The wonderful and ever posting Jay Brooks has posted the latest version of this odd video meme (pronounced “me-me” for obvious reasons) and it has me scratching my head as much as that Craft Brewer video of a year ago. Here it is:
As I noted at Jay’s, how many of these drinkers are really marketers in their day to day life? Can they not actually find 12 or 23 real, honest to goodness average Joes who like craft beer? And what the hell is it about the soundtracks of these things? Does anyone actually associate classical string quartets or whatever the hell that stuff is with craft beer? Would a little heavy metal or bluegrass not send the right marketing message? It makes me want to fall asleep about half way through.
It’s a form of denial, we know that. And a form of spin. But wouldn’t it be interesting to have one of these promotional video thingies based on the following:
I am a craft beer drinker. I am a fan of good beer. I buy good craft beer.
I earn my money through hard work and expect craft brewers to earn it from me.
I have no time for the floaters, the makers of dull amber ale, the brewers who are there for the government grants.
Me and people like me reject badly made craft beer or beer stores that pass on soaking costs for trendy unbalanced crap.
We have the conviction of our own ability to determine what tastes good. And know a great craft beer goes with a bag of chips.
We know when it is stinking hot nothing goes down like a Miller High Life and respect our friends who like that stuff just fine.
But we also know that when the BBQ smoker in the backyard is pissing off the neighbours, when we are sick and tired another mouthful of steamed corn gak, when there is extra money in the wallet and when our mouths demand something that has extraordinary taste…
…that is when we buy good craft beer.
Background music? Metallica’s “Enter Sandman” morphing into a little early Johnny Cash ending in a crescendo of grunge. “Smells Like Teen Spirit,” perhaps?
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 iswhat 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?
There are many things that can get attached to an idea or experience. I presume the more precious or particular the key advice, the more likely you are dealing with a barnacle that needs scraping off the hull of your given ship of life.. or a consultant hunting for someone to bill. Like this mystic wisdom about pouring your beer:
There’s more to pouring a beer than you may think. Pouring a beer improperly can pollute wonderful aromas, cause an improper release of CO2, and hinder the flavors of the beer. If you want your beer to fulfill its potential, consider this advice…You want to cock the glass a certain way depending on the style of beer. If the beer is highly carbonated, tilt the glass at a 45 degree angle and start pouring down the side. Wait until a third of the pour you want is in the glass, then tilt the glass upright and pour in the center. If the beer is lower in carbonation, start pouring downwards into the center of the glass earlier. A head the width of two fingers is a good rule of thumb for what you are looking for, Deman says.
I have never been particularly anal about how to pour a beer but even I would not look for a two inch head on a low carbonation style like mild. You’d drive the life out of it. But no doubt I’ve been a lifetime beer polluter and had no idea. Better rule of thumb: do what you like when you pour your beer and it probably works for you.
What to call these beers? For the last few years, brewers have been getting together to make something new together. This one has a deeperback story than most but the point is the same. In the end they are joint projects, opportunities to get together, to share and learn. And no doubt to have a lot of fun. But what do they offer us, the consumer? They are the specials of the specials. The seasonals with only one season. Yet surely they have to stand up for themselves as beer and not be the wall hanging commemorative china plate of the beer world. What can I learn from just this bottle?
Blended three years ago, it pours a lovely light cola colour with a frothy deep cream head. The aroma (aka smell) is dandy – date and sharp apple.with a floral thing that is almost rose. On the sip and swish, there is plenty of rich pumpernickel malt but with that Avery drying hard water. Dark chocolate, dark plum and a nod to cinnamon with an interesting juiciness that nods to pear or white grape. It is styled as a Belgian strong dark ale and that makes sense. Yet there is an the underlying tone. The hard water for me is not working but that is a personal thing for me that I have noticed since I tried a line up from Colorado’s Great Divide. I am a soft water man. Yet there is a rich plum dark sugar finish. Solid if, for me, slightly sub-moreish.
There seems to be some news happening this suppertime around the Vermonstersaga-ette with news today from the website of Rock Art Brewery and via their Twitter account. Vermont Public Radio seems to have a tidbit more than I am seeing elsewhere on the why and the wherefore of the outcome… even if they get the name of the beer wrong:
Vermontster president Matt Nadeau is cautious about spelling out the agreement before getting instructions from his attorney. But he will say that Monster has agreed to withdraw its cease and desist letter, provided that Vermontster doesn’t try to break in to the ‘energy drink’ market.
If that is true, what a come down for the litigious Hansens Beverage Company, taking a kick in the teeth and putting a shadow on its brands only to force Rock Art into submitting to agree… to not do what it never intended to do. Brilliant. And all of a sudden little Rock Art is well known in craft brewing circles. Bonus.
