Do you ever read a sentence about the beer trade that just drops onto the table and sits there gawking back at you, dimwittedly? The line below in bold is one of those:
Jonathan Bennett, PR man for Miller Brands, insists Peroni wasn't worried that Skeggy would do to the brand what Daniella Westbrook did to Burberry when she was papped head-to-toe in its checks. "It's not a commentary on Skegness itself; we just didn't feel Peroni was right for [the hotel]. I'm sorry that the landlord was unhappy, but this has been a successful strategy for us for a long time," he said. "Throughput on kegs does affect quality," he added, tacitly implying that his inspectors believed not enough drinkers in Skeg would cough up for a pint that is commonly sold for as much as £5 a pop (though Bain had planned a £4 price point).
This is nothing against Peroni which, as Jeff recently pointed out, is pretty good for, you know, bulk beer. But hardly a beer I would expect that could pretend to be too good for Skegness... or any other place for that matter. More kraphtt than craft. See, however, what the marketing goal actually was: make the beer falsely limited in availability and then raise the price. Pull back on the market by 10% and then raise prices by 25% to make net gain without investing anything. Cha. Ching.
Yet, is there anything being done by Peroni that isn't being done regularly in the craft beer world? Manufacturing demand through manipulating supply and creating a narrative around preciousness and rarity? If you think about it, does playing that branding card ever convey anything but a lack of integrity?