Brookston Beer Bulletin

Jay R. Brooks on Beer

Socialize

Thoughts On The New Dietary Guidelines From Beer Business Daily

By

spirits-wine-beer
You most likely hard that the USDA released the quinquennial Dietary Guidelines for Americans at the end of last month. The 2010 version made a number of small, but significant changes with regard to food, such as “make half your plate fruits and vegetables” and “drink water instead of sugary drinks.”

In Chapter 3, they also made one small change to how they define an “alcoholic drink.”

alcohol-defined

Harry Schuhmacher commented on the guidelines in today’s Beer Business Daily newsletter. With Harry’s permission, below I’ve reprinted his thoughts on the Dietary Guidelines and specifically the changes to the alcohol portion of them:

Earlier this week the USDA issued its 2010 Dietary Guidelines as it does every 5 years. It states: “One drink is defined as 12 fluid ounces of regular beer (5% alcohol), 5 fluid ounces of wine (12% alcohol), or 1.5 fluid ounces of 80 proof (40% alcohol) distilled spirits. One drink contains 0.6 fluid ounces of alcohol.”

Now, you’d think this maybe isn’t a big deal. Well, you’d be wrong on that. It is.

Here’s why: The previous USDA Dietary Guidelines five years ago had very similar language, although it was fought tooth and nail by the beer and wine lobbies. However, this time the feds added the crucial last sentence: “One drink contains 0.6 fluid ounces of alcohol.” [Emphasis added.]

This further puts the Feds on record as saying, basically, a drink is a drink is a drink, even though we all know in reality that’s not the case. You can be sure that Diageo and DISCUS — the spirits lobby — worked with a laser focus to get this sentence added. It’s the next step toward alcohol equivalency (for excise tax, labeling, and consumer access issues), even though Diageo and DISCUS have previously said this is not what they’re after.

LABELING: First let’s consider labeling. As we know, the federal TTB is considering (since 2003) allowing alcohol producers to include voluntarily display serving facts (which includes standard alcohol content for servings) on labels. This is an issue that large distillers support, but brewers and wineries typically oppose because some believe the push for serving facts is a stalking horse for equivalency.

INDUSTRY SPLIT ON STANDARD DRINK: The Wine Institute and DISCUS are on the same side of most issues, such as opposing the CARE Act, but standard drink isn’t one of them.

DISCUS followed the release of the Guidelines with a statement. “The Government today emphasized the scientific fact that a standard drink of beer, wine and distilled spirits each contains the same amount of alcohol,” said Dr. Monica Gourovitch, Distilled Spirits Council’s svp of scientific affairs. “Alcohol is alcohol and it all should be treated equally, as a matter of public health and public policy.”

Monica told our sister publication, WSD, that the updated definition is “very clear” and shows that “each standard drink contains the same amount of alcohol.” When looking at the science involved, each serving has the “same effect on the body — potential benefits and potential risks.” She also noted that the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) already defines a standard alcoholic drink as anything containing 0.6 fluid ounces.

Wait ….. 0.6 fluid ounces of alcohol? Not 0.5 fluid ounces? There are plenty of public health folks who defined drinks as having 0.5 fluid ounces of alcohol as a standard drink. Who, I wonder, lobbied the USDA to add that extra 0.1 fluid ounce to the definition?

The Wine Institute, for one, is livid. For once they are on the other side of DISCUS on an issue. The WI issued a statement on Tuesday, saying there is no such thing as a standard drink: “We agree with the time-tested definition of a serving as being 12 fl. oz. of regular beer, 5 fl. oz. of wine, or 1.5 fl. oz. of 80-proof distilled spirits but are concerned about the additional statement that each of the drinks contains the same amount of alcohol. A precise fluid-ounces-of-alcohol statement implies that the alcohol content is the same for every drink of wine, beer or distilled spirits when, in reality, alcohol content varies widely from drink to drink. Consumers should not be misled into believing there is such a thing as a ‘standard drink.’ In fact, the term ‘standard drink’ does not appear in the Dietary Guidelines.” This is true. But it doesn’t dull the fact that a federal agency has swallowed the equivalency argument hook, line and sinker while the rest of the industry sleeps.

