Refunds for 2015 Regular BCBS and 2015 Prop

I cracked opened a 14.3% BCBS 22OCT15 1431 (bought in Charleston) last night. I haven't seen any prior posts concerning this particular one. It seemed fine to me and the wife. My other bottles left have the same day stamp and 3 different runs. I hope those are fine as well. I really feel sorry for you guys in Florida. I did see in the ISO:FT forum that a guy from Fla. was willing to trade 8 BCBS for a Mexican Cake. I steered clear of that one!!

 

This is ridiculous. Yes, there's a risk of infection with a barrel program. But the risk should fall on the producer, not the consumer. Any business who passes along the risk of putting out a shitty product to its consumers, and just says, "sorry you're out hundreds of dollars on our undrinkable product, but you know, stuff happens," won't be in business very long. I get that we all like craft beer and think the brewers are good peeps, but it boggles my mind the way people seem willing to cut them so much slack for poor quality and/or customer service that we would never tolerate in any other context.

If you order a steak at a restaurant and it comes out as a burned up, inedible hockey puck, would you just shrug and say, "well that happens sometimes when you grill with open flame"?

I feel bad for the folks at Goose too. I'm sure this whole thing is a real bummer for them. But I still expect them to fix it the way I would expect the same of any other business.

 

Yogi Berra might come in handy here because "It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future"
That is barrel aging in a nutshell. You can science it as hard as possible with the best and brightest, but you can't predict what will happen when what you are looking for to make that prediction is not there. Moreover too, to do this with an unerring accuracy would require a herculean effort which would also have to be reflected in the cost. Because each and every single barrel being used would need to be ripped apart to be examined, and then put back together. That sort of effort would require a lot of time, space, and also put the whole program at an even greater risk of having even worse infections than the ones they are supposed to be looking for.

 

Is it definitive that it was a bottling line issue or is this just speculation? I've been in and out of this thread, did GI release a statement in this regard?

 

just in the last 2-3 pages, more people have reported draft examples have soured, particularly Barleywine.

i doubt it was a bottle line issue. remember they allegedly dumped a shitload of Coffee up-front (before bottling)?

 

GI advice of two years since when it says right on the bottles develops over 5 years in the bottle. Not sure I would take a JL beers tap tenders word anyway. And still no proof the majority of South Dakotas October 6th bottling date are bad anyway. Plan to drink my case slowly over 5 years no worries yet.

 

Yes, but remember that what they dumped would have been detectably off and/or infected and so was never bottled. However, what they are reporting now includes the post bottling discovery of a previously unknown Lactobacillus which was very difficult to culture even months after the bottles were filled. So it is quite possible that the new bug was in a dormant and/or undetectable state prior to barrel mixing and/or when traveling through the lines with some remaining to create a problem for one or more lines/filling tubes, etc. Depending on frequency of line cleaning this could affect more than one bottling run. But I agree that the source has to have been in a barrel when it was mixed into the batch to be bottled. However, with a relatively low frequency of bacteria per oz it is possible that only some lines were contaminated while others were not.

 

Everyone's experience is going to be a little different. Some extremely good, others extremely bad, and everywhere in between. Whoever got hung up on probably has a right to be pissed. Others spoke to a pleasant person, got their full refund, plus a shirt, and thanked GI on social media. It seems your experience was on the negative side and you too certainly have a right to feel whichever way you feel about it, but your experience won't apply to everyone else.

 

May I respectfully suggest that when there are others you will be able to compare GI's handling of this against their handling of those future problems. May I also suggest that the quoted sentence above has the inherent meaning that there hasn't been any previous cases of a brewery with this large of a problem, and that Goose Island has been doing its best to make this all up as it progresses. Despite your harsh criticism of ABI you do seem to realize there has never been a case where so many barrels were used, so much effort was spent to avoid infection and failed, a brand new Lactarius strain with difficult to ID characteristics was the culprit, so many refunds needed to be issued, so many months elapsed before the problems became obvious, and there was so little rhyme or reason for which bottles would have problems.

I guess what I am saying is this is why I am cutting them some slack and suggest others do as well.

 

I'm not faulting them or criticizing them for the infection. I don't harbor any ill will over the fact that a beer they released ended up being infected. It happens. It's very disappointing that it happened to a beer that I love (and bought a large amount of). But I wasn't mad at GI over the fact the beer was infected even before I learned the truly bizarre details (new strain, etc). My issue is 100% there handling of the matter. They did so well handling the infection issue with BW and Coffee which makes their mishandling of the issues with Regular (and Prop and now Regal) so glaring. By their own admission, they started receiving reports about infection and pH issues with Regular at the time they made the refund announcement for BW and Coffee. However, instead of being up front and admitting there might be an issue and that they needed to look into it further they denied it. They had their customer service reps perpetuate a lie for months. That is why I can't cut them some slack. Because they had already demonstrated that they knew how to appropriately handle the issue but decided for some reason to handle the reports about Regular differently. I don't know if it was because it was initially so few bottles/select batches or if it was because they were reeling from the bad PR of the BW and Coffee infection.

