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

Beyond Meat S-1

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 439 posts

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#171

Post by Falling3 »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #130
bluntfang wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>free from cruelty. Do you mind if I ask what your requirements for this are? At the end of the day, isn't ending life cruel, no matter the means?

Ending life is not necessarily cruel...how about for veterinarians utilizing euthanasia? Let's say you have an animal that's 95% going to die sometime within 12-24 hours. If your client can pay $5000, which they can't usually, the chances improve to 50% chance of living. In most cases, for money or for suffering, euthanasia is the least cruel option, as it's vastly more affordable and a painless, harmless process.

I don't think anyone is saying ending life is necessarily cruel. We're saying unnecessarily ending life is cruel.

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#172

Post by freewilly1040 »

Slippery_John wrote: post #159
redisman wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's definitely a bit of an arms race going on, and it's unfortunate. I don't follow, how is competition bad in this case? Sounds like the opposite to me.

I think they're afraid that one brand will be so much more successful that the other goes away. Each brand has different flavor, texture, and nutritional profiles so if any of those are particularly important to you then it's hard to make do with one of the other options. For example, both Beyond Meat and Quorn sell meatless "beef" crumbles. Each has a noticeably different flavor and fairly different nutrition (The Q…

If they have different flavors that different people prefer then it's probably a safe bet that there will multiple companies that last in the market.

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#173

Post by erulabs »

morley wrote: post #2

I have a stupid question: was there a regulatory change in the recent past that made it easier to file for IPOs? Or is this just a coincidence that all these S-1s were filed around the same time?

To counter what the others are saying - yes we're at the end of a 10 year market high, but unless VC firms are _entirely liquidating_ their position immediately after the S-1, which they are not, this doesn't to me indicate that a recession is coming. In fact, if anything, the opposite.

When others are afraid, be brave, etc...

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#174

Post by goldcd »

vageli wrote: post #163
goldcd wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well no it isn't.. MM would be 2 thousands - as in the representation of the year 2019 as MMXIX (2x1000 + 10 + (10-1)) Anyway, MM is clearly man-month or 2 digit month of the year when you stringify a date... we don't need more.

> Well no it isn't.. > MM would be 2 thousands - as in the representation of the year 2019 as MMXIX (2x1000 + 10 + (10-1)) > Anyway, MM is clearly man-month or 2 digit month of the year when you stringify a date... we don't need more. Tell that to the entire practice of accountancy.

Sorry - I wasn't saying accountants "didn't do it" - just that "they shouldn't" My pedantic (and massively down-voted post I now notice) was just an expression of my annoyance at mixing syntax. I'd also have accepted "M" as "a million" and therefore MM being 1,000,000,000,000... but they didn't do that either..

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#175

Post by wickoff »

bluntfang wrote: post #48
Pfhreak wrote: post #3

I've gone vegetarian, except for a single grass fed animal I bought from a local farmer. (I live in a city, it was easier than I thought it would be to connect with a farmer out in the rural part of my state.) The transition was way, way easier than I thought it was going to be. I didn't guilt myself when I made mistakes, just stopped eating meat unless I was sure the provenance of it was sustainable and free from cr…

>free from cruelty. Do you mind if I ask what your requirements for this are? At the end of the day, isn't ending life cruel, no matter the means?

It's not like the animal is going to live forever if you don't kill it. In nature animals are often eaten alive by predators, die from disease, starvation and get horribly injured in competition for mates.

A free range animal that's being humanely put down by a farmer has a much more pleasant life.

If you go down this rabbit hole deep enough you can begin to question whether life itself should exist.

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#176

Post by rayiner »

djakjxnanjak wrote: post #168
rayiner wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what's "fairly strange" about it. Meat consumption, for Americans, does not make up a big fraction of our CO2 footprint. Globally it's quite significant, but "get[ting] in front of developing nations eating of ruminants" is a much more politically fraught issue than doing the same in the U.S. My brother and I are 3-4 inches taller than my dad, because we grew up on a meat and dairy rich American diet, ve…

> Help me figure out the right messaging for what we should tell Bangladeshis that they shouldn't eat meat now that they're finally getting to be able to afford it. Are you trying to say we shouldn’t save the world from environmental destruction because it might be awkward to ask some people to switch to fake meat? How about this messaging: “we are destroying the world, we need to stop”

You're not going to "save the world from environmental destruction" by telling people to give up meat, because as India and China (not to mention Africa) develop, meat will become a minor component of their CO2 footprint just as it is in the United States. The anti-meat messaging will be seen as both stupid (because it won't help) and hypocritical ("how about we continue to eat meat, and Americans take their turn living the way Bangladeshi subsistence farmers used to live").

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#177

Post by opportune »

radiorental wrote: post #136
telesilla wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you. I haven't eaten red meat or birds for going on 25 years now and though I do enjoy a good salmon burger, I honestly prefer a beyond burger when I can find one (trying to cut down on the fish, for health and over-fishing reasons).

I wouldn't worry about over fishing Salmon, the vast majority are farmed now. You will know when you pay for wild Salmon. Same is true for a number of other staples: Tilapia, Shrimp, Catfish, etc. That said, similar to land based CAFO's you don't really want to know what they're fed (o;

In the PNW wild salmon is usually only about 40% more per lb and definitely worth it. Also most of it is pretty sustainably fished in Alaska (though in the puget sound region the population is reduced from what it should be). You shouldn't eat it raw but it tastes incomparably better cooked

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#178

Post by sf_rob »

dsl wrote: post #140
8ytecoder wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WTF, most animals that are farmed are fed agricultural produce - crops that are cultivated. It's simple math that it's inefficient to grow crops -> feed the animals -> eat the animals. There's efficiency loss at every step. Are you seriously claiming that eating meat is better than being vegetarian?

Eating grazing animals is more humane per unit of protein than industrial crops or factory farming.

The vast majority of meat is not 100% grazed. You have a point, but it's largely a theoretical one. If one can find a source of meat that is 100% naturally grazed then they could probably go through similar effort to eat non-meat products produced in minimally destructive ways.

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#179

Post by DamnYuppie »

bluntfang wrote: post #48
Pfhreak wrote: post #3

I've gone vegetarian, except for a single grass fed animal I bought from a local farmer. (I live in a city, it was easier than I thought it would be to connect with a farmer out in the rural part of my state.) The transition was way, way easier than I thought it was going to be. I didn't guilt myself when I made mistakes, just stopped eating meat unless I was sure the provenance of it was sustainable and free from cr…

>free from cruelty. Do you mind if I ask what your requirements for this are? At the end of the day, isn't ending life cruel, no matter the means?

I guess this is a good place for a rant for some down votes. The concept that death is cruel is ridiculous to me. EVRYTHING DIES, every animal in nature either dies of starvation, freezing to death, dies in a conflict with their own species for breeding rights, or gets to be attacked and eaten alive by a predator. The entirety of nature revolves around life and death struggles. Dying isn't cruel, to think so is a rejection of nature itself.

That being said there are quicker and better ways of taking an animals life, the quicker and less painful the better. I will categorically state that for me how they live is more important than how they die. I don't agree with many of the practices in the production of chicken, pigs, cows, and yes even farmed fish and generally try to avoid them.

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#180

Post by moftz »

whitepoplar wrote: post #59
paulcole wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How could there be? Products like Beyond Meat are barely a decade old.

So if we don't know its longterm health effects, why are people so eager to replace meat with it in their diet?

Vegetarians and vegans are an expanding market. Some of them still miss eating meat, especially comfort foods like burgers. There is a good article that talks about the research done on the heme used in Impossible Burgers. It talks about the protein, how it's produced, and how it's digested. There was even research done to see how someone with a soy allergy would react to eating heme. Obviously, it's no match for a long term study and the article mentions that but from first glance, it appears to be safe. One thing the article mentions but doesn't expand on is what is in the other 20% of the extract from the heme production.

https://newfoodeconomy.org/plant-blood-soy-leghemoglobin-imp...

Post reply on HN