Impossible Foods aims to put plant-based burgers on European menus this year
Impossible Foods Inc. hopes to add its plant-based burgers to European menus this year, bringing to a close a six-year quest to enter the world's biggest market for meat alternatives.
It would mark a major breakthrough for the Redwood City, California-based company as industry sales of plant-based meat substitutes shrink in its core American market. Before rolling out all its products to countries including Germany, the Netherlands and the UK, the firm is still awaiting final regulatory approvals for its genetically-modified ingredient, according to Chief Executive Officer Peter McGuinness.
Alternative proteins are a more environmentally friendly option to meat, but makers have been hit by consumer backlash against their taste, texture and concerns about ultraprocessed ingredients. Meanwhile, demand for meat has been boosted by weight-loss drugs and a wave of MAGA masculinity rhetoric. By contrast, European retailers are still rolling out plant-based ranges to consumers who care more about sustainability.
'Plant-based has more consumption in the EU and the UK than the US and people are generally more open to it,' McGuinness said in an interview in London. 'We're ready to go. We know it's going to get approved.'
Impossible Burger mimics the taste and texture of beef with plant-based ingredients. It contains soy leghemoglobin, an additive known as heme, which helps the product taste, smell and even 'bleed' like meat and is derived from a genetically-modified yeast strain.
The products are already available in countries including Australia, New Zealand and Canada, but Europe's strict regulations on novel ingredients and GM foods have slowed the approval process.
While the EU's food safety watchdog ruled late last year the ingredient didn't raise safety concerns, Impossible Foods is now awaiting the final nod from the European Union officials in the next few months. It also has a pending risk assessment from the Food Standards Agency in the UK, which it hopes to obtain in late summer. There is a likelihood that the full approval may not come until next year, the company said.
Impossible Foods already offers a limited range of plant-based 'chicken' products, which don't contain heme. The company has met with large UK retailers like Tesco Plc, Waitrose Ltd. and J Sainsbury Plc and 'they all want our product because they want to expand their category,' he told the audience of the Bloomberg Sustainable Business Summit in London on Thursday.
'They're starting to see trends where the consumption's going down because the consumer wants better tasting food,' he said. 'So they would love our products here.'
McGuinness took over as the CEO in 2022 — switching from yogurt maker Chobani Inc. — to oversee Impossible Foods' expansion into retailers and supermarkets in the US, which now make up about half of the business, he said.
But the US market has been shrinking, just as investor funding in alternative proteins has dried up and more startups are going out of business. There are some 200 plant-based brands in the US, which is confusing to customers, McGuinness said. Impossible Foods has laid off workers over the past few years, as the value of the company's shares slumped.
McGuinness is dialing down on the climate, anti-cattle rhetoric, which he thinks alienated many people, led to politicizing of the product, and contributed to mismarketing of the category in the beginning.
He's targeting meat eaters by emphasizing the taste, protein content and nutrient-density of its products. His pitch includes changing the color of packaging from green to red.
'This only works if we get meat eaters to come try the product,' he said. 'I know once I get them to try it, they actually like it.'
The repeat rate among customers — a gauge of whether consumers like a product — is 'a little bit over 50%,' McGuinness said. Impossible is the fastest growing plant-based company in the world, he said.
Impossible Foods is expanding its distribution network to increase availability. While achieving price parity with conventionally produced meat will take longer, the company's products are now the same price or less expensive than organic, grass-fed beef, the CEO said.
