Your thoughts on Alpine's decision?

It's funny that the brewer blames this on people who drove down from Los Angeles.

If he were a Boston brewer he'd no doubt blame it on the New York Yankees.

Tempest in a dorkcup.

 

Nothing is being taken away from the local community!

From downtown SD to Stone: 32.3mi
From downtown SD to Alpine: 28.6mi

People like to bitch that Alpine is "Way" out there, but it's closer than Stone and people will travel there for mediocre beer and frou-frou food.

 

I love the fact that this brewer is taking a stand. Craft brewing as an industry seems to be contracting and increasingly focused on regional (even local) availability, whilst certain consumers purely want to profit from it. As for the illegality issue... well, beer was once illegal, so I don't quite buy into that one.

 

Honest question here, why are people bringing up things that were not legal in the past? Someone brought up the fact that women could not vote in the past. How is this relevant? As the laws stand now, if you do not have a license you cannot legally sell beer. Selling beer on ebay is illegal, that is a fact.

 

I see what you mean and not doing growler fills would probably make running the place even easier (aside from dealing with complaints) but I'm sure they're making much more money on the fills than by the keg per sale.

 

I do not think trading beer is illegal, but I did not stay a Holiday express last night either, but barter and trade are legal in most states.

 

I wouldn't call that assessment true. What if they are there and decide to buy more pints of beer because they are there? Perhaps purchase more bottles to go? If they were home with the growler, and wanted to get more beer after being a few pints deep, they couldn't.

 

I took a bit of offense to this, being from LA. It's as if he thinks everyone from here is a douchebag trying to make a buck. Coulda been from anywhere, just happened to be an Angeleno.

 

I think it's his beer, he can do as he pleases. If people want it they will travel. I think the traveling is half the fun. I know I don't mind a trip to SD.

 

What if they were under a time constraint or have to drive (some of the best reasons for growlers to go in the first place)?
That service will no longer be provided and that's basically what I'm saying isn't good for Alpine to stop offering.

 

Now you are just reaching for any tiny little point to make.

If you are in a time constraint and have to drive, then too bad. If you can't go to the brewery to drink the beer, then just learn to accept you can't have any. I don't think Alpine will have a problem selling out.

 

Then they shouldn't go to Alpine.
Guys like me will be there on the weekend to enjoy the pub, food, any camping or hiking in the hills around the brewery, I'd also stop in for a pint or two.

 

You are right they probably are making more money on fills because there are less people drinking their beer at an outside bar than at their brewery/brewpub. Not many places get Alpine on tap around SD county.

 

I bring it up because I truly doubt that the illegality of the act is what continues to drive this discussion. The access that technology (and the legal collectibility loopholes used by eBay and their buyers/sellers) equates to a loss of control. Maddening without a doubt, but the legality/licensing stand seems tenuous. It is the only the legality/eBay portion of the original post that seems even vaguely tantrum-like to me. As I said before, I like local beer, and I applaud the bold choice to eliminate growlers and bottles, even if that means I may never get to sample Alpine's products. I just view it as more incentive to save up for some of these brewery road/bicycle trips I keep dreaming up.

Now, who wants to trade for some Peruvian Morning? Thpft!

 

I think you touched on why I consider this a tantrum....you're right, locals will be served and obviously that's his goal. But if I'm running a business, national exposure is good. My beer selling for some ridiculous amount over retail on ebay builds hype and turns my brewpub into a destination when out-of-towners are in SoCal. Taking your ball and saying "screw you guys, this is just for the locals" makes me wonder why he didn't just continue to brew from his basement or garage instead of opening a business.

I think that this has a whole lot less to do with "keeping it local" than it does "these guys are stealing money out of my pocket".

 

I'm pretty sure they're don't care about the National scene. They don't brew on that scale for it, it's a family run business and they intend to keep it that way. People who want Alpine will find it on tap in SD or drive to Alpine to get it. It's not that far out, it's closer than Stone is from downtown. People will drive to Stone without thinking about it, but Alpine is just percieved to be further out. ~1,500bbl annual production is TINY. It's rated very well and sells very fast. They're not hurting their business plan.

 

I think brewing good beer and high reviews on sites such as this will also build hype even more. The idea that ebay is going to bring positive attention is ridiculous.

Alpine, like many other people here, do not agree with what is viewed as a blatant act of profiteering that takes place on ebay. He has is money, no one is stealing it out of his pocket and I am pretty sure he know it. I believe he feels disrespected that people are treating his beer as a commodity and taking it out of the hands of those he intended it to be in.

 

I think he does not like ebay. He has also said many times he does not like ebay. Does he want to keep Alpine local? Yes.

He and Alpine are also trying to expand. Meaning he is trying to build a bigger and better brewery down the road. Meaning he does want to make money.

 

I can respect a brewer wanting to keep the integrity of their beers and not expanding. However, the idea of opening a brewery is to sell to the public. If they don't want to sell their beer and only give/sell it to their friends they should have never opened a brewery. I personally don't buy and sell beers to make a profit but once it's purchased you should be able to do whatever you want to with it. As a homebrewer I track down beers so I can get ideas for beers that I'd like to make and I'm perfectly okay with paying a small mark up.

I think people make this too complicated. A brewery is opened to sell beer to the public. You made a good beer and people really want it... Good Job

 

I've been thinking about this a bit, and would like somebody to tell me if I'm missing something important or just dead wrong for some reason:

Point 1: Selling beer on Ebay is not unethical. One can view the Ebay seller as someone who is exploiting demand to make profit off a product he didn't make. But in essence, Ebay sellers are like mini-distributors, shipping beer to a market that cannot be reached by the brewer/its distributor. This is a legitimate service, and people who provide legitimate service should make a profit. The question of legality is another issue (the issue of verifying if the buyer is 21). Many would say that this shouldn't be a concern of the government or that such a measure is ineffective at achieving the desired outcome assumed by the law. Either way, ethically it seems the Ebay seller is doing something legitimate, as long as there is demand for it in out-of-distribution markets.

Point 2: While the practice of Ebay selling is not unethical qua the service it provides, it can be viewed as detrimental from the point of view of the brewer. This is not because they are making illegitimate money off the beer (the brewer has been paid the price he demanded, and the Ebay seller is providing a service), but because the brewer cannot ensure the quality of the beer being shipped, and the buyers could receive bad beer, giving the impression that the brewer, rather than the seller, messed up. One can say that sellers that ship bad beer would soon lose their market, as they will gain a reputation as a bad seller, but this might not work in all cases. So then we can view this fact of the Ebay seller's detriment to the brewer in terms of consumer perception as either 1. unfortunate or 2. unethical. Either way, the brewer is justified in pulling the format being sold on Ebay, because he is being harmed under both interpretations.

Conclusion: Treating the Ebay selling by itself, we cannot say that it's unethical. We might be able to say it's unethical because it causes harm to the brewer, depending on whether or not we find the possibility of ruining the buyer's perception of the beer a violation of the brewer's moral rights. If we find that it is such a violation, it is unethical, and the brewer is justified in pulling growlers. If we find it isn't unethical, but rather merely an unfortunate risk, the brewer is still justified in attempting to avoid such a risk.