Craft, Macro and the In-Betweens

Since early this century, craft beer has grown into a force to contend with in the adult beverage industry.  The number of craft breweries today approached 2,000 in the U.S. alone, with overseas craft breweries popping up from Zealand to New Zealand.  For the most part, this is a new industry, not simply one that has grown. This presents several questions:

1. How was it established?
2. How did it grow?
3. Why did it grow?
4. What does this mean for those breweries that already existed
5. How will this affect competition in the industries (beer, wine, spirits)

Established:

Well, this is a blurry question for it is difficult to pin the establishment of a new industry on one particular moment or person. BUT, Fritz Maytag deserves credit if we were to pin somebody, with his resurrection of Anchor Brewing. From there, breweries like Boston Beer Company (Sam Adams), Sierra Nevada, Leinenkugel's, Pete's Brewing Company, and New Belgium helped cultivate the new industry. Word spread of beers that tasted different than the mass marketed, and quite similar, macro beers from Anheuser-Busch, Miller, Coors and the like. 

Growth:

The trailblazing effect of these breweries was two-fold. More breweries popped up, and the public's attention was captured. But that's just a portion of the answer. The diversity of America (well, this is my belief anyway) was ripe for plucking by brewers who brewed diverse beers. Finally, those who liked Belgian beers could find some form of them in the States. Same for those who like German, English and Scottish styles of beer. And as time went on the U.S. brewers crept ever closer to matching the quality of their Old World inspirations. 

The new industry grew based on the difference, variety, diversity and culture of craft beer. Yes, culture. Lemme explain. With craft breweries came brewpubs and homebrewers (thanks President Carter). This culture was more of a clique, and cult to some. Craft beer lovers would gather to discover new beers, compare home brew recipes, and ponder life in general. Today, this culture is quite noticeable. Culture is strong, and resists intrusions. More on that later.

Those Existing Breweries:

At first, this new industry meant nothing. To the large brewers this new beer was just a fad, and a very small one at that. Coors then introduced Blue Moon, and they saw its sales numbers sky rocket. Soon Guinness became more popular. A-B joined in with their Michelob "flavor" line, then with Shock Top.  Miller gained control of Leinenkugel's.  Other smaller breweries were bought up, gobbled up, torn up by the big guys. Rolling Rock became A-B property. And recently a beloved Chicago craft brewery, Goose Island, was sold to A-B (which itself was bought out by InBev).  All of this to get a market share of the new market, or to stop the surge of the smaller guys from grabbing a piece of the bigger pie. Whatever the motivations, the big brewers notice the growth of craft beer, and they react with their considerable weight, power and money. (we now see James Bond favoring Heineken and not martinis.  Makes you wanna yell.....KKKAAAAAHHNNN!!!)

Competition:

Law is one arena where competition is getting...competition. The 3-tier system, excise tax, interstate commerce, on/off-premise sales and consumption, etc. are just several areas where laws affect brewing, beer, consumption, sales and the economy. The big brewers cannot compete with the culture and quality of craft beer, and craft beer cannot compete with the distribution and volume of big brewers. Deciding the tipping point may just be the laws that govern both.

But it's not just breweries who are affected by this 'craft culture'.  Craft spirits and local wineries are gaining momentum. Flavored spirits of odd flavors (marshmallow vodka?) are exploding across the scene. The blandness, even the simple comfort, of non-flavored, base spirits are not attracting the same audience. Consumers want something different, they want quality--or at least diversity--product. They are no longer satisfied with brand loyalty and commercials that use frogs, dogs, comics or celebrities (see: Bond/Heineken above) and not the product itself. 

If one thing craft beer has done for the consumer is that it's made them realize that flavor is important. If a company chooses not to focus on this in their adverts, then it is quite likely this is due to the "familiar" flavor of their product (see: Bond/Heineken above...again). 

What is for sure: the established wine, beer and spirit labels have taken notice to the growing demand of flavor, quality and attention to detail that craft beer has spawned (or awakened).  There may just be a conflict brewing...

 

Diageo and the BrewDog "un-winners"

Recently, a scandal rocked the beer world.  The Scottish brewery, BrewDog, won the Bar Operator of the Year award at The British Institute of InnKeeping (BII) Scottish Awards on Sunday May 6, 2012.  At least, they should have. See, the judges said so, but sponsor Diageo decided to ignore the judges and hand the award to someone else.  Essentially, Diageo used their leverage to “persuade” BII presenters into doing their bidding. This did not go over well with BrewDow, the BII, beer lovers and the judges.

Diageo is a large international conglomeration of wines, spirits, and beer. Notably, their British Isles beer influence comes in the form of brands such as Guinness, Smithwick’s, and Harp.  BrewDog, on the other hand, is a small nascent Scottish brewery that has, and pronounces, a reputation of going against the grain. In their own words, they are a “beacon of non-conformity in a (sic) increasingly corporate desert”.  The only thing these two companies have in common is that they make beer.

So why did Diageo refuse to award BrewDog as per the judges’ ruling? Apparently, only the Diageo representative at the BII Awards knows the answer, because Diageo corporate headquarters released a statement/apology saying the actions of said representative does not reflect in any way Diageo values. Still, this plays into the waiting hands of BrewDog. What better way to highlight their “against the grain” attitude than tangible evidence that it is affected the “grain”?  And BrewDog knows this, and has fired off several tweets, blogs, etc berating the Diageo action and apology.  So much so, that Diageo has pleaded with BrewDog to cease the ‘witch hunt’ of the involved representative.  There is no indication that BrewDog will heed this plea. Why should they?

But what’s the big deal, really? On the surface, it seems that it is just fun and games and BrewDog sees as an opportunity to promote themselves, play the victim.  Yet, below the surface, there are interesting factors. For instance, craft brew in the British Isles has changed in the last 40 years.  The small English pubs that produce their own beer are virtually non-existent. Those breweries mentioned above (Guinness, et al) are not in the hands of the original owners.  Real Ale almost disappeared, but thanks to Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA) this tasty beer ‘style’ has come back.  But its return, and specifically CAMRA’s strict adherence to Real Ale, has been called into question by BrewDog.

While BrewDog has nothing against Real Ale, they would like to see more options in the U.K. other than Diageo and Real Ale. BrewDog makes very different kinds of beer than those two.  While it used to be a struggle between macro-beer and CAMRA, BrewDog enters to challenge both…or at least co-exist with them.  This latest issue at the BII is a rather obvious uppercut to BrewDog’s platform…but the punch missed.

Another issue is the market.  While craft beer still only makes up roughly 6% of the total beer sales, it is growing. And if you have 94% of the market, why not gobble up the remainder? If craft beer sales continue to grow, then that number can reach 10% maybe even 15% in a few short years.  That is enough for the big brewers (Diageo, AB-InBev, SABMiller, Heineken, Tsingtao, Carlsberg) to take notice and alter or implement some new plans. One can see this in the new labels (and their varieties) Anheuser-Busch and Coors are putting out: Blue Moon, Bud Light Lime, Shock Top, Wild Blue, Batch 19, Colorado Native, etc).  They want a piece of the craft beer pie, and if they can't make the bee, they'll buy it (see: Goose Island). Sadly, they see craft beer and beer in general, as a line item and not a passion.  Craft beer is growing because craft brewers make interesting and delicious beers.  Not because they add flavors and syrup to an already bad beer. BrewDog knows this. So, too, does Diageo. A bigger fight may be on the horizon.

Kali-Ma and the Beer (Label)

--from OvalOptions.com

Burnside Brewery out of Portland, OR was scheduled to release a beer today called Kali-Ma. Instead, it went back to the labeling line. The reason for this is the name and label art, which have upset some in the Hindu community. See, Kali-Ma is a religious symbol in Hinduism and represents power, destruction of evil and empowerment (although these vary).  The label depicts something different. The brewery swiftly issued an apology and declared to change the name and label.  In India, the nation’s second largest political party and largest conservative party, Bharatiya Janata, demands an official American apology from the U.S. ambassador.  Now, it’s an international dispute that sucks attention away from other issues.
While some may chalk this up to misunderstanding, ignorance, overreaction and/or ‘looking for a fight’, it is still important to take a closer look to discover the triggers of such a dispute. What is really going on? Well, we may never fully know, but shedding more light below the surface will discover important aspects.

• Burnside did indeed show ignorance as to what Kali-Ma means with many people. While their take on it stemmed from an Indiana Jones movie, they didn’t follow up and dig just a hair deeper
• Not digging deeper is an accident, though, and not an intension.  The labeling of the beer based on their research (or lack thereof) shows negligence at worst, not an act of offense or purposeful degradation
• Nevertheless, minimizing and misrepresenting a religious symbol can upset many people. Religion maintains a deep meaning in many peoples’ lives; it’s how they live their lives, how they identify themselves, and how they attach worth to their being
• An apology was offered and seemed accepted by the Hindu community—at least in the U.S.  This apology contained a reason for the naming of the beer and regret that it offended others. What it did not contain was admission to negligence. A tough pill to swallow, but apologizing for offense only addresses the symptom, not the cause. It showed sympathy without empathy
• Enter politics. The aforementioned political party in India demands the summoning of the U.S. ambassador to India “and make him apologise for this” [1].  Unfortunately, a forced apology is not an apology. It has no meaning.  It’s all show.  In this instance, the demandseems to be the focal point.  Political capital is available to those who persuade, or at least stand up to, the world’s only superpower.

Summary: An honest error in research begets offense to a religious community. After a swift and sympathetic apology, politics enters resulting in an escalation of the dispute to an international row.  The brewery should have done their research. The politics should have never entered.