"Kevin" wrote:
Here is the other thing to think about, and this of course
does not apply to a brewpub, which serves their beer
on premise. A lot of the beers made in this country
quickly leaves the control of the brewer, and is at the
mercy of the distributor and retail merchant. They are
the ones who are responsible for making sure that the
beer you buy has been handled properly and is
delivered to your hands in the best possible condition.
Having a competition where beers are bought off the
shelf and judged, would be more a competition to see
who is the best beer distributor or retail merchant.

This would merely be something that my type of a beer contest would
naturally take into consideration and work to insure a level playing field.
The contest evaluating the beer distributors and retail stores. Secretly
purchasing bottles from what's considered the best distributors and retail
stores. Clearly publicly stating what standards these distributors and
stores would have to have for the contest to purchase beer from them. On
the bright side, this might improve beer distribution and retail
presentation if the contest were to give it's stamp of approval and allow
the stores to advertise this. "This retail store and its distributors are
approved by the International Honest Beer Contest. Beer bought from this
store is beer considered to be properly handled by its beer distributors and
the store itself. Because of this, beer sold in this store might be
secretly purchased and judged for IHBC." For beer connoisseurs, this could
be the thing that would make them buy their beer from one local store rather
than another.

For the judging, I would hope the contest would let the public know where
and when the winning beers were bought. For the brewers, this information
would be given to them so they know the where and when ... regardless if
they won or not.

I watched the GABF special, and can relate to those
brewmasters that hand-bottled and took some extra care
to make sure the beer arrived to the judging in the best
possible condition. The judging is about the beer, not how
others may mistreat the beer before the consumer can get
his hands (or taste buds) on it.

No, if we saw the same special, it clearly showed that some of the
brewmasters were making special batches (taking at least extra special care
when they're brewed) for the contest.

So, all of these beers at the GABF should be available for
the consumer somewhere in the country, it is just a question
if has been treated well before you bought it.

I'd disagree. From watching the special, it has more to do with you being
luck enough to have beer from the same specially-brewed batch of beer that
was tapped for the contest. Not that the beer they normally make is the
same beer that the judges taste.

Now if there's common seasonal beers, I'd hope my type of a contest would
then be done again at these times so these seasonal beers are tasted at the
time they'd be tasted by the public. Handing out maybe something like
Winter Beers awards.

Unfortunately, as no one has brought up a contest structured as what I'm
seeking, I guess it just doesn't exist. Too bad. If I had money to throw
around, I'd start it up but I don't.

Scott Jensen
--
Peer-to-peer networking (a.k.a. file-sharing) is entertainment's future.
If you'd like to know why, read the white paper at the link below.
http://www.nonesuch.org/p2prevolution.pdf

"Scott T. Jensen" wrote in message
...

See even you state that you're only sending your best to the contest.

Why is that surprising? No brewery is going to go "What are we going to do
with that one infected batch we had? I know! Let's enter it in a contest."
Of course they're going to grab their freshest stuff. It's sort of like how
if you're going out on a date with that woman you've been chasing for
months, you don't just grab your workout shorts and the t-shirt you wear
when working on the car. You're going to dress your best.

Neither move is surprising in the least.


Now don't get me wrong. I don't think you've done anything evil or
misleading. What you and the others did was allowed by the GABF. It's
their contest and how they run it is up to them. I'm just seeking one
that's more likely to represent what us average consumers will be
drinking.

That wouldn't be very fair to the breweries, IMO. In the typical retail
environment, the beer's been out of the brewer's hands for a long while, and
had a few stops over which the brewery has absolutely no control. Perhaps
the store stores the beer warm, under bright lights. Perhaps the beer sits
in the back of the store in an unrefrigerated room. Perhaps it sits in a
warm/hot warehouse at the distributor. Perhaps the distributor sits on it
for months.

These are not all worst-case scenarios. These are common occurances in the
three-tier system. Even the most dilligent brewers have difficulty
maintaining quality control throughout the supply chain.

Your criteria - buy the beer at a store - is unfair to the brewers and
invites a whole new range of complications. Which stores do you buy the beer
from? What if one store keeps their craft beers well, but another doesn't?
Then the breweries represented at the latter store are put at an automatic
disadvantage through no fault of their own.

And, as I mentioned earlier, what are you going to do about draught-only
beer? Many craft breweries sell their beer only this way. Brewpubs,
certainly. You going to send out armies of people with growlers, who then
have to haul the beer to the testing site overnight since draught beer
sitting in a growler goes south pretty quickly?

First, should there be a category then for homebrewers? Then again, are
homebrewers even allowed into the contest?

No, they're not, and no they shouldn't. The GABF is a brewery competition.
There are loads of homebrew competitions, including the national one put on
by the AHA (which shares the same parent as the GABF) to cover the
homebrewers.


Second, this would be a step in the "right" direction (as far as I'm
concerned). I would just hope that the beers selected for the shipping
brewery categories were store bought.

See the problems outlined above. How is this better?

Doubtless, some breweries are brewing special things just for the
competition. Breweries do this sort of thing a lot - brewing special beers
for festivals, contests, etc. But, usually, it's a special style or variety
they don't often do. For breweries that have a regular, staple beer that
they're entering, it's too much time and expense to suddenly brew a special
batch of it. Someone like Sierra Nevada need the pale ale to be consistent,
and they're not going to suddenly put an inconsistent batch out on the
market just because they want a "speical" batch for a contest. Doubtless
some do that. But I'd say it's in a vast minority.

