Showing posts with label craft beer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label craft beer. Show all posts

Sunday, April 26, 2015

Colorado alcohol sales: Keep local or go grocery?

Keep Colorado Local (KCL) is opposing the push to expand Colorado liquor laws that will allow full strength beer and wine sales in grocery and convenience stores.  KCL has stiff competition from large corporations, and has done a good job emphasizing a negative consequences upon local businesses. Selection and variety would decrease, privately owned stores would close, and thousands of jobs would be lost.

However, it has not explained how these consequences would come about. Let's take closer look at how an expanded liquor law will most likely play out (taking lessons from local florists, bakeries, delis, book stores, butchers and corner markets):
1.      It's all about the wine: Wine has the highest profit margin and is the financial foundation of most liquor stores. Grocery stores want it.  But, if grocery stores sold ONLY the best selling 30-50 SKUs of wine, which is equivalent to one small shelf at many liquor stores, then it takes those sales away from liquor stores (see #2).  This would be enough of a blow to the liquor stores that they must close their doors or adjust their prices on other products (i.e. raise prices on beer, liquor and mixers)…and this would just hurt them more
2.      It won't take much:  The sheer number of liquor stores helps keep the price of beer/wine/liquor down, while promising small margins. When grocery chains slash prices (see #3) by $10 per bottle of wine, or $4 per six pack of beer, even on only 30 products, liquor stores cannot compete and the margins evaporate.  Liquor stores losing just 30 products means customers losing hundreds or even thousands of choices
3.      Cheap prices now, gouging later:  Grocery stores have "loss leaders". This means that they buy a product from the manufacturer, say milk, at X cost, but sell it for less than X, thus losing money.  To make up this loss, other products are marked up way above their X cost.  Since grocery stores have tens of thousands of products, they can afford more "loss leaders".  Initially, wine prices at grocery stores will be "loss leaders" in order to undercut the competition (liquor stores).  This sounds great: Cheaper wine and beer. But when the competition closes its doors, grocery stores will have free rein to raise wine and beer prices to whatever they want (not to mention the number of competitors goes from hundreds to 10 or lower)
4.      Convenience is inconvenient: If you just want a 6 pack of beer, or a bottle of wine for a dinner party, do you really want to wade through the grocery store? While in Boston, I had to hunt for beer. Boston! I hated going to a grocery store just to pick up a 6 pack of Sam Adams or Harpoon. Does the grocery-store-system work in other states? A bit, but from my experience in Boston, San Diego, Portland OR, and Seattle, not as well as Colorado's system
5.      Nothing Personal: Not all liquor stores offer personal customer service, but many do. What's a good wine to pair with duck confit? Which beer would counter the stickiness of brie? The wine and beer worlds are complex, and to match your needs with a product requires knowledge of both. It is doubtful that grocery stores, much less convenience stores, will populate their stores with knowledgeable staff
6.      Integrity of product: Grocery stores wield awesome financial power and they can buy products en masse. Selling in bulk, distributors can decrease the number of stops their trucks make, which saves them time and money. But wine and beer are fragile products. An IPA has a shelf life of about 3 months if stored in a cooler. If stored warm, cut that time in half…at least.  Warm wine fairs a little better, but it still has a shelf life not comforted by backroom storage. Once products start to suffer to age, as we all do, their quality diminishes. Brewers and vintners know what their products should taste like and customers expect it
7.      Distribution crunch: The loss of multiple outlets might sound intriguing to the big distributors—fewer number of stops while selling the same amount of product to the bigger stores.  The trickle-down effect, however, is that the bigger stores buy in bulk (see #6) at cheaper rates, thus affecting the margin the distributor makes. Of course, by then they will have released several drivers and warehouse workers to cut the loss. They would also run into stiffer clients: Kroger, Wal Mart, Target and Safeway can battle them with their own distribution networks, political/financial capital and “other” influences.

Prediction: If this law passes, the beer scene in Colorado might suffer, or it might not. Given my experiences in Portland, Boston, San Diego and Eugene, I think chances of the former coming true is greater, but of course not certain. California and Oregon beer scenes are good, but not great—or at least not to their potential.

The important aspect is this: If this proposal becomes law, and if smaller stores close, then there is no going back. For better or worse, we would be stuck with the new system. No one in their right mind would open smaller stores after seeing small stores close, and grocery conglomerates would fight to keep it that way. The old saying comes into play here, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.  Is Colorado’s system really broken?

Personal story:
I did some snooping around Portland, OR the other week to check out the scene there.  I went to several Whole Foods, Belmont Station and a place called BEER.
Warm IPAs at Whole Foods
·        The Whole Foods selection was good, but not great. The storage was horrible: warm IPAs stacked everywhere and some bottles expose to heat, not to mention fluorescent lighting. The wine selection was equivalent to a small to medium sized store in Colorado. Traffic (car and human) was a headache
·        Belmont Station had better selection, but still had many beers warm. It was also a trek to get to
·        BEER was better with cold storage, but smaller selection than Belmont. Closer to downtown
·        Places like Belmont Station, BEER and BeerMongers also serve on-premise beer/cider. That is, they are part pub. I think without this feature, these places would fold. Not sure if Whole Foods allows on-premise sales…who would go there to have a beer anyway?
·        Plaid Pantry is a convenience store chain (private) with some beer selection. Was not a beer destination spot for me. It seems like these are default spots to find some craft beer when other places are too far away
·        Could not find MillerCoors and AB-InBev products at these locations. I was told that the distribution laws in Oregon are “quirky” and there’s a battle between AB-InBev and a smaller distributor over territories. This could affect sales of both AB-InBev and local beers.  Didn’t find a Fred Meyer (Kroger). I suppose living there I’d know more about where things are
·        Only saw one wine shop, and it was closed
·        Most selections of Oregon beer is in the bomber packaging. Few six pack offerings and I was told this is because the packaging options for breweries are limited


My conclusion from my trip (2nd time in Portland) is that the Oregon…or Portland at least…beer scene is good, but not great.  It “works”, but I think is restricted.  Bottle shops are the preferred outlet, but even they are not as good as many Colorado stores in terms of selection and storage. It was certainly easier just to hit the breweries/tap rooms instead of bottle shops and Whole Foods. 

