Beers and Breweries with Bad Looking Labels

Mother Earth (NC) and Port City (VA)

 

As a retailer, I'm more frequently bothered by inconsistent branding than anything else -- consumers should be able to figure out pretty quickly who brewed the beer they're looking at, even if it's a special release or "reserve" line. Laurelwood (Portland) has issues with this, and at my store, it seems to affect their sales.

Having said that, I'm not a fan of cartoonish or childish labels, and no matter what I say (or write on a shelf talker) about certain breweries' beers, they don't sell. Big Al is a good example from Seattle (okay beer, terrible labels), and from Portland, we have Gigantic (great beer, cartoonish labels). I'm not judging the artistic virtues of Gigantic's labels, just saying non-BA types can't figure them out and consequentially, they don't sell.

By contrast, some breweries (such as Epic Ales) have such simple, homemade-looking labels that they are, for some reason, eye-catching, and just about sell themselves, despite Epic Ales' beers not being all that approachable.

\

 

I may get some flack for this, but Jester King weirds me out.

 

I think they still have that at some minimum security detention facilities.

 

As much as I love the brews, I have to say Central Waters. Old and new labels. However, as long as they spend more on the production rather than marketing, I'm content. They continue to impress me over and over again. And if one wants to see some bad labels, check out Flat Earth.

 

Nothing wrong with the classic Budweiser label.
Most breweries would KILL to have a can that iconic.

 

I love Three Floyd's beer and there label. Pliny is a GREAT beer but there label in my opinion could up an update!

Cheers!

 

I was trying to think of this one forever today and actually saw it at the supermarket tonight, which jogged my memory...



Scotch de Silly - Brassserie de Silly

 

Sure, label designs have some impact but in the end they're never going be deal breakers. Nor are they any indication of beer quality.Just as long as they have all the relevant info (name, contents measurement, ABV , BBD & maybe style) then I'm happy. The more people get hung up on this the more we become victims of marketing.

 

I dunno, the old ones (at least for the barrel aged releases) strike a weird chord for me, so to speak. I guess for me I mostly dug the fact that you could tell this stuff is coming from the middle of nowhere.

 

Sierra Nevada Extra IPA Torpedo

 

Surprised Abita hasn't been mentioned. Purple Haze has one of the ugliest labels I can think of.

 

DFH. Cool, writing...

 

No problem.

 

Horseheads brewing in NY. All their labels are bad. They look like they were designed with MS Paint. The beer is pretty good though.

 

Thanks! I'll look in their gift shop. I'll bet I won't find 21st Amendment "Live Free or Die" there, though.

 

Even after the change?

 

Being aware of and having personal taste when it comes to labels doesn't automatically make one a victim of marketing.

I have a feeling that most BAs aren't going to refuse to drink a good beer because it has a terrible label, nor are they going to drink a crappy beer because it has a sweet label. The Plinys are a pretty good example of the former, and personally I think most BMC beers are a good example of the latter.

That doesn't mean it's not an interesting discussion, and if it really bothers you, you're welcome to recuse yourself from said discussion.

 

De Molen - when I pay $10 for a beer, I don't want the label to look like a generic can of corn. I do like how they list their ingredients and specs.

 

I kinda dig that.