The Big 3: Autos & Beer

I get your point.
But, when we're talking about the public's taste buds as a whole, inexpensive and mildly flavored/bland seems to win out every time.

 

Not to mention price. In this tough economy you really have to like/love craft in order to WANT to spend the $$ on a particular beer. Most people see the economics of 19.99 for 36 beers where most of us, are fine with a 19.99 750.

Just my .02

Cheers!

 

I think you can agree with the fact that a lot of craft beer is an acquired taste, no? American's have been trained by food makers and beverage companies to enjoy simple, straightforward tastes so that's what the Big 3 focus on. No matter what, at the end of the day, "drinkability" is what will sell to most Americans.

 

As someone driving a Ford Fiesta, there's another interesting angle - Europe. Ford sold the Mondeo and Fiesta very successfully in Europe, but for some reason never thought Americans would be interested in good beer small cars. Ford and Chevy are now in something of a small car Renaissance as Ford has begun "importing" its Euro-cars and Chevy is also designing competitive small cars. Chrysler on the other hand still seems to me like they're stuck in 1954.
I suppose that's the only way progress can be made as "micro-automaker" seems a bit more challenging a profession than microbrewer.

 

And that analogy to Toyota would mean that Toyota would actually have to be made up of 8,000 or so car manufacturers, that individually averaged about 15 different car models apiece.

 

12 packs of Sierra Nevada Pale ale and Coors Light cost the same thing.

Craft beer isn't just about limited release brewery only beers that cost $20 a bomber.

I think the bigger issue is that these car companies were a lot bigger than Craft Breweries comparatively. Also, Ford couldn't pay off distributors to keep them from selling Toyotas since they are sold through dealerships.

 

I'd venture to say this is not the case in the vast majority of areas.

 

Toyota was helped by the American auto makers not lowering their price to compete. So the American consumer could buy a Toyota for the same price as a Ford (for example) but get better gas mileage, etc with the Toyota so the benefits were better. (Or so we were taught in Intl Business)

With beer, macro is obviously cheaper so the majority will always be attracted to the lower price. If the prices were the same I think brand loyalty might be broken after some time and people would try micros and branch out.

However, just as with cars there are still those who think "dark beers are heavy" "stouts and ales are different because stouts taste like coffee" so there will always be those who don't venture out regardless of price b/c they are ignorant of the offerings.

 

I'm in Houston Texas.

Miller/Bud/Coors light all cost the same as Sierra Nevada here.

It's because people won't try new things.

That's why when I go to an get together, I refuse to bring BMC even if they say they like it. I'll buy gateway craft beers.

 

Being a car nut as well as a BA, I've thought about this comparison before and it's pretty apt in most markets, technology is the same way too. There will always be the big boys doing the bare minimum to get by (although this seems to be finally changing with regards to cars,) and the small guys who bring in disruptive technology/ideas. Unfortunately the small guys tend to die off and their work is picked up by the big guys later on, but they still have an effect on the overall market.

The cool part is, we're reaching the point in both markets where the little guy has gotten the attention of the big 3 and is really challenging them in terms of public pereception. I live close to the Tesla plant and seeing the Model S on the road is really something special. It gives me the same sense of pride that I feel as I start to see good craft on tap and in big stores all around me; the big 3 have realized that they can't survive on marketing alone. Even if they make "faux craft" to try to capitalize on the small guys' success, it's at least a step in the right direction since the masses get a better product for their money. And remember, the innovators always get their due in the end! Cheers

 

Love the Concept. Rings quite true in my opinion. Each year a more educated consumer will hit the beer store and come out with a quality beer instead of the *****d out version of what beer should be. If history has taught us anything, its that all things come to an end. This is the mear begining of the end for BMC, the revolution if you will. Im sure England and France thought Monarchy was going to last forever too.

 

I get what you're trying to say, but I think the comparison fails.

So many people drink BMC products because it's exactly what they want in a beer: it gets the job done with minimal fuss, and without paying a premium. I would argue that this is the very same reason why Toyota is so successful. Toyota is BMC. GM/Ford were BMC with QC issues.

 

Or, there were enormous costs in radically transforming their entire processes with a strong possibility that they weren't structured so as to compete better with those types of cars (i.e. similar to foreign cars). And/or their predictions weren't on target.

There's a Big 3 in carbonated beverages, as well: Coke, Pepsi, and Cadbury Schweppes. There's no thriving craft soda industry, and there are probably lots of flaws with such an analysis, anyway. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples in the corporate world. Bottom line: I'm very hesitant to draw any sort of conclusions from your comparisons.

 

Also, I think the comparison between imports and craft beer has a major limitation right off, since the imports were actually cheaper, I believe.

 

Well, your title makes an explicit comparison between "Autos & Beer," so I went off of that. Not sure about your claim here, either, but it's interesting anyway.

 

Not true everywhere. Where I live, a 12-pack of SN cans is about $12. A Coors 12-pack is generally about $8

You know, I watched an interesting episode of Undercover Boss when they were doing the MolsonCoors company. When watching that episode, I realized something: this is a company that supplies an untold amount of jobs (both directly and indirectly.)

Yes, macro-brews taste horrible, but remember that there are thousands of jobs in these companies. They also mentioned that they keep up a high standard, too.

BMC will NEVER kill craft brewing, so I don't see why people are so up in arms against corporations that supply jobs and put out a consistent, albeit shitty, product.

 

I think another thing, other than "tastes" that people are used to is temeprature. When I see folks who tend to drink macros, they want beer that is ice cold. And maybe this is a product of how beer was marketed 50 years ago...an ice cold refreshing beverage to quench thirst (especially on a hot day).

While craft brews still taste better than macros ice cold, it's not their optimal serving temp. But, with macros, the colder the better (which hides the terrible taste). So maybe it's not just an adjustment of taste, but also of temperature. And, looking to drink a beer for its flavor...not just for a lemonade-like thirst quenching ability.