LTH Home

Maker's Mark reducing its proof to help "meet demand"

Maker's Mark reducing its proof to help "meet demand"
  • Forum HomePost Reply BackTop
     Page 1 of 2
  • Maker's Mark reducing its proof to help "meet demand"

    Post #1 - February 11th, 2013, 5:34 pm
    Post #1 - February 11th, 2013, 5:34 pm Post #1 - February 11th, 2013, 5:34 pm
    This isn't the first time I've heard a story like this (Jack Daniel comes to mind) but once again, the popularity of American whiskey -- or the efforts of distillers to keep up with it -- is actually chipping away at the quality of the product. I've never been a huge fan of Maker's Mark but there's something really sad about the solution to this "problem" being to water down the product (and probably charge the same amount for it) . . .

    at ChicagoTribune.com, Samantha Bomkamp wrote:Maker's Mark announced it is reducing the amount of alcohol in the spirit to keep pace with rapidly increasing consumer demand.

    In an email to its fans, representatives of the brand said the entire bourbon category is "exploding" and demand for Maker's Mark is growing even faster. Some customers have even reported empty shelves in their local stores, it said.

    After looking at "all possible solutions," the total alcohol by volume of Maker's Mark is being reduced by 3 percent. Representatives said the change will allow it to maintain the same taste while making sure there's "enough Maker's Mark to go around." It's working to expand its distillery and production capacity, too.

    If you care at all about the quality of your product, watering it down because there's not enough of it to go around makes no sense at all. In fact, it's the dumbest possible solution. However, if your primary focus is financial, the change probably makes perfect sense because this is greed, pure and simple. The value of a brand like Maker's exceeds the actual quality of the product in the bottle. Beam surely knows that their Maker's name will continue to sell this product, even if the product isn't what it once was. Now that production has maxed out, they're counting on the blindly loyal, lazy, ill-informed and unadventurous to keep their sales growing. 'Once a Maker's drinker, always a Maker's drinker.' And they're probably right. It's sad when this is the path taken, especially when there are so many great American whiskeys out there that are worth trying. But I suppose that if you're loyal to a slickly marketed, lower quality product, you likely have no interest trying anything else. And Beam is counting on this. The dilution of your favorite bourbon is the reward for your loyalty.

    Hell, next thing you know, they'll be reducing the size of those individually-wrapped American cheese slices, too! :lol:

    Maker's Mark lowering proof to meet demand (full story)

    =R=
    Gardening is a bloodsport --Meghan Kleeman

    Why don't you take these profiteroles and put them up your shi'-ta-holes? --Jemaine & Bret

    There's a horse loose in a hospital --JM

    That don't impress me much --Shania Twain
  • Post #2 - February 11th, 2013, 5:56 pm
    Post #2 - February 11th, 2013, 5:56 pm Post #2 - February 11th, 2013, 5:56 pm
    ronnie_suburban wrote:This isn't the first time I've heard a story like this (Jack Daniel comes to mind) but once again, the popularity of American whiskey -- or the efforts of distillers to keep up with it -- is actually chipping away at the quality of the product. I've never been a huge fan of Maker's Mark but there's something really sad about the solution to this "problem" being to water down the product (and probably charge the same amount for it) . . .

    at ChicagoTribune.com, Samantha Bomkamp wrote:Maker's Mark announced it is reducing the amount of alcohol in the spirit to keep pace with rapidly increasing consumer demand.

    In an email to its fans, representatives of the brand said the entire bourbon category is "exploding" and demand for Maker's Mark is growing even faster. Some customers have even reported empty shelves in their local stores, it said.

    After looking at "all possible solutions," the total alcohol by volume of Maker's Mark is being reduced by 3 percent. Representatives said the change will allow it to maintain the same taste while making sure there's "enough Maker's Mark to go around." It's working to expand its distillery and production capacity, too.