Cheers and Beers

Wednesday, April 8, 2015

New Mediation Network for Breweries

Just unveiled, a national brewery network to help with those pesky trademarks!
Brewery Mediation Network

 National Craft Brewery Mediation Service Debuts


Denver-based OvalOptions launches network to help craft brewers with trademark and other disputes


Denver, CO (April 21, 2015) On April 15th, 2015 OvalOptions for Conflict Management launched its Brewery Mediation Network (BMN) service in areas nation-wide. The program helps connect craft breweries with local providers of mediation, facilitation and associated services to assist in resolving costly disputes, most noticeably those involving trademarks.

Breweries that contact the BMN are guided through a dispute roadmap, shaped by their unique situation, examining issues ranging from inter-brewery dispute to workplace tension. OvalOptions then suggests the most appropriate service and provider in their network and contact the other party. In certain instances, outside references may be given (e.g. legal advocacy).

Jason Gladfelter, co-owner of OvalOptions, conflict consultant and level 1 Cicerone, views trademark disputes as a threat to the industry’s image while inflicting economic damage. “Legal fees in trademark cases can cost tens of thousands of dollars and take six months or more to conclude. Mediation can produce an amicable solution in a timely manner at a fraction of the cost, which is divided between the parties.”

The BMN program is a contractual partnership between OvalOptions and local mediation providers across the country. Each provider and their services are vetted and evaluated by OvalOptions. “This brings together two collaborative industries—mediation and craft brewing—for the benefit of each”, Gladfelter says. “We hope the BMN helps local businesses help each other.”

---more---
About OvalOptions for Conflict Management:  Based in Denver, CO, OvalOptions is a consulting firm focused on mediation and other dispute resolution services operating in conjunction, parallel and outside the court system. OvalOptions helps clients find the most appropriate solutions for their situations, including, if necessary, referring to outside services. You can find them online at www.OvalOptions.com, on Facebook at www.facebook.com/ovaloptions or follow on Twitter: @BeerMediation.

For more information on the Brewery Mediation Network, visit www.OvalOptions.com/BMN or contact BMN@OvalOptions.com.


# # #


Monday, June 2, 2014

Cider: It's Not Beer


Now, I have nothing against hard cider (i.e. cider with alcohol).  It can be delicious and comes in many variations. Cider (apple, pear, pineapple…) can be refreshing and paired nicely with food.As a sub-market of the adult beverage industry, it is booming. And that is good to see.   I hold no ill will towards cider millers. More power to them, and I hope they enjoy success.  But, cider is not beer. Not even close.

Hard Cider is riding the coattails of craft beer and its incredible boom. I see ciders at beer fests, beer magazines and just about everywhere one finds beer. Why? Cider is not beer.  It is not brewed and more closely (very closely) resembles wine: Fruit is crushed into juice, which is fermented then blended and packaged. Beer has many more steps that (should) adhere to precise scientific measurements.  The only commonalities they have are alcohol, liquid and packaging.

Big deal, right? Wrong…well, somewhat wrong.  In the grand scheme of things it is no big deal. But the constant integration of cider with craft beer blurs the line separating craft beer and cider. Too many times customers ask me for cider-beer.  Never heard of it, guy, sorry. It also minimizes the efforts, techniques, skill and art of brewing beer, which are widely misunderstood (or unknown) anyway. Brewers are the most underappreciated artisans of the adult beverage industry, mostly due to the complicated and specific production cycle of their craft and the depth of knowledge of chemistry it requires.  Plus, the massive effect a minor miscalculation or error can have on the product. In other words, it takes precision, patience, vigilance and integrity.

(Recently, I was at a beer festival that had several cider companies showcasing their products. I boycotted them at first, but decided that was kind of dumb.  Strange thing, though, when I asked about the pear cider as to what kind of pear juice did it contain--Bosc, Bartlett, D'Anjou…. The reply from the owner of the company did not know!!  Say….what??)

It's also a personal matter to me.  As the beer buyer at Grapes and Grains in Denver, I have worked with the owner to expand the craft beer choices for our customers. Ten years ago, it seemed each color had its own door; silver for Coors Light, gold for Coors Banquet, blue for Bud Light, red for Budweiser, white for Miller Lite, gold/black for MGD. Then separate doors for these companies' respective "premium brands" (Michelob, Blue Moon, Natural Light…).  The bottom line was that 3 brewers commanded 7+ doors, and there was little difference in flavor among them.

Today, we can see our progress in expanding beer choices from, say 6, to well over 100 brews. This wasn't easy. Bud, Miller and Coors (BMC) surely did not want to give up their spaces, nor their color coded displays.  They bullied, manipulated, lied and tried to strong-arm us into ordering for their benefit. But we persisted and now boast a very nice array of Colorado breweries, who themselves worked hard to arrive on our shelves…only to see shelf space dwindle a bit to make room for cider.
KKAAAAHHNNN!


While sometimes delicious (and often too sweet), cider can be a great beverage. But it's not beer or cider-beer or beer-cider.  If cider producers want consumers (and others) to appreciate their product, then perhaps they should develop their own identity. It can only help them.

Sunday, May 11, 2014

Craft Beer Defies Definitions

Is it that Craft Beer as an industry has changed and thus changed the meaning of craft beer itself? Or, was what craft beer meant hard to define in the first place?  Does it need a definition? What effect does a definition have on the industry anyway? (*cough*  taxes  *cough*)

America loves to categorize things, including beer styles.  Take IPAs: American, east coast, west coast, no coast, English, double, imperial, triple, even IPA & 1/2.  It is one thing to label a beer so as to convey what it might taste like, but too much definition (or use of vague terms) serves only  to confuse matters. It seems we want the label on the bottle to tell us what to taste, instead of us taking chances and finding out for ourselves. Perhaps this is American as well…but that's another topic.

The Brewers Association has changed, or altered, its definition of Craft Beer several times. The reasons they have done so have been mentioned elsewhere and speculated just about everywhere. What defines craft beer? Ingredients, volume, ownership, origin?  One plausible reason that has not really been touched upon, as far as I can tell, is that defining craft beer may just go against craft beer's essence. Well, perhaps to a point.  But craft beer existed before its definition. How it started is where the essence lays: motivation for brewing beer.

