
Canadian meat giant Maple Leaf debuts new plant-based burger - JumpCrisscross
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-23/canadian-meat-giant-maple-leaf-debuts-new-plant-based-burger
======
ElijahLynn
Very encouraging news for our environment to see a meat producer actively
debut a non-meat product that will actively take away from meat sales. Reminds
me of Kodak. Where Kodak did not embrace digital early enough, and then many
years later was bankrupt.

~~~
toufiqbarhamov
_Very encouraging news for our environment to see a meat producer actively
debut a non-meat product that will actively take away from meat sales. Reminds
me of Kodak. Where Kodak did not embrace digital early enough, and then many
years later was bankrupt._

I think that’s a fanciful comparison. More likely they worked the numbers and
realize two things. First, the people most likely to buy meatless products
weren’t part of their existing customer base, so there is no cannibalization.
Second, that even if they don’t sell at meaningful volume, it’s fantastic PR.
After all, when there are people so unaware of global trends and so wrapped up
in their own desires and wishes that they honestly see meatless burgers as a
harbinger of global change at scale... it would be crazy to leave the PR well
untapped.

~~~
StrictDabbler
_First, the people most likely to buy meatless products weren’t part of their
existing customer base, so there is no cannibalization._

I'd like to suggest that the term "cannibalization" should be used gently when
applied to a meat company. [ I would also like to take a look at your comment
in terms of assertions because I'm having a hard time parsing it.

\- People who want meatless products aren't buying meat so they're an
expansion opportunity. I think that's a fair assessment.

\- Meatless products may not be big sellers but they're good PR. I'm not sure
about this.

\- People are unaware of global trends and are self-centered

AND

\- self-centred people see meatless burgers as a sign of global change

THEREFORE

\- making a meatless burger is good PR, so much so that not doing it is crazy.

Are you sure that last part makes any sense at all? It feels like an emotional
appeal that doesn't really connect.

FWIW, if I were running a meat company I would be comparing the PR value of a
meatless burger with the expense of tooling up an entire meat-free production
and packing line. I think I'd need real sales to justify that outlay.

~~~
munk-a
I'd also disagree with

\- People who want meatless products aren't buying meat so they're an
expansion opportunity. I think that's a fair assessment.

I think that the desire to eat meat-like products is much lower than a lot of
people assume in vegetarian/vegan people. Products like Seitan and other "meat
texture" items have always done poorly when compared to vegetarian/vegan
offerings that simply omit any meat-like ingredients, some people don't like
the texture of meat and those that do find near-meat but not meat products to
always fall short - sort of like (all)gluten free bread, it exists and you can
buy it, but it feels like having a mouth full of sand. If it's late and you're
itching for a slice of toast but can't have it it's just better to find whole
alternatives, nuts, maybe something involving harissa. I think imitation foods
will always end up falling flat because they're imitations - and there is some
psychological reinforcement there that keeps us from saying "close enough"
even when it gets really close - probably the same effect that makes people
try to call backsies if they fail the pepsi challenge.

~~~
mehrdadn
> Products like Seitan and other "meat texture" items have always done poorly
> when compared to vegetarian/vegan offerings that simply omit any meat-like
> ingredients

Hm... do _non_ -vegetarians/vegans actually prefer these newer "meat texture"
items over the classic veggie ones?

~~~
taude
I'd say "yes". I tried an impossible burger. It does a pretty good job of
imitating meat in a way that my Morninstar and TJ's quinoa and bean burgers
don't. However, I don't think I'd choose the fake "meat-like" stuff over the
real, if given a choice. (I try to only eat red meat a couple times/month,
though, so it's pretty much a treat for me.)

~~~
mehrdadn
The reason I asked is I tried these meat imitations too and I felt I liked
some (thought most definitely not all) of the usual soy-based kinds more.
Sadly I forget what exactly it was but if I remember correctly MorningStar has
been one of the ones I've liked better. So I'm wondering what the actual data
on this is like.

~~~
taude
Just realized that I also not eating my meat-substitute burgers to not eat
meat, but to eat more veggies and cut down on that stuff in my diet. Which is
probably why I still eat meat. If only a small amount per week (compared to
typical SAD diet).

------
kylnew
Semi-related, but the Beyond Meat burger at Canadian fast-food chain A&W has
been a big hit too, it seems. I got one at a mall recently and was amazed that
everyone in line at the time was there to try the beyond meat burger. There’s
a serious appetite for this stuff so I’m glad to see a big meat company paying
attention.