And, by the way, don't believe everything you see on TV. A good rule of
thumb that most people learned years ago, but very applicable to beer. Most
TV stories and newspaper articles get basic details very, very wrong (such
as the NY Times talking about fermenting hops a few months ago).

-Steve

[Some cutting and pasting was done below so points could be properly
addressed and not appear too jumbled.]

"Steve Jackson" wrote:
"Scott T. Jensen" wrote:
You don't care about beer contests. That's fine. It doesn't
mean this discussion is worthless though. There are many
people who do care or at least would like to know who
places well in such contests. I'd just like to know of a
contest(s) that uses secretly store-bought beers as the beers
that will be judged.

I'm just pointing out that I don't see how using store-bought
beer is really going to make any difference.

For the simple reason that the beers then tasted would be ones the consumers
would be able to purchase and not ones specially brewed for the contest.
It's like doing drive tests on cars secretly purchased from car dealership
rather than cars delivered to the testing grounds by the manufacturer.
Sure, some car manufacturers are going to ship to the contest cars randomly
picked off the assembly line, but there's no guarantee that all car
manufacturers are going to do likewise. Add into this equation some
perceived value of winning the contest and the temptation to send only your
best is just that much stronger.

(and what are you going to do about the huge number
of draught-only beers in that scenario?)...

I'm not seeking a beer contest that takes into consideration all the
different beers. Just store-bought beer. The beer most us will be able to
purchase from our local retail store and not need to live within reasonable
driving distance to taste. Now I'm not saying there's anything wrong with
draught-only beers ... or home-brewed beers for that matter. It just isn't
what I'm seeking in a contest.

It's still a subjective contest in an artificial environment that
simply states a certain beer measures up best against certain
criteria.

Correct. All I'm seeking is a less artificial environment than what GABF
has ... as far as store-bought beers are concerned.

And, knowing how judging often plays out - the biggest or
bitterest beer wins 90 percent of the time - I find the results
even more worthless.

That's your opinion and that's fine for you to have. We've already
established that you don't care about beer contests.

Are you actually making purchasing decisions based on
judgements at beer contests?

Yes. There are a lot of beers out there and I wouldn't mind knowing what
experts in the field think are the best. I do this all the time with almost
anything important that I buy.

That's what I'm saying is daft.

I would consider you thinking that contests don't help the purchasing
process is rather daft.

Sure, everyone finds out about beers they might not have
otherwise via these contests, but I've seen enough cases
where an award winning beer isn't any better than a lot
of similar beers out there.

Again, that's your opinion. Perhaps your tastebuds are not that
discriminating.

I'll try stuff out of curiosity, because I respect the brewery,
because of its reputation, because of friends'
recommendations, etc. Winning a contest is pretty low on
the list. But maybe that's just me.

Yeah, I'd say that's probably just you. By profession, I'm a marketing
consultant so I do understand the importance of winning awards for
businesses. Any business that was a client of mine that would take your
attitude towards awards would be one that I'd consider to have a problem.

Scott Jensen
--
Peer-to-peer networking (a.k.a. file-sharing) is entertainment's future.
If you'd like to know why, read the white paper at the link below.
http://www.nonesuch.org/p2prevolution.pdf

"Scott T. Jensen" wrote in message
...

(and what are you going to do about the huge number
of draught-only beers in that scenario?)...

I'm not seeking a beer contest that takes into consideration all the
different beers. Just store-bought beer. The beer most us will be able
to
purchase from our local retail store and not need to live within
reasonable
driving distance to taste. Now I'm not saying there's anything wrong with
draught-only beers ... or home-brewed beers for that matter. It just
isn't
what I'm seeking in a contest.

That makes no sense to me at all. If we're looking for a contest that is
judging the best beers as people can buy them - well, people buy a lot of
draught beer. In some parts fo the country, draught sales are huge and is
the primary way people drink their beer. Why rule that out right off?

And, knowing how judging often plays out - the biggest or
bitterest beer wins 90 percent of the time - I find the results
even more worthless.

That's your opinion and that's fine for you to have.

That's an opinion shared by many more people than just me.

We've already
established that you don't care about beer contests.

You've established that, and it's not very accurate. I don't care about beer
contests for making my purchase decisions. There's a big difference between
that and not caring about beer contests. The fact that I've judged at some
professional beer contests would be kinda weird for me to do if I didn't
care about contests.

I think contests are a good thing and a good way for breweries to get
exposure and recognition. However, I know enough not to regard contests as
pointing out the best beers available, etc. I simply view them for what they
are, not as some larger statement on who brews the best beer in the country
or whatever.

And contests often serve as a great chance to go to where the contest is
held. As the three days I spent at the Great British Beer Festival this year
amply illustrates. I definitely cared about that particular event.

Sure, everyone finds out about beers they might not have
otherwise via these contests, but I've seen enough cases
where an award winning beer isn't any better than a lot
of similar beers out there.

Again, that's your opinion. Perhaps your tastebuds are not that
discriminating.

