I have every sympathy for the Boston Beer Company and their Sam Adams brands if for no other reason that they keep coming up with brews that surprise me unexpectedly with their quality and value. That being said, it is getting silly out there with the efforts being made to continue their right to be called a "small" brewer or a "craft" brewer even as they get bigger and more industrial from a technical point of view. Take, for example, what was reported last week in The New York Times:
Mr. Koch said Sam Adams would remain a craft beer regardless of whether the Boston Beer Company hung on to its official craft brewer status. Quite simply, he said, a craft beer is one recognized for flavor versus thirst-quenching qualities. “A craft beer you would not drink,” he said, “after you just mowed the lawn on a hot day.”
Excuse me? That's a tad pompous, isn't it? I would be guessing (as I haven't exactly kept notes) but would be confident in saying that over 50% of my lawn mowing experiences since 2006 have been followed by a craft beer and that well over 80% of the beer Koch's company makes would be quite welcome at the post-mow lawn chair moment. Sam Adams brews may be tasty enough but, like most craft beer, they hardly cause chores and household duties to grind to a stop whenever they are near.
It isn't about flavour, is it. There is more to it. While the real issue is the lower rate of excise tax the legislatively deemed small brewer enjoys, the Brewer's Association also has part of the problem with any change for as soon as Sam Adams stops being craft beer, the entire craft beer market in the US loses about 20% of its production. One solution seems to be making small brewers be those producing under six million barrels instead of the current two. I don't have recent stats but it appears to me that this would make all breweries "small" except for the few national macros. Isn't that just an admission of the core of meaninglessness at the heart of the use of "craft" or "small" to describe brewing in the USA today?
Comments
Pivní Filosof - June 15, 2010 2:30 AM
It is quite funny, and pathetic, when the so called "craft" (I'm getting tired of that word) brewers use the same bollocksy rhetoric as the marketing robots of the macros.
The other day a Spanish blog talked about a micro from Barcelona punching their chest while saying they have the "best low alcohol beer in the world" after only 16 reviews in Rate Beer!
RunawayJim - June 15, 2010 9:42 AM
I think my problem is that they define craft beer as a number. Should a brewery trying to take on the crappy beer market by making beer meant to have little taste be considered a craft brewery simply because they make fewer than 2 million barrels a year?
The Brewer's Association needs to re-think their terms in my opinion. You can be a craft brewery and make a lot of beer, it's just a matter of how you come up with your recipes. Each recipe made by the folks at Boston Beer Co. is carefully crafted in small batches until it meets certain standards. That's the definition of craft. They're taking chances just as much as any other craft brewery. How many breweries regularly make a beer that drinks like a cognac at 27% ABV? How many breweries took a chance on a beer that tasted like maple syrup blended with soy sauce? They basically kick started the American extreme beer scene.
Maybe they don't need the representation of the Brewer's Association, and probably shouldn't be benefiting from it, but they most certainly are "craft" beer. And the BA would be stupid if they booted them entirely. They should be kept on as advisers for the BA and its members.
dave - June 15, 2010 2:28 PM
The under six would include Pabst who I wouldn't consider craft, though I have no problem drinking their wares on occasion.
Unfortunately for tax law purposes, qualifying a number is the easiest thing to do (could you imagine coming up with a law with the terms RunawayJim points out), and for whatever reason people decided to follow along with that definition (b/c its easier?). Interesting thing, the IRS measures the tax by volume in the fermentation tanks, not what is removed from them (or at least that is what Jim Koch is quoted as saying in Ale Street News - Section A - June - July 10).
JustMe - June 15, 2010 3:06 PM
Here's an idea for Mr. Koch: Stay small. How many businesses have we seen that were great when they were small to medium size and then fell apart when they went big? I'm sure at some point Budweiser actually made a good beer. Perhaps as good as the stuff Sam Adams makes now. Look at them now. They're a giant marketing machine that also makes beer. IMNHO, if Sam Adams continues its enexorable growth it will, someday, be no better than or different from Buttwiper.
Alan - June 15, 2010 6:03 PM
Pure Silliness:
- Brewers Association has page entitled "CRAFT BREWER DEFINED"
- Mr. Papazian states "Contrary to what many bloggers and news media report the Brewers Association does not define craft beer. It is a talking point among the eight bulleted concepts. It isn’t part of the definition of craft brewers, though there is a nod that craft brewers do make craft beer."
Horse pucks. The Brewers Association is a key participant in this silliness.
The Professor - June 16, 2010 1:44 AM
@justme: "IMNHO, if Sam Adams continues its enexorable growth it will, someday, be no better than or different from Buttwiper."
Why...just because they're becoming mainstream? I don't agree at all.
If Sam Adams keeps growing and keeps making great beer, that's a good thing.
The other argument (unrelated to this one) that always puzzles me is the criticisms leveled at AB-InBev and other big companies 'invading' the so called "craft" scene (and like Pivni, I have become weary of that term too). For years, beer geeks pissed and moaned saying that the big brewers were making flavorless beer. And now that the bigger brewers are bringing out some beers with more character (in some cases, succeeding quite well) many beer geeks have a problem with THAT.
Good beer is good beer. The craft is in the making, not the size of the brewery.
Gary Gillman - June 16, 2010 10:03 PM
Alan, I'd pin the distinction on average brewery size (output) as measured over a reasonable period, I think that's the only sure and reasonable criterion (not age of the brewery, what it makes, its markets, etc.). Clearly reasonable people can disagree on what that threshold should be, but essentially, those smaller producers who cannot benefit from the same scale economies as large ones should get an assist of some kind, in reduced taxes or in some other way.
Gary
dan smallbeer - June 18, 2010 6:46 PM
Many thanks for your thoughts, Alan. It's a troubling issue whichever way you look at it. I find the idea of credentials dubious in the first place. I'm not aware if Canada has a specific "craft" definition, but I think perhaps we're better off without one. My thoughts are here:
http://smallbeerblog.blogspot.com/2010/06/fallacy-of-craft-status.html#comments
I enjoy your blog immensely, thank you.
Alan - June 19, 2010 1:27 AM
Thanks, Dan. Nice to hear.