Refunds for 2015 Regular BCBS and 2015 Prop

One would say they have do something about it before their goose is cooked

 

How so? I and a couple others posted on their tap lineup that they're clearly selling the contaminated BW under a different name, but they're just ignoring it.

 

I posted comments on two of their posts which they ignored. Then I just posted directly to the page asking if they were going to do refunds and they responded with a comment mentioning having read my "numerous comments across all their facebook posts" and then they deleted my post and comments an hour later

 

Drinking a 10/17/16 , taste is awfully tart oh wait.....

 

Keep in mind any Business isn't going to let negative Social media fly, from the local donuts shop to goliath's like AB-Inbev. They made right with Coffee and BW. We should all wait on setting Fulton ablaze using Jared Jankowski Neckbeard as kindle. Simply give them time to get their ducks in a row. Testing many batches of BCBS is a much larger task then testing the much smaller BW and Coffee.

 

It seems the increased attention to the BCBS issue is getting through to GI, as evidenced in their Instagram replies. The term "an unprecedented situation" indicates they may be re-assessing the scope of the issue.

I've copy and pasted their response from their latest post below...

• dabzncheeseOk so you know all the regulars are infected too @gooseisland I'll leave it be now just SUPER BUMMED as I'm sure anyone who loved your beer was.@gooseisland
• gooseisland@dabzncheese if you think we are not also super bummed releasing a beer that does not meet our high standards, then you are sadly mistaken. We are looking into an unprecedented situation and really appreciate patience and understanding, friend. Thanks.
  

 

Patience and questionable beer. I've got both. There must be some interesting board room conversations taking place about this. I wonder if, in the future, some beer reviews will be noted as the brew being "10/21".

 

Or simply a "2015".

 

this is really still going on. Drink them or age them. its a dice roll. End of story

 

Am I taking crazy pills?!


I think some of you are really trying to find off flavors and reporting back with some "inconsistency" and "possible infection" when there is none. Because that is what you are going to find when you are specifically drinking the beer thinking "alright... any unwelcome or unexpected flavor is infection... or any flavor at all I don't remember last time."

Besides, everybody here is reporting back that their bottles are good. Can we just shut this thread down already?

 

THANK YOU!!! THATS IS WHY G.I. ISNT RESPONDING TO ANY OF YOU LOL!!!!!!!

 

Sorry, but I know of people tracking pH levels in regular and they're going down. One registered at 3.9 already.

 

They are though. Just five posts up.

 

Why are there always people in these threads who deny infection claims, especially when it's so widespread? For one, GI already admitted issues with BW and Coffee from 2015, so it makes perfect sense that this could extend to other variants. But also, it shows a complete lack of understanding how infection can work. Infection doesn't always uniformly impact every beer at the same time - other factors come into play, mainly storage method. That's why some people can report fine beer and others report off flavors.

And did you read this entire thread? Not all of them are mere "inconsistencies" or "possible infection" - other descriptions include "spritzy cherry," "sour cherry," "metallic," and "very unpleasant." None of those descriptors are slight deviations the regular BCBS flavor profile and, in fact, are all consistent with what infected BW and Coffee tasted like (in my experience).

In sum, yes it appears you're taking crazy pills.

 

it's tempting to make jokes that you're the one that opened up with the crazy pills question that sounded like maybe a joke... then said something that sounds like you might not be kidding or being funny at all. seriously. the bold portion is at best a terrible exaggeration.

 

If nothing else, this thread seems worth it for tracking GI's eventual response to the issue. Just today, I've learned on this very page that it seems like GI is actually acknowledging the issue now. I'm not sure everybody *needs* to post their results every day anymore, but whatever. It's interesting to see how widespread the issue, to me.

 

Normally, I would think that @raynmoon just poorly explained confirmation bias. I'm sure that you could attribute some of the borderline issues to that. With everyone looking for something in the beer now, it's bound to happen. I don't disagree with anyone who says there is a problem with BCBS, but just the same, there are some with fine bottles who have misinterpreted what they tasted due to that bias.

However, I agree with you completely, Berto. The ones who vehemently deny any possibility of infection/off-flavors in the face of continually mounting anecdotal evidence come across as fools or shills.

 

Ok good. I thought I was taking crazy pills.

And I honestly don't read every single post in a thread this large. I don't think anybody does.

Also, in terms of sensory evaluation, we would need more than a few "spritzy cherry" or "off" flavor reports to really know. Are these trained sensory panelists? Is this a large enough pool of people tasting specific batches in un-bias conditions?

The fact is that there is bias and there are people searching for the off flavors.

We would have to run a completely blind test with a very large number of trained panelists without a reference or knowledge of specific attributes to look for to really tell if they are flavors resulting in infection or just batch-to batch variation/ temp storage/ oxidation (which happens very quickly in every beer) etc etc.

However, I do not doubt there could be infected bottles. Seems to happen all the time with breweries.