100 Mile Lager

[Craig]

b) People shit on Bush Pilot because they came off the blocks with a terrible beer. Ask anyone who had that beer (or even just look at the RB or BA ratings), and they'll tell you the same. Being adventurous is one thing; being reckless, hasty and over-the-top is another.

Stormy Monday has an 83 (3.47) and 80 (3.38) rating on RB and BA. Obviously not glowing reviews but hardly terrible either.

It got shat on not so especially around here, probably because of the high standards we seem to have.

[nickw]

But what really gets me is the excuse that "we need to brew this pale lager to support our business, to make money and to allow us 'to brew us good beers.'"

sometimes you'd be surprised - often what us geeks perceive as the "worst" product a brewery makes is the one that brings them in the most $. Years back talking with Rudge from Half Pints, he indicated that their (somewhat unexciting) St James Pale is the one that accounts for a significant amount of their profit. We have to keep in mind that we're not the ONLY market for these folks, and sometimes that "pale lager" really is supporting the business. Do you really think the profit margin on something like Pliny The Younger would be enough to keep Russian River going if it were their only product? hell no! but the reality is that you sometimes take a loss on one product due to the success of another.

Now, I'm not saying that's the only way to go, nor am I defending the bland and uninteresting, just pointing out that there is some truth to this.

But note, I wasn't talking about more local, "provincial market" breweries, but ones that have a national scope. Half Pints and Russian River are (almost) exclusively local breweries. But if we are going to use them as an example, of course Pliny the Younger doesn't turn them their profit, but they're able to brew it (or choose to brew it) because of the overwhelming success of Pliny the Elder and Blind Pig (in addition to every sour, ever).

If we want to start change in beer culture on a NATIONAL level (or at least even begin to challenge the bigger guys) as that seems to be the overwhelming consensus of what we want, it's not going to start with one of these half-assed beers that just "pays the bills" and appeals to the lowest common denominator.

When did the discussion turn from local/Ontario breweries and the beer culture in this province to one about overarching national beer culture and nationally-available brands? Sure, there are plenty of similarities between national and provincial tastes and beer culture, but perhaps we should focus discussion our own Ontario beer scene before talking about nationally-available craft breweries at the scale of Sierra Nevada/Dogfish Head/Founders -- which do not exist in Canada right now.

If -- at this point -- breweries like Half Pints/Amsterdam/Great Lakes need to produce St. James Pale/Blonde/Golden Horseshoe in order to financially justify producing $ellout $tout/Tempest/Tank Ten series at this point in time, fine by me -- I just ignore them. I don't understand the hate. I don't see what else exactly can be done about it at this exact point in time given: a) we're a decade or more behind the US in terms of the craft beer scene anyway and we can't force fast forwarding time; b) it's not the easiest to distribute and sell craft beer between provinces; c) as such, those breweries produce for -- at most -- few million in their own provinces (or the prairie provinces in HP's case), and don't have access to potentially tens of millions of craft beer drinkers to help cover their costs. So they've got to find a way to make it work. As was mentioned, would you give up Tempest/Tank Ten series, etc in order to get rid of Blonde/Golden Horseshoe? Because I don't see how those guys can continue to operate at the same level they operate at -- AND continue to produce some pretty fantastic beers -- without having some mass market-appealling generic beers in the lineup in order to justify the costs of them.

[atomeyes]

It's a serious fuck-tonne of money to start a brewery especially bricks & mortar ones at the start, you guys know that.

$200 000 for a 7 bbl system, not including electrical, drainage and water filtration system.

so yes, some of us know.

[atomeyes]

GREAT LAKES ORANGE PEEL ALE
LCBO 615633 | 650 mL bottle
SEASONAL/LIMITED QUANTITIES

Price $ 4.95

GREAT LAKES GREEN TEA ALE
LCBO 105874 | 650 mL bottle
PRODUCT DISCONTINUED*

Price $ 4.95

GREAT LAKES BREWERY MY BITTER WIFE
LCBO 345579 | 650 mL bottle
PRODUCT DISCONTINUED*

Price $ 5.95

there isn't $1 more in labour or ingredient costs per bottle.

stop selling your discount beer and replace it with the clever beer named beer. use a spreadsheet to figure out how you can charge $1 more/beer and sell less, yet still be as profitable, if not more, than by selling your discount beer that you don't even promote

[liamt07]

sometimes you'd be surprised - often what us geeks perceive as the "worst" product a brewery makes is the one that brings them in the most $. Years back talking with Rudge from Half Pints, he indicated that their (somewhat unexciting) St James Pale is the one that accounts for a significant amount of their profit. We have to keep in mind that we're not the ONLY market for these folks, and sometimes that "pale lager" really is supporting the business. Do you really think the profit margin on something like Pliny The Younger would be enough to keep Russian River going if it were their only product? hell no! but the reality is that you sometimes take a loss on one product due to the success of another.

