Drinking wine from the bottle?

I was interested in this article in The Oz in which Foster's Australasian wine boss was giving his thoughts on wine. It's always fascinating to talk beer with business people. The average reader of these rantings - who I would affectionately call the beer purist - thinks that the only concern of the brewery should be to let the brewer make great beer. It would be a wonderful world, a better world, where that happened AND great breweries could stay in business, generate the capital they need to expand to keep up with demand etc etc etc.

Of course, in the real world, beer is business. Unit cost, innovation, distribution, porfolios, packaging, brands and brand values are often more important than what actually goes in the bottle. None of us really like it with our utopian ideas of beery nirvana, but that's the world we live in (butu please don't stop trying to change that world, one great beer at a time.)

So it was interesting to see David Dearie try to argue that wine wasn't a commodity these days. Wine still carries with it a cachet, a snob value, that beer will never and should never have. But, in my view, this is also one of the reasons that wine is so successful. I think there is a huge section of people who really like the idea of drinking wine, but don't really like the flavour - or know so little about it they just buy the label with the critter on it or the second cheapest on a wine list. The point is this class of wine drinker drinks it because they think that it makes them appear more sophisticated than drinking beer at a restaurant or elsewhere.

The theatre of wine, the need for the right glass (and Riedel has built an industry hyping that), the cork, the sniff and the pour all contribute to why people drink wine on certain occasions instead of beer. I'd love to see the pckaging innovations, and what it will do to the perception of wine, that will follow this comment...

"Dearie also wants to expand the number of occasions on which wine is drunk, with the traditional glass bottle excluding it from events where the hassle of carrying glasses and a corkscrew means drinkers tend to choose beer. The solution, he says is packaging innovation."

To keep its leading premium beer at events that don't permit glass, Foster's developed the aluminium Crown bottle. A really clever innovation that didn't change the experience in a major way (from taste tests we've done on the Beer Show, dedicated Crown drinkers say that they can taste a difference), but the shape of the bottle was the same and the experience - drinking from a Crown-shaped bottle - is largely the same. What can wine do? Plastic bottles will get the wine into events, but does "packaging innovation" and ridding the wine drinker of the "hassle of carrying glasses and a corkscrew" mean encouraging drinking wine from the bottle? Or will they develop plastic cups akin to the Berocca Twist 'n Go? Or maybe a wine cask/hat combo like beer yobs have used for years.

With 'innovation' in the beer leading to the brave new worlds of chill-filtered beer, low-carb beer and chromazone labels (that change when your beer is cold enough that you can't taste it), I can't wait to see what is in store for wine...

For a hard-earned ad campaign

In the wake of a share market analyst's recommendation that shareholders sell Fosters on the back of falling market share, and today's  news that VB will enjoy increased advertising support this financial year, the advertising types who frequent mUmBRELLA are getting all worked up about terms like 'positioning' and 'brand value'. If you don't know it, that site is the marketing equivalent of a beer site such as this one where the inhabitants debate the minutiae of IBUs and hop types, but about ad campaigns. The interesting thing in reading the comments is that, judging by the stereotypes being bandied about there, advertising obviously works-even on advertising people.

I don't know too much about advertising strategy, but The Regulars is a funny, funny ad that I would have thought would appeal to everyone, especially the VB target market.

Looking at comments such as "I do not drink VB because it is full of additives and preservatives and gives me the hangover from hell. Even Tooheys New have brushed up their beer ingredients, which is now made additive free." makes me wonder whether CUB spend too much time selling the brand and not the beer. Lion Nathan's Natural Beer Promise (which quickly fell by the wayside with XXXX Gold) did a lot to make beer the focus. Interestingly, with Fosters beers, the comments are generally negative. One of the most common things I hear at all of the lunches and presentations that I do is, "Crown Lager is just VB in a better bottle, isn't it?" With such a widespread and deeply entrenched perception that VB and Crown are made from the same brew, I can't work out why either the perception of VB isnt raised by the misconception (if you believe it, then aren't you buying Crown cheaply?) or why Crown isn't less well-regarded for being "just VB". That said, the comment is generally made to disparage Crown, so the error  just might do that.

A treasure trove of beer history

Maybe it’s just me, but when I read about Trove in The Punch, several hours disappeared before I realised it. Of course I started searching for “beer” and was amazed at the results that came back… A year after Fosters launched in Australia, they were advertising about it being “highly nutritive” in The Argus, which may have been why they were so certain that it was going to become the national drink of Australia.

Fosters also reported an increased beer sales in 1895, as well as receiving from Prince Regent Luitpold the first consignment of that season’s Bohemian hops – which were reportedly of choice quality.

