How Do They Price Bombers?

I fully agree with your premise. If not a luxury item, craft beer is at least highly discretionary. And there is certainly more compaining about it here than there should be.

 

agree but as you see i noted that the 750 ml are not true bombers, also as you see in my post,$14 is not worth the cost of the extra 24 oz. this is just one exsample. Most brewerys do not give you the option to decide on the size of preferance . The only other brewerys that comes to mind is Green Flash , and Samuel Smiths foir a choice of to be or not to be a bomber. that is the true question

 

It seems you are a bit rankled that folks feel the need to wonder about this, and reply with something as obvious as prices being set by the market, and people's willingness or unwillingness to pay, but in doing so you miss the key point, which is why beer always has been more per ounce in bombers.

In my time here I have seen breweries chime in when these threads come up occasionally, as they do, with the most bogus reasons. Changing the bottling line is expensive, labels for bombers are more expensive, the bottles themselves are more expensive, all a load of crap. If anything, four and six packs should be more expensive because they require additional packaging and an additional step to put it into the packaging.

The question is legitimate, despite your misplaced economics lesson that does nothing to end the mystery. It only answers why bombers are still more expensive.

 

For sure you clarified quite a bit in that second post and clearly do understand. :-)

 

Basically @dennis3951 has the answer here: "They "get away with it" because BA's are willing to pay it."

Permit me to broaden the statement to: They "get away with it" because beer consumers are willing to pay it.

And that is indeed the fundamental problem: beer consumers are willing to pay it.

Some people are wise shoppers and consider the price per ounce before making a purchase. Then there are the other shoppers.

Cheers!

 

OK - I'll break it down a bit more, again - bombers cost what they cost because people are willing to pay it. Cannot get much more simple than that. If there was nobody willing to buy them for the price offered, the prices would either deflate or the product size would fall out of favor with breweries that didn't lower price.

 

Im with ya but are we talking apples to apples ? the same beer ??

 

They are not bogus but they also do not tell the whole story. If your brewing operation is set up to run the majority of your beers through a 12 oz bottling line, it does cost extra to reset the line to handle 22 oz bottles and the entire packaging system changes from a highly automated to a partially automated process that does require additional labor, etc. Then the line has to be reset for the 12oz format again so there are two periods of down time on bottling that can not be used for bottling.

The critical part of the story they tend to leave out (probably so they won't be pointing fingers) is that described in one of my earlier posts above. The beer consumers want to buy them, the retailers want to sell them to satisify demand, thirst for greater variety in limited shelf space and so the distributors, who are under pressure from the retailers who are under pressure from the consumers, put pressure on the breweries who want to preserve existing markets and maybe even move into new markets. (See post #16 on page 1)

 

I noticed the pricing anomaly in my pre-craft days with Duvel, the 4 pack of 11.2 ounce bottles was a better value than the 25 ounce. I figured it was due to retail markup, at least in part. I assume the retailer wants/needs to make a minimum amount of $$ on each alcohol sale. Maybe the same is true for the brewery as well. It's the economy of scale, just like a 24 pack costs less per unit than a six pack.

 

I love your contribution to the forums on BA and I must admit that watching your participation in the threads helped encourage me to become more active. However, this particular sentiment is one on which you and I do not see eye-to-eye.

Maybe if we were talking about milk, where all ounces are created equal, then I would agree that a consumer who considers price per ounce would be wise.

But we're talking about beer--not all ounces of beer are created equal. If they were, then we'd all be buying Pabst because the price per ounce is outstanding. While it's reasonable to consider price per ounce when comparing similar beer (or especially when talking about a beer that comes in both 750/bomber as well as packaged 12 oz containers--Sculpin comes to mind), a lot of times, the beers being offered in 750/bombers only come in that format. So the choice isn't as simple as "which is the cheapest beer per ounce?"

Now, if some consumers want to avoid large format bottles on principle and are okay with missing out on some beers as a result, then I say go for it. No one should be purchasing anything they don't want to, and I'd rather see people simply not purchase those larger format bottles instead of buying them and then spending time on BA complaining about how brewers are gouging them.

But I object to the notion that if you aren't making purchase decisions based on price per ounce, you aren't a wise consumer.

