Never underestimate the effect that price has.
And especially on a very hot day, a macro brew lager can be pretty refreshing. The jokes about it being close to water, actually help in that case. And pale lagers are generally inoffensive because they don’t actually taste like much at all.
In the case of numerous small brewers that are around and the ease of entry into the market, I don’t think that simply owning 90% market share equals monopoly power in the market. And it doesn’t seem to effect consumer benefit.
I gave up “major labels” nearly 20 years ago.
I didn’t do it out of protest though. I just wanted something tasty.
And I don’t consider myself a “beer snob” either. As I’ve liked pretty much any microbrew I’ve tried so far. You’d think a true snob would be a little more discerning than that.
I only refuse warm beer. Anybody offering free cold beer, I’ll take it.
The reason it matters is distribution. There will always be plenty of small breweries that produce good beer, and if you have access to them, then mergers aren’t a big deal. But the mergers give the behemoths undue influence on the distribution of all beers. When InBev owns so many brands, they can dictate the terms: “you will put our beers on at least 80% of your taps, or you don’t get any.” Access to the independent brewers is cut off.
I, too, refuse all major label beer.
I also refuse all minor label beer.
And all beer without labels.
And all beer in cups, mugs, tankards, and vessels.
I refuse all beer.
Therefore, I’m infinitely more hipster than you, as I refuse to support any monopoly, real or imagined. I support local culture by not killing yeast.
So there.
Woah - had my first Redhook down here in OZ just last week. I was impressed.
Does that mean I’m not allowed to drink it anymore:p
It’s a standard practise down here, too. A good, small brewery will inevitably be taken over by a major supplier IF they produce a good, popular product. And why not? If it means more people get to try it due to an increase in volume production, that’s great (assuming the manufacturing process remains the same, of course).
It’s the same with music - there’s always those people who complain ‘That band was so much better before they became popular, and started selling more records’.
If this was to happen, it would be in quite clear violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act and the Clayton Antitrust Act. So I don’t think you should fear.
My scenario is exaggerated a bit - thus far InBev is offering incentives to distributors who drop craft brewers, so it’s “voluntary”. But the result is the same - small brewers get pushed out because InBev has an outsized influence on distribution of beer.
And more here:
Overheard at a local bar that has an old, faded sign reading “FREE BEER TOMORROW”:
“Hey, didja see the sign? We should come back tomorrow.”
Pretty much my story. I usually don’t care for beer and the attributes that beer aficionados look for make it less attractive to me. But, when I’ve been working in the yard, “beer flavored water” is pretty much what I want, not some hearty bread in a bottle. Bring on the cheap macrobrews!
“If you’re not brewing your own beer, you’re just drinking what someone else thought they could get you to like”
I am not a fan of Light American Lager, as a style, but there are many that are. I don’t like Beyonce’s music. That does not mean her music is bad or inferior or that the people who do like it are inferior examples of human beings. It just means I don’t like that kind of music. Same for Bud Light.
So what you are saying is that if InBev starts to engage in anti-competitive behavior the DOJ will investigate? Wasn’t that my exact point? (of course the real issue is that states still have silly you have to go through a distributor laws, which just incentivizes attempted vertical integration, but that’s somewhat separate)
If I WAS brewing my own beer, chances are I’d be drinking something no one could like… 
The investigations went nowhere. The second article includes links to brewers who have already been impacted by the consolidation of brewers and distributors.
I appreciate your optimism that the government will fix all this and keep the market wide open for all, but I don’t share that optimism.
As the Reuters article you linked states:
Not having 50% of the distributors in an area, which basically just results in some craft brewers to switch distributors I don’t think rises to the level of anti-trust violations, nor should it. I’d rather not assume guilt before it occurs (if it does).
I mean if you are really concerned you just do what some states already have done and forbid distributors from being owned by producers. Vertical integration is the problem, not horizontal.
It’s not only me who is concerned, it is many small brewers who deal with the challenge of getting their beer distributed. The distribution network has been a major concern in the craft industry for the last few years - you can google it and see this is not some unfounded concern of mine; it is a major issue facing the industry.
You are lucky you live in an area that has access to a wide variety of beers. I am even more so, living in Portland OR. But many people live in areas served only by an InBev owned or aligned distributor, and their choices are more limited. Even in Portland we see its effect: Widmer, for example, entered their agreement to let InBev take part ownership to gain access to InBev’s distribution network. Is Widmer making the same beer today they as they would have as a completely independent brewery? Tough to say.
I understand that control of the distribution market is somewhat separate from InBev purchasing small breweries. But it is directly related to my decisions about what kind of beer I drink and what companies I support, which is where this thread started.
10 Barrel was one of my favorite breweries, and I think they still make fantastic beer after their purchase by InBev. But I would rather my money go to an independent brewery who is working to support the growth of small breweries everywhere, rather than a company whose growth plan is dependent on limiting the prospects of others. My decision to no longer drink 10 Barrel is not about being a snob or thinking it’s not hip to drink their beer; it’s all about who I want to support.