Connect with us

Business

How Beyond Meat is trying to get its sizzle back

Published

on

How Beyond Meat is trying to get its sizzle back

When Beyond Meat went public in 2019 in an initial stock offering that saw its shares nearly triple in price, it seemed to confirm that plant-based meats had arrived.

The food technology, capable of converting beans into something approaching meat in taste and appearance, caught the imagination of the public, restaurant chefs and media alike. Deals with fast-food chains and soaring sales during the pandemic seemed to only underscore how a once-fringe idea had gone mainstream.

But those heady days are over as industry sales have fallen amid concerns about the healthfulness of plant-based meat, a sticker price that remains higher than a basic burger — and the fact that the product still only approximates the real thing.

“We thought we were just gonna go from our meteoric rise into the mainstream and not have to deal with this cycle that we’re in,” said Beyond Meat founder and Chief Executive Ethan Brown, in an interview at the company’s new El Segundo offices. “The trough has been a difficult place to be the last couple of years.”

Now the company is betting it can turn around its fortunes with a newly formulated burger that it says not only is a big leap in taste, but has won the seals of approval of leading health and nutrition organizations.

Advertisement

“I give credit where it’s due. I think they’ve made some clear improvements in the ingredients and nutritional profile, so there’s clear progress there,” said John Baumgartner, an analyst at Mizuho Securities, who has had an “underweight” rating on Beyond’s stock.

As the first plant-based meat company to go public, Beyond has been an industry bellwether, with its travails documented in the media and regulatory filings.

Though the company’s growing lineup, including breakfast patties, beef tips and chicken tenders, are sold at 130,000 retail and food service outlets worldwide, some of its heralded fast-food deals with companies such as Carl’s Jr., Dunkin Donuts and KFC have either petered out or not moved beyond test phases.

It’s also faced stiff competition from chief rival, Impossible Foods in Redwood City, Calif., which has made fast sales gains at supermarkets and is available as a Whopper at Burger King.

Beyond’s net revenue fell by more than 25% to $343 million in 2023 compared with 2021. Sales decreased another 18% in the first quarter of this year, with the company racking up $54 million in losses.

Advertisement

With numbers like that, investors have taken a beating. The stock is down more than 90% since its all-time highs topping $200 in 2019. Shares closed Thursday at $7.35.

The sales decline has taken a sharp financial toll, with the company’s cash position falling from $733 million in 2021 to $190 million last year.

That prompted TD Cowen in a May earnings note to say the company may run out of money if it can’t stem the bleeding or raise funds — an outcome Brown dismisses. In Beyond’s quarterly conference call, the chief financial officer talked about raising funds through either debt or equity.

Advertisement

“It’s challenging,” Baumgartner said. “The category is still trying to find its way.”

Sales of plant-based meats and seafood were down 12% in 2023 to $1.2 billion, with unit sales falling even more by 19%, according to the Good Food Institute.

While the novelty of plant-based meat has worn off, what has stuck are persistent cries of “fake” or “faux” meat by critics — a diverse group that includes nutritionists, the entrenched meat industry and whole food absolutists who proselytize eating foods closer to nature.

The meat industry has for years helped bankroll a campaign highlighting the highly processed nature of Beyond’s and other makers’ plant-based beef products. “Fake meat, real chemicals,” is one such campaign sponsored by the Center for Consumer Freedom, a business backed nonprofit.

“Our campaign simply informed the public about what’s in fake meat. Consumers have seen past the marketing spin and realized that these products are just ultraprocessed goop that costs more and isn’t healthier than real meat,” said James Bowers, executive director of the center, in an emailed statement to The Times.

Advertisement

Beyond has tried to stress that all its ingredients come from plant-based sources, but there are many nutritionists on the web who also have voiced concerns about the fat and sodium content of the older burgers — and an industrial process that creates a product Grandma would not have stocked in her kitchen.

Baumgartner thinks those voices have resonated more than any industry-backed campaign.

Brown maintains entrenched food lobbies are the real culprit, while also acknowledging their effectiveness.

