New Belgium Brewing Sells To International Conglomerate (1 Viewer)

[Joe Bryant]

I don't think he's saying that nothing matters beyond the actual product. I feel like you are trivializing our take.  Many of us are saying the actual product is what we consider first when it comes to either purchasing or abandoning a product.   Your posts so far in this thread for the most part seem to indicate that the nature of the ownership and the size of the company is the only thing that matters to you.   Not being confrontational or arguing--but it does feel like you are trivializing the opposing side a bit. 

 I'm not trivializing anything. I'm just going off the words he wrote:

The buying decision for food and drink is: do I like the taste of this? Yes?  Buy it.  No?  Don't buy

He's saying the buying decision for food and drink is pretty simple. I think tons of people agree. Are you saying those words are not what he really means?

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't think he's saying that nothing matters beyond the actual product. I feel like you are trivializing our take.  Many of us are saying the actual product is what we consider first when it comes to either purchasing or abandoning a product.   Your posts so far in this thread for the most part seem to indicate that the nature of the ownership and the size of the company is the only thing that matters to you.   Not being confrontational or arguing--but it does feel like you are trivializing the opposing side a bit. 

Did you read what I posted here?

Reading back some of the things I wrote, I think I was likely too harsh on New Belgium. Of course every business owner has the right to do what they wish with their business. That's a big part of being the owner. They also of course have to deal with how the market reacts to what they do.

I think much of my initial reaction was my backstory of having been to the brewery many times and hearing the pride from the employees in how they owned a part of the place where they worked. And knowing that is no longer the case. And yes, they're being compensated. But it just feels different. 

Bottom line, I think I likely was too strong in the criticism. I'll still choose local / smaller companies for my beer. And I love small business and the people that run them. And I'll almost always cheer for the underdog. But I get what New Belgium is doing. For their sake and the employees,  I hope it works well for them. 

 

[culdeus]

What did they do to change the core product to become mass market? Is their Bock still not their primary beer? 

Added more water, primarily. 

 

[jvdesigns2002]

 I'm not trivializing anything. I'm just going off the words he wrote:

He's saying the buying decision for food and drink is pretty simple. I think tons of people agree. Are you saying those words are not what he really means?

He said when it comes to food and beverage- the primary factor that goes into his decision is if he likes the product.  I'm sure there are other factors that could cause him to not support purchasing that product.  For example-when the founder of papa john was heard saying racist things--people that liked the product stopped consuming it because they didn't want to support a racist. 

However--until a few minutes ago--in this thread--literally every post you made had to do with the size of the company moreso than it did being the product itself. You made it clear that you would stop consuming a product that you enjoyed solely because of the size of the ownership.   So when you say--does anything matter besides the actual product---and you put our side as being "no"--and your side as being "yes"--you are trivializing the opposing side as opposed to being realistic about yours.  Your take is that nothing matters beyond the size and ownership of the company and you have shown a willingness to abandon a good product solely because of that.   Our side is that as long as the product is good and the company is in relatively good standing--there is no real reason to abandon an otherwise good product. 

Edit--i could very easily trivialize your side of the argument and say:  does anything matter outside the size and ownership of a company?  We would say yes---you would say no.  

Is that a fair characterization of your take?  If not--avoid doing it on the opposing side.  

 

[matttyl]

With you GB.

And this is has been a good exercise for me talking through some of these things.

Sierra Nevada in Asheville absolutely feels like a corporate giant. 

Reading back some of the things I wrote, I think I was likely too harsh on New Belgium. Of course every business owner has the right to do what they wish with their business. That's a big part of being the owner. They also of course have to deal with how the market reacts to what they do.

I think much of my initial reaction was my backstory of having been to the brewery many times and hearing the pride from the employees in how they owned a part of the place where they worked. And knowing that is no longer the case. And yes, they're being compensated. But it just feels different. 

Bottom line, I think I likely was too strong in the criticism. I'll still choose local / smaller companies for my beer. And I love small business and the people that run them. And I'll almost always cheer for the underdog. But I get what New Belgium is doing. For their sake and the employees,  I hope it works well for them. 

Maybe you meant to put the second bolded in a different place, or are you saying that you think it will feel different the next time you go?

It's a great brewery to visit, for sure.  Right on the river, with the "bike bridge" between the tasting room and hangout area and the actual brewery itself.  Always a food truck or two outside, and plenty of cornhole and other yard games for anyone to play.  It's maybe the first one my wife and I visit on our trips.  When we then visit the other places in town (Sierra Nevada excluded), you see the major difference between them and the others - size and scale.  It's not even comparable, and that's where the business side comes in.  What decisions they make, and what decisions say Burial Brewing in that same town make are going to be very different. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

He said when it comes to food and beverage- the primary factor that goes into his decision is if he likes the product.  I'm sure there are other factors that could cause him to not support purchasing that product.  For example-when the founder of papa john was heard saying racist things--people that liked the product stopped consuming it because they didn't want to support a racist. 

