The Beer Doctor’s Guide For Approaching Beer
01 Jan 2010 1 Comment
in adjunct lager, anheuser-busch, beer, business, genesee brewery, Jim Koch, Little Kings, Pabst, Sam Adams
A new year brings with it a desire I have had for a long time to tackle the subject of beer from a beer lover’s viewpoint.
It has taken quite awhile on the search trail of this miraculous, human culinary invention, to arrive at these discoveries. The path has seen many articles of misinformation foisted on the unsuspecting, mostly for the sake of marketing. Here are 2 current examples:
1. Craft Beer is good, giant brewery beer is bad.
2. Giant commercial brewing interests are incapable of making good beer.
The term craft brewed is most often used as a catch-all description of beer with an abundance in flavor. All beer drinkers are guaranteed a right to enjoy only the highest quality beer. Proclaims Samuel Adams founder Jim Koch, in the Samuel Adams Beer Drinker’s Bill of Rights.
Further down in the declaration it states: III. Use of adjuncts such as corn syrup, rice or corn grits is strictly prohibited as it lightens the true character of a fine beer. Which is a convenient way to make you feel guilty if you actually enjoy drinking Pabst, Genesee, or Little Kings, or any other American “all grain” lager.
Craft brew puppies buy into the vast corporate conspiracy that created these adjunct monsters, supposedly for the sake of the old bottom line. Never mind that much of this simply flies in the face of actual history. How golden lager took over much of the beer drinking world because there was an absolute fascination with its clear golden color. Or that the use of corn and rice was an American invention of necessity, because back in the 19th century there was simply not enough European malts to supply this thirsty country.
Much has been said about national beers being devoid of personality. Again the assumed narrative of why this came about ignores the obvious fact that the brewing industry was nearly destroyed by the temperance religious zealots, and their political enablers, who created Prohibition. Legislation which combined religious cultural intolerance with anti-German hysteria. It is not surprising that things became bland, because after Prohibition was repealed, there were many restrictions placed upon beer that were downright ridiculous (I mean, have you ever heard of 3.2 beer? Sunday “small beer” in the state of Ohio for many years. At one time it was the only beer allowed to be sold in the Miami university town of Oxford, Ohio.). Beer over 6% abv was not allowed to be sold in this state, until the beginning of this century. Home brewing, of which Jim Koch created his first kitchen batch of Samuel Adams, was not legal until Jimmy Carter was President.
So this points up to the obvious question: Do you love beer? I have found over the years that this a very good starting point for approaching this wonderful topic, which I hope to explore in this series. You know the old saying: Do it with love, or don’t do it at all.
Cheers!
Thank you is my only prayer.
GETTING IN BED WITH INBEV, PART TWO
19 Jun 2008 Leave a Comment
in beer, budweiser, business, InBev
This is all starting to sound like a suspense novel. Now Washington is involved. InBev has hired a posse of lobbyists. Trent Lott is on board. So is Senator John Breaux of Louisiana. The Glover Park Group, a media firm known to be connected with Senator Clinton, has been tapped for consultation. Carlos Brito is taking no chances, well aware that Anheuser-Busch spent over $3 million in lobbying in 2007. This year their PAC and employees have already given over $1 million in political contributions. The foxes are scrambling to see who gets the big hen house, with all those prized eggs.
Senator Kit Bond had another take. He told Carlos Brito: “This Bud is not for you.” The Missouri Senator has concerns he says, for the line workers, the farmers, the suppliers, and the St. Louis community in general. It does not matter who InBev hires, he is against the deal and that’s that.
But is it? What about the Oracle? What Oracle? Why the Oracle of Omaha of course. I’m talking about Big Daddy Warren G. Buffett, owner of 35.3 million shares of A-B stock, or 4.9% of the company. According to the Dutch newspaper De Standard, the Oracle is on board with the acquisition. If this is the case, having the Oracle’s blessing may very well mean the purchase will become a reality. 35.3 million shares at $65 a share. Go ahead, don’t be afraid of the math.