“So if you look at 2020, 50% or more of consumers thought that plant-based meat was healthy. That dropped to 38% in 2022. And it’s probably lower today,” he told The Times.

Beyond is banking its turnaround on the fourth iteration of its burger meat, which began wide distribution in May. Beyond has switched from canola and coconut oils to avocado oil, reducing saturated fat by 60% to 2 grams per serving, while cutting sodium by 20%.

Advertisement

Brown said the new recipe, which includes peas, red lentils, faba beans and brown rice, was developed through consultation with the company’s scientific and nutritional advisors, as well as leading health groups.

The new burger has earned key endorsements by the American Diabetes Assn. and Good Housekeeping that Beyond plans to slap on its labeling. The American Heart Assn. is including the product in its heart-healthy recipe collection.

Beyond also says its major recipe change has resulted in its “meatiest, juiciest” burger ever, citing early taste tests to back up its claim. That’s an important consideration, given the competition.

Impossible Foods, founded by a Stanford University biochemist, makes soy-based burgers, using a bean that has been manipulated by the food industry for decades to make an assortment of products. The company’s burgers also contain a genetically modified plant-based version of heme, an iron-containing molecule that is a component of beef.

In online taste tests, Impossible often beat Beyond’s burgers, which are based on peas. Brown chose peas due to alleged health concerns over soy-based products, the vast majority of which are genetically modified.

Advertisement

Impossible’s burgers became the darlings of foodies and chefs at high-end restaurants prior to pandemic, and since then, like Beyond, the company has continued to improve them, with multiple versions now available.

While both companies laid off workers amid the industry’s downturn, Impossible has seen strong retail sales and claims it is “the fastest growing meat from plants brand” in the country. It’s also managed to make its Impossible Whopper stick on Burger King’s menus. As a privately held company, it does not release detailed financial information.

Overseas, Beyond, which can market its product as non-GMO, sells in far more markets, and, though McDonald’s decided against selling a Beyond-based burger in the United States, it does so in Europe.

Despite how much is riding on its newest burger, Beyond has raised the retail prices, partially to offset the higher costs of the ingredients, but also to improve its margins.

Baumgartner questioned the move, especially after Beyond had cut the price of its prior burger.

Advertisement

“I think what complicates the matter now is in 2023, when you had inflation and you were seeing food prices going up, Beyond cut their prices. Now, as prices have generally stabilized, Beyond Meat is raising prices.”

Brown dismissed the concerns, saying the company needs to raise its margins after the prior price cut destroyed them, while doing nothing to improve sales.

While Brown’s goal has been to achieve pricing parity with animal meat, he said Beyond’s customers — health conscious and concerned about the environmental issues surrounding the beef industry — have been found to be “price insensitive.”

The fundamental challenge for Beyond, he said, is turning around the wider perception that its products are not good for you.

“Once that narrative became complicated for people because of misinformation or whatever, it became harder to grow the business. We have addressed that thoroughly in this product,” he said.

Advertisement

Business

How We Cover the White House Correspondents’ Dinner

Published

on

How We Cover the White House Correspondents’ Dinner

Times Insider explains who we are and what we do, and delivers behind-the-scenes insights into how our journalism comes together.

Politicians in Washington and the reporters who cover them have an often adversarial relationship.

But on the last Saturday in April, they gather for an irreverent celebration of press freedom and the First Amendment at the Washington Hilton Hotel: The White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

Hosted by the association, an organization that helps ensure access for media outlets covering the presidency, the dinner attracts Hollywood stars; politicians from both parties; and representatives of more than 100 networks, newspapers, magazines and wire services.

While The Times will have two reporters in the ballroom covering the event, the company no longer buys seats at the party, said Richard W. Stevenson, the Washington bureau chief. The decision goes back almost two decades; the last dinner The Times attended as an organization was in 2007.

Advertisement

“We made a judgment back then that the event had become too celebrity-focused and was undercutting our need to demonstrate to readers that we always seek to maintain a proper distance from the people we cover, many of whom attend as guests,” he said.