Perhaps you have no clue who I am, how refined my tastebuds are and
therefore have no basis to make such a statement. I could play that little
game too and say that perhaps you're too lemming-like and will just
appreciate whatever the "experts" tell you to appreciate. I don't think
that's a fair statement to make, however. Just like saying my tastebuds are
not that discriminating isn't a fair statement to make. Especially on the
basis of a statement like I've seen plenty of cases where award-winning
beers weren't better than other beers available out there. Why does that
seem such an absurd statement? Especially considering how a
not-insignificant number of well-regarded breweries don't bother with
contests?

Yeah, I'd say that's probably just you. By profession, I'm a marketing
consultant so I do understand the importance of winning awards for
businesses.

Oddly enough, my job is marketing as well. There's a difference between what
I'd recommend for a business to do and what I do. Let's take awards. My
current client is an automaker. They have a new car that has won gobs of
awards, including some of the most prestigeous ones out there. Has it helped
their sales? Nope. They are well, well below their sales targets.

Awards are important for one thing: creating recognition and getting a
product more visibility in the marketplace. It does not mean the product is
better - or that it's going to be commercially successful. Beta was widely
considered better than VHS, and look which format survived. There are
countless other examples.

Any business that was a client of mine that would take your
attitude towards awards would be one that I'd consider to have a problem.

Tell that to, say, Victory then. A brewery which, IIRC, has stopped entering
contests. Are they a "problem," even though they're one of the most highly
respected and sought-after breweries in the business?

-Steve

"Steve Jackson" wrote in message
news:1Neib.57065$vj2.52897@fed1read06...

Oddly enough, my job is marketing as well. There's a difference between
what
I'd recommend for a business to do and what I do. Let's take awards. My
current client is an automaker. They have a new car that has won gobs of
awards, including some of the most prestigeous ones out there. Has it
helped
their sales? Nope. They are well, well below their sales targets.

That wasn't very clear. The awards commentary is separate from the
difference between what I'd recommend for a client and what I'd do as a
consumer. Imagine there's a paragraph break before "Let's take awards."

As far as the differences between business behavior and consumer behavior:
there are lots of marketing behaviors that I would recommend and encourage
because I know that most consumers aren't very careful or dilligent, and
therefore are susceptible to persuasion. As an educated consumer in certain
areas, I'm less susceptible to such marketing messages, because I can see
through the fluff. Therefore, even though there may be an approach on the
table that I know wouldn't work with me, that doesn't mean I wouldn't
recommend it because I know most consumers will go for it.

And that's the deal with beer contests. They're good (though not necessary)
for raising exposure and recognition for a brewery. As an educated and
experienced consumer, I know that they're not representative of what they
claim to be: this is the best beer in the country.

-Steve

"Steve Jackson" wrote:
"Scott T. Jensen" wrote:
See even you state that you're only sending your best to
the contest.

Why is that surprising?

It isn't surprising. That's the whole point of this thread. I know it is
going on with the GABF.

No brewery is going to go "What are we going to do with
that one infected batch we had? I know! Let's enter it in a
contest." Of course they're going to grab their freshest stuff.

From the special, it is clear that some brewmasters go beyond just sending
their freshest.

It's sort of like how if you're going out on a date with that
woman you've been chasing for months, you don't just
grab your workout shorts and the t-shirt you wear when
working on the car. You're going to dress your best.

And that's fine. What isn't fine is if you then lie to your date that you
always dress this way whatever you do. That's what I'm talking about.

Neither move is surprising in the least.

Correct. However, it doesn't mean either is the "true" beer or person that
you'll normally be able to buy or meet.

Now don't get me wrong. I don't think you've done
anything evil or misleading. What you and the others
did was allowed by the GABF. It's their contest and
how they run it is up to them. I'm just seeking one
that's more likely to represent what us average
consumers will be drinking.

That wouldn't be very fair to the breweries, IMO.

It would be more fair to the consumers though.

Your criteria - buy the beer at a store - is unfair to the
brewers and invites a whole new range of complications.
Which stores do you buy the beer from? What if one
store keeps their craft beers well, but another doesn't?
Then the breweries represented at the latter store are
put at an automatic disadvantage through no fault of their
own.

See my 10/12/2003 reply to "Kevin" in this thread for how I'd have the
contest deal with this.

And, as I mentioned earlier, what are you going to do
about draught-only beer? Many craft breweries sell
their beer only this way. Brewpubs, certainly. You
going to send out armies of people with growlers, who
then have to haul the beer to the testing site overnight
since draught beer sitting in a growler goes south pretty
quickly?

No, I'm not interested in a contest that takes into consider draught-only or
home-brewed beers. Just those that the average consumers can purchase
without having to be within driving distance of the brewer.

First, should there be a category then for homebrewers?
Then again, are homebrewers even allowed into the
contest?

No, they're not, and no they shouldn't. The GABF is a
brewery competition. There are loads of homebrew
competitions, including the national one put on by the
AHA (which shares the same parent as the GABF) to
cover the homebrewers.

And I'm merely seeking and advocating one that is just done on store-bought
beers. All store-bought beers. Not just the microbreweries.

Second, this would be a step in the "right" direction
(as far as I'm concerned). I would just hope that the
beers selected for the shipping brewery categories
were store bought.

See the problems outlined above. How is this better?

