound you extract instead of it costing you a penny!

You would actually be able to take a vacation as well!


----------



## bucksbees

rolftonbees said:


> Its not unlike having a fish tank or other hobby.


When your fish become sick and die, they don’t spread the problem to other tanks in the area, it stays in that tank. When a colony that is not being taken care of dies it could spread the problem to other hives as the bees come in robbing.

Replace fish tank with carpentry or growing roses or a herb garden. This can be done with little impact to the surrounding area. However bees are livestock that can spread spores, viruses, and diseases.


----------



## Agis Apiaries

I'll be interested to see what happens when the honey that remains in the channels of the frame bottoms crystallizes. There doesn't appear to be access for the bees to get in there and clean it up. And it would be quite difficult for the beekeeper to clean it up after the frame has been drawn and without removing it from the hive and disturbing the bees, which is one of the benefits that Flow claims.


----------



## kholmar

this forum reminds me of an episode of The West Wing when Josh Lyman discovers a 'fan forum' dedicated to him...

JOSH
Seems to be a very unusual social structure. For instance, there is leader who seems
to pride herself on her organizational skills and a certain amount of discipline.

DONNA
Right. That's what's called a control freak.

JOSH
[getting visibly upset] Well, she does seems to do an awful lot of scolding. "You've
posted in the wrong place. Stay on topic people. Don't use capital letters. I don't have
time to tell you twice," when clearly, she does have time to tell us twice.


----------



## bucksbees

I remember reading that you can use a tube cleaner to clean the bottom tube.


----------



## Acebird

jim lyon said:


> I tried to explain a few of the fundamental reasons why this system (even if it works exactly as the idyllic advertising shows) will never have any sort of large scale commercial application.


When you are doing something a certain way you think that way.



> But wait, I get a wax crop too. approximately $4.00 worth of bees wax for about every 58 lbs. means I gain back almost .07 per lb. in beeswax inventory!


The way you are producing honey this appears as a gain but if the bees didn't have to produce the wax in the first place it could be considered a loss @ 8 pounds of honey per pound of wax.

It is very difficult for someone who has done something all their life to think about doing something totally different.


----------



## clyderoad

Acebird said:


> When you are doing something a certain way you think that way.
> 
> They way you are producing honey this appears as a gain but if the bees didn't have to produce the wax in the first place it could be considered a loss @ 8 pounds of honey per pound of wax.
> 
> It is very difficult for someone who has done something all their life to think about doing something totally different.


You are way over your head again; and again you don't know it!
You can not begin to fathom the workings of a commercial operation by drawing on your experience with 3 backyard hives.
Care to tell us how you acquired your financial expertise?


----------



## BeeCurious

I'm looking forward to this time next year when the Flow Hive owners post videos... 

It should be interesting.


----------



## Barry

Agis Apiaries said:


> I'll be interested to see what happens when the honey that remains in the channels of the frame bottoms crystallizes. There doesn't appear to be access for the bees to get in there and clean it up.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryWC92NT2Eo

At 8:55


----------



## jim lyon

Oddly enough the time it takes to view their video (around 9 minutes) is about the same as the time it takes to run one load in a 120 frame horizontal load extracting system which will usually net a little more than 1 55 gallon drum of honey. If you want to see how fast, efficient and sanitary both modern extracting and high speed bottling and packaging systems are one should perhaps check out some you tube videos on them before trying to make a logical argument that filling bottles in a bee yard would ever make sense commercially. 
The beauty of honey isn't unique to a flow frame, the bees get the credit for that. It looks just as pretty "flowing" out of the 4" stainless pipe coming out of a large extractor as it does the small plastic tubing connected to a flow frame. 
I'll stand by my original assertion that even if it works exactly as advertised, its a novelty whose market is for the wealthier backyard beekeeper who has already gained the necessary beekeeping expertise. I can think of a number of potential problems with it but I'm not here to knock or even to speculate on how the flow frame will work, I will, however, be interested to read the first hand reviews.


----------



## trinity

jim lyon said:


> Oddly enough the time it takes to view their video (around 9 minutes) is about the same as the time it takes to run one load in a 120 frame horizontal load extracting system which will usually net a little more than 1 55 gallon drum of honey.


How long did it take to get the frames from the hives, get the bees off, take the cappings, off, etc., and how long will it take to get those frames back to the hive?



> before trying to make a logical argument that filling bottles in a bee yard would ever make sense commercially.


Where on earth do you get the idea that ANYONE is advocating that a commercial beekeeper should fill bottles one at a time? Using the Flow Frames does NOT necessitate that. It might take some creativity on the part of some commercial beekeepers, but hey, dairy farmers had that same creativity in figuring out how to make milking machines an improvement on milking by hand, although I'm sure that there were those dairy farmers early on who ridiculed it: "So it won't require any labor? One simply sits in their truck, pushes a button and milk flows out of the milking machine right into an awaiting bottle? How does the bottle get there? How does the bottle move from the stand to the store? What happens when the bottle is full? Does the milking machine know when to stop? "


----------



## tanksbees

From my understanding the commercial guys stick a fume board on top, wait 5 minutes, load the boxes on a truck.

Back at the plant, this is what things look like:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eA30BfH6FBU

Flow hive supporters are clueless if they think this product has any business in a commercial operation.

Maybe one day this concept is the basis of a commercial product, but that day is not today.


----------



## beeware10

I have to agree with jim that the flow hive shows no promise for going commercial. for someone to believe it does has no clue about making a living from bees. how many threads have there been about my hives will not draw out my plastic foundation? this hive is a lot about making bees do what they don't want to do. time will tell but I will be surprised if a flow hive makes 1/3 or 1/2 as much honey as a conventional one. also I think it will put a new meaning to swarming. as I said time will tell.


----------



## Acebird

tanksbees said:


> Maybe one day this concept is the basis of a commercial product, but that day is not today.


Wow you want success overnight? Isn't that what you would expect from your child?

It might be 50 years before it goes commercial. I expect to be dead by that time.


----------



## Acebird

beeware10 said:


> time will tell but I will be surprised if a flow hive makes 1/3 or 1/2 as much honey as a conventional one. also I think it will put a new meaning to swarming. as I said time will tell.


Does plastic foundation cause lower yields? Do plastic frames cause swarming? Are we leaning something new?


----------



## beeware10

ace if you learned anything it would be new.lol


----------



## BeeBop

tanksbees said:


> Back at the plant, this is what things look like:
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eA30BfH6FBU


OK, forget the Flow Hive. I want that setup instead. 

I think I'm gonna need more bees.


----------



## Acebird

tanksbees said:


> Back at the plant, this is what things look like:
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eA30BfH6FBU


Thanks for the link Tankbees. This is very nice equipment. Brings back memories. You do understand that all of this is a boat anchor with the flow hive concept?


----------



## BeeBop

Acebird said:


> You do understand that all of this is a boat anchor with the flow hive concept?


Heh. I love your sense of humor sometimes.


----------



## beeware10

bebop--the sad part is that ace was serious.lol


----------



## BeeBop

Errr... welll.... But that doesn't ruin the joke does it? I think it's pure comedy genius.


----------



## beeware10

everybody needs some humor. happy 4th.


----------



## tanksbees

Acebird said:


> Thanks for the link Tankbees. This is very nice equipment. Brings back memories. You do understand that all of this is a boat anchor with the flow hive concept?


Why is it a boat anchor?

Because you said so? And that makes it fact?

Honey production trumps extracting efficiency by a long shot. To be successful in a commercial operation it would have to either produce more honey (not likely) or be vastly more efficient at extracting (unlikely), or cheaper (impossible), or a mixture of all of those.

It is safe to say it will never be cheaper than a conventional frame.
Unlikely that it will produce more honey. We already have a similar product for comparison on this point, permacomb.
Extracting is already extremely efficient. I have a hard time believing that it is faster for a commercial beek to open the side of the box, hook up all the tubes, crack the frames, wait maybe an hour? for the frames to drain, remove the tubes and clean them, reassemble the side of the box, load the buckets in the truck, etc. And then you have hygiene issues related to extracting honey in the middle of a field. 

Conventional supers are cleared by the beek and loaded in 5 minutes, and the rest of the job is done by low wage workers in an automated food processing environment.


----------



## jim lyon

trinity said:


> How long did it take to get the frames from the hives, get the bees off, take the cappings, off, etc., and how long will it take to get those frames back to the hive?
> 
> 
> The uncapping is done while the next load is extracting. It's a continuous process and an even better one than shown in the video because the loading rack is long enough to hold a full load and not a half load. The load/unload process typically takes 80 to 90 seconds and unlike the flow frame concept, it all takes place indoors in a controlled environment.
> We usually have a 2 or 3 man crew bringing the honey into the extracting plant. A typical day of honey hauling for us is 10 to 15 pallets, a pallet of honey is 42 mediums or 30 deeps, which equates to about 2 barrels of honey. It's not unusual to "pull" 20,000 lbs. of honey on a good day, all loaded with a forklift of course. Prepping a truck for honey "hauling" doesn't require loading a truckload of jars either it only requires loading a stack of freshly washed honey pallets.
> To understand how ludicrous the suggestion is that the concept of filling jars, or any container, outside in the weather via some maze of small tubes with a cloud of bees in the air is somehow an improvement on the system widely used commercially is, at best, uninformed.


----------



## Acebird

jim lyon said:


> To understand how ludicrous the suggestion is that the concept of filling jars, or any container, outside in the weather via some maze of small tubes with a cloud of bees in the air is somehow an improvement on the system widely used commercially is, at best, uninformed.


Jim I like you allot. I appreciate everything that you have taught me. But you are still thinking along the lines of what you see now and not what the concept has to offer. Presently contamination occurs at the hive, in the field, and transporting boxes of frames to the honey plant. All that contamination is then put in a machine that flings and mixes it with honey no matter how clean the room is.

The flow hive concept is harvesting honey within a sealed environment at the hive. Nothing is broken apart, nothing is mixed, and nothing is contaminated. Why in the world would there be a cloud of bees around? That is what you have now. The flow system eliminates this. Common now do you honestly think that for a commercial business you would be harvesting honey in a ball jar? I know you can envision something better than that.
For a commercial application I don't see the flow system looking anything like it does now. Because you don't have to lift them manually for every harvest the frames might be continuous for 2 or 3 ft. The standard Lang might disappear except for the brood chamber. These super harvesting frames might have their own support and instead of piling on top of the brood chamber the brood chamber is hung off of them. To access the brood you unlatch the box, it drops an 1/8 to a 1/4 and you slide the brood chamber out from under these honey supers. Full access and no lifting.


----------



## deknow

I've always been intrigued by the concept of a mobile extracting setup. I remember seeing photos of Olde tyme operations where extractors were on horse drawn flatbeds.

My understanding is that they would have had the same robbing feenzy problems (well, worse with Honey slinging around)....and that being beekeepers, they figured it out.....extract at night.

I can totally imagine a setup where everything is plumbed and in place (like a maple syrup operation in miniature), and at dusk you run the thing and pump/drain honey into individual buckets, a common tank, or even a tank in your truck (if you park downhill you might not need a pump).

As honey is a raw agricultural product, such a system would eliminate more than an extractor amd transporting/storing supers...it would eliminate all the overhead,labor, and hassle that maintaining an inspected facility requires.

Someone like jim absolutely is running an efficient operation, and there is nothing about the current state of the flow hive concept that would make any sense in his operation, or any large operation that I can imagine (I can imagine some practical boutique applications). ...but that isn't to say that things may change (maturation of the c9ncept, much lower prices, expensive gas/diesel, difficult to comply with FDA facility regulations).


----------



## clyderoad

Holy mackerel!
The commercial beekeepers you guys are attemping to mentally stimulate (or is it mentally simulate?) extract more honey in a week than you will in your lifetime!
Where do you get off thinking your visions are at all viable when you lack any familiarity with what these guys do.
How much honey have you extracted? anyone want to quantify their extraction/honey harvest experience?

Looks like these commercial guys are just being polite in responding to some of these posts.


----------



## jim lyon

deknow said:


> I've always been intrigued by the concept of a mobile extracting setup. I remember seeing photos of Olde tyme operations where extractors were on horse drawn flatbeds.
> 
> My understanding is that they would have had the same robbing feenzy problems (well, worse with Honey slinging around)....and that being beekeepers, they figured it out.....extract at night.
> 
> I can totally imagine a setup where everything is plumbed and in place (like a maple syrup operation in miniature), and at dusk you run the thing and pump/drain honey into individual buckets, a common tank, or even a tank in your truck (if you park downhill you might not need a pump).


This kind of setup was used years ago in situations with a continuous honey flow and primarily in very remote locations. Cowen even custom made such a setup a number of years ago but the market is very, very small for a myriad of reasons. The size of the system literally fills up an entire van trailer and such a system will easily run a ton an hour which means within a 24 hour period the entire capacity of a second truck would be required to haul the honey away and perhaps a third truck to store the comb if it isn't going back on immediately. Then you have the issue of moving and resetting up as you move between locations and the huge area each yard would require to set up multiple tractor trailers when increasingly we are lucky to get a landowner to agree to letting us squeeze into a remote corner of a field that he can't efficiently farm. When all this is weighed against the relative ease of trucking the honey into a central extracting location with ample storage facilities it just doesn't make much sense to haul your extraction facilities all around the country. 
Of course, there will always be the potential of robbing as you move full boxes in and empty boxes back out. The smell of a honey extraction facility and freshly extracted combs really can drive bees into a robbing frenzy. And yes, there will always be clouds of bees around a commercial sized bee yard. We typically run from 30 to 60 hives in a location and that means lots and lots of bees in the air no matter how you do it.


----------



## deknow

Jim, thanks for the background/insights. Kirk websters setup is in a mobile trailer, but is kept at a central location (not moved to bee yards) and is run as a stationary facility.

A hypothetical flow setup would need only some tanks and maybe a small pump in the truck...a growing sideline operation could scale up a yard at a time without ever having to plan, maintain, or grow a central facility.


----------



## jim lyon

One of the primary potential complications in a system like this is if there is a heavy honey flow the bees really need to spread the nectar out over a large area to efficiently dry it. I have seen the time that hives will have 2 or 3 mediums on a hive nearly full of nectar yet nary a frame is ripe enough to be removed. In situations like this we have the luxury of just putting on more supers and waiting for the honey to properly ripen without having to make the decision on whether to go all in and trip the lever in a given hive with the risk that what comes out is little more than nectar. In a flow system it would require a pretty hefty investment for the bees to have enough space to properly cure the honey. Of course if you are open to supplementing the flow system with regular supers then what is the point of using it in the first place. 
One final point, if I may. I'm betting those cappings on the flow frame that get circumvented when the honey drains out the back will likely just end up as so much debris found at the entrance to your hive. For some reason bees just don't recognize pieces of pure beeswax as anything other than a foreign substance to be removed.


----------



## tanksbees

jim lyon said:


> trinity said:
> 
> 
> 
> How long did it take to get the frames from the hives, get the bees off, take the cappings, off, etc., and how long will it take to get those frames back to the hive?
> 
> 
> The uncapping is done while the next load is extracting. It's a continuous process and an even better one than shown in the video because the loading rack is long enough to hold a full load and not a half load. The load/unload process typically takes 80 to 90 seconds and unlike the flow frame concept, it all takes place indoors in a controlled environment.
> We usually have a 2 or 3 man crew bringing the honey into the extracting plant. A typical day of honey hauling for us is 10 to 15 pallets, a pallet of honey is 42 mediums or 30 deeps, which equates to about 2 barrels of honey. It's not unusual to "pull" 20,000 lbs. of honey on a good day, all loaded with a forklift of course. Prepping a truck for honey "hauling" doesn't require loading a truckload of jars either it only requires loading a stack of freshly washed honey pallets.
> To understand how ludicrous the suggestion is that the concept of filling jars, or any container, outside in the weather via some maze of small tubes with a cloud of bees in the air is somehow an improvement on the system widely used commercially is, at best, uninformed.
> 
> 
> 
> 15 pallets of 30 deeps at $670 per deep of flow frames is $301,500 of equipment. And that only covers one days worth of operation.
> 
> All sitting in a remote bee yard waiting to be stolen.
Click to expand...


----------



## KiwiLad

PicnicCreek said:


> My two Flow boxes arrived two days ago, well packaged.


May I bother you to give the inner & outer dimensions (L & W) of the box? I ask because the suppliers state it's the standard Langstroth size used in Oz & NZ. But with the variations of different Langstroth versions (Dave-Cushman.net/bee/Lang.html), I don't know precisely what their's will be -- and as I will be placing mine on top of a Danish-made Langstroth polystyrene box, I'd like some idea of the degree of mis-match (if any).

Many thanks!


----------



## Acebird

jim lyon said:


> One of the primary potential complications in a system like this is if there is a heavy honey flow the bees really need to spread the nectar out over a large area to efficiently dry it. I have seen the time that hives will have 2 or 3 mediums on a hive nearly full of nectar yet nary a frame is ripe enough to be removed. In situations like this we have the luxury of just putting on more supers and waiting for the honey to properly ripen without having to make the decision on whether to go all in and trip the lever in a given hive with the risk that what comes out is little more than nectar. In a flow system it would require a pretty hefty investment for the bees to have enough space to properly cure the honey.


This is where you shine Jim and this is where you could be so important on making a commercial operation work with a flow system.
Getting back to numbers and averages... If a study was made on what the average flow expected for a certain location, the flow system could be made to that size. As you say the beekeeper than adds boxes to the hive that they need for this drying space. Most likely these boxes would be used for overwintering.

Judging from what I see in a tray under a SBB there is a remote possibility to harvest clean cappings from the flow system if the bottom board is not solid.


----------



## PicnicCreek

KiwiLad said:


> May I bother you to give the inner & outer dimensions (L & W) of the box? I ask because the suppliers state it's the standard Langstroth size used in Oz & NZ. But with the variations of different Langstroth versions (Dave-Cushman.net/bee/Lang.html), I don't know precisely what their's will be -- and as I will be placing mine on top of a Danish-made Langstroth polystyrene box, I'd like some idea of the degree of mis-match (if any).
> 
> Many thanks!


No problem. The ones shipped in the US are manufactured by BeeThinking & are the exact same size as their deeps. (I really like the cedar, fwiw.) I have 8-frame, so dimensions are:

Inner: 12 3/16 x 19 1/8

Outer: 13 3/4" x 20"​
From BeeThinking's website, for a deep (which I have & they line up exactly):









Standard frames drop right in perfectly to the Flow Hive (not that I'm doing that, but another data point for you). I'm very happy with the quality and the obviously well thought-through engineering that went into the product.


----------



## BMB

tanksbees said:


> jim lyon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 15 pallets of 30 deeps at $670 per deep of flow frames is $301,500 of equipment. And that only covers one days worth of operation.
> 
> All sitting in a remote bee yard waiting to be stolen.
> 
> 
> 
> Just to clarify. $670 is for the Complete Full Flow Hive. This is a backyard complete system like your standard English Garden hive. This is like saying that a commercial beekeeper would be buying an ultimate eastern Red Cedar hive priced similarly to a Flow Complete Full Hive $600 https://www.pigeonmountaintrading.com/shop/hives/ultimate-hives/the-ultimate-eastern-red-cedar-hive-with-copper-top.html
> 
> I can not see too many commercial beekeepers buying complete fancy hives of any style.  Don't you agree that those in the business of selling honey would likely use the Flow Frames only, and put them in their own Deep Supers?
> 
> I think the right way to do the math is to look at the equipment and labor savings that one might get from having a commercial setup with Flow Frames.
> 
> Cost of Flow Frames compared to labor cost savings.
> Cost of Flow Frames compared to machinery costs/maintenance.
> Cost of Flow Frames compared to additional honey produced due to less moving around Supers full of honey
> 
> I would love to see some calculations like those.
Click to expand...


----------



## jim lyon

BMB said:


> tanksbees said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think the right way to do the math is to look at the equipment and labor savings that one might get from having a commercial setup with Flow Frames.
> 
> Cost of Flow Frames compared to labor cost savings.
> Cost of Flow Frames compared to machinery costs/maintenance.
> Cost of Flow Frames compared to additional honey produced due to less moving around Supers full of honey
> 
> I would love to see some calculations like those.
> 
> 
> 
> So would I. I was pretty free in giving my numbers on labor and equipment costs. Honey has to be moved in some manner, you know. I would maintain leaving them in the comb, loading them with a forklift, and extracting them into large bulk containers is far, far more labor efficient than any other system I know of.
Click to expand...


----------



## Acebird

jim lyon said:


> BMB said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would maintain leaving them in the comb, loading them with a forklift, and extracting them into large bulk containers is far, far more labor efficient than any other system I know of.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you are right because the system for harvesting on a commercial bases has not been invented yet. The same forklift might be used to move large bulk containers of extracted honey from a flow system. The labor for such a system is one experienced beekeeper that has to inspect the hives to make sure the honey is ready. Aren't you doing that now? The ****** that follows needs no bee experience what so ever to hook up a plastic multi manifold into a sealed 5 gal bucket for each hive and open the tap to drain. The only lifting involved would be putting the 5 gal buckets of honey on a skid to be hauled away by a fork lift. This could be done the next day even. The time it takes to drain is labor less, no cost what so ever. Maybe the honey house gets used to clean the manifolds in an industrial dish washer along with some provision for storing them. The dish washer might also get used to wash buckets if they get reused or clean the frames if there is a need.
> 
> I am not saying that there is any commercial application for the flow hive the way it is designed now. What I am saying is the concept has the potential to eliminate all the heavy lifting, cracking open every hive putting millions of bees in the air, eliminate most of the labor in the honey house and eliminating all the manual labor associated with removing and putting back frames into boxes to either be stored or placed on the hive again. Which means cracking open the hives again.
> 
> A cost comparison cannot be made based on what is available today. Workmans compensation cases tend to inflate labor cost exponentially. The honey industry is ripe for such cases in the future.  The industry could go from a don't want to a need in a short period of time.
> 
> There are people in the injection molding industry that could project what the frames could cost based on the price of plastic and the small amount of labor pounding out frame parts. I have enough of a background to know it would be a small fraction of what the frames are going for now but I don't have the experience to do a cost projection. Maybe someone on beesource does.
> 
> Without question harvesting at the hive is the least contaminating way to harvest if there ever was a concern for contamination. It also fits into a system of trace ability to be able to know where each bucket of honey came from. Something that is not regulated today in the honey industry but it is for all other food items.
Click to expand...


----------



## Ian

Right now I have an average of 40-50 frames of head space over my hives currently being filled with honey. Space is key to producing a large crop, and I'm scrambling to keep enough ahead of them right now ...
Multiply that by 1200 and pull the honey from that comb twice or three times per frame, that's 125,000 little taps that need 10 min to drain out into little buckets or whatever. 
My extractor is going to start in 10 day and not stop extracting for hopefully 2 months, every working day. 
Gather, process, repeat. 

I love the flow hive idea, but to suggest it will revolutionize the commercial industry is a stretch.


----------



## Acebird

Ian said:


> Right now I have an average of 40-50 frames of head space over my hives currently being filled with honey.


Those 40 or 50 frames could be reduced to 8 and those 8 frames could be actuated by one lever. Now tell me how little this bucket would be.


----------



## tanksbees

It seems like the key differences to the flow hive are as follows:
-Gravity extraction.
-Being able to extract on the spot
-Being able to extract from the back of the cell without uncapping

The first two aren't something a commercial beek wants to do. And the third may be unimportant, it seems like cracking a flow hive breaks all the cell walls open, I don't see how that is easier to fix for the bees than frames which come out of the extractor.

What if you designed a plastic frame that splits vertically down the center, into two L shaped half frame pieces, with holes in the bottom of the cells, so that an automated machine could split them in half and spin them plastic side outwards.

Not only would that be cheaper to build than a flow frame, but it would allow centrifugal extraction which is faster than gravity.

I don't know if it would even work - the bees might wax the holes closed. But if I was building a product for a commercial environment this would be the kind of incremental change which would be tested. It would be designed for automation right from the start.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Acebird said:


> Those 40 or 50 frames could be reduced to 8 and those 8 frames could be actuated by one lever.


Or not!  

Jim posted this a bit earlier ....


jim lyon said:


> One of the primary potential complications in a system like this is if there is a heavy honey flow the bees really need to spread the nectar out over a large area to efficiently dry it. I have seen the time that hives will have 2 or 3 mediums on a hive nearly full of nectar yet nary a frame is ripe enough to be removed. In situations like this we have the luxury of just putting on more supers and waiting for the honey to properly ripen without having to make the decision on whether to go all in and trip the lever in a given hive with the risk that what comes out is little more than nectar. In a flow system it would require a pretty hefty investment for the bees to have enough space to properly cure the honey.


8 flow frames per hive are just _not_ going to make the cut in the above situation.


----------



## Ian

Your not appreciating the need for space. Now fill that space with wrench turning frames and not only do you have a frame inventory worth a fortune but a tonne of extra work 



Acebird said:


> Those 40 or 50 frames could be reduced to 8 and those 8 frames could be actuated by one lever. Now tell me how little this bucket would be.


----------



## rolftonbees

I wonder what fish costs per pound for the average fishing enthusiast. Boat, fuel, beer, beer, lunch, truck, lures, bait, new reel, newer rod, cool new hat, snacks. Not all fishermen are commercial fishermen and not all beekeepers are commercial beeks


----------



## rwurster

Ace should put his money where his mouth is and show everyone he's right, if even on a small scale. Or his wife's money, or however it works in that household 

looks like Ace's previous thread is out the window: http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...-cheap-hobby&highlight=beekeeping+cheap+hobby


----------



## challenger

Acebird said:


> Unfortunately the majority of people that have purchased flow hives have no bee experience so I would expect a high number of failures due to lack of experience and not the flow hive design and how it works. You can expect many discussions to come on what was the root cause of the failures. I get a kick out of the term "economic sense". It makes no economic sense for a backyard beek to buy an extractor yet most do. Backyard beekeeping for most people doesn't make economic sense but it is still a wonderful hobby.


I agree with this 100%


----------



## Acebird

Ian said:


> Your not appreciating the need for space.


I could appreciate it if I knew what it was. You said 40-50 frames. I made assumptions that this was a 10 frame hive. Forty frames would be four boxes. I assume medium size but you haven't said. So four medium boxes would be 2-2.5 feet high. That means the commercial frame needs to be 2-2.5 ft high, all actuated off from one lever and assuming the width of the frame stays the same the standard 10 frame box would have 8 frames in it. Do you need more space than that? Does it need to be temporary. Should a smaller frame set be on top or should you use conventional boxes on top? You beekeepers have the expertise and what works for one may not work for the other so there could be size differences just like there is now.
Planing doesn't change, you must plan for how you are going to winter your hives. Ian, you have an extreme case. I suspect what you do would be different than most beekeepers. It already is in your case.


----------



## burns375

I just got word one of my clients purchases a set of flow hive boxes. They won't arrive until next february but I will report out on my experience then.


----------



## Ian

Acebird said:


> I could appreciate it if I knew what it was.




The boxes over the boards are being collected first pull, the boxes under the boards are temporary for space, usually plugged by the time we get back with two more boxes per hive, which are then pulled in two weeks.


----------



## KiwiLad

I've just stumbled across this on the website of polystyrene hive manufacturer Paradise Honey in Finland (http://paradisehoney.net/documents/Beebox_Smart.jpg). "Collect honey directly from the hive"; "Turn the handle or push the button & collect honey"; "No need for any kind of extractor"; "Option for collecting honey: at home by mobile phone".









I wonder how this patent stacks up against the original and more recent Flow Hive?


----------



## Acebird

Ian said:


> The boxes over the boards are being collected first pull, the boxes under the boards are temporary for space, usually plugged by the time we get back with two more boxes per hive, which are then pulled in two weeks.


Nice Ian. Looks like a gold mine there. Is this typical beekeeping in Canada? It is obvious that you use a crane to work these hives and I see only one person. I would expect two people. Maybe the second one is on the camera. My question is, is there a need to run the hives that tall or is it more a method you have developed for yourself? If it is a need it may require two 2.5 ft sections or more harvesting for the flow system. For most people it makes more sense to use more hives and keep the height down. No invention will work for everyone. Some people still use a horse and carriage.


----------



## Acebird

KiwiLad said:


> I've just stumbled across this on the website of polystyrene hive manufacturer Paradise Honey in Finland


Interesting, coming out of Finland and written in english.


----------



## Barry

Or Pyccknn, Espanol, Francais, Portugues, Deutsch.


----------



## Ian

Acebird said:


> Some people still use a horse and carriage.


Most Beekeepers would not compare my operation to a horse and carriage. 

Good luck with your commercial Honey Flow Operation Ace


----------



## Acebird

I am sorry, I didn't mean to compare your operation to a horse and carriage. It clearly isn't.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Man, you must old. The pulsating vacuum milking machine as we know it has been around since the early 1900's!

Yes, and my grandparents were born in the 1800s as were a lot of the old farmers when I was a kid. And just because something has been invented does not mean it is in widespread use yet.


----------



## KiwiLad

Acebird said:


> Interesting, coming out of Finland and written in english.


They appear to have even sold into New Zealand!


----------



## pomicultorul

clyderoad said:


> I'm sure that any dairy farmer with any size herd of milkers knew that hand milking was a limiting factor in increasing the herd size.
> The milking machine filled a need and allowed herd growth. The machine was adopted quickly because the need was a real one, not a imaginary one. Much like refrigeration.
> 
> Maybe you can use another analogy.


I'm sure that was nothing more than an imperfect analogy - who the heck had so accurately measured the farmer's milking-machine initial skepticism anyway? 

I don't think that people in this field have a problem going along with the costs and risks associated with pioneering and implementing new technologies but when the cast from the Little House on the Prairie tells me that they only need a little-little money to get their life-time engineering project started and they come up with a viral marketing campaign, testimonials of that sort, high-end commercials, social network and forum penetration, etc. something does not smell right. 

That my dear friends is not the work of a peasant from Australia but rather that of a skillful marketing agency carefully orchestrating and monitoring every aspect of the product launch and I bet you they cost a lot more than what those gentlemen claimed they needed to finance their entire project. Buyers will be getting an overpriced gadget good for impressing picnic buddies on weekends - but beyond it... 

It was the Buzz that got them the money and if their sincerity and product confidence induced behavior are an indication of what's to follow I am glad I'm not around when they start servicing the account. 

All the best!


----------



## Oldtimer

pomicultorul said:


> That my dear friends is not the work of a peasant from Australia but rather that of a skillful marketing agency carefully orchestrating and monitoring every aspect of the product launch


I would be inclined to disagree with that statement, I don't think you understand the culture. To me, the way they have marketed it would be exactly how a lot of those kind of Aussies would do it. Can't say for sure as I've never personally met them, but my gut is to believe them totally genuine.

I live in the neighbourhood, visit regularly, in fact just came home from Aussie last week and to prove it here's a link to video shot on my phone by my son in law when he and I came upon a mob of kangaroos while out on a bike ride. Can hear us talking if you pump the volume up a lot.


----------



## razoo

PicnicCreek said:


> Unless people don't want to hear (and it kind of seems like maybe most don't want to hear) about how it's working out, I'll post progress.
> .


I have just read through every post, all 73 pages. PicnicCreek, I would love to know how it is going. 
I am sure I am not the only one who would like to know how this works out. I am sure there will be bumps and set backs along the way, but that is the case with any hive.

Since this is primarily a thread about the perceived failings of Flowhive by those who have never used it, how about you start a new thread dedicated just to telling us about your own experiences. I would greatly appreciate hearing from you how it works out, and I am sure there are others.


----------



## Acebird

razoo said:


> Since this is primarily a thread about the perceived failings of Flowhive by those who have never used it, how about you start a new thread dedicated just to telling us about your own experiences. I would greatly appreciate hearing from you how it works out, and I am sure there are others.


Barry won't allow any other threads on the flow hive. It would get junked up like this one anyway.


----------



## tanksbees

Picnic did you get your frames yet?


----------



## Kofu

Acebird said:


> Barry won't allow any other threads on the flow hive. It would get junked up like this one anyway.
> 
> [14-July]





Barry said:


> Not to worry, the Flow Forums are soon to arrive!
> 
> [16-April]


I've been wondering when the new Flow Forum might appear. Ordinary people are starting to use the Flow™ frames.

There's a fair number of people in Beesource who've been paying attention and won't jump into the discussion with "first impressions" like we had back in April.

opcorn:


----------



## tanksbees

Kofu said:


> There's a fair number of people in Beesource who've been paying attention and won't jump into the discussion with "first impressions" like we had back in April.


I think you'll end up eating those words. Just look at the bickering in the TF forum if you want to see what the Flow™ forum will look like.


----------



## Kofu

tanksbees said:


> I think you'll end up eating those words. Just look at the bickering in the TF forum if you want to see what the Flow (TM) forum will look like.


I didn't say that there aren't other people who like to bicker. It comes with the territory. For me the question is whether I can overlook the bickering and learn something from those who want more solid conversation.

If the idea is to have a space in Beesource to discuss Flow™ frames, this thread has outlived its usefulness. It's the butt of an ongoing joke about how long it is — which in itself is as bad as bickering.

For what it's worth, on my keyboard and a Mac, I get the trademark sign (™) with Option-2. Alt-Control-T might work on a PC. Not sure that ™ is precisely the right symbol, but I hate to see some folks in the Land Down-Under commandeer a perfectly good word like "Flow."


----------



## razoo

Acebird said:


> Barry won't allow any other threads on the flow hive.


Surely not?

I see FlowHive has their own forum - so at least we can go there to get info from those who are actually using it. 
http://forum.honeyflow.com/


----------



## tanksbees

Kofu said:


> I didn't say that there aren't other people who like to bicker. It comes with the territory. For me the question is whether I can overlook the bickering and learn something from those who want more solid conversation.
> 
> If the idea is to have a space in Beesource to discuss Flow™ frames, this thread has outlived its usefulness. It's the butt of an ongoing joke about how long it is — which in itself is as bad as bickering.
> 
> For what it's worth, on my keyboard and a Mac, I get the trademark sign (™) with Option-2. Alt-Control-T might work on a PC. Not sure that ™ is precisely the right symbol, but I hate to see some folks in the Land Down-Under commandeer a perfectly good word like "Flow."


Thanks for the tip, i've updated my post with the proper ™ character.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Those of you that think that this comment by _Barry _...


Barry said:


> Not to worry, the Flow Forums are soon to arrive!


... was meant to imply that he expects those Flow Hive threads/forums to be on _Beesource.com_ should consider the thread with this post also by _Barry_:



Barry said:


> *Do NOT start another "Flow Hive" thread!!!!!!!!!!!!*
> :no::no::no::no::no::no::no:


(click the blue arrow in the quote box to see the original post/thread)

This current Flow Hive thread is an amalgamation of the various other Flow Hive threads that have been started. The message is quite clear - new Flow Hive threads will be deleted or consolidated into this one.


----------



## Oldtimer

Made a lot of sense at the time, people kept jumping in and starting new flow hive threads, if you looked down the thread menu, every few threads there was a "have you heard about the flow hive" thread, if wanting to read seriously you had to plough through them all with endless duplication of posts and information.

Consolidating to one thread, complex as this thread is LOL, was still better than multiple threads all saying the same things.


----------



## Acebird

Oldtimer said:


> was still better than multiple threads all saying the same things.


There are very few unique threads on BS in general. Most are just rehashing the same questions and problems. Repetition is very much a part of a forum if the purpose is to discuss bees.


----------



## Oldtimer

I would imagine that eventually Beesource may return to allowing the occasional new thread on it, same as with other topics.

Just, during the initial hysteria, there was no point having multitudes.

Flowhive is not the only topic that has had threads combined, I have seen it done to other threads on other topics when appropriate.


----------



## PicnicCreek

The frames arrived exactly one week after the boxes - and I'm extremely pleased not only with the quality, but the followup from the Flow team. (And for those who wonder if I'm just overlooking flaws, my entire career has been spent figuring out how people will break things and making sure those things won't break.)

As an example, the caps at the top of the flow frames, that give access for either opening the frames for honey to drain or close the frames back into honeycomb position - you cannot put the caps back on if you've forgotten to put the comb back into position. Much better to make it easy for people to do the right thing, versus manuals and reminders to try to help them remember. It's a thoughtful design detail. Another small example - what you cannot see in the picture but makes all the difference - on all latches there are small springs in-between the screw and the wood latch. This allows the latch to both be tight, but to swivel easily when you want to move it. Small things like that matter.

Quality is top notch - these boxes were shipped from BeeThinking in Portland, so they've obviously outsourced the manufacturing to local companies. That's important when you start dealing with shipping costs.

Because I received some of the first product, both Stuart and Cedar Anderson contacted me, along with another person who is front lines on Customer Service. They wanted details like how long it took to assemble, did I find anything hard to do (no), could instructions have been better (couple of examples & they've now updated) - very conscientious. There is a very active (closed) page on FB for supporters, run by a couple of long-time beeks, and my experience has not been unique. 

Because of the early emails back and forth, I've had a small window into the lives of the people behind this product ... and without sharing details that are theirs to share, all I can say is I'm impressed at their commitment. It's not some slick marketers, but rather fulfillment of a dream and guys filled with wonder that it broke out like it did. They've not just focused on the product, but also are posting short, educational videos on their FB page, perfect for new beeks, slowly educating everyone about things like differences between worker bees, drones, spotting a queen, hive inspection, etc. They are taking this responsibility quite seriously. The manual, their videos, etc. all stress the importance of hive inspection and of connecting with your local beekeeping organization.

Sorry to say I have nothing to report regarding honey harvesting. Unfortunately, I live in Northern California and we have a bit of a drought situation going on right now. So I've decided to not put the new Flow frames (I have enough for two hives) and just focus on keeping my hives healthy through this mess. But I'm happy to share harvest experiences from the FB group in coming weeks.

A couple of pics:


















As you can see, the front of the frames have protruding plastic, so it forms a solid viewing window, allowing you to harvest without actually opening the hive - no bees will be able to get through the front, though all the frames have normal space between them.


----------



## Oldtimer

Any New Zealand people on that facebook page? If there's anyone near me I'd love to take a look. Our spring and nectar flow starting in a couple months.


----------



## Acebird

PicnicCreek, maybe you can answer a question for me now that you have these frames. It seems that the frames or at least the end caps are held together with criss cross wires on each frame. If you take the frames apart are the wires reusable? How are the wires terminated?


----------



## Michael Bush

>That my dear friends is not the work of a peasant from Australia but rather that of a skillful marketing agency carefully orchestrating and monitoring every aspect of the product launch

They certainly seemed to have timed everything well. I've only ever communicated with Cedar and Stuart and I've been talking to them for about a year and a half now. They have never come off as a "skillful marketing agency". They come off as a couple of beekeepers from Australia who are down to earth, stand up guys. I have told them their videos are too slick and polished, but Cedar says his sister is a professional videographer and that's how she wanted them.


----------



## shannonswyatt

PicknicCreek should offer to send his box to oldtimer to test and "break in" the frames. Maybe that is the most practical way with flow frames, ship them between the northern and southern hemispheres.


----------



## Oldtimer

Agreed.


----------



## PicnicCreek

Oldtimer said:


> Any New Zealand people on that facebook page? If there's anyone near me I'd love to take a look. Our spring and nectar flow starting in a couple months.


I can't point to any specifically, but there are over 3700 members as of this morning. I'll watch for any NZ folks.


----------



## PicnicCreek

Acebird said:


> PicnicCreek, maybe you can answer a question for me now that you have these frames. It seems that the frames or at least the end caps are held together with criss cross wires on each frame. If you take the frames apart are the wires reusable? How are the wires terminated?


I'll get you some pics when I have a chance, but it appeared to me that the wires were only there as additional lateral support during handling (meaning the frame operates just fine without).

The end caps just plug in (if you have the comb in the right position).


----------



## PicnicCreek

shannonswyatt said:


> PicknicCreek should offer to send his box to oldtimer to test and "break in" the frames. Maybe that is the most practical way with flow frames, ship them between the northern and southern hemispheres.


I need to clean off this computer screen - getting really hard to read the text all of a sudden .


----------



## PicnicCreek

Michael Bush said:


> [snip] ... Cedar says his sister is a professional videographer and that's how she wanted them.


She has been posting regular 'from the hive' video on their FB page & that video is of the same quality. When asked, she'll share camera info, etc. She's inspired me to get better pics of my girls.

There's also a video on their page showing the evolution of the Flow frames, first ideas (what worked and didn't work) - if you enjoy tinkering, you'll identify.


----------



## tanksbees

PC, we have a nice long honey flow down here, if you drop them off with me i'll even let you charge your Tesla at my house and lend you an old smoky gas generator to get back home 

If we're waiting for the drought to end....could be a while.


----------



## Michael Bush

>There's also a video on their page showing the evolution of the Flow frames...

Thanks. Very cool.


----------



## razoo

Oldtimer said:


> Any New Zealand people on that facebook page? If there's anyone near me I'd love to take a look. Our spring and nectar flow starting in a couple months.


there is a thread for Kiwi Beeks here : http://forum.honeyflow.com/t/new-zealand-flow-keepers/913/3


----------



## PicnicCreek

Acebird said:


> PicnicCreek, maybe you can answer a question for me now that you have these frames. It seems that the frames or at least the end caps are held together with criss cross wires on each frame. If you take the frames apart are the wires reusable? How are the wires terminated?


On closer inspection, you're absolutely right. The wires not only hold on the end pieces (not just caps) to the rest of the frame, the frames are made of individual pieces that snap together. (Which explains a tip I saw that when opening frames for honey flow, if it's difficult to turn the handle then only insert partway and turn that, etc. Different sections are able to operate independently of others.) It appears to be a very solid & durable assembly. 

I doubt the wires are reusable, but looks straightforward to rewire yourself if something happened (like a curious person deciding to take the whole thing apart  ).

Pics for you:


----------



## Oldtimer

razoo said:


> there is a thread for Kiwi Beeks here : http://forum.honeyflow.com/t/new-zealand-flow-keepers/913/3


Thanks Razoo, I'll monitor the page & eventually should find someone with one near me.

Couple interesting things, looks like no participants on that page actually have any bees yet, and several express fear of "anti flow types", once they show up at a bee club & mention their flow hive I doubt there will be any animosity at all, rather there will be a lot of interest, mostly academic though as the majority would not want a flow hive of their own, but would be interested to see one & see how the harvest goes.


----------



## PicnicCreek

I think the anti-flow comment was because of the experience many of us have had on different bee forums. There were certainly a lot of 'the sky is falling' comments on the Flow facebook page - and undoubtedly why the independently-run Flow Hive Beekeepers page is a closed group, by invite only. People just want to have discussion about it, help new beekeepers, get advice, etc. 

I hope you're right and they will be met with curiosity, rather than hostility.


----------



## Oldtimer

I'm sure you are right, the inflamed comments will have worried them, they probably feel the world is divided into flow hive supporters vs those violently opposed. But this type of behaviour is more a function of the internet. Meeting face to face is different and I'm certain a visit to a NZ bee clubs will not be a trip to the lions den, but rather be very welcoming to them.

Most bee clubs include some skilled beekeepers, some dreadful ones, a few eccentric characters, and those with particular agendas or fixations. But in the club context, here anyway, they all tend to co exist peacefully, and the flowhive people will just be another subset of this, but will find their needs are 90% the same as all the other beekeepers. Wouldn't be surprised if a lot of clubs add a flowhive to their apiary as a point of interest.


----------



## Acebird

PicnicCreek said:


> (like a curious person deciding to take the whole thing apart  ).


Well that would be me. Thanks for the pics. So how do they terminate the wires with proper tension? Are the ends welded or twisted?


----------



## Acebird

Oldtimer said:


> But this type of behaviour is more a function of the internet.


I don't agree OT. It has to do with threatening your livelihood, basically ignorance. I have automated many processes in my lifetime and the first thing to overcome is the ignorance that you will take someones job away if you automate what they are doing. It is very hard for them to think that you will make their job (for the most part one that they hate) much easier and usually more in demand. Which equates to higher pay. If you have never done the job before and go to work on an automated line (think younger generation) you would assume it was always done this way. Machines should work hard not humans.


----------



## clyderoad

Acebird said:


> I don't agree OT. It has to do with threatening your livelihood, basically ignorance.


I find it hard to believe even one word of your post.


----------



## PicnicCreek

Acebird said:


> So how do they terminate the wires with proper tension? Are the ends welded or twisted?


If you look at the second photo, you can see where the wire is joined - I'm assuming welded, but can't tell by just looking at the two fasteners (one top, one bottom).


----------



## tanksbees

You typically wouldn't weld or solder next to plastic like that, it looks like a crimp ferrule to me.

Acebird, some of us know from experience that new things are not always better.


----------



## challenger

PicnicCreek said:


> She's inspired me to get better pics of my girls.


Well there you have it. Nothing else needs saying. IMO "my girls" speaks to the market that flow is targeting. 
I know that calling bees, "girls" is a somewhat common thing but it drives me crazy. I've said it before, anthropomorphism and beekeeping newbs go hand in hand.

Do you think the viewing glass is so your "girls" can see you and be put at ease? Do you think your bees will get to "know you"?

Bees are bugs. If you wish to give the occupants of the hive the same name as one that is used to describe human gender then have at it. Just remember this is completely out of whack. Will your drones get a complex by being referred to as girls? Something to consider I guess.


----------



## beeware10

challenger I have to agree 100%. that girls thing drives me nuts and puts the poster in a special category. lol


----------



## PicnicCreek

challenger said:


> Well there you have it. Nothing else needs saying. IMO "my girls" speaks to the market that flow is targeting.
> I know that calling bees, "girls" is a somewhat common thing but it drives me crazy. I've said it before, anthropomorphism and beekeeping newbs go hand in hand.
> 
> Do you think the viewing glass is so your "girls" can see you and be put at ease? Do you think your bees will get to "know you"?
> 
> Bees are bugs. If you wish to give the occupants of the hive the same name as one that is used to describe human gender then have at it. Just remember this is completely out of whack. Will your drones get a complex by being referred to as girls? Something to consider I guess.


I'm sure you didn't mean to get me laughing with your post mocking me, but if this is what you actually think then yeah, it's pretty funny. My dogs are also dogs, but hey, I enjoy their personalities. Bees are 'just bugs'? Fascinating ones, at that, aren't they? 

I inspect all my hives religiously. I am not a new beek, though in comparison to many here, I'm much newer. I'm not a commercial beek, but really enjoy watching the interactions in the hive and learning about these small creatures. I have five healthy hives, double deep brood boxes, and feel like it's a never ending learning process. I started with one package six years ago, have captured one swarm, and the others are from splits. My first hive inspection (and many subsequent ones) was as a 5 year old, working at my grandmother's side (no fancy bee suits for us). That probably doesn't fit your perception of someone who calls their bees 'my girls' (since you already called it out as the sign of someone new), but hey, here we are. 

I wasn't aware this forum was just for commercial beeks like you. Thanks for the warm welcome . Something to keep in mind ... before there were commercial beeks who looked at this as a business, there were people like me, keeping bees on their farms and near their homes, harvesting honey for personal use. When I'm working my hives, I feel a strong connection to my past. Sorry that some don't get that same enjoyment.


----------



## Oldtimer

I don't think it's got anything to do with being commercial or not. I was once a commercial beekeeper and if people want to call their bees girls it does not bother me one bit. 

I've also seen people who are not commercial beekeepers have a rant about people who do it, so this like or dislike crosses the commercial / non commercial divide. 

