XXXX will be launching their new ad campaign on Sunday night (you can read the full details on Brews News so I won't repeat it here). But the casting of the new ad follows on from this morning's update to the "Over Beer?" campaign. It seems that beer marketers believe that beer drinkers identify with people who don't shave or wear shoes. The Canadian Club people agree, though don't reveal their attitude to footwear. In Canadian Clubland, however, bar workers are metrosexuals who shave more often, but still maintain a designer stubble.... [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7b3S6tqiHHU&hl=en_GB&fs=1&] .
Viewing entries in
Uncategorized
RTDs have been working the edges of the beer market for a while now, picking off those who like the thought of drinking beer without actually liking the flavour. The beer industry has hit back with an increasing number of beerish drinks so people who don't like beer can still hold one, now Canadian Club is actually saying it.... [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWQDuNFSLTQ&hl=en_GB&fs=1&] . More.... Greig posted a comment below and my reply was much longer than the initial post, so I have added it to the main post.
It fails on you because your not the market. The marketing for this isn't aimed at the sort of bloke who can drink a glass of white wine confident that it doesn't call his masculinity into question.
I think they see that there is a big market for blokes that like the idea of drinking of beer, but not the flavour (but drinks it so his mates don't call him a poof), and a big group of blokes who like sweet, tasteless alcohol but don't like the thought of being seen drinking it (and so don't drink it so their mates don't them a poof).
This is a dog whistle for that market saying it is alright to drink this sweet slop confident that you're still a good bloke. Note the casting of the "beer drinker" as being an everyday characterful yob...exactly the same sort of bloke that VB's 'The Regulars' was pitched at. Who, incidently, reminds me exactly of the decription from Roy Morgan Research of the "Heavy Drinker"
Heavy drinkers; those who drink on average more than 3 drinks per day are more likely to be males aged 18-35, single and over-represented among tradesmen and earning a good income. Their social habits are skewed towards going to sporting events, gambling either on track, at the TAB or online, they go to nightclubs, play the pokies and even go shopping more than the average Australian although it’s for music and hardware rather than groceries or clothing.
Their media habits are different to the average too being a little less likely to heavy TV viewers, magazine readers and cinema goers, and slightly more likely to be heavy newspaper readers, Internet users and commercial radio listeners.
This is the group that comprise the "17% of the alcohol drinking population consume over 21 glasses of alcohol a week or an average of more than three glasses a day, and they account for 53% of all the alcohol consumed."
But alcohol companies wouldn't target heavy drinkers...would they?
Not quite sure what to say about this other than, "Bloody Romans".
It's apparently a map of Europe's alcohol belt, showing the wine, beer and vodka belts. Can't vouch for its integrity, but it does roughly accord with my understanding of the lay of the land.
"An interesting co-explanation for the prevalence of beer in southern parts of this belt is the relatively weak cultural influence of the Roman Empire on these places. The Wine Belt indeed conforms to a large extent with the territory formerly occupied by Rome, with notable exceptions in areas with large Slavic or Germanic migration (the Balkans, southwestern Germany, northern France respectively), where beer predominates (although often overlapping with wine)."
The good news for beer is that:
There is a climatological imperative to the Vodka Belt: freezing temperatures make grape cultivation impossible (except in southernmost Russia and some areas of Ukraine). So there’s almost no overlap possible between the Vodka and Wine Belts. For cultural reasons, however, the Vodka Belt has been losing ground to the Beer Belt. Scandinavians tend to drink more beer than before (although possibly this doesn’t mean they drink less wodka). Maybe this is due to the perception of beer correlating more with ‘core European’ behaviour (as it is the preferred alcoholic beverage of Britain, Germany and other influential and centrally positioned countries). That might explain the emergence in Poland, some years ago, of a Beer-Lovers’ Party (which actually won seats in the Polish Parliament in the early 1990s). Beer has since surpassed wodka as the most consumed type of alcohol in Poland.
Let's just hope that in switching to beer the eastern Europeans don't just swap one odourless and flavourless type for another and avoid the Coronas of the world. Through the likes of Nogne O and Mikkeller, the Scandinavians are showing them great beer.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWfh6sGyso]
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.
First it was copy watches and fake designer clothes, not it seems that international beers have been faked as well.
The China Daily reports that fake "foreign" beers sold in some Beijing bars could cause sickness because of insanitary conditions in the brewing process.
Apparently in a recent raid on a rented house in Wuliqiao village, officers found four men making counterfeit beer that they hoped to pass off as Budweiser, Corona and Carlsberg.
Of course it only seems fair that these beers should be knocked off. Budweiser and Corona have been passing their products off as beer for years now.
