The craft beer industry: beer quality problems

I don't think the comparisons being made between the brewing and food industries are all that far off. One is not inherently easier or less variable than the other, they are just different. The cracker analogy struck me - think about making cookies at home. I've never made two batches of cookies that come out exactly the same - hell, two cookies side by each in the same pan don't look the same. But Ritz after Ritz after Ritz - hard to say there's any significant differences. That ain't easy... Neither is SNPA. Bell's, Bud, or any other beer that demonstrates remarkable consistency over time - it doesn't happen by accident.

To me, the huge additional variable in brewing is the fermentation step since you can only control so much. Temperature can be controlled. Pitching rates can be controlled. Strains are selected for certain characteristic results. But it is still a variable because it comes down to what the wee beasties actually do when they are turned loose. Others with more knowledge than I have can speak to this better.

You control what you can control and adapt to the rest. I think that is as true for any good brewery as it is for a Nabisco or Frito Lays or any other CPG company. I think we're all like the duck - calm and collected on the surface and hopefully nobody sees that we're paddling like mad underneath.

 

This, by far, should be the take away.

 

Nice choice of excerpts here, Jack, from an article that points out some necessary criticisms. The opener of we need to support good brewing applies to all of us as consumers as much as it does the brewers. I think rather than being worried about capturing market share from Goliath, breweries need to worry about keeping/preserving whatever piece of the pie they already have. There's ample competition on two fronts - there's the big dogs, but now the puppies are off the porch and nipping at the heels as well.

But I'll keep saying it - as things change, some good breweries are going to close because "bad" ones survive. Yes, same argument that if people are buying the product it can't be bad. I say it can be. Mostt people don't really care or simply don't know. I'd take a flight of four beers I recently suffered through and match it up style for style with four 3.25 average beers and challenge anyone to say they think the former tastes better. Four beers, four styles, ZERO flavor. The more I think about it the more it pisses me off because some people (new to the sport) would think exactly what the author in the article implies. "WTF...this is what all that craft beer hoopla is all about?".

 

I think we're completely talking past each other here, perhaps because my crackers/produce analogy just carried too much irrelevant baggage. Of course beer can be and is created consistently. I am talking about the effect a quality seal might or might not have on pointing consumers to which brands do and do not achieve this.

It's probably not interesting enough to belabor, but let me try again anyway.

I was positing that quality seals don't register much with consumers for goods that they have come to expect will always have a consistent level of quality, if only by the simple virtue of appearing on the shelves at established markets. When we buy mass produced goods from the grocery store most of us don't wonder or worry whether they will be the same as last time.

Consumers do not take the consistency of things like produce as a given. A quality seal assuring me that a cantelope was actually going to be good *would* have meaning, because we do not take their quality and consistency as a given and would welcome the additional information.

If that point has any merit, then the degree to which a quality seal on beer would register to consumers depends upon the degree to which they see beer as product where they can take quality for granted or not. Given that most people buy their beer at places like Total Wine in professional looking cans and bottles, my guess is that most people assume a level of quality just by virtue of it being on the shelves, and I'm suggesting that an additional seal to that effect isn't likely to register with people.

So in short, I wasn't in any way trying to stir up a discussion about what the actual quality level of beer is or isn't (I'm pretty sure we agree completely on that). I was trying to probe what kind of an effect the proposed seal might or might not actually have on how consumers think of the issue given how they approach buying beer. And I was hoping LeRose could shed some light on things, which he has.

 

Thanks for this post - makes sense to me that the fermentation process can be largely controlled.

Thought of it after the fact - my friend at work who operated the nano-scale farm brewery said his most important investment was a cell counter. Before he had that instrument and could very accurately determine his pitch rate, he said his beers were very inconsistent from batch to batch.

I used US-05 a lot and a couple of specialty strains, follow the directions, and try to keep things tight on temperature. But I'm not an expert in their biology/physiology by any means, just that the beers I have brewed called for their use.

 

Well I won't theorize where the majority of bad beer is purchased but of course I will say that I have some experience with a few beers that I will always drink at the taproom but am wary of buying outside of it. There's a brewery near my work that has a lager I love when it's good. The first bar I had it at it was all I drank until it blew.

I've bought 4 or 5 six packs over the time since it came out and 1 or 2 were good. The first two bad ones were off. Not nearly as clean tasting. The last six pack had a much stronger alcohol flavor that masked the beer.
But everytime I've had it at the taproom (from different batches) it's been great.

