Is non-craft really that bad?

I mean a beer that tastes good is a beer that tastes good. So in that respect the answer to the title is no.

But I can respect people choosing not to give their money to the AB-INBEVs of the world.

Edit - there used to be a lot more strong feelings on here regarding my second point, until GI were bought out. Then things definitely quietened down. I can't talk - unfortunately I love BCBCS.

 

Does this count as a non-craft, big brewer?

 

I find it horrendous that a macro brewer would go to the effort to produce a beer that I might like, shame on them!

If it's good beer, it's good beer. Sure, I support small brewers, but that doesn't mean I have to become single or simple minded about it.

 

I voted yes. I know there's principals but at the end of the day, I'm going to drink a good/quality beer regardless on who made the beer. (I.E. I still buy shoes at Wal-Mart.) I know the business practices are questionable yet, when I want an "okay" pair of shoes for cheap, I'm going to Wal-Mart.

 

I don't think that non-craft is that bad. I drink macro AAL's during the summer months and find them enjoyable. Of course I'd rather have something else, but I can't afford to drink as much Allagash White as I can Miller High Life, now can I?

 

Nope. Buy American and support your local economy.

 

I'd prefer small and local, but I'll still be buying Bourbon County because it's delicious.

 

I mainly support real craft brewers, but if I'm at a bar or a function where only macro-brewery beers are present I'll choose the 'craftiest' beer that I can. I've also purchased a 6-pack of the craft beer efforts by the macros from the store in the past, and will probably do so again if I'm curious about something that they produce.

 

Yep. And I find Shock Top rather refreshing on a hot golfing day.

 

It's not good beer but it's not undrinkable either. It is what it is. It's cheap and mass produced using low cost ingredients. They do have several 1-ups on the craft industry though. They have the consistency that no craft brewery can claim. They also have the capital to ensure that every batch is virtually identical.

Do I think they could produce a world-class beer? Absolutely. But their business models don't allow for them to do so. They value profit over all. They do not value quality ingredients or the 'craft' of beer making. They absolutely have the resources at their disposal and I have no doubt that their brewmasters have the talent. But, their current clientele has no interest and their target clientele (essentially us) already has a negative preconception about their beers.

 

Sure, I've tried many a great "craft" lagers. But I usually skip that isle as much as possible. I also don't even think of looking down the BMC isle. I prefer to drink beer from "local" or "smaller" breweries (God knows I can't say micro-brewery!!!) such as Straub, Lion/Stegmaier, Schell's, Yuengling etc. So in my opinion yes, non-craft is just as good, if not better.

 

While a few of you guys have pointed out that large brewer's business models don't allow for expanded craft offerings and so forth, and while I generally agree with you, I think that Pabst's push with the Ballantine IPA could represent a new trend among big brewers. If Pabst starts really making money on this reasonably priced, evidently quite delicious beer, it'd be a safe bet that large brewers are likely to try to emulate them.

If Miller, Bud, or Coors would jump on the session IPA bandwagon and make something good, sessionable, and cheap, they'll tap into a major revenue source. The big brewers know that targeting 50+ year old white sports fans is only going to help them along for so long, before they begin noticing a precipitous drop in sales as their main target demographic starts dying. Big brewers will adapt or die, and we all know they have the money to adapt, the main question is just when.

 

Some of the recent posts seem to imply the OP is talking about about the BMC staples (Bud Light etc). I think the question is basically - do you care who brewed the beer as long as it tastes good? I.e. if AB-Inbev brewed an APA that tasted better to you than HF Edward (whether they did this overtly, e.g. "Budweiser Pale Ale", or under a faux-craft label doesn't matter), would you buy it because all that matters to you is taste? Or would you "settle" for HF Edward, because you don't want to give money to the large corporate breweries.

And of course with breweries like Stone, Sierra Nevada and Sam Adams continuing to expand and become legitimately large breweries in their own right, the water becomes even murkier.

 

Being in Germany, I'm sure you will forgive me if I don't always drink "craft" beer. However, that being said I prefer to drink small Brauhaus beers when I can to support the smaller guy and to enjoy some great beers.

 

All I care about is great beer. I don't care about where it comes from.

 

I voted yes. But as I posted in another thread, the big brewers seem to be following the old adage "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. At least for the time being. As I also posted [in so many words], if the big brewers really wanted to stick it to small brewers, they could produce a quality craft beer much cheaper, market the crap out of it and send alot of little guys down the tubes. Price and advertising are strong motivational forces.

 

Maybe in the US, but in Germany I drank mass produced beer that I considered to be quite good...Bitburger comes to mind

 

If they could successfully brew a top shelf beer, I would have 0 issue buying it and drinking it like water. Craft isn't inherently better than non-craft. I don't have a 15 year old's anti-establishment mindset to prevent me from buying the best product available regardless of who makes it.