Brookston Beer Bulletin

Jay R. Brooks on Beer

Socialize

Moylan’s Brewing Dinner at Noonan’s

By

After the great success of Noonan’s last beer dinner featuring Arne Johnson’s beers from Marin Brewing, they’re hosting another one, this time featuring Denise Jone’s beers from Moylan’s Brewing from my hometown of Novato. It will be a four-course dinner and should be well worth the $79 price of admission. It will be held at the Noonan’s Bar & Grill in Larkspur (across from the ferry landing) on Thursday, November 15, 2007, beginning with a reception at 7:00 p.m. Call 415.342.1592 for more information and reservations.

 

The Menu:

 

Reception: 7:00 PM

Northern California Artisan Cheese Plate, including Vella Farms Daisy Cheddar, Laura Chenel Chevre, Point Reyes Blue and Joe Matos St. George

Beer: Moylan’s Brewery Celts Golden Ale and Moylan’s Brewery Dragoons Irish Stout

Dinner: 7:30 PM

First Course

Seared Sesame Crusted Ahi Tuna with frisee, red onion, soy ginger viniagrette

Beer: Moylan’s Brewery White Christmas Witbier

Second Course:

Autumn Vegetable Soup with huajillo chile broth

Beer: Moylan’s Brewery Moylander Double IPA and Pomegranate Wheat Ale Granita

Third Course:

Roasted Niman Ranch Pork Roulade with pignoli & wild mushroom stuffing, red cabbage, potato pancake, sweet onion white wine reduction

Beer: Moylan’s Brewery “Moylanfest” Oktoberfest Marzen

Fourth Course:

Granny Smith Apple & Triple Cream Brie Turnover with port candied cranberries & fig chutney garnish

Beer: A trio of Moylan’s Brewery barrel aged beers: Old Blarney Barleywine, Ryan Sullivan’s Imperial Stout and Hopsickle Imperial Ale

Denise Jones behind the bar at Moylan’s.

 
11.15

Moylan’s Brewing Beer Dinner with Denise Jones

Noonan’s Bar and Grill, 2233 Larkspur Landing Circle, Larkspur, California
415.342.1592 [ event website ]
 

Stella Artois’ Take On Their New Web Launch

By

Those of you who have been following the online debate among beer bloggers regarding ethics which was sparked by e-mail many of us received regarding the new Stella Artois website launch will no doubt be intrigued by their latest press release, which was about the website re-launch. In it, they claim that traffic has increased twenty-fold since the re-launch.

Here’s the part I think many of you will find interesting:

Both the mainstream media community as well as the social media internet community have broadly praised the website, developed by Lowe Worldwide under the direction of the Global Stella Artois brand team, and it has been awarded ‘Site of the Week’ status by the FWA.

“The interesting thing is that people are also staying on our site much longer than industry average estimates of 45 seconds,” said Neil Gannon, Global Marketing Manager for Stella Artois. “In fact, the main site attracts a viewing time of four minutes, with many people watching the short La Bouteille film, which also serves as the navigation for the site, for well over five minutes. And 30% of visits to our site are through word of mouth, rather than search engines, which is a really nice compliment,”

Reader reactions on industry blog Ads of the World (which advised readers to put aside at least half an hour to view the site) included “Wonderful! Engaging and entertaining”, whilst “Captivating, original and exciting” was the reaction from Welcome to the Future whose readers gave the site 4.8 out of 5.0. Contagious Magazine called the site an “online epic”, whilst Clare Beale, Editor of industry publication Campaign magazine and contributor to The Independent newspaper in the United Kingdom, called the website “cunning” and “with an entertainment value that means that viewers will spend time on the site and return for more.”

My initial reaction is that it clearly shows how they intended to use the beer blogging community as well as the online community generally. But I’ve been drinking seemingly non-stop in Germany for the last two days, slightly sleep-deprived and wanting desperately to go to sleep so I’m in no condition to give this my usual overthinking. So instead I’ll ask you what you think about this latest press release from Stella Artois and whether or not it has any relevance or effect on our earlier dialogues?