Keeping with the CUB theme is this photo that is identified as being:

Holding the bottle of Melbourne Bitter beer, part of a gift parcel from the RSL is, Sergeant (Sgt) Brian Charles Cooper MM, 2nd Battalion, The Royal Australian Regiment (2RAR), of Perth, WA (right), who won an immediate award of the Military Medal (MM) for his conduct in action fought on the night of 24 July 1953. Sgt Cooper, commander of a Vickers medium machine gun section, came under fierce attack by an enemy force of estimated Company strength following a heavy artillery barrage. Leaving sufficient of his gun crews to man the guns covering his primary task of guarding the western approaches to The Hook, he organised the remainder into a separate defensive position. From this position he engaged the enemy with such a volume of grenades and small arms fire that they were unable to penetrate the position despite the overwhelming superiority of numbers. He called down friendly fire so close to his own and neighbouring US positions that he prevented the enemy from pressing home any further organised attacks. Sgt Cooper also continued to pass back information to the Battalion and personally supervised the evacuation of wounded to safety through an area in which the enemy moved and under heavy shellfire. He displayed throughout cool courageous leadership. With Sgt Cooper is Corporal Ron Walker of Bayswater, one of the brave band who fought in the battle. Note the tin of Johnson's baby powder, part of the gift pack.

Castlemaine Perkins and Fourex features prominantly too, including these ads from the early 1900s…

I don’t speak German, but the google translation of the first is:

Fourex, The memory of the last bottle of beer in the verkäuff the next bottle of XXXX

You get the point.

Then there’s this article on lager beer from Burton-on-Trent, interesting because I had never realised that Burton produced lagers – and that the beers tastes of garlic…

WALKER'S LAGER BEER.

Walker's Lager Beer, concerning which an advertisement appears in another column, is brewed in England, at Burton on-Trent (so noted over five centuries for the purity and suitability of its water) by a firm established for upwards of 50 years. It is brewed from only the best malt and hops, and produced under the most perfect hygienic conditions that both scientists and modern mechanical skill can devise. It has no sediment, is conditioned for many months by nature's own process-is free from the objectionable preservatives used in foreign lagers, and reaches the consumer in bright, palatable condition. It contains a very small amount of alcohol and a relatively large amount of nutritive material. In addition, it is appetising and digestive. It is therefore not only light and refreshing, but it is claimed to be an ideal dietetic. It may be obtained through all wine, spirit, and beer merchants. The "Lancet" writes; -"Lager implies a stored or matured beer, the word itself meaning a storehouse. Storage implies time, and time means expense. The essential difference between English beer and lager beer is that the former is brewed at a comparatively high, temperature, and the latter at a low temperature. The work of the yeast in lager beer proceeds at the bottom of the vat, the so-called bottom or sedimentary fermentation, while in the brewing of English beer the fermentation at the higher temperature proceeds at the surface and much more rapidly. Surface fermentation succeeds therefore in preparing briskly foaming and strong beers, bottom fermentation produces the cold, light lager. The products are different in flavour, in nutrient value, in alcoholic strength. Some people imagine that lager beer is flavored with garlic. That is not the case. The peculiar taste has its origin entirely in the mode of fermentation adopted. A matter of genuine dietetic importance is that while lager beer contains a higher proportion of nutritive substances than ordinary brewed Burton ale the amount of alcohol in it is decidedly less while the process is conducted throughout not only in the cold but under  seal. Lastly the beer is preserved by a carefully conducted method of pasteurisation the object of which is to keep the product in a sound condition, the control over this process being such that no disturbance of the delicate flavor is incurred.   The foregoing facts apply to the Burton   lager which Messrs Peetr Walker &, Son have placed upon the market"

The site truly is a trove and a great place to while away a few hours ‘researching’ over the quieter summer days at work.

How serious are they?

Last week I posted about the new campaign from Cricket Australia, supported by Fosters, Diageo and Channel 9, called ‘Know when to declare”. While supporting the campaign, I did highlight some of the challenges that a company that profits from selling alcohol faces in being taken seriously selling the healthy drinking message. Last Sunday night on the Beer Show we had Troy Hey, Fosters General Manager-Media and Reputation, on to talk about the campaign. Troy spoke about the campaign and its aims and made good points about the role a business like Foster’s has to play in changing societal perceptions about alcohol. It’s obviously an issue that, at least on some level, the business is serious about.

Then today, I’m strolling through the local bottlo and see the latest promotion for Carlton Mid, Ken’s Bucks. With the tagline, “We made up a man so you can go to his Bucks”.

Google “Ken’s Bucks” and the first return is:'

Now, what is the first thing that you think of when you think of a buck’s party? (Ok, maybe the second..after boobs and before the shaved eyebrows and one-way train tickets). But it’s certainly not moderation or responsible drinking.