I suspect it will be a long time before we see this in Australia, but in catching up with some reading I found this on Jay Brooks’ site about San Francisco’s 21st Amendment Brewery announcing that their canned IPA is to be served on Virgin flights in the US.
It really shows how deeply craft beer is penetrating into the mainstream in the States when you see this, but that’s not the sole reason that we’re not likely to see it anytime soon in Australia. Canning lines are expensive and generally beyond the reach of reach of Australia’s small breweries. Coincidentally I had commissioned Jay to write an article on craft in cans for Beer & Brewer magazine a year or so ago which provides a background to craft in cans and why we are unlikely to see it here for some time. You can read it here.
Given the unlikelihood of microbreweries getting their beer in cans, let alone muscling their way onto a flight over the deep pockets of the Big Two. About two years ago Qantas introduced James Squires Golden Ale to their inflight range, which at least offers a choice from the usual range of generic lagers. Still, Qantas offers a 50-page wine guide to its Business Class Passengers.
Coopers does put its Pale Ale into cans for SA-based events and so that would be available…not sure why it hasn’t joined the mile beer high club.
Good post from Hefevice about the closure of Macs Shed 22 Wellington waterfront site, which I gather is the original brewery.
I always feel a little vexed when I read about these closures. Beer is a business afterall. No brewer doing it commercially – not even the smallest, craftiest microbrewer – is doing it for free. While a focus on quality (and by quality I mean more flavoursome and interesting beers, not cookie cutter consistency) may assume a higher focus for these brewers, they still want to pay their bills, feed their family and make the odd mortgage payment, just the same as the big corporates
Corporate brewers – or any corporation – always fall back on their duty to maximise the return on their shareholders investment, which is fair enough. These obligations mean that they aren’t just looking at generating a sustainable business, but to constantly increase profits. Again, fair enough - although as I get older I seem to be developing a bit more of a concern about the long-term sustainability of this sort of rapaciousness. This is particularly so when you see the reasoning given by Lion (or should that be Kirin these days?) for the decision…
The Wellington Brewery is a higher-cost facility relative to our other breweries but up until now we considered this a component of our investment in building the Mac’s brand and its reputation for brewing innovation.
However the brand has developed to a point where consumer adoration for Mac’s no longer depends on the Wellington Brewery underpinning the brand’s reputation for brewing innovation. The maturity of the Mac’s brand and the introduction of the Mac’s Brewbars throughout the country have contributed to this change in consumer attitude, to the extent that we can now no longer justify the expense of operating the Wellington Brewery.
Is it just me, or is this really saying that:
- while the brewery is making a profit, it’s not making enough of a profit because making smaller batches is too expensive
- despite this we kept the facility until now because there was a non-monetary value to the brewery, namely to convince our customers the Mac’s is all about quality beer
- Now, enough people – people who don’t really think about what they drink and are swayed by a label and clever marketing – think that we rock and will think that even if we close the brewery that made this possible, even though it is still making us money.
Am I wrong in reading it that way?
Of course, there is the environmental line being trotted out as well -
Only 20 per cent of the beer produced on site is enjoyed by Wellington drinkers. The rest is shipped off around the country via Christchurch which generates huge freight and distribution costs.
"It makes good commercial sense to move the brewery to Christchurch where we have the flexibility to meet current and future demand. Then there's the environmental footprint, which we're keen to address," Ms Read said.
Yep, because New Zealand is such a huge country, trucking beer around it has a massive environmental downside…but we’re still willing to export to Australia and have the beer trucked around that huge mofo of a country. Wait, I just realised – that will be the excuse for brewing Mac’s under licence in Australia once the brand has developed to a point where consumer adoration for Mac’s no longer depends on a New Zealand-based brewery underpinning the brand’s reputation for brewing innovation. The maturity of the Mac’s brand and the introduction of the Mac’s Brewbars throughout the Australia have contributed to this change in consumer attitude, to the extent that we can now no longer justify the expense of brewing beers for export in New Zealand.
As usual, I am diverting…what I actually wanted to post about – hence the title – was this…
We will maintain a dedicated Mac’s brewer who will still brew the craft beers with the same passion and hand-crafted approach as now…
There are a couple of words that are guaranteed to appear in any brewery media release, whether a 6 hectolitre micro or 100 hectolitre behemoth and “hand-crafted” is one of them. What does that mean in brewing? Especially in a 40 hectolitre plant…I’m pretty sure the brewers aren’t carrying in bags of malt and hops, nor measuring the water in measuring cups. One of the ways that the other breweries would be five times less expensive than the Macs brewery would be automation. Isn’t automation the opposite of hand-crafted?
