This study examines the impact of different labeling claims and information provision on the price, total sales, and quantity sold of plant-based meat alternatives (PBMA) products. Specifically, we analyze how specific labeling terms and certifications interact with information about the products' environmental, health, and ethical claims to affect consumer purchase decisions. The findings indicate that "plant-based" and "protein" labels are associated with higher demand and sales, while "meat substitute" labels correlate with higher prices but lower sales volume. Using a structural demand model, I estimate the different effects of attributes on demand and find that low-calorie claims and meat substitutes have the strongest positive impact on product choice. In contrast, protein content has a significant negative impact on choice. The random coefficients logit model refined our previous demand estimations. Additionally, we estimate the cross-price elasticities and own-price elasticities of the plant-based products, as well as related metrics such as marginal cost, markup ratio, and diversion ratios. These results have important implications for current and proposed PBMA marketing policies and labeling legislation. Specifically, restricting the use of the word "meat" in plant-based product labeling could significantly impact the demand for these products. By understanding how various labeling claims and information provision influence consumer behavior, policymakers and marketers can make more informed decisions that support the growth and acceptance of plant-based meat alternatives.