Why do people like IPAs?

That's not at all what I said. I never suggested that IPAs are preferred by more beer drinkers; statistically, they aren't. Light lagers dominate global beer drinking trends. The majority of beer drinkers prefer beer-flavored-beer. But the question the OP asked has nothing to do with that.

What I did say, in reference to the OP's question - which isn't, "Why do most people like IPAs?" but was, "Why do people like IPAs?" as in, any people at all - is that IPAs offer a broader range (variety) of flavors and options, including bitterness level and ABV, than your traditional lager or ale styles - beer-flavored-beer. Consequently, for people who don't like what they perceive as "traditional" beer, there's a much greater chance that there's an IPA out there that they will like - and what the OP dislikes about IPAs is not by any means a template one can apply to all IPAs.

He says, essentially, "I don't like IPAs (but I really mean bitter WC IPAs)." I responded: "While some people like that [and I made a separate argument for the appreciation of bitter flavors], there is so much variety in IPAs that people can find something they like, even if they don't like bitter pine bombs."

It's a pretty simple argument, really, and I don't see how reality undermines that at all.

One may as well ask, "Why do people like beer?" and pretend that all beer tastes the same. That's the macro to my micro, and obviously there's more variety among all beer than just around IPAs, but it's an argument against the same myopic viewpoint, where your experience with CAN-O-BEER "X" is what you apply to all beers (or all IPAs in the micro). [The royal you, not you, Zid. ]

Why does person X like IPAs? It may well be for a different reason than person Y, or person Z - but they all have valid, albeit subjective, reasons for liking IPAs. There may be overlap in what they like, or they may very well like completely different sub-styles of IPAs (the HazeBro who can't stand Stone IPA; the traditional HopHead who wants nothing to do with a Milkshake IPA).

But if you ask the question, "Why do Coors Light drinkers enjoy it?" and you're coming from an initial viewpoint of you, yourself, not enjoying Coors Light (as the OP stated regarding his own dislike of IPAs), the argument pretty much stops and ends at, "They like something that you don't." Hand that person a Pilsner Urquell, and if they hate beer-flavored-beer, surprise: they're still going to hate it. They just don't like it (and that's OK). There really isn't a parallel argument toward, "Well, you just really need to try the 0 IBU dry hopped imperial pilsner they released yesterday!"

(There is a separate argument about why AAL drinkers have their own preferences, say Coors over Bud, but that's definitely not an argument about the wide variety of flavors delivered by different AALs.)

But to summarize, the OP wondered why any people could like IPAs at all, and the very, very simplest response is that there's a ton of variety in IPAs, and what the OP perceives as "an IPA" is but one sub-style in a variety of very, very different tasting beers. It's rather silly to wonder why, if you don't like chocolate, someone else could like vanilla.

 

Well, that's a discussion about styles/labeling, not necessarily about what people like or don't like about IPAs.

Frankly, labels are always subjective, and language is always changing (much as some would prefer it remains static). @jesskidden has a picture database, no doubt, of "Ales and Stouts" signs, and "Beer and Ale" signs from old-timey pubs.

But when did Ale become a Beer, then? IS THAT MARKETING???

The reality is that an IPA is still an ale. And it's a pale ale. And it's an India Pale Ale. None of these are incorrect, but one of them is more specific, and suggests a more specific experience to the consumer. Would anyone honestly argue that Celebration and Two-Hearted aren't properly classified as IPAs?

I'm sure sales are a part of it, but there's no dishonesty in the label. Last time I checked, Pseudo Sue and Zombie Dust are still labeled as American Pale Ales (specifically, "Pale Ale" and "Undead Pale Ale," respectively), even though the way they're treated and enjoyed are really as slightly lower ABV IPAs. Wouldn't they also benefit from being marketed as IPAs?

It seems to be that SN and Bells updated the labels to reflect a style emerging in popularity (the American IPA, specifically, not just IPAs historically) that better described the beer in the bottle/can/keg than simply Pale Ale, which was fine, but less specific. And if it helps sales at the same time? Well, good for them! That's a win-win.

 

ISO Caribbean IPA.