Brookston Beer Bulletin

Jay R. Brooks on Beer

Socialize

Woot’s Worst Beer Styles

By

If you’re not familiar with Woot!, you should be. It stands for “One Day, One Deal,” which is essentially what it is. There’s a Woot! website and each day they offer one item for sale, usually at a very reduced price. They usually only have a limited number of the item, so when it’s gone, it’s really gone. If you don’t get there early you’re just out of luck. They often do sell out, and sometimes depending on the item very early in the day. I’ve only bought a few things there, as the variety is pretty wide, though you will see more high-tech gadgets than probably anything else. There’s also two companion sites that sell a new t-shirt every day and a wine, too.

The also have a blog, on which they recently posted a list of 11 Failed Beer Styles:

  1. Gruel Stout
  2. Twice-Baked Lager
  3. Turbo-Pilsner
  4. Steam Beer That Is Still Really Hot
  5. Stale Ale
  6. Dry-Humped APA
  7. Luxembourg Gray
  8. Lambicarbonate of Soda
  9. Insect Pale Ale
  10. Bud Light With Brown Food Coloring Irish Stout
  11. Hefvergnügen

I’m not sure they’d all qualify as “styles” per se, but it’s still a fairly funny list. What would you add to it?

 

How Stuff Works Brews Beer Tonight

By

The Discovery Channel TV show How Stuff Works tonight visits Charlie Papazian, as well as the Yuengling Brewery in Pottsville, Pennsylvania. The Show, entitled simply Beer, airs twice tonight at 8:00 p.m. and Midnight. Check the schedule for your local airing time. There are also clips from the show on their website.

According to Charlie Papazian, President of the Brewers Association, “the producers spent a full morning and part of the afternoon with [him] this past summer. Shooting [his] hop garden, homebrew “garage,” beer stash and sampling of various brews while asking [him] to tell the story of “how beer works.” He also mentions that he believes Sam Calagione from Dogfish Head will also be featured in the show. It should be interesting, set your TiVo.

Overall, it seems like there’s definitely more general interest in beer from cable television and other video outlets recently, with many more shows being devoted to beer in development and airing. I did another show recently for a new online channel, Reason TV, which is partially funded by Drew Carey. It should air online in a few weeks. The show was devoted more to the politics of craft beer and distribution hurdles and featured a roundtable discussion with me and several Bay Area brewers. I’ll update you here when it’s ready to go live. In the meantime, watch tonight’s How Beer Works.

 

Jamie Smith (right), co-executive producer of the beer episode to be aired on the Discovery Channel tonight (Dec. 18), and Charlie Papazian after shooting on location at his “home” brewery earlier this summer.

 

Budvar Prevails Over Bud In EU Decision

By

The EU’s Court of First Instance ruled yesterday that in prior rulings, the European Trademark Agency had “made several errors,” when they went against Budejovicky Budvar and accepted Anheuser-Busch’s arguments over trademark issues in Europe between the two rival breweries. This effectively undoes the trademark for A-B’s “Bud” brand name in the EU’s 27 member nations.

According to the AP report, the upshot is that “Anheuser-Busch can no longer claim trademark rights for the entire EU region but must rely on separate national trademarks.”

From the AP Article:

The Czech company said it had already registered “Bud” under a 1958 agreement which protected the name as a geographical indicator of origin in France, Austria and the former Czechoslovakia.

The court ruled the trademark agency had to “take account of earlier rights” protected in member states, adding the agency had “made an error of law” in rejecting the use of the word and signs in the context of a commercial activity.

There were actually three separate judgments rendered today by the Court of First Instance over different aspects if this on-going dispute. If appealed, the case will go to the European Court of Justice.

The rulings, while each is distinct, all follow similar language, as follows.

Judgment T-225/06 Budějovický Budvar v OHMI – Anheuser-Busch (BUD) Intellectual property

Community trade mark – Action, brought by the proprietor of the right to use the protected appellation of origin ‘BUD’ to designate beer, for the annulment of Decision R 234-2005-2 of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 14 June 2006 dismissing the appeal against the decision of the Opposition Division which refused the opposition filed by the applicant against the application for registration of the word mark ‘BUD’ in respect of goods in Classes 32 and 33

Forbes has additional analysis on the ruling entitled AB Inbev suffers a setback in its attempt to win Europe-wide rights to the trademark the name ‘Bud.’

Their take:

Czech beer maker Budejovicky Budvar won its attempt to ban AB InBev’s application for a community trademark that would have given the Belgian brewer the exclusive right to use the word “Bud” on its beers across all 27 member states of the European Union. A firm cannot acquire region-wide rights if another company holds a separate national trademark, even if it is just in one of the states.