On the other hand, long hours of working in bee yards alone led to me occasionally talking to myself or muttering my thoughts aloud, which caused embarrassment a couple of times when someone walked up to me unnoticed!  Don't think I've ever talked to the bees though.


----------



## PicnicCreek

All fair points - I fell into the trap of assuming some of the hostility towards Flow Hive (the actual topic of this thread, fwiw) was carrying over. Never meant to imply that it was 'all', but rather just some.

Never have understood why people will get all riled up over something like this, when there are so many real issues. I want a life where someone calling their bees 'girls' is at the top of my list of concerns.


----------



## max2

"On the other hand, long hours of working in bee yards alone led to me occasionally talking to myself or muttering my thoughts aloud, which caused embarrassment a couple of times when someone walked up to me unnoticed! Don't think I've ever talked to the bees though. 

The better I get to know people the more I like my bees!


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

max2 said:


> The better I get to know people the more I like my bees!


You mean: your girls. :thumbsup:

In the movie _More than Honey_, which by the way may have laid the path to things like the FlowHive-hype, the owner of the Miller Honey farms calls his bees "girls", too. So even commercial beekeepers do it at times. Why not.

I for myself do it all the time. Depends. 

I like speaking to bees better than to humans. They understand me. No anthropomorphism in my mind by doing so.


----------



## Acebird

PicnicCreek said:


> If you look at the second photo, you can see where the wire is joined - I'm assuming welded, but can't tell by just looking at the two fasteners (one top, one bottom).


I can't tell either. I think I see a twist but it could be twisted and welded. Unlikely welded in place as someone else mentioned. If it were pre-welded it would take a special tool to stretch it and get it in place I would assume. I am asking these questions because it matters as to how you would replace a broken or warned part of the comb. Maybe you can field the question on the flow forum for me.


----------



## aunt betty

I talk to myself and yell when I'm mad. Get caught all the time and really don't care. 

Now the flow-hive concept. Those guys were brilliant in that they raised a whole lot of money with their idea and the work they did on it. That's all I have to say about it that is good other than...the process of de-bunking the flow-hive caused me to contract a severe case of bee fever and it got me back into bees again.

The de-bunking...
If the bees use the flow-hive as a brood nest you are screwed and it can happen obviously. 
This thread is 76 pages, did not read it, and I'm wondering if there are pictures of flow hives with brood in them posted? I'd love to see a picture like that.


----------



## Beethinking

They recommend using a queen excluder for this reason to prevent brood in the Flow frames. Due to the size/depth of the cells, it seems that the queen is more inclined to lay drones in the Flow frames if she lays in them at all.


----------



## Acebird

What is the physical size of the comb? 5.9 vs. 5.1


----------



## Beethinking

I'm on an airplane so I couldn't tell you. They are pretty deep though.


----------



## Michael Bush

>The de-bunking... If the bees use the flow-hive as a brood nest you are screwed and it can happen obviously. 

Actually the cells are too deep and too large in diameter. It can't happen. If you deprive them of drones and you don't use an excluder and you let them get very crowded MAYBE you could force them into putting some drone brood in it. Of course you could always use an excluder... I don't.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Michael Bush said:


> Actually the cells are too deep and too large in diameter. It can't happen.


Well, the Flow Hive people don't agree with you ...



> We recommend the use of a queen excluder as this ensures no drone or worker-bee eggs and larvae end up in the Flow™ frames.
> Having said this, most of our experimental Flow™ hives did not use an excluder and we never found worker brood in them and very rarely found drone brood. We have designed Flow™ comb to have deep cells of a size that suits neither worker or drone brood.
> 
> 
> http://www.honeyflow.com/faqs/will-...e-flow-frames-do-i-need-a-queen-excluder/p/85


Clearly they _did _experience drone brood in the Flow frames when an excluder was not used.


----------



## challenger

What is wrong with all you insensitive people?
These are NOT drones. They are "boys".
Get with the program folks.
Just a little funnin around.


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> Actually the cells are too deep and too large in diameter.


Michael could you measure the frames and come up with a dia.? I am curious as to what they decided to use.


----------



## tanksbees

The premise of the flow hive is removing honey without disturbing the bees, as such it would be unacceptable to remove the frames to check for drone brood, and therefore a queen excluder should be considered mandatory.

Personally I would never extract honey without seeing it. I would love to see the face puckers when the first flow hive user opens the tap on some of that creamy smooth SHB poop and slimed filled honey, or maybe even gets a few worms working their way into the bottle...yum!

I suppose you could remove and inspect the frames, but at that point it does beg the question of why bother with this in the first place


----------



## Michael Bush

>>and very rarely found drone brood. 
>Clearly they did experience drone brood in the Flow frames when an excluder was not used.

And they had virtually no drone brood in the brood nest and as they said and as they told me, it was "VERY rare". In other words, you almost have to set the right conditions. If you have plenty of drone comb in the brood nest, I don't forsee them putting any in the Flow frames. Granted my test is pretty small in size and time, but I had no issues and I don't forsee any.

But if you are worried, there is always an excluder...


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

But as you as an experienced beekeeper know, once a comb is marked as "brood comb" by pheromones, it will receive brood as long as the queen has access to it. 
In case you restrict the queen from that comb that is marked as brood comb (pheromones), the bees will leave that cells open and empty above the queen excluder. Also many pollen will build up there during the season, because, well, it is marked as brood comb. 

Can't see the value of your recommendations to try it without excluder. I mean, that comb is completely made from plastic. So why care about "natural beekeeping" without excluder?

Do you recommend top entrances with the Flow Hive, too?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Michael Bush said:


> If you have plenty of drone comb in the brood nest, I don't forsee them putting any in the Flow frames. Granted my test is pretty small in size and time, but I had no issues and I don't forsee any.


I am aware that some of your hives are foundationless frames in the brood nest, which certainly allows bees to raise as many drones as they might want within the primary brood nest area. But using conventional foundation in the brood nest area makes it more difficult for drones to be raised on those foundation frames, and may prompt the bees to attempt to raise drones outside the primary brood area.

My understanding is that your Flow Hive test involved a single Flow Hive super. Was that test on a hive with foundation in the primary brood area?


----------



## Acebird

BernhardHeuvel said:


> But as you as an experienced beekeeper know, once a comb is marked as "brood comb" by pheromones, it will receive brood as long as the queen has access to it.


I have just put a box of black comb in the 7th position on one of my hives. Two weeks ago I put a box of brood comb on another hive and yesterday it was full. Judging by the weight and what I could see it was honey. If not honey then the brood must have a lot of lead in their butts.



> Can't see the value of your recommendations to try it without excluder.


As long as there are open cells in the hive you know the queen has room without an excluder. If you use an excluder you are forced to check if there is room for the queen. And there may be four or five boxes of honey above the brood nest that you have to get out of the way. All boils down to a lot less work without an excluder. We will have to see how much pollen I get in my box of brood frames. I never noticed it before. Seems like it should have happened by now.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

Sigh. All that beginner's wisdom just makes me smile.


----------



## TalonRedding

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ7FMjHFJZc


----------



## TalonRedding

Here is another:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CuJN41JQbTU


----------



## PicnicCreek

Well this is progress. The thread has gone from 'Scam!!' --> mocking those interested --> starting to break down the details of actual use.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Do you recommend top entrances with the Flow Hive, too?

I don't have enough experience to decide what I would do if I were using an excluder with the Flow Hive, but with no excluder, that is exactly what I'm doing.

>My understanding is that your Flow Hive test involved a single Flow Hive super.

Yes. Most of my assumptions on brood are based on a combination of my limited experience and the inventors experience under different circumstances. Even with circumstances optimal to encouraging drone in the Flow hive they only had it happen once and they've been testing a lot bigger scale.

>Was that test on a hive with foundation in the primary brood area?

The brood area was a combination of some foundationless and some plastic 4.9. It was not lacking in drone comb. None of my hives are.


----------



## tanksbees

BernhardHeuvel said:


> once a comb is marked as "brood comb" by pheromones, it will receive brood as long as the queen has access to it


Do you have any citations on this? I have never heard this before. In fact I have seen the opposite moving comb to the outside of the brood box or up into supers.


----------



## Acebird

tanksbees said:


> In fact I have seen the opposite moving comb to the outside of the brood box or up into supers.


Must be beginner wisdom.


----------



## tanksbees

Acebird said:


> Must be beginner wisdom.


Well obviously if I move comb with brood in it out of the brood nest they will continue to use it and sometimes the queen will even continue to lay in it as the brood hatches out, but after a while it ends up as honeycomb or pollen or empty depending on where I put it.


----------



## kholmar

PicnicCreek said:


> Well this is progress. The thread has gone from 'Scam!!' --> mocking those interested --> starting to break down the details of actual use.


I got mocked for pointing that out but it just made me smile...


----------



## kholmar

e-mail from Flow today:

Hi everyone,
Things are really flowing now!
Early Delivery orders shipped out in late June as planned. The bees are taking to the frames and, in places where the nectar is flowing, are already starting to fill them up.
September deliveries are being eagerly awaited by our early bird supporters, so we are excited to announce that we are ahead of schedule and have started shipping today!
If you are an Early Bird supporter with a September shipping date you will receive a tracking notification as your order ships out, we have lots of parcels to pack and send so we ask for your patience over the coming weeks as you may not be at the top of the queue.
To ensure we can keep the pace up and continue to deliver on time, the factory has retooled to double our production capacity.
Click here for an inside look at the Brisbane and Oregon factories.
We will have some exciting news for you all shortly. So watch this space!
Cedar, Stu and the Flow team.


----------



## mzsbees2000

*Flow Hive*

Is a Flow Hive a better option than an extractor?

I'm new to beekeeping and haven't had to extract any honey yet. I thought an extractor was my only option but then a friend told me about the Flow Hive. One Flow Hive super cost about the same as an extractor. 

Here's a link to the Flow Hive website: http://www.honeyflow.com/

Thanks M.Z.


----------



## Dan the bee guy

*Re: Flow Hive*

In one word NO. A good strong hive of bees will fill many supers. If you belong to a bee club many of them will have a extractor you can use. Then if you expand you can get your own extractor. That's a lot cheaper than the flow box.


----------



## tanksbees

*Re: Flow Hive*

The flow hive is probably the most controversial bee product invented in the last decade, and the debate about it has become quite heated.

They have only recently begun shipping them, and few people have actually used one.

It might be good, it might be bad, nobody knows yet.

My personal recommendation would be to buy neither a flow hive nor an extractor. Crush and strain for your first year, or borrow an extractor. Let the dust settle before making a decision.


----------



## tommyt

*Re: Flow Hive*

The best Answer IMHO is 

NO


----------



## dynemd

*Re: Flow Hive*

I think this has been brought up before...
http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...r-less-honey-by-Flow-Hive&highlight=flow+hive


----------



## marshmasterpat

*Re: Flow Hive*



tanksbees said:


> My personal recommendation would be to buy neither a flow hive nor an extractor. Crush and strain for your first year, or borrow an extractor. Let the dust settle before making a decision.


Many consider crush and straining for a few years. This is the end of my second summer and still doing the crush and strain. These ladies are requiring me to buying too much furniture for me to buy an extractor at this point.


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Flow Hive*

FatBeeMan pulled it off in a few weeks in his own way long before we're hearing from the people who invested in flow frames :applause:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjWvqSNH-k8


----------



## KiwiLad

*Re: Flow Hive*

User reports are now starting to flow (no pun intended):

http://forum.honeyflow.com/t/pics-of-the-flow-frame-in-action/2665

http://forum.honeyflow.com/t/my-experience-of-using-flow-frames-without-an-excluder/2956


----------



## JMoore

*Re: Flow Hive*

Boy, it sure did not take long for the Chinese knock-offs to reach market:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Bee-Hive-Be...b579d7&pid=100169&rk=3&rkt=15&sd=331628039923

It's deceptive for sure, same flow hive videos. Edited pics. Lol. Gotta love their industriousness.


----------



## aunt betty

*Re: Flow Hive*

I want to thank the flow-hive (tm) people for getting me to get interested in bees again. 
I had to de-bunk the system and prove how it don't work, figured out that yeah, it could maybe sort of kind of work in a way...in a perfect world. Caught bee fever and that's that. Flow-hive? It's a worthless concept to me.
meh


----------



## RobWok

*Re: Flow Hive*

The problem with having stuff made in China, is that you hand your prototype to the pirates.


----------



## tanksbees

*Re: Flow Hive*

From the other forum:
_"The honey is beautiful and golden - almost could have been poured direct into jars - there are a few wings and legs in it."_

Wings and legs? huh?

From someone who ran without an excluder:
_"I decided to go without an excluder and see what happened. So far I have harvested honey from our frames twice and each time we have found larvae and eggs in the harvested honey and near fully developed bees which have been cleaned out of the hive, on the ground, the day after we harvested the honey"_

Not a serious concern since you could use a QE, but goes to show that some of the too-good-to-be-true information the flow hive guys put out is coming back to bite them.



JMoore said:


> Boy, it sure did not take long for the Chinese knock-offs to reach market:
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Bee-Hive-Be...b579d7&pid=100169&rk=3&rkt=15&sd=331628039923
> 
> It's deceptive for sure, same flow hive videos. Edited pics. Lol. Gotta love their industriousness.


It took longer than I expected. Another couple months I bet you can buy a super of shoddy looking poor functioning knockoff frames for $59.99 direct shipped from China. Interesting thing is that in this case the product looks 100% genuine - Flow must have had it all made in China, and their factory is already competing with them. It's unfortunately all too common when you make an entire product including packaging at a single facility in China.


----------



## tanksbees

*Re: Flow Hive*

OK, so not only did the Chinese rip off the Flow guys, but someone else patented the technology in China!


----------



## VanIslander

*Re: Flow Hive*



JMoore said:


> Boy, it sure did not take long for the Chinese knock-offs to reach market:
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Bee-Hive-Be...b579d7&pid=100169&rk=3&rkt=15&sd=331628039923
> 
> It's deceptive for sure, same flow hive videos. Edited pics. Lol. Gotta love their industriousness.


Well, just WOW...! 

Yes, they've ripped off their video, pics -- everything. (BTW, I think I was the first to predict this back in post #1112, last para... Have been down this road with the company I worked for, before retirement...)

It looks like the auction is for two frames -- the bidding is at $81. It will be interesting to watch this to see what they sell for, and the promised shipping date.

I don't think I'd buy from this ebay seller, just on general principles. It looks like they carry quite a few knockoff products. See their negative comments here: 
http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISA...=25&iid=-1&de=off&which=negative&interval=365


----------



## aunt betty

*Re: Flow Hive*

Lets do analysis. I enjoy this sort of thing. 

Suppose one deep flow frame is going to hold the same as what a regular one does. (The ad never says what size depth they are). They look like deeps.

The frame costs $63.57 or close to it when you buy 7. It holds around 8 or 9 pounds of honey so you have to fill it nearly twice to pay for the thing. 

I'm pretty sure that the old way is more cost effective and the wooden equipment will far outlast the poor quality Chinese plastic if it is plastic. Don't forget how safe things are in China. They use high quality food grade plastic on all their exports. (if you want to believe that)


----------



## AHudd

*Re: Flow Hive*

After the poster said he found legs and wings in the honey, Cedar said, the legs and wings were probably bits of wax. I would be insulted if someone suggested to me I didn't know the difference between wax and wings. 
Maybe they don't have KFC or Church's Chicken down under. 

Alex


----------



## tanksbees

*Re: Flow Hive*



aunt betty said:


> Lets do analysis. I enjoy this sort of thing.
> 
> Suppose one deep flow frame is going to hold the same as what a regular one does. (The ad never says what size depth they are). They look like deeps.
> 
> The frame costs $63.57 or close to it when you buy 7. It holds around 8 or 9 pounds of honey so you have to fill it nearly twice to pay for the thing.
> 
> I'm pretty sure that the old way is more cost effective and the wooden equipment will far outlast the poor quality Chinese plastic if it is plastic. Don't forget how safe things are in China. They use high quality food grade plastic on all their exports. (if you want to believe that)


Betty, just drink the koolaid, math is overrated, you need to be guided by emotion and faith. Think of all the bees you will be saving, the planet you will be saving, and the children on that planet that you will be saving. Don't you like saving children? Think of all those children 100 years from now who won't have any trees, or bees, and visually picture the sad look on their face. Now close your eyes and imagine them saying to you "Betty, if you had only bought a flow hive, our future would be so much brighter"

Repeat that several times, and think of the children, Betty.

Does the price really even matter when you are saving the planet? Of course not. It's not replaceable. It is priceless.

Now head on over to ebay and punch in your credit card. You will feel your guilt miraculously lift as your money flows electronically over the water to a bunch of dirt poor chinese factory workers working 16 hours days so the rich guy who owns the factory can buy a Buick and a Rolex and send his kids to expensive schools in the USA. By working together, you are saving the planet, one dollar at a time, one flow hive at a time.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Flow Hive*

It's virtually guaranteed the knockoff version will not be food grade plastic. 

Honey will be sitting in those cells for some time before being removed by the beekeeper, and absorbing whatever carcinogens and other nasties are within the plastic. It would be a mistake to buy the knockoff, although no doubt some will.

Note most of the bad feedback is complaints about product being faked, mislabelled, and not what was claimed.

I used to buy the odd knickknack on Chinese web sites but have given up, in every instance the product was not what the advertisement said. What surprised me was the shortcuts that would be taken that made the product much worse, but would have only resulted in a tiny saving during the manufacture process.


----------



## VanIslander

*Re: Flow Hive*

Absolutely fascinating. There are now at least 5 ebay Chinese stores selling them under the following names:

witdeals
sforworld
faststores
yours-ours
ubeststore. 

This one -- ubestore: 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Bee-Hive-Fr...199f3ae&pid=100005&rk=4&rkt=6&sd=291540103159

... is selling them as "Buy it Now" -- two frames for $180 and 'free' shipping. So isn't that more than the real McCoy from Australia?


----------



## frustrateddrone

*Re: Flow Hive*



RobWok said:


> The problem with having stuff made in China, is that you hand your prototype to the pirates.


This quote is pure speculation is my thinking. Just hearsay.... Be informed by protection of copyright, trademark and patent worldwide. "HELLO" 

I have done business with the Chinese for over 10 years. For the most part they're good business oriented people. You do have theft from large companies and small companies. I've lost thousands of dollars in plastic injection mold project. Learned a lot of what to do to protect your business interests. So if you or anyone wants to know how to do business in China I can provide 10 yrs of knowledge.


----------



## frustrateddrone

*Re: Flow Hive*



VanIslander said:


> Well, just WOW...!
> 
> Yes, they've ripped off their video, pics -- everything. (BTW, I think I was the first to predict this back in post #1112, last para... Have been down this road with the company I worked for, before retirement...)
> 
> It looks like the auction is for two frames -- the bidding is at $81. It will be interesting to watch this to see what they sell for, and the promised shipping date.
> 
> I don't think I'd buy from this ebay seller, just on general principles. It looks like they carry quite a few knockoff products. See their negative comments here:
> http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISA...=25&iid=-1&de=off&which=negative&interval=365


It would be interesting how the reaction will be for flow hive and the legal issues from this knock off. Hope they have the best legal team to win a patent lawsuit. I would love to see this transpire over time in a positive way.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Flow Hive*

OK they grossed 10 million or whatever, but doubt they will have the needed resources to fight this successfully in China. Fighting officials who are being bribed by the other team is not a level playing field.


----------



## Warre

*Re: Flow Hive*

Any one stop to think this is just marketing by company to drum up some hoopla like they have been hooplaing the whole time. Also may of those listings are to drive interest to their store and nothing more. The listing is ended by seller and then item dispersal. before the item ends. Or they cancel sale after or send refund and you don;t hear from them again.


----------



## Ravenseye

*Re: Flow Hive*



aunt betty said:


> Good one. Laughed hard.
> 
> [delete]


I'd like to think that contributors to this forum (and particularly this thread) would refrain from making fun of an accent. After all, this is the web and it's international. The WWW doesn't live in the US. So.....

I'm not quite sure what this post contributes. I'm guessing nothing. 

Move on.


----------



## rwurster

*Re: Flow Hive*

:applause: Chinese knock offs. That's the reality of success, and on a product that's barely being mass tested as we speak. Who knows, maybe the Chinese version will work better :lpf:


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Flow Hive*



JMoore said:


> Gotta love their industriousness.


Well then you would be impressed with most thieves that rob you.


----------



## Barry

*Re: Flow Hive*



rwurster said:


> Who knows, maybe the Chinese version will work better :lpf:


Or as good. How many times do we read on here the praises of staplers bought at Harbor Freight?!

Yesterday I had to go buy myself a new left blade circular saw as my current one finally died. There are all of two to choose from. Talking to the sales rep at the tool store I buy from, there has been a huge change of ownership in the last few years with regards to hand tools. The Chinese own one of the big names (Porter Cable or Skil?) and most of the others own at least one other big name. I think Makita is the only one left that is still the same ownership.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Flow Hive*

>OK, so not only did the Chinese rip off the Flow guys, but someone else patented the technology in China!

They probably bribed someone to pre date it also so it will be earlier than the original...

I'm amazed how they not only stole the technology but even the advertising and the pictures... Apparently it costs too much to take your own pictures...


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Flow Hive*



Barry said:


> The Chinese own one of the big names (Porter Cable or Skil?) and most of the others own at least one other big name.


_Skil _is part of the Robert Bosch company, _Porter Cable_ is part of the Stanley Black & Decker company. I was a bit surprised to find that the _Milwaukee _brand is owned by a Chinese company.



> TECHTRONIC INDUSTRIES (TTI); Headquarters: Hong Kong, China
> POWER AND HAND TOOL BRANDS
> 
> AEG
> Hart
> Milwaukee Electric Tool
> Ryobi
> Stiletto
> TTI also develops and produces Ridgid power tools, under a licensing agreement with Emerson. This arrangement began back in 2003 (press release, PDF).
> 
> TTI owns the Ryobi power tools and accessories division in the USA, North America, the UK, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, but Ryobi is also an independent company with separate product lines in some other parts of the world.
> 
> http://toolguyd.com/tool-brands-corporate-affiliations/


See the link for a fairly complete listing of other tool companies, current as of February 2014. Of course, that data is about the corporate ownership of popular brands. The individual stockholders of the corporations may be dispersed more widely around the globe.


----------



## PicnicCreek

*Re: Flow Hive*



RobWok said:


> The problem with having stuff made in China, is that you hand your prototype to the pirates.


They are not manufacturing in China. The frame manufacturer is Marco Engineering, in Brisbane, AUS. 

I have no doubt that the Chinese version will not be food-grade plastic & when complaints start coming in, it will hurt the FlowHive guys. I wish them luck in dealing with this.


----------



## PicnicCreek

*Re: Flow Hive*



Michael Bush said:


> I'm amazed how they not only stole the technology but even the advertising and the pictures... Apparently it costs too much to take your own pictures...


My guess is that until they receive a FlowHive, so they can reverse engineer the design, that they have nothing to take pictures of. Yet.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Flow Hive*



PicnicCreek said:


> They are not manufacturing in China. The frame manufacturer is Marco Engineering, in Brisbane, AUS.


From Marco Engineering's own website ...



> To remain competitive within the manufacturing market we also offer mould fabrication at both our Australian facility and[HIGHLIGHT] our sister factory in China,[/HIGHLIGHT] where all tooling is manufactured to strict quality standards at a fraction of the price.
> 
> http://www.marcoengineering.com.au/


----------



## tanksbees

*Re: Flow Hive*

Nearly 100% of anything plastic which you buy was made in China. It would surprise me if the flow hive was any different. Marco engineering may well have outsourced the project to another company.


----------



## PicnicCreek

*Re: Flow Hive*



Rader Sidetrack said:


> From Marco Engineering's own website ...


True enough, it does say that. I should have also posted the pictures from the FlowHive manufacturing facility that shows it is clearly not in China (cars outside with Aussie license plates, etc.).

If you've spent time around plastics manufacturing, it's fairly common to first start at a facility nearby, so that you can easily visit/troubleshoot/establish a close relationship. When design issues have all been sorted out AND you have a need for higher volume manufacturing, then it makes sense to go to a place that can support that, with a company running their own facility there (so you maintain control over design, process, and materials). It's clear that FlowFrames being manufactured today are not coming from China (and the shipping boxes I received were clearly labeled as manufactured in Australia).


----------



## PicnicCreek

*Re: Flow Hive*



tanksbees said:


> Nearly 100% of anything plastic which you buy was made in China. It would surprise me if the flow hive was any different. Marco engineering may well have outsourced the project to another company.


That's just not the case. My career has been in design/dev/manufacturing of fairly complex electromechanical software-driven devices, most of which had plastic accessories or cases or other molded parts.

Long term, yes. You may want to outsource to a sister facility where costs will be lowered. But early manufacturing? Never. The reason is that there are typically small issues - molds don't want to release, equipment validation, training, materials, etc - and you want to be nearby to help trouble-shoot, not further away.

If you look at where the Flow team is at (Byron's Bay) and Marcos Engineering (Brisbane), you'll see they picked a manufacturer where they could work with them hands-on. And if you go through their photos, you'll see that Marcos gave them an office at the plant so they could be present as they were getting things ramped up. That's all very typical.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Flow Hive*



PicnicCreek said:


> equipment validation,


You usually have to validate equipment where it is installed and every time it is moved even in the same plant. In pounds of plastic the flow hive is a spit compared to other products produced in china. They have everything to lose if they don't provide what the flow guys want. Cheating on a spec would only save them nickels where as the bad press would cost them millions.


----------



## frustrateddrone

*Re: Flow Hive*

To quash any here-say and rumors, ask by emailing them on the website. It's funny how everything is speculation on the MFG origin it seems from what I just read. I contacted them about the patent violation; gave some encouragement and wanted to know about the legal action they plan on taking. I got the answer from the horses mouth in an email that was encouraging. 
Instead of beating this thread with speculation, just ask them on the website, leave your email and you'll probably get answers quickly like I did. Amazing when you step back and see the simplicity of what I just wrote. Well...... I guess it's fun for the few to write pages and pages or do I have it wrong?


----------



## PicnicCreek

*Re: Flow Hive*



Acebird said:


> You usually have to validate equipment where it is installed and every time it is moved even in the same plant.


True enough. (You'd be foolish not to do that!) Once you have the protocols written for equipment validation, it's just a matter of executing when you set up somewhere else. 

That's why a lot of pharma manufacturers have 'exact duplicate' plants around the world, meaning exactly the same equipment, floor layout, etc. They can reuse procedures everywhere, without developing from scratch.


----------



## JMoore

*Re: Flow Hive*

Post the email. It's a different color plastic. It's shipped from China. They don't use the name "Flow Hive" in the description. And they obviously photoshopped the Flow Hive pictures to insert their yellow colored frames. It's pretty humorous, actually.


----------



## JMoore

*Re: Flow Hive*

I wonder what eBay's response would be if Flow Hive threatened them legally for allowing this to be sold.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Flow Hive*



PicnicCreek said:


> They can reuse procedures everywhere, without developing from scratch.


That doesn't work when you acquire a competitor or different organization.


----------



## aunt betty

*Re: Flow Hive*



frustrateddrone said:


> To quash any here-say and rumors, ask by emailing them on the website. It's funny how everything is speculation on the MFG origin it seems from what I just read. I contacted them about the patent violation; gave some encouragement and wanted to know about the legal action they plan on taking. I got the answer from the horses mouth in an email that was encouraging.
> Instead of beating this thread with speculation, just ask them on the website, leave your email and you'll probably get answers quickly like I did. Amazing when you step back and see the simplicity of what I just wrote. Well...... I guess it's fun for the few to write pages and pages or do I have it wrong?


Man from Texas criticizes internet forum for whipping dead horse. Classic!


----------



## max2

The manufacturer of the frames for the Flow Hive turned up at my market stall today.
Nice fellow. Asked what I was thinking of the FH - I'm not for or against as I never seen or owned one, wait and see.
He explained to me that they are manufactured at his company near Brisbane. The factory works 3 shifts, 7 days a week. They expect to work these ****s till the middle of 2016.
He explained that the frames have been destruction tested and came up roses.
He expects a frame to last 5 to 7 years with normal use and about 2 years if stored exposed to light.
He is not YET a beekeeper but seems to be in the injection moulding business for a good while.


----------



## max2

*Re: Flow Hive*



JMoore said:


> Post the email. It's a different color plastic. It's shipped from China. They don't use the name "Flow Hive" in the description. And they obviously photoshopped the Flow Hive pictures to insert their yellow colored frames. It's pretty humorous, actually.


See post above.
I asked him about the Chinese copy too.
They did test some and the Chinese product did not perform well.


----------



## Kofu

max2 said:


> He explained to me that they are manufactured at his company near Brisbane. The factory works 3 shifts, 7 days a week. They expect to work these shifts till the middle of 2016. He explained that the frames have been destruction tested and came up roses. He expects a frame to last 5 to 7 years with normal use and about 2 years if stored exposed to light.


Good information. Thanks! :thumbsup:



> I asked him about the Chinese copy too. They did test some and the Chinese product did not perform well.


Also helpful info. It's about what would be expected. I'm sure those who've bought the Chinese product are having trouble getting it to work.


----------



## Acebird

max2 said:


> He expects a frame to last 5 to 7 years with normal use and about 2 years if stored exposed to light.


That is not good news.


----------



## Eddie Honey

At least there's a warranty: 

http://www.honeyflow.com/shop/terms-conditions/p/147


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Eddie Honey said:


> At least there's a warranty:
> 
> http://www.honeyflow.com/shop/terms-conditions/p/147


Well, maybe not .... 


> This warranty does not apply to Goods offered to our Indiegogo investors as a perk for their investment or contribution to development of first models.
> 
> http://www.honeyflow.com/shop/terms-conditions/p/147#a9


----------



## tanksbees

So they have a warranty, but it does not apply to any product they have sold...


----------



## BeeBop

From their website: http://www.honeyflow.com/shop/terms-conditions/p/147



> 11.1 We Warrant:
> 
> That all Goods are new, free from defects, of merchantable quality and conform to any specifications provided on our Website or in the Order Acknowledgment;
> The Goods *against defects of material or workmanship for a period of 30 days from the date delivered*, when used within the designed conditions for which they were manufactured. *For latent defects, we warrant the Goods for 12 months from the date delivered *(“Warranty Period”).


By the time most folks have a chance to deploy the hardware and find out what "defects" exist, the warranty is likely long over. 
Clever move shipping the first product in August/September when it's not likely to be used until the following spring?


----------



## Kofu

BeeBop said:


> Clever move shipping the first product in August/September when it's not likely to be used until the following spring?


Don't forget that spring in Australia starts right about now. So they announced in February toward the end of their summer, brought the first frames out during their winter, and are cranking up production in their early spring.

Their biggest sales are not Down Under, but they didn't know that demand would explode as quickly as it did. If they had rolled out more slowly during 2015, they'd be hitting their stride by the end of this year and on into the early part of 2016 — our spring, in the northern hemisphere.


----------



## Barry

Acebird said:


> That is not good news.


It doesn't sound positive to me as well. A wood frame with wax honey comb can easily last 30 years at a fraction of the cost. I know, I know, you're paying for the convenience with the Flow frame.


----------



## AHudd

When this thing was still on indiegogo I read the FAQ. It was stated the flow frames were not being sold in Australia. This may have changed since, but I don't care enough to look into it again. Maybe Kiwi lad would know.

Alex


----------



## jwcarlson

One of the land owners where I keep bees is enamored with the idea of this. And he recently purchased one. To the tune of something like $700 or 800. He "wants to try it". I tried to tell him that for $800 I could almost double the size of my apiary (he already doesn't have to buy honey as I supply). It has disappointed me greatly that he's wasted that much money on what I think is a gimmick. We've hunted his land for decades and he has become somewhat of a family friend.

But try as I might to convince him... I'm going to be managing a flow hive next season. 

The trouble is it comes in an 8 frame box (I run all 10 frames). And they ship it with a single 8 frame brood chamber and a six frame super with flow frames. Or is it five flow frames?

Regardless. Anyone who is near lots of people with flow hives... get those swarm traps polished up early and ready to go. Because June will be a windfall of Flow Hive swarms. "But they had six flow frames to use above their excluder... why did they swarm?"

Could be a banner year for swarms. Get your queens raised early so you can requeen them all.


----------



## Acebird

jwcarlson said:


> I'm going to be managing a flow hive next season.


If you are going to be managing it then you are to blame for the swarms. The flow hive is designed for honey harvest not swarm prevention.


----------



## Acebird

Barry said:


> It doesn't sound positive to me as well. A wood frame with wax honey comb can easily last 30 years at a fraction of the cost.


Something isn't right. A plastic bottle at the bottom of the ocean will last hundreds of years. That is part of our ecological problem. The plastic should outlast the wood.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Something isn't right. A plastic bottle at the bottom of the ocean will last hundreds of years.

Well, I don't know how they arrived at their numbers in this case, nor do I know if they are even legit, but there is a difference here. In the ecological sense we are talking about how long before it disintegrates. In the mechanical failure sense we are talking about how long before the mechanism breaks from the stress of actuating it.


----------



## BeeBop

Acebird said:


> Something isn't right. A plastic bottle at the bottom of the ocean will last hundreds of years. That is part of our ecological problem. The plastic should outlast the wood.


At the bottom of the ocean there's rather a lack of ozone, UV, and oxygen... the things that tend to degrade plastic quickly. Even a wooden shipwreck will last for 100's of years.


----------



## max2

AHudd said:


> When this thing was still on indiegogo I read the FAQ. It was stated the flow frames were not being sold in Australia. This may have changed since, but I don't care enough to look into it again. Maybe Kiwi lad would know.
> 
> Alex


They are sold in Australia


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> In the mechanical failure sense we are talking about how long before the mechanism breaks from the stress of actuating it.


Michael, PVC is the cheapest plastic that I know of. They make vinyl siding out out of it and guarantee it for 20 years. You can paint it and get 40 years out of it. When it craps out it can be recycled to make garden hoses. There is absolutely not reason at all for making plastic frames that won't outlive wood.


----------



## Acebird

BeeBop said:


> At the bottom of the ocean there's rather a lack of ozone, UV, and oxygen...


Where is there ozone and UV in a beehive? The ocean is full of oxygen. Most everything would die if it wasn't.


----------



## Vincent

I believe it comes in 8 and 10 frame boxes, though they fit less frames in each.


----------



## jwcarlson

Acebird said:


> If you are going to be managing it then you are to blame for the swarms. The flow hive is designed for honey harvest not swarm prevention.


Gee, thanks, Ace. 

Good grief. I never said mine will be a swarm factory. I'm just saying in general these folks are buying a box they think is all inclusive but is less than half of what I'd expect a full size hive to need. Truth be told it was designed to sucker people out of their money more than anything

I don't know why I'm even bothering to respond.


Vincent said:


> I believe it comes in 8 and 10 frame boxes, though they fit less frames in each.


They sell a ten frame kit which doesn't include the box. I think it holds 7 frames? 

The full hive is an 8 framer. Which is a decent nuc. 
http://www.honeyflow.com/about-flow/flow-hive/p/65


----------



## deknow

Acebird said:


> Where is there ozone and UV in a beehive? The ocean is full of oxygen. Most everything would die if it wasn't.


...that must be why it is so easy to light a match under water...all that oxygen.:scratch:

It is impossible to know what the statement from the factory worker means (I've been a factory worker...I'm not putting anyone down who works in a factory). My first two years as a beekeeper I used a tyvek coverall as a bee suit....it was rated as single use disposable.

Regardless, one would not expect someone that is working on the line (or even supervising the line) to necessarily be privy to enough data to know how long the expected serviceable life of the product is.

Remember, the Eiffel Tower was supposed to simply be a temporary structure...in 1889.


----------



## Michael Bush

>They make vinyl siding out out of it and guarantee it for 20 years. You can paint it and get 40 years out of it. When it craps out it can be recycled to make garden hoses. There is absolutely not reason at all for making plastic frames that won't outlive wood.

I have no idea of the life of a flow frame, my point was merely that there is a difference between that the plastic is still around and the mechanism still working.

>Remember, the Eiffel Tower was supposed to simply be a temporary structure...in 1889.

And the French thought it was the ugliest building ever...

"We, writers, painters, sculptors, architects and passionate devotees of the hitherto untouched beauty of Paris, protest with all our strength, with all our indignation in the name of slighted French taste, against the erection ... of this useless and monstrous Eiffel Tower ... To bring our arguments home, imagine for a moment a giddy, ridiculous tower dominating Paris like a gigantic black smokestack, crushing under its barbaric bulk Notre Dame, the Tour Saint-Jacques, the Louvre, the Dome of les Invalides, the Arc de Triomphe, all of our humiliated monuments will disappear in this ghastly dream. And for twenty years ... we shall see stretching like a blot of ink the hateful shadow of the hateful column of bolted sheet metal."--petition sent to Charles Alphand, the Minister of Works and Commissioner for the Exposition, and published by Le Temps on 14 February 1887

Kind of like all the negativity about the flow hive...


----------



## clyderoad

Michael Bush said:


> >
> Kind of like all the negativity about the flow hive...


Not an unexpected response considering your involvement with them. 
What is unexpected is why? given your level "testing" the thing.


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: honey tap*



redmcc said:


> “Mind Blowing...It's not very often something is so revolutionary as to blow my mind...Saving 20% of harvest labor is not trivial, 40% is amazing, 60% is revolutionary. But 95%, that’s Mind Boggling!”
> 
> 
> Michael Bush - USA
> 
> Author of Beekeeping Naturally and one USA’s most famous beekeepers
> 
> Really!!!!


Yes. Really


----------



## deknow

*Re: honey tap*

From my perspective, I agree...it is not unexpected for Michael (or anyone) to share their experiences with products or companies that he has some experience with.

Michael has a long history of recommending that new beekeepers not purchase (or even use) am extractor for a small number of hives. I'm not sure why one would expect him not to think a device that eliminates the need of an extractor to extract is neat.

Given the number of 'experts' that are sure the thing doesn't work, why would one not expect the reaction to it actually working as 'mind blowing'.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: honey tap*

What are the relative costs, extractor vs flowhives?


----------



## Acebird

*Re: honey tap*

I don't think you can justify the flowhive based on cost vs. an extractor.


----------



## Uberwilhelm

*Re: honey tap*

I'm not sure if it's been addressed here yet but I have a question on these. If the frames split down the middle allowing the honey to flow out, wouldn't the cells still be capped and if so, wouldn't that lead the bees to believe they still have capped honey and not refill the now empty frame?


----------



## Acebird

*Re: honey tap*

They can tell that the honey is gone in a short time so they remove the caps and refill. This is covered in the FAQ on the site.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: honey tap*

The "frame" doesn't split down the middle, each cell splits down the middle, and the cap is ruptured.

Back to the other question, if extractors are opposed on the basis of being too big an expense, this would not be a good reason to support flowhives.


----------



## tanksbees

*Re: honey tap*



Oldtimer said:


> What are the relative costs, extractor vs flowhives?


Extractor $200, Flow hive....priceless


----------



## shannonswyatt

*Re: honey tap*

I think that if they work well, and you only have a couple hives it may make sense. But if you had a half dozen supers to extract you would need something like 30 flow hive frames. That would be pretty expensive. I would love to have one hive to try it on, but I'm rather cheap.


----------



## Kofu

deknow said:


> It is impossible to know what the statement from the factory worker means... Regardless, one would not expect someone that is working on the line (or even supervising the line) to necessarily be privy to enough data to know how long the expected serviceable life of the product is.


What factory worker? :scratch:

I think 5-7 years is a good run, and to be expected for anything built of plastic and sold for a reasonable price -- or perhaps higher, but not totally outrageous for what's offered. There are trade-offs between durability and mechanical precision, and the Flow™ frame people probably made the best choices they could under the circumstances. With more experience and a chance to revise the specs, future versions will be somewhat better, but it's not like with existing constraints, they can double the lifespan or make huge improvements.


----------



## Eddie Honey

This was my concern from the beginning:

*Promotional videos and how much work to keep bees? *
"My wife and I got excited about the flow frame on the indigogo campaign, so we ordered a full set for delivery in December. In the campaign video they say no more suiting up and tearing the hive apart. Just what we wanted, easy honey and pollinators for the garden. They made it look so simple and effortless. Even little kids right up to the hive while harvesting. December delivery, set it up and start in the spring, harvest in fall if lucky, seemed reasonable. Perfect for the would be bee keeper without much time/interest in stirring up a bunch of bees

As I study up in preparation of getting my hive, I now find that you still need to suit up and tear the hive apart fairly regularly. There is regular maintenance, feeding, and checks that need to be done, requiring you do exactly what they were saying you didn't need to do. Their caveat was "to extract honey", conveniently not mentioning regular, and frequent maintenance. 

I feel we were misled into believing we didn't need to suit up and tear the hive apart at all. My wife would enjoy the benefits,but has no time/interest in the maintenance of the hive. I'm out of town too much to be able to do the work as needed. Oh, and the $88 shocker for shipping, not mentioned until after we committed. . .

I'm not sure what I'll do now, but $688, for a box of wood and plastic to sit in the garage taking up space, is a lot of money. Wondering if I'll get a bill from the shipping company for import duties too. I've had that happen before."

Complete thread http://forum.honeyflow.com/t/promotional-videos-and-how-much-work-to-keep-bees/2960


----------



## Oldtimer

> My wife would enjoy the benefits,but has no time/interest in the maintenance of the hive. I'm out of town too much to be able to do the work as needed.


OK, sympathies if they have been misled. But I really wonder about the stupidity of some people, got to ask. If she has no time or interest, wouldn't the intelligent choice be to buy the honey in a shop?

I buy milk in a shop, because I have no time / interest in owning a cow. If somebody came out with an amazingly labour free method of getting the milk out of the cow, I still would not be foolish enough to purchase a cow & think there would be nothing else need doing, other than extract the milk.


----------



## Acebird

Eddie, put it up for sale immediately for $400.00 and see if you get any takers. If you wait the value will only decrease as time goes on.

How did you expect to get the bees into the hive without suiting up?


----------



## Oldtimer

It's not Eddie, he's quoting someone.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Ace, _Eddie Honey_ is simply reposting comments made by _samat3 _from the honeyflow.com forum (follow the link Eddie provided). Note that _Eddie Honey_ is the originator of this Beesource thread. I suspect that he does not have a Flow Hive to sell.


----------



## Eddie Honey

I see your point OT. 
I'm starting up an Indigo campaign: "fresh milk on tap." Now you can have fresh, raw milk, with minimal disturbance to the cows." "Before, harvesting milk used to be a labor of love. You had to breed the cow, own some land for grazing, buy hay, buy grain, clean up manure, milk the cow twice a day, etc..." Now, you don't have to do any of that. Simply insert the tool, turn the tap, and watch the beautiful creamy milk flow from the box." (Insert video of dude with milk pouring into a bowl full of cereal, young couple making ice cream together, child sticking finger into flowing milk stream saying "mmm milk") lol


----------



## Oldtimer

Ha Ha, you make your point well Eddie! 

Months ago, I saw people posting that they thought people would buy the flowhive thinking there would be nothing to do other than turn on the tap. I did not agree with that opinion as I didn't think anyone would be so foolish. But I'll admit, I was wrong.


----------



## Eddie Honey

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Ace, _Eddie Honey_ is simply reposting comments made by _samat3 _from the honeyflow.com forum (follow the link Eddie provided). Note that _Eddie Honey_ is the originator of this Beesource thread. I suspect that he does not have a Flow Hive to sell.


Not yet Radar. I'm thinking there may be a few on Ebay or Craigslist here soon for a gentler, less disturbance to my wallet, price.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Gosh, we could have a group Beesource effort to develop a machine that turns out (generic) Wheaties and promote it through an IndieGoGo campaign. Then have all 3 devices (Eddie's milk machine, the Flow Hive, and our generic Wheaties machine) communicate with each other (Bluetooth perhaps?) to produce (generic) Wheaties, with honey and milk - right there in your bowl at the breakfast table! 


We'll all be millionaires! :lpf:


----------



## dsegrest

Eddie Honey said:


> This was my concern from the beginning:
> 
> *Promotional videos and how much work to keep bees? *
> "My wife and I got excited about the flow frame on the indigogo campaign, so we ordered a full set for delivery in December. In the campaign video they say no more suiting up and tearing the hive apart. Just what we wanted, easy honey and pollinators for the garden. They made it look so simple and effortless. Even little kids right up to the hive while harvesting. December delivery, set it up and start in the spring, harvest in fall if lucky, seemed reasonable. Perfect for the would be bee keeper without much time/interest in stirring up a bunch of bees
> 
> As I study up in preparation of getting my hive, I now find that you still need to suit up and tear the hive apart fairly regularly. There is regular maintenance, feeding, and checks that need to be done, requiring you do exactly what they were saying you didn't need to do. Their caveat was "to extract honey", conveniently not mentioning regular, and frequent maintenance.
> 
> I feel we were misled into believing we didn't need to suit up and tear the hive apart at all. My wife would enjoy the benefits,but has no time/interest in the maintenance of the hive. I'm out of town too much to be able to do the work as needed. Oh, and the $88 shocker for shipping, not mentioned until after we committed. . .
> 
> I'm not sure what I'll do now, but $688, for a box of wood and plastic to sit in the garage taking up space, is a lot of money. Wondering if I'll get a bill from the shipping company for import duties too. I've had that happen before."
> 
> Complete thread http://forum.honeyflow.com/t/promotional-videos-and-how-much-work-to-keep-bees/2960


If extracting honey was everything there is to beekeeping....


----------



## Eddie Honey

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Gosh, we could have a group Beesource effort to develop a machine that turns out (generic) Wheaties and promote it through an IndieGoGo campaign. Then have all 3 devices (Eddie's milk machine, the Flow Hive, and our generic Wheaties machine) communicate with each other (Bluetooth perhaps?) to produce (generic) Wheaties, with honey and milk - right there in your bowl at the breakfast table!
> 
> 
> We'll all be millionaires! :lpf:


That is how I got into bees lol. My wife complained about how much honey I was going through on my cornflakes and Wheaties lol.
Count me in.


----------



## Acebird

Rader Sidetrack said:


> We'll all be millionaires! :lpf:


Two people worked on a prototype for 10 years perfecting the system until they felt it was good enough to release. I am sure they ran up against all this same negativity prior to release. It is the only thing that makes sense to me how the idea didn't get out to the WWW and have some scum bag yank the rug out from under them. Now that they have generated millions it looks so simple even a cave man can do it.


----------



## Eddie Honey

Acebird said:


> Two people worked on a prototype for 10 years perfecting the system until they felt it was good enough to release. I am sure they ran up against all this same negativity prior to release. It is the only thing that makes sense to me how the idea didn't get out to the WWW and have some scum bag yank the rug out from under them. Now that they have generated millions it looks so simple even a cave man can do it.


Hey now! My 2nd (millionth) cousin on my fathers side was a caveman.


----------



## tanksbees

As negative as I am on the flow hive, I would not judge the flow hives durability based upon the second hand story of a guy on the forums.

The plastic itself should last for quite a while, as long as the design is correct for the product and it is maintained properly. Which likely means disassembling and cleaning every few years.

The flow hive guys ran an excellent viral marketing campaign, and effectively cross sold to a market that other hive manufacturers were not targeting well - however since these people have zero experience with bees, that means their will be a lot of unrealistic expectations and misuse of the product.