 

“However, this particular sentiment is one on which you and I do not see eye-to-eye.” It would be unrealistic of me to expect that you and I will “see eye-to-eye” on every topic.

“But we're talking about beer--not all ounces of beer are created equal.” Well, the value of an ounce of beer is subjective. For example, I am personally not a fan of Hopslam. That beer commands a high price point per ounce even when bottled in 12 ounce bottles. You may have no compunction paying the high price per ounce for Hopslam but I certainly won’t.

“If they were, then we'd all be buying Pabst because the price per ounce is outstanding. While it's reasonable to consider price per ounce when comparing similar beer (or especially when talking about a beer that comes in both 750/bomber as well as packaged 12 oz containers), a lot of times, the beers being offered in 750/bombers only come in that format. So the choice isn't as simple as "which is the cheapest beer per ounce?" In this instance I am a supporter of Jesse (@Providence) where it would be a good idea for beer consumers to band together and ‘encourage’ breweries to not solely package in large format bottles but provide their beers in small format (e.g., 12 ounce bottles/cans). As a group of consumers we can indeed influence things for the better.

“Now, if some consumers want to avoid large format bottles on principle and are okay with missing out on some beers as a result, then I say go for it. No one should be purchasing anything they don't want to, and I personally would like to see more people simply not purchase those larger format bottles instead of buying them and then spending time on BA complaining about how brewers are gouging them.” I suppose that you look unkindly on folks who do both things: refuse to purchase beer in large formats and also make statements on forums like BA about the prices of large format beers? Again, I am a supporter of Jesse’s movement to provide ‘input’ to breweries on this topic. One way to make Jesse’s movement a success is to discuss this matter and hopefully get others involved. I am guessing that you are a “No” as regards to being a member of Jesse’s movement?

“But I object to the notion that if you aren't making purchase decisions based on price per ounce, you aren't a wise consumer.” Duly noted. This is artifact of “you and I do not see eye-to-eye” on this matter.

Cheers!

 

How and why was the decision first made to price bombers more than their smaller size brothers that need additional packaging, and an additional step to fill the additional packaging? Can't get much more simple than that.

 

Didn't want to get too complicated but here's the math on it.

1984 ounces in a bbl. This gives you roughly 27 sixers that you may charge say....$12 for = $330

1984 ounces in a bbl. This gives you roughly 90 bombers that you may charge say.....$8 for = $720

Bean counters world wide see awesome margin for less packaging. Now THAT'S simple. Do not reward their behaviour.

Bottom line is easy, they are looking for ways to increase their profits, which I do not have a problem with but that does not mean I have to buy it.

 

You are a wise person!

Cheers!

 

I think there should be a slight markup for bombers because it does give you the option to try a beer without committing to a 6-pack, but the way I look at it is this.

a 6-pack of Sculpin is $15.
At the SAME shop, a bomber is $9

Doing the math, you're paying around 21 cents an ounce for the 6er and 41 cents an ounce for the bomber. at 6-pack cost, a bomber would be just over $4.50 which obviously isn't going to happen. But I think if bombers were more around $5.99 it would be fair.

Of course as people have said, some bombers at $15 fly off the shelf, so why would companies go cheaper for no reason at all

 

Surely you are not suggesting it is a scam? (Why are there no sarcasm emoticons?) Haha turns out we are in agreement after all. Cheers!

And as far as what @LambicPentameter said about the difference between what beers are offered in bombers being compared accurately to what is available in small bottle format, I always convert it to what the equivalent 6 pak of 12 oz. would cost. I suggest to anyone who hasn't done this, try it, your eyes will open wide when you see some of the bombers of things like IIPA at bomber prices might be 25.00 - 30.00 a six of 12 oz.ers at equivalent price per ounce.

 

I wouldn't say I was told wrong. It's just what I was told. The person who told me was the packaging director who ordered the bottles and knew what they were paying for them. To this day, I'll never forget thinking that was a ridiculous price to pay.

Why they may have paid that much when there are better deals, I couldn't say. I do remember there being an issue with us being short on bottles for a special release they were doing and, with the release date rapidly approaching, having to use some green bottles as well. Maybe that $2.50 factored in a rush overnight shipping charge or something for the amber ones we did use. Who knows? Can't quite recall any further details beyond that price quote.