It’s a decision, he added, that “we have stuck by through both Republican and Democratic administrations, although we support the work of the White House Correspondents’ Association.”

Susan Wessling, The Times’s Standards editor, said the policy is a product of the organization’s desire to maintain editorial independence.

“We don’t want to leave readers with any questions about our independence and credibility by seeming to be overly friendly with people whose words and actions we need to report on,” she said.

The celebrity mentalist Oz Pearlman is headlining the evening, in lieu of the usual comedy set by the likes of Stephen Colbert and Hasan Minhaj, but all eyes will be on President Trump, who will make his first appearance at the dinner as president.

Advertisement

Mr. Trump has boycotted the event since 2011, when he was the butt of punchlines delivered by President Barack Obama and the talk show host Seth Meyers mocking his hair, his reality TV show and his preoccupation with the “birther” movement.

Last month, though, Mr. Trump, who has a contentious relationship with the media, announced his intention to attend this year’s dinner, where he will speak to a room full of the same reporters he often derides as “enemies of the people.”

Times reporters will be there to document the highs, the lows and the reactions in the room. A reporter for the Styles desk has also been assigned to cover the robust roster of after-parties around Washington.

Some off-duty reporters from The Times will also be present at this late-night circuit, though everyone remains cognizant of their roles, said Patrick Healy, The Times’s assistant managing editor for Standards and Trust.

“If they’re reporting, there’s a notebook or recorder out as usual,” he said. “If they’re not, they’re pros who know they’re always identifiable as Times journalists.”

Advertisement

For most of The Times’s reporters and editors, though, the evening will be experienced from home.

“The rest of us will be able to follow the coverage,” Mr. Stevenson said, “without having to don our tuxes or gowns.”

Continue Reading

Business

MrBeast company sued over claims of sexual harassment, firing a new mom

Published

on

MrBeast company sued over claims of sexual harassment, firing a new mom

A former female staffer who worked for Beast Industries, the media venture behind the popular YouTube channel MrBeast, is suing the company, alleging she was sexually harassed and fired shortly after she returned from maternity leave.

The employee, Lorrayne Mavromatis, a Brazilian-born social media professional, alleges in a lawsuit she was subjected to sexual harassment by the company’s management and demoted after she complained about her treatment. She said she was urged to join a conference call while in labor and expected to work during her maternity leave in violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act, according to the federal complaint filed Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.

“This clout-chasing complaint is built on deliberate misrepresentations and categorically false statements, and we have the receipts to prove it. There is extensive evidence — including Slack and WhatsApp messages, company documents, and witness testimony — that unequivocally refutes her claims. We will not submit to opportunistic lawyers looking to manufacture a payday from us,” Gaude Paez, a Beast Industries spokesperson, said in a statement.

Jimmy Donaldson, 27, began MrBeast as a teen gaming channel that soon exploded into a media company worth an estimated $5 billion, with 500 employees and 450 million subscribers who watch its games, stunts and giveaways.

Mavromatis, who was hired in 2022 as its head of Instagram, described a pervasive climate of discrimination and harassment, according to the lawsuit.

Advertisement

In her complaint, she alleges the company’s former CEO James Warren made her meet him at his home for one-on-one meetings while he commented on her looks and dismissed her complaints about a male client’s unwanted advances, telling her “she should be honored that the client was hitting on her.”

When Mavromatis asked Warren why MrBeast, Donaldson, would not work with her, she was told that “she is a beautiful woman and her appearance had a certain sexual effect on Jimmy,” and, “Let’s just say that when you’re around and he goes to the restroom, he’s not actually using the restroom.”

Paez refuted the claim.

“That’s ridiculous. This is an allegation fabricated for the sole purpose of sparking headlines,” Paez said.

Mavromatis said she endured a slate of other indignities such as being told by Donaldson that she “would only participate in her video shoot if she brought him a beer.”

