The rapid changes in food consumption brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic are in the process of being sorted out. The food supply system had to contend with massive shifts in demand along with many additional protocols for safe food from farm to fork. In periods of high change, it often creates an opportunity to re-evaluate an entire system to see if other changes are needed. I believe the food system at this moment is no exception.
Since WWII, the main focus of our food system has been to supply the greatest amount of ever cheaper food to the greatest number of people. I would suggest that we declare that objective accomplished and move on to another prime objective that I believe will be desperately needed in the coming years. Simply stated, I believe the primary objective of our food system should be “To ensure that all American citizens have access to affordable food and nutrition to help their physical development in childhood and overall health as adults. The larger goal being to give all American Citizens a fair shot at accomplishing their life’s objectives as adults”.
I would hope the majority of Americans can support this general principle. However, even with that level of support there will be a number of very thorny issues that would need to be resolved to accomplish this. Among them are:
What actually is a base level of nutrition required to give an individual the best health and energy over a lifetime.
Should healthy food just be made available to everyone or should it be mandated in certain cases.
How would the current players in the food system best support this objective.
What role will recent innovations in food such as lab grown meat play in the new food system.
To what extent will supplements also play a role in a healthy diet and support system.
Would a refocusing of health care plans to more of a wellness approach help in the transition.
These are just a few of the difficult issues to be addressed. But the rewards of moving the food system in this direction would be great. If we accomplish this shift it has been estimated that we could decrease our health care expenditures by one-third overall or nearly one trillion dollars a year. This obviously is a significant amount, but it does not include the increases in productivity from a workforce with fewer sick days and greater mental engagement on the job.
There are many other changes that will arise post COVID-19 within many of our institutions, but I believe a rethinking of our food supply should be high on that list.
By Bob Goldin, Pentallect and John Geocaris, New Food Strategies
For the past five years, small and micro-sized food and beverage companies have grown 2.5 times faster than larger companies. They have effectively capitalized on key consumer trends (such as simple and natural ingredients, better-for-you products, and snacking) and tapped into growing nontraditional channels, including online. As a result, these companies have gained valuable market share (especially in retail) and attracted attention from strategic and financial investors willing to pay lofty multiples for rapid growth in a stable but painfully slow growth industry. In addition, a number of large food and beverage companies like General Mills and Kraft Heinz created their own incubation arms to support the development of “upstart”/emerging companies.
As we all are painfully aware, the pandemic has had a
massive impact on the food industry. Due
to stay at home and unit closure mandates, the foodservice industry has
experienced a dramatic decline. We expect the recovery to be protracted and
certain segments like independent restaurants, lodging and recreation are
extremely unlikely to return to pre-pandemic volume levels for at least five
years. While necessary, reopening mandates will exacerbate the “pain” the
industry is suffering as they will limit on-premise capacity and add
In contrast, retail has been booming as consumers shift a
huge portion of their food and beverage expenditures (somewhat out of
necessity) to at-home expenditures, and we project that retail will continue to
benefit from the slow recovery of foodservice. The new market conditions will
accelerate retailers’ initiatives to enhance their omnichannel effectiveness to
meet consumer demands.
Given the fundamental shift in demand patterns coupled with
what is almost certainly going to be an extended period of economic hardship, small
companies will face many unexpected challenges that will limit their growth rates at least for the foreseeable future. Among these challenges are the following:
In these troubled times,
consumers will almost surely increase their reliance on “tried and true” brands
and be less willing to experiment.
emerging company products are premium priced, and we foresee a significant
migration to value tiers in a recessionary environment.
Data suggest that consumer
priorities are changing, with safety and security becoming far more important
in the value equation. Arguably, this
may minimize the appeal of many niche products/brands that are premised on
other attributes such as sustainability, “fresh and natural” and the like.
Major retailers and
distributors are solidifying their market positions and will “double down” on
their private label development initiatives, which have been successful prior
to the recent public health crisis.
As industry margin pressures
intensify, participants will aggressively focus on structural cost reductions,
with SKU rationalization a likely priority.
