That’s not very clever. Or polite. But one must pun as one can. And one has to be always on watch for indulgence – especially when it comes to marketing… or is it marketability. That is what Stan mentioned: “Collaborations are good business, good marketing, good fun and often result in interesting beer.” Or a bit of what he said… or implied. Sorta. But can they also result in bad business, poor marketing, tedium and dull beer? Of course they might. If not, what point would there be to this month’s edition of The Session?
This brew is a good illustration of the quandary, Brewmaster’s (sic) Collaboration Signature Ale #1 which resulted from a brewing get together 3 years ago and two months ago between Tomme Arthur of Port Brewing and Dirk Naudis of De Proef. It pours a deep rich varnished pine under thick rocky clinging off white head. The aroma includes pine sap and nutmeg, bubblegum and marigold. The mouthfeel is very soft and compelling but turns on you with the twin bite of hops and alcohol. There is pear and honey in the malt. All very attractive yet it’s a bit of a muddle. It’s overly hot from just 8.5% alcohol, the hops also burn and the malt’s a wee bit flabby. There is a bit of brett or some other sour tang a bit down there as well as a little of spice. But the furniture polish hops overwhelm it all. As they usually do. Like using the fuzz or the waa-waa pedal or a car with an intentionally bad muffler. The label claims that “these notes could be out of balance were it not for the generous maltiness that holds the beer in check.” I am not sure I agree.
Could be that time or the shelves of the middleman have taken a toll? I think not. This beer is like a decent Belgian golden strong ale got mixed up with a good California double IPA which stumbled into little dubbel. Plenty of BAer love but hasn’t this been done? A hundred times? Could be by now – but had it “been done” back in March of 2007? Three years and two months is a lifetime in craft beer marketability trends. It took until 2009 before folks got a bit jaded on the idea. Maybe this was one of the first inquiries into the collaboration idea that branched into or at least was working with into that early late mid-decade Belgian double IPA idea. When collaboration was new and interesting.
Collaboration might be a great idea but it also might be an idea with less universal applicability or longevity than one might have hoped a few years ago. Let’s be honest. All craft beer is collaboration. Brewers work with other brewers, were trained by brewers and were inspired by brewers. Does it really matter that one craft brewer held the basket of hops as they were shaken into the other’s brewing kettle? After taking a jet?
[Original comments…]
Kelly Ryan – May 8, 2010 2:49 PM
http://thornbridgebrewery.com
Regardless, both collaborations we’ve done with Epic have been great fun and we learnt loads from each other. Anything that potentially helps market great craft beer IS a good thing.
Alan – May 8, 2010 5:57 PM
What’s the difference between marketing and selling? And what is the good thing about a 19 dollar beer that leaves one less than thrilled?
Kelly Ryan – May 9, 2010 4:36 AM
http://thornbridgebrewery.com
Generally, we market to sell beer. If only we could afford to just give it all away. But at £3 a pint for our Thornbridge Epic Halcyon, it’s no $19 a bottle.
Alan – May 9, 2010 8:52 AM
That is fair enough and I am all for a full pint for a fair price – in relation to both ends of the transaction, the vendor and the buyer. And, given I pay a standardish $6.75 CAN a pint for my oatmeat stout at the KBP (or 4.35 pounds at the current exchange) I like to live in your market. I’ve never understood why UK good beer costs less than mass macro beer.
But the opposite is true in the case of the beer I discuss as the example above. My point is what is the consumer’s interest in over paying for someone’s experimental beers and their holidays? Why are the R+D / training and vacation costs not factored in across the board or, in the case of the later, a draw from wage? It has a tinge of training the consumer to me – and training them to act like a fan as opposed to an informed buyer.
Kelly Ryan – May 11, 2010 4:46 AM
http://thornbridgebrewery.com
Quite interesting. In both cases we paid our own way. I was heading back to NZ anyway for a wedding so went up and did the planned brew then (covering all of my own expenses) and when Luke from Epic was over in the UK, he was already here doing a brew of his Epic Pale Ale for the Wetherspoons International Real Ale Festival (under £2 a pint for that brew). He just headed along to us afterwards and spent a day brewing. We didn’t factor in any holiday or travel costs into either beer because they were solely personal costs. I wasn’t lying to Stan when I said why we collaborate. We do it to learn and have fun and do what we love to do. Brew great beer.
I guess that’s why I initially replied to this post. I understand that generalisations are inevitable in blogs, but this isn’t the case here.
I don’t really think we are trying to train the consumer by collaboration alone. I think as a whole, good breweries should be promoting good beer. If that means sharing your knowledge about good beer with customers, then I guess I’m guilty. It’s not just about my beer though, in my opinion it’s a movement and most brewers I know are aware of this and help support each others brews. Does this not aid and abet the buyers becoming informed?
If people want to buy collaboration beers because they are fans of either of the breweries, and the beer is rubbish or overpriced, then I guess they find out the hard way. I’ve bought beers before that weren’t collaborations brews and were expensive and they’ve also been rubbish. The joys of the marketplace I guess.
I do agree with you though. Collaboration brews shouldn’t be overpriced!
Alan – May 11, 2010 8:48 AM
Thanks Kelly. that is why I use question marks and ask the questions in my posts. They aren’t “gotchas”. I really don’t know so you thoughtful responses are most welcome.
But the joys of the marketplace are on my back. Like a lot of beer nerds, I spend a hell of a lot on beer. Yet I am lucky as this beer blog pays for itself though it’s hardly a steady income or anything to plan a future on. Look at the sort of stuff we are presented with in addition to a 19 dollar beer – a 40 dollar entry fee thank you party. I don’t mind being taught about great beer. I don’t particularly care for being taught to pay more for beer that might be great. Where is the payback for the consumer having toi “learning the hard way”? Starting a blog and saying I didn’t like your 19 dollar beer I suppose.