See my explanation above and elsewhere in this thread.

Doubtless, some breweries are brewing special things
just for the competition.

And that's the problem I have with such contests. That there are these
contests is fine with me. I wish them the best of luck. I'm just seeking a
contest that would be closer to judging what us average consumers can
purchase.

Breweries do this sort of thing a lot - brewing special beers
for festivals, contests, etc. But, usually, it's a special style or
variety they don't often do. For breweries that have a regular,
staple beer that they're entering, it's too much time and
expense to suddenly brew a special batch of it.

As the special clearly showed, enough do this to, in my opinion, call into
question if who wins the GABF is regularly producing the beer us average
consumers actually purchase.

Someone like Sierra Nevada need the pale ale to be consistent,
and they're not going to suddenly put an inconsistent batch out
on the market just because they want a "speical" batch for a
contest. Doubtless some do that. But I'd say it's in a vast minority.

A "vast minority"? Anyway...

That some do calls into question the contest itself for what I seek. That's
all I'm saying.

And, by the way, don't believe everything you see on TV. A
good rule of thumb that most people learned years ago, but
very applicable to beer. Most TV stories and newspaper
articles get basic details very, very wrong (such as the NY
Times talking about fermenting hops a few months ago).

I'm a marketing consultant by trade so I'm well aware of this. However, to
discount everything you see on TV is just as foolish. The special didn't
just have a commentator talking all the time. It had a lot of the
brewmasters speaking for themselves and showing them do their stuff. It
came across as a nicely done show that was relatively fair and balanced.
They didn't seem to have an agenda. They seems well informed.

Scott Jensen
--
Peer-to-peer networking (a.k.a. file-sharing) is entertainment's future.
If you'd like to know why, read the white paper at the link below.
http://www.nonesuch.org/p2prevolution.pdf

"Scott T. Jensen" wrote in message
...

This would merely be something that my type of a beer contest would
naturally take into consideration and work to insure a level playing
field.
The contest evaluating the beer distributors and retail stores. Secretly
purchasing bottles from what's considered the best distributors and retail
stores. Clearly publicly stating what standards these distributors and
stores would have to have for the contest to purchase beer from them. On
the bright side, this might improve beer distribution and retail
presentation if the contest were to give it's stamp of approval and allow
the stores to advertise this. "This retail store and its distributors are
approved by the International Honest Beer Contest. Beer bought from this
store is beer considered to be properly handled by its beer distributors
and
the store itself. Because of this, beer sold in this store might be
secretly purchased and judged for IHBC." For beer connoisseurs, this
could
be the thing that would make them buy their beer from one local store
rather
than another.

I agree with you 100%--but this does put the breweries at a disadvantage if
the distributors and retailers don't care squat about the proper handling of
beer. Most of these individuals approach it from the perspective of the
megaswill--which is pasturized and/or treated with products to increase
shelf life, as well as having the advantage of moving off the shelf fast.
Most retailers don't understand the fragility of most microbrewed beer, and
couldn't care a less about it either. I wish they all knew and cared, but
they don't. I'm not sure if having a contest like you advocate would change
their minds, as long as most of their business is the megabrews.

(The GABF special) clearly showed that some of the
brewmasters were making special batches (taking at least extra special
care
when they're brewed) for the contest.

Like anyone who is going to have their work scrutinized more carefully on a
certain day than on an any other average day, they are taking extra special
care to do the job as perfect as possible for the event. This doesn't mean
that the recipe is different (i.e. special ingredients, etc.), but extra
care is taken to make sure the batch has as little mistakes or flaws as
possible. Compare it to an average day on any job, versus that same day
with the boss looking over your shoulder all day. I bet the day with the
boss looking over your shoulder is different than the other days (not much,
but different).

Being a homebrew judge, I would venture that the difference between the
"special batches" and the "standard batches" would be little to none, with
the little differences being minor flaws that would escape the palate of the
average consumer. Not that the average consumer has poor taste buds, but
these judges have trained their palate to pick up very subtle off flavors
and aromas, and that is what they are looking for in these beers (most all
of these beers in a given category are "good", but the judges need to rank
them best to worst--basically nit-picking subtle differences between each
beer). The average consumer would enjoy either version, and probably not
notice the difference (if any).

Unfortunately, as no one has brought up a contest structured as what I'm
seeking, I guess it just doesn't exist. Too bad. If I had money to throw
around, I'd start it up but I don't.

If anyone ever managed to get a contest like that off the ground, I would be
excited to see the results, and put the results to good use in buying my
beers.

Kevin

"Steve Jackson" wrote:
"Scott T. Jensen" wrote:
(and what are you going to do about the huge number
of draught-only beers in that scenario?)...

I'm not seeking a beer contest that takes into consideration
all the different beers. Just store-bought beer. The beer
most us will be able to purchase from our local retail store
and not need to live within reasonable driving distance to
taste. Now I'm not saying there's anything wrong with
draught-only beers ... or home-brewed beers for that
matter. It just isn't what I'm seeking in a contest.

That makes no sense to me at all. If we're looking for a
contest that is judging the best beers as people can buy
them - well, people buy a lot of draught beer. In some parts
fo the country, draught sales are huge and is the primary way
people drink their beer. Why rule that out right off?