That's not at all what he said.

The buying decision for food and drink is: do I like the taste of this? Yes?  Buy it.  No?  Don't buy

I'm not sure how he could be more clear.

That's a radically different statement than "Lots of factors go into the decision. Taste is the primary factor but there are other important factors as well". That's miles away from what he said. 

Now maybe he didn't mean what he said. But in a forum like this where I trust what people write, I believe him.  

 

[Joe Bryant]

Maybe you meant to put the second bolded in a different place, or are you saying that you think it will feel different the next time you go?

It's a great brewery to visit, for sure.  Right on the river, with the "bike bridge" between the tasting room and hangout area and the actual brewery itself.  Always a food truck or two outside, and plenty of cornhole and other yard games for anyone to play.  It's maybe the first one my wife and I visit on our trips.  When we then visit the other places in town (Sierra Nevada excluded), you see the major difference between them and the others - size and scale.  It's not even comparable, and that's where the business side comes in.  What decisions they make, and what decisions say Burial Brewing in that same town make are going to be very different. 

Yes. Sorry. I mean it feels different to me now and I'm sure it'll feel different the next time if I visit. The tour will have to change dramatically. I've done them three times and each time the tour guide proudly starts off, "Welcome to my brewery. I own this place". Everyone laughs and then they open with the talk about what sets them apart from many others is the employee own thing. That'll have to be much different. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

However--until a few minutes ago--in this thread--literally every post you made had to do with the size of the company moreso than it did being the product itself. You made it clear that you would stop consuming a product that you enjoyed solely because of the size of the ownership.   So when you say--does anything matter besides the actual product---and you put our side as being "no"--and your side as being "yes"--you are trivializing the opposing side as opposed to being realistic about yours.  Your take is that nothing matters beyond the size and ownership of the company and you have shown a willingness to abandon a good product solely because of that.   Our side is that as long as the product is good and the company is in relatively good standing--there is no real reason to abandon an otherwise good product. 

I'm doing a terrible job of communicating if you think I believe nothing else matters but size of ownership. I specifically called out "other options" in a post above where the guy was talking about sours from Wicked Weed. 

For me, I'll always lean more towards a private and local company than I will the international conglomerate.

But that's far from the only factor. I put a lot of other factors in. Quality of product. Price. What kind of "community citizen" is the company? And tons more.

I'm saying my buying decision is miles away from what dentist said where he said there was one factor in food and drink, "The buying decision for food and drink is: do I like the taste of this? Yes?  Buy it.  No?  Don't buy"

I'm saying there are lots of other factors. Now maybe that's what HE's saying too. If that's the case ,then he's doing a terrible job of communicating too. LOL. 

 

[Statorama]

On the New Belgium front - I had a marvelous craft (ETA: Oakspire Bourbon Barrel Ale) they put out in partnership with Knob Creek.  Really smooth at 9%ABV.  

 

[matttyl]

Doing a little homework about this, not sure it had or has anything to do with this sale.....but there is a bit of an odd situation with the couple (or one of the couples) that started the brewery.  When they were married, they had joint management.  When they split, she took over management.  Did he keep ownership stake at that time?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Doing a little homework about this, not sure it had or has anything to do with this sale.....but there is a bit of an odd situation with the couple (or one of the couples) that started the brewery.  When they were married, they had joint management.  When they split, she took over management.  Did he keep ownership stake at that time?

I'm not sure on that. I thought I remembered the original founding couple Kim Jordan and Jeff Lebesch. The origin story was how Jeff was bicycling across Belgium (thus the prominence of bicycles in the company) and stumbled on amazing beer. They are now divorced and Jeff hasn't been involved for a good while. Kim has run the business for a while.

I don't know the details of the split or how exactly ownership was done there. 

 

[matttyl]

I'm not sure on that. I thought I remembered the original founding couple Kim Jordan and Jeff Lebesch. The origin story was how Jeff was bicycling across Belgium (thus the prominence of bicycles in the company) and stumbled on amazing beer. They are now divorced and Jeff hasn't been involved for a good while. Kim has run the business for a while.

I don't know the details of the split or how exactly ownership was done there. 

Nor do I, doing a bit of reading on it over lunch, came across this....

more than 300 employees will receive $100,000 of retirement money, "with some receiving significantly greater amounts," co-founder Kim Jordan said in an open letter.

Once inked, the acquisition will mean New Belgium is no longer employee-owned, she said.

Since 1991, when New Belgium was founded by Jordan and her then-husband Jeff Lebesch in their Fort Collins basement, it has grown into one of the nation's craft beer giants.

In 2000, New Belgium became partially employee-owned, with Jordan and her family holding a controlling interest in the company. It transitioned to full employee ownership in 2012. [about the time of the divorce]

Over time, its employee stock ownership plan, or ESOP, has grown and – including this latest possible transaction – will have paid a total of $190 million to current and former employees over the past 19 years.