The pioneers of the craft beer scene started brewing beer because they were not satisfied with the beer selections at the time. They thought beer could be better and decided to make their own. While making a profit was (probably) part of the equation, it wasn't the prime motivation. These brewers wanted to make and drink great tasting beer. This desire, and the beer they produced, defined craft beer.

Of course, motivation is difficult to quantify in the first place, but additionally arduous these days in that craft beer is selling quite well, which brings in profits, which in turn muddies the motivational waters.   Is a certain brewery making beer for sheer profit or great taste? Again, hard to determine at most levels. It seems fair to say, though, that acquisition of breweries feeds the desire to obtain profits and less about improving (or ensuring) quality.

To make matters even more unclear is the expense needed to open a brewery. And add to that the inspections, zoning, legal and social red tape a prospective brewery must navigate prior to first lighting of the kettle.  Brewing is a business after all, and money finds itself in the middle of it all. How it affects the craft of brewing differs among breweries.

This is a delicate balance in the craft beer world today; craft against business. Breweries face difficult decision making processes further complicated with multiple voices in the room. Do they sell an under-par beer with off flavors to make up for the cost of brewing it? Or do they dump it to maintain quality?  Either way it is an easy decision on one hand, and the wrong decision on the other.  But that decision could reinforce the craft essence or cast some doubt.

What would those craft beer pioneers have done?


Tuesday, March 18, 2014

The Problem Big Beer Faces

Brewing is an ancient art, dating back thousands of years of human civilization. It was used in bartering, as currency, to purify water and as a social lubricant. It is, and has been, everywhere in daily life as part of the community. It should come as no surprise, then, that brewing can be big business as illustrated by the sheer numbers of production from the largest breweries.  Bases on such numbers it would seem that these breweries’ beers are revered and loved by all. This is not the case and 20 years ago the big breweries paid no mind to detractors. With over 95% of the beer market, why would they?   
However, that 95% is no more. The Brewers Association envisions that by 2020, what made up that other 5% (namely craft breweries) will increase to 20%, thus decreasing the value of the aforementioned largest breweries, who are now taking notice. It seems their reaction has two main tactics: buy up craft breweries, and/or produce beers similar to those of craft breweries. The first is straightforward. Goose Island Brewing out of Chicago sold to AB-InBev a few years ago, much to the chagrin of craft beer lovers. Many saw this as a giant, international corporate conglomerate bullying the small, local family business into submission—not the best image to have for large corporations, even though it is not accurate.

The other tactic is a bit cloudier. Instead of straight up producing and offering other types of beer, some large breweries create smaller breweries, which then produce such beer. This avoids the stigma associated with the big breweries created by the first option. It seems creating a smaller brewery, using a different name, and producing different types of beer is preferred to just buying a smaller brewery.  Perhaps this is the better way to go…at least in the short term.

Here is the problem: deception lasts only so long before it comes back to bite. The second option addresses a symptom of big brewers’ perception, not what produces this perception.  While the first option, buying smaller breweries, comes with push-back, at least it is honest and open. Maybe this is by default as it is difficult to hide a multi-million dollar deal.  Still, the public is not deceived, either in reality or (importantly) through perception.  The creation of smaller, otherwise named breweries is not only deceptive, it is willful intent to deceive. What the public calls “lying”, and this betrays any relationship and significantly damages trust.

From there, it does not really matter how the beer is produced or even if it is high quality.  The public has a tendency to shun those who have betrayed them.  While America is a forgiving country and allows for mistakes, it has little tolerance for those who manipulate its patience, sympathy and embrace of small business.  As the voices of craft beer lovers gets louder, so too will their cries of foul play of Big Beer. This is starting to happen and an example of the counter-reaction from Big Beer is more deception...without lying.  The prime example is the new Miller Fortune, labeled as an “undistilled beer” (every beer is undistilled) and a “spirited lager”, clearly (and intentionally) aimed at the whiskey market.  Do they really want to deceive those consumers as well?


In the mean time, craft beer drinkers will continue to expose Big Beer whenever they can, shun Big Beer and tell others to follow suit. However, just as America has no acceptance of deception, it still is forgiving. An apology, a real one, followed by acts of conciliation (more than “gestures”) can go a long way. It remains to be seen if Big Beer comprehends this, accepts it, and follows through. The bottom line is that the animosity towards Big Beer is not aimed at the Beer (although that is where the fallout lands), but at the Big—not the product of Big Beer, but Big Beers’ treatment and value of relationships.

Wednesday, July 31, 2013

A Brewers Only Dialogue

It's right around the corner. This biggest beer festival in the Western Hemisphere (I think): The Great American Beer Festival.  During the week of October 6-13 Denver, CO will be brimming with craft brewers from around the country, and beer enthusiasts from around the world.  Over 600 breweries bring multiple beers for three days, four sessions of beer sampling all in one place. Quite the experience, to say the least.  But that ain't it.  Denver has a fantastic craft beer scene, not to mention geographic scenery. There are many "smaller" events that take place during that week, most of these are special tappings or tasting parties. Falling Rock Tap House, Freshcraft and the Rackhouse usually have awesome events.

And while these events focus on enjoying great, sometimes rare, beer, this year there is another event that separates itself from the others.  The Great American Brewers Dialogue (GABD) will kick off its first installment on October 9th.  With so many craft breweries and their staff in town, it makes sense to try to gather them in one (or several) places to engage in group discussion about their industry. Rarely do brewers et al find free time to exchange ideas and talk about problems or obstacles they face. The GABD is a chance for them to air these out.

Since there are so many brewers in town, several locations will host these discussions simultaneously: Prost Brewing, Strange Brewing and Vine Street Pub are lined up now as hosts, with more to be added if the number of attendees pours in beyond venue capacity.

What makes this different than just a collection of brewers in one places is the addition of professional facilitators from OvalOptions for Conflict Management to help guide the groups through dialogue. These facilitators utilize methods to improve discussions, brainstorm, keep everyone engaged, and discover possible solutions to problems.  So now we have brewers gathered in one (or 3) place, where they can (re)connect with each other, focus on certain topics for discussion (each group decides their own topics), and professionals to help unpack and address concerns. Sounds like a good deal, even better since it is FREE!