Because unless you live within reasonable driving distance of that
draught-only brewery, you'll very likely never have an opportunity to sample
and enjoy their beer. What I'm seeking is a contest amongst those that
distribute their beer thus are more available for the consumer to possibly
purchase, drink, and enjoy. Just as GABF doesn't accept home-brewed beers,
my contest wouldn't accept draught-only beers.

And, knowing how judging often plays out - the biggest
or bitterest beer wins 90 percent of the time - I find the
results even more worthless.

That's your opinion and that's fine for you to have.

That's an opinion shared by many more people than just me.

Did I say it wasn't? And are you saying your opinion is everyone's opinion?

We've already established that you don't care about beer
contests.

You've established that, and it's not very accurate. I don't
care about beer contests for making my purchase decisions.

That was what I was referring to.

Sure, everyone finds out about beers they might not have
otherwise via these contests, but I've seen enough cases
where an award winning beer isn't any better than a lot
of similar beers out there.

Again, that's your opinion. Perhaps your tastebuds are
not that discriminating.

Perhaps you have no clue who I am...

I have no clue who you are.

...how refined my tastebuds are...

Note that I said "perhaps".

...and therefore have no basis to make such a statement.

Given your statement that winning beers taste like "a lot of similar beers
out there" and that I used the word "perhaps", I think my statement was
reasonable.

I could play that little game too and say that perhaps
you're too lemming-like and will just appreciate
whatever the "experts" tell you to appreciate. I don't
think that's a fair statement to make, however.

Have I ever said in this entire thread that I'd only appreciate what experts
say is the best? No. What I have said is that I'd like to know what the
experts would say if a contest was more geared for the average consumer.

Just like saying my tastebuds are not that
discriminating isn't a fair statement to make.

I stand by my statement for the reasons I've just given above.

Especially on the basis of a statement like I've seen
plenty of cases where award-winning beers weren't
better than other beers available out there. Why does
that seem such an absurd statement?

Did I say it was an absurd statement? Please don't go the strawman route.

Yeah, I'd say that's probably just you. By profession,
I'm a marketing consultant so I do understand the
importance of winning awards for businesses.

Oddly enough, my job is marketing as well.

Odd. I would have then assumed that if you're a marketing consultant you
would have always had a spellchecker look over your posts before letting
them go.

There's a difference between what I'd recommend for a
business to do and what I do. Let's take awards. My
current client is an automaker. They have a new car that
has won gobs of awards, including some of the most
prestigeous ones out there. Has it helped their sales?
Nope. They are well, well below their sales targets.

Perhaps that's due to the one that is handling their marketing. ;-)

Awards are important for one thing: creating recognition
and getting a product more visibility in the marketplace.

That's incorrect. Awards can also help in the consumer decision process.
Many consumers do pay attention to what awards products and services earn
and they are wise to do so. If you're a marketing consultant, it is rather
odd you don't know this.

It does not mean the product is better...

It does, however, lend credence to that view.

...- or that it's going to be commercially successful.

Quality does help sales, but no business should depend on just that to
generate sales.

Any business that was a client of mine that would take your
attitude towards awards would be one that I'd consider to
have a problem.

Tell that to, say, Victory then. A brewery which, IIRC, has
stopped entering contests. Are they a "problem," even though
they're one of the most highly respected and sought-after
breweries in the business?

I think you misunderstood what I wrote. Victory brewery would not "be" a
problem if they didn't enter contests. I would, however, view their lack of
participation as a problem that I would need to address if I was their
marketing consultant. Perhaps there's sound reasoning behind not entering
such contests. Then again, perhaps things have changed at their brewery
that now they don't feel they can adequately compete and have thus withdrawn
to insure their past glory isn't tarnished. It is hard to say. It could be
other factors as well. Again, as I said, I'd consider their lack of
participation a problem and one that I'd look into if I was their marketing
consultant.

Scott Jensen
--
Peer-to-peer networking (a.k.a. file-sharing) is entertainment's future.
If you'd like to know why, read the white paper at the link below.
http://www.nonesuch.org/p2prevolution.pdf

"Kevin" wrote:
"Scott T. Jensen" wrote:
This would merely be something that my type of a beer
contest would naturally take into consideration and work
to insure a level playing field. The contest evaluating the
beer distributors and retail stores. Secretly purchasing
bottles from what's considered the best distributors and
retail stores. Clearly publicly stating what standards
these distributors and stores would have to have for the
contest to purchase beer from them. On the bright side,
this might improve beer distribution and retail
presentation if the contest were to give it's stamp of
approval and allow the stores to advertise this. "This
retail store and its distributors are approved by the
International Honest Beer Contest. Beer bought from
this store is beer considered to be properly handled by
its beer distributors and the store itself. Because of this,
beer sold in this store might be secretly purchased and
judged for IHBC." For beer connoisseurs, this could
be the thing that would make them buy their beer from
one local store rather than another.

I agree with you 100%...

That's nice to know.

...--but this does put the breweries at a disadvantage if
the distributors and retailers don't care squat about the
proper handling of beer.

It might however spur them to seek out better distributors and retailers.
It might also spur these distributors and retailers to improve to keep these
microbreweries as clients and providers.

