How important is being "Craft" really?

Eh? We owned the word...we've lived the word...long before anyone cared. We, the craft brewers had an organization that cared about us and represented our interests when no one else cared, took us seriously, or would give us the time of day. They defended us, because we needed defending. They represented us because we needed representing. They stuck up for us, because we as an nascent industry needed it. The big guys tried to block, obscure, dismiss, SKU rationalize and "100% share of mind" us out of town. Those that weren't there, won't remember that. I do.

We approached brewing as if it could be a craft, while the big guys intentionally tried to dismiss and railroad.

What's changed? Nothing, except that all of sudden over the past few years they've decided they want a piece. That it's in their best interest to co-op, throw into question, and otherwise obfuscate in a textbook cable news style.

It bemuses me when someone decides to accept a big phat check, and then whine "I've been kicked out of the club by those mean bullies in the BA." You weren't kicked out son, you left. Willingly. Your call. Totally your call.

Those who chose to ignore history are doomed to repeat it. There were once 3000+ breweries in the US. Then it went down to around 50 (depending on how it's counted). It was predicted in the late 70's by some industry experts that it would go down to just TWO or THREE (and it nearly happened, and would have except for a few oddballs who envisioned something different while everyone thought they were nuts). Who do you think wants exactly that...TWO or THREE brewing entities? I'm pretty sure I know who, and we should be mighty careful or we'll be the boiled frog.

The BA still does their livin' best to represent our interests. They have the long view in mind. They know how the world turns, and how we've got to be careful, as behind the scenes there are some large entities that no matter what they say on the surface just want us to fucking go away already.

 

I agree. Eventually the designation of 'craft' will have to be addressed, as it will hold less and less value as breweries grow. The BA can't just keep forever changing the guidelines to fit breweries in. I personally think we are already there with breweries such as Sam Adams and Sierra Nevada, which you already mentioned. By past standards, they would have been out long ago. Yet I think in most peoples minds, they would consider them a craft brewery.

Which as someone already mentioned above, I think the term craft has been worn out anyways. There is good beer, there is bad beer, there is corporate owned beer, there is privately owned beer. There are those that brew for fun, those that do it as a passion, those that do it to make money. The list goes on and on and sometimes the reasons and/or designations overlap. Not to mention how subjective it can become. Ask 100 people "what is craft," and you will get 100 different answers. I don't think we can say, "this is craft and this is not craft anymore." If for no other reason than the confusion of what that can mean. I don't think there is a way to designate breweries into those two categories any longer, by numbers or anything else.

 

Here is my take:

I like the idea of the Mom and Pop shop selling mind blowing beer. I'll buy it if I can find it. It's usually more expensive.

I also like the idea of great beer being widely available at a good price point.

Example: this Canadian went for a short visit to North Dakota. I bought a 12 pack of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale and Hop Hunter. I think both cases were around 13.75 each (O pay more for a six pack in Canada). I've never had either since I can't get it where I live. The Pale ale is good. I loved the Hop Hunter. SN beers are widely available and relatively inexpensive. Now, what if those two beers became popular and overcame Bud Light or whatever crap many drink? Wouldn't that be a good thing?

 

Exactly, and as we said, the barrel count doesn't really work either because some craft brewers are getting so big that they may not fit that criteria. You end up with all of these different ideas and thoughts for classification, but non of them really work. Even the one quantifiable designation doesn't fit because it begins to become muddled as breweries expand, grow, merge, etc.

It's like I said earlier, I have no idea how they should group breweries, nor would I want to be in their shoes trying to sort it out. I think it is great to have the BA looking out for the breweries we love, but who knows how they will or should designate them in the future. It will be interesting to see what happens in the future.

 

Fritz Maytag was one of those "oddballs" who actually predicted the opposite of total consolidation. Sometimes the folks who are "ahead of their time" are actually so because they end up paving the way for a future where they'd fit in. Let's hope his prediction remains relevant.

 

Large breweries can ( and should) produce excellent beer; they have the resources to hire a top notch quality staff, dump bad batches, secure contracts for the best ingredients, and all that. We should not fear large breweries, and having Sierra Nevada, Stone, Lagunitas, and whoever else, available in places where smaller breweries can't compete should be seen as a fantastic option to have. What a threshold to have crossed.

The way I've always looked at it is this: how are the decisions made? If it's done in a 'corporate' way, where each department shapes the final product, where nothing is released until the consulting firms do their focus groups and product testing- then chances are very high that the beer won't achieve greatness, and probably will be actually be fairly uninspired. If, on the other hand, things are run with an organization that is focused on bringing its founder's vision into existence, for good or for ill- then in that more independent atmosphere exciting and great things will happen.

 

Very. Support your local brewer !

 

@StoneGreg

Thank you. I get tired of hearing Internet "experts" pontificate on craft. It is a word defined by the brewers who invented the movement.

I am not boycotting BMC, but all other things being close to equal, I will favor smaller over larger, and local over not.

 

I don't know whether you don't get what I posted or what, but I don't have a problem with most of what you post here.

Of course, the BA is backing the brewers they represent against "the big guys". That is what a trade association does. There is nothing wrong with that.

This is not about that. This is about the term "craft" as regular beer consumers use it.

The BA defined the term "craft brewer" to define whose interests they are representing, and whose they are not. Unfortunately, the way they use the term is not how consumers use the term. Hence all the roiling over and over on this board about such inane questions as "Is Stone really craft?"

Oh, and the part I don't agree with? Are you seriously arguing that August Schell Brewing Company and D. G. Yuengling & Son would agree with "You weren't kicked out son, you left. Willingly. Your call. Totally your call."?

 

I've pretty much dropped the term "craft beer" from my vocabulary. There is good beer and bad beer. Independent breweries and BMC are capable of producing both. I don't really care anymore who makes what. Is it good? Then I will drink it. That being said, I don't even support local breweries if they don't make good beer. Sorry. Its just beer.

 

If you like beer, thank the good Lord you are living now. So many wonderful choices! I do try to strike a balance between local craft and "bigger" craft. I even like the occasional Blue Moon. I am enjoying it all!

 

^^^This. Mic drop.

 

'micro' should replace 'craft'

also: i don't care if you use corn, rice, or barley, just make good beer and i'll buy it

 

Not at all important anymore. It's become 'Kobe beef'. Everyone who sells wagyu in their restaurant incorrectly label it as 'Kobe beef'. But just the same, there's too many people interested in good beer that any brewery would keep their numbers down and potentially their quality up, while maintaining a small batch 'craft' identity. I liken this to those tiny little Japanese restaurants in Kyoto, that only seats 10 people. When you put them on the map with 3 michelin stars or the like , their would popularity and name booms, but those who attempt to expand, their quality suffers, and you can no longer consider it the same place anymore. They probably need a new term to replace 'craft', to reflect a more personal and person to person philosophy on cooking/brewing/etc... Or emphasize small production, and those other little details.

 

If they're cranking out tasty, high quality beer, why should I care how many barrels they make per year?

 

Mnale

Did the brewers you mention get a big fat check? I think it is clear Stone Gregg was referring to breweries that were bought out by BMC. 90% or more of the "is it craft" debates are about Goose Island or Blue Moon. They are also the breweries you mentioned earlier in this thread. Raising the independent AAL brewers, who are now included in the BA definition, is a red herring.