Schell's Response to the Brewer's Association

Truer words were never spoken.

 

As best I could tell from following the links you posted in the other thread, this is true for 4 of the 5 towns. But if I understood it correct, Eslarn only has one. My german is nonexistent and I was relying on chrome translating pages, but figuring out the different brewers seemed straight forward. In the others it ranged from 3 to 7 different brewers.

 

I am confident that jesskidden will respond shortly.

Permit me to opine on the query of: “I don’t think the equipment matters, it’s the brewer, right?”

In a past thread BA Chlodwig23 of Mystic Brewery posted:

Simple answer: By blundering recipe I meant one that will not work for that particular brewhouse and fermenation cellar. There are no magic recipes, but the advantage a brewer may have is developing recipes specifically for a specific brewhouse. So something fantastic at one brewhouse may be full of off flavors at another if the recipe is not 'tuned' for that particular brewhouse and cellar.”

So Chlodwig23 is of the opinion that the equipment (brewhouse & cellar) does matter.

Cheers!

 

Ingedient lists are a dime a dozen. Equipment and procedure are critical.

 

Not sure where you are going with that post. What I was trying to convey, is that on multiple brewery tours that I have done at the Yuengling brewery in Pottsville, the tour guide genuinely believe that Yuengling is some kind of awesome craft brewery, or at least that is what they are being told to say.

And yet, they are BMC, at least in Pennsylvania. They fight for the case law, they price their beers at the exact price point of Bud, Miller, Coors, etc.

I would go a step further and say that A-B is better because they are at least coming out with new brews or adding brands to their portfolio.

Yuengling makes the same tired old beers, all not that much differentiated from each other.

 

I'm on Schell's side on this one but you need to back off on insulting homebrewers. Plenty of homebrewers make world class beer and plenty of commercial breweries make awful beer (Indian Wells for example).

 

You need to follow through on the whole thread -- it's already been established that this was not the intent -- despite all the knee-jerk responses.

 

I agree they matter for purposes of recipe/flavor. I meant it terms of conferring the magical "craft" tag. And I hope that brewers are adjusting recipes if they move from one location to another, to keep the flavor profile the same.

 

Which means that brewer/brewer management are critical.

I can name plenty of places that went downhill (or uphill) when a brewer left. The big problem they had was that their wasnt someone else in charge of making sure things stayed on the same path when the brewer changed.

 

“Yuengling makes the same tired old beers, all not that much differentiated from each other.”

In another thread on Yuengling in the Beer Talk forum I posted the below:

I personally do not view the Yuengling beers as being craft beer but they do have some ‘interesting’ beers in their lineup:

· Yuengling Porter: an American Porter (some folks would call this a Pennsylvania Porter). I drink this beer from time to time. It is not a favorite American Porter of mine (I really, really like Founders Porter) but I would classify this beer as being a good beer.
· Lord Chesterfield Ale: Beer Advocate classifies this as an American Pale Ale. This beer tastes like a Blonde Ale to me. I have a bottle of this beer in my basement to be enjoyed during the holidays.
· Back & Tan: this beer is a Black & Tan. I could only guess on how many barrels of this beer I consumed during the late 80’s/early 90’s. I haven’t had one of these in years
· Traditional Lager: Yuengling’s flagship beer; an American Amber Adjunct Lager. I enjoy a Lager from time to time; it is certainly more enjoyable to drink than a BMC beer.
· Etc.

I am not a big drinker of Yuengling beers but I do think that the Porter is much different from the Lager. I also think the Lord Chesterfield Ale is rather tasty and I would never confuse that beer for the Lager.

I also think it is nice that Yuengling has come out with some ‘newer’ seasonal beers in the past few years: Bock and Oktoberfest. I have both of these beers. I wouldn’t describe them as being excellent beers but I did enjoy drinking a few of them.

Cheers!

 

[quote="rlcoffey, post: 753506, member: problem. hich means that brewer/brewer management are critical.

I can name plenty of places that went downhill (or uphill) when a brewer left. The big problem they had was that their wasnt someone else in charge of making sure things stayed on the same path when the brewer changed.[/quote]
If procedures are in place it can be no problem. Or it can be a big problem. Then there are good/poor brewers that make lower/higher quality* beer when they go to a new brewery, or get a bigger brewhouse (this later can be dialed in with time).

*In the industrial quality sense.

 

I like Schell. I wish we got more of it in my part of WI. Ironically, what attracted me to Schell's was a comment that I seem to remember (or maybe misremember) being made by Charlie Papazian in which the Schell's Pilsner was favorably compared to the best pilsners in the world. Or something along those lines. I've enjoyed lots of Schell's beers, the Pils has turned out to be my favorite.

BA is off-base.

 

Yeah, Eslarn has just one at this point and it's a recent (well, somewhat recent) thing too. The Zoigl has had quite the revival in the past decade so enterprising people are rediscovering their heritage and the possibilities therein

 

My bringing up the craft brewers who use contract breweries, or are "tenant" brewers, or use alternating proprietorship model are references to points made in the original Brewers Association article written by the 3 B.A. officials that appeared in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and further elaborated by Stone's Greg Koch.

"Who is brewing the beer?" might also be asked about the now non-craft Goose Island beers still coming out of Chicago and the Kona beers coming from CBA breweries in the PNW and NH. (And, remember, before being purchased entirely by CBA, Kona was still a B.A. "craft brewer" when their bottled products on the mainland didn't come from Hawaii).