    If you care at all about the quality of your product, watering it down because there's not enough of it to go around makes no sense at all. In fact, it's the dumbest possible solution. However, if your primary focus is financial, the change probably makes perfect sense because this is greed, pure and simple. The value of a brand like Maker's exceeds the actual quality of the product in the bottle. Beam surely knows that their Maker's name will continue to sell this product, even if the product isn't what it once was. Now that production has maxed out, they're counting on the blindly loyal, lazy, ill-informed and unadventurous to keep their sales growing. 'Once a Maker's drinker, always a Maker's drinker.' And they're probably right. It's sad when this is the path taken, especially when there are so many great American whiskeys out there that are worth trying. But I suppose that if you're loyal to a slickly marketed, lower quality product, you likely have no interest trying anything else. And Beam is counting on this. The dilution of your favorite bourbon is the reward for your loyalty.

    Hell, next thing you know, they'll be reducing the size of those individually-wrapped American cheese slices, too! :lol:

    Maker's Mark lowering proof to meet demand (full story)

    =R=

    It's the story of the American whiskey maker. Lower the proof, cut aging.
  • Post #3 - February 11th, 2013, 6:08 pm
    Post #3 - February 11th, 2013, 6:08 pm Post #3 - February 11th, 2013, 6:08 pm
    More here:

    Why Is Maker's Mark Watering Its Whiskey Instead of Expanding?
  • Post #4 - February 11th, 2013, 6:14 pm
    Post #4 - February 11th, 2013, 6:14 pm Post #4 - February 11th, 2013, 6:14 pm
    I'm on the fence with this one. They claim to have done extensive taste testing and I'm definitely going to be double checking them on that one with my own blind taste tests. I do believe it is possible to make a slight adjustment to the proof and still have the same flavor. While I would certainly prefer that they keep doing exactly what they've been doing, I've tweaked cooking and brewing recipes by small amounts without influencing the final product. Anyways, I'm withholding judgement until I've tested it. If it truly tastes the same then I prefer that method than just selling less for the same price.

    On a directly related note I just picked up a case of Paulaner Salvator at Costco and was surprised to find that they're 11.2 fl. oz. bottles instead of 12. So basically it is a case with 22.5 beers in it.
    It is VERY important to be smart when you're doing something stupid

    - Chris

    http://stavewoodworking.com
  • Post #5 - February 11th, 2013, 6:42 pm
    Post #5 - February 11th, 2013, 6:42 pm Post #5 - February 11th, 2013, 6:42 pm
    I have switched to Woodford reserve for my non small batch bourbon.
    When I was living in KY, the most common drink I heard people ask for was Makers & something.
    I found that strange with so many different bourbons in the area.
    First pass from friends of that era is horror with the announcement and a changing of loyalties.

    Kinda funny-my wife grew up and still has her parent's house within sight of the Woodford distillery. Even funnier, I almost bought a home that was owned by one of the Samuels of Makers Mark when I moved to KY. If you want, one of the first distilleries in the area is a wreck and up for sale cheap in Versailles, KY.
  • Post #6 - February 11th, 2013, 7:58 pm
    Post #6 - February 11th, 2013, 7:58 pm Post #6 - February 11th, 2013, 7:58 pm
    Attrill wrote:While I would certainly prefer that they keep doing exactly what they've been doing, I've tweaked cooking and brewing recipes by small amounts without influencing the final product.

    Because you're a home brewer, I'm guessing you do this for the sport or pleasure of it, not to extend your production or profits. I tweak recipes all the time but what I don't do is intentionally skimp on a succesful recipe, so that I can reduce my cost per guest or feed a few more people. If capacity is an issue, I make more the same way. If cost is an issue, I make something entirely different.

    It's the principle here that bothers me. Take a popular, well-established product, then change it via dilution in order to create more of it. Of course, at that point you're not really creating more of it, you're creating more of something else. Unless you're focused exclusively on profits, there's no reason to do this. Attempting to justify it by describing it as a method to keep up with demand is complete BS, imo. I have to say that even raising the price on the existing proof would be a more acceptable option to me, if supply cannot keep up with demand. This is a cash grab, pure and simple.