To quote comedian Robin Williams out of context, sticking the ‘enjoy responsibly’ logo on a promotion that ties beer with a buck’s night is like trying to stop a Ferrari with a tissue.

A couple of weeks ago, Foster’s national sponsorship manager, Chris Maxwell, admitted the company was wrong to feature David Boon as part of their talking doll campaign because it could be seen promoting binge drinking.

The issue with Boonie is a hard one. He is a great Australian, and he has personally never sought to promote or glamorise his inflight ‘achievement’. As a recent article about it recounted:

When asked a few years ago to discuss it, his blunt reply was: "Never have, never will." When he penned his life story soon after his retirement he didn't even mention it.

But, fairly or not, he will forever be associated with the 52 cans on a flight to London and associating him with a beer campaign is a nudge and a wink in that direction.

In admitting the error, Chris Maxwell said:

"Looking back, we have decided that was the wrong thing to do. We didn't have the foresight to see that this issue was going to be so significant. And in glorifying that behaviour we have added to the issue of the normalisation of binge-drinking in Australia.

''The difference is now we realise we have a responsibility to the community to promote our products in a responsible way. Therefore, we think a lot more deeply about how we use ambassadors, how we use our messages, and the potential impact down the track."

When I put this to Troy, he replied:

The promotion is for midstrength beer, aimed at spending time with your mates with the prize a 5 star accommodation, meal, nightclub entry and grand canyon helicopter and white water rafting adventure.

There’s nothing in the promotion that encourages abuse of alcohol and instead, it plays to the modern incarnation of the bucks party - as the ultimate leave pass for the bloke who finds it tough to get time away to do ‘stuff’ i.e. golf, go-cart racing, fishing, fly to LA and white water raft etc.)

All reasonable, except the competition isn’t called “The Ultimate Leave Pass” competition.

The “Know when to declare” message is a positive one, but it seems to be inconsistent with and undermined by the very same brewery tying a campaign to buck's parties.

What's the first thing you think about when you think buck's nights?

Crown Ambassador reserved....

Update

The International Beer Club has just issued a clarification (??) about their newsletter entry reproduced below. I have included this first to make sure that their apology is read...As I said in my initial post, no one else I spoke to reported the same conditions...it seems that they were never made. Still, apart from the deletions, the comments on Crown itself are still pretty relevant...

Shame on us!

Unfortunately during the editing process (and perhaps caught up in the spirit of the name and shame), some of last weeks newsletter ended up on the cutting room floor, and some of the intended messages were "lost in translation", and subsequently what ended up in your inbox was quite different (or converse) to what was intended. We'd like to clarify a few of the finer points:

As written, the statement "[Ambassador] is not available to bottlestores without a purchase of 5 pallets of Crown Lager" is false. This was only requested of some small independent stores that were not already selling a substantial volume of the beer. We apologise to Fosters for the mistake, and hope that in the future better communication (both with Fosters and within our small team) will prevent any further drama.

We entirely appreciate what we perceive to be Fosters position, and, despite last weeks comments, believe that 12 months in a display cabinet is an excellent use of the visually stunning Ambassador - though we would prefer someone was drinking it!

Original Post

A couple of posts ago I talked up the Crown Ambassador Reserve as being a beer worth buying...I still hold to that ( I still think it shows that when they want to Fosters can brew interesting beer) but I received a copy of the International Beer Shop's newsletter this week, where they said this...

Shame on you Fosters!

Crown Ambassador, the beer that (according to Fosters) pioneered and defined luxury beer in the Australian market is not available to bottlestores without a purchase of 5 pallets of Crown Lager - posing the question: luxury lager or simply a subversive marketing strategy? Our apologies to any members that had requested the beer (this year and last), we simply couldn't convince Fosters that we deserved any. I guess to Foster's credit they did give a lot away to celebrities and sports/media stars - a better investment/advertisement than having it sit for 12 months on a store shelf (and yes we've heard of some stores with last year's vintage still in stock).

Thankfully, we have plenty of other limited release strong beers, all crafted with passion and without any input from any marketing department. Those interested in the style can check out (in no particular order):

- Mikkeller Big Worse

- Rogue XS Old Crustacean Barleywine (+ the rest of the Rogue XS range)

- Nogne O #100

- BrewDog Isle of Arran Imperial Stout

- St Ambroise Vintage Ale

- Fullers Vintage Ale

- Murray's Anniversary Ale

- Unibroue 17

- Cooper's Vintage Ale

I have checked with a couple of smaller Brisbane retailers and they didn't have the same conditions put on them, so I'm not sure how widespread this requirement is, but I'm not surprised. Even though CAR is a pretty good beer - and a very impressive gift (two very different things) - it is still a marketing exercise. IBS  pose the question, "luxury lager or simply a subversive marketing strategy?" Why can't it be both? Six thousand bottles of a beer is (excuse the pun) extremely small beer for a brewer producing billions of stubbies a year, even one selling for $70 a bottle. They do it as an attempt to put a halo around the Crown brand, which has diminished greatly over the last half decade.