 

A Cool, Blonde Drink of Offense

By

Since I’m in Germany right now, this item caught my eye. It’s about the National Organization for Women (or NOW) singling out St. Pauli Girl’s new ad campaign as being “offensive to women.” Adrants described the new campaign as follows:

In its new campaign, dubbed “Drop Dead Refreshing,” St. Pauli Girl is playing a little game with us. Front and center in the brewer’s new print campaign is the image of a model Photoshopped to look like beer. As an added twist to the campaign, the model is said to be “renowned and popular” and those who care, can guess the model’s identity on the brewers website. Her identity will be revealed this spring.

St. Pauli Girl’s press release indicated the new ads would begin running this spring and I’m not sure when NOW weighed in with their offense. There are certainly ads at NOW’s website collection of offensive ads which I can understand them finding offensive with and with which I agree with their assessment. BUt I’m not so sire about the St.Pauli Girl ad. Here’s the ad reprinted below along with the caption from NOW’s website.

St. Pauli: A woman presented as a human beer bottle—now that should make you foam at the mouth. Once you’ve finished consuming her, should you just discard her like an empty beer bottle?

Here’s what I don’t understand. What makes NOW think the woman is being portrayed as a beer bottle? If your eyes aren’t enough, the press release makes it pretty clear that she’s not meant to be the bottle. She’s even wearing a dress made of beer, along with her entire body, except for hair which instead is, rather fittingly, the head of the beer. There at least two additional ads which make the case for her being beer rather than a bottle even more ironclad. As a result their analogy of discarding St. Pauli Girl after drinking her falls flat. I don’t think is necessarily the finest beer ad I’ve ever seen and St. Pauli Girl is not an especially wonderful beer, but I don’t see as the most egregious beer ad I’ve seen and it doesn’t rise to anywhere near Miller’s infamous mud wrestling ad.

We know sex sells. Men like it, but so do women. They just respond to its imagery in some starkly different ways. If you want to trigger sexual emotions in men or women you have to employ widely varying techniques to reach each gender. Does using sex in advertising by definition make it bad a priori? It seems to me that our proclivity to respond emotionally to sexual cues is deeply embedded in our nature and advertisers exploit that very human nature precisely because it’s so effective.

Advertisers are not generally speaking the most moral among us. They have a job to do and they do it pretty well but they rarely consider anything beyond their goal. As comedian Bill Hicks was fond of saying. “If you’re in advertising or marketing, please kill yourself. You are Satan’s little helpers and there’s no rationale for what you do. Go on. Kill yourself.” I guess what I always took away from that sentiment is that all advertising is essentially morally questionable because it uses whatever means necessary to achieve a goal and the idea that the ends justified the means was essentially taken for granted as an unquestionable foundation of the industry.

So I think their criticism of this specific ad comes down to the question of whether it’s better or worse than the general state of advertising. It doesn’t seem to me this is even the worst of the many questionable beer ads. First of all NOW seems to have misunderstood the ad by thinking the woman was being depicted as a bottle and then leapt to some self-serving conclusions that don’t really seem to be supported by the evidence. Is a great ad? No, not really. It’s better than some, worse than others. I realize as a man I’m ill-suited to decide what’s offense to women, but I don’t think that means whatever NOW says must be true just because they say so.

Magnolia 10th Anniversary Concert

By

Magnolia Pub & Brewery on Haight Street in San Francisco will be celebrating their 10th anniversary next Monday in grand fashion at the Great American Music Hall. On November 5th they will host a concert for a mere 20 bucks with all manner of cool stuff going on with many surprises planned. It looks like it should be a great time.
 

