GABF Limiting Big Beer

Ok... I guess that makes some sense. Although it sounds like the BA is allowing a tyranny of the majority within their ranks. Then again maybe for them losing support of handful of non-craft brewers is worth solidifying support from 6000 and growing independent brewers.

 

So they took big beer's money to start and continue the festival but now shun them? I am not a fan of this practice at all.

 

The limiting of floor space is different from the entering of the competition. The number of entries per brewery have been limited for a few years.

Have they shut out anyone from the competition?

 

They certainly took BIG beer's money as in the dues they pay to the Brewer's Association. In the big scheme of things they obtain more money from the Independent breweries but the BIG beers pay more money proportionally since the amount of dues are based upon beer production (i.e., number of barrels annually per specific brewery location).

Me neither.

It seems to me that a trade organization that accepts dues from it's members should represent their interests.

Cheers!

 

Any of the companies owned by AB or any others already have a huge number of better resources and opportunity all year long. It's one event. I think they will get over it quite easily. The only scene they will make is because it is convenient for them to look like the victim here when the rest of the year they give everyone else the shaft. If they choose not to return(not sure why anyone would ever want a miller at an event like this in the first place. I'd prefer to not see big bev at my beer events. It's a total waste or space) it just opens the floor for more true craft breweries? I'm mostly just confused why we're all are so concerned for companies already doing well enough to have been bought out? Seems like they've done just fine

 

@JackHorzempa

I wonder what Victory and Southern Tier thought of this news.

I find the rule to be strange. If you want to lessen the presence of these companies, then make a rule that isn't shy about it. Making a rule that has nothing to do with "big beer" directly but essentially only impacts them is a roundabout way of making change. I assume it protects the BA from a certain level of criticism.

 

Yes, it is indeed a roundabout way of making changes IMO. Add in the aspect that apparently the BIG beer companies were not directly contacted about this change it just sort of smells to me.

Well, the independent breweries most likely view this change as being a favorable change.

The Brewers Association accepts the dues from BIG beers (hundreds of thousands of dollars from ABI alone) but apparently has no compunction in treating them differently. It seems to me that if the money from BIG beer is OK with the Brewers Association then they should represent their interests.

Needless to say but other BAs have a differing view on this matter.

I have not seen a message of Fuck 'evil' BIG beer yet but I suppose it is only a matter of time before this post gets made?

Cheers!

 

I thought you'd mainly react to my comment about Victory and Southern Tier. I am assuming that this rule means that only one of those breweries can have a booth at GABF unless space opens up for both of them.

 

Yeah, I guess you might be correct here assuming that ABV is considered the "single" brewery.

Frankly I have found some of the machinations that the Brewers Association has been going through the past few years to be confusing.

So, yes if the Brewers Association 'counts' ABV as being the "single" brewery than only one of the two (Southern Tier or Victory) can have a booth (unless one gets in via a secondary lottery).

Cheers!


P.S. On the Brewers Association website it lists:

"Victory Brewing Co

420 Acorn Ln

Downingtown, PA 19335-3040 | Map

Phone: (610) 873-0881

Type: Regional

www.victorybeer.com

Greater than 25% ownership by Artisanal Brewing Ventures, which is a craft brewer."

I personally view ABV as being a holding company/investment firm vs. a “craft brewer” but it would seem that I am ‘confused’ here?

 

I gotta admit - though I am not a fan of AB and any of their subsidiaries as I don't pay to drink any of their beers as a matter of choice for myself, I will echo the sentiments of others in this thread. This is a dangerous path for the BA to take money from them but not allow them to this festival as a big part of this festival is the beer competition. In turn, this makes the BA look conceited.

I'm left scratching my beard.... ¯\_(?)_/¯

 

Where does it say they are not allowed in the competition?

My reading of the information linked to above is that they were allowed one slot in the lottery for a booth space and then won a second one in the 2nd round of the lottery.

 

I fouled up. Okay, one slot, but quite limited, wouldn't you think?

 

Limited? Sure. Unfairly? Not clear.

 

Ah, come on. Do you really think the Brewer's Association may take themselves too seriously and think too much of themselves?

 

I am not a big beer fan but I don't like the idea of excluding anyone. That said, there has to be a capacity limit somewhere for such an event. What's fair? I don't think anyone would like a lottery system.

 

It's a competition, so why restrict entries ? If your big beer and you get trashed on a blind sampling then you get the message. If your a small brewery doing it right then you win, fair and square.

 

Entries to the competition or not limited.

 

The GBF floor festival is separate from the competition

Beers entered in the competition are limited. Only so many beers can be judged in the time allotted with the judge pool.

Entry information for the competition.

https://www.greatamericanbeerfestival.com/brewers/details-for-entering/

 

Yet again the BA looks hypocritical in its fight against big beer.