Budvar had used what is referred to as “appellation of origin”–used to protect a name on the basis of geographical origin–to claim trademark rights in several countries such as France and Austria. Budejovicky Budvar was founded in 1895 in the Czech city of Ceske Budejovice—an area called “Budweis” by the German-speaking people that lived there at the time, according to the Associated Press. The founders of Anheuser-Busch had thus originally picked the name “Budweiser” because it was well-known in their German homeland.

An Appeal by A-B InBev is likely, so I don’t think we’ve heard the last of this dispute, which so far is more than 100 years old.

 

Mug Of The World

By

I’m not sure where this originated or even if it’s real, but it’s pretty cool looking, at least to me. I guess I’ll have to start a list, but of the growing number of things I’ve recently admitted to being geekily obsessive, please add maps. I love maps of all kinds, though especially pictorial ones and globes. At one time, I had collected at least fifty globes but they’re the sort of things that quickly overwhelm a small house. I still collect postcards with the old-fashioned state maps on them with the small graphics on them to indicate particular features of the state. Anyway, enough rambling. This mug of beer looks eerily like Africa and Europe, with a splash of Asia in the corner.

It almost looks too good to be real, as it’s pretty damn accurate. If it’s fake, they did a great job. Of course, if you can put 100 monkeys in a room and eventually get Shakespeare, who know, maybe it’s real after all? Or perhaps if you have enough mugs of beer it starts to look real. Either, way, color me impressed.

 

Lingering Lager Lies

By

Somehow I missed this particular Budweiser commercial, a part of the “Lager Lessons” campaign that began sometime around the Super Bowl earlier this year. The first one, which I have seen many times, starred Ron Riggle from the Daily Show. The series was created by ad agency DDB.

The new one (at least to me) that I saw today while watching the Jets beat the Bills, starred Christine Scott Bennett as a bartender. She’s also been in at least two other similar spots, also as a bartender, entitled “The Perfect Pour” and “Delivery.” This one’s called “Commitment.” Watch it below, it’s only thirty seconds long.

Here’s what Bennett as the bartender says to the three stooges who belly up to her bar. “Budweiser has stayed true to the same recipe for over 130 years, through five generations. They could have cut corners, but they didn’t. Because they won’t sacrifice quality or great taste. 130 years. Now that’s commitment.”

Commitment, eh? No, what that actually is, quite simply, is a lie. It’s not puffing, it’s not hyperbole, it’s just not true. Back at the end of April — as most of us had been speculating for many years — August Busch III finally admitted in the Wall Street Journal that they had in fact changed the recipe for both Budweiser and Bud Light several times over the years. In and of itself, that’s not a big deal. Most, if not all, breweries are constantly tweaking their recipes trying to make them better, perfect, etc. But while the rest of the industry was openly doing so, A-B stubbornly continued to insist that their recipe had never changed, not once, since 1876. Nobody with a brain believed them, but that was the message they wanted to portray to the public. And finally the truth came out.

So why would they continue to insist that they’ve never changed their recipe in an ad, even after it was revealed that they had? That’s a good question, in my opinion, but with the company in transition I doubt we’ll get an answer to that one anytime soon. Still, it’s a galling reminder of what bothered me about the management style of the old A-B. I know advertising is all about creating perceptions and not about absolute truth, but when a company doggedly insists that something is black when it’s actually white — while at the same time suing everybody under the sun when they make any similar statements — then it’s doubly dishonest when they themselves don’t tell the truth. What kind of commitment are they making with such a blatant falsehood? Presumably most of their customers aren’t regular readers of the Wall Street Journal and even if they are, they’ve no doubt already forgotten about what A-B said last year. So in my opinion they’re inadvertently calling their customers too stupid to recognize the truth and see no problem whatsoever with lying to them to make themselves appear to be a better company than their competitors.

I certainly feel for the many good people who are losing heir jobs this month as InBev reduces costs so they can pay the high costs of acquisition. But this lingering lager lie is a final reminder to me that A-B was the bully of beer industry schoolyard.

 

Beer in Art #6: Charles Spencelayh’s Good Health

By

Most works of art are locked in museums, completely out of reach for ordinary people. But once in a while, they do become available at auction. Case in point is today’s work, entitled Good Health by English artist Charles Spencelayh.

The painting is currently at auction at Artnet Online Auctions. The price of the work is 50,000 British Pounds, or around $73,970 U.S. Dollars. Of course, when I say “ordinary people,” I mean ones with 75 Grand to blow on a painting.