    =R=
    Gardening is a bloodsport --Meghan Kleeman

    Why don't you take these profiteroles and put them up your shi'-ta-holes? --Jemaine & Bret

    There's a horse loose in a hospital --JM

    That don't impress me much --Shania Twain
  • Post #7 - February 11th, 2013, 8:14 pm
    Post #7 - February 11th, 2013, 8:14 pm Post #7 - February 11th, 2013, 8:14 pm

    Mr. Cowdery sums it up pretty well with this:

    at his blog, Chuck Cowdery wrote:They've taste-tested it, they say, and no one can tell the difference.

    That may be, but there is no denying the simple fact that they have cheapened the product without lowering the price, so consumers will get a little less of what they paid for and Maker's (i.e., Beam Inc.) will make more money.

    =R=
    Gardening is a bloodsport --Meghan Kleeman

    Why don't you take these profiteroles and put them up your shi'-ta-holes? --Jemaine & Bret

    There's a horse loose in a hospital --JM

    That don't impress me much --Shania Twain
  • Post #8 - February 12th, 2013, 12:58 am
    Post #8 - February 12th, 2013, 12:58 am Post #8 - February 12th, 2013, 12:58 am
    ronnie_suburban wrote:This isn't the first time I've heard a story like this (Jack Daniel comes to mind) but once again, the popularity of American whiskey -- or the efforts of distillers to keep up with it -- is actually chipping away at the quality of the product. I've never been a huge fan of Maker's Mark but there's something really sad about the solution to this "problem" being to water down the product (and probably charge the same amount for it) . . .

    at ChicagoTribune.com, Samantha Bomkamp wrote:Maker's Mark announced it is reducing the amount of alcohol in the spirit to keep pace with rapidly increasing consumer demand.

    In an email to its fans, representatives of the brand said the entire bourbon category is "exploding" and demand for Maker's Mark is growing even faster. Some customers have even reported empty shelves in their local stores, it said.

    After looking at "all possible solutions," the total alcohol by volume of Maker's Mark is being reduced by 3 percent. Representatives said the change will allow it to maintain the same taste while making sure there's "enough Maker's Mark to go around." It's working to expand its distillery and production capacity, too.

    The caption for the photograph from that article reads: "Makers Mark said it is lowering its alcohol content by 3 percent to keep up with demand." That's just going along with Beam's weaselly explanations. If I understand the situation, Maker's Mark is going from 45% alcohol by volume to 42%. That's a change of 3 percentage points which works out to a 6.7 percent decrease in alcohol content.
  • Post #9 - February 12th, 2013, 8:53 am
    Post #9 - February 12th, 2013, 8:53 am Post #9 - February 12th, 2013, 8:53 am
    [quote="Attrill On a directly related note I just picked up a case of Paulaner Salvator at Costco and was surprised to find that they're 11.2 fl. oz. bottles instead of 12. So basically it is a case with 22.5 beers in it.[/quote]

    Molson does the same thing Attrill - 11 ounces in a Molson Blue or 11 beers per 12-pack. When I tell my friends they are shocked. We've all stopped buying Molson for this reason.

    Davooda
    Life is a garden, Dude - DIG IT!
    -- anonymous Colorado snowboarder whizzing past me March 2010
  • Post #10 - February 12th, 2013, 9:08 am
    Post #10 - February 12th, 2013, 9:08 am Post #10 - February 12th, 2013, 9:08 am
    Attrill wrote:On a directly related note I just picked up a case of Paulaner Salvator at Costco and was surprised to find that they're 11.2 fl. oz. bottles instead of 12. So basically it is a case with 22.5 beers in it.


