More and more I find myself taking a pass on D/IPAs without dating, unless I know for sure they are fresh (say, from a place which has a high turnover, or if it’s an D/IPA which was just released). I think part of what made the Stone Best By such a winning strategy from a marketing standpoint was that it had an “expiration” date built into it—and moved fast, as I had a hard time finding bottles on the shelves beyond the first few days of release. But that was a limited release. What about your everyday IPAs? As another example I was in Michigan over the holidays and craving some Red’s RyePA. It’s widely distributed in the area where I was staying and I didn’t have a problem finding sixers. But I was mortified to find that those had been on the shelves for two to three months already, at best—and in some instances close to a year. As sad as I am to see it turn into a seasonal at least I should stand a better chance of finding it freshly bottled next time I’m in the area. So, for the harcore beer geeks (that is, if you’re reading this far) I’m wondering--would you be willing to pay more per sixpack or bomber knowing that you would get a just-released IPA and with the knowledge that it was just bottled? Especially if the brewer doesn’t have bottling dates? Hypothetically speaking, I would be comfortable paying a one to two dollar “surcharge” on IPAs and other “drink fresh” beers if it meant knowing that they were indeed recently bottled—with the price reverting to normal retail after a month, and the sale price going down by an equal amount on merchandise sitting on the shelves past three months. I imagine the money generated by the surcharge would more than compensate for the later reduction in price, and this would also serve to keep stock rotating. I am interested in knowing what others think about this. If you’re a consumer have you seen something similar in practice, and if you’re a retailer do you do something like this?