My predictions:
50% of the flow hive owners will never put bees in their hive, once they realize they have to buy other equipment and deal with stinging insects.
25% of people will only put one flow super on a brood box (because they are 'spensive!) and the bees will swarm and they will wonder why their hives never grow.
5% of people will dump a package of bees right on the frames, ignoring all instructions with the product, and absconding or brood nightmare will results.
Most of the remaining flow hive owners will go treatment free (because they only like pure natural things and don't like icky chemicals), and the bees will die.


----------



## Acebird

tanksbees said:


> however since these people have zero experience with bees, that means their will be a lot of unrealistic expectations and misuse of the product.


I agree with your statement but I suspect even you were not born with a hive tool in your hand. The fact of the matter is everyone starts with zero experience and some do better than others.


----------



## deknow

I guess I simply don't get it. The regular bee supply houses (that we trust and rely on) all sell beginners kits of one kind or another...and none of them are really adequate...yet we don't berate them for marketing to the new beekeeper something that needs more time, attention, and equipment than comes in the box. For instance:

http://www.brushymountainbeefarm.com/10-Frame-Beginner-Beekeeping-Kit/productinfo/110/

...is just a single 10 frame box for the bees along with some accessories and a book.


----------



## jwcarlson

Oldtimer said:


> Months ago, I saw people posting that they thought people would buy the flowhive thinking there would be nothing to do other than turn on the tap. I did not agree with that opinion as I didn't think anyone would be so foolish. But I'll admit, I was wrong.


Move to the US for a bit and get to know some of the moonbats here and you'll realize in a hurry that not only would anyone be so foolish... most anyone would be so foolish. This is no longer the land of opportunity it's the land of entitlement and getting something for nothing. Rampant. Gimme Gimme!



Acebird said:


> Two people worked on a prototype for 10 years perfecting the system until they felt it was good enough to release. I am sure they ran up against all this same negativity prior to release. It is the only thing that makes sense to me how the idea didn't get out to the WWW and have some scum bag yank the rug out from under them. Now that they have generated millions it looks so simple even a cave man can do it.


That's a cute narrative... but the truth is probably more like this: they found this patent from 1940 and found someone to prototype it for them.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/2223561.pdf


----------



## tanksbees

Acebird said:


> I agree with your statement but I suspect even you were not born with a hive tool in your hand. The fact of the matter is everyone starts with zero experience and some do better than others.


I started keeping bees with guidance from another beek. 

I did not simply buy an untested hive after watching an infomercial. 

The market to which the product was sold, and the way in which it was sold, has likely created a situation where people have bought a product on emotion without really understanding how it will work.


----------



## jwcarlson

Interestingly enough... if you wait around long enough I bet the Flow Hive by Ronco will be available before you know it. It will go the way of the Pocket Fisherman.









http://images.drleonards.com/images/items/19273_large.gif


----------



## odfrank

>has likely created a situation where people have bought a product on emotion without really understanding how it will work.

This goes for the hives being sold at Costco also. I have said for years this boom in beekeeping since 2006 will make for a bonanza in cheap and free bee equipment from quitting hobbyists and newbee commercials. I have seen it on Craigslist already now for a few years. And some are asking 90% of new price.


----------



## deknow

jwcarlson said:


> Interestingly enough... if you wait around long enough I bet the Flow Hive by Ronco will be available before you know it. It will go the way of the Pocket Fisherman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://images.drleonards.com/images/items/19273_large.gif


What way is that? Available and popular for decades? Great user satisfaction? Only $15? Available at WalMart and Amazon? :scratch:


----------



## clyderoad

odfrank- dead on.
A beekeeping bubble.
POP!


----------



## shannonswyatt

jwcarlson said:


> Interestingly enough... if you wait around long enough I bet the Flow Hive by Ronco will be available before you know it. It will go the way of the Pocket Fisherman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://images.drleonards.com/images/items/19273_large.gif


Why no love for the pocket fisherman?


----------



## Acebird

tanksbees said:


> The market to which the product was sold, and the way in which it was sold, has likely created a situation where people have bought a product on emotion without really understanding how it will work.


How many people do you know that own treadmills? It is what a certain percentage of the population will do.


----------



## Acebird

jwcarlson said:


> That's a cute narrative... but the truth is probably more like this: they found this patent from 1940 and found someone to prototype it for them.


I can smell the sour grapes from here.


----------



## jwcarlson

deknow said:


> What way is that? Available and popular for decades? Great user satisfaction? Only $15? Available at WalMart and Amazon? :scratch:


A joke amongst people who actually fish. Like the Barbie fishing pole my two year old daughter has... It was $15 and the user thinks it is awesome too. 

It's still a joke piece of equipment used by someone who knows no better. 


Regarding Ace's sour grapes. I think you misunderstand me. I think those guys are geniuses for prying gobs of money from the general public. Same respect I have for Ron Popeil. Guy is a genius taking money from people who care more about the slogan than the functionality of the product. Those who want to "Set it! And forget it!" 

You know the type well, surely, Ace.


----------



## Stephenpbird

Eddie Honey said:


> Oh, and the $88 shocker for shipping, not mentioned until after we committed. . .


In post 249 I said 



Stephenpbird said:


> There seems to be allot of trust with this, for eg.
> 
> SHIPPING: Shipping will be charged prior to delivery at the best rates possible. There has been an overwhelming response to Flow which will probably mean setting up more manufacturing in America. If this comes about, shipping prices will be much reduced for America and Europe.
> 
> The price of these frames was a great deal more than I was expecting (but perfectly acceptable, it seems to the 5,383 funders) , and even if I wanted to pledge/buy I don't think I would just because of the unknown price of shipping. What would it cost to ship a whole hive or frames from Australia to Europe?


I can say anything else but it's their own fault. I wonder if this "feeling of being misled" is a regular occurrence in their lives. Perhaps if he had done the research before making a impulse purchase the situation might have been avoided. Buyer beware!


----------



## rwurster

tanksbees said:


> ... Most of the remaining flow hive owners will go treatment free (because they only like pure natural things and don't like icky chemicals), and the bees will die.


Ace falls firmly into this category :lpf:


----------



## jwcarlson

rwurster said:


> Ace falls firmly into this category :lpf:


No no no, you're wrong. He has *nearly* 100% winter survival, just ask him.


----------



## tanksbees

rwurster said:


> Ace falls firmly into this category :lpf:


Ace has his own category that he inhabits with nobody else.



Stephenpbird said:


> I wonder if this "feeling of being misled" is a regular occurrence in their lives.


That is how we do things in the USA. You make stupid decisions then you blame it on someone else.


----------



## marshmasterpat

tanksbees said:


> That is how we do things in the USA. You make stupid decisions then you blame it on someone else.


There is that saying "Burn me once, your bad, burn me twice, my bad, burn me three times I am stupid."


----------



## AHudd

I hope those beginner kits from Costco clearly state on the outside of the box that they contain no bees, otherwise someone might feel as though they have been ripped off. 

Alex


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

Apologies if this has been covered before, or if it's an extremely obvious answer. In the latest Flow video, they're showing that the upgraded Cedar kids include an outer cover with a gabled roof. Fast-forward to 2:17 in the video.










Won't the bees build burr comb into that entire upper area?


----------



## Oldtimer

Best I can tell from the screen grab, the hive also has an inner cover which will prevent bees entering the gable.

EDIT - Just watched the video and the inner cover has a hole in the middle so yes bees could build comb in the gable. May not be a bad thing, them nuubs who just put on the flow box and forget till it's time to turn on the tap, will have a relief valve in the hive to give the bees a little extra room if they really need it. 

Or, a person could put something over the hole, if they are not feeling too misled about not having one supplied LOL.


----------



## jwcarlson

Lifting the top to check is too much trouble for the bees. Best put a small porthole in the gabled area so you can look in without disrupting them.

Also never trust anyone with peacocks running about.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

Back on topic, would burr comb in the gable do any harm? As long as they don't join it to the inner cover?


----------



## Acebird

IAmTheWaterbug said:


> would burr comb in the gable do any harm?


To me it would be a signal that the bees are running out of room and I am wondering if they offer that gable top for more then just aesthetics.


----------



## jwcarlson

Acebird said:


> I am wondering if they offer that gable top for more then just aesthetics.


That's rich.


----------



## CaseyWagner

Hey all  New here. I don't have any bees yet, and I don't plan on getting the Flow hive (I'm going to build some Top Bars) but a fellow I follow on Facebook did just get a Flow and will be starting it in the spring. I was curious about whether it could live up to the claims or not, especially at the 600 dollar cost, and asked if I could check it out when it's up and running, and he's happy to oblige.
So I'll post video/pics of it as I see how it progresses for him.


----------



## Oldtimer

Cool, it's been a long time waiting!


----------



## BeeCurious

Hey Oldtimer, when will the "Flow" begin down your way? 

I want to be in a comfy chair with a Costco-sized bag of popcorn when all of the videos showing honey filling all of those jars get posted.


----------



## Oldtimer

The flow has started in some areas and is a month or more away in others. But I only know of one person in my country who has a flowhive, and they are brand new to beekeeping so let's see what happens. Likely in Australia there will be more people, not sure how their flows work but probably similar timing to ours in NZ.


----------



## Acebird

Oldtimer said:


> not sure how their flows work but probably similar timing to ours in NZ.


How long after the flow starts can you expect to have capped honey? Let's say you put two fully drawn supers on a hive, will they cap the top one first or the one underneath it. I think we all realize that starting out with no drawn comb is likely to cause a snafu for the beginners waiting long enough to tap the honey but not so long that they run out of space and swarm. However we may look at that as a failure and they may not. They (the beginners) may not know it even happened. Once they get past the swarm season they eventually might get a couple of frames they could tap and call it a success.


----------



## Eddie Honey

Maybe the bears can be trained to use the crank to get the honey instead of destroying a $700 hive? lol


----------



## tanksbees

Quoted from the other thread, flow hive is a flop...

--------

3. I have been in the hive to inspect a couple of times, and each time found 100+/- bees in the Flow, but no nectar. I was asked to take the Flow to the Beekeepers annual dinner last night. I went to inspect the box, and found that the bees had completed the cell seams with propolis. I could not get the frames into the open position. I tried for about 45 minutes to use the key to manipulate the frames. No success; the frames are locked tight with propolis. I finally took the box off the hive to work on it (didn't want to be late for dinner!), and took it to the meeting. I have asked FLOW HIVE for comment on how to get the frames open. The bees put no nectar in the 6 frames. I don't want to force the frames to the point of breaking. I'll let you know what FLOW has to say. To say that I'm frustrated with the product is an understatement. Pics soon.


----------



## Oldtimer

Thing with that is what is the context or even what country is it?

If the guy has had a box on a hive for some time with enough bees but no flow, then propolisation is what's going to happen. Sounds like lack of experience to me. Could be a new one for the Aussie vendors to solve also, they can have strong flows over there which is obviously going to work better than what might be found in some other countries.

An experienced beekeeper is only going to put something like a flow box on a hive once there is a good flow happening, or issues like that are a possibility. There will no doubt be a lot of problems coming up from the less experienced.


----------



## rwurster

Haha A locksmith was buying honey from me on the side of the road and his buddy in the van with him bought a super of flow hives. His buddy said he would put them on in late summer... which is when our 2nd decent and sometimes "stinky" flow happens. Beginners  Anyway I got a deadbolt re-keyed to my new doorknob and a spare key made for 2 pints of honey. I'll go visit the locksmith's buddy next year, see how things are flowing for him lol


----------



## Cloverdale

Oldtimer said:


> Cool, it's been a long time waiting!


My brother in California is getting one. He kept bees a long time ago with my grandfathers equipment. I will also get a first hand look at one; I keep a hive up on the hill behind us one a friends property, he is getting one.


----------



## Michael Bush

> I could not get the frames into the open position. I tried for about 45 minutes to use the key to manipulate the frames. No success; the frames are locked tight with propolis. 

You don't have to open them all at once. You can insert the handle just as far as one segment at a time and turn it, advancing a segment at a time. Obviously this will work better on either a hot day (propolis is soft) or a cold day (propolis is brittle) better than a day in between.

I have not tried exposing it to hot water, but the material appears to be the same as PermaComb and Honey Super Cell. Both of those melt at 220 F so boiling them is not out of the question. I don't know for sure that it is the same for the segments on the Flow Hive frames, but I suspect it is. I don't have a guess what heat the clear hard plastic portions of frame will take, but it can be disassembled. Perhaps the manufacturer could tell you the melting point of those parts.

Any kind of foundation or comb works best when there is a flow. If they are not filling it, there probably is not a flow.


----------



## odfrank

I would think that if one person has already had propolis fouling them up this early in the game, propolis might become a bigger problem as they go into use by all purchasers. In my area, honey supers left on after the spring flow until fall, become fully goobered up with propolis. Because so many are being ordered by beginners, we can not expect them to put them on and off on a timely schedule if needed.


----------



## deknow

At least the manual that came with the wooden frames, wire, and foundation clearly cautioned me against putting a super full of foundation on the hive if they are not strong/growing enough to work it.


----------



## BeeCurious

rwurster said:


> A locksmith was buying honey from me on the side of the road and his buddy in the van with him bought a super of flow hives.


Some other FlowHive owners might wish that they had a locksmith as a friend....


----------



## tanksbees

We don't have a strong flow where I live. So I guess I could never use the flow frames.

One of the swarms I caught this year builds propolis like nothing I have ever seen before - can barely get the lid off the box, I have to use a hive tool and screwdriver on opposite corners to get it to lift so I don't destroy the box. They leave balls of it hanging from the roof of the hive not even attached to anything like they are just making it for fun.

Maybe the flow hive guys should send me a hive for propolis testing? These bees could destroy anything mechanical...


----------



## jwcarlson

tanksbees, have a couple like that too. Except mine like to add their globs between inner cover and the end bar area on frames. Which (as you say) makes getting the top off fun sometimes. Or popping the top and realize you're dragging out a frame or two with it.


----------



## tanksbees

It's a real nightmare, I can't get the old plastic frames out of that hive without snapping them


----------



## Eddie Honey

tanksbees said:


> Quoted from the other thread, flow hive is a flop...
> 
> --------
> 
> 3. I have been in the hive to inspect a couple of times, and each time found 100+/- bees in the Flow, but no nectar. I was asked to take the Flow to the Beekeepers annual dinner last night. I went to inspect the box, and found that the bees had completed the cell seams with propolis. I could not get the frames into the open position. I tried for about 45 minutes to use the key to manipulate the frames. No success; the frames are locked tight with propolis. I finally took the box off the hive to work on it (didn't want to be late for dinner!), and took it to the meeting. I have asked FLOW HIVE for comment on how to get the frames open. The bees put no nectar in the 6 frames. I don't want to force the frames to the point of breaking. I'll let you know what FLOW has to say. To say that I'm frustrated with the product is an understatement. Pics soon.


This post is from user "Native Plants.
She is continuing her story on this Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1701826046713794/


----------



## pgayle

I couldn't read without joining the group.


----------



## Ravenseye

Eddie Honey said:


> This post is from user "Native Plants.
> She is continuing her story on this Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1701826046713794/



Doesn't work. Asks me to join. I don't want to. Too bad it's a closed forum.


----------



## Oldtimer

I joined. After a time I was approved and then found her story didn't amount to much.

However people could have exactly the same complaint if they put a box of standard foundation on at the wrong time, ie, have a look later and find 100 bees and no honey. Just, in a flow hive, that risk of propolisation could be a whole new level of possible expense.


----------



## Acebird

There are going to be those that want to make it work and those that don't. Pick the side that you want to rally for.


----------



## sjz

I would like to know what you would do with honey in pail or bucket that was 20 % moisture. Impossible to dry once it is in container or barrel.


----------



## Oldtimer

If we are talking small quantities like we would be for an average flow hive person, the honey can be stored in the deep freeze, which also stops it from granulating. Could be removed for eating one jar at a time and at 20% moisture ought to be good at room temperature for at least a few weeks.

I got emails from the closed flowhive group saying that lady with the bad experience had posted, but every time by the time I got there to have a look the post had been deleted. :no:


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

I am part of that group on facebook. I guess. I don't have one and won't until someone gives me one.

We have insane amounts of propolis in this area. The bees really go to town with the stuff. Especially my swarm caught queens.

One of my biggest concerns was that a newbee would throw them on when they shouldn't be on a hive and the bees would glue it up or fill it up with pollen.

live and learn

The flow hive boxes need only to be used during a prime flow.


----------



## Acebird

Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> The flow hive boxes need only to be used during a prime flow.


Is this what is recommended by the manufacturer or is it your take on the subject?


----------



## frustrateddrone

If you have too high of moisture content in honey you can heat it 130 to 140degrees for 5 minutes. This effectively kills the yeast spores. No spoilage of honey. Amazing it's a bee forum and honey properties are not talked about.


----------



## clyderoad

frustrateddrone said:


> If you have too high of moisture content in honey you can heat it 130 to 140degrees for 5 minutes. This effectively kills the yeast spores. No spoilage of honey. Amazing it's a bee forum and honey properties are not talked about.


then why don't you start a new thread on the properties of honey.
It's not the first time you've mentioned the issue.


----------



## Acebird

sjz said:


> Impossible to dry once it is in container or barrel.


Start another thread and I will answer.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

Acebird said:


> Is this what is recommended by the manufacturer or is it your take on the subject?


It is mine. 

I don't know what their take is. 

If it is not their take IT should be.


----------



## Oldtimer

Agreed.

Reading their stuff I think this is one point they have not really stressed, and it's likely because in parts of Australia the honey comes in thick and fast, perfect for a flowhive. They may not realise the difficulties faced in other places.


----------



## shannonswyatt

You have to wonder in some places if they will be able to fill a super full of those frames. I wish the people that purchased them luck, but I've seen crazy posts on Facebook and from people that think they don't need equipment, do inspections, etc. This was spelled out on the site, but people got wrapped up in the video I guess, didn't read the not so fine print.


----------



## Acebird

Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> If it is not their take IT should be.


Do you have hands on experience with the flow hive?


----------



## sqkcrk

frustrateddrone said:


> If you have too high of moisture content in honey you can heat it 130 to 140degrees for 5 minutes. This effectively kills the yeast spores. No spoilage of honey. Amazing it's a bee forum and honey properties are not talked about.


What?!! Are you saying that if one doesn't heat honey to 130 or 140 for 5 minutes it will spoil? Then why doesn't Raw Honey spoil?


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

Acebird said:


> Do you have hands on experience with the flow hive?


I don't. 

I have done my fair share of comb honey production and the needs for the flow hive "to me" seem similar. It takes a strong condensed hive to produce supers of the stuff and you have to keep the bees from placing pollen, propolis, and brood in the comb supers with an excluder. 

Many new flow hive beekeepers will look at that (Perfect bee world) looking video and think I can keep my bees in one deep brood chamber and one flow hive box on top and make honey and keep my bees from swarming.

In fact they need a double deep chamber of regular combs full of brood prior to the main nectar flow. Then they need to take all the frames of brood they can and place it in the bottom box, place a excluder on it, then place your flow hive box on top. The other box of frames can be given to another hive and all bees shook into the bottom box of the flow hive colony. You will have a powerful comb drawing honey producing machine at this point.

Once the bees have filled the flow hive frames 50% full another box of foundation or combs should be placed under the flow hive box on top of the excluder. This will help keep the bees from swarming and/or back-filling the brood chamber below. Plus you get more honey win-win 
If you place it on to quickly they might abandon the flow frames. 

Operating a hive this strong in one brood chamber works well for producing prime comb honey and I believe will work well with a flow hive setup. 

However the bees will need to be checked every seven days for a while to make sure the swarm cells are not allowed to be capped.

As soon as the honey flows slows down the flow hive box must come off or here in TN it will be propolised so bad you may not be able to use it again.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

sqkcrk said:


> What?!! Are you saying that if one doesn't heat honey to 130 or 140 for 5 minutes it will spoil? Then why doesn't Raw Honey spoil?


After all these years Mark we must have missed something! Maybe that's why after I eat to much of my raw honey I get a buzz!


----------



## jwcarlson

Gonna be a lot of people upset that their bees swarmed with an empty "flow super" on top of it. Or will shake the package into the top box.

It will make for riveting Beesource entertainment next spring and I can't wait.


----------



## biggraham610

sqkcrk said:


> What?!! Are you saying that if one doesn't heat honey to 130 or 140 for 5 minutes it will spoil? Then why doesn't Raw Honey spoil?


Thank you Mark. And, be prepared for a nasty PM. G


----------



## biggraham610

jwcarlson said:


> Gonna be a lot of people upset that their bees swarmed with an empty "flow super" on top of it. Or will shake the package into the top box.
> 
> It will make for riveting Beesource entertainment next spring and I can't wait.


Yes it will. It will also lead to some very cheap used equipment in the coming year in my view. I really don't question the ability of the flow hive to do what it says. However, many that are jumping on to play with it, should question beekeeping as a whole. There will be many a poor soul that thought that a Georgia/California package and that brown box "package" was all that was required to live with a lifetime of free healthy honey. God rest their dream. G


----------



## Acebird

Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> As soon as the honey flows slows down the flow hive box must come off or here in TN it will be propolised so bad you may not be able to use it again.


I have never seen propolise in the wax comb have you? Why would bees do that? For those that have plastic comb have you ever seen propolise in the comb?


----------



## jim lyon

Acebird said:


> I have never seen propolise in the wax comb have you? Why would bees do that? For those that have plastic comb have you ever seen propolise in the comb?


By "in the wax comb" I assume you are referring to frames in extracting comb. The answer is yes. The later in the summer, the more propolis you will have to deal with. By fall it gets very difficult to remove frames from the supers because of the buildup. With darker bees and in wooded areas the propolizing can become an even more serious detriment to removing frames.


----------



## Acebird

No Jim, I mean in the wax cells not on the frames themselves. The propolise would have to be in the cells to gum up the flow frame as I understand how they work. I don't think the bees have access to the actuation area. I have plenty of propolise on my wooden frames.


----------



## jim lyon

Acebird said:


> No Jim, I mean in the wax cells not on the frames themselves. The propolise would have to be in the cells to gum up the flow frame as I understand how they work. I don't think the bees have access to the actuation area. I have plenty of propolise on my wooden frames.


Ok, then within the cells I would say it does happen but it isn't a common occurrence.


----------



## Acebird

jim lyon said:


> Ok, then within the cells I would say it does happen but it isn't a common occurrence.


Well if it does happen can it be avoided or is it one of those things that will happen from time to time?


----------



## sqkcrk

There can be, and I believe there is, a fine coating of propolis on the surface of the comb's wax caps. If nothing else it gets there from bees walking on the comb, I believe. If you render purely wax cappings there will be some propolis in the slum gum.


----------



## jim lyon

My guess is that it's going to happen from time to time given the widely different environments these things will be used in. I've tried to be fair and stay clear of this whole flow hive discussion until there are some actual first hand accounts. Now we actually have one and I think the experience this person had and the response (or perhaps non response) on the flow hive forum is relevant to the discussion of whether these devices work as advertised. Propolis isn't an unusual thing, rather its a normal part of the beehive environment. Are people that spent the big bucks to get one of these devices being advised of the possible problems that can arise and the limitations in its use? In fairness I don't know the answer to that question.


----------



## jwcarlson

The difference between regular fully drawn plastic combs and these "Flow Frames" is that the cells have cracks in them whereby they can fracture to drain. I'd assume bees may plug those cracks up before filling... Which would really make the whole Flow experience fun. Might not close back up properly. Leak down into the back of the frame...

I've got some bees that will fill all of the partial hexagons at the edge of plastic foundation where it meets end/bottom/top bars with propolis. Even before they start drawing it.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> I don't.
> 
> I have done my fair share of comb honey production and the needs for the flow hive "to me" seem similar. It takes a strong condensed hive to produce supers of the stuff and you have to keep the bees from placing pollen, propolis, and brood in the comb supers with an excluder.
> 
> Many new flow hive beekeepers will look at that (Perfect bee world) looking video and think I can keep my bees in one deep brood chamber and one flow hive box on top and make honey and keep my bees from swarming.
> 
> In fact they need a double deep chamber of regular combs full of brood prior to the main nectar flow. Then they need to take all the frames of brood they can and place it in the bottom box, place a excluder on it, then place your flow hive box on top. The other box of frames can be given to another hive and all bees shook into the bottom box of the flow hive colony. You will have a powerful comb drawing honey producing machine at this point.
> 
> Once the bees have filled the flow hive frames 50% full another box of foundation or combs should be placed under the flow hive box on top of the excluder. This will help keep the bees from swarming and/or back-filling the brood chamber below. Plus you get more honey win-win
> If you place it on to quickly they might abandon the flow frames.
> 
> Operating a hive this strong in one brood chamber works well for producing prime comb honey and I believe will work well with a flow hive setup.
> 
> However the bees will need to be checked every seven days for a while to make sure the swarm cells are not allowed to be capped.
> 
> As soon as the honey flows slows down the flow hive box must come off or here in TN it will be propolised so bad you may not be able to use it again.


The propolising will be in the back of the cells where the flow frame is made to cut and separate the honey. I have heard 3 reports on this so far. In my area propolis is so bad my frames can break in the fall. 

It might vary by local but why leave it in and take a chance?


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

jwcarlson said:


> The difference between regular fully drawn plastic combs and these "Flow Frames" is that the cells have cracks in them whereby they can fracture to drain. I'd assume bees may plug those cracks up before filling... Which would really make the whole Flow experience fun. Might not close back up properly. Leak down into the back of the frame...
> 
> I've got some bees that will fill all of the partial hexagons at the edge of plastic foundation where it meets end/bottom/top bars with propolis. Even before they start drawing it.


Ya what he said!


----------



## shannonswyatt

I've got a couple hives that are god awful for propolis, particularly on plastic. It's almost like peanut butter where they put it on thick, other bees not so much. You would think they would have tested for propolis pre-production, and I'm sure they would have.

I guess that these frames will work in places that have heavy flows and you have strong hives to take advantage of the flows, and possibly work well. I'm guessing that after the primary flows end you will need to pull them off the hives and put a normal super on them to give them a place to store nectar other than the brood nest, lest they propolize the flow frames to breakage or cause the hive swarm. My guess also is they will end up requiring more attentiveness by the beekeeper, not less. And I'm guessing that is why they make them like observation hives so that you can see when they are filling and drain them before you have a hive swarm on you. Lots of guessing!

I'm hoping someone near me gets some so i can see what their experience is with them. I'm not interested in purchasing any of them, but I do hope that people that paid that much money get at least something out of them, even if they don't work great and they end up abandoning the frames. They may find the like working the bees and just put on regular supers, and just harvest a bar at a time and crush and strain if they want some fresh honey.


----------



## jwcarlson

Despite my pleading for him not to waste his money... one of the landowners where I have hives bought one. 
Freaking shame... he could have doubled my woodenware count for the same price. Maybe I'll super up my flypaper propolis makers and see what they do to it. Those fuzzy little things like to put golf ball sized globs smashed between bottom bar above and top bar below. Such a joy.


----------



## Acebird

jim lyon said:


> Are people that spent the big bucks to get one of these devices being advised of the possible problems that can arise and the limitations in its use?


Come on Jim lets be fair are any newbies being advised when they buy their first beginners kit? Do suppliers provide a beekeeping course when they buy their first package, or nuc?

I have been told that almonds produce a pretty good flow. Is that true?


----------



## clyderoad

cleaned propolis goes for $50 or so a pound.
maybe start collecting it.


----------



## shannonswyatt

Not in my house! My wife is always unloading on me about Propolis in the sink.


----------



## Barry

Michael, I don't understand this statement.



> He is visiting Australia to see Flow™ Hives in action, in their natural habitat.


Australia is the only place the flow hive can be in its natural habitat? A flow hive in the U.S. is considered unnatural? I find it odd that the word _natural_ was used here.


----------



## jim lyon

Barry said:


> Michael, I don't understand this statement.
> 
> 
> 
> Australia is the only place the flow hive can be in its natural habitat? A flow hive in the U.S. is considered unnatural? I find it odd that the word _natural_ was used here.


Given the fact that Mr Bush had one of the only flow hives in the northern hemisphere this spring have I missed his follow up report on his experiences with it this season?


----------



## Kofu

Barry said:


> Australia is the only place the flow hive can be in its _natural_ habitat? A flow hive in the U.S. is considered unnatural?


Maybe the word should be 'native' (to Australia), and the flow hive is an introduced species elsewhere? (Not calling it an "invasive," of course. :lookout: )


----------



## BeeCurious

Barry said:


> Australia is the only place the flow hive can be in its natural habitat?


Without any outside influence Flow Hives would mass together close to their birthplace. 

They are not migratory in nature... 

I hope this eliminates some of the confusion.


----------



## Oldtimer

The Flow people are very pleased Michael is going there to give them presentations about natural beekeeping.

From the flow site-

"Michael Bush literally wrote the book on treatment-free beekeeping.
“The Practical Beekeeper” is the definitive guide to natural beekeeping, and a must for any beekeeper’s bookshelf. 
A prolific contributor to online beekeeping communities, Michael has churned out at least 50,000 forum posts, with his content described as “the gold standard for diverse and common sense beekeeping practices.” 
Michael started to keep a few hives in the mid ‘70s, but his deep investigations into varroa mites led to more and more and by 2008, Michael had more than 200 hives. 
Don’t miss this opportunity to learn from one the very best in the field"!

Me, I'm just pleased Michael has obviously escaped that dark basement he had been trapped in. Australian beekeeping already is reasonably "natural", but is rather different philosophically and profitability wise to the MB brand of natural beekeeping, both sides may get a surprise.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

In Australia, though, treatment-free could become real. :w


----------



## Oldtimer

Plus, those Aussies could use some cheering up, they just got their butts kicked again by New Zealand in the finals of the Rugby World Cup last night. 

New Zealand (all blacks) world champions again LOL check it out

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11538326

If it don't play in Explorer try Chrome.


----------



## Oldtimer

BernhardHeuvel said:


> In Australia, though, treatment-free could become real. :w


As it already is for most of them.


----------



## sqkcrk

jim lyon said:


> Given the fact that Mr Bush had one of the only flow hives in the northern hemisphere this spring have I missed his follow up report on his experiences with it this season?


I imagine that Michael is restricted, maybe self restricted, in what he can or does say about the Flow Hive.


----------



## Acebird

I imagine Michael Bush has placed no restrictions on himself.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

I am just glad I am not a new beekeeper all over again. When I started I would have purchased 6 of those things.


----------



## Acebird

You could afford 6 of those things when you first started?


----------



## sqkcrk

Acebird said:


> I imagine Michael Bush has place no restrictions on himself.


He did mention one time an agreement he had with the inventors. Maybe he has the self discipline to not say anything until he has put the equipment through thorough testing.


----------



## Acebird

Michael argue? I think listening to Bach would be louder than Michael arguing.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Michael, I don't understand this statement...
>Australia is the only place the flow hive can be in its natural habitat?...

Beats me. But yes, I got to see Flow hives in Australia. I've wanted to move there since I was a kid and I finally got to see it. An amazing place.

>Given the fact that Mr Bush had one of the only flow hives in the northern hemisphere this spring have I missed his follow up report on his experiences with it this season?

I think we already covered how busy I've been, but somewhere in the next few days I hope to harvest some honey. If I can get some help, I'll try to video it. What I saw in Australia was pretty amazing. We put a Flow super on a hive and in two days they had repaired most of the seams in the cells with wax. They seem to view it as damaged comb in need of repair. We harvested from quite a few hives that had frames that were already full. But then Australia is pretty amazing for bees. They have something coming in almost all year around. Lots of small hive beetles, like you might see in North Carolina or other such places, but not a lot of issues as long as they are strong hives. No Varroa. It's almost (except for the SHB) the golden age of beekeeping there...

>Australian beekeeping already is reasonably "natural"

Yes. Most of the treatments beekeepers use here are illegal there and the rest are uncalled for with no Varroa.

>Plus, those Aussies could use some cheering up, they just got their butts kicked again by New Zealand in the finals of the Rugby World Cup last night.

And I got to see the Rugby World Cup on live television... now if only I could figure out the rules... 

>I imagine that Michael is restricted, maybe self restricted, in what he can or does say about the Flow Hive.

Only before they unveiled it. I had a non disclosure agreement (NDA) up until then. But this is the first actual honey season I've had any. I got it at the end of the flow last year, so I have not had enough experience to say too much other than it's not a scam and it works. I haven't harvested yet this year. How well, and under what conditions etc., I don't have enough experience yet, to have an opinion.

>When I started I would have purchased 6 of those things.

Only if you had a lot of money to spare at the time... 

>He did mention one time an agreement he had with the inventors.

Just an NDA.

>Maybe he has the self discipline to not say anything until he has put the equipment through thorough testing.

Thorough testing is the point. Yes. Probably by the end of next year I will have a lot more of an opinion. But then maybe I'll have more of an opinion in a few days if I can get them harvested. Still I consider one year pretty limited for me to have too strong of an opinion.


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> Still I consider one year pretty limited for me to have too strong of an opinion.


Did you see any problems at all in Australia that could be avoided that would help people in the states with these frames.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Did you see any problems at all in Australia that could be avoided that would help people in the states with these frames.

I didn't see any problems really. By the time there was any honey at all visible in the ends, it was virtually all capped. If you have trouble breaking it loose with the tool, just do it a little at a time. It does not have to all be broken open at the same time. You could do as little as one section at a time (basically two cells) or 1/4 or 1/2 of the frame at a time. If you buy more than one box and have more than one tool, you can also insert two tools with the handles in opposite directions and do them both at once which gives you more leverage. But I can't say I saw any problems with it. It drained even on some of the more thixotropic honeys such as jellybush (a kind of manuka honey). I think what we harvested was not anywhere near pure jellybush, but was part. Still I think the action of sliding half the cell down helped liquefy the thick honeys which when extracting require special tools to get the honey to liquefy.

The typical hive there is one deep plus supers, so in the North of North America you would have to adjust that to two deeps to have winter stores enough. That seems obvious to a beekeeper, but maybe not to a newbee. I think anyone new should ask around and see what the locals are using and use that at least as a starting point for what to have for the brood.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

Michael Bush said:


> . . . But then Australia is pretty amazing for bees. They have something coming in almost all year around . . . .
> 
> The typical hive there is one deep plus supers, so in the North of North America you would have to adjust that to two deeps to have winter stores enough. That seems obvious to a beekeeper, but maybe not to a newbee. I think anyone new should ask around and see what the locals are using and use that at least as a starting point for what to have for the brood.


Can we assume that these two data are related? I was curious about this when I first ordered my kit. I already have standard deeps and mediums, and I've been beekeeping for a whole 18 months, so I knew I'd need a bigger brood/stores setup. I'm a bit surprised they didn't offer a bigger kit, but maybe their local practices influenced that.


----------



## Oldtimer

You are right Waterbug and from the flowhive stuff I've read it seems they have not yet fully factored in the different conditions of other countries, their info is pretty much based on what happens in Australia. Hence for example, I suspect that propolising incident would have been a surprise for them, and they need to get educational info out there about what conditions their flow frames should be used in, and should not be used in.

Likely Michael would have wised them up to a few things and will be a continuing resource for them as things progress. I still believe an experienced beekeeper in the US will have few problems with flowhives, but newbies will have a bunch of them. The lady who had a bad experience and expressed regret about buying the flowhive, was really just the result of inexperience with bees generally, plus not being given all the info she should have been.


----------



## aunt betty

The ad my friends on facebook keep posting and gabbing about shows two quart jars being filled. I'm pretty sure a deep sized box with 7 of them frames would hold a bit more than 2 quarts. Can you turn it on and off? People think you can unzip it with that tool ...let it fill a jar and then turn the crank and it's all good again. Come back next week, repeat. 

Anyone with experience knows you can't extract honey into an open jar right next to an active bee hive and not have a mess of bees trying to get into the jar yet they do it in that ad. Slightly unrealistic and leads ppl to believe that they will never get stung or have to handle bees at all.


----------



## Acebird

Oldtimer said:


> but newbies will have a bunch of them.


 Like they don't with a lang hive.
People who try to buy dreams usually get disappointed. Should the inventors know what it is like to keep bees in every part of the world? I don't. I think that responsibility falls on the consumer. If you are not up for hiccups on a new invention then don't ever buy one.


----------



## SeaCucumber

I haven't studied the design, but here's what I would want in most equipment:

- easy to burn
- saves time
- easy to swap and sell frames


----------



## Acebird

SeaCucumber said:


> I haven't studied the design, but here's what I would want in most equipment:
> 
> - easy to burn
> - saves time
> - easy to swap and sell frames


I don't know why you would want to burn plastic but it burns pretty well.
It certainly saves time.
There will be a lot of swapping in the future as I see it.


----------



## AHudd

When someone tries to extract honey from a hive into an open jar, I hope they shoot a video and post it for all to see. I can just imagine someone freaking out when the first few bees try getting into the jar. Add in a few stings and angry bees pelting their veil. If they are as clumsy as I am, they will have honey dripping from those tubes and everywhere else. Pity the poor soul who knocks over an open jar near multiple hives. They will surely think their bees have become Africanized. I hope they exercise caution!

Alex


----------



## Acebird

I don't know why people are painting this picture of africanized bees under attack with an open jar of honey during a strong flow. My bees don't react like that. I harveste honey in the fall when no nectar is present, spilling some from breaking burr comb full of honey and they don't reacted like that. I don't ever remember being stung harvesting any of my honey. If someone can't figure out how to keep bees out of a collection container they lack beekeeper ingenuity and it is likely they would fail no matter what equipment they use.


----------



## Michael Bush

>When someone tries to extract honey from a hive into an open jar, I hope they shoot a video and post it for all to see.

We harvested at least four or five into an open jar while I was in Australia. They did video several of them. I don't know if they have posted them, but I think you'll be disappointed...


----------



## Barry

AHudd said:


> When someone tries to extract honey from a hive into an open jar, I hope they shoot a video and post it for all to see.


Of all the potential issues with this hive, I don't see this as being very significant. One can use a small mouth jar to minimize the opening exposed to the air. It's not like you've got a 20 frame extractor sitting outside with the lid off, or a couple of supers of wet comb sitting out.


----------



## jwcarlson

Michael, did they have any tips/tricks for getting the bees to use the "Flow" super? I'm going to be dealing with one of these silly things next year and I know slapping plastic comb above and excluder isn't going to cut it. Just hope an active frame from down below up into the middle to get them working in there? Seems like a massive swarm machine to me...


----------



## sqkcrk

Barry said:


> It's not like you've got a 20 frame extractor sitting outside with the lid off, or a couple of supers of wet comb sitting out.


I have seen videos from South Korea wherein they do exactly that. Pull frames from hives, uncap, and extract right in the yd in the open.

The Flow Hive people also have a video with honey flowing into jars through hoses that go through a plastic cap, so no bees get in the jar. Whereas "Really Raw Honey Company" wants bees in the jar. Or bee parts anyway.


----------



## sqkcrk

jwcarlson said:


> Michael, did they have any tips/tricks for getting the bees to use the "Flow" super? I'm going to be dealing with one of these silly things next year and I know slapping plastic comb above and excluder isn't going to cut it. Just hope an active frame from down below up into the middle to get them working in there? Seems like a massive swarm machine to me...


From what I saw discussed elsewhere you really have to know when your strong nectar flow happens and get the flow super on the hive at just the right time. You can't leave it on in anticipation of the nectar flow. I don't know why.


----------



## jwcarlson

sqkcrk said:


> From what I saw discussed elsewhere you really have to know when your strong nectar flow happens and get the flow super on the hive at just the right time. You can't leave it on in anticipation of the nectar flow. I don't know why.


I'll have a better idea on what I should plan on doing once I actually see the hive. I really wish this guy wouldn't have bought one... what a colossal waste of money. It actually makes me a little queasy thinking of spending $700 on a single hive... and the bees are not included.


----------



## sqkcrk

So tell him that the bees cost as much as the equipment. One is of no use without the other. See what he says to that.


----------



## AHudd

OK, I'll take my spanking for not putting any emoticons in my post, it was early. I guess my attempt at self-deprecating humor got lost. "I" would surely drop something, such as a jar of honey, causing a massive feeding frenzy.

Alex


----------



## Michael Bush

>Michael, did they have any tips/tricks for getting the bees to use the "Flow" super?

I have seen no issues getting them to use it. They start using them immediately. Much better acceptance than any of the fully drawn comb I've used in the past (PermaComb, HSC). I think it's because they sense it as damaged and they immediately start repairing it. We put a super of it on a hive on Tuesday and when I checked it Friday they had repaired almost all of the cracks with wax. Of course that does take wax, so I'm sure it works better in a flow (as any foundation or combs do). I didn't have time to watch mine that closely, but I pulled a super off last night so I could video draining it (I don't have anyone in my house who wants to deal with the bees) and all the combs had capped honey, none had uncapped honey and several were fully capped. All I did was put this super on about the end of July (when I got it) and there isn't much flow here at that time. I need to empty three supers of them before it gets too cold (it was last week but it warmed up some now).


----------



## aunt betty

Here's a question/concern. Suppose "john" gets a flow hive along with the bees and all else he needs. Installs his flow-hive super during a strong flow, waits a week or two, (as long as he can stand it) and cracks it open into the jars. He has a refractometer and tests his honey out to 19.7%. Now what?


----------



## Barry

Sell it to David Hackenberg. I believe he was pushing for 25% to be accepted.


----------



## AHudd

>I didn't have time to watch mine that closely, but I pulled a super off last night so I could video draining it 

Is it too cold there to drain it while on the hive?

Alex


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> I didn't have time to watch mine that closely, but I pulled a super off last night so I could video draining it .


I was wondering if the system would be more acceptable for commercial applications if the box was pulled, emptied of bees by what ever method you prefer and placed on a drum with a rectangular hole that matches the box and left to drain overnight. The next day the box could be returned to the hive it came off. I think they need to get rid of the cutsie lever action tool for each frame also. I am thinking along the lines of a press and plate that actuates all the rows of cells at once for the whole box. After the box is drained it could be flipped over and reset with the same press plate before putting it back on the hive.


----------



## sqkcrk

aunt betty said:


> He has a refractometer and tests his honey out to 19.7%. Now what?


Eat it quickly or mix with low moisture honey or dry it down. If the cells are capped, why would this happen?


----------



## BeeCurious

Acebird said:


> I was wondering if the system would be more acceptable for commercial applications if the box was pulled, emptied of bees by what ever method you prefer and placed on a drum with a rectangular hole that matches the box and left to drain overnight. The next day the box could be returned to the hive it came off.


I can't imagine a commercial beekeeper seeing any merit in your suggestion.


----------



## Oldtimer

Acebird said:


> I was wondering if the system would be more acceptable for commercial applications if the box was pulled, emptied of bees by what ever method you prefer and placed on a drum with a rectangular hole that matches the box and left to drain overnight.


There is this ongoing disconnect between what some folks think commercial beekeepers should do, and what they actually can do, due to the scale of this at which they work.

It's been linked before, but here is a video of commercial beekeepers extracting honey. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpRRawVyEGM

Check it out, then tell me how it is going to be more efficient for commercial guys to have thousands of flowboxes, put each one on top of a drum to drain overnight, then go back and sort the whole mess out the next day.

The same issue comes up with "natural beekeeping" folks getting outraged about what commercial guys do, and saying they should do it some other way, or not do it, or whatever. Problem being what they say has no effect on commercial beekeepers cos their ideas are based on tiny scale stuff and don't translate to time efficiency in a larger scale.

Here's another example, this video was linked on a different site, and caused outrage and people swearing off packages forever, etc. But they don't understand what has to happen if they going to get x lb's of bees for x price.
https://www.facebook.com/damien.keys.1/videos/657235181000834/


----------



## Acebird

Oldtimer said:


> It's been linked before, but here is a video of commercial beekeepers extracting honey.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpRRawVyEGM
> 
> Check it out, then tell me how it is going to be more efficient for commercial guys to have thousands of flowboxes, put each one on top of a drum to drain overnight, then go back and sort the whole mess out the next day.


OT everything in that room becomes obsolete, including that room and the people in it. That is not something to sneeze at.
Huge operations like the one in the video would not use a drum they would have a tank with multiple boxes draining and filtering the honey near the hive. It might even be on a trailer. The question is how many operation like the one in the video are on Beesource? What mess is there to sort out? I see no mess. Not that it matters, I can see where the box that came off a hive could be put back on the same hive.


----------



## clyderoad

Acebird said:


> OT everything in that room becomes obsolete, including that room and the people in it. That is not something to sneeze at.
> Huge operations like the one in the video would not use a drum they would have a tank with multiple boxes draining and filtering the honey near the hive. It might even be on a trailer. The question is how many operation like the one in the video are on Beesource? What mess is there to sort out? I see no mess. Not that it matters, I can see where the box that came off a hive could be put back on the same hive.


Obsolete? in whose lifetime??

You have to ask how many large producers spend time on BS? You've been telling them how to do things for quite some time!
Take the blinders off Ace.


----------



## BeeCurious

Acebird said:


> OT everything in that room becomes obsolete, including that room and the people in it. That is not something to sneeze at.
> Huge operations like the one in the video would not use a drum they would have a tank with multiple boxes draining and filtering the honey near the hive. It might even be on a trailer. The question is how many operation like the one in the video are on Beesource? What mess is there to sort out? I see no mess. Not that it matters, I can see where the box that came off a hive could be put back on the same hive.


You should limit your posts to areas where you are most knowledgeable. 

For example:


Acebird said:


> Either that or drink beer and eat hard boiled eggs and light farts every 5 minutes or so.


----------



## Oldtimer

I can see what you are saying Ace, and agree that even the flowhive guys who I believe are some sort of commercial beekeepers think a bulk extracting method could be set up in an apiary using hoses etc.

But having worked in some reasonably big operations myself I simply cannot imagine how setting up such a thing could be efficient as against how it's done now. Just the fact alone that many apiaries are migratory, plus individual hives are taken off pallets and new ones added, means that at extracting time a network of hoses and fittings would have to be set up, all gravity fed.

However it may be that a person has to actually spend a few weeks pulling honey and extracting for a large outfit, before appreciating how draining it off through tubes into containers just is not going to be competitive time wise.

The proof will be if a commercial beekeeper adopts it. Maybe the flowhive guys could post a video of it being done in a good sized apiary.


----------



## sqkcrk

It would have to be done when temps are high or you would leave a lot of honey in the "combs". There is more to extracting then simply removing the supers and spinning out the honey, if you want to get as much as you can out of the comb.


----------



## jim lyon

I tried my best to explain this to Brian and anyone else who cared to listen over 1500 posts ago (in post #211 to be specific). 


Default Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"
Quote Originally Posted by Acebird View Post
You do realize this concept eliminates the honey house. What is that costing you?
You asked at a good time Brian, having just waded through a lot of numbers in preparing my tax form.
Assuming a $250,000 original outlay gives you a brand spanking new extracting system sitting in a multi use honey house that can be used for anything from extracting to wood working and that said building and equipment have a lifespan of 20 years, a capacity of 500,000 lbs. per year and a residual value of 50% then per lb. extracting expenses as I have experienced them would go something like this. 
Building and equipment .005 (cents per lb.) depreciation is deductible of course
Honey removal and extracting labor .05
Utilities .025

Total .08 per lb. 

But wait, I get a wax crop too. approximately $4.00 worth of bees wax for about every 58 lbs. means I gain back almost .07 per lb. in beeswax inventory!

Total net extracting cost .01 per lb.!!!!!!!!!!!!!
From a commercial standpoint, I cant imagine being interested if the frames were free.
Now how much do you figure its going to cost you for the far more labor intensive task of hauling the additional bulk of hundreds of thousands of jars back and forth to all your outyards? Then there is marketing.....dont get me started on that. 


