I assumed 1/4 lb burger, just because it's the common burger size that provides the most favorable comparison. It's a bullshit comparison though. A burger is more than just a patty, and upscale burgers (which they are targeting with prices like that) rarely are just a 1/4 lb of meat. I initially thought the $11.34 price was pretty good, because I eat $10 burgers all the time, but a 1/3 or 1/2 pound burger made with this meat would cost about $50 in a restaurant.

The best argument for this burger is that the moral cost of killing a cow is much higher than the added price of the artificial meat. I'd find that argument pretty convincing, but I don't make enough money to be that moral.

> a 1/3 or 1/2 pound burger made with this meat would cost about $50 in a restaurant.

More than that. A 1/2 burger would cost, using the 30% food cost rule of thumb for restaurant pricing, nearly $80 assuming that everything other than the patty had no food cost.

I didn't realize the rule of thumb was 30% for a restaurant. I've always worked in retail, where a 100% markup is always a good rule of thumb.

Restaurants aren't reselling packaged goods, they are also assembling from raw, so there is both amortized cost of production equipment and labor costs associated with production that retail lacks.

> The best argument for this burger is that the moral cost of killing a cow is much higher than the added price of the artificial meat. I'd find that argument pretty convincing, but I don't make enough money to be that moral.

There's also the effect of cattle on the environment. They are the largest producer of greenhouse gasses by far. I personally have no moral issue with killing animals, but the effects on the environment have made me switch to Chicken (which is better for the environment and leaner) but I would gladly switch to biocattle.

Wow. That's pretty good speculation! Respect!

All I know is I would have been marked off on any exam if I would have left something like that.