Now, I'm not saying that's the only way to go, nor am I defending the bland and uninteresting, just pointing out that there is some truth to this.

But note, I wasn't talking about more local, "provincial market" breweries, but ones that have a national scope. Half Pints and Russian River are (almost) exclusively local breweries. But if we are going to use them as an example, of course Pliny the Younger doesn't turn them their profit, but they're able to brew it (or choose to brew it) because of the overwhelming success of Pliny the Elder and Blind Pig (in addition to every sour, ever).

If we want to start change in beer culture on a NATIONAL level (or at least even begin to challenge the bigger guys) as that seems to be the overwhelming consensus of what we want, it's not going to start with one of these half-assed beers that just "pays the bills" and appeals to the lowest common denominator.

When did the discussion turn from local/Ontario breweries and the beer culture in this province to one about overarching national beer culture and nationally-available brands? Sure, there are plenty of similarities between national and provincial tastes and beer culture, but perhaps we should focus discussion our own Ontario beer scene before talking about nationally-available craft breweries at the scale of Sierra Nevada/Dogfish Head/Founders -- which do not exist in Canada right now.

Is it not the goal of brewing/opening a brewery to support a healthy beer culture (surely it cannot be solely monetary, as anyone looking to get involved in the industry knows it is not an inherently lucrative venture)? The formula has been laid out for us. We are able to see the successes that have come from these breweries to the south of us, and their approach is relatively transparent (at least brand-wise). If we want to even begin to approximate such a culture (who wouldn't?), I don't see how sub-par brands should be relied upon to take us there. The breweries I referenced all started out as local breweries as well (perhaps not unlike Great Lakes or Amsterdam). But the approach was different. The product was different, and those strong, core products have driven them to the top of the food (read: beer) chain. Reliance on sub-par brands to support the business DOES NOT NEED TO HAPPEN. And yet it does. Fundamental changes to the way breweries approach the task of growing their brand need to occur. And it starts with the product.

"If you build it, they will come."

[toweringpine]

Eat and drink local is every bit as trendy as craft beer itself. It really doesn't matter if the product is head and shoulders above similar brews, it is being marketed to a different group. Does a local cow always taste better that a cow from Alberta? Nope, but there are lots of places advertising 100 mile menus. The whole 100 mile mindset is not really about beer, it is just one example of a movement that appeals to a segment of the population. The fact that a brewery is trying to capitalize on that speaks well of their business sense. Let's hope they come out with other beers that are more suited to the refined beer drinkers palates of BT readers.

[jrenihan]

It seems to me that the primary obstacle to an Ontario brewery following the model of a Dogfish/Stone/Bell's/Firestone/etc is consumer tastes and perception. In the vast majority of bars in this province, if there are 10 beers on tap, 7-8 of them will be mass-produced pale lagers (the others will be Guinness/Hoegarden/Kilkenny/etc). I suspect the strong majority of Ontarians who start drinking beer are introduced to it via Blue/Canadian/Stella/etc. For most people, that's what beer is and that's what beer tastes like.

It is pretty easy to get accustomed to certain flavours and to expect them. That makes it difficult to appreciate or enjoy something with a significantly different flavour - particularly if what you are used to is relatively tasteless (and even marketed on that basis!). My wife's nephew, who is 19, was at out place over the Christmas holidays and I offered him a Boneshaker - "safest" beer I had in the house. His reaction? "It tastes weird".

When (a) almost all bars sell the same shitty lagers; (b) all your friends drink the same shitty lagers; (c) the beer store only promotes those same shitty lagers; and (d) there are no independant stores that can choose to focus on and promote other styles of beer; then it is really hard to convert a devotee of Molson Canadian into a hophead, let along a fan of lambic/rauchbier/imperial stout.

I think that's the reason why GLB/Amsterdam/etc need to sell their volume products (assuming for the moment that they do - I have no idea what their financials are). (c) and (d) above are typically NOT problems in the US (or even some other provinces), and (a) and (b) are being reduced as a result. It is much harder for this to happen in Ontario.

