Whose Fault is it When Alternative Proteins Fail?
Originally published on LinkedIn, April 6, 2026
Recently, I read that the CEO of Beyond Meat (now Beyond The Plant Protein Co.) attributed the company’s recent financial struggles to shifting consumer behavior.
In an earnings call, he pointed to a “resurgence of red meat” as a key factor.
It’s true – dollar sales of red meat hit an all-time high in 2025, up ~7% year-over-year. But pound sales didn’t increase nearly as much. That suggests something else is going on.
To me, the real issue is simpler:
The product doesn’t deliver a compelling enough experience to drive sustained demand.
I’ve written about this recently.
Beyond made a strategic decision to go to market with an MVP – a product just good enough to generate interest and attract early adopters. That’s a smart move. It builds brand, creates momentum, and generates real-world validation.
But as I’ve said before:
Just okay isn’t okay.
You can ride novelty for a while.
But novelty doesn’t create habits.
At some point, consumers start asking harder questions:
• Does it taste good?
• Is it worth the cost?
• Is it actually better for me?
I’ve called this the Iron Triangle of Food – taste, nutrition, and cost. As with the Iron Triangle of Project Management (cost-time-scope), you cannot change one without affecting at least one of the others. But the problem with Beyond is they never improved any side of the triangle enough to matter.
It’s not that no progress was made. It’s that the product never crossed the threshold needed to sustain repeat purchase at scale.
MVP created adoption.
But it also created the illusion that the core problem was already solved.
This isn’t a consumer problem.
It’s what happens when “good enough to launch” gets mistaken for “good enough to win.”
The market doesn’t reward novelty.
It rewards products people come back to.
Read the original LinkedIn article here: When Alternative Proteins Fail
Read article on The Street here: Beyond CEO Blames Americans for Company Problems