    This isn't so much to skimp on beer, but more because 11.2 fl oz is just about a third of a liter (333 mL), a much more common size in Europe than 12 fl oz. Same reason why there's also 16.9 fl oz (500 mL) beers, instead of just 16 oz.
  • Post #11 - February 12th, 2013, 10:11 am
    Post #11 - February 12th, 2013, 10:11 am Post #11 - February 12th, 2013, 10:11 am
    Yeah, the 1/3 liter (11.2 fl oz) bottles are pretty common for Euro beers that do not have separate bottling lines for export to U.S. If you ever buy Guinness Foreign Extra (which is the export stout for most of the rest of the world), for example, instead of the draught/widget bottle or the cans that are specifically directed to the U.S. market, it comes in 11.2 fl oz. bottles.
  • Post #12 - February 12th, 2013, 10:50 am
    Post #12 - February 12th, 2013, 10:50 am Post #12 - February 12th, 2013, 10:50 am
    Eh, I have a strange suspicion this may be just a money grab with the added bonus of driving those with more discerning tastes (and deeper pockets?) to bottles of 46 instead (which is maintaing its ABV, at least for now). I know Buffalo Trace overseas boasts a similarly lowered ABV, so I imagine there was no reason not keep MM higher here and just lower it everywhere else. Lowering it across the board simply seems cheap and suspicious.
  • Post #13 - February 12th, 2013, 11:12 am
    Post #13 - February 12th, 2013, 11:12 am Post #13 - February 12th, 2013, 11:12 am
    I am no big fan of Makers, although it is a good fallback at an airport bar or some other place that really does not have much of a selection. This change makes me less likely to buy it, but I doubt it will really have any adverse effect on the brand's sales or brand loyalty overall. As ronnie notes in the initial post, the people who buy this are likely going to keep buying it. Maker's is, to my mind, an entry-point bourbon (both in flavor profile and price point) for those who want to try something other than Jack Daniels or Jim Beam, and I suspect this will continue to be the case -- perhaps more so -- with this change.

    I do not fault a business for trying to maximize profits, but I do not like the potential for this type of change to be replicated by brands I actually enjoy a bit more. As adipocere notes, however, thus it ever was ("Lower the proof, cut aging"). To take a fairly recent example with regards to a brand I do like, while the proof stayed at 107, Buffalo Trace switched Old Weller Antique from a 7-year age statement to no age statement.
  • Post #14 - February 15th, 2013, 12:48 pm
    Post #14 - February 15th, 2013, 12:48 pm Post #14 - February 15th, 2013, 12:48 pm
    I'm also not a big Maker's fan but I simply challenge their claim that it's to keep up with demand . . . and that there are places where they can't keep it in stock. Has anyone been to a liquor retailer that does NOT have an ample supply of Maker's set out on their shelves? I certainly haven't.
    Objects in mirror appear to be losing.
  • Post #15 - February 15th, 2013, 1:00 pm
    Post #15 - February 15th, 2013, 1:00 pm Post #15 - February 15th, 2013, 1:00 pm
    Kman wrote:I'm also not a big Maker's fan but I simply challenge their claim that it's to keep up with demand . . . and that there are places where they can't keep it in stock. Has anyone been to a liquor retailer that does NOT have an ample supply of Maker's set out on their shelves? I certainly haven't.


    True, but I think there are some nuances here. From the blog post that I linked to above:

    [Lowering the alcohol content] is necessary, they say, because "demand for our bourbon is exceeding our ability to make it." That's nothing new. Maker's has been on allocation for something like 30 years. 'On allocation' means that when customers tell Maker's how much they want, Maker's tells them how much they can have.


    So there are retailers that can't sell as much MM as they'd like to.

    And

    As [former Master distiller Kevin] Smith explained it, Maker's Mark was the fastest-growing bourbon in the United States, with 2007 sales of 800,000 cases. The current distillery could support up to 1.5 million cases, the expansion would bring that to 2.2 million. The concern then was that, at the then-current rate of growth, they would hit 2.2 million in about 2016, and water source limitations would prevent them from growing further.


