Wolves & People

it's crowd-funding. it's not investing. both can be rewarding, and hell, you're right, they even sound similar in principle. but we don't have to call them the same thing.

 

All I'm saying is there's enough similarity in concept that to use the word is far from appalling. And crowd-funding and investing are not mutually exclusive; the universe of micro-finance incorporates a bunch of different models ... some are charitable contributions, some look a lot like commerce (e.g. Stone's beer sales on indiegogo), some look like investing, and some have a leg in multiple camps. Google "crowdfunding investments" and see how many results you get. Though some draw a line around receiving equity to call it 'investing' it's not consistent. Wikipedia points to 3 types of crowdfunding: rewards based, equity based, and credit based. Yes, this is reward based ... but if the reward is a potentially appreciating asset?

That @Snowshoes focuses on the "investment" angle explains the difference in his take. You don't have to call a half full glass the same thing as a half empty glass, but that doesn't make calling it half full wrong or appalling. ;-)

Aiight - I'll bow out now before my love of semantic hair-splitting gets even more tiresome!

 

Yeah...same reason I withdrew and turned off notifications. I only came back because you @snowshoe'd me. lol Cheers.

 

i hear you, and it's just semantics and beer... and unless there's a beer in front of me it's really a boring topic. but these guys found a clever way to sell bottles of beer for ~$30 a pop, and nobody has even had them! you can call it a lot of things, but i can't help but think of other quality breweries that have been around for ages with beers out there at the same price-point. people cry foul at cascade's pricing scheme, people cry foul at the bruery and 3F for having contamination issues, and if it was HOTD people would say "well, are there bubbles?". But for wolves & people, it's an investment? just seems like they've manufactured a creative way to increase the price of their product, and good for them because we all know that it's not an easy business to make money in. maybe appalling is the wrong word, but it all just seems off to me. it seems a lot more like donating - feel happy that you supported something worthy. and i respect that.

that said, anyone who feels like empirically proving me wrong, i can PM you my address when the bottles get released

 

This is a kickstarter. I'm investing money in them being able to get things going over there. In return, they're giving me product. Whether or not the product is any good, will help me determine what kind of investment I made. The quality of the product and the subsequent enjoyment or lack thereof that I get from it, that's my ROI. And I don't look at this any differently that when I've signed up for other clubs. Any of the things you mention the other breweries have had issues with, are all risks you incur when you put up your money. All investments have risks and rewards. If I were donating, I wouldn't be getting anything in return. I donate to the Humane Society. How about we do this...how about we call it a partial donation, and a partial purchase. Sound better? I'm paying for my product in advance, and in exchange for the privilege of securing my product early, I've also agreed to pay money above and beyond the cost of the product as a donation towards capital improvements at the brewery. If that's what I'm doing...I still don't have a problem with it...and can't understand why anyone else would either.

 

I guess for me...more than anything...I do it because the only thing better than good beer...is more good beer. The more such breweries that come to be...the better off we all are. We win.

 

yeah, and i've stated a couple times, that's awesome and i respect that. maybe the simplest way to put it is the math just doesn't work out for me. $350 is pretty close to what i spend on bottles in a given year, and i like to spread that out over multiple breweries, styles, and bottle sizes.

 

I doubt the people crying foul on those other breweries are the ones rushing to sign up for invest in W&P's club.

 

I just want to try the beer, so they need to do a tasting or bring it to an event. Then we can talk about the beer not speculate if it's good or not.

 

I can completely understand where you're coming from if that's the case.

 

Wolves have a well established brewer in Keeper. Remember, he came from Jester King and Atrial was his baby. I'll be up there next year and hope to try some more of his beers. Very jealous of the breweries y'all have up there in your neck of the woods.

 

Just as a LOL, from a thread about a magnetic strip from which to hang your beers: "Kickstarter, the new As Seen On TV."

Credit to @robear .

