Thank You InBev

That brought a tear to my one eye.

 

No matter how good BCBS is, I just can't bring myself to buy Goose Island products knowing that InBev is trying to muscle out the craft beer competition.

 

If they really wanted to make quality craft beers they could be game changers.

 

Call me crazy, but I occasionally buy BMC products...never really bought into the damn the man mentality when it comes to the big boys. I mean I shop at Walmart for Christ sake....

As long as they don't buy a craft brewery and drive it into the ground I don't care who they own. Make the beers I love more widely available and reasonably priced, don't screw with recipies and you're golden in my book.

 

Since we don't get BCBS in WA this isn't really an issue...but I think I can safely say that I wouldn't buy it knowing it came from InBev. I wouldn't damn those who did or try to convince them not to, but as a personal choice I'd rather support a real craft brewery and not support the practices of InBev. There is more than enough beer out there to drink and I'd rather my limited funds go the little guys at the end of the day.

 

i agree with you about saving breath & energy on death marches, and fully support your optimistic views on potential increased availability. i'll have to respectfully disagree on some of the unproven points of optimism though. going back to my prior point, there aren't that many examples of expansion, acquisitions or alterations that provided a final product as likeable & sought after as the original. that just seems to be ingrained in history.

on top of that, there's maybe a couple of small releases of (prior to BT) Van Winkle whiskey left @ the 20 & 23 year benchmarks (NOT CHEAP). Heaven Hill is quietly canceling Elijah Craig 18. Wild Turkey switched it's signature 101 rye to 81 proof. Weller Antique lost it's age statement and there's talk of discontinuing it altogether. these things are happening for a reason. InBev appears to be getting in right when the elite barrels, distilled by the dinosaurs are going extinct.

you're right the Halls could've built up capacity, but i fear the industry they relied on to facilitate barrels is struggling with the same resource challenges InBev probably will on this venture. it isn't just a matter of bigger equipment/facilities - you'd need quality, spent barrels to put your increased capacity into to begin with.

i'll be interested to see their attempt to crank out final product that meets the expectations of the faithful. in truth i expect the first few releases to be good, however, probably still fairly limited. the reason i expect they'll be both good but limited is because unless the bourbon gods rain down on them seriously, they probably are going to be forced to cull the shhh out produce to make sure they only dump honey barrels. which means the price isn't likely to soar downward - (they'll want to cover the cost of whatever doesn't meet expectation), & remaining limited = 0 incentive to lower prices.

ask yourself this - InBev moved in & BCBS seems to be more limited than ever. what happened to the anticipated subsequent release? and where's that wheated BCBS they were rappin' about bottling months ago? the: "We decided not to bottle & only put it in kegs" line - sounds a lot like code word for: "A shitload tasted marginal at best, it wasn't worth the bottling run for the small usable volume so we were forced to go with a single market segment (kegs)". if that is in fact what's transpired, it's could very well be a good indicator of things to come.

 

Again: where's the proof that it will be easy to get BCBS year-round? This is hype.

 

It came from a statement by Goose Island some months ago. They picked up a huge warehouse for additional barrel storage, and intimated that this was the plan. Whether or not it happens is up in the air, but that's less hype and more a matter of promises, empty or otherwise.

 

I can't really see this coming close to happening.

The few who were hoarding it will not outweigh the masses that will now purchase because it's so widely available. If they expand their reach far enough, the supply will never be fully saturated. Likewise, I'm sure a major company like this already has done their homework as far as marketing, advertising, etc.

As far as trade value is concerned, if it reaches enough markets, this is going to turn into a widely "extra'd" beer in the future.

 

The money you spend on BMC products goes directly to the same company that has told bar owners that if they don't take one/two/several/all of their craft beer taps off of their line then they will stop bringing all BMC products (including any of the hard alcohol the distribute) to their bars.

It's not a "damn the man" argument, it's just an argument to help smaller beer companies have a shot at selling their product.

 

Well, what you're suggesting will happen is precisely the opposite of how things were until a year ago. BCBS pretty much sat on shelves year round - it was only the AB buyout announcement that sent everyone scrambling for it because everyone was paranoid AB would kill it off. Then 2011 only ended up being a portion of a batch, which further sent everyone into a tizzy...

Realistically, once this beer is copious again, it should be back to how things were in early 2011. The craft beer community has proven to be fickle and drive by emotion in their purchasing decisions. So we'll see.

 

I like me some good heroin and I tell you, AL Qaeda had the best stuff in town. Normally I would be opposed to supporting a terrorist group who wants to blow up our country but the heroin is really good so that makes buying from them fine and dandy.*

Sure the Halls could have made BCS more widely available but at what price? What would they have had to sacrifice in order to do so? Let's not forget the increased flexibility and resources inbev has provided that allows the current upswing in production.

*This point was obviously exaggerated but you see where I am going with this.

 

It's called business.

 

Can you document that claim or are you just repeating things you've heard?

 

Providence may have been overstating what is happening, but similar things have happened to Bar/Restaurant owners I know. The scenario is usually this: owner isn't really selling draught Bud and wants to change the tap handle while still carrying the bottled product. He goes to his AB-affiliated distributor and asks for a craft selection to replace it- and that's when the threat comes down: "change that handle and you get no more Bud". It doesn't even matter if the guy is still buying another beer that the distributor sells (i.e. the distributor isn't losing out). Once it's their (AB) territory you can't change it; and it also gives lie to the 'fact' that the distributors are independent. They may not be demanding all the taps become theirs, but once it is they won't budge.

 

i got nothing but love for cavedave, seriously. if everybody could be this optimistic, the world would be a much better place, or if nothing else, nobody would notice/care that it wasn't.

for this to work, we have to assume GI didn't make "enough". i assume they made a lot more than we saw - they certainly indicated there was a substantial amount of BCBS coming along with a newer wheated iteration, "as soon as it's ready". which that's my point, apparently it was NEVER ready. i doubt the disappearing act was related to the old facility. so the first thing to ask yourself - will a newer, bigger facility simply mean newer, larger amounts of "never ready"?

or it could be fairly said that someone convinced you they were trying to do that. surely it has occurred to you that you've been told a bunch of things that sound awfully good?

curious, which artificial rarity(ies) are you referring to with that the Halls specifically "made" scarce & difficult to acquire?

 

what a dumb argument. if a business does something that hurts you (e.g. destroys little breweries you like), you boycott it, to deter them from doing so.

"but what they're doing Is Just Business."

i don't give a shit if they're doing it because voices in their head tell them to... what does that have to do with me? i want the craft breweries they hurt to survive. if they illegally bribe bars to drive out competition, i'm against that. "but that's how business works"--the scale of the irrelevance of such a comment is giant.

"why did you assault that person?"
"i'm a bully."
"well, time to take you to jail."
"no no, maybe you didn't hear me; i'm a bully. don't you see?"

---

p.s. re: the hypocrisy argument people are parroting somewhat foolishly, i'll once again point out that "i shouldn't do X, because it is bad," is not refuted by "i do Y, and it's bad."

you can go to the gas station and pour gas on the ground all day if you want, the myriad other moral / immoral acts you might otherwise commit remain either moral or immoral. hypocrisy is totally irrelevant. [edit: not to mention the fact that boycotting A-B is not necessarily a moral stance to begin with; it's a practical one, to not support someone who does things you condemn, in an effort to influence their behavior. "but that doesn't work!" go to school, yes it does.]