Therefore, “slots”/shelf-space for relatively low volume SKUs will be
reduced, to the detriment of many specialty/niche products.
As early stage companies
are often unprofitable, they rely on outside investment to fund their growth.
While capital is available, we anticipate a shift in investor sentiment toward
other more promising opportunities, including small food companies that are
both profitable and have a demonstrated growth strategy. This could limit the
ability of most unprofitable, high growth micro sized food companies to raise
While we believe that truly innovative small companies will
continue to flourish, to do so will require even greater differentiation, an
optimized supply chain, alignment with “winning” segments/customers, an intense
consumer focus, and a business plan designed to reach profitability as quickly
A new, post Covid-19 growth strategy for emerging brands may
contain some of the following elements:
An initial regional expansion
strategy focused opportunistically on all channels with the dual objective of the
proof of concept in the targeted channel along with generating sufficient volume
to become immediately profitable. An
example would be taking on a large foodservice customer to build volume and
attain breakeven operations while simultaneously exploring retail sales as the
long-range targeted focus of the company.
Manage the company for the
long term without a “Liquidity Event” focus
Knowledge of production
costs in great detail and how they change with volume. This will be true whether the product is
co-packed or self-manufactured and will help in understanding when the emerging
company will attain a breakeven.
When a firm foundation of
volume/profitability is reached, a new growth strategy can be created, focusing
on the long-term channel(s) for the product with outside capital if desired.
This would be part of a deliberate strategy maintaining profitability along
need for emerging food and beverage companies to prioritize profitability vs.
top-line growth represents a “sea change”. This path will
enable these firms to establish sustainable positions and desirable outcomes.
Bob Goldin is a Partner and Co-founder of Pentallect Inc., a food industry advisory firm and a longtime friend and fellow foodie.
John Geocaris is President of New Food Strategies, an emerging business advisory firm, and an Associate of Pentallect.
We are defining a small company as having sales of $25 – 100 million and a micro company as having sales less than $25 million
Source: IRI and Boston Consulting Group’s 2019 CPG Growth Leaders report
The word that best describes the current foodscape is chaotic. The stay home orders caused by the coronavirus pandemic has locked down over 2/3 of the population and closed a similar number of restaurants and foodservice operations. Before the pandemic about 40% of all food was consumed on site in restaurants. Most of this 40% is now, almost overnight, being reallocated to grocery, home delivery, and increased restaurant take out from those remaining open.
So, on one hand the restaurant and hospitality industry are suffering job losses in the millions, while grocery brands and their manufacturers have seen 50% + surges in demand. They have had to increase production while keeping their workforce healthy, in a poorly defined, regulatory environment.
There has been a constant drumbeat of daily stories on the coronavirus. People in the food industry are almost exclusively focused on day-to-day operations, with demand changing constantly. I thought it may be helpful at this time, to speculate on the longer-range effect of the coronavirus on the food industry. This can help all of us to begin to think about the next growth strategy for our firms and investments.
The following are some longer-term trends based on my own observations and articles I have read recently.
E-commerce food sales have increased about 5-fold to 25% of total grocery sales. This number will not go all the way back to 5% but should fall to 15% to 20% post COVID-19. Older customers who were not comfortable with e-commerce were forced to learn, and are becoming increasingly reliant on it.
The biggest data players in the market; Amazon, Wal-Mart and Instacart, will become more dominant as the shoppers increase and the amount of data these players gather increases. Their knowledge of shopping behavior will give them a much larger competitive advantage than ever.
Food retailers that do not have access to that level of data will have to shift their point of difference to store experience, to the individual shopper. The competitive battle will be between analytics versus positive emotions. Any retailer that is not good at either may find themselves acquired, or out of business.
Specialty, and better-for-you food will continue to grow as the underlying trends are very strong. However, you will see a shift to “frugal-better-for-you” retailers such as Sprouts, Trader Joe’s and even Aldi, as consumers will be more stretched financially than before the pandemic.