The Beer Institute and the NBWA have remained mute on this issue, so far. But clearly it is important: As one alcohol politico told me: “Once the language is in a federal government guideline, it’s in the bloodstream.” What he meant by that is that, since the USDA has defined a drink as 0.6 ounces of alcohol, it gives the TTB cover to move forward with their “serving facts” labeling, and maybe it gives the states the argument to increase taxes on beer and wine and offer it at more times and in more channels, and maybe it gives the feds something to point to when considering an excise tax increase. It’s a slippery slope, my friends, toward equalization of taxes and access among the beverages, which works against beer and wine and is probably just bad public policy. In fact, if alcohol excise taxes were suddenly equivalent, it would virtually kill the wine and beer industries, and we’d be a nation of vodka swillers like Russia, wiping away 200+ years of cultural and policy differences between the beverages. It was Thomas Jefferson who logically first put forward the notion that moderation should be nurtured by the government by encouraging the consumption of beer and wine over spirits.

As usual, a distributor put it most succinctly: “So a Four Loko is the same as Jack Daniels is same as Coors Light is same as Mad Dog 20/20 is same as a hot 17% abv California cab is the same as an 11% abv Italian white? Really?”

It brings to mind the old story where August Busch III went to Capitol Hill and demonstrated to a Congressman considering equivalency that a drink is not a drink. He reportedly said, “I’ll drink these three Budweisers, and you drink these three dry martinis, and at the end we’ll see who is more intoxicated.” It’s a shame our beer industry leaders don’t pull more stunts like that.

Ethanol is ethanol, to be sure. But different types of bev-alc are consumed by the majority of Americans in different ways. Ethanol is ethanol, but a drink is not a drink.

Thanks Harry. If you don’t know about his Beer Business Daily, especially if you’re in the beer business, I highly recommend it. You really should subscribe to Harry’s newsletter.

Stephen Colbert Tastes Walgreen’s New Private Label Beer “Big Flats”

By

colbert-report
Last month, you may recall, the drug store chain Walgreen’s debuted a private label beer brewed by Genesee, which they call Big Flats 1901. On last night’s Colbert Show, during his regular Tip of the Hat/Wag of My Finger segment, Stephen talked about the new Walgreen’s beer, and even tried a can of the beer. Wait through the British Superman story for the hilarious Big Flats piece.

The Colbert ReportMon – Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Tip/Wag – British Superman & Big Flats Beer
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full EpisodesPolitical Humor & Satire BlogVideo Archive

Beer In Ads #302: Schlitz, How To Pamper A Husband

By

ad-billboard
Wednesday’s ad is for Schlitz, from 1951. The title of it is “How to pamper a husband,” in this case one who mowed his way to the hammock, where he proceeded to take a nap. I’d like to think my wife would carry a tray holding a bottle of beer poured into a glass, smiling all the way, but I just can’t see it happening. I think it would be something more along the lines of WTF isn’t the lawn done?

Schlitz-1951-pamper

Barley’s Angels Goes Worldwide

By

pink-boots-society
If you haven’t heard of the Pink Boots Society, it’s an organization by and for women in the brewing industry. It’s open not just to brewers, but to women in any position throughout the industry, whether owners, salespeople, servers or writers. Founded by Oregon brewer Teri Fahrendorf in 2008, today there are over 500 members of the society.

Last week, Portland beer writer Lisa Morrison — a.k.a. the Beer Goddess — started a consumer division of the society known as “Barley’s Angels.” The idea is inspire chapters all over the country and the world, and the first chapter in Portland met for the first time January 23. The worldwide launch is now scheduled for February 20. There will be a meeting in the Pacific Northwest, at Fort George Brewing in Astoria, Oregon. (Sunday, Feb. 20, 2-5 p.m.; $35 per person.) At the “Beer O’Clock Chapter” meeting, founder Lisa Morrison will lead a tasting comparing “at least six beers, pairing them with some fantastic snacks, learning a bit about recent developments regarding beer as a healthy addition to your diet.”

At the same time, new chapters will hold meetings in London, England; Toronto, Canada and Sydney, Australia. And if you want to start a chapter in your town, now’s the time. Information about how to start your own chapter can be found at the Barley’s Angels website.

barleys-angels

My only question is who gets to be Bosley … and is there a Barley?

The Barley’s Angels website also has information about the aims of the group and the answer to the question you know were asking, why Barley’s Angels?