'What's going to bring it to the next level is choice and taste,' McGuinness said. 'We've doubled down on taste and at the end of the day it's food.'
de Sousa writes for Bloomberg.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Atlantic
26 minutes ago
- Atlantic
How to Assess the Damage of the Iran Strikes
In August 1941, the British government received a very unwelcome piece of analysis from an economist named David Miles Bensusan-Butt. A careful analysis of photographs suggested that the Royal Air Force's Bomber Command was having trouble hitting targets in Germany and France; in fact, only one in three pilots that claimed to have attacked the targets seemed to have dropped its bombs within five miles of them. The Butt report is a landmark in the history of 'bomb damage assessment,' or, as we now call it, 'battle damage assessment.' This recondite term has come back into public usage because of the dispute over the effectiveness of the June 22 American bombing of three Iranian nuclear facilities. President Donald Trump said that American bombs had 'obliterated' the Iranian nuclear program. A leaked preliminary assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency on June 24 said that the damage was minimal. Whom to believe? Have the advocates of bombing again overpromised and underdelivered? Some history is in order here, informed by a bit of personal experience. From 1991 to 1993 I ran the U.S. Air Force's study of the first Gulf War. In doing so I learned that BDA rests on three considerations: the munition used, including its accuracy; the aircraft delivering it; and the type of damage or effect created. Of these, precision is the most important. World War II saw the first use of guided bombs in combat. In September 1943, the Germans used radio-controlled glide bombs to sink the Italian battleship Roma as it sailed off to surrender to the Allies. Americans developed similar systems with some successes, though none so dramatic. In the years after the war, precision-guided weapons slowly came to predominate in modern arsenals. The United States used no fewer than 24,000 laser-guided bombs during the Vietnam War, and some 17,000 of them during the 1991 Gulf War. These weapons have improved considerably, and in the 35 years since, 'routine precision,' as some have called it, has enormously improved the ability of airplanes to hit hard, buried targets. Specially designed ordnance has also seen tremendous advances. In World War II, the British developed the six-ton Tallboy bomb to use against special targets, including the concrete submarine pens of occupied France in which German U-boats hid. The Tallboys cracked some of the concrete but did not destroy any, in part because these were 'dumb bombs' lacking precision guidance, and in part because the art of hardening warheads was in its infancy. In the first Gulf War, the United States hastily developed a deep-penetrating, bunker-busting bomb, the GBU-28, which weighed 5,000 pounds, but only two were used, to uncertain effect. In the years since, however, the U.S. and Israeli air forces, among others, have acquired hardened warheads for 2,000-pound bombs such as the BLU-109 that can hit deeply buried targets—which is why, for example, the Israelis were able to kill a lot of Hezbollah's leadership in its supposedly secure bunkers. The aircraft that deliver bombs can affect the explosives' accuracy. Bombs that home in on the reflection of a laser, for example, could become 'stupid' if a cloud passes between plane and the target, or if the laser otherwise loses its lock on the target. Bombs relying on GPS coordinates can in theory be jammed. Airplanes being shot at are usually less effective bomb droppers than those that are not, because evasive maneuvers can prevent accurate delivery. The really complicated question is that of effects. Vietnam-era guided bombs, for example, could and did drop bridges in North Vietnam. In many cases, however, Vietnamese engineers countered by building 'underwater bridges' that allowed trucks to drive across a river while axle-deep in water. The effect was inconvenience, not interdiction. Conversely, in the first Gulf War, the U.S. and its allies spent a month pounding Iraqi forces dug in along the Kuwait border, chiefly with dumb bombs delivered by 'smart aircraft' such as the F-16. In theory, the accuracy of the bombing computer on the airplane would allow it to deliver unguided ordnance with accuracy comparable to that of a laser-guided bomb. In practice, ground fire and delivery from high altitudes often caused pilots to miss. When teams began looking at Iraqi tanks in the area overrun by U.S. forces, they found that many of the tanks were, in fact, undamaged. But that was only half of the story. Iraqi tank crews were so sufficiently terrified of American