Three Floyds Releases

So on that note, just curious b/c I don't know, does 3F have profit sharing or the like? Something Todd couldn't get at Surly?

 

Since they are primarily a blender, probably not....

 

When the owner takes all the financial risk and put up all the money then they deserve to reap the rewards.

While the head brewer is important you also have logistics, packaging, marketing, etc. which all are needed to make a brewery successful. Sounds like Todd became bitter and made the decision to leave a successful brewery, more power to him.

 

So, for you build a company from the ground up, no matter how important someone is, you don't believe there should be profit sharing?

I don't follow this logic. Profit sharing is done to reward people for their role - past, present, and future. Just because you are the president doesn't mean that you would be as successful without some critical people. Those people should be rewarded. It's not like I'm saying make the head brewer go halfzies, but I am saying in this case you should certainly be given some profit share.

 

Profit sharing isn't just something you do. The owner can't just reach into his wallet and hand someone 10,000 dollars and say "PROFIT SHARING!". There's laws and programs you have to set up to do it. Maybe Surly wasn't in a position to offer profit sharing.

 

I understand the former.

The idea that the latter is true forever (which is what you are suggesting, as it is not about today, tomorrow, or even a year from now, but at some reasonable point in the future) does not make much sense. Over a reasonably long length of time (10 years?), it seems unreasonable that you could not find someway to apply appropriate compensation.

 

I suggested no such thing. However, after a huge expansion, and surely a lot of investment who is to say Surly is turning a profit. You can't share a non-existent profit.

 

I think you need to read up on the history of Surly...

Remember when RAM Schaumburg was all the rage and then the head brewer left and no one talks about RAM anymore? Had Todd left Surly after a year or two of starting, Surly wouldn't be where it is today.....

 

You are literally implicitly suggesting this is over some extremely small finite timeframe.

Do I care if My profit share today is 0 because profit is 0 when in 10 years, I will receive a share of the positive profit? No, not unless you only care about today.

It's awefully short sited to say "I don't care about profit share today because I'm not turning a profit today."

 

This is interesting...folks defending someone for possibly leaving a brewery because they weren't getting paid enough via profit sharing/ownership. Yet many people also vilify breweries that have business practices that seem to be profit-driven.

I'm not pointing fingers at anyone, just find it interesting that we are having a debate/discussion about this aspect that may be financially driven by an individual, yet we often have discussion about companies doing the same thing and seem to take the other side of the argument.

 

But you can turn a non-existent prophet into a top 3 religion....

 

I want to talk about FFF beer again. How about that Knut of the Living Dead 2? They've got nuts don't they?!

 

I understand what you are saying, and hopefully you understand how this is coming off:

Businesses exist to make money. Making money is relative. If you pay yourself nothing in order to not be in the red, you may or may not have turned a profit in terms of the company, but you yourself are in the red. Alternatively, if you pay yourself a huge amount, your profit could still be 0.

Over a short enough timeline, you can pay yourself a very low wage to keep the show going. -But at some point, you need to recoup those earnings. If you never do, you will not stay in business.

Without making some positive profit, you also have essentially no way to expand. Everyone wants expansion because the needs you love become more readily available. You won't get a loan if you can't show a business plan where you are making a profit.

So, hopefully everyone understands that businesses have to make money.

Profit sharing is about investing not just compensation. When someone is invaluable, such as a head brewer, they should be given that valuation - not just in terms of a wage, but in terms of ownership. If the company would not be what it is without them, they should have ownership. Not to drag research into this, but wverything I've seen would also suggest that giving someone ownership (of anything) makes them value it more, and that should translate to them working hard to build that company.

 

I thought 2 was a much improved version of the first. The first one tasted like a peanut butter backmasking. Too much carb, little body, too roasted and bitter. Round 2 was pretty nice

 

Live a Rich Life being bottled today. Always thought it was greatly underrated

 

Looks like it just hit the kiosk, $15 seems a little steep! What was this priced at last year at the brewery?

 

Everything is now a few bucks more than it was last year. Bombers and six packs. Kind of makes sense to me, but I would pass at that price.

 

Right, I get that and with the 6-packs I can’t argue with the price increases...but if memory serves last year Live a Rich Life was $12.

 

I believe it's always been $15. I remember paying like 17.99 in stores which is the usual markup for their $15 bottles.

 

Looks like they updated the price down to $12.