Most of these individuals approach it from the perspective
of the megaswill--which is pasturized and/or treated with
products to increase shelf life, as well as having the
advantage of moving off the shelf fast. Most retailers don't
understand the fragility of most microbrewed beer, and
couldn't care a less about it either. I wish they all knew
and cared, but they don't. I'm not sure if having a contest
like you advocate would change their minds, as long as
most of their business is the megabrews.

A few points:

1) The smaller the business, the more important each customer is to them.

2) For the non-chain, non-supermarket liquor stores, the IHBC seal of
approval would likely give them an edge over these mega-stores that they'll
very likely view as a good way to be competitive with them. If the IHBC
were to come about, I could easily see small IHBC-approved liquor stores
heavily advertising this fact.

3) The mega-stores intensely monitor their sales. Sales fluctuations of
even the smallest amounts are closely scrutinized as they should be. You
want to catch trends at the start and not after it's too late. And this
means both good and bad trends. For the good trends, you want to maximize
the opportunity as much as you can.

Given the above...

If small liquor stores promoted their IHBC stamp of approval and a small
fraction of beer consumers (the beer connoisseurs) were to change their
purchasing habits because of this, the small liquor stores would see an
important improvement in revenue and the mega-stores would notice an
unwanted downward movement in sales. The mega-stores might then seek IHBC
approval to hopefully regain those lost consumers as well as stop any
further loss of them. The end result could be vastly improvement handling
of all beers by distributors and small and mega stores.

(The GABF special) clearly showed that some of the
brewmasters were making special batches (taking at
least extra special care when they're brewed) for the
contest.

Like anyone who is going to have their work scrutinized
more carefully on a certain day than on an any other
average day, they are taking extra special care to do the
job as perfect as possible for the event. This doesn't
mean that the recipe is different (i.e. special ingredients,
etc.), but extra care is taken to make sure the batch has
as little mistakes or flaws as possible. Compare it to an
average day on any job, versus that same day with the
boss looking over your shoulder all day. I bet the day
with the boss looking over your shoulder is different
than the other days (not much, but different).

This is why many businesses wisely hire mystery shopper services. The
mystery shopper is someone unknown by the employees and thus catches them as
they normally operate. The IHBC would need to use mystery shoppers. It
would use mystery shoppers to go into the stores and purchase the beers for
the contest. They would be "mystery" shoppers simply in the aspect that the
store employees wouldn't know they're from IHBC. In fact, if I were to run
this contest, I would definitely explore hiring mystery shopper services
around the world to purchase the beers for the contests and then properly
and promptly ship the beers to the judging location.

Being a homebrew judge, I would venture that the difference
between the "special batches" and the "standard batches"
would be little to none, with the little differences being minor
flaws that would escape the palate of the average consumer.

I can definitely see this for home-brewed beers. However, those are not the
beers I'd want my beer contest to evaluate.

Unfortunately, as no one has brought up a contest structured
as what I'm seeking, I guess it just doesn't exist. Too bad.
If I had money to throw around, I'd start it up but I don't.

If anyone ever managed to get a contest like that off the ground,
I would be excited to see the results, and put the results to good
use in buying my beers.

That's good to hear. And the contest would be relatively simple to set up.
It just needs a backer for at least the initial years. Eventually, the
contest could decide to support itself through charging stores for the
privilege of being able to advertise that their store(s) are IHBC approved.
No entry fee to brewers. In fact, by not depending on financial support
from the brewers, the beer judged would be judged regardless if the brewer
wanted their beer judged or not. The contest judging all beers and not just
those willing and able to fork over the money to be judged. Personally, I
think this independence from the brewers would further improve the
creditability of the contest results.

Scott Jensen
--
Peer-to-peer networking (a.k.a. file-sharing) is entertainment's future.
If you'd like to know why, read the white paper at the link below.
http://www.nonesuch.org/p2prevolution.pdf

"Scott T. Jensen" wrote in message
...

Because unless you live within reasonable driving distance of that
draught-only brewery, you'll very likely never have an opportunity to
sample
and enjoy their beer. What I'm seeking is a contest amongst those that
distribute their beer thus are more available for the consumer to possibly
purchase, drink, and enjoy. Just as GABF doesn't accept home-brewed
beers,
my contest wouldn't accept draught-only beers.

Well, it strikes me as being arbitrary and not fitting with the supposed
goal of finding the best beer available to consumers. But, hey, it's your
contest. Go crazy.

And are you saying your opinion is everyone's opinion?

Nope. I'm just saying I'm far from alone in that opinion.

Sure, everyone finds out about beers they might not have
otherwise via these contests, but I've seen enough cases
where an award winning beer isn't any better than a lot
of similar beers out there.

Given your statement that winning beers taste like "a lot of similar beers
out there" and that I used the word "perhaps", I think my statement was
reasonable.

Except that's not what I said. I preserved the original above. I said that
I've had award-winning beers that are *no better* than similar beers.
There's a difference between that and tasting the same.

Especially on the basis of a statement like I've seen
plenty of cases where award-winning beers weren't
better than other beers available out there. Why does
that seem such an absurd statement?

Did I say it was an absurd statement? Please don't go the strawman route.

OK, fine. You didn't say "absurd." But you've chosen to pick on that
statement twice now as some sort of indicator that my opinion on that point
is wrong and somehow calls into question my ability to have discerning taste
when it comes to beer.