 
While Charles Spencelayh is not a household name in art, he appears to have been well known in his day and Queen Mary loved his work. Here’s what little biographical information there is about him, from Wikipedia:

Charles Spencelayh (October 27, 1865 – June 29, 1958) was an English painter of the Academic style. Born in Rochester, Kent, he first studied at the National Art Training School, South Kensington. He exhibited at the Paris Salon, but most of his exhibits were in Britain. Between 1892 and 1958, he exhibited more than 30 paintings at the Royal Academy, including ‘Why War’ (1939), which won the Royal Academy ‘Picture of the Year’ for 1939. He was also a founder member of the Royal Society of Miniature Painters. Many of his subjects were of domestic scenes, painted with an almost photographic detail, such as ‘The Laughing Parson’ (1935). and ‘His Daily Ration’ (1946). He also painted still life subjects including ‘Apples’ (1951). Spencelayh was a favourite of Queen Mary, who was an avid collector of his work. In 1924 he painted a miniature of King George V for Queen Mary’s dolls house.

Supposedly, he may have done a painting commissioned by the Bass Brewery for them to use in advertising entitled The Steward, depicting a steward opening a bottle of Bass. But so far I’ve been unable to find anything more about it or see what it looks like.

Five of his paintings are at the Tate in London and a few more are shown at the online Art Renewal Center and Bridgeman has quite a few. There are also some links at the ArtCyclopedia.

Cerveza Cycling

By

My friend Brian Hunt from Moonlight Brewing sent me this fun little item. Thanks Brian. It seems someone in the Netherlands built a beer bar bicycle that they call Het Foute Fietcafe.

It appears there is one cyclist who sits in the middle and five on each side of the bar who have to pedal sideways.

There’s a barrel at the front but I don’t think it actually holds any beer.

Someone in Minneapolis has imported one from the Netherlands, though they call their bicycle bar a Pedal Pub, and it’s available for rent, too. They even went so far as to have the Minnesota law changed, effective May 16, 2008, that now “allows passengers aboard the PedalPub to consume alcohol while aboard the PedalPub.” Does this mean you can now work off the calories from your beer at the exact same time you’re consuming them?

I’m surprised New Belgium doesn’t have one these given their love of all things bicycly, not to mention their Tour de Fat.

 

The First Month At InBev’s A-B

By

Jeremiah McWilliams, writing in his St. Louis Post Dispatch’s online presence Lager Heads, revealed on Friday that things are not going too smoothly for the current and soon-to-be former employees of Anheuser-Busch. In Rough times at Anheuser-Busch he details what anonymous insiders are saying the mood is like at One Busch Place, and it doesn’t look pretty. Having lived through mass layoffs at a former company, I know how anxiety-inducing and unpleasant it can be, and it must be doubly so in this case while employees are waiting to find out what kind of Christmas it’s going to be this year. I know business is business, but really; can InBev be blind to the fact that Christmas is less than two weeks away? Can this honestly be the best way to swoop in take care of business from a public relations point of view, or do they figure they’re already so vilified that they may as well play the part?

 

Ah, the “good old days.”

 

Running From Santa

By

It seems to happen every year at this time of the season; Santa Claus comes out and neo-prohibitionists can’t help themselves in believing that he belongs to them exclusively. The latest salvo is from Join Together who wrongly targets MillerCoors for sponsoring the Running of the Santas, a charity event taking place in several cities on the East Coast. That these events are raising money to fight pediatric cancer is mentioned, but the events are nonetheless characterized as “binge drinking events.” The Running of the Santas wesbite characterizes the events as “a national pub crawl scheduled for December 13th across 25 cities.”

According to Join Together, “MillerCoors is getting a lump of coal in its Christmas stocking this year. The beer producer is sponsoring binge drinking events in Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, Washington, and several other cities.”

“The Running of the Santas” may ostensibly raise money for charity, but using Santa to promote beer-soaked pub crawls? Bad idea. And it clearly violates the beer industry’s own marketing code, which bars Santa from selling beer.

Santa’s too busy these days to be dragged into this. So let’s get MillerCoors’ attention: file a consumer complaint with the Beer Institute and copy the Federal Trade Commission.

Yes, by all means let’s undermine an effort to raise money to combat children with cancer if it’s done in a way we don’t like. I just want to scream epithets at these people and try to shake them loose from their myopia so they’ll focus on something bigger than themselves and something bigger than a few young people having a pub crawl to raise money for a worthy cause. Surely, there must be more important issues these people could spend their time pursuing?