air power that they stayed some distance away from their tanks, and tanks immobilized and unmaintained for a month, or bounced around by near-misses, do not work terribly well. The functional and indirect effects of the bombing, in other words, were much greater than the disappointing physical effects. Many of the critiques of bombing neglect the importance of this phenomenon. The pounding of German cities and industry during World War II, for example, did not bring war production to a halt until the last months, but the indirect and functional effects were enormous. The diversion of German resources into air-defense and revenge weapons, and the destruction of the Luftwaffe's fighter force over the Third Reich, played a very great role in paving the way to Allied victory. At a microlevel, BDA can be perplexing. In 1991, for example, a bomb hole in an Iraqi hardened-aircraft shelter told analysts only so much. Did the bomb go through the multiple layers of concrete and rock fill, or did it 'J-hook'back upward and possibly fail to explode? Was there something in the shelter when it hit, and what damage did it do? Did the Iraqis perhaps move airplanes into penetrated shelters on the theory that lightning would not strike twice? All hard (though not entirely impossible) to judge without being on the ground. To the present moment: BDA takes a long time, so the leaked DIA memo of June 24 was based on preliminary and incomplete data. The study I headed was still working on BDA a year after the war ended. Results may be quicker now, but all kinds of information need to be integrated—imagery analysis, intercepted communications, measurement and signature intelligence (e.g., subsidence of earth above a collapsed structure), and of course human intelligence, among others. Any expert (and any journalist who bothered to consult one) would know that two days was a radically inadequate time frame in which to form a considered judgment. The DIA report was, from a practical point of view, worthless. An educated guess, however, would suggest that in fact the U.S. military's judgment that the Iranian nuclear problem had suffered severe damage was correct. The American bombing was the culmination of a 12-day campaign launched by the Israelis, which hit many nuclear facilities and assassinated at least 14 nuclear scientists. The real issue is not the single American strike so much as the cumulative effect against the entire nuclear ecosystem, including machining, testing, and design facilities. The platforms delivering the munitions in the American attack had ideal conditions in which to operate—there was no Iranian air force to come up and attack the B-2s that they may not even have detected, nor was there ground fire to speak of. The planes were the most sophisticated platforms of the most sophisticated air force in the world. The bombs themselves, particularly the 14 GBU-57s, were gigantic—at 15 tons more than double the size of Tallboys—with exquisite guidance and hardened penetrating warheads. The targets were all fully understood from more than a decade of close scrutiny by Israeli and American intelligence, and probably that of other Western countries as well. In the absence of full information, cumulative expert judgment also deserves some consideration—and external experts such as David Albright, the founder of the Institute for Science and International Security, have concluded that the damage was indeed massive and lasting. Israeli analysts, in and out of government, appear to agree. They are more likely to know, and more likely to be cautious in declaring success about what is, after all, an existential threat to their country. For that matter, the Iranian foreign minister concedes that 'serious damage' was done. One has to set aside the sycophantic braggadocio of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who seems to believe that one unopposed bombing raid is a military achievement on par with D-Day, or the exuberant use of the word obliteration by the president. A cooler, admittedly provisional judgment is that with all their faults, however, the president and his secretary of defense are likely a lot closer to the mark about what happened when the bombs fell than many of their hasty, and not always well-informed, critics. *Photo-illustration by Jonelle Afurong / The Atlantic. Source: Alberto Pizzoli / Sygma / Getty; MIKE NELSON / AFP / Getty; Greg Mathieson / Mai / Getty; Space Frontiers / Archive Photos / Hulton Archive / Getty; U.S. Department of Defense


Forbes
30 minutes ago
- Forbes
Tesla Supercharger Surge: GM And Ford EVs Begin To Roll In
