Russian River Rant

Yemenmocha - you make it sound as if debt is something to strive for. Maybe I'm subconsciously part of the same debt-averse cult, but being debt-free, or at least limiting debt as much as possible, seems like a pretty good situation to me.

Unless someone on here is Vinnie and Natalie Cilurzo's accountant, then conjecture is driving both sides of the argument here, regarding whether they could or couldn't expand. I don't know whether they're turning $25k profit a year or $1mm a year, but whatever amount it is, it seems (based on the fact that they've continuously stated that they won't expand further) like it's enough for them. So whether it's a desire to not touch the pile of money they're sitting on and/or the desire to not take on debt/additional debt that they view to be needless (because the best case scenario would involve turning additional profit that they don't believe they need, along with all the drawbacks that come with expanding a business), then do you need a more plausible argument?

 

To be fair, those of us that have been critical of the OP are not denying his right to do any of this. And I would also stress that just because something is one's right to do, does not make exempt from being entitled on some level.

Look back at the OP--he is frustrated because he had to wait in line for something and wants the business owner to completely change his business model for the purposes of benefiting his own personal desire. How is this not entitlement? He believes that he is entitled to go to enjoy the Russian River experience without waiting in line.

I agree that it is absolutely his right to not patronize RR. I would argue that not going to Russian River is the most appropriate choice he could make. Unfortunately, it's hard to expect RR to change course, because 1) there are too many other people who don't mind waiting in line, and 2) even if demand dropped and the lines and craziness weren't what it is now, chances are the Cilurzos would still not change their business model. To that end...

...there is a difference between reaping the benefits of a unique supply/demand situation like the Cilurzos have found themselves in and intentionally creating this scenario. To my earlier point, this is not the type of scenario you can intentionally create. Frankly, it is impossible to project/predict this kind of popularity. No sound business plan includes "make product insanely popular" as a tactic. That's an outcome of proper product design and matching said product with prospective customers. In business, the best you can do is set yourself up for success--whether or not the success actually comes is a fickle thing, because people/consumers are fickle.

I have a feeling their beer has become more popular than they could have ever imagined when they started out. It's difficult to say that it was a known/foreseen consequence of their business strategy based on the quotes in that article. To me they sound more like people who never wanted to expand, but that acknowledge how their lack of expansion--when coupled with the insane demand--has afforded them sustained success. After all, with the status quo, they never have to worry about projecting demand in order to produce the correct amount of product. They produce capacity with the assurance that it will all move.

All that said, I don't for a second think that they are trying so hard to keep up with demand and can't. I agree that the decision not to expand is a conscious one. I just don't think there is anything wrong with not wanting to take on huge debt or grow the business to the point of having to manage a network of properties and assets.

Agreed.

It's hard to say. Difficult? Risky? Yes to both. But impossible? Absolutely not. There are countless examples of breweries who've expanded and maintained their quality. But with expansion comes risk, and with risk comes the potential to fail. The trick is that you can't always put the proverbial toothpaste back in the proverbial tube. If you try to expand and fail, it's not necessarily possible to go back to the way things were.

I think it's entirely reasonable to want consumers to make informed decisions. And they certainly need to realize that RR isn't expanding anytime soon... or ever. If that kind of things makes them want to stop supporting RR, then by all means, they should do that. My mantra is that no one should ever be spending their money in a way that upsets them or giving it to people that piss them off.

But I also can't really fault the Cilurzos for deciding not to expand. For all the customers that they might be pissing off, it seems they are making many more customers quite satisfied. In an ideal world, business owners would be able to run their business the way they want to while also making enough customers happy to succeed and remain open. It seems that Russian River is doing just that.

 

I'm with you for the most part and will respond in Robert Evans form. Can they do what they want with their business? You bet your sweet ass. Could they do something to make things better for customers and in the process make boatloads more money? Absofuckinlutely. Do they owe it to anyone to do that? Not a chance in hell, baby. Do I want them to raise prices? I'll answer with a question: do you want me to kick you in the balls? Could they expand and still keep quality up? History says you're goddam right.

I just think people have the right to be frustrated with the current state of affairs and not without necessarily being labeled whiners. This is a place that's popularity and demand has grown out of control who's owners choose to do nothing about it. Again, that's their right, but it doesn't make it any less annoying; that fact actually makes it more annoying. This is not a Hill Farmstead situation. HF is in the middle of nowhere and never was a place that you could just pop in while in the area and enjoy a few drafts and get some bottles or a growler to go but is now a constant shitstorm with a goddam bouncer and long waits. Yeah, it's easy to say "just go somewhere else" but it's freaking Russian River we're talking about. Third Street Aleworks is a below-replacement-level backup option.

As for me, I will continue to drink RR beer, but mostly on draft at places other than the brewery because I think it's too good not to. I think they're good people and I respect (most of) their business decisions, I just wish they would do more to make their beer more available at the very least to locals.

 

I too drove over an hour to visit Russian River recently. It's a destination that's worth the drive for me.

I walked in, found it was packed in spite of being the middle of a Monday afternoon, so I squeezed myself in to the bar as best and politely as I could and ordered a pint of Hopfather. While I was sipping I struck up a conversation with a couple of other standees. Lo and behold, one seat eventually opened up, and then another, and another. Eventually we were all seated at the bar, and as my drinking companions rotated in and out new faces joined our ongoing rambling. One pair waited while their table opened up, but decided to pass on the table after settling in with us. This roomful of strangers certainly didn't feel that way after the course of the afternoon. I left with a growler of Hopfather and a case of beer I could probably get, and for cheaper, locally--but I didn't have to time out my visit to a beer store (or three) spread across town. Had a blast, as always, tipped well, and looked forward to my next visit. Community building and camaraderie over craft beer? If this is the future then I'm all for it.

 

Given that 50% of all startups will be gone without a trace within 5 years after start up, there's a lot room for bad business decisions, and one of them can be attempting expansion. Now RR has been around for more than 5 years, so we can assume its run by people making reasonably good business decisions.

There are people in this thread saying that "expansion can be successful." That is absolutely true and there are indeed examples to prove it. However, expansion can also be a failure. That is also absolutely true and there are indeed examples to prove it.

What we don't have are the data needed to conduct a proper risk assessment. First, how many breweries have actually been successful enough to have attempted expansion in the first place? Second, how many have not? Third, of the breweries that actually attempted expansion, how many of them succeeded? Fourth, how many of those attempting expansion failed? Fifth, how many breweries have not attempted expansion and continued to succed. Sixth, how many breweries have not attempted expansion and failed.

More importantly, what are the factors that have to be in place to improve the likelihood of success if a brewery is successful enough to consider expansion.

 

One thing to consider is that if they were to expand now, they would have had to have placed larger hop contracts 3 to 5 years ago.

 

I don't really have any data to back that up, I was sort of exaggerating for effect, but given the fact that Spiced Ale, Dancing Man, and other out of season brews are sitting on shelves in some areas, I'd say the beer just sits there as beer does elsewhere.

 

Seen lots of stores that are totally ignoring those requests.

 

Hil Farmstead is winning and will continue to win. That dude is never ever going to contract brew or sell out to Long Trail

Sir -- I see a beer flop house in your future!

 

In NJ all the stores ignore those requests from RR.

 

Then there was the Nano School in Holland with ones and twos, here and there.

 

I was there last Friday a little after noon (2 people), walked right in, got seated at the bar almost immediately, ordered tasty pizza and had a few beers then left with a case of PTE and a few bottles of Damnation and such. The service was excellent, the beers stellar and the pizza very good.

 

Very good friend of mine just went to RR. He lives in PA and was really looking forward to it. After waiting in line outside for 40 minutes, they were let inside to stand in the back and wait for a table. 2 hours later they purchased a half dozen bottles and left, very dissatisfied wirh the experience. I felt bad because my wife and I were there exactly a year ago and walked right in, got seated and had pizza and some samplers. Its sad to hear how it's changed.

 

Even if they did so what. It was a business decision. They could very well make more $ selling one T-shirt than 3 beers. Seeing how their place is so full of tourists, I would bet they sell a lot of T-Shirts.

 

The great thing about the retail area is that it keeps the folks looking to buy merchandise from tying up the bartenders. It can still be a long wait to get a beer, but it was much worse when the bartenders had to deal with guys trying on hats.

 

That sounds like a really crappy experience. Did they say that there was poor communication from the RR folks that strung them along like that? To me, that's just salt in the wound; if you know you are in for 2 hrs from jump street, then there usually aren't such feelings of frustration.

Personally, I wouldn't do it. I'd find another time to go, or just avoid the place. But sites like BA can be a great resource for trips like that. Crowdsourcing known pitfalls and guiding visitors through them is something I would hope the local boards can be a great help with.

 

I felt bad because I told them to go, talked about what a great time we had. I recommended the deluxe beer sampler. He was so bummed to go so far and not be able to sit and enjoy.

 

I definitely hear that. I have a friend who said the same type of things to me, and he'd feel the same way if I had a similar experience. From this thread, at least, it seems there are good times and bad times, so hopefully someone reading along can try to hit it at a better time.

 

This just in! Problem solved!

WASHINGTON – Today, President Barack Obama officially declared a nationwide 1 bottle limit on Russian River Brewing Company's Pliny the Elder Double India Pale Ale. The President states, "Without over reaching, I'd like to find a way that maybe I too, can get some Pliny."

This latest wave of limiting how much Pliny a person can buy comes shortly after San Francisco Bay Area regions which previously had ample supply were suddenly restricted to only two bottles. Backlash form this restriction has caused severe traffic jams as poor souls who've love the beer now must drive as much as as 100 miles - looping back and forth between multiple retail stores in order to get the same amount of Pliny they had only a month ago.

Brewers Vinnie and Natalie of Russian River Brewing declined to comment specifically about the Presidents actions but did state that they were experiencing a quintessential level of happiness and wanted no more stress in their lives. When asked about their customers going crazy, demand being insane, the traffic jams, increase in pollution from cars on the road and loss of regional productivity caused by the local restriction, they were unaware but humbled to learn that people cared so much about their beer.

"We are glad that we make one of the top beers in the world and have lines out the wazoo for this product. Sure it sells out on the same day it is delivered to the store but our first priority is to quality...so we will not be making any more no matter what. Even if Barack gives us 100 million dollars, we aren't going to make more and we are happy about that. Just because you and the rest of the nation is stressed about Pliny and worried if they can get their monthly fix doesn't mean WE want to be.", said a company spokes person.

In an effort to alleviate the traffic congestion, road rage and the like, the new law clearly states that only one Pliny may be in one person's possession at one time and once per month. "The nationwide one Pliny limit has been put in place as an effort to - spread the wealth" says the President. "The CBO has created an algorithm which finds if this one bottle limit holds true, then the product could potentially be distributed to new areas that Russian River does not currently distribute to. But don't hold your breath."

The new law is easy, citizens who like to buy Pliny must purchase a new Pliny license from the DMV which they will present and have punched upon each monthly purchase. Once your card is punched, it becomes illegal to possess more than one bottle of Pliny during that month.

"Pliny the Elder is meant to be consumed now, immediately! It is meant to be savored not saved! The nationwide one bottle per month, per person limit seems to be the only logical way we can force the brewery to distribute more widely and systematically block those who hoard the beer or generally consume more than 2 per month. Of course this may not be constitutional but until Congress says so, I'm goin' with it."

Lines at RRBC are expected to be much shorter as the 1 bottle limit also applies to pints at the pub and your license will be punched.

What if?