I have never bad mouthed the flow hive because it would just be speculation to do so but I stick by my original opinion that "IF it works as it's supposed to that its primary market would be to wealthier backyard beekeepers who have an understanding of basic beekeeping".


----------



## biggraham610

jim lyon said:


> "IF it works as it's supposed to that its primary market would be to wealthier backyard beekeepers who have an understanding of basic beekeeping".


Touche'. My sentiments exactly. G


----------



## Acebird

Oldtimer said:


> I can see what you are saying Ace, and agree that even the flowhive guys who I believe are some sort of commercial beekeepers think a bulk extracting method could be set up in an apiary using hoses etc.


I have abandoned the idea of hoses. Those that have spoke out against them are right. Fiddling with them, connecting, unconnecting, and cleaning will add more labor then it saves. I don't see the need for the hoses if there is a hundred hives or so when the super can fit on top of a collection tank and be dumped all at once.

Jim I respect your views and value your opinion. I always have. I don't think your numbers are wrong. I am sure they are dead accurate. Please keep this in mind though, you can have one beekeeper with a 1000 hives or you can have 10 beekeepers with 100 hives. In the case of the 100 hive beekeeper you are talking 10 honey houses not one. Most likely they haven't been built yet. Wax can be harvested by other means, different management. The world is a global market now. Things will change because of it, even in beekeeping.


----------



## Acebird

sqkcrk said:


> It would have to be done when temps are high or you would leave a lot of honey in the "combs".


I would expect the temperatures will be warm because it will be done during a flow.


> if you want to get as much as you can out of the comb.


Why do you need to? You are eventually going to leave them some honey anyways, are you not? I don't know for a fact but I suspect the way the comb splits not much would be left in it like a wax comb. It is going to have a siphoning effect and even more so if there wasn't a collection channel at the bottom. The channel and tube system slows things down.


----------



## gmcharlie

Just food for the fire, most of the large Maple syrup operations now have lines and hoses (sometimes with vacuum) running from tree to tree. very little pail carrying done anymore.... 
just saying 30 years ago that idea was insane....


----------



## Jim Brewster

lazybhoney said:


> Just food for the fire, most of the large Maple syrup operations now have lines and hoses (sometimes with vacuum) running from tree to tree. very little pail carrying done anymore....
> just saying 30 years ago that idea was insane....


Trees stay in one place. The other difference is summed up in one word: viscosity.


----------



## gmcharlie

no argument.... Just pointing out sometimes an idea comes along that seems weird, but with a few tweaks changes the game... 100 flow supers feeding into a drum, swap the drum once a week... dry your own nectar... May be the future of beekeeping in china.....


----------



## sqkcrk

Acebird said:


> I would expect the temperatures will be warm because it will be done during a flow.
> 
> Why do you need to? You are eventually going to leave them some honey anyways, are you not? I don't know for a fact but I suspect the way the comb splits not much would be left in it like a wax comb. It is going to have a siphoning effect and even more so if there wasn't a collection channel at the bottom. The channel and tube system slows things down.


Honey houses and hot rooms are much warmer than outdoors temps specifically so one can get as much honey from the comb as possible. And slinging it out of uncapped comb by force will do the job faster than letting honey drain on its own.

Leave honey? I don't leave honey in honey supers. Only that which cannot be gotten by way of the extracting process. 

"The channel and tube system slows things down." As you said yourself. When things need doing, "slows things down" is not acceptable.


----------



## Acebird

sqkcrk said:


> And slinging it out of uncapped comb by force will do the job faster than letting honey drain on its own.
> "slows things down" is not acceptable.[/COLOR]


You are absolutely right it will be slower but slower doesn't mean unproductive. The draining would occur over night, again, no outlay of labor. And yes the channel and tube system is the wrong way to go. I said from the very start changes will have to occur in order to meet the requirements of a business situation.
On the topic of dryer frames at this point you can't assume the spun frames will be dryer than the flow frame system, you just think it will be. One would have to build the system and test it. Personally I don't see why they would have to be bone dry that is just the way you are doing it now.


----------



## sqkcrk

Acebird said:


> You are absolutely right it will be slower but slower doesn't mean unproductive.


Okay. I don't know if your boss would agree with you on that or not.


----------



## Michael Bush

>And slinging it out of uncapped comb by force will do the job faster than letting honey drain on its own.

I just harvested two supers of Flow frames yesterday. I rigged up six tubes going to a bucket and did all six frames at the same time. It took about three minutes to hook it all up and start it. I didn't have to stay and watch, and I didn't. I had other things to do. But when I came back in 30 minutes or so it was done. So for 3 minutes work, I drained a super. I didn't have to run the bees out, I didn't have to load it up. I didn't have to bring the wets back. I just hooked up six tubes, flipped the lever and came back in 30 minutes and put the caps back on etc. It drains really fast. It was not a hot day. Probably 70 F during the day, though I harvested it in the dark and it was probably 60 F by then. I would guess the honey was still warm though as the sun had just gone down. I'm sure on a hot day in the summer it would run much faster.


----------



## Barry

No pictures or video? Come on, we all know you have a GoPro!


----------



## Acebird

sqkcrk said:


> Okay. I don't know if your boss would agree with you on that or not.


Mark, I had no problem convincing my boss on several occasions. Convincing the politicians above him was the problem. And in the end they reaped millions from my efforts.


Barry said:


> No pictures or video? Come on, we all know you have a GoPro!


Barry it is not going to look any different then what they have on their site or are you looking for photographic verification?


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> I just harvested two supers of Flow frames yesterday.


The only picture I would like to see is of a frame itself to see how "dry" they come out. I am not interested in the channel or tubes. You did not harvest during a flow so is that bucket full of bees?  Michael, what is your plan now? Will you take the frames off the hive for winter or just cap the hive and leave them on top?


----------



## sqkcrk

What is the moisture content, Michael?


----------



## BeeCurious

Michael Bush said:


> I didn't have to stay and watch





> I didn't have to run the bees out





> I didn't have to load it up





> I didn't have to bring the wets back



Would you say that the "convenience" was worth $379 plus shipping ($49)?


----------



## jwcarlson

Acebird said:


> You did not harvest during a flow so is that bucket full of bees?  Michael, what is your plan now?


He harvested in the dark, Ace, as he stated. Lots of bees robbing in the dark? Anyone claiming you can leave a bucket of honey out in sunny, 70 degree weather in November in a bee yard is a liar.

I do want to know what the plan is for winter storage. Can you rinse those frames clean? Surely there is residual honey left over in the guts of the frame. Does it crystallize and gum up the works?



BeeCurious said:


> Would you say that the "convenience" was worth $379 plus shipping ($49)?


Per super. hahahaha


----------



## Barry

Acebird said:


> Barry it is not going to look any different then what they have on their site or are you looking for photographic verification?


What good is a GoPro sitting in the box?


----------



## D Coates

I'm doing the quick math for my personal needs/requirements, $428 per super, 30 hives comes to $12,840. There's some great equipment I could get that would speed things up and last longer than me. Wholly schnykeys..., there's simply not enough time savings going on to cover that cost for someone my size. I'd think you're still going to need to remove the super at the end of the year to condense the hive. It is empty after all. You're still going to have to stay on top of the hive to give them more space too aren't you? Coming into peak flow with a busting population with too little room even assuming the Flow Hive super is empty would spell swarm urging/production. What if you want to vacation for a week during heavy flow? What are you going to do with those supers if they're not Flow Hives (if they, are double my quick math, if they aren't you still need extracting equipment). They'll fill it to capacity then backfill the brood nest if not given more space. I still like the idea but this is not the time savings some may think not matter the tinkering. 



jim lyon said:


> "IF it works as it's supposed to that its primary market would be to wealthier backyard beekeepers who have an understanding of basic beekeeping".


 I believe Jim nailed it. 
To me this is definitely for the boutique beekeeper with 2-3 hives who doesn't want to buy extracting equipment.


----------



## jwcarlson

Barry said:


> What good is a GoPro sitting in the box?


In 50-60 years it can be sold as NOS (new old stock).


----------



## FlowerPlanter

>Would you say that the "convenience" was worth $379 plus shipping ($49)?

How many years to the break even point. Over 10 years?


----------



## Michael Bush

>No pictures or video? Come on, we all know you have a GoPro!

I don't have a light for it. I did shoot a video of doing one on the dining room table so I can see it all, but I can't say I like the fish eye view of a gopro. I also need something better to view it with (let alone edit it) as my viewer just lurches and freezes. I think it's all there, but somehow it doesn't show very well. Also, you can't see what you're shooting with the gopro. I also shot some on my video camera. Maybe I'll get time to look at it. It's a bit boring out in the middle where you just wait for it to drain... so I'd like to edit it.

>What is the moisture content, Michael?

I do not now, nor have I ever owned a refractometer. It looks like the normal viscosity of honey. I pulled one super and removed all the bees so I could examine all the frames. It was 100% capped.


----------



## jwcarlson

Do you have a picture of the capped frame, Michael? I'd like to see what they look like full of honey. I don't think I've seen one in their videos? Of course I'm not really watching their videos either, though.


----------



## Michael Bush

>You did not harvest during a flow so is that bucket full of bees? 

I cut a hole in the bucket lid and put the tube in that. Then I cut six holes in another bucket lid and ran six tubes into that. No bees in the bucket...


----------



## Oldtimer

Michael Bush said:


> I don't have a light for it. I did shoot a video of doing one on the dining room table so I can see it all, but I can't say I like the fish eye view of a gopro. I also need something better to view it with (let alone edit it) as my viewer just lurches and freezes. I think it's all there, but somehow it doesn't show very well. Also, you can't see what you're shooting with the gopro.


I think I can see what is going on here, it's lack of belief.

Just do it. Have faith. "Everything works if you let it".


----------



## bucksbees

I would rather watch a video from some one that I have studied, and trust their input, then from some one just out to make videos to sell a product.


----------



## Oldtimer

True.

With some very cheap, low end technology I have been able to make the odd video and post it here. It's less about worrying over perceived problems with the technology, and more just a case of deciding to do it then doing it.

Belief, I guess.


----------



## Barry

Search _Cowboy Studio_ on Amazon. Anything to do with photography on the cheap. I use their light stands and booms.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

Michael Bush said:


> I do not now, nor have I ever owned a refractometer.


Amazon has one for $30, including free Prime shipping (if you have Prime). I bought one of these last year to test honey from my cutout that wasn't fully capped. I didn't buy any calibration solution, but I did test it with extra virgin olive oil, and it was spot-on.

The honey tested fine. The honey tasted fine.


----------



## Michael Palmer

Oldtimer said:


> I think I can see what is going on here, it's lack of belief.
> 
> Just do it. Have faith. "Everything works if you let it".


Thank you master....


----------



## sqkcrk

D Coates said:


> I believe Jim nailed it.
> To me this is definitely for the boutique beekeeper with 2-3 hives who doesn't want to buy extracting equipment.


Has anyone turned Morgan Freeman onto this thang yet?


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> No bees in the bucket...


Good golly a beekeeper with a brain.:thumbsup:


----------



## clyderoad

Acebird said:


> Good golly a beekeeper with a brain.:thumbsup:


OMG. priceless.
and typical.
it is well past the time for the boot.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

sqkcrk said:


> Has anyone turned Morgan Freeman onto this thang yet?


NOW your talking! I might buy one if he is the narrator. 
Its all about marketing! To me that is the impressive thing about the flow hive.


----------



## sqkcrk

Tennessee, you have heard that Freeman is a beekeeper, haven't you?


----------



## biggraham610

sqkcrk said:


> Tennessee, you have heard that Freeman is a beekeeper, haven't you?


Is he still a keeper Mark? Haven't heard lately. Do remember that a couple years ago he got some hives. Oh, by the way, its "Thing". Just between you and I. G


----------



## Barhopper

Go Pro makes a viewer that fits on the back of the camera. You can see what your recording. Still the fish eye view though


----------



## Joel

lazybhoney said:


> Just food for the fire, most of the large Maple syrup operations now have lines and hoses (sometimes with vacuum) running from tree to tree. very little pail carrying done anymore....
> just saying 30 years ago that idea was insane....


Ran a 275 tap Maple operation for 2 decades, the major difference is Maple Sap is the consistency of water. Maybe some futuristic PVC and pumps set up but how much force would it take to move 60 degree honey through a mile of pipe? How much would you leave behind and how would clean/sterilize the piping at the end of the season.... a honey pump moving warm honey 10 feet is no race horse!


----------



## jwcarlson

Joel said:


> Ran a 275 tap Maple operation for 2 decades, the major difference is Maple Sap is the consistency of water. Maybe some futuristic PVC and pumps set up but how much force would it take to move 60 degree honey through a mile of pipe? How much would you leave behind and how would clean/sterilize the piping at the end of the season.... a honey pump moving warm honey 10 feet is no race horse!


Honestly, this sounds like a job for Ace.


----------



## Michael Bush

Here is my six way bucket...
http://www.bushfarms.com/images/FlowSixWay.jpg


----------



## gmcharlie

How much did you net out of that super?


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> Here is my six way bucket...


Am I seeing 4 mediums under the flow frame box? How long was the flow frame box on the hive? In a spring flow time frame I would expect to see three mediums under the box or do you think it wise to have the fourth box under it?


----------



## Eddie Honey

Acebird said:


> Am I seeing 4 mediums under the flow frame box? How long was the flow frame box on the hive? In a spring flow time frame I would expect to see three mediums under the box or do you think it wise to have the fourth box under it?


Michael uses all mediums for the broodnest


----------



## Michael Bush

>How much did you net out of that super?

I got a couple of gallons out of a similar one, but less than that from that one. They were not completely full as I didn't get them on until July

>Am I seeing 4 mediums under the flow frame box?

No. Five.

>How long was the flow frame box on the hive?

I think I put them all on about the same time and I got the rest of them in July. I'm afraid it was after the main flow.

>In a spring flow time frame I would expect to see three mediums under the box or do you think it wise to have the fourth box under it?

I think I would be wise to have five under it. That's what I would winter a typical strong hive in. Five eight frame mediums is the equivalent of two ten frame deeps and a shallow. Everything over that is surplus.


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> No. Five.


Yeah, wow. One of the issues I might have with 5 boxes under is the sixth one (flow frame box) would not be capped after the main flow. In a case like this year where my boomer had 8 boxes total I did not take honey in the spring (as usual). In August all my hives went light and then went nuts on golden rod and aster. If I were a newbie and took honey in the spring I think I would have had dead hives by September. This year on BS there were a lot of posts about the bees not capping the honey in the spring. Was this year unusual or is this more common?
The hive in the video is depicted as one deep and one flow frame box. If you are putting 5 mediums under yours is there any hope that one deep under the flow frames would ever work in the states? Assuming you had no time constraints.


----------



## Michael Bush

>If you are putting 5 mediums under yours is there any hope that one deep under the flow frames would ever work in the states? 

I suspect one honey flow on top of one deep box would work anywhere you winter in one deep box. Probably from GA on down south...


----------



## gmcharlie

the point for my question was volume. How to equate to a regular super, the look a lot deeper. Typicaly a regular super would be half a bucket or about 30lbs so if I understand your post the Flow hive super is about the same as a regular super in stored honey volume. Of course the next question is what perfentage of the avlible honey came out? 60/80% or better?


----------



## Maddy

Michael Bush said:


> >How much did you net out of that super?
> I got a couple of gallons out of a similar one, but less than that from that one. They were not completely full as I didn't get them on until July
> >Am I seeing 4 mediums under the flow frame box?
> No. Five.
> >How long was the flow frame box on the hive?
> I think I put them all on about the same time and I got the rest of them in July. I'm afraid it was after the main flow.
> >In a spring flow time frame I would expect to see three mediums under the box or do you think it wise to have the fourth box under it?
> I think I would be wise to have five under it. That's what I would winter a typical strong hive in. Five eight frame mediums is the equivalent of two ten frame deeps and a shallow. Everything over that is surplus.


As a hopelessly clueless newbie, in Colorado, trying to learn SO much, you being in Nebraska is a wonderful benchmark for me, as your location provides a more than fair indicator of how to approach some situations.

You state how the Flow super in the photo was put on in July.
When did you put the other set up on the brood box(es)?
And, when did you take the Flow setups OFF the hives?
How do you store them, and what preparation did you do before storage?

Our Flow arrives in December.
Yes, I agree that it is most likely for small scale beeks, as we purchased the full set up because 
1) We have no space or interest in any large scale beekeeping or extraction,
2) We believe it is an invention that will revolutionize the _harvesting_ of honey, with less stress and hassle to the bees and the beekeepers.

But again, we are backyard hobbiests, not commercial operations of thousands of hives. We invested in the belief that this can help more hobbiests get into beekeeping, which will help the bees - They are the only reason we even got into beekeeping, we don't consume that much honey in the first place.

I agree that too many people think it makes beekeeping look like keeping a tank of tropical fish, even though the focus is on harvesting, solely.
I am amazed at the vehemence with which people condemn the Flow, with NO experience with it, or full understanding behind it. Honestly, Mr. Bush's endorsement was the deciding factor in our investment, because if he did not perceive it as a "scam," we decided it was worth our time and money to experiment with, and support the endeavor by the Andersons.

It was also the tipping point to abandoning our TBH's, and switch to Langs, in order to standardize our setup. It's hard enough keeping bees with top bars, trying to understand management between the two styles is still beyond my capabilities.

We are FAR from "wealthy back-yard beeks," but we purchased the entire setup for $600, to save us the additional confusion and headaches of trying to set up a Lang and incorporate a Flow system as well. That said, we've now committed to making our own Langs, nucs, etc. to expand our backyard apiary. Time, materials, learning curve...No matter the hobby, there is always some investment to be made.

But we are still excited beyond belief for it to arrive!
~M


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> I suspect one honey flow on top of one deep box would work anywhere you winter in one deep box. Probably from GA on down south...


I'm confused. You yourself have wintered hives of 1 deep equivalent. What does wintering hive size have to do with the working of the flow frame system?


----------



## Michael Bush

>the point for my question was volume. How to equate to a regular super, the look a lot deeper.

It is an eight frame deep box and will hold the amount of honey that an eight frame deep box holds...

>the next question is what perfentage of the avlible honey came out? 60/80% or better?

I don't think it's a lot less than extracting. In extracting you're trying to overcome the surface tension that holds the honey in the cells. In this case you are not. There is a channel for the air to come in and the honey flows out. They are pretty empty when you're done. Just the typical amount that sticks to any surface left.

>You state how the Flow super in the photo was put on in July.
When did you put the other set up on the brood box(es)?

Some of them overwintered with five boxes. Some I added them in mid May.

>And, when did you take the Flow setups OFF the hives?

I will try to do that tonight... but a month ago wouldn't have hurt. I'm just behind...

>How do you store them, and what preparation did you do before storage?

I may just stack them in the beeyard or I may haul them to the barn and put them inside just to make the boxes last longer.

>I'm confused. You yourself have wintered hives of 1 deep equivalent. What does wintering hive size have to do with the working of the flow frame system?

A typical hive in the North is wintering in two deep ten frame boxes. A typical hive in the deep South is wintering in one deep ten frame box. A typical hive in the mid section (Tenneesee etc.) is in a deep and a shallow or a deep and a medium. This is what they need for winter stores. I would add the Flow super above what you expect to winter them in. In Australia (at least in NSW) that appears to be one deep. In Nebraska that is typically two deeps, though I often use just a shade over that volume (one more eight frame medium) with a strong hive. My nucs might be in as small as one eight frame medium box. But I would not be putting a super on them, I would be trying to grow them enough to get through the winter. If they grow to be two or three eight frame boxes, I'm still not ready for a super. The Flow frames are strictly supers. Not winter stores. Not brood boxes. Just supers for surplus. Supers are for "adult" hives, not nucleus hives. I don't want the bees clustered in them for winter because the queen will need to lay somewhere in the winter and the cells in the Flow frames are too deep and too wide for brood.


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> If they grow to be two or three eight frame boxes, I'm still not ready for a super. The Flow frames are strictly supers. Not winter stores. Not brood boxes. Just supers for surplus. Supers are for "adult" hives, not nucleus hives. I don't want the bees clustered in them for winter because the queen will need to lay somewhere in the winter and the cells in the Flow frames are too deep and too wide for brood.


Great explanation Mike, thanks. In my area it seems like 4 boxes is the point where the queen does not go to the fifth box for raising brood so I consider my fifth box the super. I do make sure there is a honey cap in the forth box before adding the fifth which could be foundation. After the fifth I feel I can use anything. But if I was using a flow system for the first time I would heed your advice and put it in the sixth position. My concern would be getting it capped before the bees decide to backfill and swarm.


----------



## Michael Bush

Yes, my fifth box is usually just honey, but that's for them for the winter. That's not a surplus for me...


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> Yes, my fifth box is usually just honey, but that's for them for the winter.


I did that once and it became a scramble splitting it up in the spring so it wouldn't swarm. If I leave the fifth box that would be at least 2 1/2 boxes of honey for winter. I know you can't leave too much ... but I am trying to stay at 3 hives and if I did the fifth box again I would be dealing with at least 6 hives in the spring. I agree it is great idea for those that want more bees and honey but not for me.


----------



## Eddie Honey

Thanks for the write up Mike. 
Did you use an excluder with your Flow frames?


----------



## hex0rz

Joel said:


> Ran a 275 tap Maple operation for 2 decades, the major difference is Maple Sap is the consistency of water. Maybe some futuristic PVC and pumps set up but how much force would it take to move 60 degree honey through a mile of pipe? How much would you leave behind and how would clean/sterilize the piping at the end of the season.... a honey pump moving warm honey 10 feet is no race horse!


How about using a pig in the lines.


----------



## Acebird

What do you mean by a pig?


----------



## Barry

http://www.tasteofhuron.ca/?page_id=4552


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

>> How about using a pig in the lines.


I took this to be a reference to a pipe cleaning 'pig', as in ... http://www.pipepigs.com/


----------



## deknow

I bet you could get most of the honey out of the lines by having a system that squeezes the flexible tubing (between rollers) as the tubing is wrapped around a reel for storage.

A pig (or other kind of piston or angioplasty balloon ) would work, but on a long run of tubing you would need a way to push it through. I've used simple pneumatic stock feeders (using a piston) on machine tools, and I think air pressure would be problematic.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Did you use an excluder with your Flow frames?

I did not. But I have plenty of drone comb in the brood nest which I think acts as a deterrent to the queen laying drone elsewhere and the cells are too large for worker eggs and too small to be attractive for drone and too deep for the queen to reach the bottom. It might not work as well if no drone comb was in the brood nest.


----------



## Acebird

Rader Sidetrack said:


> I took this to be a reference to a pipe cleaning 'pig',


I think you are right Rader. They work well on hard pipe but not so good on flexible tubing. For that I used a tennis ball on a line we had to clean from time to time. The ball has to be bigger than the id by a little, not to much or it takes more pressure to push it.


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> It might not work as well if no drone comb was in the brood nest.


Giving the bees some space to draw natural cells I believe has kept drones out of my supers.


----------



## Jim Brewster

Michael Bush said:


> >Did you use an excluder with your Flow frames?
> 
> I did not. But I have plenty of drone comb in the brood nest which I think acts as a deterrent to the queen laying drone elsewhere and the cells are too large for worker eggs and too small to be attractive for drone and too deep for the queen to reach the bottom. It might not work as well if no drone comb was in the brood nest.


Aren't the flow frame cells also too deep for the queen to lay in?


----------



## hex0rz

deknow said:


> ...I think air pressure would be problematic.


I would go for hydraulic means. Fluid won't compress, so using a pump to push water behind the pig would work.


----------



## deknow

I can't imagine a fluid driven pig that would be failsafe Wrt fluid getting into the honey.


----------



## Acebird

The pig prevents the water from getting to the viscous fluid you are flushing out. We used the pressure of city water to flush out gels that were well over 100,000 cp. You are going to want to wash the pipe / hose with water anyway. If we were doing a switch over from one batch to another we had pressurized tanks. 30 psi was more than enough to push it through.

I do like the milking idea much better for small hoses though.


----------



## crofter

I thought this flow hive was supposed to simplify and eliminate the extraction of honey? Hmmmm!


----------



## deknow

Acebird said:


> The pig prevents the water from getting to the viscous fluid you are flushing out. We used the pressure of city water to flush out gels that were well over 100,000 cp. You are going to want to wash the pipe / hose with water anyway. If we were doing a switch over from one batch to another we had pressurized tanks. 30 psi was more than enough to push it through.
> 
> I do like the milking idea much better for small hoses though.


I would want to use the honey I scraped or squeezed from the inside of the tubing...a pig might substantially keep the water out of the honey, but not enough for food safety/sanitary concerns.


----------



## Stephenpbird

Many posts ago a question was posed "Where's the Balance in all this"? or words to that effect.

Flow have just sent an email that said " If you want to get to know us all a bit better, you can watch it on the Australian Story website. The filmmakers really did a fantastic job of capturing where we are at and what we're about as a company, as well as how we work together and with our team of family and friends. We're sure you'll enjoy watching Australian Story, Going With the Flow".

I did enjoy watching, If you watch it I think it will answer that question once and for all.

http://www.abc.net.au/austory/content/2015/s4335344.htm


----------



## Acebird

deknow said:


> I would want to use the honey I scraped or squeezed from the inside of the tubing...a pig might substantially keep the water out of the honey, but not enough for food safety/sanitary concerns.


Why do you say that? If you have used one before you must not have used the right one for food safety. There should be 0 leakage of water past the pig into the honey if it is the right size.


----------



## Barry

Acebird said:


> There should be 0 leakage of water past the pig into the honey if it is the right size.


Do you speak from experience? I recall just a few posts ago . . .


----------



## jwcarlson

crofter said:


> I thought this flow hive was supposed to simplify and eliminate the extraction of honey? Hmmmm!


No joke. $700 honey supers, $15,000 vacuum systems, pigs in a line...









Source

At least you won't have to disturb the bees to get the honey, though, am I right? Call me when they have a tractor beam that just sucks the honey out with no physical contact.


----------



## D Coates

Barry said:


> Do you speak from experience? I recall just a few posts ago . . .


Barry, Are you filling in for Rader Sidetrack?


----------



## Harley Craig

deknow said:


> I can't imagine a fluid driven pig that would be failsafe Wrt fluid getting into the honey.


I used to be a pig tracker as a profession. when ever we purged pipe we used nitrogen to push the pig.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

D Coates said:


> Barry, Are you filling in for Rader Sidetrack?


I think Barry is inexperienced at this! 

He actually should have included the part of Ace's post about "right one for [HIGHLIGHT] food safety[/HIGHLIGHT]" in his challenge to Ace's experience.


Otherwise it will just go further down the medical device _rabbit hole_ .....  :lpf:



... anyone got a band-aid? ... how about a _sterile_ one? 


.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

Stephenpbird said:


> Many posts ago a question was posed "Where's the Balance in all this"? or words to that effect.
> 
> I did enjoy watching, If you watch it I think it will answer that question once and for all.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/austory/content/2015/s4335344.htm


Thank you for the link, I very much enjoyed the video. Hippies criticizing hippies. Too funny! Zero responsibility to responsibility and having to be an actual adult. Hilarious. 

Can't wait for my Flows to come.


----------



## Stephenpbird

SowthEfrikan said:


> Too funny! Zero responsibility to responsibility and having to be an actual adult. Hilarious.


true, but an outside karzie (toilet), ute (bokkie), an office that your expected to use and a millionaire to boot... now that's hilarious


----------



## Acebird

Barry said:


> Do you speak from experience?


Yes Barry but we called them butt corks. The version we had was made of Teflon slightly smaller than the id of the pipe. It was screwed together with a rubber washer that was slightly bigger then the id of the pipe. In one pass you could not tell by looking that the pipe was ever used. Of course we ran lots of hot water through the pipe as a final cleaning. After all it was a medical company. It the case of a change over, going from one batch to another it was one gel behind another with the pig inbetween. This resulted in almost no loss of product. If you were to try and push water by itself to clean out a line the water would just push through the center about 1/2 in diameter (2 in pipe) and take forever to clean the pipe.
Now when you talk about tygon tubing it expands under pressure so you want to use the least amount of pressure that will still do the job. An expandable ball works better for a pig. I literally used a tennis ball and scrapped a small amount of product that cam in contact with the ball. The tube came out very clean, not as clean as the pig with the rubber seal but very clean.


----------



## Acebird

SowthEfrikan said:


> Hippies criticizing hippies. Too funny! Zero responsibility to responsibility and having to be an actual adult.


I think the film was made to be funny. What I liked is no matter what you think of the guy he didn't give up the vision and made it work against all odds. He gets my deepest respect for that.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

Stephenpbird said:


> true, but an outside karzie (toilet), ute (bokkie), an office that your expected to use and a millionaire to boot... now that's hilarious


The outside loo is just silly, there are plenty of composting loos that work perfectly well inside. Of course, the weather there may mean it's not a problem wandering outside all hours of the night and day, but then again, Oz snakes are as lethal as ours in Africa. 

What is a ute (bokkie)? A bokkie is a deer. Do you mean a bakkie (vehicle)? It was clear these people are not in business to make money when they upgraded the Flows to cedar for free. I really hope they stay in business and are able to stay true to who they are in doing so.

Other than that, not big on hippy-happy in general. Hopefully he legalizes his domestic situation, if he has not already. There is a fortune, and a fortune of things, that can go wrong.

Happy for their success, happy there is Flow in the world. Yay for them! Bring on da honey flow.


----------



## jwcarlson

How fitting is it that the Flow Hive thread is now talking about toilets?



SowthEfrikan said:


> It was clear these people are not in business to make money when they upgraded the Flows to cedar for free.


Of all the silly stuff said in this thread... This one takes the cake.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

jwcarlson said:


> How fitting is it that the Flow Hive thread is now talking about toilets?
> 
> 
> 
> Of all the silly stuff said in this thread... This one takes the cake.


Ag shame yes man, poo-poo their success and generosity. These money-grubbing capitalist swine are milking the public for everything they can. Free this, and free that, and not to mention fundraising for charities. Ugh. So exploitive, all they can see are $$$ signs. Fat fingers fleecing our wallets ever inch of the way. Yep, definitely in it to make a fortune. Have some more cake.

These people are probably more successful, and probably more idealistic, than almost everyone belittling their success. And they seem like genuinely nice people, too. 

It's a pity people can't be happy for them.


----------



## jwcarlson

I am extremely happy for them. I mean to find a 40s vintage patent and make millions off of it. Seriously, good for them. 

And to have people defending them after buying a $100 hive kit for $700.


----------



## Oldtimer

Thought the word ute was used the world over, maybe it's a down under thing. It means utility vehicle, generally a 1 or 2 ton wellside.


----------



## Stephenpbird

SowthEfrikan said:


> The outside loo is just silly, there are plenty of composting loos that work perfectly well inside.


 Yes but he would have to buy stuff. Goes against his principles.


SowthEfrikan said:


> What is a ute (bokkie)? A bokkie is a deer. Do you mean a bakkie (vehicle)?


Sorry, yes Bakkie or Utility Vehicle. It's been over 20 years since I lived in Benoni near Johannesburg.


----------



## Acebird

SowthEfrikan said:


> It's a pity people can't be happy for them.


Have you ever heard the term "Sour Grapes"?


----------



## SowthEfrikan

Howzit boet - Are/were you a Saffer? Bokkie and bakkie was a tad confusing.  You absolutely have a point about them buying stuff. That's why they are also just giving away stuff. It's just ... stuff.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

jwcarlson said:


> I am extremely happy for them. I mean to find a 40s vintage patent and make millions off of it. Seriously, good for them.
> 
> And to have people defending them after buying a $100 hive kit for $700.


Well, if it's that easy, go on then. You should have done this already. What are you wasting time here for?


----------



## Stephenpbird

SowthEfrikan said:


> Howzit boet - Are/were you a Saffer?


Howzit man, a Rooinek. Lived there for 14 years though.

These guys just won a silver medal at Apimondia for their invention, I don't suppose they are affected by what some of us think.


----------



## Richard Cryberg

The flow idea will never make it commercially for one very good reason (besides the ridiculous high cost).

All states have food inspectors and people who produce human food for sale must comply with the production rules. Some states have very restrictive rules on the extraction house and knowing how our government works you can figure with time more states will write such rules. Those rules are intended to protect the consumer from bacteria and viruses they might get from improper food production and handling. Now, consider the flow frames. You have a channel at the bottom that can not be cleaned and kept clean. That alone will disqualify flow frames from commercial use unless the honey is pasturized after extraction. No problem to the small bee keeper who does not sell his honey. So the small bee keeper will remain the flow frames market. The people who brought these to market did a wonderful marketing job and already have made enough they never have to work again so I doubt if they care at all if the product has no market in a few years.

There are things that could be done to flow frames that might make them commercial. But, not as flow frames. Here are a few things that could make them interesting to a commercial honey producer:

1. Get rid of that channel at the bottom and replace it with more cells.
2. Make the cells so big queens will not lay in them. Perhaps a 5.5 or 5.8 mm cell might do the trick? Maybe bigger than 6 mm?
3. Make the cell breaking mechanicals sturdy enough that the cells can be broken by machine with a frame breakage of no more than 1 frame per 1000 even when the frames are gummed up with lots of propolis.
4. Get the sale price down to something around $5 in lots of 10,000. Or perhaps this is still too high a price?
5. Make the frame fully compatible with standard extractors
6. Make the frame study enough to withstand a drop onto concrete from ten feet (maybe five feet is enough?) with no more than a 1% breakage rate.
7. Give a five year warrenty on the frames with free replacements for any that break.
8. Size the frames width wise such that eight fill a standard ten frame box with correct side clearance.
9. Make the hanger ears strong enough they do not break.
10. You probably should use a plastic that is not prone at all to corrosion stress cracking.

Those mechanical criteria and lack of corrosion stress cracking probably dictate the frames be made of nylon.

With these ideas you have a plastic frame with predrawn cells that are designed so the cells are easy to uncap and you just run the frame in a standard extractor. You give up getting any wax as a product. However, your bees also do not have to draw foundation so can produce more honey instead of wasting honey making wax. The honey has higher value than the wax so the commercial guy wins. You will meet the food inspectors ideas of a product that will not introduce disease causing bacteria into the human food chain because of uncleanable parts such as that collection channel at the bottom. If you design the cell size correctly you will find the honey easier to extract from the larger cells and you also will not need to use a queen excluder to keep her out of the frames you harvest. You might even want to get rid of the mechanical stuff that breaks the cappings and simply run the frame thru a punch machine that punches out each cap as a more practical way to uncap. When every frame is identical such a machine would be easy to design.

Of course this negates the whole idea of a back yard bee keeper who wants to make some honey and keep some bees but is afraid to work with his bees which is the whole current basis for flow hive idea. Those people will be gone after the mites, DWV, EFB, etc kill their bees a few times anyway so I see no real loss to mankind. And, now that I have publicly proposed these ideas no one can patent them. But, no patents have issued for flow hives as far as I can tell anyhow. And, even if such a patent did issue it would never stand up in court anyhow as there is obvious prior art.


----------



## jwcarlson

I'd love to hear all the customer service calls about this time next year. Hopefully someone records them so we can all listen to them at some point.



Acebird said:


> Have you ever heard the term "Sour Grapes"?


If we had a dollar for every time you said "sour grapes" in this thread we could probably buy a Flow super. I find it more funny than anything. I don't have anything against these guys for seeing a market, a perceived crisis, and capitalizing in a MAJOR way from it. I mean most people haven't even laid hands on them yet... and they are already ardently defending them as being some sort of saints for giving a "free upgrade" on a $700 beehive.

It's like getting excited that the car dealership throws in a free car wash and oil change when you drive away with a $50,000 pick up. It is telling what kind of people they're marketing to and selling to, however. Like I said... customer service nightmare.

$12,485,752...


----------



## NY Bee Wellness

See the FLOW HIVE, Rochester NY November 21, 1-3pm.

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...e-the-FLOW-HIVE-11-21-Rochester-Beekeepers-NY


----------



## SowthEfrikan

jwcarlson said:


> I'd love to hear all the customer service calls about this time next year. Hopefully someone records them so we can all listen to them at some point.
> 
> 
> and they are already ardently defending them as being some sort of saints for giving a "free upgrade" on a $700 beehive.
> 
> It's like getting excited that the car dealership throws in a free car wash and oil change when you drive away with a $50,000 pick up. It is telling what kind of people they're marketing to and selling to, however. Like I said... customer service nightmare.
> 
> $12,485,752...


The deal was already struck months before, there was absolutely no incentive, nor need, for them to throw in anything for free. Who does that in this day and age? I'm trying to think of when last I heard of anything like this. Nope. Nothing comes to mind. As for sainthood, I'm not sure fundraising for charities is enough, but it's certainly a step in the right direction. As for the kind of people they are marketing to ... ever heard of innovators and early adopters?


----------



## jwcarlson

SowthEfrikan said:


> ever heard of innovators and early adopters?


Early adopters... sure. Certainly will give you that. But history has to show that you were adopting something worthwhile, right? More than willing to let history judge if the $700 Flow Hive is a good thing to adopt. The more correct term would be 'beta tester' if you ask me. And you're paying for the privilege.

Innovators... in the context of a consumer being an innovator. Absolutely not. Is someone buying the new aluminium bodied F-150 an innovator... nope.

History won't be kind to the flow hive.

Re: "free red cedar upgrade!"... it's hogwash and you know it. But it has served the purpose of making you think you're getting something for nothing (or that others are) and has increased your rabid defense of a product you don't even own yet and a company who has done nothing for you other than charge your credit card.

It's fascinating to me, truthfully. And you know what at this time next year you might be MORE happy with your Flow hives than anything else... and if so, that's great. More power to you. Hope you have a good market for really expensive honey. 

Ever heard of Harbingers of Failure?



> We show that some customers, whom we call ‘Harbingers’ of failure, systematically purchase
> new products that flop. Their early adoption of a new product is a strong signal that a
> product will fail - the more they buy, the less likely the product will succeed. Firms can
> identify these customers either through past purchases of new products that failed, or through
> past purchases of existing products that few other customers purchase. We discuss how these
> insights can be readily incorporated into the new product development process. Our findings
> challenge the conventional wisdom that positive customer feedback is always a signal of
> future success.


https://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/mktg/assets/File/Anderson-Eric 2015_02_05_Harbingers.pdf


----------



## jwcarlson

Would further add that the PERCEPTION of being an "innovator" or "early adopter" might be worth far more than the actual reality to the company selling to the harbingers. Marketing.


----------



## Jim Brewster

I see lots of armchair quarterbacking on both sides here revolving around commercial applications, but I've seen nothing, outside of this thread, indicating that the Flow was ever intended to scale up to large commercial operations. Mr. Bush, or someone else with hands-on experience, may be able to tell us if the channels can be cleaned to a level that is acceptable for sideliners to sell the honey. I expect it's not a problem that can't be solved with some trisodium phosphate or similar cleaner.

Gee, the garden hive covers that everyplace sells are also not good for large-scale beeks. They're expensive, and how would you stack them on pallets with those gabled roofs? Seems there are some hobbyists and sideliners who find them worthwhile.


----------



## Stephenpbird

jwcarlson said:


> Early adopters... sure. Certainly will give you that. But history has to show that you were adopting something worthwhile, right? More than willing to let history judge if the $700 Flow Hive is a good thing to adopt. The more correct term would be 'beta tester' if you ask me. And you're paying for the privilege.


Oh its much worse than that...
they even managed to get people to give them money for nothing in return. REALLY. Look I have proof
http://www.honeyflow.com/about-flow/indiegogo-campaign-supporters/p/150 
they call these people supporters, and there are nearly 1000 of them, if I remember correctly they each gave $25 to be called "bee very supportive" or $10 to be called "bee supportive". They got about $20,000 just for calling people names
And they say there is no money in beekeeping.


----------



## jwcarlson

Maybe they'd consider a free upgrade from bee supportive to bee very supportive for innovators and early adopters?


----------



## SowthEfrikan

jwcarlson said:


> Early adopters... sure. Certainly will give you that. But history has to show that you were adopting something worthwhile, right? More than willing to let history judge if the $700 Flow Hive is a good thing to adopt. The more correct term would be 'beta tester' if you ask me. And you're paying for the privilege.
> 
> Innovators... in the context of a consumer being an innovator. Absolutely not. Is someone buying the new aluminium bodied F-150 an innovator... nope.
> 
> History won't be kind to the flow hive.
> 
> Re: "free red cedar upgrade!"... it's hogwash and you know it. But it has served the purpose of making you think you're getting something for nothing (or that others are) and has increased your rabid defense of a product you don't even own yet and a company who has done nothing for you other than charge your credit card.
> 
> It's fascinating to me, truthfully. And you know what at this time next year you might be MORE happy with your Flow hives than anything else... and if so, that's great. More power to you. Hope you have a good market for really expensive honey.
> 
> Ever heard of Harbingers of Failure?
> 
> https://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/mktg/assets/File/Anderson-Eric 2015_02_05_Harbingers.pdf


Awesome post, this illustrates exactly why the Anderson's are successful when other people are not; the failures focus on - failure.


----------



## jwcarlson

SowthEfrikan said:


> Awesome post, this illustrates exactly why the Anderson's are successful when other people are not; the failures focus on - failure.


I don't know what you do for a living, SowthEfrikan. It's just how the real world works. Things come and things go. We think shiny stuff is really cool. Someone makes a buck or twelve million bucks and they fade into the shadows in a year or two. We'll see how history treats the Flow Hive. Next year will be telling. Please do let us know how it goes. The drop out rate for 1st to 2nd year beekeepers is already pretty big... add to that non-standard equipment, ridiculous expectations, childlike ignorance of bees, and a cult like dedication to defense of something you haven't even used yet... the writing is on the wall.

The Anderson's model on this has been going gangbusters in the PC gaming industry for the last 3-5 years. "Early Access", "Early Alpha", or "Closed Beta" testing (where customer typically pays)... You float a video game idea... sell a bunch of copies. Throw your "supporters" a bone by releasing a shell of what you claimed. And then you ride off into the sunset. This is just made out of wood and plastic instead of software, but it's not that different. Some games and development teams are successful, but a huge percentage are not. 

It used to be that companies would prototype and test... now the trend is getting your customers (fans, supporters, etc) to fund your prototyping and testing. You sell it as a chance to be on the cutting edge of whatever you are peddling... games. Bee hives. Electric cars. Cell phones. Computers. Convince them that being cutting edge is more important than more guaranteed or traditional performance. Then they pay you to do your testing. This isn't new to the Flow Hive. But it is smacking the older generations hard as evidenced by them raising 12 million dollars.

Edit to add video game link discussing early access games if anyone is interested:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/11/17/early-access-games-on-steam-usually-dont-see-full-release
That article is a year old already... but you'll get the drift. Actual full release figures are about 25%. The other 75% watch their money float away with, most times, not so much as a thank you. But the defenders of even the GROSSLY failed games still litter the "gaming world". Time is undefeated though... just gotta wait and see.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

jwcarlson said:


> I don't know what you do for a living, SowthEfrikan. It's just how the real world works. Things come and things go. We think shiny stuff is really cool. Someone makes a buck or twelve million bucks and they fade into the shadows in a year or two. We'll see how history treats the Flow Hive. Next year will be telling. Please do let us know how it goes.


This is the real world, JWCarlson, and they made $12M bucks more than you while living in it. Just how life goes. And we will see, won't we?


----------



## SowthEfrikan

Not just gabled roofs, but copper-plated gable roofs.


----------



## jwcarlson

SowthEfrikan said:


> And we will see, won't we?


Sure will. Hopefully you share your Flow Hive experience, warts and all, just like I plan to. I suspect you won't, though. Would love for you to prove me wrong.


----------



## Maddy

SowthEfrikan said:


> This is the real world, JWCarlson, and they made $12M bucks more than you while living in it. Just how life goes. And we will see, won't we?


HEAR HEAR!
I am amazed at how vehement the haters are about the Flow hives, without using them, without even giving them a chance.

The MAIN tipping point that made me browbeat TheOzer into letting me buy one, was Michel Bush stating IN A VIDEO (still viewable on the Flow site), that he considered them "REVOLUTIONARY."
The man is not one to bandy about such a word lightly, nor is he a gullible back-yard beek, easily swayed by pretty words or shiny marketing.
For god's sakes, people, Mr. Bush has posted his actual, working, results within this very thread. And he still is not slamming the invention. He was one of the MANY testers, the world over, who USED the product in the THREE YEARS of testing before the Andersons took it to crowd-funding.

If HE thinks it worthy of CONSIDERATION, who the hell are the rest of you to slam it SO HARD without trying it, or giving it enough time to work or wash out?

Yes, a GREAT MANY people are sold on the romance behind it. I'm one of them. I'm a now OLD hippie, but it's all the old hippies like me, as well as the young un's who are trying to help the bees. Yes, too many investors have no clue at all about the actual work behind successful beekeeping, and expect to unpack a Flow hive, slap that wonderful little box on top, and within a week or two, crank the tap and get gallons and gallons of nice honey. That is NOT the Anderson's fault. 
They very clearly identify the Flow hive as a means to HARVEST honey, nothing more. They also very clearly state that you need to practice good beekeeping habits (including inspections). But the overly-dreamy people don't pay attention to that. Such is human nature.

BUT, give it a chance, people! While many concerns MAY be valid, after TEN YEARS development, and THREE YEARS of in the field testing, it is NOT the wacky, hippie-dippy gadget some of you keep foisting off as factual opining. 

It may or may not be useful for large scale operations - again, time will tell. There ARE professional producers testing the product right now. Unless you are one of them, please stop passing your "opinion from on high," based solely upon what you think or believe. Give the product enough time to be tested by those actually using them, instead of just reading about them.

As for the now tiresome slam regarding the "40 year old patent" (which is actually 75 years old, not 40). That has been disproven on numerous fronts, as being somewhat similar, yet basically entirely different from that idea. Also, you cannot patent any idea. You have to provide a working model of your idea. Otherwise, Al Gore would OWN the Internet... 
And, the Flow hive IS patented, which would not be possible if the prior patent were similar in function...

And, no offense, but if you have NOT fully read all the information regarding the Flow Hive, and have not seen it in action, or tried it yourself, you are just spreading fertilizer around to try to sound knowledgeable.

If Michael Bush thinks them worthy of consideration, that alone should make those of you with NO EXPERIENCE WITH THEM pause before condemning them or piling on with the hate...

I can only imagine what Langstroth must have had to endure with the naysayers of his generation.
Get over yourselves. 

Thank you, rant over...
~M


----------



## jwcarlson

Maddy said:


> HEAR HEAR!
> I am amazed at how vehement the haters are about the Flow hives, without using them, without even giving them a chance.


First off... general public hasn't had a chance.

Second off... are you not reading all the posts? Someone bought me a Flow Hive. Because they're dumb, frankly. Try as I might they could not be convinced that it is entirely useless to me... but they wanted to be an innovator/early adopter. So they shipped like $755 to a foreign country for a cedar (FREE UPGRADE!) bee hive that doesn't even come to your house assembled! And you even get your choice of eight frame deep or eight frame deep!

I never said it was 40 years old patent... I said 40s era.

There is one person on this thread (unless I missed one) that has actually used the hive. The rest of us are just wallowing around dispensing opinions about it. Because our opinion is different than others who also have NO EXPERIENCE WITH THEM it's considering 'piling on'? I'd be curious to know the 'nature' of Mr. Bush's involvement with the Flow Hive folks. 

Equating Langstroth with the Flow Hive guys... 

