LCBO Summer 2010 Release (Full list)

Bytowner · Post by **Bytowner** » Sat May 08, 2010 8:36 am

Lukie wrote:Too bad they couldn't squeeze in Westmalle T. They bring it in for one season, teasing us with it and then pull it off the shelf. Bastards!!! Kind of a flat selection. Who makes these decisions and don't they ever visit beer rating sites when considering new comers?

Also, are they in a habit of making additions to this list later on or is this pretty much going to be a final list?

LCBO doesn't do pleasant surprises, just crushing disappointments. Sometimes a general release might sneak by us, but I don't know if I can remember a last minute addition to a seasonal release.

Lukie · Post by **Lukie** » Sat May 08, 2010 6:01 pm

Bytowner wrote:
Lukie wrote:Too bad they couldn't squeeze in Westmalle T. They bring it in for one season, teasing us with it and then pull it off the shelf. Bastards!!! Kind of a flat selection. Who makes these decisions and don't they ever visit beer rating sites when considering new comers?

Also, are they in a habit of making additions to this list later on or is this pretty much going to be a final list?
LCBO doesn't do pleasant surprises, just crushing disappointments. Sometimes a general release might sneak by us, but I don't know if I can remember a last minute addition to a seasonal release.

This may sound like a naive question but why can't the LCBO, with all its vast resources, try to get the best rated beers every season? Or do they just believe taste is entirely relative and they can please us with these (mostly) half ass brews?
Can anyone on this site, who works for the LCBO purchasing dept., explain why they cannot strive to consistently bring in the best (i.e., highest rated by consensus) beers? I realize there must be many criteria for the decision makers, but if they'd only consider beer ratings from sites like RB or BA, I'm sure we'd see better selections made more consistently. My suggestion is that they should form a small volunteer panel, made up of beer connoisseurs to help make these seasonal picks.

frosken · Post by **frosken** » Sat May 08, 2010 8:55 pm

I'm glad to see Gaffel FINALLY coming to Ontario, although you can get it in SAQs since last summer.

Don't compare Beau's LT to a real Kolsch. A great summer beer and reminds me of Koln. Now if Fruh, Sion and Kuppers would be available here...

If you've never tried a Kolsch, try it...

my $0.02

frosken

GregClow · Post by **GregClow** » Sat May 08, 2010 11:42 pm

Lukie wrote:This may sound like a naive question but why can't the LCBO, with all its vast resources, try to get the best rated beers every season? Or do they just believe taste is entirely relative and they can please us with these (mostly) half ass brews?

The seasonal releases are put together from beers that are submitted to the LCBO for consideration by import agents. If a brewery is not represented in Ontario, then their beers will not appear in a seasonal release, regardless of how highly rated they are.

And then there's also the question of how valid the ratings on RB and BA really are. Don't get me wrong - I rate myself on RB (well, I'm about a year behind on entering my notes...), and I often refer to it to get info and opinions on particular beers. But it can't be denied that the top beers on both sites tend to skew towards "extreme" beers of various sorts - massive hop bombs, barrel aged monsters, etc. Unless they were to look for highly rated beers by style, we'd never see some of the more subtle styles represented.

Bobsy · Post by **Bobsy** » Sun May 09, 2010 10:43 pm

GregClow wrote: I rate myself on RB

Greg Clow (B+):

Light appearance with a reasonable sized head. Completely opaque when held up to the light. Aroma of horseblanket and mild funk. Meaty flavour with light berry notes and a touch of hay. Significant alcohol was discernible. Medium to full bodied - slightly chewy.

While not to everyone's taste I think this one has session potential. Would recommend to others.

Belgian · Post by **Belgian** » Mon May 10, 2010 12:14 am

Bobsy wrote:
GregClow wrote: I rate myself on RB
Greg Clow (B+):

Light appearance with a reasonable sized head. Completely opaque when held up to the light. Aroma of horseblanket and mild funk. Meaty flavour with light berry notes and a touch of hay. Significant alcohol was discernible. Medium to full bodied - slightly chewy.

While not to everyone's taste I think this one has session potential. Would recommend to others.

Notable alcohol presence. Lightly peppery with a hint of sourness. A bit nondescript at present, although I think this one might age & integrate very well if set aside for two to four years. 3.7 / 5

The_Jester · Post by **The_Jester** » Mon May 10, 2010 11:35 am

Lukie wrote:Too bad they couldn't squeeze in Westmalle T. They bring it in for one season, teasing us with it and then pull it off the shelf. Bastards!!! Kind of a flat selection. Who makes these decisions and don't they ever visit beer rating sites when considering new comers?...

I wonder if it was submitted. (Didn't we have this same complaint about Orval, only to find out that it was never submitted by the importer?)

Kel Varnsen · Post by **Kel Varnsen** » Mon May 10, 2010 11:47 am

GregClow wrote:
Lukie wrote:This may sound like a naive question but why can't the LCBO, with all its vast resources, try to get the best rated beers every season? Or do they just believe taste is entirely relative and they can please us with these (mostly) half ass brews?
The seasonal releases are put together from beers that are submitted to the LCBO for consideration by import agents. If a brewery is not represented in Ontario, then their beers will not appear in a seasonal release, regardless of how highly rated they are.

