Boston Lager Remastered

This was when Boston Lager was special.

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1985/1...er-after-passing-a-strict-16th/8083107001573/

 

Re-imagined is tantamount to an admission of unimaginable again. Let's see, could the Frisbee or Hula Hoop possibly be re-imagined?

 

I've had that beer, pretty good but just like every other DIPA...

 

Absolutely, but the talk has to be you have to try this beer, then you need to get it on tap in as many places as possible. Guys will spend $6 on a beer before they spend $15 on a 12 pack. Shouldn’t be a problem there SA is already mainstream at most chain places where it’s already likely to be the best beer on the bar. Interesting to see where this goes, for all the self promotion he’s done a great job for himself making a buck.

 

For old time's sake, I will try it. Like many of you, Boston Lager was one of the first "craft" beers I tried back in the mid-1990s. It seems to become more bland and sweet as the years rolled by; perhaps it was my palate evolving. In any event, Sam Adams' beers seem to have slowly disappeared from the shelves where I am in northern Florida. To bring back memories of early beer discovery, I would surely love to have some Boston Ale.

 

In advertising using the terms new and improved doesn't necessarily mean a big change. They could remove a grain of malts and add a pellet of hops and that would be a new and improved recipe. Same goes for any consumer product in the USA.

 

Yeah, sounds familiar, too.
Welcome to the Kona Beer Settlement Website

I tried to find a lawyer that would sue Stroh because after they bought Schlitz they brewed Old Milwaukee all over the place except in Milwaukee - since Schlitz closed their flagship brewery a year or so before they sold out to Stroh. Never found one that'd take my case*, but one did threaten to sue me, 'cause I made him choke on his morning coffee and he ruined a two thousand dollar suit. (Different kind of suit).

* It didn't help, I suppose, that I always mentioned up front that I'd never drank or bought Old Milwaukee...

This guy disagrees:

 

I was going to re-tell the tale of the two US beers that claimed they "passed the Reinheitsgebot" before BBC and Samuel Adams even existed but I'll just link to it instead.

Of course, just as Stroh had the qualifier "distributed nationally", BBC had the even more impressive claim of being "the only American beer being imported and sold legally in West Germany". (IIRC, they eventually even found a German contract-brewery for Samuel Adams, so they could also make the "freshness" claim there - long shipping times was something BBC often attacked Heineken and Beck's over).

My question about those first two brewers' claims - so the German authorities actually tested these beers for them, even though there was no intention to export them to Germany? In 1983, the VP/General manager of Hudepohl even admitted that they had "no immediate plans to sell the beer (in Germany)."

One of my favorite quotes about "imports" was from an AB wholesale distributor in the 1970s or so, which went something like "If you want a good imported beer, go to Germany and order a Michelob." I didn't agree with it, just always found it... "interesting" (?)... and an great example of AB's once-extremely loyal independent distributors. (But could you get a Michelob in West Germany at the time? Apparently AB did supply the US military bases there at the time.)

 

That is absolutely true. These explanations are not mutually exclusive, though. HFCS can have been introduced first AND that can still be the reason for New coke.

My understanding is that this was still the reason, because the taste was noticeable and disliked compared to coke w/ sugar. They needed something different in order to “bring the old coke” back, which was not the old coke at all.

 

Boston Beer is in good financial shape because of their hard seltzers. Sam Adams Boston Lager sales have slipped. I'm sure they don't want to abandon Boston Lager and the rest of the their beer portfolio. Some regular Boston Lager drinkers should do a taste comparison of old vs. new for us. Stone also nudged their flagship IPA recipe a year ago. There was notice of the new "tropical aromas and flavors" on the can, but in a typeface that challenged 70+ year-old eyes. I had drunk a can before I read the text, and hadn't noticed much difference (but I don't drink Stone IPA regularly). Local brewer Barrier originally marketed a traditional amber IPA under the Money label. Now Money in cans is a modern hazy IPA. It's a total reformulation using an earlier label. The entire craft beer market is unstable, and every brewer is trying to cope. I'd like Beer Advocate to retain old reviews and have the ability to have separate pages for reformulations. I revised my old reviews for Stone IPA and Barrier rather that replace my original review completely, but there should be a way to post separate reviews of old and new. Another issue is of similar brands brewed by different companies. For example the Labatt label is owned in the US by FIFCO Genesee and not brewed by AB Labatt Canada. Should Labatt Blue have two reviews? In a similar situation, Modelo and Corona US are owned by and (mostly) brewed by Constellation. Do these beers conform to the AB Modelo Mexican recipes?

 

I love Prima Pils, it’s been gone here for years, I’m sure it’s syill in the district system, it’s just not getting to the retailers. Same with Pivo, I’d guess sales were sluggish.

 

I noticed a difference between bottled Brooklyn Lager and a draft I had at P J Clarke's branch near Lincoln Center. The bottled product is OK, but the draft had a lively balance of malt and hops that seemed different. I revised my review to note this.

 

I’m not a marketing guy, but I always thought their portfolio to be a bit bloated with mediocre beers. If they weren’t brewing 50 different beers BL sales might be a bit stronger.

 

My guess is that the draft product was fresher (in better condition).

Draft beer is continuously stored cold throughout the supply chain.

Cheers!

 

Could also be because of this:


Brooklyn, from its beginning, has contract-brewed at F X Matt - they even have a TTB Permit for it BR-NY-BRK-2 - bottles, cans and keg. But some draught is also brewed in Brooklyn (above) under the main permit BR-NY-BRK-1. (Don't know the current state of bottling in Brooklyn - for awhile, it was only the larger 750 ml. bottles). Of course, if the draught was from Brooklyn, the freshness factor would have been in play, as well.

 

You mean like when the Boston Beer Co makes their beer everywhere except Boston and only opens up a brewery in Boston after being called out on it? Or maybe how a beer branded Brooklyn is really Utica?

That kind of thing can really hurt a brand image if it gets out of hand.
Cheers

edit;
JC you guys don't miss an opportunity quickly.

 

Well, I'm not usually one to defend BBC/Koch ... but he was talking about building a brewery in the old Haffenreffer Brewing building just about from the beginning. It surprised me, too, when I went back and checked some of the early articles.

It did take him awhile...

There was once an article in a noted business magazine in which either the author or Koch seemed to imply that his "Boston Beer Co." was somehow related to the original Boston Beer Co., founded in 1828 (so, it was "America's Oldest Brewery" before Yuengling got the title when the first BBC closed in the 1950s)...

I should go look for that.

 

You mean 1828, you still have time to edit.

Cheers!

 

Whadaya talkin' about, it's right (now). I hate when that happens! Ah, at least the image had it correct. Thanks! Well, since I'm posting again...

Found it. From INC magazine, July 7, 2004.

* The original Boston Beer Co. closed in 1956, with Haffenreffer buying their brands. Don't know where "the 1970s" came from or what, if anything, Koch "purchased" - maybe some trademarks from the Haffenreffer family or succeeding business (Falstaff/S&P)?

 

You beat me to it on this statement. . .