Otherwise, Maddy, it looks like you could use a trip to the forum rules sticky...
http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?226194-Forum-Rules

Hope everyone has a fantastic rest of the day out there in their own little worlds!


----------



## Eddie Honey

This is in Russian but we finally have a first hand look at harvesting from these frames although he brings it inside to do so.....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfVs0TVmYDI


----------



## Oldtimer

Maddy said:


> I can only imagine what Langstroth must have had to endure with the naysayers of his generation.


And still does from the naysayers of this generation LOL



Maddy said:


> .... it's all the old hippies like me, as well as the young un's who are trying to help the bees.


----------



## Acebird

Richard Cryberg said:


> All states have food inspectors and people who produce human food for sale must comply with the production rules.


Were are the rules for producing honey. I have never heard of such a thing.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

jwcarlson said:


> Someone bought me a Flow Hive. Because they're dumb, frankly.
> 
> I'd be curious to know the 'nature' of Mr. Bush's involvement with the Flow Hive folks.





jwcarlson said:


> I'd be curious to know the 'nature' of Mr. Bush's involvement with the Flow Hive folks.


Calling someone generous enough to give you a gift "dumb"?

The "nature" of MB's involvement with Flow? Ugh. Just ugh. Noone has to answer to you, nor prove anything to you ... who are you, again???

*IF* I have anything to say about Flow - or anything else - I say it, and certainly not at your bidding. 

Excuse me, I have to go paint my nails. It's much more entertaining than wrestling with a pig. Figuratively speaking, of course.


----------



## Barry

Eddie Honey said:


> This is in Russian but we finally have a first hand look at harvesting from these frames although he brings it inside to do so.....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfVs0TVmYDI


Yikes! Perhaps this is a non "_natural habitat_" issue? Once you finally get the frame to separate, aren't you suppose to leave the wrench in and turned until it all drains out?


----------



## VanIslander

Eddie Honey said:


> This is in Russian but we finally have a first hand look at harvesting from these frames although he brings it inside to do so.....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfVs0TVmYDI


If anyone was waiting to see real world evidence of the effectiveness of these frames before buying, this video would probably be a deal breaker. It is painful, watching this guy trying to break those frames to start the emptying process. And the frames are leaking honey into the bottom of the box -- this would result in a robbing frenzy, if he'd done this outside.


----------



## clyderoad

Maddy said:


> HEAR HEAR!
> I am amazed at how vehement the haters are about the Flow hives, without using them, without even giving them a chance.
> 
> The MAIN tipping point..........
> Thank you, rant over...
> ~M


ignorance is bliss. 
enough said.


----------



## rwlaw

I was flustered just watching the video also, mainly knowing the fellow had probably plunked down at least a thousand rubles and having to torque that hard on the handle to get the things to drain? Jeez, I don't care what space rated polymer you use, it's only going to take that force so many times and fail.


----------



## clyderoad

SowthEfrikan said:


> *IF* I have anything to say about Flow - or anything else - I say it, and certainly not at your bidding.
> 
> Excuse me, I have to go paint my nails. It's much more entertaining than wrestling with a pig. Figuratively speaking, of course.


when your done with your nails (figuratively speaking, of course) watch the video Eddie Honey posted showing the flow in action.
be great to hear what you think.


----------



## Dan the bee guy

clyderoad said:


> when your done with your nails (figuratively speaking, of course) watch the video Eddie Honey posted showing the flow in action.
> be great to hear what you think.


Wow just Wow I could of uncapped a 8 frame box and spun it during that video.


----------



## Acebird

Barry said:


> Yikes! Perhaps this is a non "_natural habitat_" issue? Once you finally get the frame to separate, aren't you suppose to leave the wrench in and turned until it all drains out?


Nope! speaking with no experience. Once the cells are skewed the wrench means nothing. I will be seeing the flow frames 11-21-15 thanks to a demonstration in Rochester, NY.

No one can see that he got the four frames flowing as a success... hard crowd to please.


----------



## Barry

Acebird said:


> Nope! speaking with no experience. Once the cells are skewed the wrench means nothing.


How do the cells get "unskewed"? Look at time 1:15 on their homepage video compared to the Russian one.

http://www.honeyflow.com/

A polished sales video may not equate to real life experience.


----------



## jwcarlson

SowthEfrikan said:


> Calling someone generous enough to give you a gift "dumb"?
> 
> The "nature" of MB's involvement with Flow? Ugh. Just ugh. Noone has to answer to you, nor prove anything to you ... who are you, again???
> 
> *IF* I have anything to say about Flow - or anything else - I say it, and certainly not at your bidding.


Geeze. Testy when the cult gets questioned now aren't we? 

Someone paying $755 for an unassembled bee hive without bees is stupid in my opinion... Yes. I told him as much. 

I simply ask that you honestly share your Flow Hive experience and that's your response... you act like I slapped your mom. I am not the one who blew a bunch of money on hives I haven't seen yet. 

I am watching this Russian video. Those things aren't going to hold up if I had to guess :/ it sounds like he is breaking them. 

Also... Does anyone think this is less disruptive to the bees really? Go out and beat on top of your hive with a hammer and jostle it around like he is. 

What a joke. At least there is a window so you can see their faces when they think a bear is attacking each time a frame is wrenched. Speaking for wrenching... This doesn't look like the minor little twist they manufactured for their video. Might be some folks upset with physical labor required.

Also... This dude's pancakes would have been waaaaaaaay cold by the time he got the honey going.


----------



## Jim Brewster

That's not Russian. That's a Roman not Cyrillic alphabet. Without resorting to google-fu I'd guess Czech or Polish, but anyway…

There's a comment a little ways down in English to the effect that one should push the key in a little bit at a time and twist when it's too hard to move the whole frame. I hope that's in the instructions (which are probably not translated to this guy's language yet).


----------



## BeeCurious

Could the Australian gentlemen have stolen the Flow Hive idea from the inventor Nik Ramage?

Some have seen his work before. 
https://youtu.be/5fXN7x7a5So


----------



## jwcarlson

BeeCurious, for $29.95 he wouldn't sell a single one. Start a crowd funding campaign and up the price to $729 and he'd likely be flush with orders. I would even consider being supportive perhaps even being very supportive.


----------



## Acebird

Barry said:


> How do the cells get "unskewed"? ...
> A polished sales video may not equate to real life experience.


A sales video never does equate to real life experience but neither does the fumbling of a first time user equate to real life practice. There is no way of telling why this person is having trouble by what is shown in the video. Right from the very first video that I saw on these frames before any were shipped to the public it was shown that two levers used together was more ergonomic because of the balance of forces. Is this Russian just demonstrating that point? If someone showed you the better way of doing something are you still going to do it the wrong way. Me, I wouldn't even waste my time doing it wrong if I knew a better way. I would do it right from the get go.


----------



## Barry

Acebird said:


> it was shown that two levers used together was more ergonomic because of the balance of forces.


Ah, that makes sense. Do you know for a fact that two levers are shipped with the hive?


----------



## Acebird

I suspect one Barry. But then ... what beekeeper wouldn't tell you to buy two hives and then you have two?


----------



## bucksbees

When we start to ridicule and attack people for “Who are you to question,” then it is time to take a step back and get some fresh air.


----------



## Richard Cryberg

It is easy enough to do a search and find out if the Anderson's flow patent issued in Australia. It did not issue and the application has lapsed. Obviously they got an initial rejection from the patent office which is the normal course of events when you patent anything. They did file three new patent applications in Feb and March of this year. It generally takes from five to ten years after application before a patent issues. So, at this point the Flow Hive clearly is not a patented invention in Australia. I have been involved personally as inventor or to provide data supporting to the inventor or supporting data to the challenger of a patent in probably 50 patents. I have had one of my patents licensed for a fee of $100,000 plus royalties. I have never seen a single case where any patent office anyplace in the world had any interest at all in seeing a model of the invention or seeing the physical invention itself. In the Flow Hive case you patent an idea, not a product. Your claims cover the range the idea can cover. In the US about 2/3 of all patents litigated in court are found invalid. So, even if the patent issues it is generally pretty meaningless until it has been litigated.

I never said anything negative about the Andersons. In fact I give them very high marks for their obvious marketing skills. The job they have done marketing the Flow Hive is super and is probably going to be a Harvard Business School case study. They recognized their potential market from day one and they did everything right to generate maximum publicity and sales. They even very cleverly limited the amount of goods offered during the campaign to induce people to "buy now" because if the limits were real they were not going to get the product unless they rushed their order in. These guys are marketing geniuses without question. They have become instant millionaires. That is what life is about and they deserve credit for pulling it off. They even managed to convince most people the product was patented even thou they never once have made that claim to my knowledge. More power to them.


----------



## Acebird

Richard Cryberg said:


> In the Flow Hive case you patent an idea, not a product.


I never heard of such a thing. You can patent a design, a process or a device not an idea. The closest thing to an idea would be software but I don't think that is considered an idea I think it is a process.


----------



## Barry

Acebird said:


> A sales video never does equate to real life experience but neither does the fumbling of a first time user equate to real life practice.


I will differ with you here. There is no way you can determine what part of the apparent struggle to split the comb was due to user inexperience and what part was normal real world elements playing out, like propolis issues. How many millions were spent on hive orders based only on the sales video? Now we're going to start seeing the operation of these frames in the down and dirty world that we all live in. We'll see how it compares. If two levers are recommended, then two should have been supplied. Why would he only use one if he had received two? 

No worry, I'm not going to base everything on this one video. Many more will be available in time.


----------



## Maddy

Take a breath of fresh air, and understand my question was very to the point. 

First, NO you CAN NOT patent an idea. A simple Web search will repeatedly answer that question...
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/can-you-patent-an-idea

Secondly, as I CLEARLY stated, far too many of the "torch and pitchfork" crowd are not questioning, but _condemning_ the Flow hive, basing their outright negative and hateful condemnation on nothing more than a marketing video, DESPITE the extensive testing, world-wide, by beekeepers and bee experts, including Michael Bush's VERY CLEAR and honest comments WITHIN THIS THREAD. 

These same hyper-critical people plug their ears (figuratively), and go "Lalalala" to ignore these facts, as they SO definitively predict all manner of FALSE outcomes, dismissing the ACTUAL experiences presented by people like Mr. Bush and others.
And _I_ am the one being castigated for calling them out? Okay...

The FACTS still remain.
Flow hives are NOT the same as that 75 year old patent. The Flow Hive HAS been patented, IDEAS can NOT be patented.
Flow hives were developed over 10 years, and were TESTED by people the WORLD OVER, from small scale beekeepers to well-respected experts in the field, educators and beekeepers alike.
Michael Bush himself PUBLICLY stated that he considered the concept "REVOLUTIONARY" in the HARVESTING of honey from bees.

While the skill level of the people buying them is, no doubt, not going to be of such high caliber as most of the people who tested them, it is BEYOND pompous for the people here who are SO adamant that the Flow Hive is a scam or a toss-off gadget, WITHOUT ever having used one, and BEFORE they have been tested in a large-scale operation.

While differing opinions are always to be expected, the gravitas being given to these ignorant opinions, when the facts and the research ARE out there, and have YEARS of data to back them up, shows that I may not be the only ones who need to step back...

~M


----------



## rwurster

My favorite part of the thread has been the supporters of the flow frames calling people who question its viability or usefulness out and vice versa. Plenty of good points have been made on both sides but relatively no one has hands on experience with them for a full season here. I too question Michael's involvement with the flow hive people as I see him as their unofficial spokesperson here in the states. The comparison of the flow hive to Langstroth made me bust a gut. Now THAT was funny. :lpf: opcorn:


----------



## Maddy

rwurster said:


> The comparison of the flow hive to Langstroth made me bust a gut. Now THAT was funny. :lpf: opcorn:


Why so?
The Flow Hives purchased through the funding campaign are 8 frame deeps, stacked two high, with a Flow Extraction unit being the top box.

Being as they take standard Lang frames, and there are even instructions on how to convert Lang Boxes to take the Flow Extractions units, what, pray tell, is so hilarious about it???

~M


----------



## Stephenpbird

In the "Russian" video the flow frame super has been taken off the hive, I think that could have been the first mistake. We all know from experience how much the cold affects propolis, wax and honey. He just made things a lot harder for himself. 
And is that not the whole point of the flow hive, leave it in place so you don't disturb the bees, no heavy lifting harvesting supers etc

The video does reflect the real world, but that does not mean its representative of what should be done in the real world. 

I once bought a kite, of course I thought I could assemble it easily after all it was only a kite. I failed and found the instruction booklet, the first sentence was " Now that you have tried it your way, try ours".


----------



## Eddie Honey

...but there is an instructional video showing that the Flow frames can be harvested inside http://www.honeyflow.com/gallery-videos/videos/p/60#ryWC92NT2Eo


----------



## Stephenpbird

Eddie Honey said:


> ...but there is an instructional video showing that the Flow frames can be harvested inside http://www.honeyflow.com/gallery-videos/videos/p/60#ryWC92NT2Eo


And he clearly states that they are just doing that for the demonstration.


----------



## Maddy

rwurster said:


> ... I too question Michael's involvement with the flow hive people as I see him as their unofficial spokesperson here in the states.


You give Mr. Bush FAR too much credit as an "unofficial spokesperson here in the states." He is merely the most well-known figure in these parts. 
What about some of the "unoffical" spokespersons from the rest of the world?
* John Gates, Canadian Apicultural Specialist, 26 years - British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture, Canada
* Dani Lloyd-Pritchard, Bee researcher, University of Newcastle, Australia
* Michael Howes, Commercial Beekeeper - Tyagarah Apiaries, Australia
And others, most of whom have no "official" footprint in beekeeping, many just being beekeepers of various sizes of operation...

While Mr. Bush is the most renown American tester, he by no means was the only person of experience and education publicly stating positive support for the Flow Hive. 
What exactly are you questioning? His experiences, or his validity of opinion regarding Flow hives???

And again, without actual hands on experience, what gives the "keyboard warrior" critics SUCH gravitas for their prophesies of doom and ruin? Other than they THINK it will not work, therefore, it must be garbage...

These were field tested for THREE YEARS. What is so "questionable" about the testimonials???
~M


----------



## BeeCurious

Barry said:


> Now we're going to start seeing the operation of these frames in the *down and dirty world that we all live in*.


I'll be watching from the hard streets of Greenwich CT...


Given the cost, inconvenience, and probable service life I'd like someone to conjure up a breakeven point for a sideliner's investment in Flow Hives...

The calculations might require some: Eye of newt and toe of frog, Wool of bat and tongue of dog...


----------



## Acebird

Barry said:


> If two levers are recommended, then two should have been supplied.


Barry this is true story: My father-in-law is legally blind but has some vision. So we bought a magnifying device that requires two power cubes. One to power the device and one to recharge the mouse that is used with the device. You guessed it only one power cube is provided. You are expected to unplug it from one port and plug it into the other port to charge it. He is blind. he can't see well enough to plug it in. Why do they supply only one because you can buy another for 15 bucks, that's why. The device comes from the association for the blind. They know the user can't see well enough to switch the plugs. I think if the association for the blind can rip off blind people for another 15 bucks the Aussies aught to be able to rip off a yuppy in the US for another tool if they have no intention of buying another hive. Of course I don't think like most people.

The tool is a piece of round stock flattened on one end and bent at 90 degrees. You couldn't make one?


----------



## rwurster

rwurster said:


> My favorite part of the thread has been the supporters of the flow frames calling people who question its viability or usefulness out and vice versa





Maddy said:


> And again, without actual hands on experience, what gives the "keyboard warrior" critics SUCH gravitas for their prophesies of doom and ruin? Other than they THINK it will not work, therefore, it must be garbage...


opcorn:


----------



## Barry

Stephenpbird said:


> In the "Russian" video the flow frame super has been taken off the hive, I think that could have been the first mistake. We all know from experience how much the cold affects propolis, wax and honey. He just made things a lot harder for himself.


Of course you're assuming they sat around and got cold after he brought them in. We don't know that. Maybe it's raining the day one needs to "extract" and they need to bring them in, or maybe it got cold outside and the bees moved down to cluster so the honey had gotten cool and they brought them in to warm up! 



Stephenpbird said:


> And he clearly states that they are just doing that for the demonstration.


I believe the "Russian" video, the frames were brought in for demonstration purpose as well. Big difference between the two experiences.


----------



## Barry

Acebird said:


> You couldn't make one?


I'm expected to make one after spending $700+?


----------



## Acebird

BeeCurious said:


> Given the cost, inconvenience, and probable service life I'd like someone to conjure up a breakeven point for a sideliner's investment in Flow Hives...


You'd like that wouldn't you?

First the bugs will have to be worked out using inexperienced beekeepers who most likely don't know anything about beekeeping let alone using a mechanical device. Then the frames will have to be redesigned with a new set of goals in mind not people who are trying to save the bees but people who are trying to make money. If you are going to run a taxi business are you going to use a chevy or a farrari?
I think harvesting individual frames through tubes will go by the wayside and the concept of harvesting by the box will be more accustom to what beekeepers are doing now. What ever it is it won't be what you are seeing now but I am certain you will see something in the future that beekeepers can make money with.


----------



## Acebird

Barry said:


> I'm expected to make one after spending $700+?


No, you are expected to buy another hive and if one hive is all you want then you are expected to buy another tool. You buy a 60,000 dollar vehicle ... do you change the oil? Your choice.


----------



## Stephenpbird

BeeCurious said:


> I'll be watching from the hard streets of Greenwich CT...


Me too, but maybe a street a bit more local.




BeeCurious said:


> Given the cost, inconvenience, and probable service life I'd like someone to conjure up a breakeven point for a sideliner's investment in Flow Hives...


Now this I like, the numbers game... but first lets look at the ingredients in the recipe for your witches brew. What we need is...

1 Eye of newt, that's an entrepreneur with an eye on the future and prepared to take a gamble.

2 Toe of frog, said entrepreneur in USA or Canada who might be prepared to dip his toes into beekeeping by agreeing a manufacturing and marketing agreement with the Andersons to supply America and Canada.

3 Wool of bat. Sorry but I can't get past the image of a bat with wool, so being a Hobby cook I reserve the right to substitute ingredients. In this case change the material of the manufactured frames probably to a metal like stainless steel (but we have to keep that quiet because the hippies with the patent will never go for it).

4 Tongue of dog... that's a silver tongued salesman (armed with charts etc showing break even points for a sideliner's investment in Flow Hives). You know the type of salesman, the ones that can sell sand in the Sahara.

So now you would have the right ingredients to support selling Frames to sideliners. Low cost, suitable product, local support and a motivated sales team. 


Then who knows you might, just might, be able to create your own niche market. Or is it back to the streets of Greenwich CT


----------



## Acebird

Stephenpbird said:


> In this case change the material of the manufactured frames probably to a metal like stainless steel


glass filled nylon might be as tough as stainless but not crush the bottom box from weight. It could very well be that the selected material is adequate and doesn't need changing.


----------



## Stephenpbird

Acebird said:


> glass filled nylon might be as tough as stainless but not crush the bottom box from weight. It could very well be that the selected material is adequate and doesn't need changing.


Yes but there seems to be a lot of resistance to Plastic from the sideliners/professionals and don't forget changing the material would create a new product, the "Professional flow frame" and appeal to a lot of beekeepers who want to be seen as professional beekeepers.:lpf:


----------



## Oldtimer

I think a stainless one would be phenomenally expensive.


----------



## Stephenpbird

but cheaper than the present plastic one:lookout:


----------



## Acebird

Stephenpbird said:


> appeal to a lot of beekeepers who want to be seen as professional beekeepers.:lpf:


No Stephen the professional beekeepers already are professional they don't need that appeal. What they need is something that makes money. I don't think you will see that in parts that are made out of stainless. Completely unnecessary. In no way will stainless be cheaper than plastic. Plastic in a hive that makes money is not a new thing.


----------



## Richard Cryberg

Maddy said:


> First, NO you CAN NOT patent an idea. A simple Web search will repeatedly answer that question...
> https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/can-you-patent-an-idea
> 
> The FACTS still remain. The Flow Hive HAS been patented, IDEAS can NOT be patented.
> 
> 
> ~M


Finding some site on the web with some claim does not impress me a bit. Most ideas can not be patented because they fail one or more of several critical factors required in every patent. The first requirement is the idea must be novel and not obvious to one skilled in the particular art covered by the patent. That gets rid of 99.99% of ideas right there. Let me give you an understandable idea that was patented, litigated and found valid. The idea was to provide some mechanism that allowed the windshield wipers on a car to pulse on for one or two swipes then turn off for some period then turn on for one or two swipes, etc. This idea was granted a US patent. The claims granted were broad enough it did not matter how the automatic on to off function was performed. Nor did it mater if the power driving the wipers came from manifold vacuum or an electric motor or a crank turned by the passenger riding shotgun. Every auto company paid lots and lots of money in royalties to the patent holder for many years. Those auto companies, lead by Ford, litigated this patent for years trying to get the patent declared invalid. They failed. The patent was held valid.

You state it is a fact that the flow hive is patented. Please provide a patent number and country of issue. You might even be right. Some countries simply grant every patent application without any prior art examination nor judgement as to novelty and leave it up to the court system to decide if the patent is valid if someone wishes to litigate the patent. Australia is not such a country. Actually, it is irrelevant if a patent has been granted. The Andersons are very smart fellows and know darned well that legal defense of their patent would cost them more money than they are going to be willing to spend. Still, the patents do have some nuisance value even if you do not intend to defend them and I would expect them to submit applications from time to time. Even the applications, until abandoned, have nuisance value as who knows what an examiner might allow that could in the future lead to legal issues. It does beat me why they bothered to apply for a patent on decapping with a hot wire thou. That seems awfully obvious.


----------



## Acebird

Richard Cryberg said:


> It does beat me why they bothered to apply for a patent on decapping with a hot wire thou. That seems awfully obvious.


Everything is obvious once you see it. The funny thing is it takes several tries to find the obvious until you do it.

You are still messed up on the idea thing. The wiper interval thing is not an idea, it is a process. If it didn't work it isn't a valid patent. It has to work and it has to be marketable. You can't just get a patent and sit on it. You have to produce the item. If you have no intention of producing the item the patent is worthless, granted or not. Come up with all the ideas you want and you still have nothing.


----------



## BeeCurious

Acebird said:


> Everything is obvious once you see it. The funny thing is it takes several tries to find the obvious until you do it.
> 
> It has to work and it has to be marketable. You can't just get a patent and sit on it. You have to produce the item.


Really? It has to be marketable? 

Have you seen many of these? 

Separating parasites from bees 
US 6702645 B2









http://www.google.com/patents/US6702645


----------



## Acebird

If you can't sell a device you have no grounds for loss if someone copies it. A patent give you the authority to make and sell a device. If you don't do that you essentially have paper suited for an out house.


----------



## BeeBop

SowthEfrikan said:


> This is the real world, JWCarlson, and they made $12M bucks more than you while living in it. Just how life goes. ?


Of course one could make similar claims for Victor Lustig, Charles Ponzi, Bernard Madoff, ...

Just how life goes.


----------



## Stephenpbird

Acebird said:


> No Stephen the professional beekeepers already are professional they don't need that appeal.


Oh ace, I said "and appeal to a lot of beekeepers who want to be seen as professional beekeepers." Totally different, these beekeepers might have only one hive.



Acebird said:


> In no way will stainless be cheaper than plastic.


To manufacture sure, but they sell the plastic ones for $85 each or so. You would of thought they could gold plate them and still make a profit.


----------



## Acebird

Stephenpbird said:


> To manufacture sure, but they sell the plastic ones for $85 each or so. You would of thought they could gold plate them and still make a profit.


When there is competition price is much closer to cost. When there is no competition the only limit is what the consumer will pay. The fact that these frames are so expensive means they will be coming down in price.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Aren't the flow frame cells also too deep for the queen to lay in?

Yes.

>1. Get rid of that channel at the bottom and replace it with more cells.

I don't see how you would capture the honey if you do that.

>2. Make the cells so big queens will not lay in them. Perhaps a 5.5 or 5.8 mm cell might do the trick? Maybe bigger than 6 mm?

They did that.

>3. Make the cell breaking mechanicals sturdy enough that the cells can be broken by machine with a frame breakage of no more than 1 frame per 1000 even when the frames are gummed up with lots of propolis.

Well I haven't seen 1000 of them harvested yet, but I've seen several and I've seen a lot of force applied and never seen any of the plastic crack or break.

>4. Get the sale price down to something around $5 in lots of 10,000. Or perhaps this is still too high a price?

I doubt it could ever come below that because of the price of the plastic.

>5. Make the frame fully compatible with standard extractors

I don't get it. The whole point is to not have to remove the supers in the first place, let along extract them...

>6. Make the frame study enough to withstand a drop onto concrete from ten feet (maybe five feet is enough?) with no more than a 1% breakage rate.

I think it probably would. I haven't tried it, but it's pretty solid stuff.

>7. Give a five year warrenty on the frames with free replacements for any that break.

That would be interesting, but part of the problem with a world wide distribution is what shipping costs and people are so ingenious when it comes to breaking things.

>8. Size the frames width wise such that eight fill a standard ten frame box with correct side clearance.

But then the cells wouldn't be deep enough to deter the queen and save you buying another frame...

>9. Make the hanger ears strong enough they do not break.

I haven't seen one break yet. I don't know what circumstances would cause that. Age, perhaps.

>10. You probably should use a plastic that is not prone at all to corrosion stress cracking.

I'm pretty sure they did.


----------



## Michael Bush

Watching the Russian video is kind of painful. It's easy to open them a few at a time. Just insert the tool a little ways and turn it. Then a little more and turn it. Divide and conquer. Apparently the Flow hive people need to explain it better in the instructions.


----------



## Kofu

Michael Bush said:


> Watching the Russian video is kind of painful. It's easy to open them a few at a time.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfVs0TVmYDI

Actually, Andrzej Tenus is in Poland, and he had his Polish viewers in mind when he made the video, as he explains in the comments on the Youtube page.

But how did the honey get out of the channels and onto the woodenware below the tubes? Maybe he says something about it (in Polish) I don't know. It looks like another possible failure to add to the list of what may happen to the folks who get the Flow™ frames. I watch the video and try to imagine it happening out in the yard.

With experience, good instructions, and in the hands of people already familiar with beekeeping, most of these failures can be avoided, but the underlying problem is that the Flow™ Hive was pitched to novices around the world.


----------



## AHudd

Richard Cryberg, > I remember this, but I thought the car companies used the pulse wipers without paying royalties and the case was finally settled in favor of the inventor.

Alex


----------



## deknow

I wonder if anyone had listed the possible failures inherent with a package of bees, and used that information to update the manual that the product comes with.


----------



## Acebird

What problems do you think they would have?


----------



## Oldtimer

The manual for packages would include - 

Slow release queen and put cage where the cluster will go, not on the hive floor.
Treat for mites as needed through the life of the hive.
Until a decent nectar flow starts feed 'em plenty but don't drown 'em in the feeder.
Don't let them all get trapped under a mesh bottom board during introduction.
If you are not an experienced beek, don't mess with them inside of the first week other than to replenish feed.

Those simple rules and maybe a couple I didn't think of would likely make the bad rap packages get a thing of the past.


----------



## jwcarlson

Acebird said:


> No, you are expected to buy another hive and if one hive is all you want then you are expected to buy another tool. You buy a 60,000 dollar vehicle ... do you change the oil? Your choice.


Totally off base analogy. An apt one would be buying a $60,000 car and finding out it doesn't have power steering. 



Acebird said:


> glass filled nylon might be as tough as stainless but not crush the bottom box from weight. It could very well be that the selected material is adequate and doesn't need changing.


Wood can withstand something like 600 PSI, Ace. I am not a mechanical engineer myself. Since I can't plug the box in, could you tell me just how much stainless it would take to "crush the bottom box from weight"? 



BeeBop said:


> Of course one could make similar claims for Victor Lustig, Charles Ponzi, Bernard Madoff,


Nah, all the Flow Hive guys are as pure as the wind driven snow. Just awaiting canonization. The cult like following is extremely interesting to me. Ace is just defending it because he likes being contrarian, but some of the others... Wow. Makes me wonder what other impulse buys they made and then defending to the death on Amazon and other review sites. 
Toxin removing foot pads? One of those belts that shakes your rear end and supposedly makes the fat jiggle right off? A thousand pack of lint lizards? Can't wait to see how many of them are back to tell us how it went about 12 months from now.


----------



## Oldtimer

Come on admit it JWC, you will enjoy turning the tap on "your" flowhive once the time comes. 

Put it on youtube. - JWC Shows Polish Guy How To Work Flowhive.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

AHudd said:


> Richard Cryberg, > I remember this, but I thought the car companies used the pulse wipers without paying royalties and the case was finally settled in favor of the inventor.


Ford and Chrysler paid more than $40 million to the Robert Kearns for infringing on the intermittent wiper.

Similar suits are pending for Chrysler's infringement on the intermittent engine and intermittent brakes.<badum bum>


----------



## jwcarlson

Oldtimer said:


> Come on admit it JWC, you will enjoy turning the tap on "your" flowhive once the time comes.
> 
> Put it on youtube. - JWC Shows Polish Guy How To Work Flowhive.


Thank you for putting the "your" in quotes. The only investment I'll be making is 1x12s to make a couple of 8-frame deep boxes so the hive can have a proper broodnest instead of the single swarm factory that it ships with.

I do want to know what Ace thinks about how much SS it would take to "crush the bottom box from weight" though. He must not have ever ran into cribbing or anything during his work as an engineer. Never plopped down a 120,000 pound AC motor down onto wood cribbing, Ace? Or did you use use tennis balls or something?


----------



## D Coates

jwcarlson said:


> I do want to know what Ace thinks about ...


Wholly shnikeys... hasn't over 12K in his posts in 4 years all while having fewer than 5 hives shown his "thinking" already? You're a very brave man. Personally, so thankful for the block feature on Beesource. 

I look forward to the day people start using these here so we can see them ourselves and read respective reviews. I'll not even going to try one until they get to about 1/2 the cost of what they currently are.


----------



## crofter

D Coates said:


> Wholly shnikeys... hasn't over 12K in his posts in 4 years all while having fewer than 5 hives shown his "thinking" already? You're a very brave man. Personally, so thankful for the block feature on Beesource.
> 
> I look forward to the day people start using these here so we can see them ourselves and read respective reviews. I'll not even going to try one until they get to about 1/2 the cost of what they currently are.


You mean you are going to wait and see before you make any endorsement? I think down to about 25% before I think of nibbling!


----------



## D Coates

crofter said:


> You mean you are going to wait and see before you make any endorsement? I think down to about 25% before I think of nibbling!


The reviews are going to have to be mostly positive before I'd consider trying one. The lower the reviews the lower the price is going to have to go before I'd dip my toe in the water. Endorsing is a whole different kettle of fish.


----------



## Oldtimer

There will be some value in reviews as attention can be drawn to various issues such as the propolis thing.

However the device has been shown to work, the Polish guy obviously had bees store honey in it, and Michael Bush has harvested from it. I think any experienced beekeeper in an area with a reasonable honey flow will be able to make a flowhive "work". The negative reviews will come from inexperienced beekeepers, like that person who left the box on then complained later there were only 100 bees in it plus it had been propolised. I think she would have got exactly the same result had she put a standard super with undrawn plastic foundation on the hive, it was more about inappropriate timing and poor assessment of what stage the bees were at etc than an issue with the flowhive.

What could be more telling will be in a few years time when we start hearing of the product ending it's working life and breaking down. Once the average working life is known then the true economy of it can be calculated.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

Oldtimer said:


> . . . What could be more telling will be in a few years time when we start hearing of the product ending it's working life and breaking down. Once the average working life is known then the true economy of it can be calculated.


I'm sorry, but we don't want any rational thinking or logical conclusions in this thread. We only want knee-jerk reactions and emotional outbursts. Thank you for your cooperation.


----------



## Oldtimer

LOL


----------



## hypsin

Acebird said:


> There is no way of telling why this person is having trouble by what is shown in the video.


Wrench, he is "... holding it the wrong way®"


----------



## Kidbeeyoz

So who is writing the book "Flow-hive for Dummies"?


----------



## jwcarlson

Anyone unboxing their flatpacks and getting their Flow Hive (tm) ready for Christmas this week?


----------



## JRG13

The wife ordered me one, but knowing that I now have 3X daddy strength and my past experiences with plastic stuff, I will attempt to crank the frame to activate the flow and all the frames will simultaneously shatter somehow... which is my typical luck with all things plastic....


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

jwcarlson said:


> Anyone unboxing their flatpacks and getting their Flow Hive (tm) ready for Christmas this week?


My box has been sitting on my hearth for nearly 2 weeks now, just waiting for me to have some free time. Yes, I think I can get this built and tunged during the Christmas break. But my flow frames (tm) haven't arrived yet.


----------



## jwcarlson

IAmTheWaterbug said:


> My box has been sitting on my hearth for nearly 2 weeks now, just waiting for me to have some free time. Yes, I think I can get this built and tunged during the Christmas break. But my flow frames (tm) haven't arrived yet.


Well that's a bummer (tm). 

Is it a Flow (tm) box? Did you get the free upgrade (tm) to western red cedar?

The landowner who bought one "for me" $till cannot be convinced to cancel hi$ order. I think it'$ $upposed to arrive in February and I'll help him get it all put together. Going to make him $ome 8-frame deep brood boxe$ becau$e I refu$e to i$$ue a bunch of Flow $warm$ (tm) by $lapping a queen excluder on top of an 8-frame brood ne$t and expecting them to u$e $ix fully pla$tic Flow frame$ (tm).


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

jwcarlson said:


> Well that's a bummer (tm).
> 
> Is it a Flow (tm) box? Did you get the free upgrade (tm) to western red cedar?


Yes, and yes!


----------



## Michael Bush

After my experiences with Honey Super Cell, PermaComb and wax dipped PermaComb, My expectations for Flow frames was that there would be acceptance problems. Oddly enough there seem to be less problems and the cause seems to be those very cracks in every cell that need to be "repaired". The bees jump right on filling all of those cracks and at that point they are seeing it as comb. I saw a two week delay with the fully drawn comb with no wax (HSC and PC) and I saw no delay with the Flow frames.


----------



## Ross

Maddy said:


> The FACTS still remain.
> Flow hives are NOT the same as that 75 year old patent. The Flow Hive HAS been patented, IDEAS can NOT be patented.


To be very clear, Flow Hive HAS NOT been granted a US patent. It has a patent application filed. A prior art claim has been filed against that application based on the 1940 patent. Here is the record just pulled from the US Patent Office database. There is no patent number, issue date, or international registration. This is the only application the Andersons have on file and no patents have been issued with them as inventor. If someone has a patent number and issue date, please post it and the authoritative reference to back it up. Again, this is the record from the US Patent Office.

Bibliographic Data 


Application Number: 14/362,446 
Correspondence Address 
Customer Number: 77093 
Filing or 371 (c) Date: 06-03-2014 
Status: Docketed New Case - Ready for Examination 
Application Type: Utility 
Status Date: 09-30-2014 
Examiner Name: TSANG, LISA L 
Location: What is a Location? ELECTRONIC 
Group Art Unit: 3643 
Location Date: - 
Confirmation Number: 3861 
Earliest Publication No: US 2014-0370781 A1 
Attorney Docket Number: 003107 P0002 
Earliest Publication Date: 12-18-2014 
Class / Subclass: 449/005 
Patent Number: - 
First Named Inventor: Cedar Anderson , Broken Head, (AU) all Inventors 
Issue Date of Patent: - 
First Named Applicant: FlowBee Australia Pty Ltd , The Channon NSW, (AU) all Applicants 
International Registration Number (Hague): - 
Entity Status: Small 
International Registration Publication Date: - 
AIA (First Inventor to File): No


----------



## NDnewbeek

For consideration:

https://www.milkwood.net/2015/02/26/going-flow-flow-hive-actually-good-idea/

http://www.honeycolony.com/article/3-reasons-to-go-against-the-flow-hive/

My favorite pull quote from the second article, "the device reduces nature’s miracle into a beer keg."


----------



## jwcarlson

I just got a text from the person who insisted on buying a $700, 8-frame double deep (Flow(tm)) hive. The eagle has landed... I am surprised all of the ardent defenders haven't posted a bunch of pics of their Flow(tm) Fleets!


----------



## Oldtimer

I too am surprised at the paucity of success stories as I have been awaiting, but, nothing.

Maybe next year?


----------



## jwcarlson

Maybe the excitement has fizzled now that they have to do something other than over pay for hives?


----------



## clong

I've received two Flow Hive supers. I certainly don't have any success stories with them yet. In fact, I lost my two hives last year to Varroa mites. However, I consider my experience with the Flow Hive a success, since they helped inspire me to take the leap into beekeeping in the first place.

I have two nucs on order, and intend to put out 5 or 6 Bait Hives in the next couple of weeks. I am praying that I will be able to report on a harvest from the Flow Frames in June. I'm still excited and optimistic, but keeping bees has been humbling.


----------



## COAL REAPER

i saw one on CL last week but the post is no longer there


----------



## aunt betty

Oldtimer said:


> I too am surprised at the paucity of success stories as I have been awaiting, but, nothing.
> 
> Maybe next year?


The big success "stories" will be sponsored content in one of the big bee publications later this spring.


----------



## Oldtimer

Clong, long as you learn from your experience it will be worth it. Research and understand varroa, and deal with them next season if there is a need. That way you may be back here with a nice flowhive success story.


----------



## Oldtimer

aunt betty said:


> The big success "stories" will be sponsored content in one of the big bee publications later this spring.


Will be interesting, but it does seem odd that there is nobody here (that I know of) other than Michael Bush with a nice story of a flowhive harvest. 

There's just about every variant of beekeeping here that one could imagine, but flowhive, almost nothing.


----------



## jim lyon

Northern hemisphere folks didnt start getting them until mid summer of 15 so there wasnt much opportunity, however, seems like there should be quite a number of reports by now from "down unda". I am curious if everyone who ordered them has received them.


----------



## vaughnm

I ordered 7 frames (no super) and received them in December, which was about a month later than they originally had said they would be delivered. In my neck of the woods, I won't be putting them on a hive until July or so, as that's when I hope to get a good star thistle nectar flow, which was my plan all along.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

I received my frames a few weeks ago, but I haven't even had a chance to assemble my box. Doesn't matter, though, because we're still a ways off from any nectar flow in my area, and then the first box they fill will be theirs anyway.


----------



## Acebird

Oldtimer said:


> There's just about every variant of beekeeping here that one could imagine, but flowhive, almost nothing.


Has anybody had them in this country long enough to have put bees in them? And my second question is did Barry lift the ban on starting new flow hive threads?


----------



## JRG13

Still waiting on my frames, got the box in December.


----------



## Ravenseye

Acebird said:


> And my second question is did Barry lift the ban on starting new flow hive threads?


No. Why? PM the answer please.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Has anybody had them in this country long enough to have put bees in them? 

I've had bees in them for two seasons now.


----------



## jwcarlson

I have two pictures. One if of $700 worth of bee equipment. The other picture is about $350 worth. 

Can you pick each one out?


----------



## BeeBop

It's very cute with it's peaked roof and little "Flow™" logo.
Your $300 pile isn't nearly as cute.


----------



## Beethinking

There are a lot of videos out there of Flow customers and their new hives/frames. Obviously only those in the southern hemisphere, aside from Michael Bush and a few others who got them to test in 2014, have actually been able to get bees into them and harvest. Since most of their customers are in North America, and this forum is largely North American beekeepers, you'll probably see a lot more reports once the season starts this year. 

Here's one video showing both the hive and frames, as well as harvesting:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOxOsoij0fg


----------



## Ross

I wonder how long it will be before someone figures out how to 3D print the frames. For that matter, why hasn't someone released a design for 3D printing fully drawn comb frames.


----------



## D Coates

BeeBop said:


> It's very cute with it's peaked roof and little "Flow™" logo.
> Your $300 pile isn't nearly as cute.


I'll agree it's cute. However, I'll take the $300 pile all day long. I can make money with that.


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> >Has anybody had them in this country long enough to have put bees in them?
> 
> I've had bees in them for two seasons now.


Yes I know Mike. Apparently the hecklers don't believe you when you say the flow hive works and they are waiting for some mass eruption of unsatisfied customers to come and report their dissatisfaction. They haven't had a chance to fail yet.


----------



## rwurster

Where's your flow frames ace? They are the best thing any "non-interventionist" could hope for. I'm sure your unadulterated and invaluable input on their performance will be cherished by all


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

Michael Bush said:


> >Has anybody had them in this country long enough to have put bees in them?
> 
> I've had bees in them for two seasons now.


Have you had your second year's harvest from them yet? If not, when do expect to?

My antennae are quivering in anticipation.


----------



## Acebird

rwurster said:


> Where's your flow frames ace? They are the best thing any "non-interventionist" could hope for.


This is true. But I never buy into new technology because I know they have made some mistakes in design. Five or ten years down the road they will have worked the bugs out and the price will be way down. What is stellar is the concept. Frames that can be harvested without the use of another machine and reused again and again. It could be as revolutionizing as the Lang hive itself.


----------



## aunt betty

To do a proper cost analysis I need information on how long before the plastic gets brittle and breaks thus rendering the device worthless.
What is the expected life on a flow-frame?


----------



## sweetas

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I believe it is an interesting concept and hope it works.

Because of the great interest my apiarist Society has purchased two supers. Should arrive next week. Yes, there are a lot of negative comments but I decided that without the hives, we ( WA Apiarist Society) are not qualified to make much comment. A person in Perth has purchased 100 Flow Hives. I do know the purchaser.


Stuart Anderson ( co-inventor) will do a presentation at our monthy meeting on 6 April.


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BsQxqpsmbU

Found one!


----------



## sweetas

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Interesting. I do honey comb in plastic cells and at times use plastic foundation. I give them a coating of wax otherwise not a lot of action.

With the Flow Hive I would suggest putting a coating of wax across the top at least.

When WAAS gets their flow hives I will try several things.

Also suggest you send Flow Hive and email and ask.

Geoff


----------



## Acebird

aunt betty said:


> To do a proper cost analysis I need information on how long before the plastic gets brittle and breaks thus rendering the device worthless.


The plastic will last in the ocean a thousand years. You are going to do a cost analysis but you have no idea how long the plastic will last? I will trust that one.


----------



## CoryM465

Acebird said:


> The plastic will last in the ocean a thousand years. You are going to do a cost analysis but you have no idea how long the plastic will last? I will trust that one.


In the ocean plastic is protected from UV rays, O2, and fatigue.


----------



## Acebird

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Eddie Honey said:


> Found one!


Obviously the lumix doesn't know enough to ask Michael what HE is doing wrong.


----------



## Acebird

CoryM465 said:


> In the ocean plastic is protected from UV rays, O2, and fatigue.


There is no UV in a beehive, There is O2 in the ocean, and Aunt betty was concerned about brittleness which is not brought on by fatigue if aunt betty has any idea what fatigue is.


----------



## sweetas

Wont it be great that the comb will last a beekeepers lifetime. No more putting in new foundation or scraping old plastic foundation.


----------



## Eddie Honey

Wouldn't that make for some dark nasty wax over time?


----------



## dynemd

sweetas said:


> Wont it be great that the comb will last a beekeepers lifetime. No more putting in new foundation or scraping old plastic foundation.


Wouldn't it be nice... Let the field trials begin!


----------



## sweetas

You can't have every thing


----------



## jwcarlson

sweetas said:


> You can't have every thing


But you could have had a "free" western red cedar upgrade if you were timely with your purchase.


----------



## Oldtimer

The guy in that video mixed plastic with natural wax. Never a good idea unless there is a hard core flow on, which by the looks of his hive, there wasn't.


----------



## Acebird

Eddie Honey said:


> Wouldn't that make for some dark nasty wax over time?


The cappings and repairs would be new wax. How would it get dark?


----------



## AHudd

jwcarlson said:


> But you could have had a "free" western red cedar upgrade if you were timely with your purchase.


"Donation" 

Alex


----------



## Eddie Honey

Acebird said:


> The cappings and repairs would be new wax. How would it get dark?


Only part of the sidewall is pre-made, the bees have to draw out the rest, or so I've been told. That's a good question though; do the bees strip off ALL the old wax after each harvest and replace it with fresh? If so, what do they do with all that old wax?


----------



## jim lyon

Eddie Honey said:


> Only part of the sidewall is pre-made, the bees have to draw out the rest, or so I've been told. That's a good question though; do the bees strip off ALL the old wax after each harvest and replace it with fresh? If so, what do they do with all that old wax?


The wax caps will mostly get hauled out of the hive like so much debris. It's one of the oddities of " bee-havior" and one of the negatives of the flow hive concept...no wax crop.


----------



## Acebird

Jim if you wanted a wax crop couldn't you just load the hive with plastic drone foundation and strip it when you cull the drones?


----------



## Eddie Honey

Acebird said:


> Jim if you wanted a wax crop couldn't you just load the hive with plastic drone foundation and strip it when you cull the drones?


NO! That is extra work and would be a "disturbance to the bees!" lol


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Or you could use a conventional super (no flow hive) and harvest _both_ wax and honey! 



... course, there would be _some_ work involved in that ...


----------



## jim lyon

It's not a matter of wanting a wax crop it's a matter of not getting the wax crop you would have gotten by using regular comb. In addition raising a frame of drone comb has a "cost" both in reduced field force to produce honey and in hive resources to feed and care for a frame of drone comb that far exceeds the wax that it would net you.


----------



## Acebird

jim lyon said:


> It's not a matter of wanting a wax crop it's a matter of not getting the wax crop you would have gotten by using regular comb.


At the moment this doesn't make sense to me. As I understand it the bees are still drawing out the comb a tiny bit and capping the cell with wax so the wax is there. It is just a matter of harvesting it. If the boxes were pulled off as in the conventional manner and the channels eliminated on the bottom of the frames the honey and wax would drop down into a collection vessel below instead of going into individual tubes. This would collect the honey and the wax both. Would it not? The problem as I see it is the frames are designed not to collect the wax. It isn't a question of the wax crop not being there. The goals of a hobbyist and the goals of a commercial beekeeper are not the same. Why would you expect the design of the frames to be the same? I don't expect that at all.


----------



## jim lyon

Brian, neither you nor I have seen one in action but the description of how they function seems pretty clear to me. The inside of the cell is opened allowing the upward angled comb to drain out the back, leaving empty, wax capped cells. To refill these cells I presume the bees, apparently sensing that they are empty, remove the wax caps to prep them for refilling. My logical assumption is that these wax caps would be hauled out of the hive during a healthy hives normal housecleaning activities. Bees just don't do much reusing of beeswax though the different shades of brood capping prove that it does happen to a degree. I am going with this presumption until I'm proven wrong, not because I'm trying to disparage this device but because of what I have observed about "bee-havior".


----------



## Acebird

Jim, how they function is clear to me too. All I am saying is these frames were designed for a hobbyist with the intent of harvesting honey on the hive. You and I have had several discussions about these frames and I can clearly see how in their present design they would not work for you or any commercial beekeeper. It is possible that even with design changes they won't meet your goals. But it is equally possible that with design changes it could. That is all I am saying.
The hardest part in designing anything for commercial applications is the variation in scale. You can be a commercial beekeeper with 500 hives or 20,000 hives. I don't see the flow frame concept being an advantage for operations in the 10k-20k range. The amount of time it would take to harvest 10k hives by a drip method just doesn't seem realistic to me. I do see a possible advantage for those in the 500-2000 range. It will never ever happen if these beekeepers don't want it or they are unwilling to work with the designers to make it happen.