Other marketing speak on my hate list are:
- Premium (how can Corona be a ‘premium’ beer except that being a crap beer from an exotic foreign country we have convinced the punters to shell out $50 for it)
- Super or ultra premium (how can Boags Pure – that’s repackaged Steinlager Pure for my kiwi readers - be super premium when it has less flavour that regular beer? Oh, it’s in a nicer bottle)
- finest quality ingredients (our cane sugar and tetra hops are the finest quality)
- innovation…we put it in a nicer bottle, or a new label that does a magic trick or put fruit cordial in it like people have been doing for years
Readers, what are your pet hates?
If you want to see just how much the world has got its panties into a bunch about alcohol, read this article about the UK’s ultra-hyped Brewdog brewery. Now, it’s true that Brewdog actively court controversy as a means of seeking free exposure and goes out of its way to do so, but comments such as this from campaign group Alcohol Focus Scotland show that the anti-alcohol lobby has no sense of moderation either…
“It is a product with a lot of alcohol in it, that's all. To dress it up as anything else is cynical.”
And this one…
“We want to know why a brewer would produce a beer almost as strong as whisky.”
The brewery itself says the beer, called Tactical Nuclear Penguin, should be drunk in "spirit sized measures".
A warning on the label states: "This is an extremely strong beer; it should be enjoyed in small servings and with an air of aristocratic nonchalance. In exactly the same manner that you would enjoy a fine whisky, a Frank Zappa album or a visit from a friendly yet anxious ghost."
Of course, launching it on the same day as the Scottish government's Alcohol Bill which includes proposals for minimum pricing on drink was introduced is both inspired and incredibly cynical marketing which, while great for Brewdog’s business, does little to take the heat out of the debate about alcohol.
My question yesterday asking in all of the Schoolies photos that have been taken this past week, has anyone seen one with Schoolies carrying cartons of Murray’s 2IPA or Redoak Wee Heavy Ale into their units prompted a comment from colleague Ian Watson linking to this article from The Onion. It’s priceless and deserves a post of its own…
I often get accused of cynicism...I'm not a 'glass half empty' or a 'glass full guy', I'm more of a 'the glass is too big' sort of guy. So, I will lead with praise this post...
Congratulations to Fosters, Diageo, Channel Nine and Cricket Australia for announcing today they are partnering on a responsible drinking campaign titled, "Know when to declare". You can read all about it here and here. Without having seen any of the campaign, if Fosters applies any of the consumer insight and creativity that they use to get people drinking their product then this is the sort of positive campaign that can make a real contribution to changing the drinking culture that has come under fire of late.
Having said that though, a couple of things sprang to mind when I read it about it...
It is suddenly clear why "a senior Foster's executive" apologised a few weeks ago - seemingly apropos of nothing - for using David Boon and the "Boonie Doll" in a campaign a few years ago because Foster's "had not anticipated binge drinking would become such an urgent social issue." It was less of an apology and more of a clearing of the decks so that they nullified the issue so that nothing would take the rosy glow off the campaign methinks...
Also, while I concede that there is definitely a hiding-to-nothing element to this, there is just something that jars about a company like Diageo running a campaign such as this. They are proud to be a company with a "strong and continuous innovation pipeline driven by consumer demand and market opportunities", (which I think in English means, "we will continue to develop cheap alcohol that tastes just like soft drink at the same strength as beer and argue that even though it is designed to be appeal to a generation that wants to drink but doesn't actually like the flavour of alcohol and so has no nasty alcohol flavours to act as a brake or a speed bump to excessive consumption, it should be taxed at the same rate as drinks that do have a flavour brake and aren't as binge-worthy." (draw breath)
I am trying to think of an appropriate simile to describe this. The best that I can come up with (and I know that it is a little extreme, but it makes the point) but there is an element of Jack the Ripper campaigning for better street lighting while plying his trade in the alleys to the campaign.
In all of the Schoolies photos that have been taken this past week, has anyone seen one with Schoolies carrying cartons of Murray’s 2IPA or Redoak Wee Heavy Ale into their units or even a bottle of an Islay malt?
But maybe I'm just being cynical.
Just under a month ago I went to Denver for the Great American Beer Festival. I really should have written something about it before now, but am still trying to get my head around the whole experience. Two and a half days, 450+ breweries and more than 2000 different beers, in a city with half a dozen really good breweries and plenty more quality beer bars...I described it in my notes as like trying to take a drink from a firehose. It was a blur and in a way I am still trying to make sense of it. So it was reassuring to see I was actually there when I cropped up in the background of this photo posted on US beer writer Carolyn Smagalski's blog...that's me, just behind Michelob brewer Adam Goodson's left ear...no, not the guy about to sip a big, foamy beer...further in the background looking like I'm wearing a black turtleneck (I'm not incidentally, I'll leave that to the wine writers.) I took over 600 photos in Denver and this is probably the only one with me in it.
The Michelob Rye-ters block (so named because it was brewed based on suggestions from beer writers invited to the event) was my first beer in Denver and was excellent. My notes accorded with Carolyn's, though I accentuated the balance of this beer and underlined my surprise at a beer like this coming from Michelob, a brewery I only knew of by reputation and from the watery Michelob Ultra that is available in Australia.
I have just filed a story for Beer & Brewer magazine about Denver as a great beer destination...the magazine hits the streets mid-November. I'll write more about Denver and the GABF in time...but I think I really need to head back next year so I can shake the feeling from my last visit that I was just a pebble skimming across a pond of beer.
There has been a trend over recent years to turn the descriptions “sessionable” and “refreshing” into a dog whistle call to those after bland and characterless beers designed simply to be drunk thoughtlessly and in great quantity. Whether that’s a bad thing really depends on how you view beer – that is whether you consider flavour or alcohol content to be beer's finest quality.
With summer around the corner this trend has continued with a wave of beers crashing down upon us that has left us awash in dross. So far we have had the nothingness that is XXXX Summer Bright Lager, the wretched VB Raw and the disappointingly plain Coopers 62 not-quite-Pilsner. So it was with great trepidation that I ventured along to the launch of Matilda Bay’s new offering, a dry Munich-style lager. “Dry” can be another of those euphemisms for blandness but with Matilda Bay’s pedigree in bringing out interesting beers across a wide range of styles I was hopeful. And I wasn’t disappointed.
With much Oktoberfest fanfare at the Matilda Bay Garage, Big Helga was unveiled. While easy-drinking and approachable are two adjectives that can be used to describe her, so are flavoursome, complex and generous. It is a light lager and not with the biscuity malt character of some Oktoberfest lagers, but she comes with sweet malt profile with the "dry" coming from a balanced hop character that spreads across the palate leaving a dry mouthfeel. While this sounds like the claims made by many of the new beers on offer, at 20 IBUs Helga is almost three times as bitter as the offering from XXXX. However the bitterness isn’t overt, nor the sweetness cloying.
Helga is deceptively complex for a lightish lager and I agree with brewer Scott Vincent that it’s a beer that won’t overwhelm or frighten the average lager drinker but can still reward the genuine beer lover. It’s a rare occasion that I spend a day happily drinking the same beer - or at least the same style of beer - but having done that yesterday I can say that Helga keeps on giving. There's plenty there to keep you going one with and that seemed to be the view of most there. It’s not a great beer or an earth shaker, but it is a clever beer. In a perfect world, this is the type of beer that would be considered “sessional” and “refreshing”.
It will be very interesting to see whether it finds a market – it deserves to. At the moment Helga is on tap at select venues and will be available in bottles by February.
Disclaimer – In the interests of full disclosure, I was a guest of Matilda Bay in Melbourne and they are very generous hosts ensuring that we all enjoyed a thoroughly entertaining day of free food and entertainment – not to mention beer and the company of a statuesque 6’ 2” blonde beer maiden named Helga...all of which tends to flavour one’s perception of a beer. Feel free to take that into account when you consider the above review.
Included for completeness:
Society of Beer Advocates (SOBA) Inc. C/O 11 Malda Grove, Khandallah, Wellington 6035James & Wells HAMILTON OFFICE Level 12, KPMG Centre 85 Alexandra Street Hamilton 3204 New Zealand
Media Statement
September 21st 2009
SOBA WELCOMES DB’s CANCELLATION OF SAISON TRADEMARK
In response to a media statement issued last week by DB Breweries, New Zealand’s Society of Beer Advocates Inc (SOBA) welcomes DB’s decision to voluntarily cancel the registration of its New Zealand trademark of the term SAISON, which it has held since 2002.
SAISON is a recognised beer style brewed around the world and SOBA is delighted that DB Breweries’ action means any brewers or importers wishing to sell SAISON-style beers within New Zealand will now be free to do so without the threat of legal action from DB.
However, SOBA notes with regret that DB Breweries intends to continue to defend its trademark of the term RADLER, another well known beer style.
In response, SOBA re-states its assertion that no brewery should be allowed to ‘own’ sole rights to the use of beer style names. SOBA believes that any such ownership is anti-competitive and detrimental to the education of and choice of beers available to the New Zealand consumer.
DB’s trademarking of beer style names came to light at then end of 2008 when the company forced the Dunedin-based organic microbrewery, Green Man, to re-label its entire production run of its RADLER style beer, or face costly legal action. Subsequent investigation revealed that DB had also trademarked SAISON.
RADLER, the background:
- In 2003 DB Breweries, producer of the Monteith’s range of beers, was granted a New Zealand trade mark on the name RADLER and is now preventing other brewers from using it.
- In November 2008 Dunedin’s Green Man Brewery began making a radler-style beer, but DB’s lawyers soon served papers ordering the brewery to cease selling it. Unable to afford a protracted legal battle with DB, the microbrewery capitulated and relabelled its beer Green Man Cyclist.
- In response to the frustrations expressed by the Society of Beer Advocates (SOBA) Inc about DB Breweries’ trade marking and preventing others from using the generic term “radler” in relation to their beer, James & Wells Intellectual Property offered SOBA Inc the services of its specialist intellectual property litigation group on a pro-bono basis to invalidate DB Breweries’ trade mark registration for RADLER.
- In May 2009, James & Wells, acting on behalf of SOBA, issued an Application for Declaration of Invalidity for New Zealand Trade Mark Registration No. 700726 RADLER in the name of DB Breweries Limited. The case continues.
SOBA argues:
1 - That ‘radler’ - like Pilsener, porter, brown ale, bock etc. - is a generic name for a recognised style of beer and should therefore not be permitted to be a term owned by one brewery. A simple search of the internet will give an indication of the number of breweries producing radlers.
2 - That DB was most certainly well aware that ‘radler’ is a recognised style of beer. Indeed Monteith’s own website acknowledges radler’s stylistic heritage, stating, “The style originates from Bavaria and was first created in the early 1920's…”
About SOBA:
- The Society of Beer Advocates (SOBA) is an independent, non-profit society whose main aim is promoting a wider availability of better quality beer. SOBA is a growing consumer organisation which seeks to encourage the broader availability and appreciation of high quality beers through education and a sensible approach to drinking.
Website: soba.org.nz
Roger Protz, the doyen of British beer writers and one of the most highly respected writers on the subject internationally, has weighed in on the Montheith's trademark issue. To date DB has shown no intention of backing down. They haven't really had much motivation either, they've not really been confronted with a firestorm of protest. Not unreasonably for a publicly listed company wholly owned subsidiary of Asia Pacific Breweries Limited, market share and profit are what motivates DB. If SOBA's call to boycott the DB brands worked and there was a widespread boycott, they would backdown quickly. But to the average beer drinker the issue of trademarking exotic syle names is a fairly abstract one, not like the practical issue of a brewery such as CUB-owned Cascade changing their bottle size but not the price of their beers. This eventually led to what, in corporate terms, was a grovelling apology. It was a boycott over 45ml of a fairly pedestrian beer but it worked because people personally felt it and responded to it.
Roger weighing in shows how important an issue it is and he shows how much bigger it is than being about one brewing company's bottom line:
The issue is an important one at a time when there has been a great renewal of interest in traditional beer styles in Britain, Europe and the United States. India pale ales, porters, stouts, Pilseners and bocks are widely brewed again, bringing much-needed diversity to the beer scene.
This renewal of beer styles could be cruelly nipped in the bud if the likes of global brewing groups such as Asia Pacific use legal trademarks to force competitors out ofthe market.
I'm not sure what will take issue from the abstract to the practical for the average drinker, but hopefully the weight of Roger's comments will go some way to doing so.
I've been away on work for a week so am catching up on my reading, which is why I came across Jay Brooks' post in my previous post. Jay's had a fairly prolific week. I was going to note this one (which is very interesting and a pointer for where our beer market is going), and then I came across this one. Maybe it's because I'm Australian that I bristled a little, but I really can't work out why you'd get upset over the use of the word "boutique". Jay is a great beer writer and covers the US craft scene really well with great insight, but I can't help wondering whether worrying so much over the word to describe non-mainstream beer really matters or whether it starts to create a winey snobbishness in beer. I regularly describe beer as "boutique". Boutique describes the characteristic of a small, exclusive producer or business. While "craft" beer has a distinct definition in the States, I can't see any problems with using a generic adjective as a catch all phrase to describe beer that isn't generic lager. Sydney's Redoak Boutique Beer Cafe even uses the description in its name and when I once queried brewer Dave Hollyoak about it he pretty much shrugged and said he'd rather focus on the beer than the name. I'd be interested to know what readers of this blog think.
Yes, "craft" is a specific and important term in the States and I think Australia should have a similar definition developed as the comparatively nascent domestic beer market develops. Properly used it helps differentiate between a massive brewery and a small one...but in Australia is Coopers still a craft brewery? Little Creatures makes great beer but is substantially owned by Kirin now (formerly Lion Nathan)...are they "craft" or not? In getting worked up and damning a TV talking head for using a generic descriptor for beer with flavour seems to me pretty stupid. Shouldn't we be celebrating that beer is starting to get mainstream coverage and hope that it leads to people trying better beer and maybe even learning the lingo later? To get all snarly about the use of a word like "boutique" just creates the sort of linguistic divisions that give wine a bad name and act as a barrier to people coming to the party. It makes beer a private club that leaves people feeling stupid and excluded if they refer to it the wrong way...when we should be welcoming them with open arms and saying thanks for talking about it. Even more, it is incredibly hard to get mainstream media to cover beer at all, is slamming them and calling them "a nutter" when they put together a pretty good story on beer going to (a) encourage them try and find out what the universally agreed definition of small brewed beer is (there isn't one) or (b) discourage her from reporting on beer again?
Let me know what you think....
I often get asked why I have such a thing against low-carb beers with the suggestion being that I bring a wine-tosser's snobbery to beer. This isn't really true. Beer is all about enjoyment. You can bring a judge's forensic palate to beer to determine whether a beer is "good" or not according to an objective standard, but the real test for me is a subjective one: whether you enjoy a particular beer or not...a beer you enjoy is a "good" beer because beer is for drinking, not judging.
That said, I do have a particular antipathy for low-carb beers. If you enjoy drinking them for their flavour - and a lot of people do - that's well and good, stop reading now. If you are drinking them because you have been sold the idea they they are the key to you becoming the next cover model for Men's or Women's Health, you might want to rethink your weight-loss strategy.
I have done a few interviews with nutritionist Trent Watson for the Beer Show on 4BC and he has a refreshing attitude to beer and life. In our most recent interview we were talking about beer consumption and health. Among the things Trent said were:
- When you look at an alcohol intake of 1-2 standard drinks a day, the relative risk of death or disease is actually lower than in people who consume none - this is teetotallers. Once you move to 4, 5 or 6 drinks (or more), you see the relative risk of death or disease increase quite significantly.
- The reasons for this aren't clear. It's uncertain whether there are actual benefits in moderate amounts of alcohol or whether someone who can moderate that aspect of their life is more likely to moderate other aspects of their life by engaging in moderate exercise and moderate their intake of fruit and vegatables for example.
- Beer has nearly as many anitoxidants as wine has but you shouldn't rely on your alcoholic beverages to provide your antioxidants...at the level that they exist, if you're relying on beer or wine to provide your antioxidant requirements you're in trouble for other reasons - mainly point 1 above!
- For the average male, 178cm tall and weighing 70-80 kilograms, the average daily energy intake to maintain that weight is approximately 10,000 kilojoules. For an average woman of 65 kilograms the maintenance intake is approximately 8-9,000 kilojoules. If you consume more kilojoules than this you will gain weight, if you consume fewer you will lose weight.
- An average full strength beer contains about 550 KJs, a reduced alcohol beer about 400 KJs, an average full-strength low-carb beer 460 kilojoules. So an average low-carb beer contains more kilojoules than the average mid-strength beer and contributes more to your daily intake of kilojoules...even though lower in carbs. (So, if you substitute two low-carb beers for your favourite full-strength beer you are saving only about 200 kilojoules from an intake of 10,000... saving 2% of your daily kilojoules intake or the equivalent of a whole 4 water crackers. Of course, if you're drinking more than 2 standard drinks regularly the studies would indicate carbs and kilojoules are the least of your worries.)
- Trent's advice for drinking a beer or two...drink a beer that you enjoy... "Enjoy it, enjoy the flavour!"
Given all of this, my biggest problem with low-carb is that despite their healther image, at moderate consumption levels they do next nothing to assist weight loss. What they do though is single-handedly confirm all of the negative stereotypes about beer: that beer makes you fat. It was this media release that prompted this diatribe. You never see "wine lover wants to lose weight" stories, or talk of "wine bellies" in the media even though wine generally has more kilojoules than heavy beer. You'd think beer was the only beverage with alcohol in it.
Wine would seem to have the better PR team. Rather than try to educate people, brewers seem to have chosen the path of least resistance and are jumping on the low-carb bandwagon.
Thanks to the growth in "craft" beer - and that includes the craft beers from the big two - beer has been attracting growing attention and respect but just when this has started to occur the low-carb category legitimises all of the negative stereotypes about beer for a short-term bump in sales. It's just like setting fire to your house when you run out of firewood. Sure, you'll be toasty for a while, but then what? I wonder how this will affect beer in the long term? If you legitimise an erroneous perception about your product, one that essentially tells people that there is an unhealthy or negative aspect to it, doesn't that jeopardise the long term interests of your product? When the current low-carb fad has passed it will only ever get harder to reduce the negative perceptions about beer left by legitimising them in the first place.
Drink Less, drink better.
Issue 7 of the magazine just went to the printers, so it's been a crazy week or so hence no posts. Consequently there is a backlog of things for me to get off my chest...
The first is beer snobbery. I love beer and I want to see it become a more valued drink. I want to see interesting lists served at good restaurants, I want to hear people talk about the hop aroma and malt profile and I want to see people care about how they store their beers and drink them from glasses. I think It's important that people know the difference between a lager and an ale. That is all about the enjoyment of beer - respecting it and not mindlessly guzzling it. What I don't want to see is beer become wine with the all of the posing and posturing and the one-upmanship that comes from supposedly knowing more than the bloke at the bar next to you.
Yesterday, I was introduced to a guy that "loves his beer and knows all about it, he tries new ones all the time". We had a brief chat during which I offered him a bottle of one of the beers that I had on me from a tasting I had conducted. It was from a small brewery and I thought he may not have tried it before. "No thanks, I've tried it," he said in a way that suggested he didn't think too much of it.
"How would you rate it," asked the pub owner who introduced us.
"Five out of ten," pronounced the connoisseur without hesitation.
This genuinely surprised me as I really enjoy this particular beer, it's well regarded by others and the beer has done well at various competitions.
"What didn't you like about it," I enquired, expecting an considered answer about hop and malt balance or some such, given the authority with which the rating had been pronounced.
"Don't like the style," was the reply.
Now, there are a stack of styles that I don't like...the previously mentioned low-carb lagers being an example. I'm also not a lover of highly-hopped IPAs - which puts me out of step with most latter day craft beer lovers - but there is a huge difference between not liking a style and not thinking that a particular beer is a well-made, balanced, true-to-style example of a style. This distinction is important. This guy was introduced to me as someone who "knows his beers" and either deliberately or inadvertently he is an influencer for his circle of friends because he is regarded as a beer authority. His pronouncements on a beer carry weight in that circle. If he damns a beer, as he did, just because he doesn't like the style, he may be denying his friends the chance to try a beer that they will like because they don't share his dislike of the style. He has also not extended his or their appreciation of beer if he tastes it and regardless of how good it is, doesn't like the style, dismisses it and leaves it as that. For him it could be the best made beer in the category ever and would still only get five out of ten because his enquiry stopped at not liking the style and yet was willing to damn it with what I saw as pompous authority.
It is a natural human condition to like to (a) know more about something than someone else, and (b) want to be recognised for that. In most areas of interest this can also lead to a snobbery or willingness to dismiss those who know less as being somehow less discerning and lesser members of "the club". But some of the best brewers and beer judges I have met are incredibly modest in their discussion of beer, even with the casual drinker of it. They genuinely listen to what the other person is saying about their experience of the beer. They do prompt with question like, "well what does that remind you of" when discussing a flavour profile, but they never say, "you're wrong, this beer doesn't taste like that," or "how can you say this is a good beer, it's swill" because everyone's experience of beer is different and perception of flavour is highly individual. For me, that's the difference between appreciation and snobbery.
While I want to see more people out there drinking, appreciating, discussing and debating beer, I hope that pronouncement and snobbishness are left to other areas of the drinks trade.
Afterall, it's just beer.
I normally eagerly await new beers from Gage Roads. It's a good brewery and their recent run of seasonals 
has been pretty good. So when I received a media release today about a new beer I opened it expectantly, wondering what delights they had in store for me...instead I found a media release trumpeting a new low-carb beer, Kutt.
I will say at the outset that I haven't tried Kutt yet and it could be the greatest beer of 2008...but I doubt it. No offence to anyone who actually likes likes low-carb beers for their flavour, but everyone else is getting conned. Compared to almost anything else you are drinking, ALL BEERS ARE LOW-CARB! So much so that last year Lion Nathan started marketing XXXX Gold as lower-carb - they could simply because it fit the definition, not because they changed it in any way.
Fosters publishes a table of the carbohydrate levels of its beers which makes for fascinating reading. VB has 3g of carbohydrates per 100ml of beer (roughly 10g for a stubby), Carlton Draught has 2.7g, Crown Lager 3.1g and Redback Original has 3.6g. Amazingly Guinness (with its "pork chop in every glass") has 3.6g per 100ml. These all have fewer carbs than milk (4.9g/100ml) or chocolate milk (9g/100ml). Then there's 15.7g of carbs in 20g of plain flour and 21.7 grams in a 35 gram Tim Tam.
Now, I'm not suggesting you drink beer instead of milk, but it does put things in some perspective. I would rather forgo the Tim Tam and have a beer with real flavour.
Beers that are marketed as low carbs are just that, marketing. All you need to do is read the second paragraph of a media release about a new beer:
"It is presented in unique packaging that reflects the style and aspirations of the consumer. The stylish graphics and the extra long bottle bring something new and fresh to the low carb beer market."
Huh?? The graphics and the bottle...what about the taste of the beer? Shouldn't that be what Kutt brings to the low carb beer market? Nope, jumping on the low-carb bandwagon (while trying to shoe-horn in mentions of craft beer - but I'll write about that later), slick graphics and clear, trendy bottle. This is the beer equivalent of a fast-talking, leased-Mercedes, dripping in gold jewellery, Gold Coast life coach.
I don't mean to single out Kutt - it equally applies to all of the low-carb beers - though Kutt certainly turns the marketing up to 11.
If you like the flavour of low-carb beers, you might find something here. If you force yourself to drink low-carb thinking it's good for you, have something you actually like (in moderation) and lay off on the Tim Tams.
Me, I'll wait 'till Gage Roads' next seasonal comes out...
Beer clubs have never really flourished for some reason. People are more willing to accept a mixed carton of wine turning up at their door every month or quarter than they have been for beer. I can think of a lot of reasons this might be the case, but it may be changing.
Yesterday I had a carton of beer land (FA!) on the door step from a new beer club called Beer Masons. As you can see from the photos, it’s a pretty impressive package on the outside and more so on the inside.
I have spoken to Chris Badenoch who identifies his job as GrandMaster Brew and Brand and these guys come across as very serious about beer. This is confirmed when you open the box and get a strong waft of hops, courtesy of the very slick information pack that includes samples of three malts for you to taste and three hops which you smell straight away (for the uninitiated – DON’T TASTE THEM!). The information is good for the novice embarking on their path to beerdom – including good tasting notes for the beers included- though I’ll have to find out whether the information changes with each new pack.
The 17 beers included in this one were Maudite (from one of my all-time favourite breweries – Unibroue), Franziskaner Hefeweizen, Hobgoblin from the Wychwood Brewery, 3 Ravens Black from the highly-regarded Melbourne 3 Ravens brewery, Gouden Carolus Classic, the Red Angus Pilsner from the brewing arm of the De Bortoli wine company and Reserva 1925 from Spanish brewer Alhambra.
It’s a very interesting mix of good beers, including some that would take some searching for. At $120 this isn’t targeted at the budget conscious beer buyer who scans the junk mail for the best buys at the local beer barn. The company say they are after the discerning drinker and for someone who is interested in receiving a good mix of hard-to-find beers with complementary and useful information it is probably worth the outlay. Members also have access to additional information and other specials on the website, that also contains quite a bit of free content – that again seems well researched and helpful.
All in all, a great one-off gift for the beer lover in your life, or regular treat for yourself.
Matilda Bay is about to release their new occasional reserve beer with the launch of Sebastian Reserve.
The new release is in the style of Matilda Bay's earlier limited release vintages, MB21 and Grayston Reserve, being a dunkelweizen. I didn't taste the MB21, but well enjoyed the Grayston Reserve and have a bottle saved from that release to sample side-by-side with the 2008.
The media material from Matilda Bay says Sebastian "is brewed with five different malts and two noble hops - Hersbrucker and Tettnang - and fermented using classic Redback yeast. It has distinctive chocolate and banana aromas followed by subtle hints of clove and spice. The palate is characterised by a smooth, round malty body with warming alcohol balanced by low bitterness from the German hops." (For those interested in the name of the beer, it was named after a three-year-old Indian Runner duck - you can read the full media release here)
The brewery suggests the beer will age well over a number of years, though I note a number of reviewers on Beeradvocate doubt its cellaring potential. I'll make up my mind when I try them side by side this weekend.
The rise of the seasonal and reserve beer is an exciting development for beer in Australia. In the US, seasonal release beers are the highest selling category of craft beer, even surpassing the mighty American Pale Ale. Their Brewers Association has even launched a website dedicated to seasonal beers.
As our own craft beer industry goes from strength to strength, seasonal and special releases are increasingly being offered, from the nationally available examples such as Sebastian Reserve and James Squires' Pepperberry Winter Ale, but also the smaller regional brewers such as the excellent Migration Dark Ale from Northern Rivers Brewery at Alstonville.
With our climate south east Queensland may not enjoy four seasons a year, but we are certainly enjoying some great seasonals...
Matilda Bay Sebastian Reserve Releasing 1 October 2008 750ml 6% abv Available nationally for a limited time. RRP 18.99 Available on draught at select venues in Qld (and Vic, NSW, WA and SA). Breakky Creek is one that I know will have it