One thing that really galls me is Join Together’s characterization that the charities being helped out by these events are only doing so “ostensibly,” that is “outwardly appearing as such” as if it was a front of some kind. If you can look at the two specific charities — Alex’s Lemonade Stand Foundation and Ellie Koerner Leukemia Fund — and not be touched by the sadness of these childrens’ stories and moved to action, then by all means sign up to be a member of Join Together.

The Running of the Santas breaks no laws, and in fact looks like a pretty fun event for those with an open mind. The organization describes the events thusly:

The Running of the Santas is an annual bar tour. What started with 40 Santas in Philadelphia has turned into a national phenomenon. The goal is to raise money for a local charity while getting a lot of Santas together for one big party. In Philadelphia, over 5,000 Santas are expected at the event in 2008. Live bands, great beer specials, a Hottest Santa Contest, and a short “RUN” (two blocks) is what makes the Running of the Santas something special.

If I were twenty years younger, I’d certainly participate. What doesn’t sound fun about that? Oh wait, I forgot, some people think they own the idea of Santa Claus and believe it can only be shown one way. In fact, one of the bludgeons Join Together is attempting to use is the following.

But the beer industry’s own voluntary advertising and marketing code (Guideline #3) explicitly bans the depiction of Santa Claus in beer marketing materials. And though the events are aimed at adults, many of them start in daylight or early evening hours — when children may well spot St. Nick dashing through the snow … getting drunk.

Holy crap, first of all they’re right about one thing. The Advertising and Marketing Code Guidelines on the Beer Institute’s website really does say that. It’s right there at 3b. “Beer advertising and marketing materials should not depict Santa Claus.” That has to be the stupidest rule they’ve ever agreed to. But let’s get back to that later.

The rule says the “depiction of Santa Claus in beer marketing materials” is banned for the beer companies. Running of the Santas is not a beer company. That Coors is a sponsor is an entirely different matter. They’re sponsoring an event, not advertising or marketing a beer using Santa Claus. Join Together obviously hates the idea of Santa being used in an event involved with alcohol, but they can’t complain to the event itself since they’re not doing anything illegal, so instead they turn their attention to someone they can try to intimidate.

A stooge from the neo-prohibitionist Center for Science in the Public Interest, George Hacker, is quoted. “How realistic is it to let the beer industry’s lobbyists write and enforce the rules if not even Santa is safe? Besides, everyone knows Santa prefers milk — skim, actually.” Dude, leave the jokes to the professionals. These beer advertising guidelines don’t even come close to applying in this situation. You just want to rail against this, reality and logic be damned.

If you want to get technical about is, Saint Nicholas (who we call Santa Claus, among other names) is the patron saint of brewers, for fucksakes. According to many different churches and denominations, St. Nick counts brewers among his many, many occupations, afflictions and places for whom he’s the patron saint. For more about this, see my earlier post from December 6, St. Nicholas’ Feast Day. So it’s not at all out of line that Santa Claus would drink beer. In many other countries, because of this, Santa Claus is often used on beer labels. Only here in the U.S. is this considered a taboo.

Beyond their bullshit pretense that Coors is violating an advertising guideline, Join Together and the CSPI are simply out for publicity. The CSPI already filed a complaint with the Beer Institute and Anheuser-Busch withdrew their support from an event in Atlanta. It’s the threat of bad press that has beer companies spooked, not any violation of the guidelines. These neo-prohibitionists know how they can manipulate the facts to get favorable treatment in the press. Using Santa Claus to garner sympathy for their cause is becoming the neo-prohibitionists holiday gift to society each year, an opportunity to use dishonesty and propaganda in a most unsavory fashion.

This notion that Santa Claus can’t be associated with anything having to do with adults just fries my bacon. The spirit of Christmas is not restricted to children. When Join Together asserts that “children may well spot St. Nick dashing through the snow … getting drunk” I can’t help but think simply “so what?” I’m so tired of some elements of our society that are constantly worried that children might see something that’s adult in nature and believing we have to create a sanitized world where there’s no possibility of that ever happening. Like it or not, this is a world for everybody, not just children, and we can’t create a world that’s only for kids and expect that adults can live full, mature, adult lives. They’ve been trying that on television for years now, making every show appropriate for a fifth grader. And guess what, most of the shows on network television suck, especially the ones that embrace that lowest-common denominator ethos. Personally, I don’t want to live in a child’s world, and I really don’t understand why neo-prohibitionists do, either, but then I really don’t get where they’re coming from at all.

