Best by date vs born on date

Born on date for sure. The fact that many cans I see don't have a stamped on date on the bottom pisses me off. It's not that difficult.

 

The milk industry should not tell me when my milk is the freshest by. I Will determine that. Same goes with eggs. And cheese. And meat. And produce.
Oh, and cereal, and sauces and creams. And potato chips. Or most snacks.

Actually, I would say that for most every single thing we eat or drink, it has a "best by" date, not a "packaged on/pulled from/butchered by/cultivated on date.

So, why should beer "have to have it" ?

 

I prefer "enjoy by" dates...so I don't need to think, just drink

 

Budweiser does it, I'm not sure why so many craft breweries can't or won't.

 

Because if you eat expired milk, meat, cheese or eggs there is a potential for harm and possible illness. Human pathogens cannot survive in beer, the worst you risk with old beer is an unpleasant experience, there is no public safety issue. Pretty simple. really.

Beer is not food, nor should it be considered as such. Rules and regulations are not the same and one should not be applied to the other.

 

Budweiser has the disposable income that some craft breweries will never even dream of.

The bigger point is that people keep buying undated beers, products move and breweries make profits. Where is their motivation? Why change when the customers don't care enough to change their purchasing habits?

 

Yeah, I'm sure putting a date on something is costly.

 

Depending on the brewery. Sure, it is not expensive but everything is relative and not all things are equal. Some small breweries run a thin profit margin and any small investment is a very big deal.

Still does not address my second point, where is the motivation?

 

Er, sure... nothing to do with my post, but right on!

 

You said some people prefer IPAs a week or two old. That's absurdly fresh. The part of beer community that's overly fresh obsessed is really annoying. I know several guys who do think 3 or 4 weeks old is too old.

Unless you're going to the brewery, a week old IPA is a pipe dream. Most IPAs don't even hit the distributor floor for a week or two once it's been bottled. It happens once in a while, sure. I saw 2 day old Flower Power the other day but if I was that pick I don't think I'd drink beer again.

The ideal is both best by (so the product can be pulled on a strict day) and either a julian code/bottling date both in clear view (so the consumer can make their own decision) but I can't name more than a handful of breweries that do both. Weyerbacher (both clear as day in blue ink on the neck), Ballast Point (julian date and best by)

 

I prefer bottled on dates for sure, let me make up my own mind. I've seen IPA's with BB dates two years after bottling(I'm looking at you Mikkeller!!) and on the flip side I've seen cellar monsters with a BB date a year after bottling.

 

Agreed. Too many people confuse the BA world with the real world. We all need to accept that we, on BA, are the minority. We may be a vocal minority but we are the minority. The majority of the customer base is either less concerned with freshness, completely oblivious or completely indifferent. It is not like the majority of the customer base has a fit if a beer is over 6-8 weeks old.

 

I don't necessarily disagree, however my "week or 2 old" example was just an extreme at one end of the spectrum. The overall point I was trying to make was that individual palates have different freshness preferences, ranging from beers that are a couple of weeks to a few months old, and (for the majority) everything in-between. So with a bottle date, you know exactly how old your beer is, rather than a much vaguer enjoy by date. I just don't see the argument against being more, rather than less specific.

 

Fair point, I know I'm guilty of looking at such issues through my own lens. Still, as I mentioned in an earlier post, a bottled date coupled with something on a label reading "we recommend you consume within (X amount of time) of the bottle date" would seem to satisfy both camps.

 

This mirrors what I prefer. My local example is Bell's, they list a packaging date as well as a recommended shelf life. Listing both gives a complete picture.

 

One thing that might be useful could be dual dating - a born on date AND a best by date (provided the automated labelers can do this)

 

There needs to be some sort of dating.

*I think my father said the same thing to me when I went to college.

 

Water has a best by. So does soda, toothpaste, and coffee. There are best by dates on Many things that aren't food and won't get you sick. The company just knows when it's not the same product they put out. Beer fits that same bill.

 

I think most of us here on this site would prefer a bottled on date. We represent a minority of the minority of beer drinkers. Most if not all of us check dates on the bottles and decide if we will buy it. Hop forward beers the fresher the better. Stouts, Belgians etc can have some age on it and we are fine.

I understand why brewers use enjoy by though. For the casual drinker, retail and wholesaler it is easier to see if it is out of date. I believe @Sixpoint said something similar before. In Germany every beer I saw was best buy from 1 year of bottling. Granted I didn't buy an 11 month old hefe but that was they way they did it. I would be ok with something like that in the States. Maybe have certain styles at 6 months and others at 12. Just get rid of the damn Julian Code dating please.

 

Definitely born-on date. I think everyone should have their own philosophy of when certain styles should be consumed by. The easiest way that helps everyone the most is to just have the bottled-on date, so you at least know what you're workin' with.