----------



## aunt betty

One thing I notice about the flow hive is it is just one box. Anyone with experience knows that there has to be extra space for drying the honey. When the owner of the hive notices that "hey, the flow super is completely capped" the bees already are in swarm mode and the fool is all in the mindset of "let bees be bees". All he has to do is crank the crank and whallah.

Going to be some really messed up beekeepers this summer who follow this concept of "not managing their bees".
"Bee havers" with it all figured out. Ever met one? Have already left a few in my rear-view mirror as I was driving off with their swarms. They just aren't set up when "it" happens. 

Looking forward to this summer. Should be quite fun and amusing.


----------



## Acebird

Aunt betty you don't have to wait until the whole box is crammed with honey you can harvest one frame at a time. The bigger issue might be for northerners is leaving the frames on for winter and if you don't then you are going to be overwintering a small hive that might not make it up here as a single unit.


----------



## BeeCurious

Acebird said:


> Jim if you wanted a wax crop couldn't you just load the hive with plastic drone foundation and strip it when you cull the drones?


"strip it when you cull the drones"

What does that mean? Getting wax from brood cappings? :scratch:


----------



## sqkcrk

aunt betty said:


>


Nice tag line.


----------



## sqkcrk

Acebird said:


> The bigger issue might be for northerners is leaving the frames on for winter and if you don't then you are going to be overwintering a small hive that might not make it up here as a single unit.


Leaving the Flow super on over Winter is just the sort of thing a beginner or beehaver would do. And then not know what went wrong come Spring.

You wouldn't leave a comb honey super on over the Winter, would you, Brian?


----------



## sqkcrk

Acebird said:


> Jim, how they function is clear to me too.


Not to pick on you or to be disrespectful, but clearly not. Not when you make statements like this, "It is just a matter of harvesting it. If the boxes were pulled off as in the conventional manner and the channels eliminated on the bottom of the frames the honey and wax would drop down into a collection vessel below instead of going into individual tubes. This would collect the honey and the wax both. Would it not?"

That set of sentences implies you are still trying to imagine how it might work if it were used as it was not intended.


----------



## NDnewbeek

In the poultry industry, chickens are crammed (sometimes 3 at a time) into tiny cages for the sole purpose of maximizing their egg production for harvest. Their environment is wire floors and metal cages. Most agree that this is bad for the chicken and produces a lower quality egg that is bad for the consumer.

Is the ''Flow Hive" in concept and philosophy different from this? If so, how?

I ask, not as a challenge or to promote my own point-of-view, but as a thought exercise.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Is the ''Flow Hive" in concept and philosophy different from this? If so, how?

"Every" way. What about it is similar in philosophy to a battery cage? Hmmm... the only thing I can come up with is that a battery cage simplifies gathering the eggs, but otherwise, you confine a chicken in a cage where it can only stand up, sit down, eat, poop and lay eggs. It can't fly, it can't walk, it can't reproduce, it can only lay eggs. You put a flow hive super on your hive, your bees are still free to do whatever they like (and they have to be able to). They fly, they reproduce (by swarming) if they want, abscond if they want, they store honey (as they always have) and we steal some of it (as we always have). In what way does this resemble a battery hen? The difference to the bees compared to fully drawn comb like PermaComb (around since the 1960s) or Honey Super Cell (around since 2005 or so) is nothing. Fully drawn plastic to store their honey in. The difference between a flow super and plastic foundation is that the bees don't have as much work to do. They don't have to build the comb first. The difference between a flow super and wax foundation is the same except with the wax foundation they don't have to put up with the plastic. None of this in any way resembled a battery hen that I can see.

The difference to the bees is whether they simply see that their honey is gone, or you chase them out of the supers and then steal it. One is much less disruptive than the other.


----------



## Acebird

sqkcrk said:


> That set of sentences implies you are still trying to imagine how it might work if it were used as it was not intended.[/COLOR]


You seem to understand what I am getting at and that makes you think I don't understand what they intended?


----------



## Acebird

sqkcrk said:


> You wouldn't leave a comb honey super on over the Winter, would you, Brian?


Of course I do because my bees determine what is a honey super and what is a brood chamber. However, I know that the flow hive super is designed so it cannot be used as a brood chamber which I would not do up in this neck of the woods. It may be possible to do that in the Down Under or the South in this country.


----------



## sqkcrk

Apparently you are not familiar with what a "comb honey super" is or you wouldn't leave one on over Winter.

I have not read much of the literature on the Flow Hive, but I believe it is meant to only be on the hive part of the year and not the Winter, anywhere.


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> The difference to the bees is whether they simply see that their honey is gone, or you chase them out of the supers and then steal it. One is much less disruptive than the other.


Michael, you have seen these frames up close and personal, even had a chance to work with them, if the bottom channel did not exist and you took each box off the hive would there be a need to remove the bees? What I envision happening is the bees would go up in between the frames and get out of the way of the honey flowing down especially if you gave them a slight puff of smoke from underneath before you shifted the cells. In just a few minutes you could put the box back on the hive.
Next question: how stuck are the wax cappings on the half cells once the frame is empty?


----------



## Michael Bush

I don't follow the point of the conversation, but I took one off so I could watch it and film it. It was as much work as harvesting as I brushed all the bees off and took it to the house. Then, of course, it was a mess when I drained it. Some of the honey always spills. Not much, but on your living room table with no bees to clean it up, it's a mess. Not that it ran enough to go on the floor or anything, but some of it spills of course. There is no wax that falls or flows. What comes out doesn't really even need to be filtered. It's clean. The cappings are intact. When you put it back the bees uncap it. I'm sure they haul all the cappings out as they always do when they uncap. If you want wax you should do foundationless and crush and strain. It will be MUCH easier and MUCH cheaper...

My guess is that in Australia you could leave it on all the time. In NSW they don't seem to have anything that resembles winter. In Nebraska I'm thinking it would be a very bad plan. Full or empty it would still be a bad plan. Empty might tempt them to move up there and cluster in which case come spring the queen would have nowhere to lay. Full they might eat their way up there and have the same issue. I pulled all of mine off for the winter, like any super and will put them back on about mid may or early june depending on the flow here.


----------



## Acebird

sqkcrk said:


> Apparently you are not familiar with what a "comb honey super" is or you wouldn't leave one on over Winter.


I am familiar with a comb honey super but I have no use for one. I did not say I would ever leave a flow frame box on for winter. But I could devise a way to do it that would not be detrimental to the bees if I wanted to.


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> but I took one off so I could watch it and film it.


Any link to the vid?


----------



## sweetas

Got the cedar upgrade yesterday. Took just over a week to get from the US


----------



## Michael Bush

>Any link to the vid?

Maybe someday. I'd have to find time to edit it and then either post it on my web site or figure out how to upload a video to UTube, which I have never done... Time is hard to come by...


----------



## Acebird

Send it to me. I will do it.


----------



## jwcarlson

Yesterday, while talking with the guy I know who bought one, I found out that when you buy an 8-frame double deep with gadget frames they don't include foundation for the brood chamber. Which is really really generous of them not to include less than $8 worth of plastic foundation.

But the hive only cost $750, so what do you expect? Get what you pay for, I suppose.


----------



## EastSideBuzz

PET ROCK. :ws:

Oh yea. With Millionaire Aussies.


----------



## sweetas

I don't know the reason why but in Western Australia there are quarantine issues with bee products and second hand material. Plastic would be OK but wax is a definite NO NO.


----------



## aunt betty

Just dawned on me that a new wave of modern beekeepers is on its way. AWESOME! 




Can sell them new bees each spring when they starve them to death by extracting every drop of honey because "it's so easy". 
SWEET!


----------



## Michael Bush

>Can sell them new bees each spring when they starve them to death by extracting every drop of honey because "it's so easy". 
SWEET!

That was the complaint about the Langstroth hive when it came out. For the first time beekeepers could SEE all the honey and they would harvest it. Even experienced beekeepers, but of course the Langstroth also brought a lot of new beekeepers. Both had to learn to leave them enough honey...


----------



## jwcarlson

Michael Bush said:


> Both had to learn to leave them enough honey...


Isn't part of the issue that you CAN'T really leave them the honey they stored in the Flow frames, though? It's not the same issue as being able to see all the honey in the Lang. If anything I'd say that the Flow hive will lend people to extracting honey blindly, without checking the broodnest for adequate stores. Of course if they're keeping them in the 8 frame deep they'll probably have swarmed by the time they want to drain the honey anyway, so maybe it won't much matter.

Bad beekeepers will be bad beekeepers... the Flow Hive just makes it easier. The information the keeper needs is there if they care to look, so as I've told everyone who's asked me about it personally... in the hands of a good beekeeper, I'm sure the bees will be just fine in whatever box you put them in.



sweetas said:


> I don't know the reason why but in Western Australia there are quarantine issues with bee products and second hand material. Plastic would be OK but wax is a definite NO NO.


Completely separate issues.
The hives being shipped around the states right now are actually manufactured somewhere on the west coast in the USA (at least the western cedar ones). From an established bee equipment supplier. Which is the reason the guy I know has received everything but the flow frames, which will ship from Australia.


----------



## jwcarlson

I still just want to add how remarkable it is that someone could be into a single bee hive (of inadequate size) for nearly $1,000 and still not have purchased the bees yet. They certainly grabbed the "save the bees" movement by the toes, which is (as I have said before) commendable.

Here's a moment that I experienced on Saturday that just made me shake my head. The fellow that bought this Flow Hive ($750) was tagging along while I was adding protein patties to my colonies that I keep out at his place. They all looked great.
Anyway, my dad took out his ventilated jacket from Mann Lake. Flow Hive owner says, "Man, that sure looks like a nice suit, where did you get that?" I tell him that dad and I bought bought one and they were just under $100 on sale. He was absolutely FLOORED that it could have cost $100, even going so far as to take a step backwards in disbelief. 
About 20 minutes later we were in his garage and he was showing us $30-40 worth of wood that he paid $750 for... I just chuckled.


----------



## Barry Digman

jwcarlson said:


> Bad beekeepers will be bad beekeepers... the Flow Hive just makes it easier.


I'm going to use this from now on when people post the Flow Hive on my Facebook page. It's perfect!



> Bad beekeepers will be bad beekeepers... the Flow Hive just makes it easier.
> ----- J.W. Carlson - 2016


----------



## Acebird

jwcarlson said:


> in the hands of a good beekeeper, I'm sure the bees will be just fine in whatever box you put them in.


One would think with your expertise in beekeeping the owner will do well with his flow hive. Although it has been my experience that when a person is negative about a concept, device, whatever, they make sure it fails. I have never experienced the opposite.


----------



## sweetas

Good call.

There appears to be a lot of experts that know it will fail without any experience in the flow hive. When the Flow Hive first shoe its head, the experts stated it was a scam.

Personally, I want it to work and will try to make it work for the sake of all the people who have taken an interest in bees because of the flow hive. On the weekend I had two people ask me. "I've got a flow hive, where do I get the bees.

The more people are interested in bees, the better.


----------



## jwcarlson

Acebird said:


> One would think with your expertise in beekeeping the owner will do well with his flow hive. Although it has been my experience that when a person is negative about a concept, device, whatever, they make sure it fails. I have never experienced the opposite.


And that doesn't cut the other way, Brian? Come on. You don't think there's ANY evidence that early adopters who buy high-priced, emotional items are more apt to 'make them work' and give them extra chances than would a third party? Here's the thing... if I had paid $750 for a $120 beehive... you can bet your ass I'll make it work. I believe I posted a link at some point in this thread of some study outlining that exact thing.

Now the guy who bought this thing wants to take a more active role in them. So we'll see how this goes. He bought a package of bees a week ago for May delivery, so that's a good thing. I think. I haven't quite figured out his angle other than being drawn in by the rhetoric they used to sell this thing.


----------



## Acebird

By your own words you said an experienced beekeeper could make it work. Prove me wrong and make it so.


----------



## jwcarlson

So now making it work would be proving you wrong, Ace...? That's quite a logical wrap around you've crafted there for yourself... hahah


----------



## JRG13

Got my frames today, still gotta put the box together, I didn't buy the whole kit, just a box and some frames, I'll super one of my urban hives with it, see how they do.


----------



## jwcarlson

Does anyone know if they have cycle tested the frames? Or have any sort of longevity information? I am curious to see how durable they seem once propolis'd and sealed up.


----------



## sweetas

It's OK to ask the question here.. Possibly the best source of that information is Flow Hive themselves. If they say it is OK and if it is not , you have a case against them.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

Intended for single use only. :lookout:


----------



## Michael Bush

>Does anyone know if they have cycle tested the frames? Or have any sort of longevity information? I am curious to see how durable they seem once propolis'd and sealed up.

Cedar and Stu have been using them for a decade. I've been using fully drawn comb made from the same material (PermaComb) since 2003 and those are all still in use. They can be cleaned (though I've never done it on the PermaComb) by many methods since you can boil it. It will withstand 220 F. You could powerwash it, boil it etc. I have heated the PermaComb to 220 F with no ill effects but anything over that and the material starts to deform. You can also disassemble the entire flow frame if you really wanted to work on it.

I agree, though, it will be interesting to see how it ages.


----------



## Acebird

There are people that can wreck a locomotive.


----------



## Barry

Acebird said:


> Although it has been my experience that when a person is negative about a concept, device, whatever, they make sure it fails. I have never experienced the opposite.


I remember this well, Brian. All the advice about managing bees that gets stated over and over on this forum, you ignored, and were negative towards. The result, your bees died.


----------



## jwcarlson

Michael Bush said:


> I agree, though, it will be interesting to see how it ages.


I've never had good luck with anything where metal is used to actuate anything made of plastic. From door mount disconnects on electrical cabinets to parts in a garage door opener. Of course these frames aren't likely to see that many uses, but disconnects and garage door openers aren't working against tens of thousands of bees hell bent on sealing cracks.


----------



## rwurster

Acebird said:


> There are people that can wreck a locomotive.


Wonder who one of those people could possibly be :lpf:


----------



## tanksbees

Acebird said:


> There are people that can wreck a locomotive.


Pot, meet Kettle


----------



## D Coates

Acebird said:


> There are people that can wreck a locomotive.





Barry said:


> I remember this well, Brian. All the advice about managing bees that gets stated over and over on this forum, you ignored, and were negative towards. The result, your bees died.


Sometimes, nothing needs to be added.


----------



## DirtyLittleSecret

Geezy, this thread is STILL going?


----------



## sweetas

it's hard to kill some things.

Well I will meet Stuart Anderson personally on 6 April.

If you want me to ask him some questions please list them

cheers

Geoff


----------



## Oldtimer

Could you ask him to join the forum?


----------



## sweetas

a very positive suggestion


----------



## jwcarlson

sweetas - 
Do they have any problems with bees taking to their frames? Do they coat them with wax or anything? Bare plastic or even lightly wax coated plastic here and you might as well put in vinyl siding for all they care.


----------



## sweetas

jwc
I don't know. I haven't had any experience yet. I imagine that a good coating of wax would help. Got the boxes, frames are on the way.


----------



## Acebird

sweetas said:


> jwc
> I don't know.


PM Michael B. he has already addressed this question eons ago.


----------



## aunt betty

jwcarlson said:


> Does anyone know if they have cycle tested the frames? Or have any sort of longevity information? I am curious to see how durable they seem once propolis'd and sealed up.


Commercial beekeeper spoke at our meeting yesterday and brought up this very issue. 
Will echo (parrot) what he said. "These things might work just fine the first summer or two but we're in the midwestern USA, not Australia, and it gets cold here at night about the time people are going to want to extract". "The video shows the frame emptying pretty quickly and how's that going to work when it was 35 degrees last night?". "How it this going to work once the bees start plugging every tiny hole and crack with propolis?". 

How is a beekeeper going to test with hydrometer before extracting? Last year for instance I had quite a few frames of honey that were above acceptable moisture levels. Had to build a "dryer". 

Other than the points made above, the flow-hives are awesome, just awesome and I personally can not wait to start selling the flow-hive "lazy beekeepers" new bees every spring. AWESOME!


----------



## Oldtimer

aunt betty said:


> Commercial beekeeper spoke at our meeting yesterday and brought up this very issue.
> how's that going to work when it was 35 degrees last night?".


Do it in the day when it's 75 degrees. Thought the average commercial beekeeper had the smarts to figure that out LOL 

Robbing need not be an issue. If bees might rob, the tube could be run through a hole in the jar lid so there is no contact between any foraging bees, and honey.

Propolis etc, well that could be an issue if harvesting is left too late in the season, but I'll bet the average flow hive keeper will hardly be able to wait that long to harvest their honey. Other issue could be small amounts of honey re stored in the super after the harvest that then granulate in winter. But I'll bet with time, for every problem, a solution will be found.


----------



## sweetas

Had a report on Saturday. Took 20 minutes to empty a frame. Was a hot day , 38 degrees.


----------



## Oldtimer

Yes I guess it's harvest time in Aussie, was there many flowhive people got a crop? And how do they feel about flowhive now?


----------



## Acebird

Oldtimer said:


> Other issue could be small amounts of honey re stored in the super after the harvest that then granulate in winter.


It shouldn't be that hard to clean.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbx-Dv5iLmA


----------



## Michael Bush

>Do they have any problems with bees taking to their frames? 

I have seen no issues. Putting them in during a flow they seem to view it as damaged comb and have fixed all the gaps in a day or two and then use them.

>Do they coat them with wax or anything?

Who is "they"? The bees? They fill the gaps and they add to the walls of the short ones, and of course they cap them, but no, they don't coat them with wax. The manufactures? No they do not coat them with wax. The beekeepers using them? I have not heard of anyone doing that.


----------



## jwcarlson

Michael Bush said:


> Who is "they"?


MB, my original question was posed to sweetas as a possible question for him to ask of the oracle. I wanted to know if they run a foam roller with hot wax over the edges of the plastic comb in a similar fashion to how I recoat plastic foundation with beeswax.


----------



## Oldtimer

jwcarlson said:


> the oracle.


 Ha Ha


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

Guy asked me if I got one today. I told him no, they are not in my price range. Took him to my woodshop showed him 100 deeps I had just finished cutting out. Told him I had the same amount of money in the 100 deeps as he had in his one box. That doesn't include my time but still.... He said well the flow hive will save me so much time it will be worth it for me........... Hmm


----------



## Vance G

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Saw the first used/unused flowhive listed for sale at a deep discount yesterday. If you want one, just wait a bit and they will be everywhere.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Oh boy! If it is all propolized together it is probably not worth the cleaning time it would take


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Same rules always apply when buying used hiveware, find out why the original hive died.


----------



## tanksbees

Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> He said well the flow hive will save me so much time it will be worth it for me........... Hmm


Keep in mind that making $100/hour is pretty common occurrence out here in California for many tech workers - it's not off the mark to say that the flow hive will pay for itself if you are one of those people.

Those people also generally lack the ability to any sort of simple mechanical task, like changing their oil, battery, air filter, wiper blades, installing a doorknob, light switch, mowing the lawn, etc.

I think in the end managing a flow hive will still be too complicated for those people, but they will purchase all the fancy beekeeping supplies and might even get as far as dumping the bees into the box.


----------



## clong

As a tech worker, I wish I made $100/hour. 

Every single person in the IT Dept (5) where I work is quite adept at mechanical tasks, including mowing the lawn, <chuckle>. In fact, mechanical/manual tasks are a joy after tech-ing all day. I've met the sort of people you are describing, but in my experience they are in the minority.


----------



## jwcarlson

Acebird said:


> It shouldn't be that hard to clean.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbx-Dv5iLmA


Joe Flow gets this beehive so that he doesn't have to use and extractor, doesn't have to bother the bees. Now he's going to take their honey and then build some sort of steam cleaning device so that he can get all the honey out of them for reuse... :scratch: Talk about reinventing the wheel!

A simple solution exists for people who want to get honey without an extractor (crush and strain). The Flow Hive fills the void between use of readily extractable combs and crush and strain (by charging you what it would cost to buy a two frame extractor or two each time you buy a hive). This is supposed to be a zen experience, right? I mean these people walk around their 'office' without shoes on for goodness sake. But we're going to build steam cleaning units so that we can avoid using an extractor.


----------



## Acebird

Did you watch the movie? he doesn't have to build anything. Wagner did it for him.


----------



## Oldtimer

This from a guy who just harvested, 20 lb's from 4 flow frames apparently, took 20 minutes.

Evidently some honey got loose inside the hive causing the bees to go uber active for the rest of the day. 



Photo credit to Andrew of Flow Forums


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

I finally got around to assembling my Flow box and playing with the frames:

















Some thoughts:

The woodwork is _extremely_ tight. Tolerances, anyone? I had to really pound on the pieces to get them to go together. They've been sitting in my closet, so they're dry. They're just really tight.
On the same note, the large access door was impossible to remove or insert. 20 minutes with some coarse sandpaper fixed that, but it was more work than I would have expected. 
The frames are pretty amazing. We'll see how they actually work, and whether they last, but they look beautiful, and they're quite a feat of engineering. 
One surprising thing that I hadn't noticed before in other photos--the plastic on the cells doesn't form a plane, even when rotated into the "storage" position. The sections are staggered in the Z dimension (e.g. along the axis the bees would draw), so the bees have to do a fair amount of construction on the cells in addition to sealing up the seam.
The instructions warn, "Don't twist the frames, or they could fall apart. But they're easy to reassemble."
This means that the frames are a bunch of separate "columns" that are held together by the tension of the steel wire you see running the top and bottom.
Overall I'm quite impressed with the engineering and overall construction. 

Now let's see if my bees will make some honey!


----------



## Acebird

IAmTheWaterbug said:


> The woodwork is _extremely_ tight. Tolerances, anyone? I had to really pound on the pieces to get them to go together. They've been sitting in my closet, so they're dry. They're just really tight.





Where was the wooden parts milled and how many moisture changed did they go through getting to you? Hopefully you are reporting these issues to the makers forum. Maybe they can make adjustments. Did you use a water based glue?


----------



## clong

IAmTheWaterbug said:


> I finally got around to assembling my Flow box and playing with the frames:
> 
> Some thoughts:
> 
> The woodwork is _extremely_ tight. Tolerances, anyone? I had to really pound on the pieces to get them to go together. They've been sitting in my closet, so they're dry. They're just really tight.
> On the same note, the large access door was impossible to remove or insert. 20 minutes with some coarse sandpaper fixed that, but it was more work than I would have expected.
> 
> This was my experience, too. I ordered two, and both were tight - especially the removable access door. I had to sand too, although that is better than too loose. Beethinking made the woodenware, and both they and FlowHive have been quick to replace parts when needed.
> 
> I too, wondered about the jaggedness of the comb in relation to the plane of the frame. But that is by design. I think Michael Bush confirmed this. It will be fun seeing if it works.


----------



## Acebird

clong said:


> IAmTheWaterbug said:
> 
> 
> 
> I too, wondered about the jaggedness of the comb in relation to the plane of the frame. But that is by design.
> 
> 
> 
> More photos please. I can't grasp what you are talking about.
Click to expand...


----------



## BradC

This is what he is talking about. The comb sections are offset like this


----------



## tanksbees

Oldtimer said:


> This from a guy who just harvested, 20 lb's from 4 flow frames apparently, took 20 minutes.
> 
> Evidently some honey got loose inside the hive causing the bees to go uber active for the rest of the day.
> 
> 
> 
> Photo credit to Andrew of Flow Forums


From what I was reading on the flow forums, seems most are harvesting the inner frames since they are ready much earlier than the outer - except when they harvest the inner ones, the bees move all the honey back to the center. So they never really harvest the outside ones at all.

It would seem to make more sense to use two boxes, with 3-4 flow frames each in the center, with ordinary frames on the outside since you will likely never harvest them.

I'm curious about the loose honey - that can't be good.


----------



## Acebird

BradC said:


> This is what he is talking about. The comb sections are offset like this


I see some miss alignment and what appears to be some uneven gaps between cells on different comb sections. This would make me think the sections are not in their closed locked positions more so then variations between parts.


----------



## Acebird

tanksbees said:


> From what I was reading on the flow forums, seems most are harvesting the inner frames since they are ready much earlier than the outer - except when they harvest the inner ones, the bees move all the honey back to the center. So they never really harvest the outside ones at all.


Well you can imagine the impatience of a newbie with a new toy can't you? The outside ones would get filled if they waited. They also might be running the risk of high moisture honey by harvesting too soon.


----------



## Chuck Jachens

I heard that if you only use 4 or 5 of the flow hive frames in the center that the bees will use the other outside frames first. So need to use a full box, and that gets really expensive if you need a box per hive and you have more than 2 hives. Makes it limited to hobby beekeeper.


----------



## BradC

Acebird said:


> I see some miss alignment and what appears to be some uneven gaps between cells on different comb sections. This would make me think the sections are not in their closed locked positions more so then variations between parts.


That's in the closed position. The comb halves are offset. There is a slight gap between the halves and one side is lower than the other on purpose. The thinking is that the bees have to even out the comb. Hence repairing the comb before they use it


----------



## Acebird

BradC said:


> There is a slight gap between the halves and one side is lower than the other on purpose. The thinking is that the bees have to even out the comb. Hence repairing the comb before they use it


OK so when you say offset you are speaking of one half of the cell being longer than the other and it is on purpose. That part makes sense.


----------



## kholmar

Here is my "flow hive"
it is 6 of the flow frames in their 8 frame size box but the rest of it is standard stuff from Kelley Beekeeping.
well, the bottom board is a fancy screened thing with a tray for oil and my frames are 'foundationless' but it's all fairly standard.
tung oil on the outside of everything.
I plan to add a couple more 8 frame mediums for my brood nest as they grow into it and I haven't decided if I am going to use an excluder or not to start with.
I had to do some cutting on the outer cover but that was easy.
I'm also going to use one of those beetle blocker things you can see leaning in the bottom of the picture but I haven't put tung oil on them yet.

will be setting it up next month when the package arrives and we shall see what we shall see.
not really expecting to get a big harvest from a new package the first season but depends on the weather of course.
In central TX hill country, it could go either way.
my two top bar hives I started with last year are doing great and I got about 2 gallons of honey from the two of them a couple weeks ago.
I have been watching the videos including the Russian one (although it was painful to watch since it should be patently obvious that you can get past his issue by inserting the key a short distance at a time and only trying to crack a few of them at a time).

some discussion on whether or not you need one or two of the "keys".
it seems to me that in the demo video where two keys were used, he used two of them because the flow frame was free standing by itself and had nothing to support it but that is just a guess on my part.
I don't expect to need 2 of them when harvesting as intended.

I will try to make a video if I get a harvest this year but not counting on it.
peace!
Bill


----------



## Acebird

kholmar said:


> it is 6 of the flow frames in their 8 frame size box but the rest of it is standard stuff from Kelley Beekeeping.


I didn't think of this until now but do the frames come in both deep and medium size? What is the weight of your 8 frame box with 6 frames dry?


----------



## kholmar

no, they are all deeps. It is pretty heavy.
You can find the weight on their website, I imagine it is going to be a heavy mo-fo when full.
Bill


----------



## Acebird

I am wondering if a 6 frame flow box would be heavier than a 10 frame regular Lang both full of honey?


----------



## SowthEfrikan

I had exactly the same experience, way too tight woodwork. Plenty of elbow grease needed to sand the access door down. Also, the closure for the access door was too big, so it was impossible to open the door with it fitted. More sanding. All done now. Oh, and the holes in the roof were drilled at least half an inch away from the support, so I had to putty those closed and drill holes in the correct position. The hive looks fantastic. Overall, like IamTheWaterbug, impressed. The hives are just gorgeous.


----------



## SowthEfrikan

jwcarlson said:


> Yesterday, while talking with the guy I know who bought one, I found out that when you buy an 8-frame double deep with gadget frames they don't include foundation for the brood chamber. Which is really really generous of them not to include less than $8 worth of plastic foundation.
> 
> But the hive only cost $750, so what do you expect? Get what you pay for, I suppose.


The original intent was to provide foundation of some kind, ugh ick eeewwww - I was one of those who asked for an option not to have that, and happily, Flow decided to let people make their own choices.

You certainly get what you pay for. It's fabulous.


----------



## jwcarlson

I just had an impulse Flow Hive purchaser offer to "let me use" her flow hive (IE, assemble it, put bees in it, and give her some of the honey) for this year to see how I like it as she's too busy.

It's the twisted weirdness that perverts some of these purchasers... they don't understand that it has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BOX and everything to do with what's inside of it. What a bizarre mentality. No I do not want nearly $1,000 in borrowed equipment that I still have to assemble and take care of for you for a year. I'm sure the "rental" to use her box would be half of the honey harvest and all of the bees and drawn comb that I had in them when the following spring rolls around and she wants the hive back.

No thank you. The good news for people who weren't early adopters is that you might be able to pick up a Flow Fleet earlier than expected and ever cheaper than you imagined. It will be interesting to see people thinking they're going to get $600 out of their used flow hives in a few months.  While the hive does look kind of nice... there's a lot of moving parts on it and gadgets. Stuff that isn't exactly going to be durable in the long run.


$750 eight frame double deep that you have to make a bunch of modifications to, SouthEfrikan? Shaking my head. The Flow hive fella I know had to do a bunch of stuff to his too. What a joke. But it looks nice! HAHAHAHAHA
That's like paying 3-4x "retail" for a brand new car and then having to replace spark plugs, tires, and fix a few other items before it's driveable.


----------



## odfrank

The first Flowhive I have seen on Craigslist.

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/grd/5505734312.html


----------



## BadBeeKeeper

What, no bees? LMFAO


----------



## Chuck Jachens

Challenger, I had to laugh at the non-profit status comment. I consider Beekeeping my hobby and its cheaper than drinking or owning a boat. 

As a Californian, I don't think it was a spelling error. Bran is wholesome while brand is associated with all big, bad corporations. Still a good chuckle for pointing it out. I also laughed at the low investment cost to get into the honey business that was in the ad.


----------



## Agis Apiaries

Chuck Jachens said:


> I also laughed at the low investment cost to get into the honey business that was in the ad.


I also chuckled at the comment in the ad that the FlowHive will allow anyone to become a beekeeper. Huh? As if only certain people can learn to become beekeepers with other types of hives? Or is the seller implying, as we all fear, that one can be a "beekeeper" with a FlowHive without learning how to take care of bees, do inspections, etc., like you do with a normal hive? Yikes!


----------



## challenger

I have not read the part of the ad that suggests (or states??) that learning to be a beekeeper using the flow hive is easier. This makes absolutely no sense to me for the following reasons:
Easier comes in many flavors is suppose but one has to consider costs. It is easier to start keeping bees by catching a swarm of bees using LGO and empty boxes as this would enable one to get started with free bees. It would be much harder to start bee keeping by beginning the effort with an outlay of nearly $700.00 for equipment only. Then you have to purchase (anyone spending this kind of $ for the flow hive will have no problem spending $175.00 for a nuc) bees etc etc.
The flow hive is brand new. If you start beekeeping with a flow hive (please DON'T DO THIS!!!) there will be literally no body to help mentor you. All new beekeepers should have a good mentor. This is imperative IMO. I also believe that new beekeepers should start out with the most user friendly equipment. Even top bar hives would not be recommended IMO as it will require that one learn everything a langstroth beekeeper has to learn plus the specifics of the TBH.
Lastly, but far from finally, IF one does learn to beekeep using the flow hive they have not learned to be "real" beekeepers. I say this due to the fact that knowing the flow hive does not include knowing beekeeping from the ground up and would not allow one to understand bee husbandry the way anyone from a Langstroth or TBH background would.
IMO the flow hive hive should be undertaken by experienced beekeepers. I think it would certainly help the long term success of the flow hive. Learn beekeeping THEN learn the flow hive. 
One would not learn to make splits or graft queens before having any type of bee experience would one?
Seems like the folks at flow would be better off suggesting their hives are better suited for those with some beekeeping experience.


----------



## Oldtimer

challenger said:


> Seems like the folks at flow would be better off suggesting their hives are better suited for those with some beekeeping experience.


True. After they have been around a few years the fact you have to know something about bees to run one will become more ingrained in the common wisdom. I think this may not be deliberate deception on the part of the manufacturers, just, in their part of the world beekeeping is still fairly easy.



Agis Apiaries said:


> I also chuckled at the comment in the ad that the FlowHive will allow anyone to become a beekeeper.


Clearly didn't allow the vendor to become a beekeeper.

After buying his flowbox he investigated beekeeping and decided that selling the flowbox would be the simpler option.


----------



## BadBeeKeeper

Oldtimer said:


> Clearly didn't allow the vendor to become a beekeeper.
> 
> After buying his flowbox he investigated beekeeping and decided that selling the flowbox would be the simpler option.


Yeah, judging by the writing, this guy isn't too awfully bright, and got sucked into the deal thinking that it was just a simple matter of setting the thing up and pouring off the honey...and only later found out that he'd actually have to "do things" with the bees, and that just wasn't his cup of tea.


I have a feeling that there are going to be a lot more folks who thought the same thing, and aren't going to be happy with their purchases when they find out that keeping bees means a lot more than just turning a crank and having honey pour into a jar.


----------



## deknow

> One would not learn to make splits or graft queens before having any type of bee experience would one?


When they dont, they often end up hopelessly queenless after following common advice of destroying queen cells.

I always advise (and teach) new beekeepers with new packages to make some kind of split (and raise a queen) when they find cells.

What do you advise a first year beekeeper with queen cells to do? ...remember, they can't reliably find a queen (or know if one has already swarmed).

First year beekeepers should absolutely understand, and be prepared to split and/or raise a queen one way or another....grafting isnt ever required to raise queens...it is just efficient and convenient.


----------



## BadBeeKeeper

> I always advise (and teach) new beekeepers with new packages to make some kind of split (and raise a queen) when they find cells.
> 
> What do you advise a first year beekeeper with queen cells to do? ...remember, they can't reliably find a queen (or know if one has already swarmed).


Having more queens than you need, is a sight better than having none when you need them.

I never grokked that advice to trash all the queen cells either, when I read it (I forget which book) I thought it was stupid. A number of things could happen that could result in no mated queen. And to not have a back-up plan? That would suck.

I'm lucky enough to have a big commercial guy 30 miles away that keeps some queens banked, who'll sell me some in an emergency ,but still, I'd rather not have to drive 60 miles and spend $30 (per) for queens when I could as easily have my own. (Although sometimes in the Summer it's nice to have an excuse to hop on the bike and take a ride, and amusing when you stop for coffee and have people asking about the buzzing bulge in your jacket.)


----------



## Michael Bush

I see a lot of Langstroth equipment for sale on Craig's list... does that mean the Langstroth hive is a failure? Just wondering...


----------



## Agis Apiaries

Michael Bush said:


> I see a lot of Langstroth equipment for sale on Craig's list... does that mean the Langstroth hive is a failure? Just wondering...


The failure is not with the hive, whether FlowHive or Langstroth. The failure is with the person, who doesn't take the time to learn what it really takes to manage bees.

You could be a great beekeeper with FlowHives. But, to make it work with FlowHives, you have to LEARN to be a great beekeeper, not just set the box out there and assume the only thing you need to do from that point on is turn a crank and pour out honey. (You also need a much bigger checkbook to pay for them) Yep, Langs on Craig's List as well. Enough folks get sucked into beekeeping as a fad and realize that, despite the greatest bee suit in the world, they still get stung, and they still have to manage their colonies. It just seems that the marketing of the FlowHive has been such that more people get sucked in thinking that it will be simple than those that buy langs.


----------



## clyderoad

Michael Bush said:


> I see a lot of Langstroth equipment for sale on Craig's list... does that mean the Langstroth hive is a failure? Just wondering...


Just wondering why you would even go there......


----------



## Oldtimer

Michael Bush said:


> I see a lot of Langstroth equipment for sale on Craig's list...


But is it "Bran New"?


----------



## Agis Apiaries

clyderoad said:


> Just wondering why you would even go there......


Michael Bush says this about the Flow Hive:

_“Mind-blowing! It's not very often something is so revolutionary as to blow my mind. Saving 20 per cent of harvest labor is not trivial; 40 per cent is amazing; 60 per cent is revolutionary. But 95 per cent – that’s mind-boggling!”_ 

I'm assuming that means that he has now swapped out all of his Langs for FlowHives? The pictures on his website would not suggest so. Perhaps he'll chime in here and let us know if he is swapping out all of his Langs for these "Mind blowing" new hives.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Just wondering why you would even go there......

Because people are already going there...

>I'm assuming that means that he has now swapped out all of his Langs for FlowHives?

I said all of that before they put a price on it...

>The pictures on his website would not suggest so. Perhaps he'll chime in here and let us know if he is swapping out all of his Langs for these "Mind blowing" new hives.

Maybe someday if the price comes down. No, I am not.


----------



## lemmje

I personally hope they do work, and that the price comes way down so i could buy a couple -- no chance now though.

Just a few days ago there was a thread on here where someone said their hive swarmed so they were gonna give up, or some such. I'm not mocking her, I'm just saying that people who quite do so for a lot of reasons, and the most common is that beekeeping ends up being more than just setting up a hive. With Facebook and other social media touting the Flowhive, a lot of folks seem to have bought into the idea that those things would "save the bees" if you just bought one. Advertising at it's best...er...worst.


----------



## ritan1

Well, looking at it from a time and proportion perspective, there are millions and billions of Langstroth (and Warre and TBH) hives in active use around the world by hundreds of thousands of beekeepers. That some proportion of them wind up on CL/eBay is to be expected. The Flow Hive is new, relatively few (>100k?) available, small population of buyers (37k?) and already on CL/eBay. I think that probably indicates that the marketing of it caused a number of unprepared people to buy them, realize the work required, and sell them off. These are not people who tried and failed; these folks never tried. I would count those as a marketing failure (maybe), not a failure of the product. In years to come, we will likely begin to see postings from those who tried and failed. Whether that is a failing of the box or the keeper has yet to be determined. 

I see that eBay has a number of "Flow Hives" available from China - http://www.ebay.com/itm/Flow-Hive-f...705188?hash=item4afb4cf764:g:GngAAOSwu1VW62sV
I notice that they do not have the tree-like logo that the Flow Hives have on them. Are they already being counterfeited?!


----------



## D Coates

ritan1 said:


> Are they already being counterfeited?!


No doubt. Umpteen million in sales before they even hit the market? Then 6+ months before the orders start being satisfied? The Chinese will be all over that like a skinny chicken on a fat June bug.


----------



## clyderoad

Michael Bush said:


> >Just wondering why you would even go there......
> 
> Because people are already going there...


That makes sense.


----------



## Agis Apiaries

D Coates said:


> The Chinese will be all over that like a skinny chicken on a fat June bug.


I'm sure the Chinese will be very careful to use only safe plastic that won't leach nasty chemicals into your honey. :scratch:


----------



## challenger

deknow said:


> When they dont, they often end up hopelessly queenless after following common advice of destroying queen cells.
> 
> I always advise (and teach) new beekeepers with new packages to make some kind of split (and raise a queen) when they find cells.
> 
> What do you advise a first year beekeeper with queen cells to do? ...remember, they can't reliably find a queen (or know if one has already swarmed).
> 
> First year beekeepers should absolutely understand, and be prepared to split and/or raise a queen one way or another....grafting isnt ever required to raise queens...it is just efficient and convenient.


My post says, "graft queens". Moving queen cells is not grafting. 
Of course beekeeping 102 would suggest trying to make walk away splits. This isn't the very basics I was talking about.
How many people do you teach to become beekeepers each year? Is this mentoring or teaching for a fee? Just wondering BTW - I see absolutely nothing wrong with getting paid for knowledge. Unfortunately most people I know that "get into" teaching have "gotten into" beekeeping only a year or two before. It's the whole newbeek phenomenon we all run into. So many newbeeks jump in with both feet and wallet. They have one good season and proclaim themselves to be the best beekeeper out there since their "girls" lived a whole season. Now they want to pass along their wealth of knowledge and jump out of their clothes to mentor any poor slob that's dumb enough to get into beekeeping. Their knowledge turns out to be junk and their "students" are more ignorant than before they met.
I know you are not a newbeek BTW so I'll assume you have been through all you need to go through in order to get a newbeek off the ground.


----------



## rwurster

Agis Apiaries said:


> I'm sure the Chinese will be very careful to use only safe plastic that won't leach nasty chemicals into your honey. :scratch:


Hahaha that's the truth. They were producing knock offs soon after the flow hives made so much in their startup. We know China's track record for food safety and unadulterated honey is impeccable


----------



## Joe Hillmann

How does/will the flow hive work when it comes to extracting honey for sale? I know each state/country will have different rules but here in Wisconsin any extracting, processing or bottling is required to be done in a facility that meets certain requirements. I personally don't know of any hobby beekeeper who extracts in a facility that would meet the minimum requirements they still sell their honey but keep below the radar of inspectors. 

I realize at this point it is mostly hobbyist buying them but if a sideliner or commercial beekeeper were to switch to flow hive supers to stay legal they would have to remove them and bring them into a facility to do so. Which may defeat the reason of having them.


----------



## Richard Cryberg

rwurster said:


> Hahaha that's the truth. They were producing knock offs soon after the flow hives made so much in their startup. We know China's track record for food safety and unadulterated honey is impeccable


When you can not get a patent to protect your idea someone is sure to make knock offs if there appears to be a market. Last I looked the Australians had abandoned their original patent application and submitted a new application, in addition to filing applications on a decapping method that has nothing at all to do with flow hives. Looks like they are years away from having a actual patent and by then they will have collected all the easy money and the product is not big enough to hire lawyers to defend any patent anyhow. That is assuming the patent is ever granted which seems very unlikely based on my patent experience. Seems like obvious prior art exists that should prevent a patent from being granted. It is cheap and easy to file patent applications. It is hard and expensive to get an actual patent granted and even more expensive to defend that patent.


----------



## odfrank

Another one on Craigslist only $500 for this one. 

http://sacramento.craigslist.org/grd/5509708026.html


----------



## BeeBop

> I did things backward-I bought the Flow Hive set-up because I thought I wanted to have a beehive in the backyard and the city of Sacramento now allows it. Then I went to the BeeKeepers Association and read books. *They are more work than I am prepared to do! *I was not looking to sell or even use the honey (since I cannot eat honey) *but wanted to "help" the bees*.


Another victim of fancy advertising. The real genius from the Flow Hive™ people isn't the hardware. It's the advertising and play on peoples emotions.

When the price for one comes down to $225 I'm in.


----------



## tanksbees

odfrank said:


> Another one on Craigslist only $500 for this one.
> 
> http://sacramento.craigslist.org/grd/5509708026.html


From the ad:

*Then I went to the BeeKeepers Association and read books. They are more work than I am prepared to do! I was not looking to sell or even use the honey (since I cannot eat honey) but wanted to "help" the bees. I will be helping them by having a bee friendly yard instead of keeping them!*

It's amazing that people would impulse buy something as expensive as this


----------



## sweetas

I need clarification here. At $600 plus, it is a stupid system that does not work; however if you pay $225 or less it is highly desirable and obviously will work.

It sort of reminds me of one of George Bernard Shaw's statements. "we've established what you are, we are now just negotiating the price".


----------



## Chuck Jachens

Sometimes we like to keep a reminder of past mistakes so we don't make them again.


----------



## Green Tractor

rwurster said:


> Hahaha that's the truth. They were producing knock offs soon after the flow hives made so much in their startup. We know China's track record for food safety and unadulterated honey is impeccable


I'm new to beekeeping but not to patents (I have several on fairly technical matters). If the patent has been maintained and properly registered internationally, then Flow could shut down sales in nations where the IP is properly registered. They could even force China to crack down per various treaties (that's a joke in patent attorney circles, largely because any sentence that mixes "China" and "IP protection" is laughable). But Flow could certainly quickly and easily shut down US sales with an order to eBay/CL or whoever. 

I don't want a Flow hive, but I applaud them for their effort and their invention. Most people wake up at night with a good idea, but few will put their tail on the line to implement, finance and market them. Those that do deserve a metric ton of applause. As for pricing, I suspect a lot of that is backlog. Once the backlog works down they can lower a price to get orders back in. Give it a few years - and maybe some additional revisions - and a lot more beeks might actually become honey plumbers.

Not me, though. Absent some accident I like the physical work.


----------



## ritan1

Let's at least give the guy credit for reading the books and attending a beekeeper's association. At least he learned the lesson before killing several thousand bees.


----------



## AHudd

ASCAP can't shut down Chinese infringement of intellectual properties.

Alex


----------



## Ziva

sweetas said:


> I need clarification here. At $600 plus, it is a stupid system that does not work; however if you pay $225 or less it is highly desirable and obviously will work.


It was the *false/misleading advertising* by the Flowhive guys that suckered gullible people into believing the FlowHive is an endless "honey keg" ("Honey On Tap!") and will "help/save" the bees. They also mislead people into thinking "less disturbance" to the bees meant "no work". 

This is *EASILY* seen by the descriptions the sellers on CL wrote about the FlowHive.


----------



## jwcarlson

Something about a fool and their money...

Anyway, you can't blame the Flow Hive people. It's not like this was theft. Ding-dongs willingly paid money to them. These are the same people buying AS SEEN ON TV stuff, infomercial products, and garbage from door-to-door salesmen "back in the day".


----------



## Green Tractor

AHudd said:


> ASCAP can't shut down Chinese infringement of intellectual properties.
> 
> Alex


ASCAP is for music and similar copyrights, but your point that US law won't stop the Chinese from infringing US IP is understood and agreed regardless of mechanism.

However, a US patent-holder _can_ stop a Chinese infringement from being sold (or even marketed) _in the USA_. The rules there are really no different than if a non-Chinese actor (your neighbor) did the same with your IP. Assuming Flow has proper patents in any nation, that nation's laws should presumably protect the Flow product the extent that the law of that nation allows it.

It's been a while since I had to pay attention to all the little details, because after the first few patents I settled on my "go to" list of jurisdictions and left it at that. Suffice to say I expect China to copy anything I publish to the extent they find it useful to them. All I can do is stop them from selling in the nations where I am covered (which included nation's that have an IP treaty with the US that covers the tech I patented). That was enough for me. 

And honestly, just how many nations would be interested in my patent on tap-water powered cold fusion anyway? It's kind of an odd niche industry... 

Back on topic, I saw some videos on the Flow system and thought it pretty cool, but wonder if it could withstand time. You've got a lot of contact surface that can easily be gummed up by nature, not to mention tens of thousands of little critters that are genetically programmed to glue stuff together anytime it looks like it might come loose. I think it'd be fun for those of us who manage a handful of hives, but imagine if a producer had to extract and clean several dozen clogged frames a day. It might get old real fast.

I'm still new at this so have no real frame of judgement other than helping others. It's impressive, but right now I think probably not for me. 

Thanks.


----------



## lemmje

ritan1 said:


> Let's at least give the guy credit for reading the books and attending a beekeeper's association. At least he learned the lesson before killing several thousand bees.


Hey, i've read all kinds of books on bees and am the First Officer at the bee club, have been keeping bees for a long time, and i still kill thousands of bees! D'OH!

Just beekeeping it real....


----------



## ritan1

lemmje said:


> Hey, i've read all kinds of books on bees and am the First Officer at the bee club, have been keeping bees for a long time, and i still kill thousands of bees! D'OH!
> 
> Just beekeeping it real....


True, dat! I know I have a bunch more lessons to learn (and bees to kill?)...
But seriously, he did learn maybe the most important lesson - this is hard-ass work!