Odd. I would have then assumed that if you're a marketing consultant you
would have always had a spellchecker look over your posts before letting
them go.

I'm capable of telling the difference between professional and formal
communications, and personal and information communications. Usenet is
neither professional nor formal. That's no excuse for bad use of the
language. But typos do not constitute bad use of the language.


There's a difference between what I'd recommend for a
business to do and what I do. Let's take awards. My
current client is an automaker. They have a new car that
has won gobs of awards, including some of the most
prestigeous ones out there. Has it helped their sales?
Nope. They are well, well below their sales targets.

Perhaps that's due to the one that is handling their marketing. ;-)

The little smiley face doesn't mitigate the fact that you're approaching
asshole territory right here. I'm not questioning your professional acumen.
I'd appreciate it if you'd extend me the same courtesy. I could go on and on
about why the company's missing its sales targets, how it's unrelated to the
particular marketing areas I'm involved in, etc. but it's irrelevant here.
Other than to suggest that you stick to topic you actually have a basis to
comment on.


Awards are important for one thing: creating recognition
and getting a product more visibility in the marketplace.

That's incorrect. Awards can also help in the consumer decision process.
Many consumers do pay attention to what awards products and services earn
and they are wise to do so.

It depends. If car is one of Car and Driver's 10 Best, yes, that's something
that a consumer can take a lot of stock in. But, there are a lot of contests
(and, to be pedantic, something like Car and Driver's awards and reviews
aren't technically contests) that are bogus and not at all indicitive of
quality.

Take the classic example of a restaurant advertising it's been recognized as
having "the best burger in town." By whom? A lot of times the cites aren't
even listed. Is it dumb for the restaurant to say that? No. Because most
consumers aren't going to bother checking into it or even noticing that
there's no indication of who said it was the best burger in town. Same thing
goes with movie reviews: take a look at the citations on a lot of the
glowing praise in movie ads, especially for movies of marginal quality.
They're often from organizations that you've never heard of, from TV
stations in Wichita and Indianapolis, etc.

Again, certain ratings, awards, etc. are important ones to have. Getting JD
Power's top quality rating is huge, for instance. But, to speak in broad
abstracts, awards are more important for raising visibility and recognition
than as a mark of quality. Again, because most consumers will not do the
homework to check into an award's veracity and pertinence. There are
exceptions for well-known ones, like the examples I've cited.

If you're a marketing consultant, it is rather
odd you don't know this.

If you're a marketing consultant (that's only part of my job, by the way),
it's rather odd that you as a consumer don't recognize the shortcomings of
awards.


It does not mean the product is better...

It does, however, lend credence to that view.

No. It leads to the *perception* of that view. Subtle, but huge, difference.


...- or that it's going to be commercially successful.

Quality does help sales, but no business should depend on just that to
generate sales.

Most certainly. The marketplace is littered with the lower-quality product
having hte dominant market share. The Betamax/VHS example I cited earlier is
a textbook example.

-Steve

"Scott T. Jensen" wrote in message
...

It might however spur (the breweries) to seek out better distributors and
retailers.
It might also spur these distributors and retailers to improve to keep
these
microbreweries as clients and providers.

Once again, it comes down to sales volume and market forces. Unfortunately,
craftbrewing comprises only 3% of the US beer market (see
http://www.beertown.org/craftbrewing/statistics.html ). I would expect to
find most distributors and retailers not interested in spending a lot of
time, energy, or money on what happens to the craftbrews, when they can more
effectively spend time, energy, and money on the 86% that comprises the
megaswill market segment.

1) The smaller the business, the more important each customer is to them.

2) For the non-chain, non-supermarket liquor stores, the IHBC seal of
approval would likely give them an edge over these mega-stores that
they'll
very likely view as a good way to be competitive with them. If the IHBC
were to come about, I could easily see small IHBC-approved liquor stores
heavily advertising this fact.

3) The mega-stores intensely monitor their sales. Sales fluctuations of
even the smallest amounts are closely scrutinized as they should be. You
want to catch trends at the start and not after it's too late. And this
means both good and bad trends. For the good trends, you want to maximize
the opportunity as much as you can.

Given the above...

If small liquor stores promoted their IHBC stamp of approval and a small
fraction of beer consumers (the beer connoisseurs) were to change their
purchasing habits because of this, the small liquor stores would see an
important improvement in revenue and the mega-stores would notice an
unwanted downward movement in sales. The mega-stores might then seek IHBC
approval to hopefully regain those lost consumers as well as stop any
further loss of them. The end result could be vastly improvement handling
of all beers by distributors and small and mega stores.

Most liquor stores (even the small ones) still depend on the mainstream
market to make the majority of their sales (see my first comment above). I
don't know about where you live, but in Southeast Michigan, I don't find any
stores that specialize in micrbrews ONLY.

Being a homebrew judge, I would venture that the difference
between the "special batches" and the "standard batches"
would be little to none, with the little differences being minor
flaws that would escape the palate of the average consumer.

I can definitely see this for home-brewed beers. However, those are not
the
beers I'd want my beer contest to evaluate.

However, the judging process is the same for both. All beers (homebrewed
and commercial) are judged by:

A) how closely they meet style guidelines (does it taste like a Pale Ale,
or more like an Amber Ale?), and
B) are there any flaws in the beer (are there "bad" flavors that should not
be there, and detract from the overall enjoyment of the beer?).