Here’s the basics from the homepage:

What we are:

Mission Statement: As the consumer leg of the Pink Boots Society, Barley’s Angels is committed to involving women in the enjoyment of craft beer by creating environments where women can learn more about beer in a friendly, educational and supportive atmosphere, thus creating more women beer enthusiasts, and, ultimately, involving more women in beer- and brewery-related careers.

Purpose: Barley’s Angels is a growing collection of individual chapters around the world that work with craft-beer focused breweries, brewpubs, restaurants, alehouses and other public beer establishments to advance the female consumer craft beer enthusiast, resulting in increased patronage and revenue from women, while encouraging education and interest in beer among this often under-recognized demographic group.

What we are not:

Barley’s Angels is not just a social, beer-drinking club for women. Barley’s Angels respect beer and brewing, have a thirst for education, enjoy beer responsibly and act appropriately at all times.

Casting Call: Homebrewing Meets Reality TV

By

bn
It was bound to happen, but at least it’s being done by someone we know and trust to treat beer and homebrewing with the proper respect. The Brewing Network has partnered with KOFY Channel 20 to create a new reality TV show about … homebrewing. The show, to be called Brew Your Own Beer TV, will take the form of a “game show-reality style program pitting teams of homebrewers and craft beer lovers against one another for some really great prizes. It will be shot all across the greater Bay Area in parking lots and bars and breweries.”

Here’s what they’re looking for:

We are looking for beer lovers of all types, men and women, couples, teams, bikini models — as long as they have a general understanding of how beer is made and a flexible schedule, they will be considered for the show.

Do you love beer? Are you a home brewer or craft beer enthusiast? Are you interested in learning more about the brewing process while competing with other brewers for great prizes?

We are casting for a reality show that centers around home brewers and craft beer lovers in the greater San Fransisco Bay Area.

Applicants must have a LOVE for beer, a desire to learn more about the brewing process, and a flexible schedule between February 20th and June 15th. A basic knowledge of how beer is made is required but home brewing experience is not a must — we want beer lovers of all knowledge levels.

21 and older only!

To apply: e-mail your name, recent photo, brewing experience (if any), an explanation or example of your passion for beer, and a reason why you should be a part of this TV show. If possible, you may also submit a link to a short video that further explains why we should select you and to help us get to know you better.

Deadline for submissions is February 15th!

The casting call is also on Craigslist and that’s where the e-mail address to use for applying can be found. Or you can simply e-mail the Brewing Network.

My understanding is that there will be ten teams of homebrewers competing, so not every team has to consist entirely of expert homebrewers. You’d need at least one, of course, but enthusiastic assistants that work well together would most likely make for the best team, rather than all homebrewers who might have trouble agreeing on how to proceed. There will be contests and competitions along the way to eliminate teams until one emerges victorious. Sounds like it could be great fun.

Good luck to everybody, and good brewing. But hurry up and apply, there’s less than two weeks to go.

Rumors Of An Anheuser-Busch InBev & SABMiller Merger?

By

abib sabmiller
Wow. This rumor is just mind-boggling. It makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. But could it be true? According to Harry Schuhmacher at Beer Business Daily, it’s not only being discussed but is considered “likely and lucrative.” Harry’s quoting analysts at Credit Suisse who believe “‘SABMiller selling to ABI would provide SAB management and shareholders an obvious and desirable exit strategy for all involved. The idea of a merger we believe could be sold to both sets of shareholders’ even though ‘this would be a large deal with many moving parts.'” Apparently there’s not much overlap between the two behemoths globally, but in the U.S. it would be more of an issue, with the two companies combining for around 80% of the domestic beer market. That, I imagine, would raise big anti-trust concerns and would loom large in the closing of the deal, which would also most likely lead to massive distributor consolidation. The price being thrown around is somewhere in the $9-10 billion range.

Obviously, there’s a lot more details to be worked out, and many of them are already addressed in the Beer Business Daily piece, which looks at pros and cons for both sides, and likely resolutions of certain issues both companies face. It’s not as far-fetched as you might think on first blush. To read the rest of it, I highly recommend a subscription to Harry’s newsletter.