    So the move is also about keeping up with growing demand in the future.
  • Post #16 - February 15th, 2013, 4:20 pm
    Post #16 - February 15th, 2013, 4:20 pm Post #16 - February 15th, 2013, 4:20 pm
    No, it's pretty much BS. They even said that should demand drop again, they're sticking with the low ABV. Conversely, they poo-pooed simply raising the price, because they don't want to compete with Beam's higher end entry bourbons - Basil Hayden, Knob Creek, etc. The decision to cut ABV is just a sucker move. They're gambling, probably correctly, that most Makers drinkers won't be able to tell the difference. See also: all sorts of other deceptively packaged stuff that makes it seem like you're getting the same product but is actually giving you less of it. Per that same article, if Jim Beam really wanted to keep up with demand, they would increase production with a third plant. This is all about the $$$. But that's fine. It's a golden age of bourbon out there, and there are plenty of alternatives to this airport-bar standby.
  • Post #17 - February 15th, 2013, 4:41 pm
    Post #17 - February 15th, 2013, 4:41 pm Post #17 - February 15th, 2013, 4:41 pm
    Vitesse98, with all due respect, you seem to think you are disagreeing with me. I don't see it that way. Yeah, it's about money. Let me know when you find someone who disagrees with that. :) In any case, I'd rather drink a Bourbon than try to get inside the brain of a Beam executive.
  • Post #18 - February 15th, 2013, 5:04 pm
    Post #18 - February 15th, 2013, 5:04 pm Post #18 - February 15th, 2013, 5:04 pm
    Yeah...gotta say that my reaction to this AND the bland beef post is the same--if people can't tell the difference and don't care to educate themselves about the difference, then why should I care? Those that want better have other options. If they cost more, so be it--none of these things are necessities for anyone's existence. As with the water-filled chicken breast of the masses, we may be missing the fact that natural flavor may NOT be the preference of the masses. So for them, watered down bourbon, probably "sweetened" up a bit for good measure, may be the gold standard. And if the masses decides it sucks and start buying something else, Makers will either change it or be gone. I just wouldn't hold my breath about that happening. The meat issue is a bit different because they're adding something to the process that may or may not have other consequences. But that's not the issue on the table here. I say, plenty of room on the back bar for choice--I can't drink 'em all anyway.
    Last edited by boudreaulicious on February 17th, 2013, 7:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
    "Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit; wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad." Miles Kington
  • Post #19 - February 15th, 2013, 7:37 pm
    Post #19 - February 15th, 2013, 7:37 pm Post #19 - February 15th, 2013, 7:37 pm
    In any case, I'd rather drink a Bourbon than try to get inside the brain of a Beam executive.


    :D

    none of these things are necessities for anyone's existence


    :shock:
  • Post #20 - February 17th, 2013, 6:03 am
    Post #20 - February 17th, 2013, 6:03 am Post #20 - February 17th, 2013, 6:03 am
    No facts/stats to back this up, but such a large portion of their sales are going to people who mix with coke or ginger ale (great summer afternoon drink btw), that I have to imagine it will go unnoticed by most. In my opinion, the neat or on the rocks bourbon drinker has probably moved past Makers as their primary brand of choice and as mentioned above in th thread, treat as a backup bourbon. Just one guys poorly researched opinion...
  • Post #21 - February 17th, 2013, 2:42 pm
    Post #21 - February 17th, 2013, 2:42 pm Post #21 - February 17th, 2013, 2:42 pm
    Not so fast, my friends.

    You spoke. We listened.

    Dear Friends,

    Since we announced our decision last week to reduce the alcohol content (ABV) of Maker’s Mark in response to supply constraints, we have heard many concerns and questions from our ambassadors and brand fans. We’re humbled by your overwhelming response and passion for Maker’s Mark. While we thought we were doing what’s right, this is your brand – and you told us in large numbers to change our decision.

    You spoke. We listened. And we’re sincerely sorry we let you down.

    So effective immediately, we are reversing our decision to lower the ABV of Maker’s Mark, and resuming production at 45% alcohol by volume (90 proof). Just like we’ve made it since the very beginning.

    The unanticipated dramatic growth rate of Maker’s Mark is a good problem to have, and we appreciate some of you telling us you’d even put up with occasional shortages. We promise we'll deal with them as best we can, as we work to expand capacity at the distillery.

    Your trust, loyalty and passion are what’s most important. We realize we can’t lose sight of that. Thanks for your honesty and for reminding us what makes Maker’s Mark, and its fans, so special.

    We’ll set about getting back to bottling the handcrafted bourbon that our father/grandfather, Bill Samuels, Sr. created. Same recipe. Same production process. Same product.

    As always, we will continue to let you know first about developments at the distillery. In the meantime please keep telling us what’s on your mind and come down and visit us at the distillery. It means a lot to us.

    Sincerely,

    Rob Samuels Bill Samuels, Jr
    Chief Operating Officer Chairman Emeritus
    rob@makersmark.com bill@makersmark.com
  • Post #22 - February 17th, 2013, 2:53 pm
    Post #22 - February 17th, 2013, 2:53 pm Post #22 - February 17th, 2013, 2:53 pm
    It's New Coke all over again.
  • Post #23 - February 17th, 2013, 3:32 pm
    Post #23 - February 17th, 2013, 3:32 pm Post #23 - February 17th, 2013, 3:32 pm
    I see they are "resuming production" of the original, higher proof bourbon, which might imply they made some at the lower proof. Wonder whether any such product - if it exists - got shipped, and how much it's going to go for on eBay. By the same token, I noticed the shelves at my local CVS were swept clean of Maker's right after the announcement was made (I bought a bottle myself!). Not that Maker's was having trouble selling its product (they say they couldn't even meet the demand), but making that announcement couldn't have hurt their sales of exiting stock; correct?
    JiLS
  • Post #24 - February 17th, 2013, 7:39 pm
    Post #24 - February 17th, 2013, 7:39 pm Post #24 - February 17th, 2013, 7:39 pm
    98% sure I saw some bottles at 42% just last week at Binny's.
  • Post #25 - February 17th, 2013, 8:53 pm
    Post #25 - February 17th, 2013, 8:53 pm Post #25 - February 17th, 2013, 8:53 pm
    ziggy wrote:
    You spoke. We listened.

    Dear Friends,

    Since we announced our decision last week to reduce the alcohol content (ABV) of Maker’s Mark in response to supply constraints, we have heard many concerns and questions from our ambassadors and brand fans. We’re humbled by your overwhelming response and passion for Maker’s Mark. While we thought we were doing what’s right, this is your brand – and you told us in large numbers to change our decision.

    You spoke. We listened. And we’re sincerely sorry we let you down.

    So effective immediately, we are reversing our decision to lower the ABV of Maker’s Mark, and resuming production at 45% alcohol by volume (90 proof). Just like we’ve made it since the very beginning.

    The unanticipated dramatic growth rate of Maker’s Mark is a good problem to have, and we appreciate some of you telling us you’d even put up with occasional shortages. We promise we'll deal with them as best we can, as we work to expand capacity at the distillery.

    Your trust, loyalty and passion are what’s most important. We realize we can’t lose sight of that. Thanks for your honesty and for reminding us what makes Maker’s Mark, and its fans, so special.

    We’ll set about getting back to bottling the handcrafted bourbon that our father/grandfather, Bill Samuels, Sr. created. Same recipe. Same production process. Same product.

    As always, we will continue to let you know first about developments at the distillery. In the meantime please keep telling us what’s on your mind and come down and visit us at the distillery. It means a lot to us.