Members of New Belgium's ESOP – current and former employees included – will vote on the deal before it is finalized, a New Belgium spokesperson said.

 

[Ron Swanson]

The new store in Houston is gigantic. I don't know the details but it seems clear they are partnering with a backer for money. Huge place in hot real estate part of town.

But Leonard the owner is still often behind the counter. The staff has been clearly trained up to be exceptionally friendly. It still feels like a small place.

Louie Mueller's in Taylor will always be my favorite as I fell in love with BBQ there (owner Wayne is a long time FBG Subscriber) but Truth probably gets my vote for best overall BBQ restaurant when it comes to food. 

Johnny Carraba is Botello's partner in Truth Houston. 

Mueller's is also my favorite. I grew up on Bobby's BBQ and Wayne has kicked it up a notch.  I do love their potato salad for some reason but it isn't particularly noteworthy.

 

[Ron Swanson]

Added more water, primarily. 

Culdeus, you are a dude who obviously has a lot of knowledge about a lot of things and I normally respect your takes but I don't think beer production is your thing. It's OK to be a Texan and not like Shiner...I'm not a huge fan myself. But the truth is the product hasn't changed and Alvarez and the Gambrinus crew are a pretty legit company and not a huge conglomerate. In fact, they built the Shiner brand by not screwing with the product and raising its price to make it a premium product. When he bought it Shiner was a budget brand that sold for less than national brand. They even contracted the geographic sales area for years to make it work. That's why when he bought the company he was willing to overpay for it.

 

[culdeus]

Culdeus, you are a dude who obviously has a lot of knowledge about a lot of things and I normally respect your takes but I don't think beer production is your thing. It's OK to be a Texan and not like Shiner...I'm not a huge fan myself. But the truth is the product hasn't changed and Alvarez and the Gambrinus crew are a pretty legit company and not a huge conglomerate. In fact, they built the Shiner brand by not screwing with the product and raising its price to make it a premium product. When he bought it Shiner was a budget brand that sold for less than national brand. They even contracted the geographic sales area for years to make it work. That's why when he bought the company he was willing to overpay for it.

Shiner was our keg beer in college.  $44 in town, cheaper than Bud Light.  40 at the brewery. Only nattie light was cheaper.  Would kill the stuff by the gallon.  

In or around 2000 something changed and by 2004 it was a different product.  Consensus is the changes were staggered.  They launched a bunch of interesting products that kept them semi relevant but ultimately abandoned those.  

Nobody i know and I mean nobody drinks the stuff anymore.  It's hard to even find on tap now that there are good beers in Texas.  

Shiner100 is the most similar to what it was. 

 

[Ron Swanson]

Shiner was our keg beer in college.  $44 in town, cheaper than Bud Light.  40 at the brewery. Only nattie light was cheaper.  Would kill the stuff by the gallon.  

In or around 2000 something changed and by 2004 it was a different product.  Consensus is the changes were staggered.  They launched a bunch of interesting products that kept them semi relevant but ultimately abandoned those.  

Nobody i know and I mean nobody drinks the stuff anymore.  It's hard to even find on tap now that there are good beers in Texas.  

Shiner100 is the most similar to what it was. 

Wait. Shiner as in the light one like Lone Star or Shiner Bock?

 

[culdeus]

Wait. Shiner as in the light one like Lone Star or Shiner Bock?

Bock

 

[Osaurus]

Wait. Shiner as in the light one like Lone Star or Shiner Bock?

Ruby Redbird too

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Shiner was our keg beer in college.  $44 in town, cheaper than Bud Light.  40 at the brewery. Only nattie light was cheaper.  Would kill the stuff by the gallon.  

In or around 2000 something changed and by 2004 it was a different product.  Consensus is the changes were staggered.  They launched a bunch of interesting products that kept them semi relevant but ultimately abandoned those.  

Nobody i know and I mean nobody drinks the stuff anymore.  It's hard to even find on tap now that there are good beers in Texas.  

Shiner100 is the most similar to what it was. 

or, you and your buddies became adults and realized you we’re drinking crappy cheap beer all those years in college 

 

[Joe Bryant]

Culdeus, you are a dude who obviously has a lot of knowledge about a lot of things and I normally respect your takes but I don't think beer production is your thing. It's OK to be a Texan and not like Shiner...I'm not a huge fan myself. But the truth is the product hasn't changed and Alvarez and the Gambrinus crew are a pretty legit company and not a huge conglomerate. In fact, they built the Shiner brand by not screwing with the product and raising its price to make it a premium product. When he bought it Shiner was a budget brand that sold for less than national brand. They even contracted the geographic sales area for years to make it work. That's why when he bought the company he was willing to overpay for it.

That's exactly how I see it. Thank you. 

 

[RUSF18]

The Keystone Light recipe was so much more complex back in my college days during the early 2000s. Can’t believe they turned it into such swill.