 

Sam to Sam: “Sorry About That”

By

sam-adams-new
Okay, it’s not exactly a full-blown apology, but the words “for that we apologize” do appear in a statement released today by the Boston Beer Co. regarding what they characterize as “clarification” of “what really happened in Portland, Oregon.”

The statement begins:

The Boston Beer Company, brewer of Samuel Adams Boston Lager, wishes Portland City Commissioner Sam Adams the best of luck in his pursuit of higher office. And guess what – Samuel Adams Beer has in no way ever suggested that Sam Adams the candidate cannot use his own name. But, according to recent stories in the media, it sure hasn’t looked that way.

Which I guess is their way of saying Intellectual Property Manager Helen Bornemann never said “she’s willing to discuss Adams’ use of his name on his Web sites “probably for the length of the time the election is being held,” as was reported by the Associated Press. It sure looks like a direct quote. It would nice to have a more definitive answer about that statement, because frankly that’s the one that stuck in my craw. She either said it or she didn’t. Which is it?

Boston Beer continues:

A little history: last week The Boston Beer Company learned that an individual named Dave Anderson of Portland, Oregon had registered two domain names that featured the name Sam Adams. Not knowing his intent, we sent him a letter asking him not to use these sites. Next thing we knew, we had a call from the legal department at broadcasting conglomerate, Clear Channel, at which point we learned that Dave Anderson is a DJ at Clear Channel’s KEX radio and that a man named Sam Adams was indeed running for Mayor of Portland. We wish we had learned a little more about Portland’s race for mayor before sending out that initial letter, and for that we apologize.

Notice how in the statement they use the passive phrase “asking him not to use these sites.” Reread the original letter again and see if that sounds like they’re just “asking?”

The only thing they really admit to in the letter is that they “wish [they] had learned a little more about Portland’s race for mayor before sending out that initial letter.” Amen, that is the problem in a nutshell. And that’s the only thing they’re apologizing for, that they wish they’d “learned a little more.” I hate to keep beating a dead horse, especially over a company I generally like a great deal, but that sure seems like a pretty half-hearted apology. Notice that they’re not actually apologizing for sending the letter, making threats or not using a more measured approach or even for Bornemann’s statement that “she’s willing to discuss Adams’ use of his name on his Web sites ‘probably for the length of the time the election is being held.'”

They go on to say that they reacted so swiftly because they’ve had bad experiences in the past and characterize themselves as “a small company.” Technically that’s correct because the federal standard for a brewery business to qualify as a small business it must have less than 500 employees. According to Google Finance, Boston Beer has approximately 433. Certainly they’re smaller than Anheuser-Busch, Miller, Coors and even Pabst, but with total revenues last year exceeding $285 million they are the biggest microbrewery in the country, and by a pretty wide margin. The next closest brewery is Yuengling, and while they’re privately held so I don’t know their revenue, I do know they have only 185 employees and are not distributed nationwide. With numbers so much larger than a majority of their peers, calling them small seems a little hard to swallow. I doubt they talk about themselves that way to investors. But if you’re trying to garner a little sympathy, the underdog card is always a good one to play.

They go on to explain their actions:

Why did we ask Clear Channel and Dave Anderson not to use those domain names? In the past we have experienced times when individuals and organizations have tried to use our brand name for commercial purposes or to disparage our good name. We have learned that, as a small company, we need to protect our identity. At the least we wanted to prevent a situation where people looking for our Web site end up linked to a radio station promotional site.

On the other hand, there have been occasions over the years when individuals actually named “Sam Adams” have registered domain names that included the words Sam Adams, and we have had no quarrel with that.

Those are, of course, all legitimate reasons and any company should protect its intellectual property. But as they say, a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down. When you use a bludgeon, you should expect things might go awry. Would it have mattered if Bornemann had waited another day or even a few hours to send the letter, giving her ample time to figure out the true nature of the situation she was facing? Would such a modest delay have weakened her case? Could she not have called her company’s local field representatives and/or the distributors of Samuel Adams beer working in the Portland area soliciting what they knew? Could she not have looked up the website of the radio station or the name “Sam Adams” along with the modifier “mayor?” I think any of these actions might have been quite revealing and saved her company much grief.