Status food and beverages such as wine, gourmet brands, and unique restaurants should have solid sales trends. People are status seekers in general, when financially strapped they cannot afford new houses or fancy cars, but food and beverage is an affordable way to differentiate yourself from the crowd.
Independent restaurants will take the biggest hit from the pandemic. Some estimates are as much as 30% of restaurants will never reopen. Many are owned by families where the younger generation has moved on to other occupations and the founders are near retirement. These restaurants will not survive.
Food supply chains will diversify and become much more local. Having a significant reliance of ingredients and packaging from China and other far-away countries will be reconsidered. Most food consumed in the US can be easily supplied by Canada, the US. and Mexico.
Food security and future pandemic response planning will significantly affect food safety regulations for a number of years to come.
Whenever there is a massive short-term change, new opportunities quickly emerge as the new normal becomes clearer. Those of us struggling with managing the day to day in this environment may be well served by beginning to think about what is next, and how you can adjust, and perhaps thrive under the new normal.
Subscribe to our Monthly Newsletter Today! Receive the latest information, thoughts and insights into a new food industry that’s healthy for consumers, employees, and the world.
I have been involved in food co-packing since the late 1980’s. During this time, I have seen food co-packing evolve from primarily low-cost producers of products developed by other companies, to full blown R&D and marketing companies, that have the capability for large volume co-packing.
This change has occurred in a number of phases. In the early 1990’s some co-packers moved away from the purely low-cost production models, to a more R&D focused strategy by customizing products for large end users. These included CPG companies, grocery private label and custom products that were created for mid and large size restaurant chains.
This strategy worked well for a number of firms in several product categories until the great recession in 2008. For several years after that, new product launches were severely curtailed and existing products were searching for the lowest cost producer.
As the economy improved, the food market began undergoing massive change. New, better-for-you products were emerging everywhere. These firms generally used co-packers and were looking for ones with great R&D capabilities. A number of co-packers jumped on this trend, but some bumps in the road quickly materialized. Many new products were launched, but very few were successful. This left the co-packer with little to show for their product development.
If the initial co-packer lacked the scale to meet increasing price pressure after the first contract period, the products that succeeded often moved to different low-cost producers. The more innovative co-packers began taking equity interests and/or success fees for new projects. This allowed them to beef up their production to quickly scale successful items.
As the food customer demanded more variety in better-for-you products and the share of the market grew, large food producers jumped in with a flurry of new product introductions. Along with this heightened new product activity, product life-cycles were dramatically shortened and competitive reaction to a successful product launch was almost instantaneous.
Based on these accelerating trends, what capabilities should the co-packer of the future have? I’ve listed a few of these capabilities below:
R&D capabilities on par with the large food companies before they gutted them for cost savings
The ability to rapidly roll out multiple new product launches on a small scale to see which ones stick and which ones fail
The ability to rapidly scale the successful launches to full national roll outs at competitive pricing
Create strategic partnerships with interesting startup companies. This offers both companies their R&D capabilities and access to subject matter experts in marketing, logistics and other critical activities.
So, the next generation of co-packers will need to think like a startup, R&D like a large company and scale up the successful items quickly. And all while carefully maintaining manufacturing flexibility and controlled Capex spending, to account for the shortened product life-cycles. This is certainly a tall order, but there are already some next generation co-packers out there, with more to come.
For an industry that only grows overall at 1 to 2 % annually, there is a lot of change transpiring. It surely does keep things interesting.
Everyone in the food industry is aware of some of the big multiples paid for early stage branded food companies over the last few years. Exit valuations as high as 6- or 7-time sales have been seen. This has caused a large number of entrepreneurs and funders to create companies searching for these exit valuations. I have noticed some recent developments that will make these high-priced exits more and more difficult. They are as follows:
Big food companies struggle when managing a portfolio of mid-size specialty brands rather than billion dollar plus brands. Even when a specialty and better for you company grows significantly, it often will not attain the volumes required by big food company infrastructures to efficiently manage.