~~~
elektor
You should give the Impossible Burger a try as well, it's even more meat-like
and has a great taste. Both burgers recently announced 2.0 versions of their
products so there's a lot of excitement in the field of plant-based meat.

~~~
AnIdiotOnTheNet
I actually much prefer the Beyond Burger. Maybe it was cooked wrong, but the
Impossible Burger I tried tasted a lot like a Morningstar Farm's Griller's
Prime to me. Not a bad flavor mind you, just not worth the $3 surcharge.

~~~
elektor
Agreed, I think the way its prepared definitely matters.

For me, I think the Impossible Burger seems "better" because I've only had it
prepared by restaurants whereas the Beyond Burger I've mostly made myself from
the grocery store.

------
schnevets
As a long time flexitarian (I hate that phrase too), I just roll my eyes at
all of these "non-meat initiatives". Impossible and Beyond burgers don't hold
a candle to a classic portobello burger.

People have made delicious meals without meat since society began, and they
didn't rely on "tricking" people into thinking a meal is something else. It's
baffling that the marketing department of Beyond and Impossible have turned
standard food r&d into an environmental savior.

~~~
atombender
My vegetarian (since her early teens) girlfriend rolls her eyes at portobello
burgers and positively praises the gods that there are now brands like Field
Roast and Impossible Burger.

Tastes differ, of course, and everyone is entitled to theirs. My sense from
two other vegetarian friends, though, is that they feel they're finally coming
out of a food ghetto -- vegetarianism is no longer considered an annoying
quirk that goes with hippie political beliefs and wearing socks in sandals,
and the food has been lifted up into a new level of quality. It used to be
that every restaurant's idea of a veggie burger was a portobello mushroom
between two buns, and this is fortunately no longer true.

I myself went vegetarian a year ago, and aside from occasionally thinking
about bacon or pepperoni, I really don't miss meat. Like my girlfriend, I'm
now actually slightly grossed out by the burgers that bring too much of the
meat experience; I tried the Beyond Burger recently and while it tasted okay,
it was a bit creepy. We're a big fan of Field Roast's Field Burger, which
doesn't bleed and indeed doesn't look like meat.

~~~
jeremysalwen
I will second that as someone who has been vegetarian their whole life. I do
feel like vegetarian (and especially vegan) food has steadily become more
popular, and "coming out of the food ghetto" is a great way to describe it.

Based on my taste in food, I think if I wasn't vegetarian, I would probably
eat a lot of meat -- so all the meat substitutes which have exploded in
variety and availability has been a boon for me. It feels very "parallel
universe" for me to hear that Carl's Jr and Whitecastle are selling premium
veggie burgers now, I definitely had classified them as places I would never
even consider eating at.

------
gbrown
All the black-bean and beet burgers in town have been replaced by these
things. Sometimes I feel like the only vegetarian who hates fake meat and
wants recognizeable veggie products.

Fake meat creeps me out.

~~~
kentosi
It might be a far stretch to say that they've been "replaced". At least in my
area the traditional vegetarian options are still there alongside these newer
items.

It's not to your taste, which is fine. There are meat-eaters that don't like
seafood. Let's just be happy that there is now an ever-growing choice in the
plant-based section of the supermarket.

~~~
gbrown
Three of the restaurants I most frequently went to have switched away. There
are still other places with black bean burgers, but it feels like replacement
given my restaurant preferences.