It is only open to brewers and brewery staff to keep discussions open and confidential. Like everybody, brewers are reluctant to advertise problems they face. The GABD provides a safe space.  This should be fun and interesting!






Monday, July 8, 2013

Craft Beer Saturation: Lesson Learned, Lesson Followed?

A recent article from Time Magazine online mentioned some concerns over the rapid growth of the craft brewing industry. While this article barely scratches the surface of the concerns mentioned (it doesn't even touch others), it focuses on the associated industries' ability to accommodate this growth. Restaurants, bars and retail stores are finding it difficult to provide space for these new breweries and their new beers. As such, competition among craft breweries for this limited space is intensifying. Some see this competition as a very strong adversary to not only the continued growth of craft brewing, but its chances of sustaining its current status. In other words, after the Big Bang comes the Big Crunch.

This is not a surprising or unrealistic prognosis. Craft brewing saw a Big Crunch in the 1990s, so there's ostensibly no reason to foresee it not to happen again. Except there are several. One is that after the 1990s Big Crunch, say the last 10-15 years, the big breweries (Anheuser-Busch, Miller, Coors) refocused their targets on each other, allowing the few craft breweries who survived to build strong foundations.  Breweries like Sierra Nevada, New Belgium and the largest craft brewer, Boston Beer Company, helped cultivate a resurgence of craft beer.  Under cover from the giant breweries' gaze elsewhere, small breweries crept back into the market, and this time they assessed what went wrong before to apply what they learned today.

The main lesson was that direct competition with the financial capital of big breweries is suicide. No need to attract attention from Bud, Miller, and Coors beating themselves up. Which is another point: the big breweries consolidated.  Miller, Coors and Molson merged (for lack of a better term), AB was bought by In-Bev, which just acquired Group Modelo. Meanwhile, the craft beer lover was not to be forgotten. The Internet plays a big role here as well.  Beer lovers took to cyberspace to advocate for better beer.  Websites like BeerAdvocate and Ratebeer are consumer driven, contain open forums and information on beer, beer styles, beer events and beer…you name it. The need for advertising through Super Bowl commercials, billboards and sporting event sponsorships became fleeting, and therefore big money was not the dominant weapon it once was.

While other factors differentiate today's craft brewing boom from the 1990s, the focus now is on how to keep it up, and to keep at bay the Big Crunch. Back then the competition was for tap handles and cooler doors, and this is still a part of the scene.  Yet it's not the whole picture. Perhaps the most unique characteristic of today's craft beer scene is the scene itself.

The size of breweries opening up today is relatively tiny. One brewery will not make a dent on the national share of the beer sales market. Places like Denver Beer Co and Hogshead Brewery reside in small buildings, like old auto mechanic garages, where their consumer base spans less than a square mile.  Restaurant tap handles and retail shelf space are not their primary concern. It is a different business plan than the big breweries and the craft breweries of the 1990s. Craft breweries are becoming the neighborhood hangout, which harkens back to Colonial days.

This is what can prevent a Big Crunch, if many craft brewers stay extremely local. If money is poured into competing for limited space, then big money can be lost.  Attention should be, first, on the beer.  Good beer will lure people in and persuade them to stay.  Next should be customer service (well, you need a tasting room first). Making people feel like friends, or guests, rather than customers is not a secret, but it isn't all that easy to do. Skills in personal interaction are rare in today's social media world, yet are vital to small business.  So, the people have come to drink great beer, and they're staying…what else can they do at these small breweries?

The brewery is not just a drinking hole; it's a gathering place for everybody, although only adults can enjoy the beer.  Atmosphere is important--otherwise people would just stay home.  Music, volume, space, table arrangement, outside seating, etc all affect the brewery. Some places provide board games, others have periodic group meetings. Accommodating designated drivers, children, pets and tourists have little to do with beer…but everything to do with a neighborhood brewery.

And this is working: These places are busy. Sometimes breweries cannot keep production ahead of consumption; there is more demand than supply. That's a good business recipe, yet it shouldn't be a sign for breweries to expand and start distribution. While a particular neighborhood is familiar with their brewery, many others are not, and to make them aware takes money and time.  Both of which are needed in the original location to maintain great beer, customer service and atmosphere. If they do this, then they have established a strong opposition to any Big Crunch that may occur.

Some believe that the lack of retail and tap space will hurt craft brewing, and this may be true for breweries looking for space.  But revenue does not have to come from distribution; on premise tasting rooms are becoming neighborhood hot spots.  While this may not provide short term profits, it can lead to long term, established success. People want to gather, mingle, talk, play and meet.  The neighborhood brewery is the perfect place, away from the labyrinth of distribution. With so many neighborhoods in the U.S. saturation is a long way off.

Monday, June 24, 2013

Review: Lake Dillon Beer Festival

This past weekend presented me with two beer festivals. The first was on Saturday in Dillon, CO.  The Lake Dillon Beer Festival--with bluegrass concerts--is one of my favorite festivals of the year.  It's not the biggest or best, but the location and music is just fine.  About 20 breweries were there at the Dillon Amphitheatre and for $30 I could try as much as I could in a 4 hour span. On top of that, many breweries sent their head brewers or sales (distribution) team. This made for nice, face to face conversations.

Some well known and larger breweries were there, like Breckenridge, Odell, Oskar Blues and Boulder Beer.  Their always popular and widely available.  For me, this is repeat territory, but I still like talking to them. Then there are the smaller guys: Backcountry Brewery, Ska, Renegade and Wynkoop.  And then the very small and/or new places such as Fate, Our Mutual Friend, Butcherknife, Big Choice, Strange Brewing, River North, Hogshead, and the locals Pug Ryans and Dillon Dam Brewery. Always good to grab some Backcountry beers, Alan Simons up there has good stuff.  It was also great to hang out with Jeff Griffith from Fate.  His Watermelon Kolsch was a hit.

It was also nice to see the Colorado Brewer's Guild with a booth. The craft beer scene in Colorado is booming and it needs representation on "the Hill".  Craft brewers also need access to, and knowledge of, valuable resources.  The Guild is doing its best to keep up; beer is growing fast 'round these parts.

