1. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  2. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Filling generic growlers

Discussion in 'US - Pacific' started by ModernTimesJacob, Feb 13, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Flawless victory. (golf clap)
  2. If you read MacCheese's prior posts, he does not oppose a reasonable growler fill policy. What he is saying is that the is skeptical that many breweries will follow it. If Alpine or Stone choose not to fill generic growlers, it is not going to hurt them too much.
  3. That's my point: His comment was divisive for no substantive reason, hence, a tad dickish.
  4. Not sure why any brewery would cut off their nose to spite their face. So you don't make the $6-12 sale for glassware. Perhaps a brewery should be more focused on brewing beer than moving shaped glass.

    I get that it's part of the branding of the company to have people walk around with your name on their growler. But is bragging rights worth losing a constantly returning $12-16 sale in them refilling any "specified growler size/type" at your place? Hell, I would love this if I was a brewer. You mean I don't have to have a huge supply of growlers taking up space in order to move more growler fills and my customer bases now has increased to anyone who has a "specified growler size/type"? Score!

    Not saying to allow people to come in with a milk carton or anything. But stop trying to make the money off the glass and start moving the beer that goes within it.

    I think any brewer would appreciate that.
    drewone, jmgrub and jtmartino like this.
  5. Let me guess - you've not followed his posts much, have you?
    jtmartino and tjensen3618 like this.
  6. From selling glass at a small profit to having to pay for stickers to apply to the growler (and covered any markings from other breweries). Might be a threshold some breweries don't want to cross. Of course a scenario not often mentioned is the Brewery is still going to need growlers for folks who don't have one so that line of revenue is still there just not at the same level. When the pre printed growlers run low it will be interesting to see how these businesses adjust to the ruling...
    PaulStoneAnchor likes this.
  7. jtmartino

    jtmartino Savant (470) California Dec 11, 2010

    The only way it wouldn't apply to a brewery is if it were against that brewery's business practices. It has nothing to do with state (or county) law.

    That's the entire point. It's not illegal, it has never been illegal, and anyone with basic common sense would interpret the law that way. Or at least get clarification from their ABC rep.

    At a certain point, the beer is simply more profitable than the glassware. There is no excuse.
  8. jtmartino

    jtmartino Savant (470) California Dec 11, 2010

    You don't need stickers. And there are only about a thousand ways to cheaply cover the existing logos on growlers.

    None of these excuses make sense. A brewery can simply mandate that the logo must be covered by the consumer prior to filling. Or they can use tape. Or paper. And they can use a sharpie, or tape a printed piece of paper to the growler with the beer info.

    Hell, a pre-printed piece of paper that can be taped around the outside of the growler would be simple, cheap solution. Or even a growler "sleeve" that can be re-used that has a clear plastic pocket for holding beer/brewery info.

    Many ways to handle this situation.
    Madirish76, jmgrub, Retsinis and 3 others like this.
  9. MacNCheese

    MacNCheese Initiate (0) California Dec 10, 2011

    To say you won't visit a brewery because they won't fill your milk jug is just dumb. Every brewery may have a different policy so get ready for it. Societe has already stated they will refuse to fill screwtop growlers. Does that mean you won't enjoy their beer in a hissy fit of entitlement? The law simply states they can, not that they must...fill anything a consumer brings in. Currently all the breweries are trying to wrap their collective heads around it. The Guild meeting is tonight so in the next few weeks there *might* be some clarification.

