In December 2025, a Dutch startup called Meatable that produced engineered meat, ended operations due to a lack of financing. Although this company is no longer at the forefront of the engineered meat industry, its closure exemplifies the difficulties that exist when trying to turn a research project into a profitable business.
In particular, Meatable’s experience provides valuable insight into the challenges surrounding the funding and development of engineered meat products, and how these types of companies operate within the realm of technology.
What was Meatable
Founded by Krijn de Nood, Daan Luining and Dr. Mark Kotter, Meatable launched in 2018 with a bold objective: to produce actual meat from animal cells without killing any animals. Meatable’s founders were highly motivated to change how people view and consume protein, and to create new options for alternative proteins.
From its inception, Meatable received significant interest within the engineered meat industry due to the technology used in its products. This technology is based on pluripotent stem cells, which are one of the fastest and most efficient ways to produce muscle and fat cells without the use of conventional meat production methods. Additionally, Meatable’s technology is intended to reduce the amount of agricultural input needed to produce meat, as well as reduce the overall environmental impact.
Moreover, Meatable achieved several major milestones as part of the engineered meat industry. In 2024, the company’s founders held the first ever legally sanctioned tastings of engineered meat products within the European Union. In an industry where regulatory approvals and public confidence are two of the biggest challenges, Meatable was able to accomplish a feat not many others could accomplish.
Meatable has raised an impressive amount of capital throughout its history, with multiple sources estimating total funding at over €85 million (around $100 million). Many venture funds and private equity firms have invested into Meatable, including BlueYard Capital, DSM Venturing, Betagro Ventures (Thailand), and various government-sponsored investment funds, including Invest-NL. Although Meatable had done well in the science of cultivated meat, it has not been able to convert that success into an operationally sustainable company.
Reasons Why Meatable Ran Out of Funding
Meatable was not a sudden failure. It is a symptom of a larger set of challenges facing the cultivated meat industry. As such, there were a number of factors at play that made it difficult for Meatable to continue attracting funding.
1. Funding Dwindled for the Industry:
In 2021 and 2022, funding was at its highest level for cultivated meat due to low interest rates and the willingness of investors to take risks on new types of technologies. However, by 2025, most of this funding had dried up. As a result, there were few investors who were willing to invest in companies that do not generate revenue and have a lengthy approval process. Even very successful companies such as Meatable are experiencing this tightening of capital markets.
Although Meatable had raised an enormous amount of capital over its life cycle, it is unable to raise additional capital required to grow and get to revenue. Subsequently, existing investors are pulling back on their support, and new investors are not willing to invest in Meatable until they can demonstrate profitability and regulatory compliance.
2. Absence of Revenue and Delayed Regulatory Approvals Meatable:
Because of this the comapany was unable to generate revenue since it had yet to sell any products. For deep-science start-ups like Meatable, the approval from regulators represents a crucial milestone in determining whether a company can succeed or fail. To date, Meatable had planned to look at Singapore, which is far ahead of the world regarding regulatory approvals for cultivated meats. Unfortunately, delays in the approval process for this region forced Meatable to push back its timelines.
Loop in an Entrepreneurial Mindset
The difficulties Meatable experienced trying to sell products in the EU were compounded by the fact that, when Meatable went out of business, the EU had yet to provide full-market approval for the sale of lab-grown meats. This limited the options available for Meatable. From an Investor’s perspective, Meatable presented an increased risk, as there was no clear path to generating revenue. Consequently, due to a lack of confidence among investors in the company’s ability to secure further investment required for the subsequent stages of its growth. Meatable had a decreased potential pool of investors, reported Agroempresario.
3. Changes in Strategy and the Challenges of Executing Them:
Over the courses of 2024 and 2025, Meatable made multiple strategic moves. The company purchased technology from another start-up; appointed Jeff Tripician, a veteran meat industry executive, as the CEO; and partnered with others to establish production facilities.
These actions illustrate how Meatable made efforts to change course. Meatable’s efforts, including transitioning their business from a cultivated meat brand to a supplier, did not garner enough investor confidence to secure the funding needed for the next stage of growth.
A Simple Breakdown on What Went Wrong
Here is a summary of the three key elements resulting in the demise of Meatable:
- Lack of Capital: Meatable failed to attract necessary funding within a challenging investment environment.
- Revenue Generation: Without revenue from market sales, Meatable presented a higher risk to potential investors.
- Regulatory Approval Delays: The time required for regulatory approvals slowed Meatable’s sales activities.
- Timing of the Market: Overall consolidation and slower-than-average growth rates in the industry affect Meatable and others. Lessons for Entrepreneurs, Investors, and Anyone involved with Technology
What We Can Learn From Meatable
The Meatable experience is more than just a cautionary tale, The following are lessons that entrepreneurs, investors, and anyone involved in the deep tech sector should consider.
1. Know What You Are Facing in the Funding Cycle
Some concepts take several years before they can ultimately be marketed. Furthermore, concepts that depend on Science and Regulatory Approval, like Lab-Grown Meat and Biotech will require both money and time. The Meatable experience has shown that while entrepreneurs may create a great deal of excitement or obtain significant financing at the start. It is just as necessary that an entrepreneur has access to long-term financing. Why you may wonder? This is to sustain the operation of a company, and to bridge the gap between invention and commercialization.
2. Do Not Depend on Good Luck
Many companies in Cutting-edge Industries have faced long delays in the regulations around their technology. Which thereby has lead to uncertainty about how businesses will find or maintain the funding they require. And to create revenue streams (markets) not solely dependent on receiving regulatory approval. Additionally, if they can’t get regulatory approval, they should have alternative ways to generate revenue without waiting for regulatory approval.
3. A Strong Business Model Must be in Place
A strong business model drives a successful business. Technology cannot ensure success alone without having strong revenue generation capability planned out beforehand. Investors want to see a strong connection between the technology being developed and its path to revenue generation. Therefore, startups should look for new ways to generate revenue within a short period of time (e.g., 12 months). To reduce their reliance on outside funding in order to have their business models developed enough. Up until where they don’t need to rely on future rounds of financing in order to grow.
4. Timing and Market Conditions Shift Fast
Market conditions, as well as timing, change rapidly.
There are many macroeconomic factors that can change what type of investment opportunities are available. Such as interest rates, venture capital trends, or other economic shifts. Even companies that are well-funded can be susceptible to these changes in the market, as was the case for Meatable.
Wrapping The Story Up
In conclusion, Meatable was one of the most promising companies within the cultivated meat industry due to its unique technology. Further due to its strong investor backing, and early production milestones. However, because of the slow pace of the industry, the high capital need, and the regulatory challenges faced in an emerging sector, the company was unable to secure the necessary investment to complete its next phase.
(Note: Entreprenuerloop gives us an insight into what it takes for start-ups and companies involved in deep science to successfully launch and grow. Loop has pointed out that these successful companies require an optimal blend. Of resources, timing, strategy and patience to be successful. When establishing deep science companies, you should always remember “it’s a long road ahead”. And be prepared to handle unpredictable outcomes by designing your models with a view towards building a pathway towards business operations beyond just raising capital through financing rounds.) Therefore, Meatable’s failure is not simply about one company going out of business; it also underscores the difficulty in converting what has been scientifically verified into an independent entity.