But there’s one more thing I think would make all of this go away, and that’s perhaps the hardest thing for any modern company or person, for that matter, to do: and that would be giving an unqualified apology or just saying a blanket “I’m sorry.” I’m not sure why that’s so difficult for people these days, but it does seem spin always gets in the way. You almost never hear people just simply say they’re sorry. Instead they “regret,” or “wish it had been different” or some other similar device so it sounds like they’re apologizing without actually doing so. There’s a great phrase used in a song by one of my favorite songwriter/singers, John Wesley Harding, and the line is “naked as a true apology.” And I think that nicely captures people’s feelings today about apologizing, that it somehow makes them vulnerable or open to attack. But sometimes it really is the best thing to do, right or wrong. I’ll even start the ball rolling. To all of the people I’ve met over the years and who are my friends at the Boston Beer Co., I’m sorry for having been so hard on the company over the last couple of days.

 

Greenpeace Asserts GE Rice Used in Bud

By

budweiser
Greenpeace today released the results of an independent analysis of rice at an Arkansas mill which supplies rice to Anheuser-Busch for use in their beer. The lab found genetically engineered rice in 75% of the samples. From the press release:

An independent laboratory, commissioned by Greenpeace, detected the presence of GE rice (Bayer LL601) in three out of four samples taken at the mill. The experimental GE rice is one of three rice varieties that were first found in 2006 to have contaminated rice stocks in the US. Since then, GE contamination has been found in approximately 30 per cent of US rice stocks. This has had a massive negative impact on the US rice industry as foreign markets, where GE rice has not been approved, have been closed to US rice.

“Anheuser-Busch must make a clear statement about the level of GE contamination of the rice used to brew Budweiser in the US and spell out what measures are in place to ensure this beer does not reach the company’s export markets,” said Doreen Stabinsky, Greenpeace International GE Campaigner.

“US beer drinkers need Anheuser-Busch to explain why it is not preventing use of this genetically-engineered rice in the US. If, as the company has informed Greenpeace, all of the Budweiser exported from the US or manufactured outside of the US is guaranteed GE free then Anheuser-Busch needs to state this publicly, and explain the double standard,” said Stabinsky.

Greenpeace informed Anheuser-Busch of the test results prior to their release and sought clear information from the company on the extent of contamination and its global policy on the use of GE ingredients. Anheuser-Busch responded that the rice is approved in the US and is not used in brewing Budweiser destined for export. The full extent of the contamination remains unclear, however.

LL601 GE rice was retroactively granted approval by the US Dept of Agriculture in an effort to reduce public concern and company liability despite 15,000 public objections. The European Food Safety Authority stated that there was insufficient data to make a finding of safety. Greenpeace says that US consumers have a right to know if this GE rice is used to make Budweiser. This GE rice is not approved outside the US so the Budweiser brewed with it could not be sold abroad.

Anheuser-Busch is the largest single rice buyer in the US, buying 6-10 per cent of the annual US rice crop. Budweiser is one of only a few beers having rice as an ingredient. The brand is found in around 60 countries through a mix of exports and local brewing arrangements.

I recently did an article on green breweries and interviewed the Senior Group Director of Environmental, Health and Safety for A-B. I was pleasantly surprised at just how many things they were doing to be “green” so it seems surprising that they’d overlook genetically engineered rice being used in the beer itself. One thing you can say about Anheuser-Busch is that they do care about their public perception, so it will be interesting to see their reaction to this revelation.

bud-gerice

Doug Muhleman, Anheuser-Busch’s Group Vice President of Brewing, Operations and Technology, released a statement yesterday which I think suggests that Greenpeace is not the virtuous one in this story. On closer examination, this may be more about international politics than beer. Here’s Muhleman’s statement:

Greenpeace’s statements regarding our beer brands are false and defamatory. All of our products are made according to the highest quality standards and in complete compliance with the laws in each country where we sell our beers.