Another disaster of their efforts is that these charity events specifically draw in younger people to participate. People under 30 statistically give less money to charities (though they give as much of their time as other age groups). That the neo-prohibitionist groups are targeting these events suggests to me that they care more about their agenda than kids with cancer. And the (perhaps) unintended consequence of their actions is that less money will be raised to fund research into pediatric cancer. And they think MillerCoors deserves a lump of coal this Christmas?

 

 

An Open Letter To “The Session”

By

session-the
Dear Session,

We’ve been going steady now nearly two years, and it’s probably time to start seriously considering taking our relationship to the next level. Unfortunately, I think you’ve changed and I think perhaps it’s time to “talk.”

When Stan at Appellation Beer first proposed The Session back in January of 2007, he started out with “Stouts,” writing:

There aren’t many rules. Simply pour yourself a stout (or stouts) and post on the topic March 2, looking ahead to St. Patrick’s Day or not and writing about any stout that isn’t Guinness, Murphy’s or Beamish (the Irish old guard – good beers but we’re writing about others). Should you worry about style? About getting the opinion of friends, about writing an official tasting note, about food? About the history of the beer or how its made? All optional.

In fact, the first three Session were particular beer styles. Five of the first ten were likewise beer styles as were four of the second ten we’ve done but none since we passed our teens and entered our twenties. So that means of 22 completed Sessions, only 9 (or about 40%) have been about beer but only 2 of the last ten (20%) have been about a particular kind of beer. And Session 23 will likewise be more of the same, though I want to be clear I don’t want to single anyone out for criticism. Most of the topics have been interesting on their own, I’m just starting to feel like we’re all trying to be too clever and veering away from our original purpose or vision.

As for me personally, it was my hope that with The Sessions, “a record will be created with much useful information about various topics on the subject of beer.” But lately it seems as if we’ve been spending more time talking about ourselves than the beer. Not that we’re not all incredibly interesting, but I’d like to suggest that we return to the subject that brought us together in the first place, our common interest: beer.

One of the strengths of doing something without a clear leader or overarching plan is that it allows for much creativity and individual writers’ personalities to shine through. That can also be a weakness, too, if we don’t keep our eyes on the prize. I don’t really know if there was an actual “goal” when we started or how many people will agree with me, but I’m going to throw this out there and see where the prevailing winds blow us.

So I’d like to suggest that beginning with February’s Session (our two year anniversary) and going forward, we all follow a few simple rules when choosing a topic for a Session. I’m also going to be so bold as to suggest that we do come up with a goal for The Sessions. While not strictly necessary, having a stated purpose I believe will make it easier to not stray in the future and keep us all focused on what we’re trying to accomplish with The Sessions. Here’s my first draft then. Feel free to join the discussion and offer your thoughts, criticisms (civilly, please) and suggestions.

Goals For “The Sessions”

  1. Encourage a lively discussion about beer.
  2. Educate people about some aspect of beer.
  3. Have fun.

Though not necessarily a goal, I think it’s important to remember that our audience isn’t (or at least shouldn’t be) just one another, but people we’re hoping to draw into appreciating beer more fully and each topic more specifically. If each post is written in such a way that it causes the reader to seek out more information on the same topic and that extended story is there for the taking throughout the other Session posts, then that I would consider a successful Session. That is to say, anything that ignites the passions of a reader to read more on a particular subject should be the measure of success for this project, at least in my opinion.

But that’s it, simple and concise; encourage, educate and have fun.

Rules For Choosing A “Session” Topic or Theme

  1. Review past topics to avoid duplication.
  2. Closely review the last three Sessions to avoid choosing a topic too close to those recent ones.
  3. Restrict topic types, to the following per calendar year:
    (if limit is reached, choose something different)
    1. Philosophical Topics (2 per annum)
    2. Memories & Nostalgic Topics (1 per annum)
    3. Beer & … (e.g., food, music; 1 per annum)
    4. Beer styles, type of beer, or beer-related (no limit)
  4. For Topic Types a, b & c above, they should never follow one another, that is they should always be bookended by a more beery theme.
  5. Consider the audience.

It is not my intention to stifle creativity in any way with trying to propose a few simple rules to follow. I’d like them to make each Session more meaningful. Hopefully, these rules should encourage all of us to simply think carefully about our topics when we try to come up with a theme. And my goal with trying to limit certain types of topics is merely to keep them diverse throughout the year and also maintain an interesting mix for anyone who happens by to see what the beer blogging community is up to. But the upshot is, I’d really like to see us talk about beer more often than not. If nothing else, that should be a goal in and of itself.

So that’s it, have at me. What do you all think? Goals? Topic Rules?