You know, it’s fun to learn new things. Today, for example, I learned how to use the search tool at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. A great example of open government, you can even see the emails on the Office’s file listed as Notation to File – thrill to the bureaucratic reality, baby. Why’d I do it? Well, because Hansen Beverage Company, the makers of a jittery soda pop called Monster, has issued a press release about their reasons for objecting to the application filed by Rock Art Brewery to trademark their beer called The Vermonster. In part, they state:
In order to protect Hansen’s valuable Monster Energy® trademarks, Hansen is legally obliged to, and routinely sends, “cease and desist” letters to, and where appropriate, pursues litigation against, entities and persons who use or attempt to register similar trademarks for products that are similar or related to Monster Energy® products. A “cease and desist” letter was sent to Rock Art Brewery on September 4, 2009… Hansen has not, and does not, target or single out one company over any other, nor distinguish between big or small companies or individuals when enforcing our trademarks.
To be fair to Hansen, that is true. For example, when one looks at the registration by Coca-cola of a drink called “Monster Refreshment” you can see that Hansen does object to others and is not afraid to take on companies far bigger than they are. Hansen actually seems to be involved with a whopping ninety-nine trial or appeal files of one sort or another at the moment. So, they are not picking on Rock Art – though what I see are other firms using “monster” somehow and not just a word, as with Vermonster, containing “monster” or some a step further. What would the do if faced with a “-onster” word like “Sue-me-nonster” beer? I have no idea.
But one trademark didn’t seem to get protected by Hansen. The one for Monster Malt Liquor. It was deemed abandoned by the Patent and Trademark Office who sent Hansen’s lawyer this Notice of Abandonment on 20 July 2009. See, Hansen failed to file a document called a “Statement of Use” even though they were given three extensions to make that filing. Because, presumable, they did “use” the name by making a beer called “Monster.” Or, I think, make any beer at all for that matter. I guess in that respect beer and jittery soda pop are very different things.
Will Hansen’s abandonment of their one intended beer trademark make a difference? Will it matter to their argument that Vermonster causes confusion when it is pointed out that they could not put even a malt liquor on store shelves? I have no idea – but you sorta think it should, right? Interestingly, another factor that might affect the outcome is that soda and beer are in the same trademark goods and services category called “light beverages” which is separate from both wine (listed under “alcoholic beverages”) and coffee (listed under “staples”). A quirk? Not important? Who knows?
Meanwhile, you know things are getting more jittery than usual at Hansen HQ as Monster Energy may havestopped tweeting. the push back and the boycott grow. Because the consumer doesn’t need to wait for a ruling from the Patent and Trademark Office, right?
Much is being made of a legal claim being brought against Rock Art, a small Vermont brewer, who makes “Vermonster” beer by a premium soda pop maker whose brands include “Monster” energy pop for confusing the brand – especially since the claim is being made in the name of the soda company’s plans to enter into the beer market. But not so much is being made on this point noted by one Green Mountain State publication:
Rock Art isn’t the only Vermonster out there. Ben & Jerry’s has long used the name for a massive tub of ice cream available at its shops. A spokeswoman for the company said she was not aware of any trademark issues with the name. “Vermonster” is also the name of a series of truck rallies in Bradford. Brooklyn Brewing Co. makes a barley wine called “Monster Ale.” A representative to the company declined to discuss whether Hansen had challenged its use of the name.
OK, that is a few points but you see my point, right. Good old Brooklyn Beer has had a beer called “Monster” on the shelf for quite a number of years. I have one in my stash right now. Simmering in its own wickedness, no doubt. There are others, too. Will they all get sued? The Bee-to-the-Ay lists 34 monstrous craft beers on the market already. What if all craft brewers shared in the idea and put out their own Monster and “-onster” branded beers, too?
We are only at the stage of the legal letter sent, we are told, by the specialist intellectual property law firm Knobb, Martens, Olsen & Bear. Which is good. There is still time to think of the big picture. It may well be that the negative reaction to the note may well lead the Hansen Beverage Company to reconsider their strategy. They look like they want to get along and have a happy name in the marketplace. Who doesn’t? Hard to overcome bad press.
Macro beer ads are so weird. There is so little connection to beer involved in them that it is quite the thing to read them being discussed seriously as in this St. Louis Business Journal article:
“The free-wheeling, let’s-give-it-a-try attitude is changing,” said Jeff Goodby, co-chairman and creative director at San Francisco-based Goodby, Silverstein & Partners, the agency responsible for Budweiser’s commercials featuring Louie the Lizard. “I think things are scrutinized and calculated a lot more now.”
Louie the Lizard. Now that just screams of quality, no? No doubt Gary the Goat was an idea dropped in an earlier round of free-wheeling, let’s-give-it-a-try thinking-outside-the-box. Apparently ad agencies are shocked that big big brewers want ads that sell beer. Problem is I can’t think of a single quality in an ad an agency could make that would “incentivize” this consumer to pick up that sort of product. A crazy idea – but maybe tell me about its actual characteristic? That it is good value? That I might, you know, like the taste?
Not being American in the national constitutional sense, though somewhat in the continental Vespucci sense, sometimes I find things like American Craft Beer Week and a Declaration of Beer Independence all seem a bit too hooray for everything for me. You remember “Hooray for Everything” don’tca? They were in one episode for about 17 seconds of the Simpsons fifteen years ago, a youth musical group of “clean-cut youngsters” who sing about “the dancingest hemisphere, the Western Hemisphere.” In this case, however, it’s apparently about the greatest “beverage of moderation” instead. And keep tea out of this, wiseguy!
