Hacker News Reader

Comment by magic_beans | Hacker News Reader

Who is the audience for this burger? I was a vegetarian growing up and to this day I prefer a balanced veggie burger (made of beans, grains, and veggies) to a beer burger. I would be horrified to eat something made of plants so desperately pretending to be meat... or which "bleeds".

Why don't we just raise and slaughter cattle humanely instead?

View on HN

Meat eaters that don't want to give up the "taste" of meat to become vegetarian (e.g. for environmental or animal ethics reasons).

This is a "10x" sort of product -- for every 1 person who is willing to give up food that they think is delicious to become vegetarian, there are probably 10 people who wouldn't mind switching because the reasons are valid, but don't have the willpower or desire to give up burgers and fried chicken.

I believe this is the incorrect usage of "10x". "10x" generally implies a product that is 10 times better in some way to the existing solution in the market, not that there is "10x" the number of potential users.

Following this line of thought, imagine the reduction of cow slaughtering if all the fast food chains started serving Impossible burgers.

Even if it were possible to take the life of a sentient being "humanely," trying to do so is not sustainable. You can't meet the demand for meat and still treat these animals with respect. So this product is aimed at people who will always eat meat, but who might try to reduce their consumption periodically without reducing the experience.

I think the intended audience is current meat eaters. Based on the marketing materials I've seen, it seems they're trying to push the fact that it's a much more land and water efficient way to make burgers.

It's arguable whether it's possible to slaughter cattle humanely; personally I'm skeptical. As for why most cattle isn't raised more humanely, it's because it's cheaper not to.

Some friends of mine are vegan or vegetarian for environmental reasons. Eating beef = biggest carbon footprint. These are folks who still want the taste of meat.

The video says they're not targeting vegetarians or vegans, they're targeting meat eaters. And why not? I love beef but I'm absolutely interested in eating a good, guilt-free copy of it.

Now if only I could get over my fear of soy...

I am. My wife is vegan but I'm not. I'm happy to eat something that tastes like what I'm used to and doesn't kill a cow. I'm not a foodie. For the most part, I eat out of necessity and not some sense of pleasure. I dislike most foods and I'm impossible to cook for because of it. I like the taste of a burger. I've cooked a Beyond burger. Tasted good enough. As long as the costs aren't crazy, that's what I'll eat.

For one (or, rather, for one billion) - the audience is a large portion of the Indian subcontinent, many of whom (79.8%) are Hindu, for whom cows are sacred (and they, therefore, don't eat beef.)

They're not vegetarian for the same reasons as many Western folks are - they're vegetarian because religion dictates it.

For them, a delicious Impossible Burger that meets religious guidelines might be a huge huge thing.

But why would they want a pale imitation of something else, instead of the good food they already have? Why bother trying to build the best handicapped product?

Sprouted superfirm tofu is a great base meat. It's fine raw and can be spiced and dressed any which way. Who needs to fake ground beef -- the cheapest meat cut there is?

Except India already has a culture of (delicious) vegetarian cuisine, so there's no great need for meat substitutes, unlike say America.

The Impossible burger is meant for the future of meat-loving America. At some point, we need to really raise the price of meat to factor in its environmental costs.

In the video, the narrator says that the target market for the burger isn't vegetarians but meat eaters. The idea being that it's a way to wean us carnivore folks off the real stuff.

The market isn't vegetarians/vegans. Their ultimate goal is reduction of environmental damage and greenhouse gases. Why try to sell to someone who already doesn't eat meat? The company is mission-driven and it wouldn't contribute to their cause.

The market is also too small. Reminds me of the apocryphal story of the 2 shoe salesmen in Africa: 1 says bad news, no one wears shoes. The other says good news, no one wears shoes.

I am? Lifelong vegetarian, but once in a while have real meat, so know what it tastes like.

I actively avoid burger joints that only serve your mashed vegetable cakes (aka garden burger). The point of a burger is lost.

There are plenty alternatives besides Impossible Burger that have robust flavor and texture. Several burger bars have let me bring examples, tried them, and started stocking.

To be fair, none of those alternatives were trying to bleed.

I would eat this (as long as the price is reasonable). I've been having to cut down on red meat due to health issues (gout). I find most veggie burgers to be pretty good (I'm not too picky) so this stuff would have to be extremely competitive in taste and price to make me even bother trying it.

I'm guessing vegans and those worried about the environmental impact of meat products (how much water does it take to make a pound of beef?) and worried about meeting the food demands of a larger world population.

because even the most ideal implementation of cattle is inefficient, adds carbon dioxide to the atmosphere and, ultimately, not humane. industrial murder can never be humane. as a meat eater, i am eager to switch to synthetic meats because they are better in every conceivable way.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com