 

The best crowd-funding project I've ever seen a brewery run was for Modern Times in SD. They did include some beer incentives (including membership in a special growler club) but didn't promise bottles @ hugely inflated prices like we're seeing here. Mostly it was swag (very well designed swag) that greatly appealed to local beer folks as well as high-end rewards including brew-days, recipe designs, etc. I believe it was set up to be just a piece of the financial puzzle for Modern Times- they were a smartly planned business and I don't think their success hinged on Kickstarter, but I do think it made a huge difference PR & Marketing-wise. Maybe breweries like W&P are trying to cash in on that success.

Any brewery that asks for money before you taste a drop of beer is taking a big risk. For Modern Times, that risk paid off.

 

They do have swag and "high-end" rewards as well - the $500 event, the $750 "barrel", etc.

Interestingly, though, pretty much all of the money has come from the society. I say "interesting" since you can get 12 bottles for $300 as well, $50 less but without the glassware and discount, and no one has gone that route. Perhaps they're skeptical that it's a brewers selection of bottles ...

 

Not sure I get this. Let's say the brewery did things the way you prefer - "special club only events, special glassware, plenty of swag, discounts on food and beer", etc. How would that be better if the brewery doesn't turn out "something pretty special and desirable?" You have special glassware and discounts from a brewery making mediocre beer?

Obviously, the ONLY reason to participate in the W&P crowd funding is that you speculate that there are acceptable odds for you that they will make something pretty special. What those odds are - 25% chance, 75% chance - are sort of up to each individual to determine and then figure out if that works with their financial situation. But everything they say is based on the premise that they aim to be world class. Maybe they'll fail. But I can't see any reason why you'd participate in this if you thought they'd simply be run of the mill and not in the company, at some point, with the premium products of the De Garde's / Block 15s / Ale Apothecary's. If they succeed in that, sending them some start up money and getting a bunch of beer back seems cool (to me and my odds-making & financial situation). If they succeed and I was sitting around with a T-Shirt, a hat, and a discount I'd feel like "man ... I wish I had some beer." And if they failed I'd think "why the hell do I have a T-Shirt and hat from this meciocre brewery?"

 

I keep thinking the average person sees this as "12 bottles for $350" and not "$12 bottles for...whatever...and money to, you know, actually help get this place fully up and running."

If you just equate money spent to number of bottles...and ignore that the chief purpose of them collecting money off of you is to help fund a fledgling operation, then perhaps yes, you're not going to find as much value in the bottles. The fact that the future cost of the membership drops to $315 for people that renew after the inaugural run shows a nice dip in costs.

Guess I'd be curious to know what people would have preferred for their $350 from a brand new brewery that's fundraising its endeavor. You know...on top of this and the other options that were made available. Seriously...not trying to incite, just curious as to what this place would have had to offer for $350 that they didn't already, before people found value. Just looking for opinions.

 

I'll happily donate $10-20 to a project that I feel has a chance at succeeding. But I'm not going to throw hundreds of dollars at it, even if I get some beer (or whatever else) in return.

I'll happily buy good beer at a fair price. But I won't promise hard earned dollars for future beer at a premium price. Not even to Stone.

 

And happy hour pricing during all hours of operations.

That's cool. At $10-$20 per person, all they'd need is 6000-7000 people to hit their goal. lol There's nothing at all wrong with you being adverse to risking/investing/gambling your money on a new brewery for nothing more than the opportunity to receive some potentially great beer both now in the future. And likewise, there's nothing wrong with those who aren't adverse to it, doing so.

It's obvious that the people who populate this website represent the most enthusiastic individuals on the face of God's green earth where beer is concerned. Christ. Many of us have spent hundreds to thousands of dollars just trading beer...or traveling for it...or attending releases and festivals...all in part on speculation that something we'll really enjoy is on the other end of our expenditures.

Really...this is just one more thing. The method of getting our drink on may be different...but it's just one more thing. I have no doubt that going forward, there will be brand new ways for us to remove money from pocket and put beer in face that'll stir up conversation similar to this.