----------



## challenger

Green Tractor said:


> I'm new to beekeeping but not to patents (I have several on fairly technical matters). If the patent has been maintained and properly registered internationally, then Flow could shut down sales in nations where the IP is properly registered. They could even force China to crack down per various treaties (that's a joke in patent attorney circles, largely because any sentence that mixes "China" and "IP protection" is laughable). But Flow could certainly quickly and easily shut down US sales with an order to eBay/CL or whoever.
> 
> I don't want a Flow hive, but I applaud them for their effort and their invention. Most people wake up at night with a good idea, but few will put their tail on the line to implement, finance and market them. Those that do deserve a metric ton of applause. As for pricing, I suspect a lot of that is backlog. Once the backlog works down they can lower a price to get orders back in. Give it a few years - and maybe some additional revisions - and a lot more beeks might actually become honey plumbers.
> 
> Not me, though. Absent some accident I like the physical work.


Well you are giving the people at flow hive a lot more credit than I would. I don't call using Internet funding "putting your tail on the line". Imo they have preyed on the people that think they are all just out to, "save the bees". They received several times their original funding goal which, in my estimation, means free money. Yeah, big risk takers, really? 



Ziva said:


> It was the *false/misleading advertising* by the Flowhive guys that suckered gullible people into believing the FlowHive is an endless "honey keg" ("Honey On Tap!") and will "help/save" the bees. They also mislead people into thinking "less disturbance" to the bees meant "no work".
> 
> This is *EASILY* seen by the descriptions the sellers on CL wrote about the FlowHive.


Agreed


----------



## AHudd

Green Tractor said:


> And honestly, just how many nations would be interested in my patent on tap-water powered cold fusion anyway? It's kind of an odd niche industry...
> 
> I'm still new at this so have no real frame of judgement other than helping others. It's impressive, but right now I think probably not for me.
> 
> Thanks.


Since you've mastered cold fusion, ridding the world of Varroa should be a walk in the park. That would be a big help to others.

Thanks
Alex


----------



## Richard Cryberg

Green Tractor said:


> However, a US patent-holder _can_ stop a Chinese infringement from being sold (or even marketed) _in the USA_. The rules there are really no different than if a non-Chinese actor (your neighbor) did the same with your IP. Assuming Flow has proper patents in any nation, that nation's laws should presumably protect the Flow product the extent that the law of that nation allows it..
> 
> Thanks.


You assume they actually have a patent. They have never claimed they had a patent. They only claimed they had applied for a patent. A patent application number is not the same as a patent number and does not mean that a patent will ever issue. In fact most patent applications end up abandoned in the waste basket and never issue. No one has ever supplied an issued patent number and country that granted the patent for a flow hive as far as I can tell. The patent application was a good marketing gimmick IMHO. These guys are good marketers. If a patent did issue I am sure it would fail a test in court based on obvious prior art. That is the fate of 2/3s of patents that go to court. So, just on general odds it is a good bet to think courts would not uphold a patent on flow frames.


----------



## rwurster

I agree the genius of the flowhive was the marketing aspect of their product. As has been pointed out numerous times, a very similar device was around back in the day and it didn't take off. I think it's a cool idea but know I wouldn't run them. With all the positive or negative aspects to the design I would run one super of them (if they weren't so darned expensive) on the hive by my back door and only then it would be to impress people with that magical "honey on tap" idea that is put forth. There's lots of behind the scenes knowledge that makes a hive survive and produce a surplus of harvestable honey, which most of us know. A fool and his money are soon parted, definitely. Its a cool gadget, definitely, for the price, definitely not.


----------



## Green Tractor

I thought I heard Flow say in one of their videos that they had a patent. If not, then like you said they are just hoping they have something in the future. "Patent Pending" (as it has been droned into me) is nothing more than a warning to others that they might be subject to an issue in the future. It's also a call for prior-art.

Again, I am talking just what I know and have seen when it comes to my specialized areas of engineering. One of our lawyers told me the Chinese never bother with arguing prior art - they just keep flooding markets with stolen IP until the overwhelm the system. For instance Cisco had their entire proprietary OS stolen by Chinese industrial espionage, and had to compete with it worldwide. Cisco had its case dead to rights, but China still sells the stolen works today. The best Cisco got was a forced "license fee" they paid to Cisco. IP is never a replacement for good customer service and good products.

It's sad we see so much work get stolen. It's tough to compete against yourself. I'd like to see the USA work a little harder getting our "hard" products better protected worldwide. China and others will keep stealing so long as we let them.


----------



## sweetas

When I first heard of the flow hive February last year, I did check out the US patent and it is there plus multiple draining system.


----------



## Oldtimer

Re the recidivism rate we may be jumping the gun here. Thousands of units have been sold, and at this piont we know of 2 that have showed up on Ebay.

I am sure there will be more, but there is a normal rate of mind change with any product requiring user input, and a beehive is particularly complex.


----------



## sweetas

Good point, on the ABC (Australia) (Australian Story) program it was stated that the Flow Hive had been sold to 140 countries. I have been advised that over 5,000 hives have been sold in Australia.

About 25 of our WA Apiarist Society members have flowhives.

Just checked Gumtree, there are 3 for sale. A very small percentage. When the Apple IPhone 5/6/7/ went on sale, they were on ebay etc immediately.

I did hear before it went on crowd funding and afterwards it was a total scam. Well I believe they have delivered the product to all that have paid for it.

It will now live on the quality the product.

One improvement I think needs to be made is that the spout needs to be an elbow so the honey can flow into a container with a lid on just big enough for the for the spout.


Criticism on anything is OK provided it is informed and fair. I think a lot of the previous is neither.

I will be meeting Stuart Anderson ( Co-inventor) on Wednesday.


----------



## mlmihlfried

The only thing I want to hear from this post is someone who actually used one and if it worked or not. This thread is unbelievable. I keep getting emails for new posts and it never has any worthwhile information.


----------



## Eddie Honey

You can change your settings to not receive notifications from this or any post.



mlmihlfried said:


> The only thing I want to hear from this post is someone who actually used one and if it worked or not. This thread is unbelievable. I keep getting emails for new posts and it never has any worthwhile information.


----------



## jim lyon

mlmihlfried said:


> The only thing I want to hear from this post is someone who actually used one and if it worked or not. This thread is unbelievable. I keep getting emails for new posts and it never has any worthwhile information.


This thread is for discussion.

You need to subscribe to this one instead. 

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...Hive-Firsthand-Experience&highlight=Flow+hive


----------



## Michael Bush

>The only thing I want to hear from this post is someone who actually used one and if it worked or not.

I have used five. They worked.


----------



## Brent Bean

*EZ-Flow Beehive, boom or bust?*

I have had several people in the last week tell me that they have thrown down over $600 to have a beehive with a honey tap. They asked me if I thought it would work. Having only heard and not really giving an honest evaluation of performance or practicality of this new hive, I did some research with an open mind, what I came up with is this.
First I have to tip my hat to the inventors, they became rich on an idea they made into reality whether or not it proves effective or not.
Pro: It’s said you never really need to open the hive and disturb the bees.
Con: Is that even practical? How would you evaluate the queen performance, is she laying spotty brood or all drones. Or if they are being overrun with new pests like small hive beetle.
Pro: To get honey for breakfast simply open the observation window and look to see if the comb is full of honey, turn the handle and wait for the honey to fill the jar, yummy. 
Con: Bees don’t always fill the comb form inside to outside, without looking at the frame you to see if its capped you could be getting some honey and some nectar, this will lead to fermentation problems. Without looking at the entire frame you could also have brood that will be ripped apart this will also add brood juice to the honey, yummy. 
Pro: You can eliminate all the extraction equipment and additional honey supers, and forget all the labor of honey extraction. This is a selling point of the price of the ez-flow hive.
Perhaps in my opinion, the ez-flow will fail because mechanically it won’t work after the bees glue it together with propollis and burr comb. Anybody with little beekeeping experience knows that burr comb is not as fragile as comb it’s dense and takes effort with a hive tool to remove. Propollis even more so and all the movable parts will be coated and glued together. Another weak point, here in Michigan we have a cold long winter, that requires 60 to 90 lbs. of honey this can be done with two deep supers. The hive kit comes with one brood box and one super, can more be added? In my area I need to go with three brood boxes to keep up with population.
These are some of the glaring features that make the Ez-flow hive impractical , and will be a fad that will only discourage people to forget about beekeeping.
Any other opinions?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: EZ-Flow Beehive, boom or bust?*

>> Any other opinions?

Definitely. :lpf:
The Flow Hive has resulted in a single thread with more than 2100 responses!


The largest thread ever on Beesource: http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?307501-Extractor-less-honey-by-Flow-Hive


----------



## Billboard

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

The flow hive is for the person who whats to reap the rewards without doing the work. Its the lazy mans hive, shortcut hive, The Flop Hive..


----------



## Nabber86

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I found somebody on Craigslist selling one. Only $720. 

At least they posted a nice picture: https://kansascity.craigslist.org/for/5533082848.html


----------



## Agis Apiaries

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Nabber86 said:


> I found somebody on Craigslist selling one. Only $720.


Ha ha ha.... I can get three Langs for that price.


----------



## Nabber86

Michael Bush said:


> >The only thing I want to hear from this post is someone who actually used one and if it worked or not.
> 
> I have used five. They worked.


Relevant: http://youtu.be/WbMV9qYIXqM#t=3m20s


Skip ahead to 3:20


----------



## D Coates

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Nabber86 said:


> I found somebody on Craigslist selling one. Only $720.
> 
> At least they posted a nice picture: https://kansascity.craigslist.org/for/5533082848.html


I'm 10 miles from them... still not going to get it though. For $720 they're going to have to find another sucker.


----------



## tanksbees

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

How much do the frames from one of these flow supers weight? 10 pounds?

10 pounds
* $1.00/lb for plastic resin
* 2 to cover molding and assembly
* 2 for R&D payback
* 2 for overhead & profit
= $80

+ $20 wooden box
+ $20 shipping cost

= $120

If priced realistically these should sell for $120. $240 would be the scam artist price. $720 is the F-U price.


----------



## challenger

Well I made the mistake of looking at another flow hive video. This was from the manufacturer. I'm hoping we can boil down one very basic problem with this company. BTW this fact is the reason I've changed from being a wait and see observer to a staunch anti flow observer. 
The company has stated several reason their design is, "better for the bees" and this the germ that has infested my brain and made me think these people should be taken to court. 
The straw that broke my back was when the dude in the video said, "even if you don't want to start beekeeping, please consider donating to this cause to help save the bees" This isn't verbatim but it definitely IS what he says in different words. This is a person that is building a business by preying on the emotions of the ignorant. This is a blatant effort by these people to fleece the uninformed and the many people that are being educated by flow. These are the same people that look at a flow video and comment things such as, "I almost cried" '' you people are saving the bees" and on and on. 
P

Please view their video and look objectively at their comments AND the replies before flaming this post. 
At this point I don't care if the flow hive is the best thing in beekeeping. For me, the company has obtained funding through unethical and unscrupulous means. For this reason I condemn them and this flow hive.


----------



## DanielD

Challenger, I largely agree with you but almost everything advertised now is preying on emotions for a buck. Even the government does that. "Climate change" is a good example. It makes you want to cry over that famous picture of the poor polar bear clinging to that last piece of iceburg. Don't you want to save the polar bear? All about the money.


----------



## challenger

Yes it is all about the mighty dollar BUT there is now the almighty Internet as well. As it has worked FOR Flow Hive it should work AGAINST Flow Hive. 
They used the Internet as their major (putting it mildly) advertising agent. We, as in we here that feel the way that I do, should use the Internet to expose flow hives and the company as what they really are. Agents of spreading misinformation and ripping people off. 
Many will say, "they wouldn't go to all the production trouble etcetera if they were just going to rip people's let off". I say yes they would IF it pays. It's certainly paid so far for them. 


DanielD said:


> Challenger, I largely agree with you but almost everything advertised now is preying on emotions for a buck. Even the government does that. "Climate change" is a good example. It makes you want to cry over that famous picture of the poor polar bear clinging to that last piece of iceburg. Don't you want to save the polar bear? All about the money.


----------



## arnaud

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Billboard said:


> The flow hive is for the person who whats to reap the rewards without doing the work. Its the lazy mans hive, shortcut hive, The Flop Hive..


Pretty sure if you lived in the 19th century, you would have been the type saying the same thing about the Langstroth design.


----------



## tanksbees

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



arnaud said:


> Pretty sure if you lived in the 19th century, you would have been the type saying the same thing about the Langstroth design.


I would have to work at my day job for six months to pay for flow hives for my apiary, which might save me an hour or two at extraction time at most.

It certainly is not the "Lazy Mans Hive"


----------



## challenger

I'm not defending anyone, the can do this themselves but I have to agree. Simply go look at the flow videos and read the comments. Several all but say, "I'm lazy and I need results NOW so I'm getting a flow hive" 
I mean really? Go look at these videos please. The comments are almost comedic. Like a satire on how people, who's lives are already ridiculously easy compare to most parts of the world, are being vocal about how they see no value in the word, "work". It's just nuts how soft people have become. It's now totally acceptable to beg for money and to brag about how lazy one is. Read the comments. It makes me embarrasses to say I share the same species as these fools. Tap these people for character and all that would come out is dust. 



arnaud said:


> Pretty sure if you lived in the 19th century, you would have been the type saying the same thing about the Langstroth design.


----------



## odfrank

I was hired to finish, stock and maintain a flow hive today. I was surprised to find that it comes with foundationless frames. That seems like a risky mess in the hands of thousands of beginner beekeepers. It comes with a plastic queen excluder. Is it recommended to use an excluder? I feel that the name Flowhive is a misnomer to the unaware. It is a standard hive with a Flow honey super.


----------



## Oldtimer

odfrank said:


> I was surprised to find that it comes with foundationless frames. That seems like a risky mess in the hands of thousands of beginner beekeepers.


There are issues sending bee products such as wax foundation internationally. Are the frames suitable to have US purchased foundation fitted?



odfrank said:


> It comes with a plastic queen excluder. Is it recommended to use an excluder?.


Yes. In their testing they found queens will occasionally lay in the flow combs so they recommend an excluder is used.


----------



## Beethinking

The frames can accept plastic foundation easily. They do come with wooden starter strip inserts to encourage straight combs.


----------



## odfrank

I would think that plastic foundation with a tiny beeswax coating would not have shipping restrictions. The standard wood comb guide seems to be glued in. The screened bottom board has fancy joinery, a sloped landing board which requires the bees for some strange reason to climb a 1/2 step if they land on it. In the rear of the SBB is a piece of flashing I have yet to understand. My main concern for novices is that the 8 frame brood chamber is small for many climates and will require an additional super either as a food chamber or increased size brood chamber. They are being sold a "hive" that is only part of what they need. In my area if the flow super is left on after the honey flow it will become a propolis trap, and in winter it will be filled with fast granulating (one week) ivy honey. Removing the honey is only a small part of keeping a hive and the unit as received is missing other major components.


----------



## Beethinking

The metal flashing is to prevent you from cutting yourself on the screen that attaches at the back. The bottom board is sloped backwards to help honey flow out of the frames, which means the entrance would be massive if the wooden block wasn't there. The wooden comb guides should have come unattached, giving the user the option of using them or going with the foundation of their choosing.


----------



## odfrank

I was not given the instruction manual which I will download and study.


----------



## Oldtimer

Yup, the old saying is true. - "When all else fails, read the instructions".


----------



## odfrank

*Re: EZ-Flow Beehive, boom or bust?*

Wow. Slope for honey drainage built into the the bottom board, not the Flowframe itself? So does that mean the frames will not drain properly if used on a level hive or front sloping hive as many normal hives are setup? And the honey is drained from the back so you must set the hive up out in the open, not against a wall or fence? I better read the instructions.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

I want my hives level or sloped very slightly forward so any water from condensation &c runs out the front instead of staying inside. 

When I finally put my flow super on I'll put the whole hive up on two shims, front and back. Then, at harvest time I'll pull out the rear shim. I might screw a handle onto the bottom board rear cleat to make it easier to lift/tilt. 

If the BB is well propolised to the brood deep then the handle might not be necessary.


----------



## Beethinking

*Re: EZ-Flow Beehive, boom or bust?*

In regard to the slope in the bottom board rather than the frames, that is correct. My suggestion was to simply have folks tilt their hives back at time of harvest since it's not that difficult. If you use a regular bottom board, you could also do the shims like IAmTheWaterbug described. Access to the back of the hive is pretty standard, even without Flow frames, since most people work the hive from back there.


----------



## aunt betty

*Re: EZ-Flow Beehive, boom or bust?*

SUHWEET. This just gets better and better. One deep, foundationless, plastic excluder, and one super. People are going to have it soooo easy and I can't wait to start gathering up the swarms. When they ask me what they did wrong guess what I'm gonna say?


----------



## DirtyLittleSecret

*Re: EZ-Flow Beehive, boom or bust?*

Already sold mine and amazed this thread is still going.


----------



## Tenpin

*Re: EZ-Flow Beehive, boom or bust?*

Mine's booming. Two brood boxes loaded w/ bees, Flow Super is on and about 100% filled. Ordered a metal QE since I've learned that plastic ones can cause more damage to wings than a metal one.
Flow Frames will be removed after June harvest and replaced with a medium super.
My typical 10-frame hive is running a close second but with 20% more space to fill it's likely even - it just looks behind.

(Not all Flow owners are as clueless as many of you would like to believe.)


----------



## jwcarlson

Oldtimer said:


> There are issues sending bee products such as wax foundation internationally. Are the frames suitable to have US purchased foundation fitted?


OT, the Flow Hives sold in the US shipped from a US manufacturer, so the shipping of foundation shouldn't have been an issue. The Flow frames themselves were a second shipment months later (at least for the guy I know who I am helping). I had the guy go buy frames with plastic foundation, I refuse to deal with foundationless again unless I can fully control it. Since he doesn't know anything about bees, I'm not going to be responsible for dealing with someone else's mess.
They can be fit with plastic foundation (not sure wax would fit as it's grooved top and bottom bars), but the instructions tell you to snap the piece of wood in and glue it.


----------



## Tenpin

jwcarlson said:


> OT, the Flow Hives sold in the US shipped from a US manufacturer, so the shipping of foundation shouldn't have been an issue.


The woodenware did indeed ship from the US but that woodenware ships worldwide so waxed foundation would still be an issue.
Flow Frames shipped from AU in large lots (to reduce importation red tape) to distribution centers around the globe before shipping to individuals hence the difference in delivery dates.

I personally did not go foundationless. Used waxed plastic foundation.


----------



## Tenpin

*2 months in with my Flow Hive*

Bees through the observation windows and washboarding.


----------



## Tenpin

*My Flow Hive: Week 5 - Oxalic Acid Vaporization Treatment*


----------



## Tenpin

*My Flow Hive: Week 6 - Adding the Super*

Rolling wax onto my Flow Frame before installation.


----------



## troymoore4

*Flow Hive/Frames*

flow hive was mentioned in a thread i posteds in im curious as to what everyones opinon i9s on the saubject. personaly, i think that its cleaver idea, but maybe needs more testing/improvements'


----------



## camero7

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Ha Ha yes I've had that look a few too many times. 

Troymoore here is a light read that once completed will leave you with an overall answer to your question on peoples opinions on the subject.

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...ractor-less-honey-by-Flow-Hive&highlight=flow


----------



## Bkwoodsbees

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Old timer we.won't hear from him for a while , that's a month of reading.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

LOL


----------



## morton.hollyb

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



troymoore4 said:


> flow hive was mentioned in a thread i posteds in im curious as to what everyones opinon i9s on the saubject. personaly, i think that its cleaver idea, but maybe needs more testing/improvements'


This is an interesting review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oPKUxsQJUc


----------



## Barry

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

We all knew this was coming -

Original flow hive and flow frame producer in China!

*Ella-Green Bee <[email protected]>
3:34 AM (2 hours ago)
to me*


*







*​ 

Dear Beekeeping Equipment Imports Manager,


Good day.


This is Ella from Shenzhen Green Bee Industrial Co.,Ltd. We are Original Flow Hive and Flow Frame Producer in China.


We supply high quality products with competitive price .Now our company are promoting the honey flow hive-honey on tap .


Pls feel free to contact with us for your any further request if you are interested with our products.thank you.















Any further request pls feel free to contact with us .Thank you.



[HR][/HR]Best Regards

Ella

Shenzhen Green Bee Industrial Co.,Ltd
Room 1418,New Town Plaza,Puxia Road Henggang Street
Longgang District Shenzhen, Guangdong, China 
Mob:0086 153 0269 2116 Tel :0755 2831 7591 Skype:greenbee.ella
Email:[email protected] Website:www.cngreenbee.com


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Perhaps we could now have a _Beesource _private labeled / branded Flow Hive! 




k:


----------



## jwcarlson

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Well...

Since all of these Flow Hive maniacs (except TenPin) for over 100 pages who told us they were going to update us on their fancy new hive$... but haven't.

I guess I will.

This is a picture from the Flow Hive I've been managing for one of the land owners where I have an outyard. I must say that I'm impressed in the sense that they're filling it up and don't seem to be cramming cracks with propolis. Of course I timed adding it with a good flow, but they did jump on it pretty quick even above the excluder.



I didn't add any wax or anything to the Flow Frame$(tm).


----------



## clong

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

I purchased two Flowhives. My bees died out last winter, so I put the set of Flow frames on one hive started from a package installed April 8th, and one nuc hive installed April 29th. It was too late to catch the main flow. The flow in my area, Richmond, VA seemed to peter out by mid-June. We had 23 days of steady/hard rain in May.

I left them on into July to see what the bees would do. Both hives patched up the cracks in the frames for the most part. One of the hives propolized the gaps between frames, but the cracks between cells are fine. I tried cracking the cells open on a couple of frames. They opened up with minimal resistance. The plastic appears to be sturdy. 

I'll be taking 5 hives into winter this year. Hopefully, at least two will make it through to Spring.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Nice work JWC, I guess once it's time you'll be getting the owner over for a ceremonial crank turning?


----------



## NewbeeInNH

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Wow. 108 pages on this thread. Well, I can't read all those.

From the posts I did read, I am starting to see why some folks are a bit oppositional to this system for the reason of being too mechanical and putting more distance between a beekeeper and his/her/its bees. I'm wondering, not to be a bee therapist or anything, if this system is "psychologically damaging" to a colony, more than, say, using an escape board and snatching the super off when they aren't looking.

I only remark because I watched the video posted on the other thread showing the clear agitation of the bees while the honey was being released from the flow hive.


----------



## Tenpin

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Figured it was time to wade back into this mess of a thread 

I harvested last week. Pulled 7.5 quarts and the only issue I had was hungry bees. The dearth is on and I have 6 hives in close proximity so the scent of honey brought more than just the casual observer around back.
I wrapped the extraction tubes and jars in cling wrap but that can get messy when switching jars.

















I pulled the Flow frames off a week later but had to drain them again as the bees started refilling them a bit. I think they were moving honey up. This go around I rigged a set up so the honey ran into closed containers.


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Thanks for posting. 

How many minutes/hours does it take to fill a jar?


----------



## sakhoney

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

love it - when will Americans or any other person figure out that China manufacturing is not as cheap as they thank - now you can buy direct from the people making the thing and bypass the inventor.


----------



## Tenpin

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Not long at all Eddie. 3 minutes or so. It was 95 degrees though ☺


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Here's a link to a video I found of a flowhive working just as intended, a nice, feelgood video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5RN-ztkmn8


----------



## jwcarlson

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



Oldtimer said:


> Here's a link to a video I found of a flowhive working just as intended, a nice, feelgood video.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5RN-ztkmn8


I bottled almost 200 pounds of honey in the time that video took.  And it's in fast forward. 
OK, so it took me a little bit longer than the video... 




Oldtimer said:


> Nice work JWC, I guess once it's time you'll be getting the owner over for a ceremonial crank turning?


It's at his place, just a few feet from my bees. We ditched the foundationle$$ frames they sent with it, built him a second 8-frame brood box, and timed the placement of the Flow $uper to hopefully force them into service above the excluder. $eem$ to have worked. We'll see what harvest is like. Having to harve$t and remove this box before winter kind of kill$ the deal to me. What a pain. It's not really any different than a conventional super in that regard. Except that the honey in it isn't really usable for winter unless you feed it back to them after 'extracting' it.

It's a novelty item... nothing more. I cannot imagine harvesting honey into open containers around here in August. Would be better off gassing them down, pulling the box, and letting it drain somewhere else. Does that sound familiar at all?


----------



## Flyin Brian

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Well I intended to come back in here and post up a video of our successful extraction from the Flow hive but after re-reading many of the snooty comments that the naysayers posted I think I will just go somewhere else. It seems like there is just too much of the "good 'ol boy" club in here for my liking. The Flow hive did work as advertised, btw. Take care.


----------



## AHudd

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

I'll have to say I am one who thought it was a scam. If they work for more than a couple of years I'll eat my words. I think it is still a little early to call them a rousing success. If they are the best thing to happen to beekeeping in ___ years, then I hope the people that own them don't keep it a secret. 

Alex


----------



## Bee Arthur

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

I've been reserving judgement of the Flow Hive until after they've been in use in North America for this first year. From what I can tell from people's comments and videos, the hardware pretty much works as advertised. Which is great.

I'm still dislike the way the Flow Hive was marketed; which is to say, giving the impression that it takes the hard work out of beekeeping. I'm afraid many people who bought the Flow Hive to use as a honey tap will either: A) be surprised by the amount of work required to keep bees even without using traditional extraction methods, or B) be oblivious to the amount of work required and therefore neglect their bees. But for those people who buy the Flow Hive and are willing to put in the labor as a beekeeper, good on them. The Flow Hive isn't for me, but neither is a Top Bar hive and I don't chastise TBH beeks for their equipment.

What I don't like are lazy beekeepers that put their bees and their neighbor's bees at risk. The equipment used is much less important than the calories expended.


----------



## Tenpin

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



Bee Arthur said:


> ...But for those people who buy the Flow Hive and are willing to put in the labor as a beekeeper, good on them. The Flow Hive isn't for me, but neither is a Top Bar hive and I don't chastise TBH beeks for their equipment..


Kudos for saying that


----------



## jwcarlson

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



Flyin Brian said:


> Well I intended to come back in here and post up a video of our successful extraction from the Flow hive but after re-reading many of the snooty comments that the naysayers posted I think I will just go somewhere else. It seems like there is just too much of the "good 'ol boy" club in here for my liking. The Flow hive did work as advertised, btw. Take care.


Go find a safe place.



Bee Arthur said:


> The Flow Hive isn't for me, but neither is a Top Bar hive and I don't chastise TBH beeks for their equipment.


You should, TBHs are goofy.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

*I *don't think TBHs are "goofy". 

They are very easy/inexpensive to construct from 'found' materials, and can offer a decent introduction to beekeeping.

I have moved away from the TBHs that I started beekeeping with, but I don't regret making that choice initially.


----------



## jwcarlson

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



Rader Sidetrack said:


> I have moved away from the TBHs that I started beekeeping with, but I don't regret making that choice initially.


They make good observation sized hives and swarm machines.
I do regret making the choice initially.


----------



## bucksbees

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

From an email from them.

"Hi Everyone,

It’s winter here in the subtropics, and the bees are bringing in so much honey it’s unbelievable. Watch as we harvest 44 jars from one of our office hives and attempt to stack them up in a big pyramid.


Seeing our team on time lapse, rushing around stacking honey, reminds me of the crazy busy year we’ve had here in the office fulfilling the 35,000 pre orders from our original campaign!

And it’s such a good feeling to see all of the photos and videos flowing in from all corners of the globe as people experience the wonder of harvesting pure honey directly from their hives.

My sister Mira is currently in the USA visiting customers, and she just sent back a video of Jeff, an experienced beekeeper harvesting honey in Texas. Listen to the way he describes the extra floral notes in the Flow honey and likens it to wine tasting.

Stu and I still pinch ourselves when we think about all the people our invention has inspired, and all the people who are engaging, learning and having fun with their bees all over the world.

None of this could've happened without the Indiegogo community, who jumped on board to support us and shared our campaign far and wide.


So, to say thanks to the Indiegogo community, until Midnight August 22th our best selling Flow™ Hive Classic will be back on Indiegogo, at the original campaign price of $599 for anyone who missed out.


The best bit is, you don’t have to wait - we have hives in stock right across North America, Australia, and Europe ready to deliver to your door.

Your Flow Hive will ship within 3 working days when you place your order here.


Happy Beekeeping,

Cedar

P.S. I’m really excited to announce that we’re also releasing a brand new range of organic t-shirts. And what’s even more exciting is that 100% of the profits generated from this range between now and midnight August 22nd will be donated to The Rainforest Trust.


The preservation of forest ecosystems around the world is vital to the health of thousands of species of pollinators - so it feels great to know that the support of our customers can assist this organisation’s fantastic work."

Wonder how much they clear this year?


https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/...from-your-beehive-environment--4/x/10378208#/


----------



## Agis Apiaries

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



bucksbees said:


> "Listen to the way he describes the extra floral notes in the Flow honey and likens it to wine tasting."
> 
> Wonder how mych they clear this year?


What??? You mean that bees who live in flow hives will decide to bring back "extra floral notes" to make fine honey, as opposed to that "run of the mill" plain honey that bees in regular hives make? I didn't know that!

They'll probably make a bundle from all of the fools out there who fall for this marketing marvel and believe the outrageous hype that these crooks dish out. :waiting:

Guess I need to have a chat with my foragers about why they are refusing to bring back any extra floral notes.


----------



## bucksbees

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

For 599 dollars I can see why they bring back "extra floral notes".


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

>What??? You mean that bees who live in flow hives will decide to bring back "extra floral notes" to make fine honey, as opposed to that "run of the mill" plain honey that bees in regular hives make? I didn't know that!

They are the same "extra floral notes" you get with crush and strain and comb honey and don't get with extracted honey. Flinging the honey through the air loses a lot of flavor. You may also notice them in cappings honey that hasn't been flung through the air. I don't know how much of it is from what cause, but the honey I got from the Flow frames last year is the most flavorful and pleasant tasting honey I've ever gotten in Nebraska.


----------



## tanksbees

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Maybe they use floral scented plastic in the flow frames.


----------



## Tenpin

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Some of y'all are plain mean 

Some folks trying my honey from the Flow hive have said that there is a floral aroma to it that they had never noticed before from processed honey.


----------



## jwcarlson

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



Tenpin said:


> Some of y'all are plain mean
> 
> Some folks trying my honey from the Flow hive have said that there is a floral aroma to it that they had never noticed before from processed honey.




Probably because all they've ever had is garbage they bought at Walmart?


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Another factor is they are tasting the honey immediately on being taken from the hive, and fresh honey really does taste better, and taste will often deteriorate after being jared for a while. 

When I'm showing non beekeeping folks through a hive I normally let them put their finger in a honeycomb and have a taste, just about always they say wow that's the best honey I ever tasted. I do think it's true the extraction process takes something away.


----------



## aunt betty

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

No doubt about it the cappings are best except for comb honey.
There's some truth to this argument about flow-honey being more better. I'd charge $100/quart if I had a flow-hive and would write all over the jar in big BOLD letters about how it's more better than anything available on the market today. (snicker)


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



Tenpin said:


> Some folks trying my honey from the Flow hive have said that there is a floral aroma to it that they had never noticed before from processed honey.


I'd love to see a neutral, controlled, double-blind tasting to compare Flow vs. cappings vs. crush and strain vs. centrifugally extracted.

I'd love to participate in it!


----------



## crofter

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> I'd love to see a neutral, controlled, double-blind tasting to compare Flow vs. cappings vs. crush and strain vs. centrifugally extracted.
> 
> I'd love to participate in it!


Yes, I suspect the "spin" that is put on the subjective description alters the taste. It really is an excellent practice as "spin" certainly can elevate the price and the cost is virually zero!


----------



## Tenpin

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> I'd love to see a neutral, controlled, double-blind tasting to compare Flow vs. cappings vs. crush and strain vs. centrifugally extracted.
> 
> I'd love to participate in it!


That would be pretty interesting. The hard part would be ensuring an identical nectar source.
When I harvested my Flow hive, the honey from frame-to-frame varied in color and smell, so I reckon it's safe to assume the nectar sources were different as time went on.

This is honey from individual Flow frames - no mixing it all into a bucket, so the difference is obvious.


----------



## bucksbees

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Tenpin, at the bee meeting last night, had a lady talking about how her flow hive was full of shb, have you seen anything like that?


----------



## Tenpin

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



bucksbees said:


> Tenpin, at the bee meeting last night, had a lady talking about how her flow hive was full of shb, have you seen anything like that?


SHB will set up shop anywhere they can. They don't care what type of hive it is.

I had some, but they showed up a month after pulling the flow frames off.


----------



## bucksbees

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



Tenpin said:


> SHB will set up shop anywhere they can. They don't care what type of hive it is.
> 
> I had some, but they showed up a month after pulling the flow frames off.


Thank you.


----------



## Moby Duck

*Re: EZ-Flow Beehive, boom or bust?*

Yes, and I believe that the inventors have also sold their interests in the company as well.


----------



## Clairesmom

*Re: EZ-Flow Beehive, boom or bust?*

I have already seen used Flow Hives being offered on craigslist. I emailed one of the sellers, who wrote back that they had the Flow frames on their hives for two weeks, then decided to go back to using regular supers instead. He told me that the bees hardly went into the Flow hive frames at all. doh! If he had waited till a good strong flow he might have had different results.

I am waiting until next year, when I imagine the market will be flooded with used Flow Hives, then I am going to buy one dirt cheap just to try it out. I still think it was a great idea- for a hobbyist with one or two hives and a lot of $$$$. Not something I would use for anything more than a trial/demo- at the cost, even if it was the best thing since sliced bread I could never afford them for all of my hives. Even if I wanted to, which is a big IF.

On the other hand, if enough of them hit craigslist


----------



## Moby Duck

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Re: Flow Hive/Frames
Wow. 108 pages on this thread. Well, I can't read all those.

From the posts I did read, I am starting to see why some folks are a bit oppositional to this system for the reason of being too mechanical and putting more distance between a beekeeper and his/her/its bees. I'm wondering, not to be a bee therapist or anything, if this system is "psychologically damaging" to a colony, more than, say, using an escape board and snatching the super off when they aren't looking.

I only remark because I watched the video posted on the other thread showing the clear agitation of the bees while the honey was being released from the flow hive.
Last edited by NewbeeInNH; 07-19-2016 at 01:26 PM.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Surely Worker bees must have enough psychological problems with them knowing that they are gender-less, neither male nor female. I have heard that Drones in particular bully the workers and taunt them about this. We need urgent government intervention to place Social Worker bees in all hives to defend their Bee Rights. And while they are at it they could counsel the tens of millions of baby bees that are born fatherless, and never ever get to meet their dads. They can't even be sure if their fellow workers share the same dad as themselves and of course there are bad words that could be used to to describe their multiple mating mother. Mum produces tens of thousands of babies, doesn't tend them or feed them, or look after them in any way - what must the babies be thinking. I am surprised that they all don't get out there and fly straight into a car windscreen. 
Do they have Bee Psychologists/ Therapists in the USA? If they have none yet I am sure that if you ask around there will be a university only too willing to set up a course and take your money.
Well done for spotting how psychologically damaging Flow Hives could be to the bees, it would never have occurred to me.


----------



## cervus

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



Moby Duck said:


> Surely Worker bees must have enough psychological problems with them knowing that they are gender-less, neither male nor female. I have heard that Drones in particular bully the workers and taunt them about this. We need urgent government intervention to place Social Worker bees in all hives to defend their Bee Rights. And while they are at it they could counsel the tens of millions of baby bees that are born fatherless, and never ever get to meet their dads. They can't even be sure if their fellow workers share the same dad as themselves and of course there are bad words that could be used to to describe their multiple mating mother. Mum produces tens of thousands of babies, doesn't tend them or feed them, or look after them in any way - what must the babies be thinking. I am surprised that they all don't get out there and fly straight into a car windscreen.


:applause: I laughed.


----------



## NewbeeInNH

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Oh bee-hive.

Anyway, my bees are special. Apparently yours are just, um, ordinary.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

>Yes, and I believe that the inventors have also sold their interests in the company as well.

Based on what? They have not.


----------



## Moby Duck

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Re: Flow Hive/Frames
>Yes, and I believe that the inventors have also sold their interests in the company as well.

Based on what? They have not.
Michael Bush bushfarms.com/bees.htm "Everything works if you let it." ThePracticalBeekeeper.com 42y 40h 39yTF
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I stand corrected if I am wrong, but as a subscriber to their emails/updates on distribution etc I believe that I had an email earlier this year, explaining their decision to sell, and the details of who had purchased the rights. Since then I have had no further emails from them or anyone else. I have just searched my computer for that email but can find nothing as it would have been deleted long ago and I also have a new computer. I personally think that the concept is good and was quite surprised to see so many knockers on this forum when i read it yesterday. I too can see some conceptual problems but if they had been cheap I would have been one of the first to buy one and give it a go. Because of the cost, I erred on the side of caution and decided to wait to see what other users thought of them. I note that most of the knockers on this forum don't actually have a Flow Hive. If I find anything on the sale of the company I will post it, but I also accept that if you have an association with the company then you are probably better informed than I am. My apologies to all if I have posted incorrect information.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Well I've been generally supportive of flowhives, but that's changed to mildly negative, since a few days ago when I actually got to see one.

A guy saw bee stuff on my truck when I was outside his place, and came and grabbed me wanting advice how to start his flowhive. Went into his place and took a look, he had a kitset flowhive partly assembled. I wasn't impressed.

Frankly, it was tiny. I little 8 frame brood box, plastic excluder, and flow box on top. It is way too small. I would imagine if a nuc or swarm is installed it will fill the hive quickly and likely fill the flow box with honey. But then it's going to swarm. What got to me, this guy has been given no information. He really thought you just put the bees in & forget, other than turn on the tap from time to time.

I was working a site near him so he tagged along and watched, he was horrified how much work was involved especially when I told him everything i did (early spring here), he will also have to do with his flow hive.


----------



## Tomcleaver

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Default Re: Today in the Apiary
Hi all,

I live on Gold Coast Australia and I'm just getting into bee keeping as a back yard hobby. I haven't got a hive yet, but I am anticipating on buying one really soon. I was thinking about getting a flow hive but I'm just not sure because there has been a lot of bad comments about it. A few questions, 
-should I get a flow hive over the traditional hive, is it worth the fuss?
-how does the plastic affect the bees, do they care?
-how many hives should I start with? 
-should I just simply start with a traditional bee hive?
-why is there so many bad comments about flow?
-should I get one flow and one traditional hive, can I still compare them?
-does the plastic frames in flow hive brake and snap over time?

And anything else I need to know as a new bee keeper please tell me. Thanks

Replys would be greatly appreciated. 

Tom


----------



## Tomcleaver

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Also, will my Local bee keeper still support me if I get a flow and a traditional? 
And can I still start a bee hive in summer instead of Spring? 

Thanks


----------



## Agis Apiaries

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



Oldtimer said:


> What got to me, this guy has been given no information. He really thought you just put the bees in & forget, other than turn on the tap from time to time.
> 
> I was working a site near him so he tagged along and watched, he was horrified how much work was involved especially when I told him everything i did (early spring here), he will also have to do with his flow hive.


Therein lies the problem with FlowHive. They are a cute novelty and will pretty much do what they say it will do. It just won't do the things they convenienty don't say much about. Marketing hype.


----------



## Tomcleaver

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Is someone gunna reply to my last messages? Not being rude. 

Also My local bee keeper obviously does like the flow, and his strongest agument is that the plastic frames in the split cell technology in flow will become brittle and brake over time. Is this correct? 
-How strong is the plastic? 
-Should I go against his word and get a flow hive, will he still support me as a member with the hive?
-should I get wax foundation frames or foundationless? 
-can I still start a bee hive in summer instead of spring.

Sorry about all the questions.

Tom


----------



## clong

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



Tomcleaver said:


> Is someone gunna reply to my last messages? Not being rude.
> 
> Also My local bee keeper obviously does like the flow, and his strongest agument is that the plastic frames in the split cell technology in flow will become brittle and brake over time. Is this correct?
> -How strong is the plastic?
> -Should I go against his word and get a flow hive, will he still support me as a member with the hive?
> -should I get wax foundation frames or foundationless?
> -can I still start a bee hive in summer instead of spring.
> 
> Sorry about all the questions.
> 
> Tom


As background, I am not an experienced bee-keeper. I got started in April 2015, largely due to the FlowHive campaign. I bought two sets of frames along with their boxes. The bees took to the frames readily and began chinking up the cracks between cells, but due to a late start, and a month of rain, they did not fill the frames. I am hoping they will get to fill them next Spring.

To your questions:

-should I get wax foundation frames or foundationless?
ANS: I went with foundationless. I use crush and strain to harvest honey.

-can I still start a bee hive in summer instead of spring.
ANS: Yes, but a start earlier in the Spring is better.

-should I get a flow hive over the traditional hive, is it worth the fuss?
ANS: Only if you have the money, and really enjoy gadgets. On a strictly cost basis, I don't think it is worth it. (I enjoy gadgets and innovation.)

-how does the plastic affect the bees, do they care?
ANS: In my experience, a strong hive will take to the Flow frames readily. I suspect the bees much prefer their own comb.

-how many hives should I start with? 
ANS: At least 2.

-should I just simply start with a traditional bee hive?
ANS: This is the best way to start. Some would say use all medium frames. Ask your local beekeeper.

-why is there so many bad comments about flow?
ANS: It is costly, and it is new.

-should I get one flow and one traditional hive, can I still compare them?
ANS: Again, if you don't mind the steep cost, sure. This is what I did.

-does the plastic frames in flow hive brake and snap over time?
ANS: This was my concern. I don't think anyone knows the answer to that yet. I'm guessing they will last less than ten years. Storing them in a dark place during the off-season might help to delay embrittlement

A Flowhive might be better suited to a location with a longer season. I don't know what conditions are like in your location, but it is worth considering

Hopefully, others with more experience will respond to your questions.


----------



## Daniel Y

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*



Tomcleaver said:


> Is someone gunna reply to my last messages? Not being rude.
> 
> Also My local bee keeper obviously does like the flow, and his strongest agument is that the plastic frames in the split cell technology in flow will become brittle and brake over time. Is this correct?
> -How strong is the plastic?
> -Should I go against his word and get a flow hive, will he still support me as a member with the hive?
> -should I get wax foundation frames or foundationless?
> -can I still start a bee hive in summer instead of spring.
> 
> Sorry about all the questions.
> 
> Tom


I have no idea about the plastic or how long it will last. can plastic break? Yes. will it. I would think it is not exposed to he sun which is its worst enemy. You money your risk. I know I am not even thinking of buying one.

You need to ask you local beekeeper what they will or won't do. In my experience local beekeepers have their way of keeping bees. that is what they support and it is what they teach. mainly because it is what they know. if you want to keep bees in another way largely it is up to you to be the local beekeeper with that method. It does seem to me that you expect and then demand what you want from others. Not looking good for your expectations to be fulfilled.

My best guess would be to guide you toward wax foundation. I don't use foundation but I also understand a lot of details of being able to do that. It requires a lot of extra care and attention. Something just tells me that is not your cup of tea. Call it intuition.

Sure you can start a beehive any time you want to. will it survive? there are way to many reasons it won't to roll that die. I have people calling me in September wanting to get bees. I recommend they wait until April. Starting a hive in summer is buying the work with no reward and then sustaining the loses of winter with no chance of having gained anything from that colony first. Basically maximizing your risk and minimizing your profit.


----------



## Tomcleaver

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Thanks so much Clong and Daniel for the great tips, really appreciated.


----------



## Tomcleaver

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

Just one more thing sorry. 

-is it worth selling the honey with just two bee hives? Will I make enough?


----------



## Vincent

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

If you have surplus honey to your own requirements, sure. Sell to friends and workmates. You can even put your own label on your jar.


----------



## sweetas

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

If you want to know more about the inventors go to

www.abc.net.au/austory/content/2016/s4537244.htm


I met with Stuart Anderson on three occasions in April when he came to Perth. A very nice guy.

NO, they haven't sold out , or changed their lifestyle.

GEoff

​


----------



## Daniel Y

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

I sell around 300 lbs of honey a year without even trying. Word gets around that I keep bees and people just show up asking if I have any honey.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Flow Hive/Frames*

>-should I get a flow hive over the traditional hive, is it worth the fuss?

That depends mostly on how much money you have to spend. You can certainly get into beekeeping with less money that a flow hive will cost. If you have the money to spare, the flow hive is a lot of fun.

>-how does the plastic affect the bees, do they care?

Circumstances have a lot to do with acceptance of plastic by bees. My experience was that they immediately started fixing the cracks and soon started storing honey in a flow. In a dearth, of course, they just ignore the plastic combs.

>-how many hives should I start with? 

2 1/2 is a good number... 2 is the minimum. I'd say for a beginner 4 is about the maximum.

>-should I just simply start with a traditional bee hive?

Nothing wrong with it.

>-why is there so many bad comments about flow?

Why are there so many good comments? Most of the bad comments here are by people who have never actually seen one.

>-should I get one flow and one traditional hive, can I still compare them?

Sure you can. Just keep in mind that one hive often does better than another and it has nothing to do with the equipment.

>-does the plastic frames in flow hive brake and snap over time?
>Also My local bee keeper obviously does like the flow, and his strongest agument is that the plastic frames in the split cell technology in flow will become brittle and brake over time. Is this correct? 

I've only had them 3 years so I can't say what happens in a longer period of time. It seems to be the same material as Honey Super Cell and PermaComb and they have not gotten brittle over the more than a decade I've had them...

>-How strong is the plastic? 

Pretty strong. The sections that open are very resilient plastic. Not brittle. The clear plastic on the ends may be more brittle, though I can't say as I haven't broken any of them, but it's not the same kind as the sections.

>-Should I go against his word and get a flow hive, will he still support me as a member with the hive?

I can't know that.

>-should I get wax foundation frames or foundationless? 

I like foundationless. 

>-can I still start a bee hive in summer instead of spring.

Based on my brief observation of the gold coast, I would say you could start one anytime there... but I don't live there. Bees often make a crop in your winter (our summer).

>-is it worth selling the honey with just two bee hives? Will I make enough?

Honey keeps well. You can accumulate it for a while until you have enough to be worth trying to sell some.


----------



## rolftonbees

If I was starting with the flowhive available and had money for one or more, I would want a compare contrast and would want at least one and one. 

When I only had a couole hives the first years, I traded honey with people who are much better veggie gardeners than I am. These all no what a quart of local honey is worth and gave me oddles of surplus from their kitchen gardens. 

I ate lots or produce and even canned a little from this barter.

I makes the work in the beeyard a more affordsble and healthy hobbie.


----------



## ABruce

I have read and followed this thread with interest. I really didn't see the value of the flow hive to me , however I unwrapped one at Christmas last year. Since my wife had invested a large sum of money in it I was instantly an enthusiast. We had an early spring and an unusual summer where or flow started and stopped. My experience was the bees were slow to utilize the flow hive. The bees would not go in it. I had varathained the cedar and although it had had months to air I could still smell it, not sure if that was the cause. The bees swarmed rather than move up, so I moved it to a second hive and added a normal super partial full above, the bees filled the normal super and then decided to fill the flow hive. It was slow going at first but after they filled it once and I taped it, they had no reluctance to get back and fill it again. 
It works as advertised in my opinion.
One other note, opening a flow hive in an apiary with thirty hives at the start of the dearth may not be the smartest move, ask how I know.
All in all we learned from it , and we will have one hive on the deck in the yard next summer with the flow hive on it. The rest will be in the apiary a good distance away.


