Should price/value/availability apply to beer reviews?

It should not be but it is, we have to deal with that.

 

It's not one of the categories and I don't think it should be. I don't mind if people want to note the cost of that beer on their rating though. Some people feel that is useful information so that you can know if prices in your area are similar. Your experience in getting the beer will influence the rating. If it was terribly hard to get, mediocre anyway and expensive too ; I would expect your rating to naturally be lower. It's human nature.

 

I don't think so. Is there some credibility to the old BA gag of "rare tastes soooo good?" Yes, I believe there is some artificial inflation due to the "rare" factor but it shouldn't be that way.

But I do think from an informational standpoint price especially would be useful. I often think in terms of value vs. quality. For example, Jai Alai at $10.49/6 pack (where I am) is a much better value/quality ratio than Sculpin is at $8.99/bomber (we don't get six packs of Sculpin here).

The more info the better, IMO. But I don't think price and availability should count toward the inherent quality of a beer.

 

Blind tastings followed by public display of the results might be the only way to combat hype. At least this is the only way I've seen peoples gaze turned towards local brews of the same caliber.

 

it's a user review site. accept bias, and don't cry too hard about beer someone else is drinking that you don't get to.

 

If I have any bias at all it's that I tend to talk up the beers that are more available and affordable while I talk down those that are difficult to obtain.

I think the bias can go both ways

 

No, but it does.

 

People rate Dark Lord high? And no PTY would not fall out of top 10 if year round

 

This is a fool's errand. It would be unfair to Old Rasputin Imperial Stout if one person bought it at a cheap liquor store in Oakland and another person bought it at an expensive bar in São Paulo. In said example, the former would score higher than the latter because Old Rasputin is not only tough to find in São Paulo, it's much more expensive too. Another example would be Left Hand; somewhat easy to find in Amsterdam, but not available in California. How would you rate it then?

My point is there are different regions in the world with completely different representations of beers, completely different cultures (you can buy and drink Augustiner in the subway, the subway, in Munich), and completely different tax structures which influence the final price of a beer. You're not going to fairly grade said beer with a score of "availability" and "price", it would render the worthiness of said beer worthless.

 

Let me use all caps for this. NO. That Dark Lord is mentioned before the second page of the thread is a sure sign this thread is a red herring. The only thing that will be noted in a review is that it might be pricey and otherwise hard to get. That you had to suffer the humiliation of waiting in line or driving like a jagoff to every store to hoard to get that rarity with a high pricepoint doesn't matter for how good or not it is and that does not mean that it gets more points than a beer which is for all intents and purposes better and which is also available at the local Walgreens all year. That'll make a funny review if you put it in that you ran out of gas on your way to get that last bottle of whatever when you have raided three stores already but it doesn't make the beer any better except for to you when you get home and crack that one open.

 

Availability and Distro should not play into any rating.

 

If you factored in price and availability, that would inflate the ratings of BMC and their kin. They certainly are available and cheap. Natural Light might be the #1 beer NOT!

 

It might be interesting to have a secondary "value meter" in addition to the BA score. Users could rate their perceived values based on their rating of it, how much it cost, would they buy it again, etc. This could be displayed along side the BA score and the Bro's score without being included in those scores. Imagine a fuel gauge type graphic indicating very low value all the way to very high value.

 

I would agree that availability and distribution have no place in ratings... However, I would argue that price plays an important component... While it has no impact on appearance, smell, taste or mouthfeel, it does have an important impact on overall drinkability...

A general economic concept that I carry with me in most decisions is the concept of "utility" which I define as "units of happiness obtained" / "unit of cost." If Beers A provides the same "units of happiness" as Beer B, but costs 1/2 the price, the I would consider Beer A have higher utility and therefore to be more drinkable. The same general concept applies to everything (televisions, Cars, dining out, etc.) and while everyone's personal scale related to utility may differ, the theory holds true...

Not saying that's right or wrong, it's just the way my brain works... Cheers...

 

I like the way you used to be able to input prices. To me I make these choices at the store. If I feel the beer is worth wherever they charge for it. When it gets opened price is never a factor on HOW good it is to ME. Now I will note if I think the prices was too high in my review, every time. Since I do keep my own notes, its kind of silly to lie to myself about how I thought he beer tasted...my reviews here are just my notes.

Just like the other day at founders in Florida day. sure the place I went to, the prices bugged me, but I reviewed those beers honestly to myself, so I can look at my notes/reviews later and go to myself, I say do I want to buy that again?? bottom line review for yourself.

 

No.
/endthread

 

Good beer is good beer because we like to drink it. Rarity might not make it better, but it does make it special. I think we all know the feeling of scoring something out of the ordinary. It's what sparks the trading and sharing. I'm sure I'm not alone in wanting to find appreciative friends to open something rare with. I don't think that price and availability should negatively impact the rating. It should be noted to inform those unfamiliar, but it shouldn't be in the rating.

On these same lines: Budweiser shouldn't get a bump because their crap is pumped out like mad.

 

Maybe there could be a way to add this in a fun way. Perhaps leave the scoring system untouched. But then have a sort of "badge" system for value. Reviewers could check a yes/no box, or maybe some other simple system, and then beers could have gold/silver/copper or whatever award for value. Sierra Nevada Torpedo would have its score and then gold badge for value, whereas Sculpin would not have such a badge (most likely).