------
silentrob
I suspect the timing deliberately lines up with the launch of the new Canadian
food guide yesterday. [https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/](https://food-
guide.canada.ca/en/)

~~~
taxguy
This is interesting. One of the recommendations are to "Limit highly processed
foods. If you choose these foods, eat them less often and in small amounts."

Would these meatless products be considered "highly processed food" that
should be limited?

------
dsfyu404ed
Everyone here is talking about taste, quality, and all the other things office
workers making six figures base their purchasing decisions on

For every pound of free range, organic fed, fair trade ground beef that gets
sold at Whole Foods Walmart sells a truck load of house brand 80/20.

Plant based ground beef replacements are not going to have a measurable impact
on the meat industry or environment until they can deliver almost the same
experience as cheap ground beef at a lesser price.

I see no mention of price in this article which tells me price is not one of
the strong suits of this product. While another choice of vegetarian beef is
certainly a good thing for vegetarians and the Whole Foods crowd I don't see
this product affecting everything at the macro level. Things will likely get
cheaper over time but we do not appear at a tipping point yet.

------
thtthings
You people not in Canada, Canada has a new food guide:

[https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/](https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/)

It encourages people to eat minimal amount of meat and dairy products. Change
is coming and it's good they are embracing it.

~~~
wccrawford
I don't see anywhere that it recommends eating "minimal amount of meat and
dairy products". In fact, if you click on the "eat protein foods" part, it
specifically recommends lean beef, pork, and poultry as well as milk and
yogurt.

~~~
thtthings
But that is a very small part of the whole meal. Look at the picture, you see
very less meat and more nuts, beans etc

------
SketchySeaBeast
Honestly, if it's as tasty and protein-filled as a normal burger, sign me up.
I enjoy meat for the taste and because of my nutritional goals, so if it can
be nutritionally better and as tasty, there's no contest.

------
b_tterc_p
It seems to me that insect meat is the way to go taste, nutrition, and cost
wise. But people are adverse to eating bugs. To me this seems to be a branding
problem. One of the plant based burger producers should advertise that their
food is supplemented with natural proteins and lipids, then stuff their plant
burgers with ground up crickets or meal worms or whatever.

I don’t think people would have as much a problem eating a plant burger with
insect protein supplements as they would eating straight crickets

~~~
koolba
What they really need to do is stop pushing fake meat as “like beef” and start
pushing it as delicious on its own.

Fried crickets are amazing. It’s natural to be squeamish but just like people
were once scared of red tomatoes they’ll come around.

~~~
tyfon
They started doing that in Norway with some of the veggie burgers and they are
delicious. I don't think I've had a meat burger in two years.

I haven't been able to find insect meat here yet but it's probably coming soon
if you got it in the US now.

We do eat meat though, but only once or twice a week and almost never red meat
anymore.

~~~
koolba
I eat it all. Red meat, white meat, fish, you name it. If it’s not going to
kill me I’ll try it and if it tastes good I’ll likely try it again.

I have no qualms about eating anything and my comment is based purely on
trying something new and actively enjoying in taste alone. I’d be more
inclined to try something new if someone says it tastes good on its own accord
vs “tastes just like X”.

~~~
tyfon
Oh yeah, I completely agree on the "tastes like X" thing.

The veggie burgers I talk about tastes nothing like meat and the texture is
different, but they do not market it as meat replacement just a delicious
veggie burger. The different ingredients are displayed on the package so it
all looks very good too :)

I often find the "meat replacements" rather disgusting and I prefer to eat
real meat over those.

------
chiefalchemist
> “Consumers may realize the product is healthier for them and their family,
> but when it boils down to it they’re probably going to go with the thing
> that tastes better or they’re more familiar with,” said Billy Roberts,
> senior food and drink analyst at Mintel. But manufacturers such as Lightlife
> are targeting younger consumers, he said, who are more likely to try new
> products they see as healthier.

I sometimes think these plant-based burger outfits are doing themselves a
disservice by trying to simulate a beef burger. At this point, the ground beef
most people are accustomed to is not all that tasty.

As for taste vs healthy, well that's another, albeit related, issue. Food as a
source of pleasure, as opposed to a source of nutrition for the body / mind,
has distorted the consumption expections for the last 25 - 50 years. Too much
salt, too much sugar, hyper-flavored foods designed to increased consumption
are all status quo.

To me, the smart (startup) move would be to move beyond the confines (and
baggage) of the burger, and become the sports drink of healthier eating.

Yes. Easier said than done. But being a cookie cutter is running into the
competition storm.

------
rch
> its non-GMO, soy-free, gluten-free pedigree may give it a leg up on its
> competitors

It's still not organic however, which makes it significantly less appealing
for me. Since Beyond and Impossible don't seem to be organic either, they all
have the same "pedigree", FWIW.

The packaging ratio for Beyond has always bothered me too. I believe it's
recyclable, but it seems like a lot of plastic and cardboard relative to the
amount of food.

I'm still enthusiastic about the overall concept though.