When Anheuser-Busch and InBev merged, I remember someone joking that eventually there would be just one international beer company and it would just be called “Beer.” I chuckled at the time, but maybe they were on to something. Stay tuned, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Brewhog Determines No More Winter Ales, Bring On The Spring Beers

By

groundhog-day
Over in Gobbler’s Knob, in Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania, Phil the Groundhog — a.k.a. Brewhog — raised up his head this morning and looked around, but could not see his shadow anywhere. You know what that means. It’s out with the winter beers and in with the spring beers early this year. Or something about an early spring, I can’t keep it straight. You can see a video of Punxsutawney Phil here. And there’s more information about Groundhog Day at the Punxsutawney Groundhog Club.

groundhog-beer

Beer In Ads #301: Genesee, Enjoy It Here …

By

ad-billboard
Tuesday’s ad is for Genesee Beer from an ecologically-minded 1967. Half the ad shows an idyllic woodland stream setting held out as the perfect place to enjoy a couple of cans of Genesee Beer with the text “Enjoy it here ….” The other half shows a trash basket with a sign on it; “drop it here” and “American the Beautiful” at the bottom.

genesee67trash

When Zero Tolerance Makes Zero Sense

By

cheerleader
There was a little item in the Brickbats section of Reason magazine for February about a high school cheerleader in Ohio who was suspended for two games. Why, you may ask? Because school officials found a photo of her on Facebook holding a beer at a family wedding. According to her own Mother, she wasn’t drinking it, just holding it. No matter, her school insists that even holding a bottle of beer violates their no-alcohol policy.

Where to begin? All by itself, it’s a rather absurd and silly incident, but what it represents is, I believe, much larger. It’s a little sad that school officials, with all the budget cuts schools are facing, even have time and the inclination to troll Facebook looking for school policy violations. But if it was at a family wedding, not a kegger, and her Mom was okay with whatever was going on (holding it for another adult?) and assures us nothing sinister was occurring, frankly that should have been the end of it. It should matter that it wasn’t even on school property, at a private, family event but believe it or not courts have actually ruled that schools can regulate a student’s behavior outside of school, which as a parent I find both frightening and infuriating. That’s not their job, it’s my job. Period. Education is their job.

But that’s the sort of nonsense zero tolerance causes. It ignores circumstances and common sense, creating results that have little to do with the spirit of the policy. It punishes the innocent indiscriminately, which could even lead to issues with authority for the students on the receiving end of such unjust treatment. Is that really the lesson we want to teach our children? Follow the letter of the law no matter how ridiculous or suffer the consequences. Don’t think for yourself or interpret, just obediently do what you’re told. No exceptions.

In theory, such a policy would mean I can’t ask my son to help carry groceries if one of the bags contain alcohol. (Or for my brethren in less fortunate states, where even beer in grocery stores is too dangerous and not permitted, how about carrying the beer from the state store or beer distributor.) Is that rational? Does it serve some higher purpose of education? Or does it further the demonization of alcohol and our already irrational fear of it? And what does it say about who controls our own children, when a school can override a parent’s choice of discipline. Parents have the ultimate responsibility for their child’s upbringing and welfare, but the school has the final say?

But there’s obviously nothing rational about alcohol in our society, as this incident so clearly reveals. Whenever it’s about beer, you can be sure decades of one-sided propaganda will create absurdist zero tolerance laws and policies that makes sense only to Franz Kafka.

Gambrinus Discontinues Pete’s Wicked Ales

By

petes
It’s the end of an era. My friend Pete Slosberg was a pioneer in the craft beer world. His Pete’s Wicked Ale, which debuted in 1986, penetrated the country nationwide and helped introduce flavorful beers in places that previously hadn’t known any. He was a beer ambassador who traveled tirelessly in those heady early days. Pete sold the brand to the Gambrinus Company in 1998, and they’ve had mixed results with it ever since.

I learned today that Gambrinus has sent letters to their distributors announcing that as of March 1, 2011 they’ll be discontinuing the Pete’s brand, citing “rapidly declining sales volumes.” Pick some up while you still can, and have your last taste of the iconic brand.

And for a fun trip down memory lane, below are a few television commercials that Pete did around 1994. Enjoy.

Signing Autographs, a TV commercial from 1994.

Here’s a second one, also from 1994, where a police officer ask him for a permit.

Here’s one that never aired, “Pete Goes Clubbing.”