Dillon is about one hour outside of Denver and far enough in the mountains to catch some awesome star-gazing.  Unfortunately timing was not on my side Saturday: a full moon (and the biggest of the year) lit up the lake and the sky. Darn. Still, the scenery was fantastic and the weather even better.

Nice place, fairly close, great scenery, friendly people, not all that crowded and good price all add up to a great time and a promise from me to return next year!

Dillon.  The fest is behind me


Music has started


Beer and the lake


Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Beer Review: Odell's Woodcut #6

So, I'm going to try and post my reviews on this blog for posterity.  Since this is review #1,655, though, it may be a lost cause.  We'll start with this one:

Odell  Woodcut 6


I rarely rate according to price, but what exactly should a 'strong ale' taste like anyway? Since there really isn't a benchmark, I'm going with wallet affects. 

Pours a murky off amber/gold will huge head. This thing billowed up to about 3 fingers, off white. Looks ok, but the lacing seemed oily. 

Aroma is wood, aspirin, date and unripe apple. 

Tastes is wood and unripe apple. But mostly wood. Not a scratchy kind, just like a wet log. Subtle hints of vanilla and caramel on the end. But it's thin. Maybe some cherry?

The feel saves this beer a bit. It's got a bubble whallop to save the thinness of the taste. Really, what is this thing for 21 bucks (on SALE!)? At least the wood isn't too bold or scratchy, that would result in a drain pour. 
This is my first, and last, Woodcut I'll pay for. Not a bad beer, but horrible for the price

Tuesday, June 11, 2013

The Magic Hat / West Sixth Trademark Dispute: Settlement

The good news is that Magic Hat and West Sixth breweries agreed on a settlement to their intense, and public, dispute.  A joint press release stated that the parties have come to a mutually agreeable solution to the trademark problem.  Here it is in its entirety

"Official Statement
West Sixth & Magic Hat

The parties have a mutual interest in assuring that consumers perceive their products as distinct.

The parties have mutually resolved the issues addressed in the lawsuit in a manner that eliminates potential confusion about product origin and resolves the lawsuit in a mutually acceptable way.

To the extent West Sixth in any way represented that Magic Hat filed a frivolous lawsuit, that Magic Hat initiated litigation improperly, that Magic Hat was unresponsive in negotiating a resolution, that Cerveceria Costa Rica was itself involved in the dispute or its resolution, that Magic Hat claimed ownership of the numeral 6, that Magic Hat sued West Sixth after West Sixth had already acceded to its demands, that Magic Hat has no Vermont presence, or that Magic Hat sought to recover for or enjoin West Sixth from truthful public statements, such representations are retracted. West Sixth regrets that it in any manner communicated any inaccuracies, and hereby corrects those errors.

Both Magic Hat and West Sixth have agreed that this joint statement will be the last public communication from either side regarding the resolved dispute.

Each wishes the other good fortune and continued success."

So, there it is.  It seems the mediation worked, and the slight change to West Sixth's label was the removal of a compass / star image.  That's it...as far as labeling goes.  But what takes up the bulk of this joint message is public relations mending.  Why is the biggest paragraph essentially an apology from West Sixth about its public comments during the dispute?  After all this time and threats of litigation, what comes out is a simple (relatively) label edit and a long, drawn out "regret". Does this seem odd?

In fact, no, it doesn't. At least not to those in the field of conflict management. To them, they see this paragraph of apology as addressing the main issue for Magic Hat: public image and possibly hurt feelings.  While the label dispute was the main issue, as soon as it hit the social media stream it became a side dish.

They're not alone. Even more recently the international, conglomerate brewer, giant corporation AB-InBev reportedly issued a cease and desist to extremely tiny, ma-and-pop brewery Belleville Brewing in the UK.  Now, Ab-InBev is the type of large corporation that can weather a flame war of public image on the social networks, so they probably aren't worried about this dispute's affect on their image. And as far as image goes, this can help Belleville...assuming it survives the legal costs. This dispute is a bit different from other brewing trademark cases because of the disparity of sizes between the disputants. This is not true with most other cases, where disparity in size may exist, but not to this extreme.

The fact is, most breweries involved in trademark (or other) disputes cannot afford negative press, litigation or drastic label changes. One may suggest that breweries refrain from hitting the social media airways that flame the dispute.  Yet social media is a weapon, and powerful enough to counter, or at least dissuade, the use of legal maneuvering. Plus, anything filed through the courts is public domain anyway, so the dispute is not reserved to privacy. This does not mean that relying on social media is effective or efficient. It creates an uncontrollable firestorm; a Pandora's box of back-and-forth. It can get ugly.

With Magic Hat and West Sixth, at least the label dispute is resolved and the public firestorm over (well, maybe not. Supporters of both sides, and fed-up neutrals, may still vent and foam over this mess). Both companies can go about making beer, and making a living.  That's the important part. Hopefully this situation serves as a lesson to other breweries in similar situations.  Hopefully.

Sunday, June 2, 2013

The Dilemma (and test) of Aging Beer: A "Scientific" Approach

Last night, some fellow beer geeks and I gathered for a beer tasting. Tastings aren't really uncommon, but this one had two aspects that made it boarder line unique.  One was the return of a beer geek to beer geek-dom. See, he committed himself to family, house and job for several years. The last time I drank with him was at his new house, at the time with quite an unfinished basement and his beer collection/cellar was a pile of boxes. Fast forward to last night, and the basement served quite well, equipped with a small fridge, couch, tables....all the things needed for a beer tasting.

Which brings us to the other aspect: the verticals.  Initially, this tasting's aim was to try the same beers, aged for the same amount of time, but in different "formats".  For example, we not only had most of the Stone Vertical Epic brews, but we had two of each.  For each set, one had been aged in cold refrigerators and the other aged at cellar temperatures or wine fridges. The idea was to compare and contrast the affects of these different aging techniques. Each of us (there were 8) got two pours from each Vertical year--one pour from the refrigerator aged, and one from the cellar aged version.  Pure science, of course.










(The Stones)





And it went...interestingly.  Not many of us were fans of these beers, refrigerated or not.  Probably because few, or none, of them were meant to be aged at all. But, that wasn't a requirement for this experiment (yeah, like we thought this up way back in 2003).

