Beat still at RR

Off-topic, I know. Sorry, it just seems like a lot of BA's have been defending high prices in the bottle shops in recent threads but then attacking exorbitant trade offers. Seems contradictory to me.

 

First, I don't think that the SAME BA's are actually making those arguments.

Second, why is that inconsistent? It's perfectly consistent to say that beer is systematically underpriced and that beers are being "ransomed" (or whatever). The first is all about the MSRP, but the second is a bunch of relative factors. If beers are systematically underpriced, then odds are pretty good they're similarly underpriced. So even if you think Beat or King Henry should have sold for twice as much, they should still trade 1:1. So someone asking for more is, by that definition, asking for too much.

You can quibble about certain things in there, but I think it's pretty straightforward that those two positions aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

(Not that anyone necessarily cares, but my position is that beer is systematically underpriced in general, but that some of the big names being stupid about releases is compounding the problem. That Beatification has lasted this long at the brewery and been so smooth for locals to get is a testament to the inanity of the GI/Founders model of release. I also don't really give two shits about what people ask for their beer, though I find obvious attempts to inflate a beer's perceived value annoying. That said, the latter isn't particularly common.)

 

I think everyone should be ecstatic about the amount that was released. The bottom line is that it's an amazing beer (instead of a hyped mediocre beer), and this batch is fantastic! I only wish I had more for myself lol, mine are going straight to folks who have unselfishly traded their gems to me in the past!

I understand the frustration about people asking too much for this beer, but because of the amount released that means more chances of finding reasonable traders as well. Actually I've seen quite a lot of people sharing the wealth rather than ransoming, which is quite refreshing.

 

Best thing I gained from this entire discussion.

 

I wouldn't doubt that it is because a lot of people arguing about that is just arguing the semantics of it. I think we all now by now from those people if we didn't before that you can't gouge anyone on something that isn't an essential good. We also all know what people mean by price gouging by now isn't the actual definition of gouging...yet people continue to argue semantics on this, its a beer forum, not a legal document

 

Ok what the hell do you mean by difference of opinion? I think most BAs will agree with me that the norm is that nothing is locked in or finalized until you exchange a conversation stating ok so the trade is these beers on my end for these beers on your end and the other person replies in agreement. Any discussing before this happens, even if it looks like it will be a locked in trade is not one. I would never bitch about someone not trading me their beer when it wasn't locked in by the standards I described above. Even if it was locked in and they backed out, I'd just move on and never trade with them again.

Clear communication is key and a lot of people on here from what I've seen don't wanna be mean and tell you no, so when you propose something and they say yea sure or yea maybe, that doesn't constitute a locked in trade agreement. But if you ask me those people should just grow some balls and say sorry not interested and avoid the confusion. Being clear avoids a lot of butt hurt issues.

I always make sure the other person is on the same page as me so that if I read the conversation to someone else they wouldn't be confused about anything.

 

O and also usually you exchange info after, if the other person doesn't send me their shipping info I don't consider it locked in either...

 

Beatification is still here. I'm drinking my second one in the last couple hours in honor of Russian River's 8th anniversary. I even mixed a little fresh supplication in the last 1/4 or so of my Beatification at the brewery earlier to make a delicious blend. Hope it lasts for another couple weeks so I can keep getting cold ones at the brewery. On a side note, I think the enamel on my teeth are starting to come off or at least it sure feels like it right now.

 

You are about 15 mins from the brewery...I think I would have spent several hundred dollars this week if it were me.

 

So where's that Cantillon keg at?

 

Still waiting to become friends with the Shelton Bros I guess. In the mean time at least these showed up today

 

Ecstatic is right. Try to find a crazy release where a SoCal trader could get six bottles of a Founders release or a Bourbon County variant. I'm in the Midwest and because of the six bottle limit, I have an allocation coming my way. Vinnie nailed it. God I love that beer!

 

How much does Beatification cost per bottle at the brewery

 

$15

 

This assumes that these breweries all have the same desired outcome.

 

Man, can you edit your post so it doesn't look like I said that? Thanks.

Anyway, if you're actually saying that Founders would rather have a clusterfuck of a release that makes pretty much everyone involved butthurt versus a smooth release that increases the goodwill felt by locals toward the brewery then that's fine. I just very sincerely doubt it.

 

I don't think that's what he said at all. I interpreted as Founders and Russian River just have very different business models. Russian River obviously wants to make sure all of their locals are taken care of, and they have proven this over time with pulling back their distro and trying to keep as much of their beer in Cali as they can. They don't seem very concerned with expanding to new markets so much as fully supplying their existing distro. Founders, on the other hand, continues to grow and explore new markets, running more of a business-like brewery based on growth. Have they gotten a little ahead of themselves as far as being able to keep up with production? Probably. But I'm curious to see if that changes with the new, larger brewing system.

 

Fixed it.

You seem to be saying that "...Founders would rather have a clusterfuck of a release that makes pretty much everyone involved butthurt versus a smooth release that increases the goodwill felt by locals toward the brewery...."
That is your assumption, not mine, about Founder's intentions. I would suppose that Founder's would like to please locals as well as those in the different markets they distribute to. They are a regional brewery, so they serve their region. RR is happy to serve only their local market with this release and has a few accounts in very select other markets. These are different business models. They don't really compare.

I think they all want to please their customers. However, some customers can't be pleased.

I am echoing Mark.

 

I'm not making any assumptions about their intentions other than that pissing off customers is bad. Is that REALLY an unreasonable assumption? Did you two even read the KBS release threads? Can you honestly tell me that you think the way Founders handled KBS this year is superior in any possible way to the way RR handled beat?

 

Let me follow-up just to say that many companies are being faulted for distributing or for not distributing certain beers. There is always a party that feels injury.