Close-up of a Tesla Supercharger with red logo, near Camino Tassajara in Danville, California, May ... More 18, 2025. (Photo by Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images) What a difference a reliable charging network makes. Earlier this month when I arrived at a massive Tesla Supercharger location (76 chargers) at Tejon Outlets in Southern California just off Interstate 5, the only other cars charging were a Honda Prologue EV and Ford Mustang Mach-E. So, for a moment, there wasn't a single Tesla. Only the Prologue, Mach-E, and a GMC Sierra Denali EV (which I was driving) and a vast, empty sea of available charging spots. Teslas began showing up soon thereafter but it was odd to see only non-Tesla EVs using the chargers. And refreshing to see so many available stalls. And it gets even better. Less than a mile away, across Interstate 5, there was another Tesla Supercharger location with 24 chargers. And in nearby Lebec – about 20 minutes from the outlets on Interstate 5 – there was a spanking-new Supercharger location with 38 new super-fast v4 Superchargers. Not to mention the multiple Supercharger locations in Santa Clarita, Calif (further south on Interstate 5) and the three locations near my home in northwest Los Angeles. Charging a Cadillac Escalade IQ at a Tesla Supercharger in Simi Valley, Calif. A massive Tesla Supercharger location at Tejon Outlets near Bakersfield, Calif. Available Tesla ... More Superchargers as far as the eye can see. Competition isn't even close A night-and-day difference from competing networks such as Electrify America, which I've used extensively over the years. By comparison, there is no nearby Electrify America charging location in the long stretch of Interstate 5 between Santa Clarita, Calif and Bakersfield, Calif. versus the 130+ Tesla Superchargers in that same stretch of highway. And even if you find one, the charging experience is very different: a handful of chargers (often no more than 8), lines, and long waits. Not to mention the hit-or-miss vagaries of Electrify America chargers: one day everything works, the next day multiple chargers are down. Waiting, waiting, waiting… I've been waiting for Electrify America to locate a charger near my home. But that's never happened. Despite the very high density of EVs in the northwest Los Angeles area where I live, there are no Electrify America charging stations. Not one. The closest location is in Van Nuys, Calif with 3 fast chargers (level 3) and one slow level 2 charger. So, that's a total of 3 Electrify America fast chargers in a vast area in northwest Los Angeles covering high-density EV hotspots such as Chatsworth, Porter Ranch, Granada Hills, and Simi Valley (Ventura County). Yes, there are three Electrify America locations in Santa Clarita, Calif but that's further north bordering the high desert. GM, Ford, others need Tesla Not everyone charges at home. At least 50 percent (and often more) of the Tesla superchargers near my home are usually being used. And lack of public charging is often cited by prospective EV buyers as a reason they hesitate to purchase an EV. GM and Ford are now offering NACS (Tesla) adapters for their EVs (see my video below) but they will soon offer NACS ports built in. That can't happen soon enough.


New York Post
31 minutes ago
- New York Post
New Queens park to feature giant dragon
Dragons rarely appear on this page but we'll make room for this 30-footer at The Baseline, a new, more than one-acre park under the 59th Street Bridge ramps on the Queens side. The park to open next year lies between two new Long Island City apartment towers from a joint venture of Fetner Properties and Lions Group. The Bold's 164 units including 50 affordable ones are fully rented. Leasing has started at sister building The Italic, which has 363 units of which 109 are designated as affordable, just began leasing. A rendering of the 30-foot dragon that will be the focus of The Baseline, a new park in Queens. STUDIO V Design + Planning The 50-story tower has amenities including a state-of-the-art fitness center and rooftop terrace. In addition to the presumably friendly dragon, the park designed by Studio V and LVF Landscape Architects will boast children's playgrounds, a dog run, public seating, extensive plantings and public art space. It's funded by $5.5 million from the developers and a $2.4 million grant awarded by Gov. Kathy Hochul. In a break to the Midtown leasing lull since early spring, Pinterest is taking 83,000 square feet on the entire 13th floor at SL Green's 11 Madison Ave. Pinterest will leave behind 40,000 square feet at 225 Park Ave. South. The deal brings 11 Madison to 92% leased. The asking rent was $90 per square foot. 11 Madison Ave. Google Maps San Francisco-based Pinterest is a social media 'visual discovery platform' for product-scanning and ideas-sharing. It was repped by a JLL team while SL Green was repped by Newmark. Other large tenants at 2.34 million square-foot 11 Madison include UBS, SONY, Suntory and IMG.