We stand in support of U.S. farmers, who are partners with us in the quality of our products. Greenpeace recently asked us to join their advocacy campaign on genetically modified crops. We refused their calls to boycott U.S. farmers, and they are now retaliating.

The use of genetically modified crops in the United States is not new. The vast majority of the commercial corn and soybean supply in the United States contains genetically modified versions that are certified to be safe for human consumption by the U.S. Government.

We use U.S. rice for brewing our products for U.S. consumption. U.S.-grown long-grained rice that may have micro levels of Liberty Link proteins present is fully approved by the U.S. Government, having determined that it is perfectly safe for human consumption. Moreover, the Liberty Link protein, like all proteins, is substantially removed or destroyed by the brewing process. Liberty Link has not been found in any of our tests of our beers brewed in the United States.

We fully comply with all international regulatory standards on the use or presence of genetically modified ingredients wherever our beers are sold internationally, as well. Neither Anheuser-Busch, nor our international licensed brewing partners use genetically modified ingredients, including genetically modified rice, in brewing products sold in any country with legal restrictions.

We talked with Greenpeace, hoping to help them understand the facts. We are disappointed that they instead chose to pursue pressure tactics.

Now I’m no fan of GMO’s, but they have been used here for many years and, like it or not, they’re a part of our massive food system. Short of pulling out every crop in the country and starting over, I’m not exactly sure what would satisfy Greenpeace. Certainly the way Greenpeace is seeking to sensationalize this seems more bullying than anything. I confess I was alarmed when I first read the story but having looked at it more closely in the interim I’m not sure their tactics are entirely warranted.

ab-muhleman
Me with Doug Muhleman at an A-B reception at GABF last year.

Colorado Unseats California As No. 1 Beer Producing State

By

The Beer Institute has released its 2007 Brewers Almanac with all sorts of statistics, but the one that’s getting all the attention is that California has been unseated as the number one beer state in terms of production, a position its held for several years. Colorado takes the top spot this year, besting California by just over 500,000 barrels, or roughly the equivalent of a brewery two-thirds the size of Sierra Nevada Brewing.

To Colorado, I raise my glass and toast their success. There are some fine breweries there and they deserve their moment in the sun. But just wait until next year. Let’s go breweries of California, get brewing. You’re not going to take this lying down, are you? Some kidding aside, it’s great news for everybody. A little healthy competition never hurt anybody. And with contests like this, everybody wins.

From the press release:

In 2006, the state of Colorado officially became the largest beer producing state in the country, according to newly released data from the Beer Institute. The Colorado brewing industry produced over 23.3 million barrels or 724.5 million gallons of beer. This makes the state tops in production.

“Colorado is tremendously important to the beer industry and produces a number of high quality brews enjoyed by adults around the country,” said Jeff Becker, president of the Beer Institute. “With a strong beer culture and a rich brewing history, it’s no surprise the state has become number one.”

“As a state widely recognized around the country for our natural beauty, rich history, and extensive cultural attractions, we’re pleased to now also be known as the beer brewing capitol of the United States,” added Colorado Governor Bill Ritter. “Colorado breweries are also increasingly using and producing renewable energy, which is good for the industry, good for the environment, and good for developing more home-grown sources of energy.”

Colorado is also home to other major industry trade groups such as the Brewers Association, based in Boulder, representing America’s small brewers since 1942. The state also plays host to the annual “Great American Beer Festival” in Denver.

“In addition to housing many long established large brewers, Colorado is also leading the way among small, independent craft brewers,” said Charlie Papazian, founder and president of the Brewers Association. “We invite beer lovers from every state to visit us and sample firsthand some of the many fine varieties of craft beer produced here.”

