Sunday, December 12, 2010

Brewdog join our gang!

Fantastic news! The Society of Independent Brewers (SIBA) has been honoured by Brewdog. "Welcome aboard" we say.

It's a pity that  James Watt chose to mark the event by saying BD were
"not fans of SIBA…especially the Scottish branch. In fact we pretty much detest everything they stand for and their close-minded clique mentality"*
BD also go on to make clear that they've joined mainly to get access to the Direct Delivery Scheme - which allows SIBA members to sell to some pubco outlets while preserving the pubco mark-up (and subject to pubco control).

We're SIBA members, but we don't bother with DDS. Why not?  Well, there aren't really enough outlets near us for it to generate a lot of business.  Getting further afield would make it difficult to fulfill orders in the required time. But mainly, we believe deals like this are papering over the cracks in the pubco model:  The pubco still gets to charge their mark-up, SIBA takes a (small) cut also. The pubco (rather than the tenant) still gets to choose which beers will be available (i.e. membership of the DDS doesn't guarantee that your beer will be listed). DDS creates an illusion of choice for the tenant (and pubgoer) and the illusion of market access for the brewer.

Oh, by the way boys, dissing the trade organisation that you've just joined (as a probationer) is a bit rude, and stupid - unless of course you're hoping that they'll (threaten to) throw you out, generating a bit of publicity.

What do you think?


*http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?sectioncode=7&storycode=68595&c=1

13 comments:

Ed said...

Same old shit really isn't it? Seeing as Brewdog haven't been around that long it's surprising how long ago it seems this sort of thing got boring.

HardKnott Dave said...

I think there are quite a few members of SIBA who make comments about how the organisation is run. Every member of every organisation has the right to raise concerns about the organisation they are members of. I don't really see how, as new members, they have any less right to voice their opinions.

Boring? Don't listen then, that would be my response.

As for the publicity thing, we all know that making good beer is in itself not good enough. Every business has to promote itself somehow. I think that the sour grapes attitude towards BrewDog only goes to fuel their program of publicity - you are right, SIBA wouldn't dare throw them out because of the fuss it would create, and if they did throw them out BrewDog would milk it for all they could.

Aside from the fact that assuming the facts are true they do have a point about what has been said about them by other SIBA members. Again, sour grapes.

StringersBeer said...

If I want to make comments about how SIBA is run, I make them inside the organisation. That's the way that grown-ups carry on in a society of equals. I don't grandstand in the pages of the f-ing Publican like some naive 19-year old holding forth in some student magazine.

If BD think that SIBA is such a crock of shite then they're welcome not to f-ing join it. It's a mark of how open the organisation is that any brewer meeting membership criteria is welcome - regardless of the amount of cock they talk. The fact that they've joined (if they have) would prove that it's not the clique they claim it to be. What Mr Watt says doesn't actually make sense, when you think about it.

I don't care if BD's one trick publicity pony works or not. I'm not commenting on it's effectiveness but rather on how irritating it can be to those who actually have any background in what they're talking about. I'm sure it looks great iconoclastic stuff to the ignorant outsider. Bur really, who are they going to find to kick against next? Is this really the only way they can find to define themselve - in opposition to something else? It's a real victim stance isn't it? Not really progressive.

BD may allege that someone who might be a member of SIBA said something nasty about them once, but this says nothing about SIBA the organisation. It's the kind of rhetorical trick that makes me deeply suspicious - as it should you.

See, I don't find it "Boring" - I've always found it all mildly amusing, although it is getting a bit repetitive (new idea now, please chaps).

I'm not sure who else you're accusing of sour grapes. I hope it's not me.

the_tender said...

obviously your sour grapes, u tagged it fake and bullshit. Thats a lot more childish than anything brewdogs said.

StringersBeer said...

Hello there "the tender", and welcome to my blog. I'm guessing you don't know what "sour grapes" means.

"Sour grapes" is when someone pretends not to care about (or not to want) something that they can't have. (But you don't have to believe me - why not look it up. It's on the internets, so it must be true)

In this particular context I suppose that would imply that I pretend not to want publicity (like that BD get), or commercial success (like BD have?) because I don't have those things.

But of course I would like those things - after all, I put "Brewdog" in the post title so as to catch the attention of people like you. Didn't I?

I think it's interesting how BD position themselves to exploit the tendency to "root for the underdog" among the naive, while also managing to be seen as successful and significant, as well as attractive to major investors.

Well done them - but why is being fooled by BD so important to you? Why be so threatened when someone criticises them? Is it "Emperors Clothes" sort of a thing? I mean, BD's not exactly naked. After all, the beer's not that bad.

Come to think of it, maybe the Emperors Clothes are a bit skimpy - see Mr Howes funny post here

Ed said...

I don't really get the sour grapes comment either. You'll probably be called a 'hater' next.

HardKnott Dave said...

Ed, no, I know these people, "hater" is not them.

My comments seem to have upset StringersBeer, for which I am sorry.

Who did I mean when I said "sour grapes"? I can't really be sure, I think I'm referring to the general anti-BrewDog thing that seems to be going on amongst other brewers.

Perhaps the term is incorrect, maybe just jealousy would be better.

StringersBeer said...

All good fun Dave, not upset. But I don't believe there is a "general anti-BrewDog thing" much as they'd love there to be. They'll have to carry on stirring it up (making it up?).

HardKnott Dave said...

"All good fun" is the way I see it too.

StringersBeer said...

Glad to hear it.

Flagon of Ale said...

Having only heard about these boys vicariously, I assumed that a bunch of "renegade" brewers from Scotland were going to be a bunch of manly men. Turns out they like making indirect, passive-aggressive comments, eh?

On a side note, can someone find me a picture of one of these guys without a scarf or a ferdora? I feel embarrassed on their behalf.

http://www.thepublican.com/story_attachment.asp?storycode=68595&seq=1&type=P&c=1

StringersBeer said...

Nowadays they employ professionals, so perhaps we'll see less of the whiny stuff (and maybe less scarf - hats are probably always going to be a feature).

Flagon of Ale said...

That's great Stringer.

I see on that link there they have campaigned to introduce a 2/3 pint. Arrogant pricks. I guess those of us who prefer 7/13 of a pint are left out in the cold again. How thoughtless of them. I think the real question isn't why do people take them seriously, but how do they take themselves seriously?