 

Damn the reports on the the regular are still spotty, not sure what you expect them to do about that. Yes it's a problem with some bottlings that's clear, some are fine and completely as they should be 6 months out from release. I'm not sure what they can definitely say on this, seems like there's far more good than bad. I'd assume a barreling issue and not a line issue, the bad barrel blended contaminated that batch or maybe two who knows. I doubt hey do either.

 

When damage happens, like this has happened to GI, I don't think you can fault them for a cautious, damage control stance. They are making it up as they go along, and I think we would do well to wait until it is all over to jump on them.

Having owned my own business for many years that had a fantastic reputation in my industry I can see their point of view trying to limit the damage, control the situation, prevent future occurrences, and take care of a basically brand new situation in such a way as they don't go bankrupt and don't lose their customers.

I think you are right not to give a free pass and be hyper critical, I bought 2 cases and was planning to put some away and if they were already bad (they aren't) I might be angry enough and have different attitude, but after reading the interview I believe I will give them slack and judge it when all the results are in.

 

Not a knew shipment just Quality releasing stuff they have had since November :-)

Apparently it was half-way to black friday like that matters....

 

I'm not sure what lie was perpetuated. They said they hadn't, at the time, identified any issues with Regular or Prop in their own stash (entirely plausible, given the much more sporadic nature of off flavor reports we've seen in those varieties) and that they started to finally see some dipping of pH even as they continue to be unable to pinpoint the actual reason for said pH drop within Regular and Prop.

Of course it makes a difference that the Coffee and Barleywine were much more widespread and (apparently) easier--albeit still difficult, it seems--to nail down. That has huge implications for how much financial burden a business might be willing/able to bear for a product issue.

Do I think GI should have come out earlier with a more straightforward statement along the lines of "we've been hearing reports of off flavors in Regular and Prop and we're looking into--please be patient with us"? Sure. But I still think the overall response to this deserves some slack. When they've had definitive data, they've responded strongly, and they are clearly still care about this from a "we care about the integrity of our product" standpoint rather than a "protect the bottom line at all costs!" standpoint.

I'll close by pointing out that consumers and producers *always* share risk on consumer goods. Not in that consumers should necessarily be expected to eat the cost of faulty product, but in the sense that products that carry a given level of uncertainty in outcome (like infection risk in barrel-aged beers) will be passed along to the consumer in some form. And if brewers start to see more of these potentially expensive, hard-to-pin-down issues, I think we're going to see a shift within barrel programs as companies that already generally operate on low margins (most breweries) begin to protect themselves. That may result in more expensive barrel-aged beers than the currently fairly reasonable prices we see now. It may result in fewer brewers going down the barrel-aging path, or scaling back existing programs. It may result in brewers making clear up front that they can only guarantee the quality of their product for a shorter window so that they are accountable for releasing beers in good faith that aren't infected to the best of their knowledge but aren't risking financial ruin from some obscure strain of bug that rears its head months after release. It may result in more flash pasteurization, taking away the aging/development component that so many people love.

Now, I'm not saying that all of these possible outcomes are acceptable to me as a consumer, but I am saying that I'm willing to be patient with companies that release beers in good faith--i.e., they release beers that aren't infected to the absolute best of their knowledge--and that handle issues in good faith, even if execution may turn into a shitshow (as it did with the Coffee and Barleywine refunds). I'd rather personally assume some of that risk as a consumer than usher in some of the changes I mention above. And that also means I'd prefer to give companies that appear to operate in good faith every benefit of the doubt before I refuse to cut them any slack. I may get more gun-shy about buying future releases from companies that show issues--especially repeatedly--with their beers, but it's going to take a lot more obviously egregious actions than we've seen from GI throughout this fiasco to decide that they don't give a fuck about their customers, as seems to be an all-too-common attitude towards them right now.

 

I just cracked open one of mine lot 1759 and it was infected. Not to the point of undrinkable but definitely not what it used to be. Still a good beer but needs to be drunk soon. I cellared all mine around 60 degrees out of sunlight and sadly it is not the amazing beer like when I had it the first time.

 

BCBS from the infamous 21OCT15 Florida distro, I bought a case it has been stored at 30 degrees in fridge since purchase. Have not drank one since a week or two after the release. It is drinking great sipped on it for about an hour and a half and enjoyed it very much.

 

I'm sure it is part of the same truck load North Dakota received. The 06OCT15 are drinking great, had one last weekend. Bourbon coconut vanilla fudge. I know a thing or two about beer so feel free to take my free advice.

 

Do you like your beer slushy?

 

It was not slushy 30 degrees in my fridge at least does not freeze beer or make them slushy and I also let my beers warm up before drinking them.

 

Exactly I had bought 13 bottles and have drank two so far 06OCT15's and they are tasting fine! I only put one or two in the fridge at a time the rest are bagged and in around a 60ish basement. I have no worries yet. I also bought one 13.7% from Sioux City letting age some and yes I do a thing or two about beer as well!