The whole idea sounds pretty insane really. Who's going to pay hundreds of dollars for a battery-powered kettle just so they can save 1-2 minutes of time (and less if you're just making enough boiling water for 1 cup). I use a little 100V (900W I think, according to the label) kettle to make tea, either 1 or 2 cups at a time, and while it's certainly not as speedy as those EU/UK market kettles, and a bit slower than a US kettle, it's fast enough.
A battery-powered one might save me 1 minute of time at best, but will cost probably at least 5-10x as much for the kettle, it'll be MUCH larger than my current kettle (that battery pack and power electronics needs space) which is a problem with my tiny kitchen, and I have to worry about how long the battery will last and how to dispose of it later and if I can even replace it.
There are lots of products that aren’t _necessary_ at all but bring an amount of fun to the world. This feels to me like one of those. Not convinced it could even recoup development cost, but I’d be happy to be surprised. There’s certainly a niche for well off Brits (and EU folks) living in 120V land hankering for a fast cuppa.
The reality of product development and manufacturing is that economies of scale affect prices such that low sales quantities (i.e. a "niche product") generally means extremely high prices. Also, the BOM cost alone is probably going to be high, because of the huge batteries needed (with high current ability) and the power electronics involved. Then when you consider the safety ratings and certifications needed (since this is something that could easily start a fire with the power levels involved), I don't see how it could be sold at any kind of reasonable price unless there's a really big underserved market.
Sure, if this device could be sold for USD$50, it might sell some to people like you say, but how many of these people would spend $500 or more on it?
I'm supportive of the original idea because I think it's fun and cool. I agree with everything you've said, but we're talking a bit at cross angles. You're looking at it from what it would take for this to be a successful, competitive, and profitable consumer product. I'm looking at if it is technically feasible and can be made for non-absurd amounts of money. Our threshold of non-absurd may also differ, but given there are some people will pay $20k+ for an espresso machine, there are likely some who would pay several hundred dollars for a tea kettle.
Sure, it's technically feasible, but I'm questioning if it's financially viable at all. Being fun and cool isn't all that great when you end up with a product that just has some prototypes and a bunch of hype, but then the company goes bankrupt before it goes anywhere. There are some examples of things like $20k espresso machines that were successful, but I think they're rare.
A battery-powered one might save me 1 minute of time at best, but will cost probably at least 5-10x as much for the kettle, it'll be MUCH larger than my current kettle (that battery pack and power electronics needs space) which is a problem with my tiny kitchen, and I have to worry about how long the battery will last and how to dispose of it later and if I can even replace it.
This is really a solution in search of a problem.