 

Here the Top 10 beer producing states:

  1. Colorado
  2. California
  3. Texas
  4. Ohio
  5. Virginia
  6. Missouri (est.)
  7. Georgia (est.)
  8. Florida
  9. Wisconsin
  10. New York

 
Surprisingly, Oregon and Washington ranked 15th and 16th, respectively. After I take a look at the full almanac, I’ll see what other interesting facts emerge. Until then, I’m drinking a Great Divide Titan IPA tonight. Or perhaps an Odell 5 Barrel Pale Ale or even a Dale’s Pale Ale. Damn, I just have too many friends in Colorado making great beer. Congratulations one and all!
 

On Drinking Well

By

I got this press release from Diageo and Zagat last week and was only able to glance at it because of some article deadlines, and I also saw that Stan Hieronymus wrote about this over at Appellation Beer. The two companies have launched a new website, Drinkwell, that uses the Zagat survey format but for restaurants serving drinks.

From the press release:

In an innovative industry collaboration, Diageo, the world’s leading premium drinks business with hallmark brands including Smirnoff, Guinness, Johnnie Walker, Baileys, J&B, Cuervo, Captain Morgan and Tanqueray, announced today that it has joined with Zagat Survey, the world’s leading provider of consumer survey-based content, to launch drinkwell(TM) (www.idrinkwell.com), the first online resource guide to restaurants that are dedicated to serving the highest quality drinks and drink service.

“When people go out they often start the evening with cocktails, and that experience — good or bad — can set the mood for the entire night,” said Steve Wallet, vice president of Channel Marketing for Diageo. “At Diageo our leadership and knowledge in the area of spirits, beer and wine is second to none. drinkwell(TM) combines Diageo’s expertise with Zagat’s, and the industry’s foremost mixologists, to create a one-of-a-kind online resource for consumers seeking a complete quality dining and drinks experience.”

Visitors to www.idrinkwell.com will have free access to the ratings that Zagat surveyors have given to the hundreds of drinkwell(TM) establishments across the country, based on the quality of drinks, service, atmosphere and cost.

“Eating is only one part of the consumer experience when visiting a restaurant,” said Tim Zagat, Co-chair and CEO of Zagat Survey. “The creation of drinkwell(TM) gives consumers a new way to make informed decisions about where to find the best drinks and service.”

drinkwell(TM) has partnered with several world-renowned beverage experts including Dale DeGroff, Steve Olson, Paul Pacult, Dave Wondrich and Doug Frost, to develop the drinkwell(TM) Academy Staff Training Program for participating establishments. drinkwell(TM) — accredited establishments are identified by a special black and brushed metal plaque, in the same way the burgundy Zagat Survey decal denotes a Zagat-rated restaurant.

That’s all well and good, but apparently by “world-renowned beverage experts” they mean people who know wine and spirits but precious little about beer. You’d think that would not be the case given that Diageo also owns the Guinness brand, but since acquiring it they’ve essentially squandered away all its respectability. I’ve never been entirely sure why Diageo bought Guinness, because they seem to have little feeling for the original Irish Stout, its history or even its customers. They’ve insulted consumers everywhere with such abominations as the widget-bottle, Red Guinness and Extra Cold Guinness.

Stan knows a lot of the initial fifteen cities that Drinkwell launched with better than I do and he notes that the Chicago listings are missing some of the Windy City’s best beer destinations. His nutshell take on Drinkwell?

The good news is it free. The bad news is there’s dang little beer.

Their listings for my local area include not just San Francisco but the entire Bay Area. Only 61 places are listed — I know they’re just getting started but that still feels like an infinitesimally small number — not one has much of a beer selection, though the cynic in me is willing to bet they all carry Guinness. In California, there are two main types of restaurant alcohol licenses, a Type 41 allows a restaurant to carry just beer and wine and a Type 47 allows beer, wine and spirits. There are others, of course, but for discussion purposes that’s the main difference: just beer and wine or both with spirits, too. All 61 of the Drinkwell’s Bay Area listings are “full bar” places, meaning they sell all three kinds of alcohol.