    But really, will it stop you from visiting the tasting room? I have enough growlers from most of the breweries that *if* they choose to only fill their own, I'm cool. I *want* to have my Societe/RC SS growlers filled everywhere because it means I can unload a ton of glass and keep 2 growlers in my car without fear of them shattering. Is my world going to end if PP refuses to fill them? Will I stop going to PP? FUCK NO.
  10. Exactly. If somebody comes in with another brewery's growler and they haven't covered up the logos, you can just tell them you won't fill it. If these rules are well established nobody has a right to get upset about being turned away. Come in with a plain growler (or covered growler) of a certain size with specified type (screw on or flip-top) and we will fill it. Or you can buy ours.
    jtmartino likes this.
  11. Your guess is incorrect.
  12. MacNCheese

    MacNCheese Initiate (0) California Dec 10, 2011

    Welcome to the story bro...the reason this whole thing has kicked off is that the ABC just issued a clarification of the law. The ABC isn't exactly what you'd call a streamlined well communicating government agency. Local enforcement guys have been saying 'if you fill another brewer's growler, you'll get fined/points'. No brewery is really willing to risk their license and they simply abide by what the local agents have been saying. Then the clarification.

    Now as a professional group they're going to try to sort things out. As I have said from the very very beginning, it will take a few weeks to sort some things out. I know you must be of the Bieber generation that has to have things Right Now or you'll throw a tantrum...but relax, have a beer and chill while things get sorted.

    The idea is if a majority of the breweries are on the same page, it'll cause less confusion. Some breweries will do their own thing. The different types of license will also come into play. Not all breweries are a Type 23 small manufacturer...that will play into this as well.
  13. You're the only person who mentioned the specific things you are arguing against. If someone doesn't want to support a brewery that won't fill a blank growler, I think that's fine by me.
  14. That's why I said "a reasonable growler fill policy" in my post, I'll clarify...

    If a brewery doesn't institute a policy that, at the very least, allows for- blank, 1 or 2 liter swingtops to be filled, I will be going elsewhere.
    They can attach a $0.03 hang tag, no stickers or label covering required. No water bottles or milk cartons.

    Blank, swingtop growlers.
  15. MacNCheese

    MacNCheese Initiate (0) California Dec 10, 2011

    I think it's fine too, asinine, but fine. I think it is, however, dumb to boycott a brewery because they have their own growler fill policy that is inline with their business plan of packaging beer.

    I find this entire thread hilarious over the fact the entitled demand an instanteous response from the breweries.
  16. MacNCheese

    MacNCheese Initiate (0) California Dec 10, 2011

    Fantastic, then I'll know which breweries won't be catering to the entitled whiney beerdorks and I can enjoy some quiet.
  17. Another strawman you're fighting against. Nobody said anything about instantaneous response as if they are marching on breweries demanding these things immediately.

    People support businesses that are inline with their consumer preferences. That doesn't seem asinine to me.
  18. The ironing is delicious.
  19. haha, you're ridiculous.
    jmgrub likes this.
  20. I find ironing to be quite delicious, too, especially when I have a growler full of beer.
    stupac2 likes this.
  21. I meant all his posts on BA - it's part of MacNCheese's shtick. Or real personality. At any rate, you simply were stating the obvious.
  22. MacNCheese

    MacNCheese Initiate (0) California Dec 10, 2011

    I've been called much much worse.
  23. jtmartino

    jtmartino Savant (470) California Dec 11, 2010

    I've been aware of the growler law and breweries' misinterpretation of it for a long time. I've been saying the same thing for years. I'm a minority stakeholder in this issue since I don't regularly purchase growlers.


    Bullshit. Did you just make this up?

    Breweries don't need to band together to figure this shit out. The same people who issue your license can answer your question about filling growlers, regardless of what other brewers are doing.

    You are making up excuses in support of breweries' slow response or lack of initiative on this issue, and I'm not sure why.
  24. MacNCheese

    MacNCheese Initiate (0) California Dec 10, 2011

    Midnight
    Shuffled sounds from the pavement
    Has the moon lost her memory
    The brewery is shuttered
    In the lamplight
    The rusted bottlecaps collect at my feet
    And the tickers begin to moan
    Memory, all alone in the moonlight
    I can dream of the old days
    Life was beautiful then
    I remember the time I knew what happiness was
    Let the memory live again
    Every beer faucet began to pour
    A fatalistic imperial stout
    Tickers mutter and the street lamp sputters
    Fucking tickers ruined it all...

    Daylight
    I must wait for the sunrise
    I must think of a new life and
    I mustn't give in
    When the dawn comes
    Growlers will be a memory
    And a new day will begin
    Labled growers of bygone days
    The stale ale smell of morning
    A beer lover's dream dies
    Another night is over
    Another line is cutting
    Touch me
    -Begs the beer dork-
    It is so easy to leave me
    All alone with the memory
    Of collected growlers
    If you'll touch me
    I'll understand what happiness is
    Until then, I have my beer to cry into....

    With my utmost apologies to Barry Manilow
  25. MacNCheese

    MacNCheese Initiate (0) California Dec 10, 2011

    You're awefully vocal for someone who doesn't care much.

    No, it's what I've been told from multiple breweries. It was the common understanding and they didn't want to rock the boat and attact more attention to themselves by making waves.

    And again, what you're bitching about is a completely moot point, the clarification has been done. Now the breweries are working through the guild to come up with a solution that causes the least amount of confusion. but since you don't care, why do you keep posting?

    I'm not making any excuses for anyone, this is the way it is.
  26. jtmartino

    jtmartino Savant (470) California Dec 11, 2010

    It's less about me being able to fill any growler and more spread of misinformation within the industry on both sides of the fence. I've talked to brewery employees, brewmasters, brewery owners and distributor reps about this issue in California. The fear of the ABC exists, but most of the time its misplaced or stems from a complete misunderstanding of the law. There's a huge number of industry people who have no idea what the growler law states, and are just under the impression that it's "illegal" to do anything differently than what they've done in the past.

    The ABC clarification may have been issued recently, but it didn't change anything in regards to the law. Breweries could've filled generic growlers the whole time, and there are no excuses for why they didn't other than ignorance or business practice. The ignorance may have stemmed from the brewery's side, or apparently from "local enforcement guys." For those where it was business practice, we as BAs are urging them to change their policy.
    flexabull and Beerandraiderfan like this.
  27. I really doubt we are urging much of anything by posting anonymously on Beer Advocate.
    MacNCheese likes this.
  28. Not to mention BAs who enable said ignorance by attempting to rationalize the inertia, while castigating others trying to overcome it.
    jtmartino likes this.
  29. And yet some big name brewers routinely respond to threads on beeradvocate. In fact, I see one here on page 5.

    Besides, you can't get anything done anonymously. . . right Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, New/Old Testament authors, Charles Dickens etc. . .
    jmgrub and jtmartino like this.
  30. It's alway seems to be the same few people in every thread, bitching, whining, complaining and arguing.

    Just an observation...carry on.
    albertq17 and DrtyBvrJuce like this.
  31. Which poster is that?

    I still think that anonymous posts don't accomplish nearly as much as going to your favorite tasting room(s) and saying "you guys are being douchebags with this growler policy".

    But honestly, I think MacNCheese may be having some local perspective you are not. I will guarantee you that if for whatever reason Alpine chose to make people use their growlers, it would not put a dent in their business. Probably the same for Societe at this point, even with their notoriously high growler prices (but they are high quality growlers :) ). Simply threatening to not go to a place because they don't change their policy might work for some of the less popular places, but they are going to be the ones that are more likely to change.

    In short, you need a better sales pitch than a threat.
  32. DrtyBvrJuce

    DrtyBvrJuce Initiate (0) California Jan 17, 2013

    This thread is highly entertaining. I plan to boycott any brewery that won't let me suck super frosh IPA's directly from the brite tank.
  33. jtmartino

    jtmartino Savant (470) California Dec 11, 2010

    PMR?

    And there are a shitload of other brewery/brewpub employees that are BAs. This point of this thread, and many others, is about the dissemination of information and (mostly) good discussion between members.

    You never know - perhaps a post will urge an employee (or a customer) to bring it up in conversation. Conversation leads to change.

    What doesn't help is all the bullshit in-between, and BAs being stupid. For the record, this is not about boycotting breweries or any of that stupid shit. It's about supporting breweries who take initiative and adopt policies in support of their customers.
  34. MacNCheese

    MacNCheese Initiate (0) California Dec 10, 2011

    So much drama. Not enough beer. Go untwist your panties and slam a few IRSes.
  35. evilc

    evilc Initiate (0) California Jan 27, 2012

    I would suggest going to Poor House or ECBS and spill beer on the floor and wait for the cleanup crew WOOOOOHOOO!!!
    Xul, tjensen3618 and Beerandraiderfan like this.
  36. --Your assumption that it is a singular poster is faulty.
    --Calling people douchebags isn't as persuasive as using logic and manners.
    --Local perspective? I was born in SD, lived there longer than anywhere else in my life, and I spend as many weekends there as I do where my home is in Nevada currently. Seems superfluous as we're discussing a state law, not a city or county ordinance.
    --Not going to address the undefined 'dent' in business, but I will engage anecdotally and say I filled a growler of Alpine last month, but not Societe. Societe was awesome, but if they are going to require me to use their expensive growler when I have an ample amount of other growlers and brewery options, well, I'll just continue to fill my growlers at Alpine, PP & Bruery when I'm in the area. But since I'll be in the area again next month (sorry SD, Nevada is the place to be during March Madness), I'm gonna see how Societe handles a blank growler request. Frankly, my last visit was so awesome (quality, customer service) I'd be surprised if they didn't continue to impress me, and fill a non Societe growler for me. If they refuse, that's fine and their right, but they'll be missing out on other beercationers in Nevada getting to taste how great they are.

    I mean seriously. . . just me: Societe only growlers: Zero.

    If they allowed other growlers, and fills of these beers, I'd buy 2 growlers of Pupil, 1 roustabout, 1 dandy, 1 O'Brien's Chinook, 1 Apprentice. . .

    A giant fan buying and sharing 6 growlers of beer and sharing 500+ miles away with many other beer aficianados = priceless for an upstart brewery.
  37. I didn't see anybody posting to this page that went by PMR. Maybe earlier in the thread. Pinkgrenade works for Stone.

    In my opinion, part of a useful discussion is to address the negative issues. They may have been brought up in his usual snarky fashion, but MacNCheese's points are valid.

    Besides, simply throwing out a threat not to go to a place probably isn't going to effect change. I could threaten not to go to Alesmith if they don't change their growler policy, but they know damned well that I would be on Brown Tickets clicking away the next time they did a special release, and if not me it would be somebody else.

    I dunno - some reasonable people might think the boycott threat qualifies as "BAs being stupid" [wink emoticon left out because I think it looks strange]
  38. Relax man, just because you're on the internet doesn't mean you should go all 13 year old on us.
  39. MacNCheese

    MacNCheese Initiate (0) California Dec 10, 2011

    As of Saturday, you'd only get 3 growlers anyway...just don't ask them to fill a screw top.

    My words have been completely twisted so I'll say it again one more time: the brewers were waiting for their Guild to get together tonight, to hash out a uniformed response/solution. The decision isn't binding but a 'group faith' effort, and individual breweries may address this clarification in the law as they see fit and as it best aligns with their business philosophy.
  40. jtmartino

    jtmartino Savant (470) California Dec 11, 2010

    PMR commented earlier in the thread. Big post page #2.


    I agree, but Mac has a talent of doing so in a complete asshole fashion. It's a gift.

    You are addressing a single comment from a single individual in a long thread. As I stated before, my comments are "not about boycotting breweries or any of that stupid shit." Tjensen can do whatever he wants. I won't boycott breweries for not accepting generic growlers but I will talk to them about it.

    Boycotting won't effect change, but discussion will.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page