Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

plantbasednews.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 623 posts

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#31

Post by mystraline »

Grimblewald wrote: post #11

I always wondered who their demographic was. The core early adopters, the ethical vegans, who actually like the taste of plants are never going to make a lab made ultra processed salt bomb their daily driver (never mind issues surrounding industrial agriculture). Health-conscious folks would take one look at the ingredient list and bail because of the heavy processing and industrial fillers. You've got bodybuilders a…

Thats the thing... Really really good vegetarian and vegan food tastes amazing and is filling. And unless you're intentionally picking around for meat or meat products, you're not going to notice.

A lot of Indian/Brahmin food is exactly that. Its insanely delicious.

And we have Beyond Meat and Impossible Meat(is that the name?). Both instead of going "vegetarian done well is superb" went to "sorry its a sad reminder of a hamburger". And thats a problem. Nobody wants to be reminded that this is $10/lb and real hamburger is $5/lb.

Ive also had problems with other 'meat substitues'. They're almost always plasticy or fake tasting, or chemically off.

Whereas my tofu saag is delicious. And no meet or cheese needed... Although my favorite is saag paneer (cheese). I stay away from the fake-almost-but-not-quite foods.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#32

Post by XorNot »

MrLeap wrote: post #13
znpy wrote: post #9

It was never going to work. Proprietary food, that you can only buy from one company? Of course it was doomed to fail. It’s not even about veganism, it’s a cancerous idea.

Proprietary food.. that you can only buy from a single company are all doomed? Might I offer an example that, under some definitions, has not failed despite that strategy. The McRib. I was going to offer the twinkie but I guess hostess declared bankruptcy, so maybe you're right.

It's not an unreasonable statement though that for the concept to work it has to "jellybean" though: many manufacturers, many variations, same basic product, ubiquitous availability.

Where it sits as a "premium" good doesn't really work as a value proposition.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#33

Post by 6510 »

Maybe I've missed it but I see a much more palatable market in "light" meats. It has great flavor and texture but it needs to be part of a composition even if it is just salt and pepper. I've seen really great tasting meatballs in the wild that had less than 4% meat in them, say 5% for lazy calculations. You can feed it to 20 people and get the same results as 19 vegetarians + one meat eater.

Some are so much into meat the vegetarian evangelism has about as much chance as trying to convince them cannibalism is the solution to all world problems.

If you sell them something cheap that tastes great and tell them it has meat in it there is no need for all that tiresome talking about saving the world on an empty stomach. They become easy to catch and kill.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#34

Post by jghn »

cogman10 wrote: post #19
jfengel wrote: post #12

That's too bad. I don't expect fake-meats to be healthy, or cheap, but I like that they can be made without killing animals and without raising them in inhumane conditions. I had really hoped that people would say, "Well, if it tastes close enough, then how about I go for the cruelty-free version." And it is close-enough -- it's at least as good as a fast-food hamburger. Perhaps the cognitive dissonance is just too m…

Maybe it's just me, but beyond has never tasted close to the original. Impossible does. The fact that it doesn't taste close to the original and that it commands a price premium is why I ultimately gave up on it. Where I might use beyond, I can usually get a healthier option using ground turkey instead with a much more agreeable flavor and price. But really, I've just focused on making more meatless dishes in general…

Not just you. To me Beyond tastes barely better than the classic fake meat products. Whereas I find impossible actually tastes good.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#35

Post by midnitewarrior »

This is the moment, but they refuse to market the product in a way that is acceptable, (and adds affordability) to consumers.

If they would do a 55/45 beef/plant-based meat blend and burgers, I think adoption rate would pick up significantly. Anybody who questions the taste is going to see that beef is the main ingredient. If the product comes in significantly cheaper than beef alone, more consumers will try it and look to it as an affordable way of eating beef.

For the bigger picture, 65 cows will stretch as far as 100 cows previously did, lowering suffering, environmental damage, inputs, etc.

For the people who like the 55/45 blend, it would open the door to an 80/20 blend plant vs. beef, and a 100% plant-based product.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#36

Post by blackjack_ »

Grimblewald wrote: post #11

I always wondered who their demographic was. The core early adopters, the ethical vegans, who actually like the taste of plants are never going to make a lab made ultra processed salt bomb their daily driver (never mind issues surrounding industrial agriculture). Health-conscious folks would take one look at the ingredient list and bail because of the heavy processing and industrial fillers. You've got bodybuilders a…

I'm like technically the exact demographic they should be chasing. Plant based eater who loves the taste of meat and just stopped eating it for ethical reasons. But like, I'm not gonna eat a heavily processed food often for the reasons stated above, and also it's just not great nutritionally compared to Seitan, which also actually just tasted better when prepared right. And it also doesn't stack up compared to high protein / extra firm tofu, which is incredible for cooking when frozen and then defrosted and cooked. And also made of soybeans, one of the cheapest food commodities in the world. So why would I pay 2x or 3x the amount of money for a drastically inferior product? Just when I want an exact burger replica, and once you are plant based for 3 or more years, you just don't really crave that anymore except as maybe a guilty pleasure once or twice a year.

So like, sure it's fine, but it is already in a tough competition with other plant based foods.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#37

Post by carlosjobim »

cpursley wrote: post #14

I never understood these engineered ultra processed meat imitation products, they are not healthy - period. There's already healthy and delicious cuisines that have developed over thousands of years (Indian, Nepalese, I'm sure many others). This desire to just recreate the SAD (standard American diet) with goo is beyond strange...

They are for vegetarians who want something that tastes similar to a burger.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#38

Post by antonymoose »

asdff wrote: post #28
Grimblewald wrote: post #11

I always wondered who their demographic was. The core early adopters, the ethical vegans, who actually like the taste of plants are never going to make a lab made ultra processed salt bomb their daily driver (never mind issues surrounding industrial agriculture). Health-conscious folks would take one look at the ingredient list and bail because of the heavy processing and industrial fillers. You've got bodybuilders a…

My vegetarian friends can now go to a restaurant (or better example yet, any event space like sports event or theme park, since having a veggie burger is pretty easy to check a box and satisfy dietary restrictions) and get any of the burger offerings on the menu with a beyond patty. Before that, the vegetarian option of only resort was often much more depressing and unsubstantial.

Reading this somewhat reminds me how the Gluten Free trend led to a lot more options for my friend with celiac.

Still, one wonders does “buying a fake burger at the ball park with my friends” translate to actual fandom and further consumption or is it just a a captive consume picking the least-worst option.

The impression I’ve gotten is for the latter.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#39

Post by wmeredith »

jfengel wrote: post #12

That's too bad. I don't expect fake-meats to be healthy, or cheap, but I like that they can be made without killing animals and without raising them in inhumane conditions. I had really hoped that people would say, "Well, if it tastes close enough, then how about I go for the cruelty-free version." And it is close-enough -- it's at least as good as a fast-food hamburger. Perhaps the cognitive dissonance is just too m…

I never found it close enough, and it's expensive, and it's bad for you. So no thanks.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#40

Post by dgxyz »

3rodents wrote: post #7

I disagree with the idea that it's "not the moment for plant-based meat". Beyond Meat has a fantastic product that does very well in lots of markets. The problem is that Beyond Meat the company was valued as some sort of once in a generation radical reimagining of the way we eat. Beyond Meat's product is not going to change the world, it's just a good product. If Beyond Meat had grown organically, instead of raising…

Yeah exactly that. It's just pretty damn good. It's just not universe changing.

Hope this doesn't kill them.

Post reply on HN