It would take forever to list what’s missing here but what’s wrong will take considerably less time. It’s not a bad idea to rate drinks selection, service, and the like but “drinks” should really mean all of the drinks, not just cocktail-friendly places. There’s more than a whiff of this being a self-serving promotion by Diageo to sell more of its spirits portfolio, which ends up cheapening Zagat, in my opinion.

Zagat bills itself as “the world’s leading provider of consumer survey based content about where to eat, drink, stay and play. With more than 300,000 surveyors worldwide, Zagat Survey rates and reviews restaurants, hotels, nightlife, movies, music, golf, shopping and a range of other entertainment categories and is lauded as the “most up-to-date,” “comprehensive” and “reliable” guide ever published.” Maybe, but I can’t help but thinking pairing with Diageo makes them much less independent. This “partnership” probably means Zagat is trading on their unbiased reputation for a large fee from Diageo to increase their business. That may be untraditional or even cutting-edge but it still smacks of old-fashioned crass advertising and marketing. Plus, there’s no reason I can think of why Zagat couldn’t include drinks information as a part of its regular survey information without Diageo’s biased assistance. If, as Tim Zagat says in the press release, “[e]ating is only one part of the consumer experience when visiting a restaurant,” why didn’t he conclude they should have added that to their current survey model? Why would they need to “partner” with a company that has such an obvious agenda?

But the real tragedy is beer is once again ignored as a part of a fine dining experience. It may be that many or even most of the 300,000 Zagat restaurant reviewers are biased with regard to their perceptions of beer, wine and spirits and it seems Diageo’s rationale for doing this is perfectly transparent: it’s to increase their business. Zagat had an opportunity to make their ratings more complete and with a broader appeal, including people looking for good beer in a restaurant setting along with wine and spirits. Instead it appears they decided to take the money and run. Maybe I’m overreacting as I’m so often accused and things will improve with time, but with Diageo driving the bus, so to speak, I can’t see how they’ll ever include good beer destinations as one of their stops. And that makes Zagat ultimately less useful to me, and perhaps many other lovers of great beer. In the end, the experience of eating and “drinking well” should be about all of the available choices to enhance that culinary adventure.

 

Craft Beer vs. Fine Wine Dining Challenge in San Diego

By

Stone brewing is doing a beer vs. wine dinner next week that sounds like it should be great fun, not to mention informative and delicious. Here’s the press release for the dinner:

Stone Brewing CEO Greg Koch is a tireless exponent of the virtues of great beer, and is nothing if not confident of his company’s handiwork. Yet he concedes that the image of beer still has room for elevation in the culinary world. “The understanding of the extraordinary culinary aspects available in the world of beer is lagging,” says Koch. He maintains that beer offers more range and depth of flavor than what is found in any other beverage. And he aims to prove it. “I will never argue that you can’t carefully pair a great wine with certain select dishes with very good results,” says Koch. “However, I have no hesitation in arguing that, more often than not, great beer is a superior mate for great food.”

It does appear that the culinary world is waking up to the reality that great beer compliments great food. In the June 2007 issue of TIME a full-page article began with the headline “Instead of uncorking a vintage red, Michelin-starred chefs are tapping into a long list of artisanal beers.” The article continued to state that “Now some of the country’s best restaurants are offering craft beers – produced by small, independent brewers – on the menu and often suggesting food pairings.” Recently, National Public Radio’s Weekend Edition program ran a story extolling the virtues of pairing craft beers with food; and NBC’s Today show aired a similarly themed segment featuring Stone’s very own inimitable Arrogant Bastard Ale with Food & Wine magazine’s Senior Wine Editor in which it was proclaimed “Beer is the new wine.”