The traditional product development no longer works. Large food companies used to bring a new product to market by developing a new product internally over a number of years with millions of dollars invested in market research and product testing. This strategy does not work in the high change, short product life cycles in today’s market.
It isn’t paying off. To compete in this new marketplace, large food companies began acquiring early stage growth companies for very high valuations putting most of their financial and organizational resources behind a couple of big bets. This strategy has actually paid off in only a few instances and misses are very expensive.
Today, the more sophisticated large food enterprises are developing the same fast fail methods that the start ups have been using for years. They work closely with an increasing array of sophisticated co-packers that can both develop and scale new products rapidly. A company can often bring 10 to 15 new items to market in this way for the same cost and far faster, without having to buy an early stage company.
The ones that do not gain traction, they kill early. The ones that look successful they rapidly expand with the co-packer. They do not want to build their own production capacity as a successful new food item generates many copiers in a very short period of time, making an acceptable return on new production capacity problematic.
You may still see some very high valuations for companies like the Impossible Burger. But these will increasingly be companies that develop entire new markets with very heavy R&D and start up production costs often in the 9 figures before the first dollar of revenue. Think lab-grown meat as future new market segment for environmentally sound and clean label real meat. The development cost for this project may approach a billion dollars before reaching the market.
So, where does this leave a startup food company in today’s market?
Is your goal to significantly grow a start up food company over a short period of time? To never make money and hope for sufficient funding and a high value exit? I would caution against it.
Do you want to build a food company for the long haul with distinctive products in multiple channels, including both retail and food service? Is your goal to reach breakeven as quickly as possible while financing your growth with a mix of internally generated funds and traditional bank lending? Then I would say let’s get started.
In this environment, a traditional PE firm can develop a very profitable strategy around hitting 6-8 out of ten doubles rather than 1 out of 10 home runs. Family offices with their longer investment horizon and flexible financing structures should thrive. This would leave the search for the next unicorn with the increasingly heavy front-end investments to the true venture capital firms that are structured on big risk big reward strategies.
A final note. Whenever I would discuss future trends with my late father, Angelo, he often ended the conversation with the same phrase “It could be and then again….maybe not”. Always something to keep in mind when predicting the future.
John Geocaris Managing Director New Food Strategies
Often a Founder of an early stage food company gets so focused on raising money they lose sight of what they need to do to efficiently manage the funds an investor is putting in the company. You have convinced an investor in the value of your product, management team, and marketing plan. Now you need to hit your growth objectives with the funds provided.
There are a few simple tools that will keep you on track towards increasing your company valuation before an exit or the next round of funding without running out of money. They include: Continue reading →
Developing an effective Sales Strategy to grow your company from its early stage $1,000,000 annual sales level to $10-25,000,000 and beyond is not an easy task. As you grow you will greatly expand the number of competitors while simultaneously entering new markets and channels of distribution that often have conflicting requirements. You will also be building out a sales and marketing function within your own company as the requirements in this area quickly outgrow your ability to manage them. Continue reading →
A member of a prominent family who has bought and sold many companies over the years once told me that there are only two times that you should sell a business. The first is when you are not really trying, and someone comes to you with an offer to good to refuse. The second Continue reading →
What drives valuation in an early stage, branded food company?
What does an early stage investor look for in a growing food company when they attempt to put a value on a potential investment? Many food entrepreneurs think it is the rate of growth in sales that drives valuation. That is partially true but does not tell the whole story. I have found the following to be the key factors in valuing early stage high growth food companies.
Managing your supply chain as your food company grows from early stage to mid-size is both complicated and a great opportunity. As your volume increases you can reduce your product costs as much as 30%. Purchasing raw materials at higher volumes along with production economies of scale drive this reduction. However, if not managed well your supply can kill your business quickly. Running short on raw materials, quality issues in finished products, and uncontrolled costs from out of code product are some of the many issues that can cripple a growing early stage food company. These issues can come up whether you use a co-packer or make the product in-house When planning your growing supply chain, you should consider the following: