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.
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".
It is alleged that John S. claimed:
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
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
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
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.
You're propping up a straw man here. Dick didn't say nobody
liked the swill (see above), he simply labeled it swill.
I believe that "popular" beer is a very well made product--
clean, consistent, brewed to exacting specifications from
quality ingredients. I have toured the headquarters plant of
the biggest US brewer at least twice. As a homebrewer and
beer lover I was quite honestly awed by their operation. I
also believe that they brew, at best, a product that is
uninteresting to the average informed, open-minded beer
As an aside, some of the big brewers have come out with
specialty beers that are better than uninteresting (if less
than mind-blowing great), but they don't seem to last long on
I agree. The large brewers are clearly succesful at turning out a
huge amount of beer that is consistent in quality and it meets the
expectations of a lot of beer drinkers. There are a lot of people who
enjoy what Serious Beer Drinkers might call a mild tasting beer. A
confirmed Bud Lite drinker would likely find a good Hefe or IPA to be
overpowering and not to his liking. I've enjoyed my beer much more
when focusing mostly on their good points.
And yes it is a good sign that the big brewers are taking an interest
in either brewing their own small batch beers or buying an interest in
a local brewery.
On Oct 15, 11:30 pm, "Steve Jackson"
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.
If someone does not agree with you, does that make what they write
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.
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
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.
On Oct 15, 11:30 pm, "Steve Jackson"
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.
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.
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
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.
Wow. Did you ever miss the point.
Other than the use of sub-par - and, btw, I just had a McDonald's burger - I
didn't make any value judgements. In fact, my point was that just because
some of us prefer things that are outside the mainstream, there are a great
many people out there who enjoy things that they know what they're getting
and prefer that over taking the risk that something may be better, or may be
You had originally asked how Bud, Miller, etc. had "convince(d) great
numbers of the american public to drink and enjoy their products if all they
are selling is 'swill'." I responded by saying that they did so by giving
people a product that they want and value.
You're the one reading value judgements into my statement that many people
value predictability over the chance to maybe get something better. I didn't
say predictability is bad. I personally, in a lot of parts of my life,
prefer the risk, but that's just me. And there are areas where I definitely
don't and value predictability and consistency, while others like the risk.
It's just different ways of viewing things.
And there are products out there that meet the needs of those who want
consistency, just as there are products out there that meet the needs of
those who want something more adventurous.
That was the point. And it flew right by you.
On Oct 18, 12:16 am, "Steve Jackson"
I'm not sure if you are ignoring the point intentionally or just don't
see it. When you talk about sub par and people not wanting better how
more value laden can your observations about the consuming habits most
of the populationfbe! Good grief - don't you even read what you
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
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
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?
I acknowledged that "subpar" conveys a value statement.
OK, I suppose "better" could be a value statement. I refuse to be a
Barneyist and delcare that all foodstuffs and beverages are equally good.
They're not. Period.
However, you'll note that I never said it's a bad thing to like something
that's not of higher quality compared to some available other options (in
part because "quality" is beyond subjective), nor that everyone should like
the same things I like. Personally, I think wanting to opt for the
consistent is just as valid a choice as opting for the riskier, but
potentially more rewarding, choice.
And that's where you're missing the point. You've declared I've made value
judgements about people's choices, and not simply about products. For the
record, I find nothing wrong whatsoever with someone choosing Bud or Miller
over Victory or Goose Island. That's they're choice. Not the one I'd make
most of the time, but I don't care. You're the one, in fact, who is casting
the perception that someone's choosing the consisent, predictable
alternative is somehow shameful, given the defensive way you've reacted to
that simple statement of fact.