4 ms·

> ... can be both cheaper ... Impossible Burger patties are actually more expensive. For example, Burger King: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/meatless-fas

by kyrra 7y ago

> ... can be both cheaper ... Impossible Burger patties are actually more expensive. For example, Burger King: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/meatless-fast-food-burgers-probably-arent-any-healthier-but-theyre-definitely-more-expensive-2019-06-12 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/meatless-fast-food-burgers... > The meatless burger is $5.99, around a dollar more than the regular Whopper with meat.

xvector 7y ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the US heavily subsidize meat costs?
- devmunchies 7y ago
  yes. and corn and soy production is also subsidized which is fed to livestock.
jghn 7y ago
Unless I missed it in TFA, it doesn't say that the raw materials (the meat) are more expensive but rather that the product is more expensive. If a fast food chain can charge more for cheaper materials, that's a double win for them.
- jakob223 7y ago
  I imagine that that difference is going mostly to recoup R&D costs at e.g. Impossible right now, who is making the patties.
  - JakeTheAndroid 7y ago
    for now I expect you're correct. But in the long run it should ideally have really nice margins. Once Beyond and Impossible get a version that is as close as it needs to be, they can start focusing on supply chain and stuff like that.
    - jghn 7y ago
      Agree w/ you & GP, and I suspect that the parent of my reply is actually correct. I just didn't think the linked article supported the claim.
  - entropicdrifter 7y ago
    Could also be due to scaling costs and farming subsidies on meat vs the plants used in Impossible Burgers.
jedberg 7y ago
For now. But as more people start selecting the plant based substitute, the cost will come down because of volume.
_bxg1 7y ago
I would assume the margins are really high. It's a premium product right now because they're still building out a market and because there was a big up-front research investment, but the fundamental sustainability of the raw materials and process must be miles better than raising cattle.
tom_mellior 7y ago
On the other hand, Swedish fast food chain Max has a pretty good "plant beef" burger made of wheat and soy protein, and it costs the same as the meat version. I guess with Beyond and Impossible you pay a hefty price for their marketing. Or for irrelevant features: Didn't one of them put a lot of research into making a "bleeding" plant burger? Bleeding may be relevant in some settings, but not at Burger King where you always get your burger well done (AFAIK).

by kyrra 7y ago

xvector 7y ago

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the US heavily subsidize meat costs?

devmunchies 7y ago
yes. and corn and soy production is also subsidized which is fed to livestock.

jghn 7y ago

Unless I missed it in TFA, it doesn't say that the raw materials (the meat) are more expensive but rather that the product is more expensive. If a fast food chain can charge more for cheaper materials, that's a double win for them.

jakob223 7y ago
I imagine that that difference is going mostly to recoup R&D costs at e.g. Impossible right now, who is making the patties.
- JakeTheAndroid 7y ago
  for now I expect you're correct. But in the long run it should ideally have really nice margins. Once Beyond and Impossible get a version that is as close as it needs to be, they can start focusing on supply chain and stuff like that.
  - jghn 7y ago
    Agree w/ you & GP, and I suspect that the parent of my reply is actually correct. I just didn't think the linked article supported the claim.
- entropicdrifter 7y ago
  Could also be due to scaling costs and farming subsidies on meat vs the plants used in Impossible Burgers.

jedberg 7y ago

For now. But as more people start selecting the plant based substitute, the cost will come down because of volume.

_bxg1 7y ago

I would assume the margins are really high. It's a premium product right now because they're still building out a market and because there was a big up-front research investment, but the fundamental sustainability of the raw materials and process must be miles better than raising cattle.

tom_mellior 7y ago

On the other hand, Swedish fast food chain Max has a pretty good "plant beef" burger made of wheat and soy protein, and it costs the same as the meat version. I guess with Beyond and Impossible you pay a hefty price for their marketing. Or for irrelevant features: Didn't one of them put a lot of research into making a "bleeding" plant burger? Bleeding may be relevant in some settings, but not at Burger King where you always get your burger well done (AFAIK).