Advertisement

“In this male-centric workplace, Plaintiff, one of the few women in a high-level role, was excluded from otherwise all-male meetings, demeaned in front of colleagues, harassed, and suffered from males be given preferential treatment in employment decisions,” states the complaint.

When Mavromatis raised a question during a staff meeting with her team, she said a male colleague told her to “shut up” or “stop talking.”

At MrBeast headquarters in Greenville, N.C., she said male executives mocked female contestants participating in BeastGames, “who complained they did not have access to feminine hygiene products and clean underwear while participating in the show.”

In November 2023, Mavromatis formally complained about “the sexually inappropriate encounters and harassment, and demeaning and hostile work environment she and other female employees had been living and experiencing working at MrBeast,” to the company’s then head of human resources, Sue Parisher, who is also Donaldson’s mother, according to the suit.

In her complaint, Mavromatis said Beast Industries did not have a method or process for employees to report such issues either anonymously or to a third party, rather employees were expected to follow the company’s handbook, “How to Succeed In MrBeast Production.”

Advertisement

In it, employees were instructed that, “It’s okay for the boys to be childish,” “if talent wants to draw a dick on the white board in the video or do something stupid, let them” and “No does not mean no,” according to the complaint.

Mavromatis alleges that she was demoted and then fired.

Paez said that Mavromatis’s role was eliminated as part of a reorganization of an underperforming group within Beast Industries and that she was made aware of this.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Heidi O’Neill, Formerly of Nike, Will Be New Lululemon’s New CEO

Published

on

Heidi O’Neill, Formerly of Nike, Will Be New Lululemon’s New CEO

Lululemon, the yoga pants and athletic clothing company, has hired a former executive from a rival, Nike, as its new chief executive.

Heidi O’Neill, who spent more than 25 years at Nike, will take the reins and join Lululemon’s board of directors on Sept. 8, the company announced on Wednesday.

The leadership change is happening during a tumultuous time for Lululemon, which had grown to $11 billion in revenue by persuading shoppers to ditch their jeans and slacks for stretchy leggings. But lately, sales have declined in North America amid intense competition and shifting fashion trends, with consumers favoring looser styles rather than the form-fitting silhouettes for which Lululemon is best known.

“As I step into the C.E.O. role in September, my job will be to build on that foundation — to accelerate product breakthroughs, deepen the brand’s cultural relevance, and unlock growth in markets around the world,” Ms. O’Neill, 61, said in a statement.

Lululemon, based in Vancouver, British Columbia, has also been entangled in a corporate power struggle over the company’s future. Its billionaire founder, Chip Wilson, has feuded with the board, nominated independent directors and criticized executives.

Advertisement

Lululemon’s previous chief executive, Calvin McDonald, stepped down at the end of January as pressure mounted from Mr. Wilson and some investors. One activist investor, Elliott Investment Management, had pushed its own chief executive candidate, who was not selected.

The interim co-chiefs, Meghan Frank and André Maestrini, will lead the company until Ms. O’Neill’s arrival, when they are expected to return to other senior roles. The pair had outlined a plan to revive sales at Lululemon, promising to invest in stores, save more money and speed up product development.

“We start the year with a real plan, with real strategies,” Mr. Maestrini said in an interview this year. “We make sure decisions are made fast.”

Lululemon said last month that it would add Chip Bergh, the former chief executive of Levi Strauss, to its board to replace David Mussafer, the chairman of the private equity firm Advent International, whom Mr. Wilson had sought to remove.

Ms. O’Neill climbed the organizational chart at Nike for decades, working across divisions including consumer sports, product innovation and brand marketing, and was most recently its president of consumer, product and brand. She left Nike last year amid a shake-up of senior management that led to the elimination of her role.

Advertisement

Analysts said Ms. O’Neill would be expected to find ways to energize Lululemon’s business and reset the company’s culture in order to improve performance.

“O’Neill is her own person who will come with an agenda of change,” said Neil Saunders, the managing director of GlobalData, a data analytics and consulting company. “The task ahead is a significant one, but it can be undertaken from a position of relative stability.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending