Ah, I was wondering where the pressure was coming from.
The idea that this 150 year old brewery is closing down a truly cornerstone beer in craft beer history because the label art is expensive - despite weathering untold recessions and tough periods - strains credulity
Ballast Point had a similar trajectory. They got bought for a gigabuck and now are just gone.
Why the hell would you buy a company and then screw it up? In the case of Ballast Point, all Constellation Brands had to do was leave the bought company alone.
And, no, I don't believe that the issue is because you can buy great beers in every market. Hogwash. Maybe I can buy IPA, IPAer, IPAest, and IPAestest in every market--maybe. However, dark, heavy porters like old school Victory at Sea seem to be very thin on the ground nowadays.
(Side question: Why is everything in craft brew now shipping in cans instead of bottles? When did that happen?)
My understanding is also that canning lines can be a lot more compact than bottling lines, so cheaper/easier to install in a smaller brewery. For a while, I know there were a couple local breweries who essentially time-shared a canning line on the back of a truck that would just drive between the breweries and was cheaper than all of them buying it themselves.
>- They weigh less and are more compact than bottles
This is the real key one. My intel from a brewery that was sadly bought by Coke was that the savings in transit & shipping is staggering. More beverages in the same amount of space, which also means less costs for refrigeration.
> I can buy IPA, IPAer, IPAest, and IPAestest in every market--maybe. However, dark, heavy porters
I'm totally with you, though my personal love is sour beers. IPA rules the market, to the point where I have trouble distinguishing between whichever super-hoppy IPA is currently the best. But good sour beers are not nearly so common. If someone ever buys Cascade Brewing and kills it, I will be wildly irritated.
I do see that I can buy their good stuff in cans now. I actually think that's alright. They still sell it in bottles, too, but the upside of the can is that it's 250ml, versus the 750ml bottle. One bottle will take care of my entire evening and then some, so the option to just open a can at a time is appealing.
There's a bunch of Minnesota breweries doing some amazing sours, and many of them are only around for a season or two before they switch up the fruits. I'm so happy about it because I was totally burnt out on IPAs.
And now that everyone isn't so IPA-happy there are some great examples of varieties like Gose and Kolsch that I hadn't even heard of before.
IPAs really suck. There’s a plethora of beer types, and we get hoppy trash forced on us.
Craft breweries love the IPA for three reasons. First, they’re one of the easiest beers to make. Second, they stay the most stable on the shelf/truck. Third, toxic style trend. But mostly, it’s the first two reasons.
They are not one of the easiest beers to make, but in fact one of the hardest. They’re very susceptible to oxygen ingress and the high hopping rates can cause diacetyl production + hop creep which can ruin the beer.
They’re also one of the most expensive beers to make based on the cost of hops and the typical amount of hops used per barrel produced.
They do not stay the most stable on shelves / truck as they can fade quickly and are heat sensitive. Heat can quickly cause off flavors in IPAs. If you keep an IPA, especially a hazy, longer than 6-8 weeks you’re going to have an inferior tasting product so you have to turn them quickly via taproom pours & hyping up can sales. There’s a reason why no one ships IPAs overseas like they do with Belgian & German styles. They don’t travel well.
Breweries brew them because they’re a very popular style and they can charge $18-24 for a 4 pack where-as a lager or lower ABV beer cannot typically sell for the same price. They can also increase the grain by ~30% and make a double IPA which can sell for closer to $24 for a 4-pack.
This is why you see six-packs for $15-18 of lagers or similar styles, the customer expectation is different.
I can understand not liking IPAs or thinking they’re overdone but they aren’t the easiest style nor the most shelf stable.
Haha I mean it’s strange considering IPAs were created for long-haul travels but fast-forward & we’ve now made hazy IPAs that don’t travel well at all.
Hazies typically have 1/2 to 1/8th the amount of IBUs (bitterness) to older school “west coast” IPAs which is why they don’t get the same benefit as older school IPAs which traveled better + had more stability due to the hops.
I think you’re getting your breweries mixed up. Cascade only makes sours and they are owned by a local group in Portland with the founder still heavily involved.
