14 Breweries Split from the Colorado Brewers Guild

however competent or incompetent the Guild may have been, it may not have made any difference in this umpteenth battle over grocery store sales. Some times an idea's time just comes, and this isn't the first time the grocery stores have thrown big money at it, thouagh it is the most they've thrown at it to date.

It really has been going on for over 30 years here, much longer than you've been here. That we've always managed to fight it off before by some combination of pluck, luck, and hard work doesn't mean that we were always going to be able to do it, and maybe this was the year that we weren't going to make it, ergo the compromise bill, which btw is not nearly as bad as losing that election would have been. The difficulty people like me had in the thread Jason linked to here in making the case to new Colorado beer advocates--beer advocates!--shows how hard it was going to be to sell to the general public, to keep the status quo.

How does the same lobbying firm now working for the new entity translate into meaningtul change? Seems to be a small outfit where one of two partners has a connection with craft brewing in that she did PR at Bristol for a significant period of time before moving into lobbying. Bios and representaIve clients (still including the Guild) are on their website. So turning away from Chris Black, how does keeping the same lobbying firm demonstrate a significant change from the so-called incompetence of the Guild?

 

I don't think the article said the lobbyist has been hired, yet. But, keeping the same lobbyist does communicate something...but what? It is interesting and we can speculate to just about any reason. Maybe the lobbyist thought the messaging instructions they were given were not clear, "right", enough, etc...and they had ideas that were shot down or ignored. Whatever the reasons, communicating it to the public would be a good idea.

Carlson's response is fairly nice, if still reactive.

 

Falling Rock doesn't have a "if you're not in the CBG, we don't pour your beer" policy. End of story.

 

Off topic, forgive me. My perception of it was, "we were your first account outside of the brewery. We have supported you for the last 20 years while you grew. Now I have to compete with you, among some other things that we have discussed in the past. Sorry, last straw." It wasn't that easy selling craft beer 15-20 years ago.

Kinda like, I'll always remember who was the first store to sign up for all of Backcountry's six packs. We sold the store limited items because of that. If I had the opportunity to open a liquor store in the same mall, I wouldn't. I think you know this store.

Not saying I agree with his decision, but I certainly understand it. I'm sure we all make business decisions based on our relationships with our business partners.

 

It is interesting that Oskar Blues left the Guild, but was one of the first to sign up with the new organization. I am not sure what their true reasons were for leaving the Guild, but I'm guessing it was a combination of things, from the supermarket issue, to their feelings about leadership and direction there, to the cost of their dues, which were high. I am wondering how many other breweries will sign up with the new organization, and how many will stay with the Guild.

 

Jesus Guys, the fact is Colorado does not have the best laws for craft. It's not as bad as other states, but craft better get way serious about protecting it. Distribution laws have to change, inhouse sales, etc. If folks don't protect it, it will get squeezed by big money. I have no issue with someone selling to a big conglomerate, but as a long time CO beer drinker I want a environment that fosters new brewers, like Comrade, etc. Vote with your dollars and throat punch your friends who buy big beer. Jesus guys, we can drink 2x4 out of a can, you want to see that lost?

 

Uh oh. A post about voting with your $. Might as well write that off as a lost cause as that phrase is the kiss of death.

Personally, I'm just going to watch the various news outlets and see what the various brewers have to say about all of this. I don't know enough to have an opinion and it seems like there's a lot in play here. No matter how friendly it can be at times (especially locally), there's still a business at stake.

 

So let's say 100 breweries join the new "guild" (is it a guild?). How would this affect the pursuit of causes currently undertaken by the CBG? Who will lawmakers listen to? If regulators receive different (or even competing) information about a certain issue, what happens? Would CBG and the new guild share information, resources, contacts, etc?

 

With some big names on the CBG board (Ska, Dry Dock, Telluride, Breckenweiser), I doubt the organization is going anywhere. Is it not beneficial when it comes to lobbying to have unified industry representation? As you mentioned, what happens when the 2 groups are not in cohesion on an important issue? Regardless of the ineptitude of the CBG in the past, I tend to think having 2 separate factions does not represent the best chance of fighting "the man."

 

As a distributor in a state where entities can hold several liquor licenses I will simply add that it is far less profitable to do business

I see this as having a whole lot to do with Breckenridge still having a spot at the table. Their interests in the legislation is in direct opposition to the craft brewers. It is a complete conflict of interest and if I were these brewers, I would have requested/insisted that Breckenridge be removed as a voting member. If the CBG refused to do that, then that could be the point of contention right there. I am just speculating here, but I have served on the board of the NMBG and this would have been a major concern to me.
From the Craft Brewers of this country, this is the major point of contention with brewers that sell to BMC. They are truly now in direct opposition to what is good for craft breweries. We can talk "sell out", "cheaters", til we're blue in the face. At the end of the day, they decided to turn their backs on all of us and truly made it an "us and them" issue.

 

The 14 brewers that signed this letter seem to be pretty upstanding and highly respected breweries. Do you think we'll see more breweries jumping ship over to this new organization?

 

Yes.

How many?, that's a tricky part. The smaller ones may be gun shy at first. The new ones (i.e. not operating yet) have a choice a) join CBG, b) join CBC, c) join both, d) join neither. Can a brewery join both?? Would that be a good or bad idea?

 

After the hubub Tipsy's threw their beers on sale and no longer do business with them.

 

This is what I suspected it was all about, without any info. And it is a GREAT reason (IMO) to leave the Guild...

 

Two guilds will be counterproductive and the longer this goes on, the more Inbev and grocery stores will be able to erode the power of craft beer in CO. I think that it is an arrogant and destructive move, especially from some of the bigger names in CO craft beer, some of whom already have beer on the grocery store shelves.

 

• We need legislative and regulatory leadership and vision. Historically the CBG has reacted to changes; we need a proactive agenda.
• There has been, for many years in the CBG, a culture of information control and director behavior that is the opposite of transparent. This is not healthy for our trade association and we are no longer willing to condone this management style.
• With the changing landscape of craft where multinational brewers are buying craft brewers and blurring the lines, our by-laws and articles of incorporation don’t reflect what we believe to be membership’s wishes.

Nothing was getting done by the CBG.
So anything that gets done by this new trade association will be more productive than the state of existing affairs.
Would you have some of Colorado's craft beer leaders just sit on their hands and hope that things get better?

Change was necessary. To call this move arrogant or destructive isn't even close to reality.

I applaud anyone that sees the need for change, and takes the initiative to make it happen.

 

The response by Carlson mentions that they have actually been working and succeeding at many things. I would like to know what they are and how they achieved them. But, I'm not a member so I really don't have a say in it