Andy was wondering a bit about the promotion as well, especially the part in the Brewer’s Association material that states their members “want the week to inspire beer enthusiasts to declare their independence by supporting breweries that produce fewer than 2 million barrels of beer a year and are independently owned.” I don’t know about you but I would expect that beer made by an operation making 2.5 million barrels a year has a lot in common with those making say 1.25 million a year. Hardly a reason to distinguish one from another and, frankly, hardly the hallmark of “an artistic creation of living liquid history made from passionate innovators.”¹ But, to be fair, this is a PR effort that, like the recent craft brewer pep rally video, is really aimed at someone other than me. It seems to me that it’s aimed at the brewers themselves and the clients that have yet to commit to a relationship. Me, I just want a tasty beer. It could come from anywhere for all I care… or could it:
During the discussion portion of Beer Wars Live Greg Koch pointed out that Stone Brewing’s Arrogant Bastard Ale is the nation’s top-selling craft 22-ounce package. How’s that for a target? If Anheuser-Busch could brew that beer for less wouldn’t they? So to the line I’ve heard so often: “The big brewers could brew whatever they want if they chose to” I say “Poppycock.” I’m of the opinion they can’t brew the beer at any price. It’s not in their DNA.
² I don’t know if it is about DNA but I get Stan’s point – it may be within their technical capacity but it is not in their business model. But is it really in the business model of the brewer that makes 1,999,999 barrels either? Does the recently released lists of both the top 50 brewers and top 50 craft brewers really provide that much of a distinction? And what about Yuengling anyway?
So, if you don’t buy into brewers as celebrity… or brewing as nationalistic jigno… or can see “not quite mass industrial” as being fundamentally different from “mass industrial”… well, it all makes for a yearning for the simpler approach to ads in the England of the 1930s like “Beer. It’s Lovely” or “Beer is Best.” Such short simple sentences. All the everything with a bit less of the hooray.
¹[Ed.: that’s rather plummy… a bit ripe… where is my cravat anyway?]
²[Ed.: image brazenly nicked from Pete’s blog. Buy his books. Now I feel better.]
Man – things are getting weirder and weirder out there. You know, I really don’t need any videosofpeople I will likely never meet telling me how great they are and how there is a unified movement of pure positivism that you can’t deny – even, I suppose, that time the beer kinda sucked or, worse, their experiment in your mouth ended up costing you $15 bucks too much. I mean it is fine and fun for them and their friends and at the conventions and all but let’s get a bit serious: is this about beer or fawning?
No, I think there has been a little too much attention placed in the wrong direction lately what with this wave of celebritosis, not to mention with the new found right for some beer people calling other beer people hateful, idiotic and uninformed on the one hand while others are acting like outright sycophantic cheese eating schoolboys on the other. You know what I think? We need to find our center again. We need to understand who is the most important person in each beery universe and that is the person in the mirror. Lew knew when he wrote about describing taste today:
But “Don’t write to impress, write to communicate” is good stuff. I can’t believe that one of his commenters — “Dr. Wort” — actually advises him to use the Lovibond scale to make more accurate descriptions of color. Great, let’s just all do it by the damned numbers. Useful. Beer tasting is subjective. There’s no way to get around that. Period. Never will. That’s why medals are usually awarded by blind judging and consensus, by panels. Best you can do. I don’t present my “reviews” as anything but my opinions. I don’t say you’re right or wrong if you agree or disagree; frankly, I don’t care, in the end. If you find them useful, and I hope you do, that’s great; if you don’t, I can understand that, too. They’re descriptive, not prescriptive. I hope you find the following reviews useful. I’m not going to worry about it, though, and neither should you.
I thought a similar thing when I was thinking about how to describe the fact that I really do not care about the preciousness of the thoughts of others to the detriment of my own ideas. And when I think like this, like you, I think of the Romantic poets as I mentioned over at Maureen Ogle’s place during a good exchange about ideas when I realized I needed to mention Billy’s Wordsworth’s fantastic 1804 poem “Daffodils” aka “I wander’d lonely as a cloud…” which ends:
“For oft, when on my couch I lie
In vacant or in pensive mood,
They flash upon that inward eye
Which is the bliss of solitude;
And then my heart with pleasure fills,
And dances with the daffodils.”
That is it! I said that it’s all the “truth of the couch” – except with web twenny I get the interpretation of the daffodil… or the beer… or the movie… or anything under the sun from a hundred, a thousand folks laying upon the couch in pensive or, more likely, vacant moods. That is in fact so it. My sofa. My mood. My vacancy. So, if you want to go to movies and gush or crap about movies, feel free. If you want to go to fest and gatherings where you can meet brewers and folk that present about beer and think that was money well spent or a total drunken waste, fill your boots. If you want to read a book and think you’ll never be as clever as someone who gets their words set by members of the typesetters union or think it was a really dopey way for the author to spend two years of their life, well, to each their own on that, too.
But if you want any of those things or you just want to think about the beer in your glass and then tell people what you think of it – good or bad – don’t take guff off of anyone because at the end of the day it is only you… and the beer.
What to call these beers? For the last few years, brewers have been 