I drove down to Vermont to go to Magic Hat last summer and took the tour. I think someone might have asked and the guy said they aren't even in all 50 US States yet so between wanting to get better distribution in their own country and all kinds of red tape they would have to go through to get into Canada, they basically said that with the amount of beer they produce, they just aren't interested. I imagine that it would be the same for a lot of smaller US breweries.

Belgian · Post by **Belgian** » Mon May 10, 2010 11:55 am

Some products are cursed. Like other importers, Esprit has in the past experienced unreasonable delays, headaches and fees due to LCBO's little games over packaging et cetera. The 2008 LCBO release of Orval was switched to 12-packs to meet the LC strict carton standards... however then the importer got hit with twice the per-case fees because there were now double the number of cases - even to bring in the same total number of bottles. Did not even matter if they were 12- or 24- packs, bizarre.

So I speculate Esprit can no longer meet the LCBO's low price point for Orval, whereas in dealing with more expensive private orders any costs can be passed on to the end purchaser.

We were warned this prpduct (and Weltenburger) could be going away from stores for good.

biegaman · Post by **biegaman** » Mon May 10, 2010 12:03 pm

Kel Varnsen wrote: I think someone might have asked and the guy said they aren't even in all 50 US States yet so between wanting to get better distribution in their own country and all kinds of red tape they would have to go through to get into Canada, they basically said that with the amount of beer they produce, they just aren't interested. I imagine that it would be the same for a lot of smaller US breweries.

Yup, I've heard the same story at just about every US micro I've visited too. Having to jump through all the LCBO's hoops definitely plays into it, but essentially these breweries are more concerned with ensuring their distribution first in their own state, secondly in key markets, and by extension, throughout more of the continental US.

matt7215 · Post by **matt7215** » Mon May 10, 2010 12:11 pm

Kel Varnsen wrote:
GregClow wrote:
Lukie wrote:This may sound like a naive question but why can't the LCBO, with all its vast resources, try to get the best rated beers every season? Or do they just believe taste is entirely relative and they can please us with these (mostly) half ass brews?
The seasonal releases are put together from beers that are submitted to the LCBO for consideration by import agents. If a brewery is not represented in Ontario, then their beers will not appear in a seasonal release, regardless of how highly rated they are.

I drove down to Vermont to go to Magic Hat last summer and took the tour. I think someone might have asked and the guy said they aren't even in all 50 US States yet so between wanting to get better distribution in their own country and all kinds of red tape they would have to go through to get into Canada, they basically said that with the amount of beer they produce, they just aren't interested. I imagine that it would be the same for a lot of smaller US breweries.

this is not a response directly to Kels comments but rather to this topic as a whole.

the only way we are going to get "better" beer in ontario any time soon is if our ontario breweries brew it and we the craft beer enthusists of ontario support them when they do.

10BY is a great example of what i hope becomes the norm. an ontario brewery brewed a great beer and it sold out quickly. win-win

other breweries are coming out with more interesting stuff as well (Beaus, Flying Monkeys, Great Lakes)

others seem to be stuck in light lager/golden blonde ale/light wheat ale mode.

so lets do our part to show the breweries that are progressing that we will support them when they make the types of beer we are lacking.

we have 50+ breweries in this pronvince and any one of them could make up for the lack of Magic Hat, if we support them when they brew the beer we're missing.

mintjellie · Post by **mintjellie** » Mon May 10, 2010 1:07 pm

What was the issue with Orval not meeting packaging requirements?

matt7215 · Post by **matt7215** » Mon May 10, 2010 1:16 pm

mintjellie wrote:What was the issue with Orval not meeting packaging requirements?

the carton was not LCBO approved, something to do with how the bottles were seperated from each other if i remember correctly

Torontoblue · Post by **Torontoblue** » Mon May 10, 2010 1:56 pm

matt7215 wrote:
mintjellie wrote:What was the issue with Orval not meeting packaging requirements?
the carton was not LCBO approved, something to do with how the bottles were seperated from each other if i remember correctly

Which is no excuse as all agents and suppliers know the packaging regulations as they are all laid out quite clearly in the guidelines.

icemachine · Post by **icemachine** » Tue May 11, 2010 7:07 pm

Torontoblue wrote:
matt7215 wrote:
mintjellie wrote:What was the issue with Orval not meeting packaging requirements?
the carton was not LCBO approved, something to do with how the bottles were seperated from each other if i remember correctly
Which is no excuse as all agents and suppliers know the packaging regulations as they are all laid out quite clearly in the guidelines.

And if the Brewer does not meet the LCBO's ridiculous guidelines there is no reason they should feel the need to jump through the ringmaster's hoops so a few thousand people can enjoy the product when the current packaging is acceptable elsewhere