Celebrated Bocuse d’Or Chef Gavin Kaysen—of the Rancho Bernardo Inn’s equally celebrated restaurant El Bizcocho—may have yet to be convinced. After all, it’s not “Food & Beer” magazine that Chef Kaysen currently graces the cover of, it’s Food & Wine (which to the magazine’s credit recently featured a surprisingly enlightened article on the artisan beers of California’s Napa Valley). Koch indeed realizes he is placing the odds squarely against himself by agreeing to hold the challenge dinner at the clearly wine-centric environs of El Bizcocho. “I want the challenge to be extremely fair, if not even stacked against me,” says Koch.

Guests at the “Beer v. Wine” dinner will sample both a craft beer and fine wine selection specifically chosen for each course. Koch will introduce each beer, and Certified Wine Educator and Sommelier, Barry Wiss will introduce each wine. Wiss is Vice President of Trade Relations at Trinchero Winery in Napa Valley. Once guests taste both the beer and the wine, they will have a chance to fill out a small card with their preferences as to which beverage pairs best with the dish. Results will be tabulated and announced at the end of the dinner. Allowing that there are more gustatory possibilities than could possibly be represented by one meal, one of the contest’s stipulations is that the loser of this round has the right to challenge the opponent to another dinner at a venue of their choosing.

While Koch might be very confident when it comes to beer’s prowess in pairing with food, Wiss is somewhat more dubious. “There is no doubt that some foods are complemented by the tastes and flavors of beer, but those foods tend to be less complex, with the possible exception of spicy Latin and Asian cuisine,” explains Wiss. “For centuries wine has been the preferred accompaniment to the world’s finest dishes, and there is little doubt that it will remain that way.”

Who is correct? You can help determine by attending the Beer vs. Wine Dinner. Reservations can be made by contacting El Bizcocho at the Rancho Bernardo Inn.

Located at 17550 Bernardo Oaks Dr. in San Diego, CA, the Rancho Bernardo Inn, recently completed a $25 million enhancement and expansion project. The hotel is a member of Preferred Hotels and Resorts Worldwide and is the distinguished holder of many honors, including Mobil Four Star (18 years), and AAA Four Diamond (31 consecutive years) ratings. Rancho Bernardo Inn is owned by JC Resorts, whose other holdings include Surf & Sand Resort, Temecula Creek Inn, and JC Golf. For reservations and additional information, please call 800.770.7329 or visit www.ranchobernardoinn.com.

 

9.27

Craft Beer vs. Fine Wine Dining Challenge at El Bizcocho

Rancho Bernardo Inn, 17550 Bernardo Oaks Drive, San Diego, California
250.383.2332 [ website ]
 

National Toast for Michael Jackson Planned

By

Details for the National Toast to Michael Jackson are being finalized and it will take place on Sunday, September 30 at exactly 9:00 p.m. EST (6:00 p.m. for those of us on the left coast). Bars, breweries, brewpubs and restaurants are being invited to participate with the following press release:

“At 9:00 pm EST on Sunday, September 30, beer drinkers across the continent will raise a glass to the memory of the man who did more than anyone to further the cause of good beer, the one and only Beer Hunter, Michael Jackson. And your establishment can play a part!

“Participation is simple. Just download a copy of the official poster and print out as many as you want, adding in the details of your particular event. It could be a single toast, an all-night celebration or a more organized remembrance. Then decide how you’d like to contribute to the National Parkinson Foundation, whether “passing the hat” for donations, contributing all or a portion of the night’s revenue or selling a single keg for the charity.

Later this year, “a ceremonial contribution on behalf of all the participating bars, restaurants and brewpubs will be made at the Great American Beer Festival on Saturday, October 13. See the Brewers Association website for GABF information and tickets.”

If you own a bar, brewery, brewpub of restaurant, please consider participating. You can find more information on how to sign up at the Michael Jackson Memorial. If you’re just a lover of great beer, please ask your local favorite beer establishment to participate.