~~~
shawnz
But it's a good proof of concept of the technology which could easily be
remade into an organic version. And the cheaper price afforded by not using
organic practices might help speed up adoption to a point where organic
versions could become more cost-efficient.

~~~
rch
I'd agree to a point, but it might be even more difficult to make the shift
once the supply chain and pricing settles into place, particularly for
restaurants that are already taking a risk on this as a new category.

------
ajcodez
Meat substitutes are the best for infrequent cooking. Chick’n by Tofurkey for
example tastes pretty similar to chicken except it pan fries in minutes and
lasts in the fridge for months. I think burgers miss the mark because
hamburger buns don’t keep but definitely excited by more innovation.

------
YeahSureWhyNot
I love meat but I would not mind having a healthy and good tasting alternative
hopefully available at a reasonable price (eventually). great news

------
dominotw
> meant to be more like beef

I hate tastes like X concept. I don't care if doesn't taste like beef, it
never works, our brain is way too smart to fall for this kind gimmicks.

Surprise me with new products, tell me whats in it straight up.

I really hope this "tastes like meat" trend dies.

~~~
bdamm
"Uncanny valley" is the effect at work, likely. But about your point on the
brain not falling for it... there is evidence that it can be done for foods.
Just take a look at how many drinks and sweets contain artificial flavors.

~~~
dominotw
> Just take a look at how many drinks and sweets contain artificial flavors.

Because most ppl have no idea of how any of those things actually taste. Its
so easy to tell when flavor is artificial.

------
ziont
when i saw animals being mistreated it made me feel sick for eating meat.

if this alternative has all of the same nutrition and taste and texture as
real meat then i am switching

~~~
spraak
Sometimes it won't have the same taste, texture and nutrition [1] - but it's
still worth switching.

[1] one for one (cow burger vs plant burger) that is. Plant based diets can
absolutely have the same net nutrition as a diet with animal products.

~~~
ziont
if it's not 1:1 to meat then forgettaboutit

guess im eating steak tonite

~~~
spraak
Are you being sarcastic?

------
neogodless
Off Topic: another example of egregious capitalization!

Is "Canadian meat giant Maple Leaf debuts new plant-based burger" easier on
the eyes? Or should proper nouns be wrapped in quotes when part of a headline?

~~~
sdinsn
Is English not your first language? Titles are supposed to be capitalized

~~~
neogodless
Canadian English is not my first language! "Meat", "Giant", "Maple" and "Leaf"
can all be nouns, and some of them can be adjectives. With everything in that
sentence being flexible words, and "maple leaf" not standing out, you can't
parse that sentence in order.

Canadian - I'm with you

Meat - Ok, Canadian meat!

Giant - I'm not sure here, is Giant a kind of Canadian meat?

Maple - huh... ?