Prior to tasting, we had a little bit of a debate as to which version (fridge or cellar) would be better, or at the least, would there be any difference.  There was some disagreement, and the results were conclusive.  Cellared beer aged more rapidly than fridge beer across the board.  Also across the board, the beers did not hold up to even fridge aging.   Most were oxygenated and faded. We concluded that aging beers is, for the most part, overrated.  Two years was the common maximum duration to age a beer (a beer that can be aged), with 5 years being the extreme.

...But that wasn't all.  The unique aspect of this tasting was the other vertical tasting:
The Dark Lord (2005-2013)


That's a lot of strong beer right there, folks.  But, for science, we endured. And this vertical pretty much convinced us that aging is not all that great for many beers, eve the Lord.  While 2005 had a nice roasty characteristic, it was more of a result from oxygenation than the beer itself.  The 2006, 2007 and 2008 were not very good, while 2011 was agreed on to be the best of the bunch.  Most Dark Lords were aged at cellar temps as they were gathered from various sources.
A shorter vertical was the night cap:  Bourbon County Brand Stout (2007-2008)

So with the verticals and science concluded we had more beers to drink:
Midnight Sun's Monk's Mistress (oak aged)
Beatification batch 008
Supplication batch 002
Thomas Hardy's Ale 1993
Sophie Paradisi
Backcountry SaiZin
The Bruery Cuir
Cantillon Cuvée Des Champions
....and several homebrews

Quite the night!



Friday, May 31, 2013

A new Toad on the block


Last night we hit the newest Golden, CO brewery: Mountain Toad Brewing.  It's a cozy little spot with an open patio along the side. Still working out the kinks, like with the PoS system, but the beers on tap (there were only 3) were solid. No defects detected, which isn't the usual for new breweries.  Good location.

Thursday, May 23, 2013

Trademarks: Here We Go Again

It seems like we can't even blink between trademark disputes in the craft brewing industry. And it also seems like each dispute grows uglier than the previous.  Today, we see two breweries engaged in this ugliness: Magic Hat Brewing Co. and West Sixth Brewing, with the former suing the latter for trademark infringement. Social media sites just ooze of nastiness, mostly from supporters of each brewery, but occasionally from the breweries themselves--at least, they have not done much, if anything, to stop the flow.

Some of the rancor stems from the image of a giant beer company picking on a weaker one. And this does not sit well in a culture that has only recently become aware of the affects of bullying. Magic Hat is the playground bully; West Sixth is the new kid at school. The fight has begun.

Sadly, it could have been avoided. Private phone conversations, one-on-one discussions and even email would have been preferable to social media, lawyers' letters and lawsuits. Even though it sounds like attempts at personal contact were unsuccessful, going from discussion to lawsuit is a giant leap over some critical steps. Facilitated dialogue, mediation, and settlement conference are always options for disputants.  While more effective prior to retaining legal counsel, these options are still on the table.

Still, it surprises me that Magic Hat and its corporate connections have not figured out the power of social media. A power that can build and destroy. West Sixth knows this and are using it to their advantage. At least, so far. While I'm no prognosticator, this dispute will harm both breweries. And that's sad. 

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

ROY G BIV at Crooked Stave

I gotta say, I had a blast at Crooked Stave's release party of Wild Wild Brett Violet this past Sunday. While I didn't get there super early, 2 bottles of this rare beer ended up in my hands and later in my "cellar". Honestly, though, I would not have cared all that much if no bottles made it to my humble abode.  Why? Well, I'll tell ya...

If there is one "duh" moment I've ever had, it was on Sunday when I said, a little under my breath, that craft beer lovers really do love craft beer. I know, duh!  But really, looking back on that day, through pictures or stories, there endured that one constant. Craft beer lovers love craft beer, and because of this, grabbing two bottles of WWBV was just a bonus, even an afterthought. The brewmaster, Chad, spoke individually to each person purchasing WWBV, thus keeping the spirit of craft brewing alive: it's about the relationship, community and atmosphere, with great beer added.



See, the line stretched around the corner, and then the next corner of the building outside. It moved slowly. Waiting time to get a beer from Crooked Stave's rather small bar was about 20 minutes. To get a bottle was 3 hours, with many in line not getting even one before the bottles ran out. Tap times were discombobulated.  WWBOrange wasn't tapped (as far as I know) due to massive foaming. It was crowded. One bathroom was hammered with...well, beer-sidules.

But get this: I drank more different (and delicious) beers at this event than any other, maybe...maybe excluding GABF. When craft beer lovers get together, they bring craft beer. They dive into their cellars and private collections and offer bottles to beer geek friends and strangers. And most of these beers, if not all, are hind to find and obtain: i.e. the white whales.
Here, look at this:
This is just a glimpse of the bottle share...the lineup continues...

Beer wasn't the only thing brought along.  Cheese, grapes, water, soup, sammiches....it was a backyard gathering with friends and strangers who just love craft beer. It was a great time. It was Craft Beer fun.

Oh, and there was some sort of bottle release inside. 

Saturday, April 20, 2013

Why I Love Beer



People who do not really know me think I drink a lot.  Just because I have reviewed over 1,600 beers online doesn't mean I drank them in 4 days. No. I take my time drinking a beer.  It's rare that I have more than 2 beers a night, and most nights I don't have any.  Of course, this was not always the case. 

While I didn't touch any alcohol until I was 21 years old, when I did start to drink it was mostly beer (Bud) with some shots mixed in. Still, I never drank alone. It was a social thing back then, and remains (mostly) so today, albeit with a little more style than yesteryear. I love the differences in making beer, the variety of ingredients and variations of combining them, and the spectrum of flavors; from super sour to malty sweet.

When I was younger, Cheers was my favorite TV show--still is. The closeness and camaraderie in that studio bar really hit home with me. Combine that with my history degree that highlighted the role of pubs and taverns through the Colonial days, and I started to see beer (and pubs) as an important social cog in the wheel of civilization.

