Madison Beer Review

Where Do We Go From Here

2009-11-25T05:30:00.001-06:00

Lew Bryson links to an interview with SABMiller head Graham Mackay. The general gist is that industry consolidation is, for the most part, over. There simply aren't any more pieces to buy. There are a couple still out there, Grupo Modelo and FEMSA for example. The big guys, AB-InBev, SABMiller, Heineken, and Carlsberg, are not likely to be purchased - they are, for the most part, "family owned" (!HAH!). So, now what?

Well, I want to take up the "now what" question because I think the "now what" question will affect the craft beer industry more than consolidation has. Over the past decade, market share here in the United States, proportionally, has been moderately stable. Anheuser-Busch has been number one, floating between about 45% and 60% or so, and Miller number two, between 20% and 30%, with Coors and a variety of imports and regional macros making up the difference between the remaining percentage, with micros/craft at 4% and growing rapidly. It doesn't seem like micro/craft growth is affecting any one category more disproportionately than others. Imports have been taking a hit, but I would doubt that this is because of crafts specifically, but a more general domestic/protectionist/pro-USA trend.

Consolidation with global powers like InBev, SAB, and Molson have allowed American macros to increase production and gain revenue and profits despite the meteoric rise of American crafts. The past few years have seen growth by the American macros in places like Asia, South America, Russia and particularly Africa; markets that are more than off-setting American losses. These places, largely vast wastelands of quality beer, are where concentration will be focused. South Africa will host the World Cup and Africa, as a continent, is growing rapidly where countries are stable enough to support it. There is plenty of opportunity for market growth in these regions.

In general, I think these macros will let the US market settle out over the next 10 years. There is a lot of growth and uncertainty over the American market. Who will shake out as major players? How will up-and-comers handle their growth? How will regional brewers respond? What will the market look like? For the most part (Blue Moon and Leinenkugel excepted for reasons I'm not really going to go into), the macro attempts to tap into and participate in this market have failed.

Frankly, it seems to me, that the macros, AB-InBev/SABMiller/MolsonCoors, are happy to ply their trade elsewhere, take their proportional share here and let the market settle out. All the while keeping an eye on the market until the craft market actually starts making a dent. And, while 10% market share is a nice goal for crafts, both AB and Miller crap 10% market shares. They won't even perk their ears until crafts hit 15-20%.

So, what does this mean for American craft brewers? There's plenty of market for the taking and the big-boys aren't really going to put up much of a fight. The real battle, though, is going to take place in the distribution tier. Already distributors are acquiring significant craft portfolios with a "collect them all" attitude. Distributors view crafts, largely, as a commodity. They never know which one will hit, and they don't really care - they just want to be owning the one that does.

Unfortunately for brewers, this means that they shouldn't expect significant marketing efforts by the distributors. It will be up to the breweries to do their own marketing and push their own product. A problem only exacerbated by the fact that the distributors are indifferent and, in fact, are encouraging competition in places where your brand might otherwise succeed. Of course, competition is never a bad thing, but it means that you'll have to fight for every sale with not only other crafts your own size, but larger regional and national crafts, and young, smaller up-starts as well. "Partnering" with a distributor will be largely meaningless because they only have incentive to help those that will bring them the most money.

Madison Beer Review Presents Beer Talk Today

2009-11-24T09:00:00.001-06:00

On today's podcast we have news in 60 seconds, including info on the most expensive bottle of beer ever sold.

Here's the mp3

cheers!

PorterPalooza - Roundup

2009-11-23T15:00:00.003-06:00

So, what did I learn about Porters that I didn't know before?

Well, I really like proper "English Porters." And, say what you will about New Glarus' Old English Porter, it undoubtedly fits into the mix with Samuel Smith's Taddy Porter and St. Peter's. There is a brightness to these British-style Porters, a lightness of palate, a tang, and a cleanness of finish to them.

Moreover, this British-style is almost exactly the opposite of the American-style, of which Great Lakes Edmund Fitzgerald is probably a classic and the O'So Nighttrain is a darn good runner-up. The American style is more full-bodied, if not truly a full mouthfeel, and a compound of roasted and coffee flavors and aroma. Any bitterness or bite comes from roasted malts and a more generous handful of hops. There can be some that are over the top, like Dark Horse's Black Bier with its huge chocolate and roasted malt profile, and some that are more reserved like Sand Creek's Badger Porter.

So, what are the dangers of the Porter? To my mind, the porter is an easy beer to make, but a difficult beer to make really well. The emphasis is on ease of drinking, but it can't sacrifice flavor - the porter is primarily a flavorful beer. To that end, many American porters can veer very, very close to being a stout; especially with the "heavying" of the stout. Finally, the emphasis here is on malts, though hops can make nice complimentary notes, particularly to help provide a clean finish.

To that end, much like the "Imperial Pilsner", an "Imperial Porter" doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. An "Imperial Porter" would be a stout, and mostly defeats the purpose of the porter - with its focus on easy-drinking working man roots.