Ten years ago there was what I called the "Crown ceiling" for most restaurants' beer lists, where the most expensive beer on the menu was pretty much Crown. You couldn't put another more expensive beer on the menu because it wouldn't sell. The general appreciation for beer -  or at least the perception of beer - was that Crown was as good as you could get in Australia so you couldn't charge more for a craft beer or an import.

Tastes have changed, and you will regularly see beers costing more on a menu these days. I'm not sure that you can say that the average drinker is much more informed though because the beers that have broken the Crown ceiling include international brands brewed under licence such as Stella and Becks, but that just shows how important marketing is. Crown Ambassador Reserve is designed to give the ailing Crown brand a lift - and if that means requiring retailers to buy huge amounts of the regular Crown, then that's what Fosters will do. After all, beer is their business and marketing is central to that business...although the business Fosters is in is growing their business by selling shitloads of beer, not building a sustainable business - and hopefully making a living - by brewing great beer, which is the modest ambition of many of the smaller brewers springing up.

Mind you, that's where Foster's strategy of requiring mass purchases of Crown may hurt them. If it is common practice, there are going to be retailers all over the place with their storages stocked with Crown. Lagers of that type don't last very long and so the beer either needs to be sold - and that means discounts - or it will sit around unrefrigerated until sold, which could see it age. Even worse, if the retailer's storage space is really full the pallets will be pulled out of the storage in the morning to sit around in the sun until close up time when it will be wheeled back in - a common sight at the big liquor retailers. Either way, discounting or aged, stale beer will hurt the brand further...but that's never really been the concern of accountants and marketers  - after getting a pat on the back for a short-term lift in sales - will just come up with a clever way to try and mend its tarnished crown in 6 or 12 months time. Watch out for specials on Crown in the coming months - something that you never saw in the past as Fosters maintained its "premium" branding.

All that said, I think I'd pretty much prefer any of the beers that the International Beer Shop recommended too. But I also know a lot of dads who will be more impressed - and more thankful - for "a $70 bottle of Crownie" because to them it has more cachet - and a nicer box - than some Scandinavian beer that he can't pronounce. But that's the power of marketing for you. And that is something that Fosters does very well.

Still, if Mikkeller Big Worse or Unibroue 17 mean more to you than Crown - you're my kind of beer drinker. You should check out IBS if you haven't already...

Ads without people?

Fosters hasn’t quite stopped making beer, but they obviously want to focus on what they do best. They have just appointed Sydney-based ad agency Droga5, creators of The Regulars and the controversial, cynical and extremely successful Raise A Glass campaign, to handle advertising for Crown Lager and Cascade in addition to VB. Expect to watch more advertising brilliance in the future…while you drink something else.

Fortunately, they don't advertise in Russia which prohibits the use of people in beer ads.

In 2004, the Federal Anti-Monopoly Service prohibited the use of human or animal images in beer commercials and limited the time that beer advertising can be shown on television to between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.

In May, however, the regulator complained that the beer industry was circumventing the law by using images implying the presence of people without showing the people themselves — such as clinking beer glasses and off-screen voices conversing.

Now obviously advertisers use people in ads for a reason. They want to establish a brand identity that their target market will indentif ywith, and will hopefully prompt beer drinkers to think they will look as cool, wealthy or as discerning as the pretty and handsome young things in the ad and hopefully encourge them to buy that brand of beer to cloak themselves in those brand attributes. While this in all probability does have a flow on effect to make drinking seem cool as well, I'm not quite sure that that's the biggest problem that alcohol faces. It's just one of the easiest for government's to tackle and to be seen doing something to pander to the ever louder voices of prohibition. You will still have endless images of footballers celebrating with beer (and the scandalous stories of how the night ended up in the papers for weeks to come), champagne corks popping at Formula One trophy presentations, cocktail parties in the social pages and so on and so on.

Drinking and any problems surrounding it is a huge issue and Government's just tend to distort the problem with half-arsed bans like this one.

I enjoyed the quote from Konstantin Garanin, creative director of the unusually  named Reclamafia advertising agency.

“If we’re banned from using people’s voices and other human-related stuff, we’ll just show more beautiful landscapes and flowing water,” he said.