Living in Denver facilitates this interest: The metro area has a ton of breweries, tap rooms, and beer bars, not to mention many beer geeks.  It's no wonder that places such as Denver Beer Co., Hogshead, Dry Dock, Prost and Strange Brewing Co are packed with patrons every night.  Consider that these places are not the only on-premise beer joints.  Denver is also home to several very large liquor stores that carry hundreds of beers.  If beer were the only factor, then people would be drinking it at home and not packing  the beer halls.  No, there is something more than just drinking beer.

People go to these beer venues to try new and good beer. And to mingle with their fellow citizens, meet new friends, tell and hear great stories, and have fun. This is one reason why I love beer.  It truly is a social lubricant. It helps people unwind, not from the alcohol, but from the joy of drinking good suds (the Colorado scenery doesn't hurt either).

More people should take advantage of what beer halls have to offer. The Pub Dialogues is an effort to do just this: Gather people to share beer and ideas about social, political and community issues. Colonists did it years ago, and look what came out of that.

Friday, April 12, 2013

Small BREW Act, Taxes and Craft Brew



The growth of craft beer as an industry has persuaded some to take notice as to what "craft" brewing really means and its role in the overall beer industry. While debates continue over craft v. crafty, production levels salience on definitions and independent v. corporate brewing, one issue has craft brewers seemingly debating each other, and that issue is tax.  More precisely, excise federal tax on the production of beer, no matter if it's craft, independent, neither or both. 
Basically the excise tax code is set up so that those breweries who produce more beer are taxed more on the federal level. Right now, that production level is 2 Million barrels per year (those producing such quantities are taxed more per barrel than those producing less).  On the ground, it currently means that all craft breweries do not pay this extra tax, but large breweries (like SABMiller and AB-InBev) fork over the money.
Yet, the growth of craft beer has pushed some breweries closer to this 2 Million barrel level, and therefore more taxation.  As such, or by coincidence, the Brewers Association has altered/updated its definition of craft brewery to include breweries producing up to 6 Million barrels per year (among other stipulations).  Following this, there have been efforts to alter/update the tax code.  Without getting into details, the new tax proposals seek to increase the production level to 6 Million barrels per year before enduring the full excise tax of $18/barrel. 
This has some people in an uproar (or at least discomfort).  Some claim that only a handful of large craft breweries will benefit from this while most of the other medium/small craft breweries will see little benefit, especially if the money saved by the large breweries is spent on marketing--giving them a leg up on the competition, which is the smaller breweries.  Are you following?  It's a bit complicated, so to summarize:  Craft breweries are getting bigger. Getting bigger means more excise tax.  Change definition of "bigger" to avoid this tax burden increase. Those "bigger" breweries benefit most, while smaller breweries see little gain. I think that's the gist of it.
This will be interesting to watch to see if a rift develops (or grows) between the handful of big craft breweries (like Sam Adams, Sierra Nevada, New Belgium , etc) and the more numerous small breweries (like Crooked Stave, Lagunitas, Foothills). It will also be interesting to see how the Brewers Association handles this disagreement.  It should be noted that the BA supports this new tax code, as well as a majority of its member breweries. Consensus is difficult to achieve in any industry, so we'll see how this situation develops, if at all.  Sources predict that this new tax code will not pass Congress.
It should also be noted that the main argument in favor of this proposed tax code is job creation.  With the money saved from the discounted excise tax (from $7/barrel to $3.50/barrel for production under 60,000 barrels), small breweries can re-invest in their companies, hire more employees and build up their neighborhoods.

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

What's the Matter with Craft Beer? Cracks in the Foundation


The Craft Beer industry is taking off; sales are rising, approaching 10% of overall beer sales, which interestingly have dropped. Craft Beer is growing, even through Recession. No doubt this is time for rejoicing for craft beer, craft beer geeks and tap rooms. But there are fractures in the foundation that are coming to light. How these are managed can either fix the cracks, or expound them.

It is important to note that craft brewing is a business and must take on certain business responsibilities. One is establishing and protecting a brand. For the most part a brand is a name. To differentiate beers consumers (for the most part) identify with names: Sam Adams (by Boston Beer Company), Budweiser (AB-InBev), Coors (MillerCoors).  If Boston Beer Company labeled one of their beers "Bud", AB-InBev would see this as trademark infringement (and so, too, would a judge).  This blatant example illustrates why trademark laws are in place.

However, in the business world of trademark infringement the devil is in the details. While "Bud" is an obvious example, Righteous is not, nor is Seven Seas. In these cases the breweries involved are geographically separate, their markets do not overlap. Ostensibly the struggle is to keep other craft breweries from copying each other, stealing names and taking advantage of others' successes.
While some of this might be true, we must look at the business side: protecting trademark.  For if a company does not protect its trademark, then it could lose it, if not now then later. So a brewery on the west coast must keep an eye out for similar beer names/labels emerging on the east coast, not for fear of theft of customers, but of losing trademark. If that happens, then larger companies that are closer can start using that same name/label, and no infringement of trademark can be claimed.  

So, to take "Bud" as an example (which was actually contested in court), if Boston Beer Company started using "Bud" to label a product, and AB-InBev did not claim infringement, then anybody could start using "Bud"…even MillerCoors. Brand recognition would be out the window as would fair competition.

While this may sound easy to avoid, it certainly is not. Trademark infringement disputes are going to happen. In a growing industry full of small companies, it is inevitable that names/labels will fly under the radar, only to appear in the form of cease and desist (CD) letters.
And this is how management of these disputes can either fix the cracks, or widen them. Sometimes the business decision is not best for the business, especially in a personal industry like Craft Beer, and with the explosion of social media.  Trademark protection is necessary, but it's not as black and white as a CD letter. 

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Craft and Crafty Beer


The Brewers Association recently announced that the time has come to draw a line between authentic craft beer and crafty beer. The BA wants clarity as to what companies produce which beers.  In other words, the BA doesn't want large breweries to claim to be producing craft beer when, according to BA definition of craft, they are not.

Ostensibly, the crux behind this debate is the definitions of craft and large breweries.  Is this simply a case of small companies trying to make a name for themselves? Or is it a case of large companies trying to dominate smaller ones?

The scale of production of a brewery is the central figure used to define “craft[1]” and “macro[2]”, but it’s not the only one.  A craft brewery cannot produce X amount of beer and still be considered "craft". But how does production affect the "craft" side of beer? That's a tough question for BA to address.  So, ownership is another factor, and its salience towards defining “craft” has increased in recent years for several reasons, mentioned below.