    Sincerely,

    Rob Samuels Bill Samuels, Jr
    Chief Operating Officer Chairman Emeritus
    rob@makersmark.com bill@makersmark.com


    Sniff. I love that movie. My family used to gather round the TV every Xmas to watch it ... Jimmy Stewart as "Rob", Brian Donlevy as "Bill" ... with Joan Blondell as "Sally" and Gale Sondergaard as the evil Chief Accountant .... Thank you, Maker's Mark, for helping us remember that big business has a heart as well.
    fine words butter no parsnips
  • Post #26 - February 18th, 2013, 4:07 pm
    Post #26 - February 18th, 2013, 4:07 pm Post #26 - February 18th, 2013, 4:07 pm
    The great, ironic obscure taste of New Coke and watered Maker's is within reach . . .

    http://www.ebay.com/itm/WOW-NEW-COKE-6- ... 35c484c63c
  • Post #27 - February 18th, 2013, 5:19 pm
    Post #27 - February 18th, 2013, 5:19 pm Post #27 - February 18th, 2013, 5:19 pm
    Rosanne Rosanadana wrote:Never mind
    Steve Z.

    “Only the pure in heart can make a good soup.”
    ― Ludwig van Beethoven
  • Post #28 - February 21st, 2013, 3:27 pm
    Post #28 - February 21st, 2013, 3:27 pm Post #28 - February 21st, 2013, 3:27 pm
    As others here probably did too, I just got a very amusing email from Binny's . . .

    in an email, Binny's wrote:Makers Missed the Mark.
    Don't miss your chance to grab this COLLECTABLE BOTTLE.

    If you missed this story, here's what happened. Maker's Mark announced that they would lower the alcohol of their beloved bourbon from 90 to 84 proof. It took less than a week for public outrage to reach such a fervor that they doubled back on their decision, promising to stick with the original recipe. We don't mean to wax poetic, but this may be one of the biggest beverage missteps since New Coke. One that will leave its mark on the industry for generations.

    That makes the low proof Maker's Mark an instant collector's item for whiskey enthusiasts.

    The distillery is busy reclaiming cases from wholesalers, but we're holding our allocation for you. We want to offer you the chance to buy this bottle of history. Remember, it's a limited product, production had a life measured in hours instead of days or weeks. Once it's gone, it's gone for good.

    Limited Collector's Item: Maker's Mark 84 proof

    =R=
    Gardening is a bloodsport --Meghan Kleeman

    Why don't you take these profiteroles and put them up your shi'-ta-holes? --Jemaine & Bret

    There's a horse loose in a hospital --JM

    That don't impress me much --Shania Twain
  • Post #29 - February 27th, 2013, 11:36 am
    Post #29 - February 27th, 2013, 11:36 am Post #29 - February 27th, 2013, 11:36 am
    Beer drinkers accuse Anheuser-Busch of watering down brews

    Beer drinkers in three U.S. states filed lawsuits accusing brewing giant Anheuser-Busch of watering down and mislabeling Budweiser, Michelob and other brands to cut costs.

    The lawsuits, filed in the last week in California, Pennsylvania and New Jersey, said the brewing giant cheated consumers by listing a higher alcohol content than the beers actually contained.


    According to the lawsuit, the company has sophisticated equipment that measures the alcohol content throughout the brewing process and is accurate to within one-hundredth of a percent. But after the merger, the company increasingly chose to dilute its popular brands of beer, the lawsuit alleged.

    “Following the merger, AB vigorously accelerated the deceptive practices ... sacrificing the quality products once produced by Anheuser-Busch in order to reduce costs,” said the lead lawsuit, filed Friday in federal court in San Francisco.


    Yes, the 2008 merger was when AB began to sacrifice quality!

    I haven't seen the actual lawsuit, but I presume they reduced the alcohol, but kept it within the rounding error of what the label says.
  • Post #30 - February 27th, 2013, 1:47 pm
    Post #30 - February 27th, 2013, 1:47 pm Post #30 - February 27th, 2013, 1:47 pm
    Darren72 wrote:I haven't seen the actual lawsuit, but I presume they reduced the alcohol, but kept it within the rounding error of what the label says.

    Probably true, although you'll note that most of their macrobrews don't include ABV on the packaging.

Contact

About

Team

Advertize

Close

Chat

Articles

Guide

Events

more