Besides that, I hate that they took me out of rhytm of work. If a standup is at 10am, and I arrive at 9am to do dev work, there is very little I can do before being interrupted - I need at least 2-4h of interrupted time to do some good work.
We do this on top of a good culture of asking for help and posting regular updates on our internal Sprint tracker, it works quite well.
It's amazing how much of a time saver and efficiency builder that can be. It's equally amazing how many managers prefer time wasting group meetings where people essentially read written reports...
You interrupt people 2-4 hours into their work, which is highly disruptive for those who get the most done in the morning.
Often discussions run on past many peoples' lunch time, which can make people cranky and occasionally leads to tense exchanges which might have been more amicable if people weren't hangry.
You wind up with people melding the work they did during the previous day and the current day. It gets difficult to keep track of what you did between two days' midpoints compared to what you did during a day.
And things get worse as more items are inevitably added to the standup meetings (now we need to check on tests, now we need to add a review of open tickets, now we need to involve people from other teams, etc).
In my experience, pre-lunch scrums result in heavy disruption and a bunch of people who feel like they could be doing other things to much greater effect.
Though that was the full on clean room high level sponsor route, collocated with the customer.
I've been on 11am standups lately and they're not too bad, but it incentivizes me to either come in at 8 or come in at 10-10:30. The latter is what usually happens.