For the most part, craft and macro were separate and didn’t directly compete.  Anheuser-Busch's foes were Miller and Coors; Dogfish Head's (DE) foes were…well, that’s hard to say since their share of the beer market was less than 1% and localized.

But times have changed. Craft beer has exploded over the last 10 years, even during the Great Recession, while macro beer has expanded over the globe, into China and India. Today the number of small breweries in the U.S. has eclipsed 2,000 while the number of macros has decreased (due to consolidation) to a handful.  In that time Miller and Coors merged, Anheuser-Busch was bought by InBev and Boston Beer Company’s (Sam Adams) success has persuaded the BA to re-define “craft”.  The latter's growth has pushed the "craft" definition to new limits, literally.

While the big breweries were merging they were also keeping an eye on the small guys.  The latter’s success did not proceed unnoticed. The small breweries’ market share in the beer industry has surpassed 6%, while overall beer sales have decreased: Craft is going up, macro is going down. To assuage this, macros have taken to two tactics: compete with craft, or buy them (or both).
Buying is financially easy, but personally difficult. The beloved Chicago-based Goose Island brewery was bought by AB-InBev and ended that competition, and was greeted with intense beer-geek backlash.  And this highlights a dilemma: is Goose Island still “craft” even though it’s owned by AB-InBev?  And why would that matter? We’ll get back to that.

The other option, directly compete, is tricky, because in order to do so the macro company must admit there is a difference in terms between craft and macro, thus accepting the “craft” definition, and thereby admitting that there's a difference in product.  MillerCoors is attempting to compete directly by establishing smaller brew houses with their own brands and labels, like Blue Moon, Tenth and Blake, AC Golden. But why do they need to do this? Why not just produce the Blue Moon recipe under Coors labeling?  And here we are back to the question posited above: Why does labeling, and therefore ownership, matter?

First, we must establish that it does matter. The actions of BA and the macros establish that it does. And here we (finally) get to the core issues: product and livelihood. 

Product: The difference between the craft breweries' products and the macro breweries' products are vastly different. Craft breweries produce varieties of beer, while the macros produce, mostly, one. While craft brewers detest the product from macros, they do marvel at the consistency macros display on such large scale productions. In short, craft beers are more diverse, while more susceptible to production mistakes, while macros are consistent yet uniform. And this are the stigmas each carry.
Livelihood: The conflict attaches to the product, or perhaps more directly the stigmas.  Many craft beer geeks (their numbers are growing) don't see macro beer as "real beer", but as mass produced flavored water. They are defiant toward the macros and do not want any of their money going to these businesses. Macros know this, so they turn to tactics mentioned above.  If they succeed then the craft breweries will have direct competition with large breweries that they never really had before. And this threatens their passion and livelihood.

The key point here is that the BA and craft brewers do not wish to eliminate the competition. They are not calling for macros to cease production of certain beers. What they are calling for is the claiming of such beers by their owners. Those craft beer geeks want to support the small breweries, but are being deceived by small brewing operations owned (and operated) by the macros. And that is what the BA is trying to confront: displayed ownership of product. Why hide it? Be proud of your product is the BA mindset. Perhaps this sheds light on a larger difference in the modus operandi of marco and craft: To make money or make beer?



Further reading:
http://www.brewersassociation.org/pages/media/press-releases/show?title=craft-vs-crafty-a-statement-from-the-brewers-association
John Cochran of Terrapin Beer Company highlighting the complexity of brewing, beer and business.
http://business.time.com/2012/12/27/trouble-brewing-the-craft-beer-vs-crafty-beer-cat-fight/#ixzz2K3fu06H9



[1] The term "craft" replaced the common term "micro" as the popularity of small breweries increased, and so too did their production, thus ushering in a need to change the definition
[2] Characterized as "American Adjunct Lagers" and commonly referred to as "BMC" (Bud/Miller/Coors)

Wednesday, August 8, 2012

Support local, or support best?

In a recent issue of BeerAdvocate the magazine a reader (and fellow BeerAdvocate member) clarified his position on the 'support local' idea.  In his feedback column (which is a limited space to write one's position) he stated that there one should support whichever brewery produces the best beers. In other words, don't support local brewers just because they are local; crap beer is crap beer, no matter who makes it.  I can understand this viewpoint, and agree with it...to a point.

On a level playing field his point is valid. Just because one brewer is local doesn't mean he/she deserves our money, time and effort. Yet, this is the real world. The playing field is not level.  Big, chain breweries can afford the nuances that smaller, local guys cannot provide. When is comes to beer, maybe this is quality control, or sufficient production, or it could be that they cannot afford the extra electricity is takes to operate ceiling fans. Whatever the discrepancy may be, it is important to note that the local businesses of brewing cannot compete with the chain juggernauts head to head, and especially right of the starting line.

A local brewer needs to tweak recipes, brewing times, batch sizes, minimize expenditures (overhead stuff like AC), and still, perhaps, work another job.  Basically, they need time to fine tune his/her product. To do this, they sell their initial product to consumers, who in turn like it, love it, or hate it. Sometimes this version of the product isn't up to snuff, and the tweaking begins. They cannot take as much negative publicity as the big chains, and need more patience from consumers.  Sure, Flingers (see: Office Space) can provide quick service, comfortable AC, satellite television, and ice cold beer; that's expected from them.  But they have the capital to provide those.  Locals do not: They must start off slow and build up.  They need support.

But why should we support their business growth?  What's in it for us?  Several things:

  • After fine tuning their product, local brewers can provide awesome beer that is unique to them
  • Money spent on their beer, at their business, is kept local (for the most part. Credit/debit card acceptance costs a LOT of money to run and maintain, and that money goes elsewhere)
  • A local business values its customers more, and more personal attachments build
  • Customers can experience the growth themselves. They can witness how the beer changes from recipe to recipe, and be a part of the evolution of a particular brewery: the life of a beer
So, sure, I understand that if a brewery continues to make bad beer, or just beer that you don't like, to avoid them (or not support them).  But keep in mind that brewing beer takes time, patience, tweaking, and money. 

Cheers!