Leaf - I'm really getting lost here

It isn't until I get to the "Burger" that I'm starting to realize we're
talking about a "meat giant" _company_ and that company is named "Maple Leaf."
I get that if you know all companies in all countries, you probably recognize
Maple Leaf, but I had not heard of them before, so it took some logic to
interpret a sentence that, in my opinion, should be understandable the first
time you read it, without making assumptions (or having explicit knowledge
about a specific company.) If only "Maple Leaf" was capitalized, it would've
been instantly recognized as a company name, and the "meat giant" descriptor
would've been logical.

~~~
sdinsn
I understand your confusion, but titles are capitalized in the English
language so I don't know what to say. It's not the most confusing rule we have
at least

------
ovx99
Ah, a veggie burger. Truly a paradigm-shifting innovation.

------
village-idiot
No thanks. I suspect that the mass scale conversion from meat to plant based
substitutes will go as well as our conversion to seed oils in the late 20th
century: poorly.

------
nonbel
Normal Burger:

    
    
      Carbs   : 0 g
      Fat     : 10 g
      Protein : 17 g
    

[https://www.nutritionix.com/food/beef-
patty](https://www.nutritionix.com/food/beef-patty)

"Lightlife Burger":

    
    
      Carbs   : 11 g
      Fat     : 2.5 g
      Protein : 10 g
    

[https://lightlife.com/sites/default/files/SmartPatties_Black...](https://lightlife.com/sites/default/files/SmartPatties_BlackBeanBurger_Nutrition.jpg)

Nope, not a substitute.

EDIT:

Apparently that is for a different veggie burger from the same company. Not
sure where to get the info for the one under discussion here.

~~~
paulcole
You’re not comparing to the product mentioned in the article which clearly
shows 20g protein in the image.

~~~
nonbel
Thanks. I am not sure where to find the nutritional info for this then.

~~~
tom_mellior
I don't think the nutritional info is available online, as they are just
announcing the product and it's not for sale yet.

However, [https://www.lightlifenews.com/](https://www.lightlifenews.com/) as
of the time of writing
([https://web.archive.org/web/20190124100505/https://www.light...](https://web.archive.org/web/20190124100505/https://www.lightlifenews.com/))
writes: "The Lightlife Burger has 20 grams of pea protein, 0 grams of
cholesterol, and only 2.5 grams of saturated fat in a quarter-pound patty,
compared to 80 grams of cholesterol and 9.3 grams of saturated fat in a
quarter-pound patty made from traditional beef."

The 9.3 grams of saturated fat are a good match for your figure of 10 grams of
fat, though note that they do qualify it as "saturated" and don't give figures
for total fat or carbs. Bummer.

------
porpoisely
It's terrible news for the environment. In terms of environmental harm,
vegetable farming is easily the most environmentally damaging human endeavor.
The distant second is raising livestock. The most environmentally friendly
method for humans would be the "hunter gatherer" diet ( wild vegetation and
wild animals ). But we might be too populous for that to work.

If you care about the environment, this is the worst news. You essentially
have to farm one plant ( either grain or corn or soy ) to feed livestock for
your burger. How many different types of plants have to be planted to produce
a single burger? And of course, most of those plants can't be raised in frigid
canada so they'll have to destroy the environment elsewhere.

Not to mention plants are nutrient deficient and as a result people have to
eat far more of it which means more farms and more environmental destruction.
Ever wonder why grazing animals have to eat constantly?

It's amazing how PR has convinced people that industrial farming is actually
good for the environment and animals. I guess if you repeat a lie often
enough, people will believe it.

~~~
ClassyJacket
I want a source for that _outrageous_ claim that the most environmentally
damaging human endeavor is growing vegetables. I suspect you being right would
turn the world on its head.

~~~
wstrange
Not the GP, and I don't have any conclusions in this matter - but I don't
think we can outright dismiss the role of livestock in maintaining a healthy
environment. For example:

[https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/reversing-desertification-
with-l...](https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/reversing-desertification-with-
livestock)

And many vegetables are fertilized with blood meal, which comes from
animals...

Perhaps a more nuanced view is needed...

~~~
tom_mellior
> [https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/reversing-desertification-
> with-l...](https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/reversing-desertification-with-
> livestock)

That link talks about Allan Savory's work. Savory has a reeeally well-done,
convincing-sounding TED talk about this. But unfortunately it looks like many
people who know a lot more about this than I do disagree with pretty much
everything he says: [https://slate.com/human-interest/2013/04/allan-savorys-
ted-t...](https://slate.com/human-interest/2013/04/allan-savorys-ted-talk-is-
wrong-and-the-benefits-of-holistic-grazing-have-been-debunked.html)

Also, even if keeping livestock is a good idea in some environments, that
doesn't mean that farming livestock elsewhere is a similarly good idea.