Yikes! All this monumental fuss over a very pedestrian beer. It is enough to drive you to drinking… water.
GETTING IN BED WITH INBEV
13 Jun 2008 Leave a Comment
in beer, budweiser, business, InBev Tags: Add new tag, business
The news announced: “an all cash takeover at $47 billion”, now that sum is reported to be $47.5 billion. I am speaking of course of the buyout of Anheuser-Busch (ticker symbol: BUD) by the Belgian based brewing conglomerate known as InBev. According to Theresa Howard of USA Today, it just might be that InBev needs to bed A-B, more than vice versa. It is being reported that the hydra-headed brewing concern has squeezed all of the profit margins from their existing portfolio. Sales in Latin America, their biggest market, are now flat. The old adage, get bigger or get out, seems to apply here. InBev’s CEO, Carlos Brito reveals their desire by promising to keep A-B’s headquarters in Saint Louis, along with continuing operations in their 12 regional breweries.
But then, there is the whole matter of marketing, especially sports marketing. InBev known in big business circles for its cost cutting, will certainly change Budweiser’s advertising, what beverage industry analyst, Tom Pirko calls “Anheuser’s carpet-bombing approach”.
Anheuser-Busch, known for making The King Of Beers, is most certainly the king of advertising, spending $475 million in the United States, with $20 million going for TV spots on the Super Bowl. Contrast that with InBev, whose brands include Bass, Beck’s, Stella Artois, spent $58 million in the United States.
Many analysts believe that InBev will cut advertising expenditures and fight competition by cutting prices (so that’s why that 24 ounce Labatt’s costs one dollar!).
Of course there is much controversy in all of this. Objections to the purchase, on patriotic grounds seem disingenuous at best. Since 1852, Anheuser-Busch has been an American-owned and operated business. In addition to great tasting beer, the company has provided thousands of domestic jobs as well as millions of dollars in charitable donations to nonprofit organizations and disaster relief, and has a long history of environmental awareness. Anheuser-Busch is a huge supporter of our military and their families both here and abroad… so intones savebudweiser.com, a web site created to cancel the purchase. Throwing in the military line seems to imply that to be bought by the Belgium based company is somewhat an act of surrender. But what is truly suspect on savebudweiser.com, is when it declares, We don’t want another American icon turned over to a foreign company; we want the motto to remain… The Great American Lager. Funny they just happened to use the latest marketing motto to express their nationalistic fervor. Instead how about “A Bud Never Meets A Stranger” or “When You Say Budweiser, You Said It All” or “For All You Do, This Bud’s For You!”
Putting aside the emotional jingoism, consolidation has been going on in the beer industry for a long time. From a Pitt News editorial on May 24, 2006: Last Friday, Rolling Rock said goodbye to its home in Latrobe. The recipe and label of the green-bottled brew were purchased for $82 million by Anheuser-Busch. Which says nothing of Bud’s relationship with Japan’s Kirin Brewery. Throw in the marketing arrangements with Tsing Tao in China, and what we have here is an American based company with very global concerns.
And then, there are always those people who simply can not stand Buweiser, who couldn’t care less. I find their posts on beer sites: The man who drank 3 Buds at a wedding reception, which produced his first hangover in twenty years. The people who love the Bell’s Brewery, and that’s that. (Well, maybe not, Carlos Brito may one day make Larry Bell an offer he simply can not refuse.)
“Anheuser-Bush is just about as American as can be” said one construction manager, “I just don’t like them being gone and owned by a foreign company.” I am sure the people of Latrobe, Pennsylvania felt likewise, when the 250 jobs and $300 thosand property taxes evaporated when Anheuser-Busch bought the brand and pulled up stakes… from the glass lined tanks of Newark, New Jersey?
Money does not talk, it screams. The possibility of $70 dollars a share (ticker symbol: BUD) may be impossible to resist.
