Why no Love for Stone?

They're not as bold or cutting edge as they used to be. The replacements for Pale Ale have been disappointments (2.0 and Ripper) and they're trying harder to appeal to the masses.

They still put out some great stuff. W00t Stout comes to mind. A key purchase every year.

 

Not to speak for him, but I'd suggest that the contradiction he sees is in the wording you use.

You acknowledge that they make good to very good beers, but also say that "Stone is and always will be about the Marketing..."

Now if they were all about marketing they'd not need to worry about making good to very good beers or getting feedback on freshness, to which they actively respond. Their freshness initiatives are indeed helpful in marketing but at the same time it displays a high level of commitment to producing and selling "good to very good beers." Furthermore, the reason it is successful marketing is that they follow through and display a higher level of commitment to ensureing we have access to fresh versions of their beers than do numerous other breweries.

So what you might want to be saying is that they are about good to very good beers and have a more aggressive marking of those beers than many other breweries.

 

I heard that after Berlin opened, they were at max capacity and couldn't produce enough for the market demand. Of course: 1) that could have been an exaggeration, and 2) that could change significantly in time. I'm just throwing that out there nonetheless since we hear more gloom and doom stories.

 

Chris, frankly my bigger concern is the RVA brewery. I need to do more research as to the capacity of that brewery but I am pretty sure they are not even close to producing at the capacity of that brewery.

My understanding is that Stone - Berlin is a small brewery so while I do not have the figures I would not be shocked they are producing near or at capacity there.

The information that is needed here is what is the combined capacity of all three breweries (San Diego, RVA and Berlin) and what are they actually producing..

Maybe @jesskidden is knowledgeable here?

Cheers!

 

I have a question. Why would you even want a brand new brewery to already be at capacity? Then for any future growth you'd have to plan on building another one with all the costs associated. Why not start out with extra capacity and grow into using that over a period of time?

 

I fully agree, I can get local stuff single digit days old from multiple breweries. I'm guessing most Cafl IPAs are suffering a sales drop to a large degree, for that matter most out of style hoppy beers I'm sure have declining sales.

 

I have talked to a number of family members, friends, and others I have met who have visited Stone Berlin and said that while the facility is impressive, it is typically quite empty when they have been there. Take that anecdotal information as you like. All I will add is that -- as I have said before -- Germany is a weird market where things that would seem to be a slam dunk here in the States can easily flop.

 

Maybe you were put off by the challenge of a west coast beer and being an mid-west you felt apprehension toward socal beers ... Your loyal to yours

 

Berlin is a foray into a market that presents a great deal of variables to them. Better to start "small" and have to think about what to do with demand that is in excess of your production capacity than to start out big and have a lot of capacity going unused. IMO, they did a smart thing, if, in fact, they are brewing at max. capacity from the jump. I don't know that to be true, though.

 

you are probably correct about Berlin. I know very little about the german marketplace.My question was really to what @JackHorzempa said about the Richmond brewery.

 

Hmm, why would it be better? Seems like if you are on a growth curve and expect that to continue, the extra expense involved in building one complete facility with extra capacity is a lot less expensive of having to create another whole new facility.

 

I would agree with this, if and ONLY if, they knew what kind of demand they had in that marketplace and how long term that demand was. I just don't think they knew that or, more accurately, had very good numbers that reflected assured growth.

They tested the water and, apparently, it was just right. Buildings with extra fermenters are not that expensive. If their capacity is limited by the size of their brewing system, they could always contract out. I hear Germany might have some breweries that could do that.

 

Yes, but rightly or wrongly they thought the demand was there and that they could build the market for their product.

But as for including the contract brewing option in their thinking, even if there is contract brewing capacity in Germany, doing that wouldn't fit with their own, fiercely independent identity and the image they have projected for years. Also we have no idea if those contract breweries you mention are independently owned rather than by a large corporate brewery specializing in AAL or Euro lagers.

 

I don't know the details either, so all this banter is just conjecture, but I'm sure they'll be just fine no matter what the situation is.

 

Indeed, but keep in mind that the only uncertainty here is the availability of an acceptable contract brewer.

From earlier threads it is quite plain they did what they consider to be adequate marketing research, etc. We also know from earlier threads that they definitely built with the goals of both moving into the local market and moving canned beer into Europe in general, hence the expect growth in use of capacity. They already had some test marketing feedback in some of those other countries, etc. and the choice of cans was in part dictated by conditions in Germany and Europe.

 

On the Stone website they list their production figures:

“2015: 325,645 bbls (13.4% increase)”

I could find no mention of the combined brewing capacity (barrels per year) of their various breweries (e.g., San Diego, RVA, Berlin, Liberty Station,…).

Cheers!

@jesskidden

P.S. As to the aspect of “they'll be just fine no matter what the situation is” I sure hope we will not be reading about a further reduction of the Stone labor force this year or next (re: 5% layoff of 2016).

 

Adding buildings to a historic site in Germany is anything but "easy"

 

Did anyone suggest this?

 

Interpreted your mention of "buildings with extra fermenters" not being that expensive to imply building such a place. Apologies if I misunderstood.

 

Also true for more than Germany. I've been to at least one town in the UK where if you wanted to dig a hole in the ground deeper than would be involved in having a garden, you first had to secure permission from the the city government. That approval would only be granted after a team of archaeologists examined the site and agreed historical artifacts would not be disturbed.