MONDAY BEER LINKS, MUSING 04.13.15
Newly Formed Craft Consortium Enjoy Beer LLC Eyes Acquisitions, IPO.
Honestly, I wouldn’t pretend to understand all the implications for “an acquisition vehicle and craft beer consortium,” which is how Enjoy Beer is described. But it must be big business because founder Rich Doyle says he “hopes to have five craft beer breweries under the Enjoy Beer umbrella before 2020, at which point the company may consider an IPO.” This certainly means more of what Alan McLeod has been calling “big craft” or “national craft” for about four years. Abita Brewing CEO David Blossman, whose brewery is the first to enter into a deal with Enjoy Beer, told the Boston Globe: “We’re not losing our heart and soul. We turned down lots of other opportunities because we wanted to remain rooted in our local community and culture.” But he also wants his coming to keep expanding.
That’s not a particularly bad thing, at least that’s the view from here, nor is it necessarily a good thing. It simply is. There are going to be more breweries shipping more beer farther from where it is brewed. It may be harder for them to act as autonomously as they once did or to appear as warm and cuddly. This won’t bother most of the drinkers who buy their beers. But if it does, here’s the thing, there will still be more local, quite often pretty small, definitely independent breweries in America than since, well, probably ever. [Via Brewbound]
In which I give more badly written beer history a good kicking.
Marytn Cornell goes to work on “How the India Pale Ale Got Its Name” at Smithsonian.com, which carries a certain cachet when it comes to history. But Cornell calls the article “one of the worst I have ever read on the subject, crammed with at least 25 errors of fact and interpretation.” [Via Zythophile]
Nano Breweries: The Art (and Economics) of Brewing at Tiny Scales. Small. “Success is contextual.” [Via Paste]
Let’s Grab a Beer… With A-B InBev.
Big. Curious fact: Herestobeer.com will redirect you to what appears to be a sign in page. But if you really want to see what the site looked like back in 2007 or so use the Wayback Machine. [Via Advertising Age]
The Growing Future of Local Hops.
Noteworthy here is that the Hop Growers of America has added an at-large director to its board, so that for the first time there’s a board member from outside the states of Washington, Oregon and Idaho. Tom Britz of Montana is also chairing the Small Growers Council, which will address “the very different business model and challenges of small growers across the country who have no infrastructure, no multi-generational institutional knowledge, and no economies of scale.” Just to be clear, three Northwestern states will continue to supply almost all the hops in the country. We don’t know how things will work out trying to grow hops many places where they eventually failed before. But nobody will succeed without putting the infrastructure for picking, drying and processing in place. This is another sign that is happening. [Via Flathead Beacon]
Brewery has enough water to make beer for the year.
The local water district in Redding, Calif., lets Wildcard Brewing in Redding know just how much water it can use during 2015. [Via KRCR]
The Lesser-Spotted True Red Lion.
Maybe the beer culture always looks a greener on the other side of the Atlantic, but — dang — a true inn that offers beer and lodging, and also the village shop and post office. Plus a backyard that comes “closer to the feel of a Bavarian beer garden than anywhere else we’ve been in Britain and yet, at the same time, could not be anywhere but in England.” [Via Boak & Bailey]
Brewery re-imagines flagship beer.
An announcement from Stone Brewing not long ago that it was replacing Ruination IPA with Ruination generated the usual Stone related chatter on the Internet. New Holland Brewing in Michigan is taking a different approach — simply stating it is changing the recipe on Mad Hatter IPA and throwing a little party. The change includes using Michigan-grown hops, not available when the beer was first sold in 1998, and a hop variety, Citra, that also wasn’t available. [Via Grand Rapids Business Journal]
How Cans turned Craft into Crass.
This would have made an interesting addition to The Session #98, although it’s about something more basic than cans versus bottles. “I’ve said before how I dream of a day where a brewery releases its beers in cans for the first time and there isn’t a gratuitous Twitter frenzy worked up where people admit they’ve masturbated five times that morning because a beer that more often than not has already been available for 12 months is now going to be a million times better because its changing vessel. I’d like to think such a day will come. I fear it shall not for many a year.” [Via Beer Compurgation]
Stan, a history of the brewing industry as well as of general business organizations does suggest the pooling of brands is one way business has grown. It’s sounds to me not dissimilar to the concept of the conglomerate which permits pooling of resources and other efficiencies. In the past, the focus was on closing the local brewery but things are different now because products are more differentiated than in the 50’s and 60’s.
The shipment factor, which in the past (in part) mandated the value of local breweries, is less and less important. Last night I had a Stone IPA from California of course in pristine condition some 5000 miles from the source. Modern shipment and refrigeration capabilities permit a greater distribution of a quality product than ever before. New York beer bars have offered West Coast beers and Colorado beers, and now from other distant regions, for years without difficulty and it’s a pattern being replicated everywhere.
Some craft had to get big, it is in the nature of business growth and the competitive process but it doesn’t have to. Compare Sierra Nevada to Anderson Valley, say, or Anchor. (I didn’t check the figures but am guessing Anchor sales lie midway between these two).
The focus for the beer enthusiast whether informed or casual in the end must be the beer and the rest must yield to that, IMO. The only risk companies of any size or distribution have is when they stop offering a quality product to people. They will find another option as the whole history of the beer revival shows.
Gary
Correction: conglomerate is not the right term as it connotes generally a group of different businesses, pooled to balance risk (but also benefit from shared resources and other efficiencies). Perhaps the term consolidation is closer to what I understand from this business model. Given the prevalence of “localism” today, this model does not necessarily require the closing of local small plants and the regionalization of supply as occurred say with S&P in the 70’s. However one can’t rule out I suppose that some brands may one day be brewed “centrally” and brought in for sale where they used to be brewed locally. This model however is as old as the hills and if the beer is great whether it is brewed down the street or two states away is not material to me and I suspect most consumers. For those who worry about such a (possible) future development, they can patronize other brewers, as you said, Stan.
Gary