The big merger

Have a question or want to show off your project? Post it! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View


With the merger of Miller and Coors/Munson, they and Bud
now have 80% of the US beer market or better stated they
have 98% of the American Swill market.  No I am not a
beer snob, just a Condescending Afficiando.

Dick

Re: The big merger


On Oct 14, 3:02 pm, rdad...@panix.com (Dick Adams) wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Perhaps you could tell us how it is that huge beer makers such as
Miller, Coors, Anheuser, etc., have over the decades managed to
convince great numbers of the american public to drink and enjoy their
products if all they are selling is "swill".



Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: The big merger


It is alleged that John S. claimed:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I'm not Dick, but may I answer?

1: People buy into advertising.  If you're told often enough that
something is good, you tend to start believing it.  Particularly when
that advertising includes implied sex and other forms of people having
fun.

2: A-B, Coors, etc, are less expensive, and less expensive sells.
Particularly when all you want is the alcohol so you can get drunk on
the cheap.

3: Most American beer drinkers are easily satisfied.

4: By not having much real flavor or character, the megabrews are also
inoffensive.  If they don't taste like anything, there is no flavor to
dislike.
 
--
Jeffrey Kaplan                                         www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled             Send personal mail to gordol

DISCLAIMER: Do not write below this line.

Re: The big merger



Quoted text here. Click to load it

The same way McDonald's has sold billions and billions of rather sub-par
hamburgers: by offering a consistent, predictable product. A great many
people - maybe most - value predictability in their purchases over the
chance to get something really good. They'd rather give up the chance for
something really great for the guarantee that they won't be let down.

That, and there are people out there who actually like what the big brewers
(and McDonald's) have to offer.

-Steve



Re: The big merger


wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

If believing nonsense like that helps you to enjoy your micro brews,
then please feel free to continue.  I've found that focusing on the
good points of the beers I enjoy helps a lot more in their enjoyment.


Re: The big merger



Quoted text here. Click to load it



If someone does not agree with you, does that make what they write
nonsense?

You asked HOW?  The above is an excellent answer.  Wendy's went after
McDonald's "made to inventory" product with a "made to order" product
for the same price and ate up a big piece of McDonald's market share.

Dick



Re: The big merger


On Oct 16, 6:22 pm, rdad...@panix.com (Dick Adams) wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Sorry bud, but his response is essentially the same elitist crap you
put forth.  Dressed up a bit nicer is all.  Why you all feel it
necessary to put down hugely popular brews and their drinkers is
beyond me.  If put downs are what help you feel good the expensive
beers you drink I would say your habit is on very shaky ground.


Re: The big merger



Quoted text here. Click to load it

I must have missed something here.  Who was putting down someone
for their choice of beers?  Who has discussed expensive beers?
As far as I can tell, the answer to both questions is only you!

I'm sitting here drinking a Maple Porter that I homebrewed and
cost me 52 cents for a 12 oz bottle or $3.12 a six pack.  That
is not expensive by anyone's standards.

Popular is not a surrogate for quality and neither is expensive.



Re: The big merger



Quoted text here. Click to load it

So, where's the nonsense? That the big brewers brew a consistent,
predictable product? That a lot of people value that predictability and
consistency? That there's a good number of people who'd rather be safe than
advernturous? That there are people out there who actually do like what the
big brewers offer?

Oh, and please point out any point I mentioned craft beers or my enjoyment
of them.

-Steve



Re: The big merger


Quoted text here. Click to load it

   I found the introduction of the term "micro brews" kinda
funny. I could swear I've seen you drinking beer from breweries
that are by no means "micro," you nonsensical person.
--
Joel Plutchak                   "They're not people, they're HIPPIES!"
$LASTNAME at VERYWARMmail.com            - Eric Cartman

Re: The big merger


wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoting:  "The same way McDonald's has sold billions and billions of
rather sub-par hamburgers......A great many people - maybe most -
value predictability in their purchases over the chance to get
something really good."

Focus on your elitist assessment of many or most people.  It's the
same way you describe drinkers of popular beers from the big brewers.
It provides a thin support.


Re: The big merger



Quoted text here. Click to load it



Anyone who took Marketing 101 should be able to tell you
that advertising is not about sales - it is about creating
brand-consciousness and maintaining brand-loyalty.  There
was a commercial for a brand of cigarettes that used the
slogan "I'd rather fight than switch."  It was an extremely
effective commercial.  Nothing elistist about that and there
is nothing elitist about any of the responses you have
received.

If education and knowledge are elitist to you, then I clearly
understand from whence you are coming.  BTW, the chip on your
shoulder looks bigger with your every post.

Dick

Re: The big merger


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Sorry, but your painfully narrow definition makes no sense in the real
world.  Advertising is ultimately about sales.  Creating an awareness
of the product is an intermediate step.  Additionally advertising can
be used to reinforce brand loyalty, but if the seller does not deliver
what the buyer wants that loyalty will be very short lived.  In the
final analysis sales are what advertising is about.

The cemetary is full of dead products that did not live up to the
advertising.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

My comments did not refer to advertising.  They referred specifically
to your elitist comments about people who drink very popular beer.
Lest you forget,you stated that the large brewers are doing little
more than producing swill for the overwhelmong majority of beer
drinkers.

You come across as both a "beer snob" and a "Condescending Afficiando"
looking for ways to justify his consumption of expensive beer.  Does
making fun of the drinking habits of the vast majority of beer
drinkers really help your enjoyment of micro brews?

Have you really stopped to think about how absurd your statements
about the vast majority (98%) of beer drinkers really sound?

Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: The big merger


So John, what exactly are you bringing to the discussion?
Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: The big merger


Quoted text here. Click to load it

   A kind of inverse elitism-- being a self-appointed
Defender of the Common Man. The main tenet is that if
somebody says anything is better than anything else,
they're elitist/snobby/nonsensical/evil.  We get one
of those around here every once in awhile. <shrug>
--
Joel Plutchak                   "They're not people, they're HIPPIES!"
$LASTNAME at VERYWARMmail.com            - Eric Cartman

Re: The big merger


Quoted text here. Click to load it


I brought an objection to nonsense statements like this one.  Quoting
from  "Dick's" original message: Miller and Coors/Munson, they and
Bud....have 98% of the American Swill market.  No I am not a beer
snob, just a Condescending Afficiando."

And just what did you bring to the discussion.


Re: The big merger




<big sbip>

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Could you give me one reason, please, why he/I/we would need to justify what
we consume,  be it expensive or not?

Joriswondering



Re: The big merger


Quoted text here. Click to load it

I have no idea why a few of us are obsessed with justifying the
purchase of expensive beer. Dick and Steve are focused on proving that
most beer drinkers consume undrinkable beer they call swill.
According to them that swill is produced by companies wsuch as
Anheuser who do not know how to produce beer.  They repeat that
nonsense so frequently that they give the impression they are intent
on proving they are knowlegable beer drinkers while the great masses
are not.  They justify their beer purchases by tearing down someone
elses choice in beer.  It would help the discussion a lot if they
would focus more on the specific reasons they enjoy certain beers and
less on this adolescent name-calling (swill beer).


Re: The big merger



Quoted text here. Click to load it

You are a master in befuddling issues, are you not? You join things together
that aren't linked, and certainly not the same.
"most beer drinkers consume undrinkable beer they call swill".
No, most consumers (I cannot call them beer drinkers) consume beer that is
virtually tasteless. It is swill allright, but it certainly isn't
undrinkable.
"by companies wsuch as Anheuser who do not know how to produce beer"
Anheuser-Bush knows as no other - except some of their collegues - how to
produce beer that lures the masses, by making their products as inoffensive
as possible. I happen to have met some technical people from A-B, Coors, and
InBev over here, and they certainly know their matter! Nobody disputed that,
did they?
"they are intent on proving they are knowlegable beer drinkers while the
great masses are not."
The great masses certainly aren't. Otherwise they would carry their money
elsewhere - not to A-B, M-C, but neither to McDonald's, Burger King, or
Heinz. Need they prove that they do? If they prefer Russian River, Lost
Abbey, Hair of the Dog or 3 Fonteinen, as well as homemade relish, there is
little else to prove, no?
"and less on this adolescent name-calling (swill beer)"
It is swill, so that doesn't rank as name-calling, in my book.



Re: The big merger


Quoted text here. Click to load it

You are misinformed my friend.  Anheuser Busch, Coors and all the
other large brewers from around the world did not overwhelm their
smaller competition and take a commanding part of the beer market by
selling beer that was not demanded by a great proportion of the
public.  They are providing beer that is considered to be desirable by
a huge majority of the worlds beer drinking population. In otherwords
they could not have become so overwhelmingly successful by providing
swill or tasteless beer.  Ask yourself how many businesses remain in
business by providing only products that their customers detest.
Swill beer for instance.   If share of market defines success one
could easily argue that the large brewers are more successful and in
touch with the needs and desires of the beer drinking public than
their smaller and less successful micro-brewwer competition.


Site Timeline