They haven’t figured out how to put more than one cap on a screwtop bottle without having the threads start to chip off. How badly do you want to avoid having shards of glass on the threads when you start drinking?
Also, since they haven’t been refillable, they’ve been making them out of much thinner glass which can’t handle a lot of abuse. Bottles which are planned on being refilled are thicker (even thicker than non-screwtop bottles which aren’t expected to be refilled). I wouldn’t want to put a lot of faith on lightweight bottles with my homebrew. Don’t need no exploding bottles in my basement.
As a counter to my previous post in the it-takes-all-kinds category, I have spoken with homebrewers who reuse screw-top bottles and they say they’ve never had a problem. Not for me, thanks. I have also heard from someone who reuses 2-liter soda bottles.
We used to get the pony bottles (8 oz) when I lived in NJ, and they were good for sneaking around. The beer was also colder because you finished it before it could warm up! I’m sure some of this has to do with deposit laws. We have a $.10 per bottle deposit, redeemable anywhere that sells the product. It probably cuts down on the hassle by reducing the amount of bottles.
A long neck beer just tastes better. It’s a proven fact. For a cite, I’ll point you to myself. Now if I could just get some of those 16oz Yeungling long necks that they have in PA.
The 'Skellar’s annual “Case Races”! Ah, yes. I can’t believe such a thing was legal. Is it still allowed?
(FTR, my sister, who went to Dickinson, in Carlisle, used to go out with her friends not for a case of ponies, but a “bucket of rocks”–pony Rolling Rocks in a bucket with ice.)
The OP begs two questions:
Do retailers charge more for longneck bottles? If they charge some sort of premium for a presumed “premium beer experience,” I could see the logic in offering it … else, why not just switch to cheaper short bottles?
Is there some sort of longneck arms race we’re only dimly aware of? That is, is there a significant portion of beer drinkers that prefers longnecks over shortnecks to such a degree that they’d be willing to switch brands (i.e., from Miller to Bud, etc.) just to get a longneck bottle?
The 'Skellar’s annual “Case Races”! Ah, yes. I can’t believe such a thing was legal. Is it still allowed?
(FTR, my sister, who went to Dickinson, in Carlisle, used to go out with her friends not for a case of ponies, but a “bucket of rocks”–pony Rolling Rocks in a bucket with ice.)
The OP begs two questions:
Do retailers charge more for longneck bottles? If they charge some sort of premium for a presumed “premium beer experience,” I could see the logic in offering it … else, why not just switch to cheaper short bottles?
Is there some sort of longneck arms race we’re only dimly aware of? That is, is there a significant portion of beer drinkers that prefers longnecks over shortnecks to such a degree that they’d be willing to switch brands (i.e., from Miller to Bud, etc.) just to get a longneck bottle?
Have you ever tried to defend yourself with a pint glass? Ever seen a tab of acid or a cigarette butt flipped four feet into an open beer bottle? If you don’t see the point in drinking longnecks in a bar, maybe you’re not hanging out in the right bars.
Where I grew up the point of drinking a long necks in a bar is that with a long neck you have a weapon with a good gripable handle, with a stubbie you don’t.
For the most part, I no longer frequent tough bars, but I continue to order long neck beer (whatever kind they happen to have) and sit with my back to the wall usually on the blind side of the door. It’s may be paranoia, but it’s a habit I got into. If forced to drink out of a glass, I will always request a mug - it also breaks better for making a weapon.
Drinking long necks has nothing to do with taste (in my mind it never has) - just defense.
Just for the record, those short-neck bottles are referred to as “flagships” in the beer industry. And long-necks may be either returnable (where they are cleaned and used again) or non-returnable. The way to tell the difference is by looking at the thickness of glass on the rim of the bottle. Returnable bottles are made of thicker glass.
Few bars order returnables; they tend to ask for longneck NRs. Breakage seems to be their main concern, and returnable bottles require a deposit. IIRC, they’re about a buck and a half more expensive than NRs, not even counting the deposit.
I spent way too much of my life working in the adult beverage industry…
A twist-off on a long neck is a bastardized wanna-be. Thinner, lighter-weight glass, threads on the lip, why bother? Just because it’s tall, doesn’t make it a long neck.
This is going to come as a shock to you, but after spending more years in the Stop-N-Rob[sup]TM[/sup] industry than I care to admit, I know the answer. (No, it’s not shocking that I know the answer, what’s going to shock you is the answer.) They’re sold because halfwits out there think that long neck bottles have more beer in them, even though long necks and flagships both have the fluid ounces printed clearly on the labels which state that they both hold the same amount of beer. The yutzes buy the long necks (same price as the flagships, BTW) because they’re too stupid to read anything on the label other than “Budweiser,” “Miller,” or what have you, and think that long neck=more beer.
A. Buyer prefers Bud. Buyer sees Bud in flagships and longnecks. Flagship 6-pack costs buyer $6. Longneck 6-pack costs buyer $6. Both contain 12 oz. of beer per bottle. Buyer chooses longnecks, pays $6. Brewery spends more money on longneck bottles, receives no extra money from buyer.
B. Buyer prefers Bud. Bud decides to only make flagships. Flagship 6-pack costs buyer $6, contains 12 oz. of beer per bottle. Buyer chooses flagships (no other choice), pays $6. Brewery spends less money on flagship bottles, pockets savings of flagship vs. longneck bottle manufacture.
The only way this scenario could make sense would be:
C. Buyer has no particular beer preference. Buyer sees Bud in longnecks, and Miller in flagships. Bud six-pack costs buyer $6. Miller six-pack costs buyer $6. Both contain 12 oz. of beer per bottle. Buyer chooses longnecks, thinking that they contain more beer than rival flagships, pays $6. Bud spends more money on longneck bottles, but doesn’t care because it just stole market share from Miller.
Of course, then Miller would just produce longnecks so that the playing field would be level, making option C impossible.
Is this what has happened? Are the rival breweries just producing longnecks to keep their business from being lost to people whose brand preference is not that strong (and would simply prefer the most beer for their dollar)?
Now if I could just get some of those 16oz Yeungling long necks that they have in PA.