My guess is that Bellwoods is a success in part because of its beer (I'm a big fan), but also in large part because it is a destination. It is located in a trendy part of town and markets itself well. It is a cool place to be - for some, the beer is not the main focus. Of course, once you are in, you may be introduced to new styles of beer and you may change your tastes. If Bellwoods didn't have a bar where people could eat and drink but only had a retail store, my guess is things would be very different. Maybe I'm wrong.

To sum a long post, it's primarily a marketing problem, rather than a brewing problem. It takes serious marketing to move people away from ABInbev et al, and the liquor laws in Ontario make it even more difficult.

Having great product, as Liam suggests, is always important and (hopefully) necessary. And I agree with most of what he has said. But I am not convinced that an Ontario brewery could find serious success of the kind seen in the US by simply brewing great stuff.
Ren

[jrenihan]

All that being said, I remain surprised that we do not have a local, regularly available porter of high quality. If we could have something like a Founders, a Black Butte or an Edmund Fitzgerald (doesn't have to be quite as good!), i would be very happy.
Ren

[Bobsy]

Does it really matter if a brewery makes a boring pale lager if they make more interesting brews as well? (Especially because of the success of their boring pale lager.) As beer geeks, just ignore the pale lager and enjoy the other good brews.

I'm kinda with Lister on this. Love, love, love Great Lakes, and I'll give em a pass on Red Leaf because they brew such awesome stuff elsehwere.

This discussion reminds me of the conversations around how to get newbies into craft beer. There's the shock and awe approach of throwing them in the deep end, or there's the more long-term approach of gradually amping things up. I've found the latter to be more successful when I've tried it on people, and I'd assume the same for new breweries.

I've namechecked Amsterdam and Great Lakes as two breweries who started off with more commonplace styles, slowly built up a base and then produced some of the best beers to come out of this province. Their entrenched, have a broad customer base, and the segment of their business loved by the diehard beergeeks is growing rapidly.

I'm not sure if a brewery opened up with Jolly Pumpkin's lineup they would find much success beyond niche. There's only so many funky ales and sours that Bartowellers will buy up, and I don't see a massive demand outside of the big urban centers yet.

We all know the craft beer segment is exploding at the LCBO - there's room and profitability for lots of beers in the same style, and with time I'm sure we'll see an expansion of style variety too.

[Bobsy]

"If you build it, they will come."

Or you'll go bankrupt, and all the craft beer altruism in the world won't keep the creditors at bay.

Different markets require different strategies. You have to understand your audience before you simply port over a US model. I stand by Toronto as a vibrant scene, but we're not quite at critical mass in the marketplace yet for me to say that the only thing holding us back from greatness is overy-cautious brewers.

[atomeyes]

except that Bellwoods is successful. And Amsterdam had a line-up for their XX release.
and Beard of Zeus got people out for that release party, even though it was available in the LCBO.

[liamt07]

except that Bellwoods is successful. And Amsterdam had a line-up for their XX release.
and Beard of Zeus got people out for that release party, even though it was available in the LCBO.

Not to mention all of the ridiculous lineups at (almost) every beer event worth giving a hoot about (Zwanze Day, DDC at BarHop, DDC at WVRST a couple years back etc etc).

[liamt07]

You have to understand your audience before you simply port over a US model.

While I gave exclusively American examples earlier, I'm not sure it's exclusively an American "model." I'm pretty sure building a business around an excellent core product (or core product group) is a relatively reasonable approach for constructing a brand and successful business? It may not be the only thing involved in the process, but surely it's one of the most valuable?

[atomeyes]

"you have to understand your audience..."

Toronto doesn't have good tacos.
within 2 years, Grand Electric, La Carnita and 7 Lives open up.
Can't find a seat in either place.

Toronto doesn't have a good burger.
Burger's Priest opens 3 locations. Holy Chuck opens 2. all are packed.

find the void. fill it. get rich.

[toweringpine]

"you have to understand your audience

Toronto doesn't have a good burger.
Burger's Priest opens 3 locations. Holy Chuck opens 2. all are packed.

find the void. fill it. get rich.

Without knowing the sales figures it is all pie in the sky. Perhaps locavores make up the beer void that needs to be filled.

I've only been to the Burger's Priest location on Yonge. It has no tables and only six stools, it doesn't take much to make it packed - but damn the burgers were good!