The craft beer industry used to look down on cans as inferior and only for cheap beer. But I think much of that was just an image thing, likely resulting from prohibitively high costs for small breweries to can their beer in the past. Slowly craft came around to cans and canning lines and can labeling options became affordable.
Also the new school breweries 10 years ago like Trillium, Treehouse, Other Half all came on the scene with 16oz cans and sticker labels as well as the new NEIPA style that became so hot. I think that did a lot to improve the image of cans among consumers. Especially newer craft fans.
As far as the cans, it's just a better way to package beer. It stays fresher longer due to less oxidation and also no light infiltration.
As far as Ballast Point in particular, I can only offer conjecture. Sculpin was great ten years ago, but the craft has moved forward and I don't feel like Ballast Point kept up. In my opinion, their recipes are dated. Whether that's due to the acquisition or not I couldn't say, but I believe that's why they've fallen out of favor.
You are a few years behind the merger and acquisition market conditions.
The ballast point buy out by constellation brands was probably very much the peak of the craze around craft breweries.
Ballast point was very savy in increasing their unit sales numbers. That 12$ a 6 pack in the California market was unheard of at the time and made sales projections go off the charts.
Of course it was bullshit and unsustainable but their investors took it line and sinker..
The sheer amount of competition with thousands of breweries all over, to me means its a good local business (lifestyle in hn lingo), and a very tough regional business it you want to grow.
> Why the hell would you buy a company and then screw it up? In the case of Ballast Point, all Constellation Brands had to do was leave the bought company alone.
It would almost never make economic sense to buy a business and then leave it alone. The profitability of the current operation would be factored into the price, so leaving it alone means you're just wasting money buying it. There are obviously exceptions to this but that should be the general rule.
No, you buy a company to make changes. Perhaps you intend to find synergies to cut costs or expand distribution -- or other ways to increase profits that the current management isn't doing. Obviously they wouldn't intend to screw it up, but I'm sorry that your beloved brewery was a victim to corporate shenanigans.
I think this is part of the reason why Berkshire Hathaway has been so successful. Sure they buy good companies, but for the most part they buy them, keep the current management and then leave them alone to continue to do the things that made the company successful in the first place.
Happily, Ballast Point beers are still made under license locally here in New Zealand (by Behemoth Brewing) and are available fresh in my local supermarket. Yum!
Ok, you're calling this sentiment "hogwash", but I think it might be testable. Name the locale you say you can only get IPAs in, and we can probably search quickly to see if there are regional breweries there, and what they're selling. Obviously, in Chicago, we're spoiled for regional craft beer options (although the last time I was drinking beer, which was years ago, we'd still be pulling good brett sours in from Michigan).
Let's get concrete about this. I sort of believe what other people are saying, that regardless of what Anchor makes available outside California, we're far better off today than we were in Anchor's heyday. But maybe I'm wrong! It'd be interesting to find out.
1. We've reached Peak IPA. It was novel a couple decades ago, but geez, you can't taste the beer for the hops any more.
2. "Craft beer" has become a branding exercise. A lot of it is being brewed in contract breweries that will make a batch of whatever recipe you provide, with any label art you want. Bingo, craft beer. A couple of breweries in my region, in conversations, people say: "Oh yeah, they also brew for brands W, X, Y, and Z.
I end up bringing home something from one or two mid priced regional brands that taste good but don't break the bank.
My key takeaway as well. The moment I read that line I knew it was just corporate budgeting. EBIDA strikes again.
They purchased the company because they were successful and will then proceed to kill the company by doing the exact opposite things that made them successful.
I hate this trend. Because successful as a business that sustains itself and success as part of a portfolio are different and the latter version of success is always less human, less interesting, just less.
I'm not sure why that's hard to believe. For most of those 150 years, Anchor had a sector of the market to itself. But there are 9,552 craft breweries in the US today, and several hundred of them are quite excellent.
Ah, I was wondering where the pressure was coming from.
The idea that this 150 year old brewery is closing down a truly cornerstone beer in craft beer history because the label art is expensive - despite weathering untold recessions and tough periods - strains credulity