How would you have the beers judged? Unless you have a standard set of
guidelines to measure the beers against (and a group of trained and
experienced individuals to judge them), the contest would just devolve into
a debate of "I like this one the best", without any solid rationale as to
why.

Kevin

In article ,
Scott T. Jensen wrote:
"Oh, Guess" wrote:

This isn't some conspiracy theory. What I state was SAID by microbrewers on
the show, SHOWN on the show, and even one of the JUDGES that entered in his
own beer (Dark Chocolate Stout ... if I remember correctly) was shown
specially hand-bottling his own beer and stating why he's doing it.

This is exactly what I saw as well. Brewers tweaking batches until they
had one that they felt was contest worthy. I doubt this is an issue with
the big boys' beer that comprises a large proportion of GABF entries, but
is something the the micro guys do since they don't have the millions
invested in consistency that BMC does.

--NPD
--
___________________________
Nicholas P. Dempsey
Department of Sociology
University of Chicago

I think that your assumption is not correct. The "Big Boys" can tweak if
they want to, but they have long ago tweaked in the pilot brewery, found
their flavor and aroma characteristics that they want, then brew for the
general public with great consistency. If we were to accept your points as
valid, the corollary would be that the "Big Boys" know that they are selling
an inferior product, but are locked in to this product because of the need
for consistency. If the Big Boys want to change the recipe, they can. They
don't do it very much or often, because they are right where they want to be
(selling a whole boatload of beer to the masses--what they brew works for
their needs). The brewpubs and microbreweries don't have the millions
invested in consistency; their product varies from batch to batch, no matter
how much they try to keep the consistency the same. Looking at it another
way, the brewpubs and microbreweries are brewing as best as they can to fit
the style guidelines set out by the GABF for judging. All the entrants know
this--if the Big Boys don't feel that their beer meets the style guidelines
for judging, then don't enter that style category, or change the recipe.
Looking at the some of the style categories for the GABF:

American-Style Light Lager
American-Style “Light” Amber Lager
American-Style Lager
American-Style Premium Lager
American-Style Specialty Lager
Non-Alcoholic (Beer) Malt Beverage
American Lager/Ale or Cream Ale
American-Style Wheat Beer
American-Style Amber/Red Ale
Irish-Style Red Ale
Golden or Blonde Ale

These styles probably encompass the majority of the Big Boy's beer portfolio
(and comprise approx. 15% of the total style categories). They can enter
their beers in the American-Style Lager, and should do well. If they don't
do well, then they may be losing market share, because some other Big Boy is
brewing a better American-Style Lager. If they enter that same beer in the
English-Style Indian Pale Ale, they will lose. You should know what you
brew, and brew it the best you can, then enter it. The Big Boys should have
figured out how to brew it the best long ago, and are just working on
consistency. If not, then they may be losing market share.

Kevin


"nicholas peter dempsey" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Scott T. Jensen wrote:
"Oh, Guess" wrote:

This isn't some conspiracy theory. What I state was SAID by microbrewers
on
the show, SHOWN on the show, and even one of the JUDGES that entered in
his
own beer (Dark Chocolate Stout ... if I remember correctly) was shown
specially hand-bottling his own beer and stating why he's doing it.

This is exactly what I saw as well. Brewers tweaking batches until they
had one that they felt was contest worthy. I doubt this is an issue with
the big boys' beer that comprises a large proportion of GABF entries, but
is something the the micro guys do since they don't have the millions
invested in consistency that BMC does.

--NPD
--
___________________________
Nicholas P. Dempsey
Department of Sociology
University of Chicago

nicholas peter dempsey wrote:
Brewers tweaking batches until they
had one that they felt was contest worthy. I doubt this is an issue with
the big boys' beer that comprises a large proportion of GABF entries, but
is something the the micro guys do since they don't have the millions
invested in consistency that BMC does.

FWIW, same things goes for many homebrewers who regularly
participate in competitions. You brew a kick-butt beer in a
certain style, but tend to take a little extra care when
specifically targeting competition.
--
Joel Plutchak plutchak@[...] | Boneyard Union of Zymurgical Zealots

"I don't like beer. I tried it once and thought it was terrible."
- Overheard at a restaurant

Kevin wrote:
The brewpubs and microbreweries don't have the millions
invested in consistency; their product varies from batch to batch, no matter
how much they try to keep the consistency the same. Looking at it another
way, the brewpubs and microbreweries are brewing as best as they can to fit
the style guidelines set out by the GABF for judging.

I agree with much of what you said. I'm not sure I put as
much weight on the above, though. Craft breweries vary in
their ability to brew a given beer recipe consistently.
For example, I never got a lot of variation from the main
beers of Anchor, Sierra Nevada, or Rogue, to name a few.
(I've noted more variability among some smaller breweries.)
The last sentence may be true of some of the breweries
when preparing beer specifically for the GABF, but I don't
think it's true for mostsmaller breweries most of the time--
they could care less what GABF (or BJCP) guidelines say.
--
Joel Plutchak plutchak@[...] | Boneyard Union of Zymurgical Zealots

"I don't like beer. I tried it once and thought it was terrible."
- Overheard at a restaurant