Koch wrote, "Nothing I've said above is intended to make any comment about qualitative issues. Only about disclosure." Why would disclosure be desired for the non-craft AB- and MC-affiliated beers but not for the contracted craft brewers' beers?

The Post-Dispatch Op-Ed claimed craft brewers rely on "...an appreciation for local, and authentic and delicious products to attract their consumer base... brewed locally by neighbors and friends who are very visibly involved in their communities". How are 21st Amendment's beers "local" to San Francisco when they are brewed half a continent away in MN and TN? Check Sixpoint's website or labels and see how many times you can find "Brooklyn" and then how many times for "Wilkes-Barre".

The Op-Ed goes on to say that craft brewers are "lifting the local economies" and creating "local, Main Street jobs". But the jobs created (if any, it is a much smaller number than would be the case with true local production "microbrewery-sized" facilities) by the contract brewers aren't on "Main St.", but in far away Rochester, Stevens Point, Cold Spring, Utica, La Crosse, etc.

I have nothing against contract-brewing - I regularly drank some of the earliest East Coast examples like New Amsterdam (brewed by Matt) and bottled Wm. Newman's (from Schmidt's and Walter's in Eau Claire) in the early '80's pre-dating the founding of BBC's and their Samuel Adams Boston Lager. And I've pointed out that most contracted-beer, craft and non-craft alike, lists the actual city along with a dba name making it relatively easy for anyone curious enough to do the minimal amount of research to know a contract brewed beer and what brewery in comes from. (Greg's question re: Kona and GI 312 "Would you like these facts disclosed to you on a label?" is answered by "Well, yeah.... but they are.")

I guess I keep "bringing this up" because I don't care for deception (regardless of if its source is a craft or non-craft brewer) or hypocrisy.

 

I agree, if you don't own your own equpment you do not run a "brewery". You may still make yummy beer but you're not a brewery and I would like to know about such details.

 

The problem with self proclaimed experts is they have to proclaim themselves experts. Their opinion only matters as far as how many others give it creedence.
To me, if you call yourself an expert, whether or not you really are one, and think you are the sole entity that has the authority to define a word, you come off as an arrogant snob. It doesn't have to be about exclusivity. Just my personal opinion. Maybe it matters, maybe not so much.
You drink what you like, I'll do the same. I'll clink my glass with any "craft" or not drinker because why create drama about a beverage that we all enjoy? Cheers to all that we can!

 

I think you missed my point (or failed to combine it with all the other points I made into a coherent whole), probably my lack of clarity. Im in absolute agreement with you on deception and I think the stuff the BA is saying absolutely applies to craft breweries, especially when contracting.

But you seem to be making the point that if, say, The Lion isnt cant make craft beer because they arent a craft brewery, then if they make contract beer for a craft brewery then it shouldnt be considered craft either. Which I think is silly, because of the rental argument I made.

On a semi-unrelated note, I dont get the general hatred of hypocisy. I figure the hypocrite is right 1/2 the time (either in what they say or what they do) which is much better than the person who is consistent but wrong.

 

That is questionable. What if you rent?

I know of a recent startup brewery in which the equipment was owned by a separate investment arm, and the brewery leases it with a right to purchase. It was done, I assume, in order to get the needed investment money, but to keep control of the brewery equity. In return, the investors get a nice return on investment and own the equipment if things go south.

This is, of course, different from a contract situation, but really, is it? Is this any different than a gypsy brewer, other than the fact that they are always brewing on the same equipment and not physically moving about like a gypsy brewer?

I think you have to be very careful trying to draw definitive lines (which is also what caused this whole problem, with the BA trying to define craft brewery).

 

Hopefully jesskidden and Stahlstrum will respond shorty.

In the interim, permit me to opine on the topics of “rental argument” and “recent startup brewery in which the equipment was owned by a separate investment arm, and the brewery leases it with a right to purchase.”

As I discussed previously via quoting Chlodwig23 of Mystic Brewery and hopfenunmaltz’s post of “Equipment and procedure are critical” it is not always as simple as a brewer going to another brewery and being able to make ‘quality’ beer. The bottom line is that the equipment at the existing brewhouse could have profound effects on how the beer is produced. So, if the brewery has a brewhouse that has equipment that permits the brewer to brew their beer per their established recipe and procedures than it is indeed possible to produce consistent, quality beer.

Let’s get into the specifics of Sixpoint brewing (or having their beer brewed) at Lion Brewery. For a period of time, the Lion Brewery utilized their house ale yeasts to make Sixpoint beers. After some time an ‘agreement’ was reached whereby Sixpoint could use their Sixpoint ale yeast strains to make the Sixpoint ales. I would imagine that the Lion house ale strain was first utilized either out of fear of yeast cross-contamination (or maybe it was a process issue which later got resolved?). A number of ‘older’ regional breweries utilize a high gravity fermentation process whereby the beer is brewed at a higher gravity but then diluted with water post fermentation. I do not know the specifics of the Lion Brewery brewhouse but this could very well be the case. If so, then Sixpoint needed to change (tailor?) their brewing accordingly. There are a myriad of other considerations that I am not aware of since I have never brewed professionally.

Cheers!