So of course I'd want to see any sort of Quality Seal take the packaging controls into account.

 

I think it is predominantly - maybe 80/20 - on premises situations where "bad" is encountered, but not entirely. I've had two unacceptable experiences in two taproom/brewpubs within the last month. Part of it is being in new places and having new opportunities I don't have in the liquor stores at home. So for me, my own curiosity gets the better. And yes - this delves into the "other reasons beside the beer" aspect of the discussion. Even then I have to wonder why - ok, we're going to XYZ pub to listen to some tunes, hang with a fantastic crowd, have a plate of great chicken wings and an awesome burger...if yeah, they got beer, too. Why shouldn't that beer be up there with the same rave as the food and social experience? I kinda conclude that it isn't really important to the customers.

Some of these places obviously don't package their beers, but some that I have NOT enjoyed over the years do. Whether they are "slow movers" or not - I guess I could ask the store beer managers about that.

That's part of what's changing - consumption and purchasing patterns. There's a lot more "on site" consumption these days than ever, and that trend will probably continue.

 

I would wager that it would affect the beer buying of the average consumer more than the "independent" seal does.

 

Understood now. Yeah we were talking past each other. I agree that for most consumers a quality seal isn't something they will notice to guide any buying habits.

HOWEVER, I don't think you don't need anywhere near a majority of customers to force a positive change in the industry. Let's say only 5% of craft beer customers care about a quality certification and buy accordingly. For many brewers losing or gaining a couple percentage points of sales is very significant and could be worth getting the certification. The remaining 95% of customers that don't care about the seal/certification are still gaining the benefit of [presumably] better QA/QC for the beer they buy, even if they have no awareness of it.

We already have a similar example of this phenomenon in the beer industry... I mentioned above that beer bottle/can dates has improved vastly over the last few years. A majority of customers has never looked at, care, or demanded a date on their beer, but a small number of customers did.* Many brewers have decided it was worth the effort to add the dates to retain those customers, but all customers benefit whether they know it or not.

* - Conscientious store owners/distributors probably also wanted bottle/can dates too, but they are also reacting, at least in part, to the demands of their customers.

 

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by quality. I mean. It's value here within the parameters of what this spiraling black hole of a list of failings you have here as a potential source of what to respond towards.
I can see how, for the sake of being able to identify which dog is the one BA should have in this fight. It's easy to get lost in the forest here. Because best practices has literally zilch to do with deadstock sitting on the shelf. It does, ultimately. But, honestly. Not worth discussing. Let it die in the silence it deserves.
So. Let's zero in on distribution, because the most common thing to complain about NOW that there are so many breweries all fighting for the same shelf space. Is old product. Deadstock.
There were 408 entries for IPA last year for GABF. Let's do the math here. That's 408 beers whose owner / operators are fighting for their limited space with a limited window of enjoyment for you to maximize. Never mind best practices. That can be encouraged, sure. But. It is a sidebar to the larger problems that beer faces once it gets out into the bigger world and goes through third parties to arrive on the counter with you interested in buying it.
It's going to be hard to value the worth of rotating out old stock, but it's obviously on its way towards becoming a Casablanca Records sized one. Minus the cocaine at lunch time.

 

On the other hand, if you are packed all the time and the joint is hopping, what's the point of having the "brew" part of the brewpub? Switch to PBR, have a nice day. So the beer might play some role. Hey, we hang out in the cool place that makes their own beer kind of thing. I would agree that an establishment would potentially expand their clientele if the beer was improved and played an even greater role.

Or... Maybe it is something of an "anti-beer-geek" thing, though. We'll make a beer that is marginally palatable so those Beer Advocate guys don't rain on our parade... Hell, if we make GOOD beer, only ten people will show up and five of them will bitch that the beer isn't hazy enough... I hope - very sincerely - that some of the insipid and/or flawed brews I have tasted are not made that way intentionally or reflects growing pains, but it has not been a one-time thing. Plus, I know at least one brewery (that I will not support) where world-class beers were made on the exact same equipment...hard to figure.

We keep talking about educating the brewers, which I think we can agree is a much needed step in the right direction. Educating consumers - that's an even more difficult challenge.

 

How to you propose the Brewers Association go about measuring those things and how often do they re-check so they can give their members specific guidelines so say who gets the quality logo and who does not?

 

AB solves this problem by also having the slight advantage of something akin to a monopoly where it concerns distribution. The pieces that comprise their corporate holdings have deep pockets and several generations of continued relations to factor in towards this form of problem solving.