----------



## iwatchthebees

So has anyone actually used a flow hive? If so was it just pie in the sky or did it really work?


----------



## Michael Bush

I have five of them. I didn't have to pay for them so they are well worth it to me.  They are expensive. They work fine.


----------



## aran

i have one but the colony I started this year just managed to fill 2 deeps and the one medium super all of which im leaving them for winter.
-> next spring ill put the flow super on and will see how they do!


----------



## HoneyMonk

I have one (legit original make and model) flowhive. Beetles love the design; but, the bees aren't very enthusiastic. Nothing to really compare it to besides 20 frames of HSC. They haven't drawn anything in the flow super and that super has been on for about a month in a half on a triple deep 8 frame Lang slam full of bees. If I walk out there tomorrow and see no change I'm going to coat in wax like I did with HSC. I know that flowhive was originally looking to get funding for mass distribution. They went to china to get it done. Apparently, their recipe got leaked because identical no-brand name frames from china have been popping up everywhere and are selling for half the price.


----------



## 3cav84a

G'day, I am new to the forum and I live in South Australia I have had a Flow Hive since March last year. The bees were very happy in it over winter, we had a cold windy winter this year for here that is, no snow and minimal frost. when I checked out the brood box just before spring it was absolutely packed to the rafters. Flow frames were about 90 full and capped. I was too late to do any manipulating of the hive and they swarmed on me not once but twice 9 days after the first.
The bees have built up their numbers again and yesterday I was able to pull honey from frames numbers 2-3-4. I got 6 kgs and it took about 45 minutes. The bees are still filling the remaining 3 frames and they should be ready next week. The process was very easy and only 4 or 5 bees took an interest on what was going on behind the hive, the rest carried on as normal. The bees took to the Flow frames without any encouragement from me.
I have to decide now as I only have room for 3 hives and a few nucs do I stick solely with the Flow Frames or have a mix. I am thinking that if I stick with the Flow concept I don't have to buy an extractor and all the other hardware for the process of of getting the honey.
I was thinking of utilizing 6 flow frames and 2 normal frames with just the starter strips on them so I can add some honey comb in the honey containers (just because it looks good), regards


----------



## Eddie Honey

Sounds like a good plan and I'm glad the Flow Frame harvest method is working out well for you. Thanks for posting.


----------



## nchvac

Thanks for that info. 

So you aren't throwing away your supers and selling your extractor is seems???????



ABruce said:


> I have read and followed this thread with interest. I really didn't see the value of the flow hive to me , however I unwrapped one at Christmas last year. Since my wife had invested a large sum of money in it I was instantly an enthusiast. We had an early spring and an unusual summer where or flow started and stopped. My experience was the bees were slow to utilize the flow hive. The bees would not go in it. I had varathained the cedar and although it had had months to air I could still smell it, not sure if that was the cause. The bees swarmed rather than move up, so I moved it to a second hive and added a normal super partial full above, the bees filled the normal super and then decided to fill the flow hive. It was slow going at first but after they filled it once and I taped it, they had no reluctance to get back and fill it again.
> It works as advertised in my opinion.
> One other note, opening a flow hive in an apiary with thirty hives at the start of the dearth may not be the smartest move, ask how I know.
> All in all we learned from it , and we will have one hive on the deck in the yard next summer with the flow hive on it. The rest will be in the apiary a good distance away.


----------



## ABruce

LOl I have spent the last few Saturdays building supers and assembling frames, If I could afford an apiary full of flow hives I probably would be spending my winter days on a tropical beach. So alas no I will not be retiring my extractor anytime soon.
But I will have the gentlest colony I have sitting at the edge of our deck with the flow hive on it , so I can go out and draw a fresh cup of honey when needed. Just because I can!


----------



## Georgiabeeman

*Re: Honeyflow Hive*

I think you are actually referring to a flow hive. Some of the issue I would see with this is cleaning and upkeep. The cells once they have been sealed become very hard to break open. If you are really interested in this I would only buy one set up. In my opinion you can get more honey faster with the standard set up. The people that I know that use these are scared of bees and do not want to be stung. With that being said they do not open the brood nest to do standard inspections. Later they find a underperforming hive with problems.


----------



## Gus979

*EZ Bee automatic flow*

Anyone noticed the ads on the right for the eBay co EZ Bee automatic flow hive? Am I mistaken or is that product a patent violation of the Flow hive?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/7PCS-Automa...id=100010&rk=2&rkt=6&mehot=pp&sd=252760068472


----------



## msl

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

that's what happens when you make you product in china


----------



## aunt betty

ABruce said:


> One other note, opening a flow hive in an apiary with thirty hives at the start of the dearth may not be the smartest move, ask how I know.


Good point. Come to one of my yards and try walking around with a cup of honey. You'll have thousands of friends in no time.


----------



## Ravenseye

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



msl said:


> that's what happens when you make you product in china


While there are plenty of Chinese knockoffs, let's be crystal clear that a product made in China may be, but probably is NOT a patent violation. This thread is NOT about China. Let's not paint with such a broad brush.


----------



## Richard Cryberg

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



Gus979 said:


> Anyone noticed the ads on the right for the eBay co EZ Bee automatic flow hive? Am I mistaken or is that product a patent violation of the Flow hive?
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/7PCS-Automa...id=100010&rk=2&rkt=6&mehot=pp&sd=252760068472


It is not a patent violation for the simple reason that the Aussies have no patent the last time I checked the Australian patent records. They APPLIED for a patent clear back in something like 2012 and abandoned that application at some point and submitted a new application in 2015. But, no patent has ever issued. A patent only has meaning after it issues. Up until it issues no patent exists. I doubt if any patent will ever issue due to existing prior art. Their talk about the patent application was pure marketing hype.


----------



## msl

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

Richard you may be misreading the events 
they were granted a US Patent Dec 10, 2015, a chinese patent Mar 2, 2016, a European patent Apr 27, 2016
and the Canadian patent seems to be stalled

Patents take time... ie they filed a provisional patent app in the us Dec 21, 2011 which is only good for a year gives you a priority date, and a full application Dec 21, 2012 and then after almost 3 years going thru the system it was granted Dec 10, 2015


----------



## CWHeadley

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

So the consensus is that these flow-hive supers work?

As someone who is greener than a noob, I have a few questions regarding maintaining the bee's using this system.

1. Is swarming still an issue with just one flow-hive super? It strikes me that everyone talks about adding supers as the nectar flow reaches a steady pace. As I understand it, this is done to allow the bees to move up the hive storing honey and that keeps them from feeling crowded which reduces the swarming tendancy.

2. Do you add additional flow-hive supers as the nectar flow increases like you do with regular comb supers? Are these flow-hives designed to stack like normal supers do?

3. If they are massively heavy, will you need to have two or more people to help you lift the flow-hive off the brood boxes so that you can inspect the hive on a regular schedule?


Thanks for you time.


----------



## CWHeadley

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

Deleted. Double post


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

Nothing changes from a bee management perspective. 
The only thing that changes is the harvesting procedure. In your location, you'll want at least two brood boxes (I use three 8 framers in southern NJ) this way when you take the Flow super off for winter, the bees have stores; actually, I'd take it off in early July so you can treat for mites and allow the bees to build up stores for winter.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

As an apiary inspector I've seen a few flow hives now, but finally got to see one being harvested today. He turned on the tap, and honey came out just like in the videos.

The way I view this is that calling it a revolution in beekeeping is wrong. It is a new design of honey super comb to enable a different way to extract the honey, that's all. As to the beekeeping, nothing has changed. Everything has to be done the same as for any other langstroth hive.

On a more sobering note, I talked today with another guy who as a new and extremely involved beekeeper, found AFB in his flowhive just a few months after installing the bees, and had to burn the whole thing. Many $$$ turned to smoke.


----------



## ABruce

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



CWHeadley said:


> So the consensus is that these flow-hive supers work?
> 
> As someone who is greener than a noob, I have a few questions regarding maintaining the bee's using this system.
> 
> 1. Is swarming still an issue with just one flow-hive super? It strikes me that everyone talks about adding supers as the nectar flow reaches a steady pace. As I understand it, this is done to allow the bees to move up the hive storing honey and that keeps them from feeling crowded which reduces the swarming tendancy.
> 
> 2. Do you add additional flow-hive supers as the nectar flow increases like you do with regular comb supers? Are these flow-hives designed to stack like normal supers do?
> 
> 3. If they are massively heavy, will you need to have two or more people to help you lift the flow-hive off the brood boxes so that you can inspect the hive on a regular schedule?
> 
> 
> Thanks for you time.


I used my flow hive last season. I had issues with swarming, I attribute that to the flow hive being new , one hive swarmed twice rather than use. it. I moved to a different hive , poured a bit of liquid honey over the frames and put a tray of wet wax capping over the top, they started using it fine after that. 
The theory of the flow hive is you just drain it when its full, you do not need or want additional super. They harvest great when they are warm and fresh. You do not want cold or crystallized honey. 
The Flow hive is probably a little heavier than a deep box with frames, but I think its lighter than a medium full of capped honey. Draining it before you lift it is a good idea. 

I have one, its a novelty I hope to be able to taste the differences in the honeys the bees produce by tapping it regularly. Would I want a yard full of them, even if I could afford it, I would not.


----------



## CWHeadley

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



Eddie Honey said:


> Nothing changes from a bee management perspective.
> The only thing that changes is the harvesting procedure. In your location, you'll want at least two brood boxes (I use three 8 framers in southern NJ) this way when you take the Flow super off for winter, the bees have stores; actually, I'd take it off in early July so you can treat for mites and allow the bees to build up stores for winter.


Thanks for the reply. I was considering the fact that overwintering with two brood boxes would be the way I would go. You use 8-frame brood boxes. Any particular reason? I'm probably a hundred miles north of Southern N.J. and wonder if that makes a huge amount of difference tempurature wise? A 10-frame brood box would provide just that much more added insulation, yes?

I also plan on doing my first hives in the traditional way. Brood boxes, with half-supers stacked as needed. I've always been a believer in learning the very basics before trying to get fancy. At this time, I don't really have any plans of trying to go commercial. I just want to get enough honey to brew some mead and I figure three of four hives would be perfect. This hive flow setup looks to be a time and money saver with regard to having to extract honey and having that equipment.

Also, would you recomment a heavy coating of wax on the flow hive combs as a way to get the bees interested in using it for stores?




Oldtimer said:


> As an apiary inspector I've seen a few flow hives now, but finally got to see one being harvested today. He turned on the tap, and honey came out just like in the videos.
> 
> The way I view this is that calling it a revolution in beekeeping is wrong. It is a new design of honey super comb to enable a different way to extract the honey, that's all. As to the beekeeping, nothing has changed. Everything has to be done the same as for any other langstroth hive.
> 
> On a more sobering note, I talked today with another guy who as a new and extremely involved beekeeper, found AFB in his flowhive just a few months after installing the bees, and had to burn the whole thing. Many $$$ turned to smoke.


AFB? Is that American Foul Brood?


----------



## CWHeadley

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



ABruce said:


> I used my flow hive last season. I had issues with swarming, I attribute that to the flow hive being new , one hive swarmed twice rather than use. it. I moved to a different hive , poured a bit of liquid honey over the frames and put a tray of wet wax capping over the top, they started using it fine after that.
> The theory of the flow hive is you just drain it when its full, you do not need or want additional super. They harvest great when they are warm and fresh. You do not want cold or crystallized honey.
> The Flow hive is probably a little heavier than a deep box with frames, but I think its lighter than a medium full of capped honey. Draining it before you lift it is a good idea.
> 
> I have one, its a novelty I hope to be able to taste the differences in the honeys the bees produce by tapping it regularly. Would I want a yard full of them, even if I could afford it, I would not.


So you would recommend removing the Flow Hive super after the Spring flow or the Autumn flow? I still have to research the nectar flows here in northern Pennsylvania, so I'm trying to get an idea of when the temp will moderate down to the point that the honey will begin to thicken so much that the Flow Hive becomes more of a pain in the backside than it is worth.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



Oldtimer said:


> On a more sobering note, I talked today with another guy who as a new and extremely involved beekeeper, found AFB in his flowhive just a few months after installing the bees, and had to burn the whole thing. Many $$$ turned to smoke.


I can understand having to burn the woodenware, but shouldn't there be a way to disinfect the flowframes? They're 100% plastic and metal.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



CWHeadley said:


> AFB? Is that American Foul Brood?


Yes, that is a common abbreviation for it.



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> I can understand having to burn the woodenware, but shouldn't there be a way to disinfect the flowframes? They're 100% plastic and metal.


Not sure if it could be done. In my country it is a legal requirement to burn any hive gear from an AFB infected hive, and we don't use antibiotics.

Maybe elsewhere sterilisation could be legally attempted, there would be some risk, just depends if someone wanted to take it. Also have to consider neighbors, and the fact that AFB can lurk in a hive several years before it shows itself.


----------



## Michael Palmer

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



Oldtimer said:


> In my country it is a legal requirement to burn any hive gear from an AFB infected hive,
> and we don't use antibiotics.


From what you told me when I was visiting you, not everyone is adhering to the burn rule.


----------



## Daniel Y

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

It was my thinking that the advantage of the flow hive was to not need additional supers or having to lift them to harvest. just drain frames as they fill up the one super.


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

Having gone through AFB last year and New York requiring the burning of AFB infected hives ( I burned 11) I would burn and not take any chances with the money put out for a flow hive. The spores are in the honey and transferred to the larva by the nurse bees. The older bees are not affected by the spores just brood. If there was a way to disinfect them I am sure most people would do that. I believe you can irradiate the boxes if you can find a place. I believe Roger Morse of Cornell ( or one of those really well educated bee experts up there) would pick up raw honey wherever and whenever he would travel. MOST of the time the honey had AFB spores in it. So far the spores seem to last forever. When adult honey bees ingest any spores they are digested within 4 days.


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



Michael Palmer said:


> From what you told me when I was visiting you, not everyone is adhering to the burn rule.


I think that happens everywhere.


----------



## bevy's honeybees

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



Richard Cryberg said:


> It is not a patent violation for the simple reason that the Aussies have no patent the last time I checked the Australian patent records. They APPLIED for a patent clear back in something like 2012 and abandoned that application at some point and submitted a new application in 2015. But, no patent has ever issued. A patent only has meaning after it issues. Up until it issues no patent exists. I doubt if any patent will ever issue due to existing prior art. Their talk about the patent application was pure marketing hype.


There is an advertisement on the right of my screen for that flow hive. This would have been the perfect spring for me to try one (as I seriously had considered the ebay one) because the flow where my country bees are is very strong this year. Maybe next year. It's definitely on my bucket list--just one for the back yard. I will have the country bees draw it out and move it.

I saw an ad on Craigslist, a lady got one, no bees, no experience. looking for a beekeeper with bees to come start the hive and take care of it, and she would share some of the honey. I chuckled.


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



CWHeadley said:


> I also plan on doing my first hives in the traditional way. Brood boxes, with half-supers stacked as needed. I've always been a believer in learning the very basics before trying to get fancy. At this time, I don't really have any plans of trying to go commercial. I just want to get enough honey to brew some mead and I figure three of four hives would be perfect. This hive flow setup looks to be a time and money saver with regard to having to extract honey and having that equipment. *I like 8 frame stuff better.* *The Flow Hive is 8 frame as well.*
> 
> Also, would you recomment a heavy coating of wax on the flow hive combs as a way to get the bees interested in using it for stores? *Yes*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AFB? Is that American Foul Brood?


*Yes
*


----------



## ABruce

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

If you have access to it irradiation is 100 % safe and effective. In Western Canada its available and many people use it. The provincial inspectors recommend it as one of the ways to deal with AFB, bonfires being the other effective method.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



Michael Palmer said:


> From what you told me when I was visiting you, not everyone is adhering to the burn rule.


There are those, and ultimately they pay the cost, just a shame about the harm they cause to others along the way.

Re a specific case I think we may have discussed Michael, those involved have now paid the price and are in the process of reforming their ways. Mostly their issue was employing the wrong guy.



Cloverdale said:


> Having gone through AFB last year and New York requiring the burning of AFB infected hives ( I burned 11).


Sorry to hear of your loss Cloverdale, such a thing is a totally gut wrenching experience. Problem is, when those kind of numbers are involved there may be more to follow in the next season or two. All the best with it!


----------



## captain776

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It is beyond crazy to pay 700 dollars plus shipping for a Flow Hive.
I bought mine on Ali Express for 368 delivered and even that was crazy when you can buy an 8 frame deep Brood Box for as little as 17.00 or make it yourself.
If you really want to try Flow Hive or Automatic Hive from Ali Express, just get 2 deep Brood boxes established and strong, then put a Super of Flow Frames on top of the 2 Brood Boxes.
Rub the face of the Flow Frames with beeswax, the face of frame is very rough and sharp, it will grate the wax onto the faces and spray liberally with syrup before installing them.
I am still a ways away from seeing if the ones I have work well, be great if they do.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It's a virtual certainty the Chinese ones will not be the same quality as genuine ones, and that could extend to the type of plastic used.


----------



## aunt betty

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Have run into many honey customers who are curious about flow-hives. I laugh and go along with them and their imaginations.
They imagine walking out onto the back deck with a plate of hot buttery pancakes. Crack the flow-hive, dispense the perfect amount of honey, close it up and walk away. Some even have illusions of having a little hole in the kitchen window with a tap.
Yeah. 
They laugh I laugh then I tell them it's not an on and off valve but once you open a frame you're going to have to bottle it. 
Really??? 
Haw haw.


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



Oldtimer said:


> There are those, and ultimately they pay the cost, just a shame about the harm they cause to others along the way.
> 
> Re a specific case I think we may have discussed Michael, those involved have now paid the price and are in the process of reforming their ways. Mostly their issue was employing the wrong guy.
> 
> Sorry to hear of your loss Cloverdale, such a thing is a totally gut wrenching experience. Problem is, when those kind of numbers are involved there may be more to follow in the next season or two. All the best with it!


Hey Oldtimer, all my hives made it through the winter here (all 6 :shhhh So far no sign of AFB, thank the Lord. I hope none come down with it again!


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

That's great news. Time to watch is late spring when they have just about eaten all stored honey. If you can get through that you may be well on the way to AFB free, did you ever find where your AFB came from?


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

What we figured was it came in a nuc when we first started beekeeping. The nuc had old black comb frames ( I am sure that hive had died) and I used them in a swarm trap that never caught any bees. When we did splits last year I ran out of drawn comb and used them. A friend who was a NYS bee inspector looked at the scale build up in the cells and said there were more than one cycle of bees raised on that comb. Fingers crossed. Thanks for asking.


----------



## Barry

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

More trouble on the horizon: https://tapcomb.com/


----------



## Tenbears

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

People will buy anything!


----------



## crofter

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

Their fairy tale is very cleverly designed for the intended audience; lots of appeal to emotion and light on facts!


----------



## AHudd

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

They have put a lot of lipstick on that pig. 

Alex


----------



## captain776

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Oldtimer said:


> It's a virtual certainty the Chinese ones will not be the same quality as genuine ones, and that could extend to the type of plastic used.


Mention the F word and a spurited debate ensues. I have one from China and I had the same small issues that people complain about with the ones from Australia. The dovetail joints required a little sanding and filing to make them fit, took maybe 30 mins. I had read enough about real Flow roof leaking so I put metal flashing under the pitched roof which later I ended up just tossing it and going to standard telescoping lid. If you dont think real Flow roof leaks, Google it, Flow had hundreds of complaints to where they had to put out recommendations how to fix them. In Flow s own assembly video, the guy is hand tooling the joints on the box. After listening to the Flow followers telling me about the plastic, I took a sample to a testing lab near me and I have a 3 page certified test report, IT IS food grade plastic. Then it just comes down to----do yiu want to pay 700 plus shipping or 368 delivered shipping included and there is even a better oackage than that on e bay or Amazon. A guy in USA pisted his was 969.00 delivered. I cant justify that price. I recommend, if you want the Flow method, buy ONLY the flow frames, but NOT from Flow Australia and modify a standard Langstroth box to accomodate the flow frames. Flow frames are about 3/8 inch or so longer than std Langstroth length. I only have the one, just to try it, my other 4 hives are Langstroth and if they fill the Fliw supers and it works well, I can add Flow supers to any of my boxes. My boxes will all take Flow frames and for my other 4 hives, I just glued a shim in each end so it catches std Langstroth frames


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

How much does that test cost and who did it?


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

After reading through all these posts on the FH here on BS and on the Flow Forum and sifting through the pros and cons, I believe it is all about the money for the originators of this and everyone fell in line to get this great "invention". Giving them the benefit if the doubt (temporarily I have to say) they are probably nice guys but when it comes to money, niceness can fly away like a swarm. A novelty to be sure; attracting people to beekeeping who KNOW NOTHING about beekeeping, easy way out, etc., to serious beekeepers who want to try something new. We are all beekeepers and are serious about taking care of honey bees. We aren't stupid, these FH guys are beekeepers too and had to know how this would affect the beekeeping world, and they aren't stupid either, so i think this pretty much sums it up. I have my own experience with a FH owner and now I am trying to nurse his colony back to health (a solar fence that a cat could knock down located in bear country, which a bear did take out twice). So kudos to an entrepreneur but BAD medicine to those who take advantage of the innocent.


----------



## jim lyon

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Cloverdale said:


> After reading through all these posts on the FH here on BS and on the Flow Forum and sifting through the pros and cons, I believe it is all about the money for the originators of this and everyone fell in line to get this great "invention".


You actually read through 2,200+ posts?  Whats next, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich?


----------



## captain776

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

It was a Flow ad that got me started reading about bees and to me having 5 hives, all are Langstroth. I have a knock off Flow Super and will put it on and see what happens, not the correct time to put it on yet.
A guy that lives near me, thought he could just buy 7 Flow Frames and put bees directly on them.
I have lived and worked in Australia twice, they have a very high cost of living and that is what you are paying for. It cost 2.50 for one 300 ml Coke if you can even find one at that price, 50 dollars for bacon n eggs for 2, and they have 46% income tax.
Flow Australia can starve to death before they ever see an order from me


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

So how much did the test cost and who did it?


----------



## captain776

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

The test was 75 USD done by a testing lab in Bangkok. I am from Boston but have lived in Thailand for 11 years. It is an easy test. They place a small sample in a Mass Spectrometer and it burns it and the computer prints an analysis.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

What is the procedure called? I would like to google up a place to do it where I am but not sure what the search words are. What part of the plastic did you break off to get tested?


----------



## captain776

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I Googled material testing labs in Bangkok, then E mailed a few to ask if they could perform the test, the first 3 replied they do not do the test, then I tried a few more and found one that can do it. Many labs are only equipped to test materials for construction and manufacturing.
What country do you live in?
Use telephone book or internet to find testing labs near you and then tell them you want to verify if a plastic is one of the 7 kinds of plastic considered food grade.
Most food containers are virgin HDPE High Density Poly-ethylene, the others are forsandwich bags, shampoo bottles, I forget now, it was over 6 months ago I read about this.
Find a lab and ask whizzed sample they need.
The Bee Farm here where I get my bees was given one by Flow Australia for them to try, but with over 2000 hives, not cost effective for them. When I was there, I saw a Flow frame in many pieces and asked for a piece, I gave the lab a piece about 6 inches long by 2 inches wide but they only need a small piece to sample. I will try to find my report and post it, I think it's in a file cabinet.
I only bothered testing it because........at that time, I was on the Flow Hive Forum and when I said I had one from China, they were telling me to throw it away, it was junk and the plastic was poison.........all without ever seeing one or knowing anything about what I had.
I understand their anger, if I spent 10 yrs developing something only to have it copied, I would not like it either. I didn't start out to buy a knock off, the first place I looked, didn't ship to Thailand, but the second place did, at first I didn't even know it was not Flow.........


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I'll check out what we have here.

Chinese fakes are starting to appear in my country, people wanting a cheaper flowhive. Sounds like you got lucky but there's no guarantees, and the competitiveness and profit drive of Chinese manufacturing leads things towards the lowest denominator. There has also been a number of scandals here with some pretty poisonous stuff coming in cheap Chinese imports, for example lead in childrens toys, asbestos in fittings. Huge damage was done to the reputation of the NZ milk industry when Chinese agents added melamine to NZ branded baby formula so they could dilute it, some babies died plus thousands of babies permanently damaged.

Our own clothes washer was recalled by the shop when they found some non spec dodgy materials in it.

If I was going to eat the honey, I'd get the comb from Australia.


----------



## Cloverdale

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



jim lyon said:


> You actually read through 2,200+ posts?  Whats next, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich?


Jim I didn't say it only took me a day!  Next isn't the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich ( even though I do enjoy reading a big fat book) it's U of M Journeyman class Very intimidating.


----------



## GoodyFarms

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



captain776 said:


> The test was 75 USD done by a testing lab in Bangkok. I am from Boston but have lived in Thailand for 11 years. It is an easy test. They place a small sample in a Mass Spectrometer and it burns it and the computer prints an analysis.


Problem with the method you describe is that while it will tell you if the majority of the material is PE it will not tell you what additives/softeners/releasers are used. Pyrolyzing plastic and sending it through a MS will give you relative carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, chlorine, and sulfur composition which will allow one to determine if the plastic is PE, PP, PVC, PPS, etc but won't give minor organic components.


----------



## captain776

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



GoodyFarms said:


> Problem with the method you describe is that while it will tell you if the majority of the material is PE it will not tell you what additives/softeners/releasers are used. Pyrolyzing plastic and sending it through a MS will give you relative carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, chlorine, and sulfur composition which will allow one to determine if the plastic is PE, PP, PVC, PPS, etc but won't give minor organic components.


Tsk tsk........then I guess you better not buy one then, I could not possible care less about it


----------



## GoodyFarms

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Ok. Just pointing out that the method you're using isn't going to tell you whether or not the plastic is food grade or not. Do with it what you will.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Issue I see if the plastic is not genuine food grade or has unhealthy additives, is that the cell size is small meaning that while the bees are storing and maturing the honey, there is a lot of contact between plastic and honey.

Some people will eat anyway unconcerned, and unlikely to immediately drop dead. But it will add to the general load of carcinogens and other nasties that we consume now.


----------



## gww

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

I had thought the austrailian invention was being made in china from the very beginning. Did I get this wrong? I do know that some manufactuers have set up plants in china and then the chineese used those plants to make the exact item as the origional one that out side owners had set up and sold it with out those owners. Not a real copycat but the real thing that someone had basically given them even if they didn't mean to.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

Googled but could not find the answer to that. Did find this video showing comparison between Australian and Chinese versions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZrUqsvuTgU


----------



## gww

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

Old timer
I found on a flow hive forum where some one said that they were making the flow hive in brisbane (probly spelled wrong) austrailia and the workers were getting a fair wage. I apoligize for my previous post and don't know where I got it from. Though I have a bad memory, I usually remember little details like this more correctly when I post something. I hate being one that puts out bad info. Sorry
gww


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

Didn't put out bad info you just asked a question, nothing wrong with that


----------



## aunt betty

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

Will be putting a flow-hive or two into the garden-apiary/petting-zoo right after we get the unicorns to allow the panda bears to ride them.


----------



## odfrank

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

A client for whom I maintain hives bought a Flowhive that he turned over to me to manage at his site. I have the advantage of 47 years of beekeeping experience to help me be successful with my first Flow experience. I also watched Flowhive videos on YouTube to educate myself and read the manual. I have long known that bees do not easily take to plastic foundation and that they have to be forced to use it. I threw out the foundationless frames which I feel should not be used for brood combs in hives for which high production is desired. On 4/17/17 I installed a purchased package of bees on drawn comb in the 8 frame brood chamber. I threw out the plastic excluder and used a steel excluder. The site is in a very productive neighborhood with ample nectar and pollen all year around. I fed the package two quarts of HFCS. I added the Flow super.

On 5/16 the bees had not entered the Flowframes. On 6/9 they were working in the Flow frames. On 6/28 I informed the client the Flow frames were full and that he should drain them. As wise as I am, I deduced that he would not take the time for that, so I added two medium supers above the Flow super. On 8/9 I harvested the whole apiary including the two full supers above the Flow frames and again told the client to drain the Flow frames, fearing granulation and wanting to have space for any fall honey flow. On 9/26 by request, my helper and I gave the client and his staff a lesson on how to drain the frames, even though we had no experience in doing so and knew little more how to do so than they did. I knew enough to manufacture hoses and lids to direct the honey into jars without robbing. Without those, exposed honey pouring in the middle of a nine hive apiary during robbing season would have meant for a huge robbing nuisance. We opened two frames progressively to make it easy to turn the handle and avoid flooding problems that I had seen on videos. It took well over an hour for the frames to drain substantially. The two frames produced two distinctively different colors of honey. It came out clean and clear totally unlike extracted honey which is littered with wax etc. and full of bubbles from extracting. On 10/11 the gardeners noticed the Flowhive was being robbed out and my helper went over and shut it down. Probably the package queen, like others from that purchase, had gone drone layer and the weakened colony fell prey to the other 8 hives.

Flowhives and Flowsupers are insane expensive and only a novelty for someone like myself who needs to extract a lot of honey from normal boxes. But if they hold up to old age, wear and tear, I can see them as useful for someone who only wants one or two hives and avoid the expense, storage and mess of normal extracting. No extractor, filtering, bottling or other equipment required. No sticky kitchen floors. If the client had drained it when it was ready, the Flow super could have collected two more fillings. The draining of a full box will take the good part of a day and has to be done when it is full so that the bees continue to have room to collect incoming nectar until the flow is over. The Flowhive does not replace a knowledgeable and capable beekeeper. It is NOT fill it, set it and forget it. So the time and commitment of being an good beekeeper is still there.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Interesting description Odfrank. Rather surprised though that someone interested enough to purchase the flowhive would not even bother to watch the first harvest. Anyhow, no doubt he will enjoy the honey.


----------



## Kidbeeyoz

Odfrank, it was nice to hear someone talk positively about the flow hive. Having beekeeping experience is pretty well essential to a positive outcome. The first flow hive I witnessed was operated by a retired gentleman who grew up with hives on the family farm. He is getting a lot of pleasure out of it and of course has a good understanding of bee behaviour and he has also combined his cabinet making skills to make his own boxes etc.

Personally, I think the inventors are 'true blue' types and I find it irritating when people slander both their product and reputation. After all, if you are a 'mug' and know nothing or very little about bees, success will be minimal.


----------



## Cloverdale

My brother marveled at the honey that flowed from his Flow Hive just 2 weeks ago. He kept bees in the 70’s a few years and just started again with the FH. He is quite pleased that it worked exactly as stated by the inventors even though he had to start again with beekeeping skills. They were good bees (he bought a nuc from Randy Oliver’s operation) didn’t take care of them like he should have, but they are hanging in there and he’s relearning the basics again from his big sister


----------



## Hogback Honey

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

How do you get the bees out of the super when you are ready to extract the FH? You don't get little bee parts in the honey? Is there a filter on the FH that filters out the cappings?


----------



## ABruce

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Hogback Honey said:


> How do you get the bees out of the super when you are ready to extract the FH? You don't get little bee parts in the honey? Is there a filter on the FH that filters out the cappings?


I have a flow hive, When I crack the frames the capping stay intact, no capping no bee parts in the honey, the bees continue to occupy the bee space between the frames. At some point they realize the cells are empty they open them up and refill it.
The honey is as clear as I get after filtering from my normally extracted honey.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

>How do you get the bees out of the super when you are ready to extract the FH?

No need.

>You don't get little bee parts in the honey?

None whatsoever.

>Is there a filter on the FH that filters out the cappings?

There are no cappings and absolutely no need to filter at all. It comes out clean.

http://www.bushfarms.com/images/FlowSixWay.jpg


----------



## clong

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I got my first harvest out of the Flowhive this year on a Spring package install. The FH didn't go on until late in the flow. 

The bees refused to fill the cells, so a brood frame was moved up into the FH box. Eventually, that encouraged the bees to fill up one side of one Flowhive frame. Harvesting that half of one frame was still a pleasure. If I ever get a hive through the winter, I hope to see a 6-frame harvest.

And yes, it was clear and pure. No filtering needed.


----------



## odfrank

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

See Post #2265 - My client never got around to draining his Flow frames and turned them over to me. I contemplated methods to warm them for draining, my extracting room is down to the mid 40's in the morning. We had some other miscellaneous stuff to extract and I didn't have the key or tubes for the flow frames. My mind might be old and rickety but I still have some genius in that old grey mass. We scratched the cappings and into the extractor they went. Hours of warming, setup and draining saved!
My extracting tech noted that the little wood cleat that covers something (key slots?) at the top of the Flow supers does not fit well, is not held in by the swiveling holder and falls out.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Lol! Isn't that a bit like using a gas chainsaw without starting the motor?


----------



## odfrank

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



IAmTheWaterbug said:


> Lol! Isn't that a bit like using a gas chainsaw without starting the motor?



The most expensive frames I have ever extracted! Luckily not my money.


----------



## odfrank

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

THE AGONY OF ORDERING A FLOWHIVE!!!!

Another bazillionaire apiary client wants a Flowhive, and since I only am making money hand over fist on the first one, I didn't argue with this guy. BUT OH THE AGONY!!! of ordering one. 

It listed a $100 discount code for the first 50 ordering, but the discount would not take so I went on chat with the FLOW GIRL!!! She had to get the tech guy to fix it. Then my credit card was rejected because it is a foreign country purchase. Then my browser would not connect to PAYPAL. So I tried another browser. Then my Paypal balance was not high enough and my credit card through Paypal was rejected also. So then I had to call my bank and you know what an agony that is. So after wasting half my Sunday afternoon I got the Flow ordered. 

So you are asking how do I get rich like Oliver selling Flow Hives? Well, you charge for the two hours of ordering the Flow, you mark up the price of the Flow, you charge for unpacking the Flow, you charge for assembling the Flow, you charge for staining the flow, you charge for making a stand for the Flow, you charge for the install of the Flow, you charge for the bees for the Flow, you charge for the management of the Flow, you charge for the lesson on how to drain the Flow, and if your wealthy client of course does not have time to empty the Flow, you charge for emptying it. And then you start all over in Spring.


----------



## Charlie B

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I think Ollie is the first beekeeper that’s figured out how to actually make money beekeeping!


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Flow Hive gets an upgrade! https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/flow-hive-2-innovation#/


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Eddie Honey said:


> Flow Hive gets an upgrade! https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/flow-hive-2-innovation#/


Interesting! From the looks of it it's everything the original FlowHive and website _should_ have been the first time around. That's not a criticism, as it's nearly impossible to get everything right on a global launch on the first try. But it does indicate that they're taking customer feedback seriously. 

I'm very surprised that they're manufacturing in-house with laser cutting. That's way more expensive than manufacturing in China will ever be, but apparently they thing it's worth the extra cost. They probably got a lot of grief over the initial build quality during the first few years, and decided that shipping good product is cheaper than shipping poor product 2-3x. My early unit was really out of tolerance, and took a lot of sanding just to get assembled. 

But this does kill the notion that they're going to get less expensive on the 2nd generation. Then again I'd rather have better quality at a higher price. Beeks have many, many options for buying less expensive hardware. There just aren't many options for "turnkey" harvesting, and Flow seems to have it. Good for them!


----------



## Matt_inSC

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



ABruce said:


> I have a flow hive, When I crack the frames the capping stay intact, no capping no bee parts in the honey, the bees continue to occupy the bee space between the frames. At some point they realize the cells are empty they open them up and refill it.
> The honey is as clear as I get after filtering from my normally extracted honey.


ABruce:
(hoping you see this although the thread is a bit old)...
I drained my Flow frames late Summer and noticed that the capping indeed stayed in place. Do you feel the "realization" of the bees that the cells are empty took some time (delaying their being refilled)? My guess is it's hard to know. Anyone removing the cappings manually to avoid delays? I'm not planning to take any extra steps but it "feels" strange to load up the Flow this year wtih capped (but empty) frames.


----------



## ABruce

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I used mine two years ago, after the last draining of the year I put it away cappings intact. Last spring I put it on a hive and when the flow started the bees must have opened the cappings because they filled the frames again, like most things inside the hive the bees seem to know what they are doing better than me


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



odfrank said:


> The two frames produced two distinctively different colors of honey.


Nice photo! It looks like a very little bit of the color difference might be in the lighting, because the right jar is in the sun, but it's clear  that the two honeys are very different in color.

Did they taste different?


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> >You don't get little bee parts in the honey?
> 
> None whatsoever.


I'm curious as to what happens if you "crack" cells with brood in them. Of course the brood will die, but it doesn't seem like brood is liquid enough to flow through the honey channels. I suppose a tiny bit of "bee goo" might "contaminate" the honey, especially if the brood have been laid near the bottom of the frame so that lots of honey is "washing" it down, but I can't imagine it would be much more than we get in traditionally-harvested honey.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Brood is very unlikely. The cells are too deep and the wrong diameter. I've never seen brood in them and I don't use an excluder.


----------



## Eddie Honey

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

This fella documents what to do when there is brood in the Flow frames: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EDiFw6gxEc


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Eddie Honey said:


> This fella documents what to do when there is brood in the Flow frames: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EDiFw6gxEc


Actually he just laments the fact that he has brood up there*, and talks about preventing it in future with a QE. But he doesn't actually say what he's going to do about it.

I suppose putting it above an excluder for 3 weeks would take care of things, as the brood would have emerged by then.

*that video also could easily have been edited down to about 1/4 of it's present length. I played it back at 2x speed, and even then it was too long!


----------



## odfrank

>*that video also could easily have been edited down to about 1/4 of it's present length. I played it back at 2x speed, and even then it was too long!

That is so true of many beekeeper YouTube videos. Get to the point for gods sake....I've go things to do. And even worse is how many teach a funky way to do something very simple.


----------



## ABruce

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I have never used an excluder with my flow hive. I had enough trouble getting the bees to use it I never wanted to add more challenges. And with really strong colonies under it I have never had brood or pollen in the flow hive frames.


----------



## IAmTheWaterbug

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*



Barry said:


> More trouble on the horizon: https://tapcomb.com/


Tapcomb is live! When I first saw these ads popping into my Facebook feed I just assumed they were a patent-infringing knockoff. But then I looked into them more carefully, and they've applied for their own patents on a design that may be different enough from Flow's to make both products mutually non-infringing. From:

https://www.facebook.com/tapcomb/posts/1327565393998659



> Tapcomb does not provide an artificial honeycomb! Our frames are approximately 30% complete and only become a honeycomb once bees have completed 70% of the frame with their own natural beeswax. This fundamental difference in both principle and methodology makes the two frames very different.


Their design supposedly keeps the cappings intact during harvest.

I'm no patent lawyer, but if Tapcomb can prove their patent claims, I could see both products being valid, from an intellectual property point of view.

If that happens, then we have legitimate competition! A Tapcomb deep with 6 tappable frames is $269, which is far less expensive than Flow's 7-frame Classic Cedar. Still very expensive, but having 2 vendors in the marketplace will drive prices down over time, especially if they keep manufacturing in volume and figure out to do it better and better.

I can't wait to see someone (e.g. not me ) do a side-by-side comparison test!


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: EZ Bee automatic flow*

Since the flow hive leaves the caps completely intact, the Tapcomb people are already lying by claiming they are the first to do that. I am curious how well it actually works. It looks like they did the same thing as the flow hive except they only did it to the back part of the cell. My experience is that with an intact cell and a midrib the honey does not drain. With the caps intact it seems like it's just the same issue. It looks like a rip off with just enough changed to hope they can get someone to allow a patent on it. Time will tell.


----------



## odfrank

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I still think it is silly that the Flow Team ships undersize equipment to the American market. This is a Mann Lake slatted rack on a Flow 10 frame bottom board.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

I only have the eight frame ones, but I have heard the 10 frame boxes are 16" instead of 16 1/4" and that's what your picture looks like. My guess is (and only a guess) that the frames just worked out that way. Of course if they used a 7/8" board on the sides they could resolve it without changing the inside space... but that may not be as simple in reality as it is in theory...


----------



## odfrank

Another disappointment with the ten frame Flow being made the wrong size. I went to stack wet extracting supers on and their 16" wide telescoping cover would not fit on my American 16 1/4" wide supers.



<a href='https://postimg.cc/image/n4doqbnl1/' target='_blank'><img src='https://s26.postimg.cc/n4doqbnl1/2018-06-25


----------



## Eddie Honey

Size DOES matter! lol

I expected this thread to be overwhelmed with success stories and harvesting pictures by now: Anyone?


----------



## Michael Bush

>I expected this thread to be overwhelmed with success stories and harvesting pictures by now: Anyone?

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...less-honey-by-Flow-Hive&p=1591688#post1591688


----------



## cfalls

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> Brood is very unlikely. The cells are too deep and the wrong diameter. I've never seen brood in them and I don't use an excluder.


I did manage to get brood in a flow super last summer by adding a queen excluder below it, assuming the queen wasn't up in the super. I don't think laying in the flow cells was her preference, but with enough idiocy you can apparently make it happen.


----------



## Michael Bush

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Yes, reports are that the queen will lay in them under some circumstances. But the size of cell and the depth of cell is definitely a discouragement for her to lay.


----------



## NiceBee15

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*

Hi Dominic, Did you go to Apimonida in Montreal this year? You would have seen Flow Hive there as they had a stand & they were doing awesome demonstrations. No scam. I have 3 & they are amazing.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Extractor-less honey by- "Honey Flow"*



Michael Bush said:


> Yes, reports are that the queen will lay in them under some circumstances. But the size of cell and the depth of cell is definitely a discouragement for her to lay.


Queens will lay in about anything, if they have a mind. Here, I left the back cover off my jenter unit, and guess what the queen did. This, when she had the whole rest of the hive to lay in!!

The bottom right plugs with no larvae are the ones I removed to get queen cells started, using larvae on the other (correct) side of the plugs.


----------



## wheeledgoat

Michael Bush said:


> >I expected this thread to be overwhelmed with success stories and harvesting pictures by now: Anyone?
> 
> https://www.beesource.com/forums/sh...less-honey-by-Flow-Hive&p=1591688#post1591688


I've got the same question - thread was started many years ago, so I was expecting to get to the end and see how wonderful this Flow product is after a couple years of beeks learning to use it.... and there's not much I can find.

Still, acknowledging that change can be hard, and slow... I wanted to jump in here and ask: does that link (to previous posts in this thread) still represent the extent of the success stories with Flow?


----------



## DanielD

wheeledgoat said:


> I've got the same question - thread was started many years ago, so I was expecting to get to the end and see how wonderful this Flow product is after a couple years of beeks learning to use it.... and there's not much I can find.
> 
> Still, acknowledging that change can be hard, and slow... I wanted to jump in here and ask: does that link (to previous posts in this thread) still represent the extent of the success stories with Flow?


The guys who developed it seemed to have overwhelming success.


----------



## wheeledgoat

DanielD said:


> The guys who developed it seemed to have overwhelming success.


Thanks Daniel, I did notice that. But as we all know, business success is only loosely correlated with a good product, if at all. That only means the marketing dept is doing a good job.

EDIT: did you mean to phrase your comment in the past tense?


----------



## DanielD

wheeledgoat said:


> EDIT: did you mean to phrase your comment in the past tense?


Yes I did. Their marketing was everything. There success was mostly all before paying users reviewed it.


----------



## wheeledgoat

Thanks for the clarification. I wonder if this topic still comes up a lot? Otherwise this post remaining stickied implies endorsement by beesource. At least as a new user, I took it that way.


----------



## cfalls

I had success but may not use them anymore. 

I threw one Flow on one hive this year just because I was out of equipment. They filled it and it's half capped. So yeah, it works. But so does regular equipment.

There are really only two small problems I see. One is that if you have several hives it's just easier to use a regular extractor, and cheaper too. The other is that, you don't build your supply of empty drawn comb that you can later put into brood boxes to prevent swarming, or into a new split to get the queen off to a fast start. Traditional extraction with a spinner does give you that precious empty drawn comb. 

After all the hype and all the agitated detractors, I'd say that's all it amounts to. It works. It's expensive. It's for people with just a couple hives.

I think that's the reason for the silence. It's not that it's flawed and people failed with it, it's just that the whole idea is kind of ... meh. It's an OK solution to a beekeeper's smallest problem. If it prevented swarms or killed varroa there'd be a post in this thread every day.

But fwiw, it does work. It works exactly like they say it will.


----------



## Honeyeater

I own two Flow Hives and I mostly agree with the above post.

I bought my first one direct from their crowd funding campaign, but I sold that when I almost gave up. Then bought again - a discounted one from their website and the next one was second hand - some one bought one and never opened the box. 

Short story: they do work with some caveats and make extraction easier and less messy. But if I had to start again with the knowledge I now have, I would not buy again.

Long story: I am very disappointed with their workmanship and quality control. I have a shed load of parts that had to be replaced or repaired - leaking roofs, brood and super boxes that were poorly machined, queen excluders that fail within a year, bottom boards poorly assembled that I had to try and fix, and pretty much every Flow frame came with incorrect wire tension resulting in honey leaks. I went through a few disastrous honey leaks, flooding the brood chamber. Another Flow frame had to be replaced entirely because it was defective. Quality control is shockingly poor though others weren’t as unlucky as me apparently. To make up for it, their customer service is responsive and generally replace stuff. One super had to be replaced three times, which is mind-blowing. No wonder they cost so much, they have to cover the costs of all the replacements.

Try to find some genuine reviews and you struggle. On their own website, they only publish the 5 star reviews last time I checked. I left a 3-star review myself after the super debacle that had to be replaced three times, and they never published that. I also have very strong suspicions that they enter into agreements with celebrity beekeepers, giving them free hives for the exchange of glowing reviews and endors. Recently I also saw some other celebrities like David Beckham featured assembling a Flow Hive on UK papers - obviously a marketing stunt. This annoys me. 

Their save the bees mantra and marketing seem to target naive world-saving-do-gooders with good intentions and zero beekeeping experience, and not enough understanding of what it takes to keep and manage bees long term. To their credit they are now encouraging taking beekeeping courses and are monetising that themselves by selling online courses. But still if you look at their website it still largely looks like a really easy gig - plop a beehive in the backyard and turn a tap for honey. Just had a look at the aussie website - there are photos of young girls with a lot of exposed skin harvesting honey from hives which are obviously misleadingly bee-less (you can see that from the lack of bees on the honey frames seen through the open side windows. It is deceiving marketing and annoys me no end. Their claim that you do not disturb the bees is bull crap and grossly misleading.

Also, check the prices of the individual components and compare with your local bee store. Excluding the plastic flow frames themselves, some standard Langstroth Flow branded parts are between twice and four times the price of regular kit, especially when including the unavoidable postage.


Then on the other side of the story, I recently joined their online forum and although I found it boring and not very active, there are people that are obviously happy with their purchase. Personally I started out liking the hives and the company ethos behind them but over the years I grew more sceptical.

People will keep buying them as long as they keep up their cunning marketing plan.


----------



## clong

I bought two Flow hives at the beginning. This year was the first year I convinced the bees to really start working a Flow hive. I harvested 22 pounds. The colony was a newly installed swarm, so they did their best. It was a lot of fun. I found that that the bees were not greatly disturbed. There was an increase in activity inside the hives as the frames were cracked. I only cracked 5 columns or so at a time. No overflow problems. I haven't seen any quality issues, though. They have been used five seasons so far, but only two harvests to speak of.

That being said, they are too expensive in my opinion. I wouldn't recommend them, unless someone just wants a cool toy to play with. If you can find them 50+% off they might be worth it.


----------