Some Things That You Should Read

2009-11-18T07:00:00.000-06:00

Why Dave's BrewFarm is releasing a pale lager, BrewFarm Select, as its flagship. It's gotten some good reviews in places like BeerAdvocate (it hasn't been reviewed on RateBeer, yet), and there's not really any doubt that it's a quality product. For now it is contract brewed and canned at Stevens Point. It does present an interesting challenge though, because it will need to compete with other "macro"-ish lagers that are much more entrenched - e.g., Spotted Cow, Point, Leinie's, etc. It's not currently available here in Madison, though I understand that the BrewFarm is looking for local distribution.

Shut Up About Barclay Perkins uncovers evidence of Yogurt Beer. It's not nearly as disgusting or strange as it might appear. It is beer (wort) that has been soured with yogurt cultures and then ale-fermented. Crazy, crazy stuff. Bets on first Wisconsin brewery to attempt this? Who wants the over-under on Furthermore? Who wants O'So? Damn hippies.

MADD Virgin Drinks. They're delicious AND socially responsible. Chardonnay, Merlot, Sparkling Wine, Margarita, Mojito, Pina Colada, and Lager with Lime. All 100% alcohol free. Does it really make sense to be training kids to acquire the taste for alcohol-filled drinks if you are against kids drinking? And, what tool would show up at a party with this stuff?! DUDE!!! LET'S BONG THIS MADD LAGER WITH LIME! CEMENT MIXER WITH THE MADD MOJITO AND PINA COLADA!! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Madison Beer Review Presents Beer Talk Today

2009-11-17T08:00:00.000-06:00

On the first part of this week's podcast we explore what time does to a pumpkin beer, tasting a five-year-old bottle of Dogfish Head's heavily spiced Punk.

Here's the mp3

Cheers!

Press Release Monday - Lakefront Beer Dinner at Kil@wat

2009-11-16T12:00:00.002-06:00

Very excited about this one. Sorry for the late notice, but Lakefront is going to be releasing its Local Acre Lager, made with 100% Wisconsin ingredients. We will talk about this in much, much more detail. But, in the meantime, get a taste at what looks to be a phenomenal event on Wednesday.

----------START PRESS RELEASE-----------------
LAKEFRONT BREWERY AND KIL@WAT PRESENT:
Autumn's Elegant Beer Pairing Dinner
Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Join Kil@wat and Lakefront Brewery for a five-course, locally sourced and organic-infused dinner created by Chef Robert Ash. Each selection will be paired with a complementing Lakefront Brewery beer choice. It's a celebration of our shared dedication to local, organic delights.

Guests are treated to an exclusive preview of the not yet released Lakefront Brewery Local Acre Lager. 100% Wisconsin grown, this true Wisconsin Lager boasts ample amounts of 6-row organic malted barley to give a hearty body and hazy straw color. Malty sweetness is balanced with an elegant finish.

Appetizers at 6:00 pm | Dinner at 6:30 pm | Cost is $45.

To reserve your dinner, please contact:
Gregory Banach
414.291.4779
gregorybanach@intercontinentalmilwaukee.com

View the menu: http://marcuscorporation.cmail4.com/t/y/l/ujitdu/kdjlwni/r

Register Online: http://marcuscorporation.cmail4.com/t/y/l/ujitdu/kdjlwni/y

Beer and Music, vol 1

2009-11-16T05:30:00.001-06:00

I like beer. I love music. The two often go hand-in-hand. But expressing the relationship between beer and music can be difficult, at best. How do you expound on the similarities between Bruce Springsteen and Lakefront? Or the Three Floyds and The Transplants? Or Brooklyn Beer and Neil Diamond?

The only way I know how is to just let you listen to what I think a brewery sounds like. Or, perhaps stated in the alternative, here's some music that reminds me of a brewery.

In this case, the music is stylish, poppy, up-beat and easy on the ears. But if you really listen, there's a lot going on: a ton of lush instrumentation, complex and/or humorous lyrics, time changes and vocalization.

Take a listen to these songs and tell me what brewery YOU think of. I'll post mine eventually, but I'll give you a hint that it is a Wisconsin brewery or brewpub.

ps. I want to make this a regular feature, so let me know what you think.

Allo' Darlin' - Henry Rollins Don't Dance

Andrew Bird - Imitosis

Imitosis - Andrew Bird

I'm From Barcelona - Mingus

Mingus - I'm From Barcelona

You'll have to click through for this one, sorry.
Miniature Tigers - Giraffe

So, what brewery does that music remind you of?

Beer Wars! MBR, Dane101 and Futhermore Beer Present ...

2009-11-13T05:30:00.001-06:00

In the coming weeks we'll talk more about Beer Wars - The Movie. There is a lot of debate and interest around this movie. But, first, I wanted to simply make the announcement that Madison Beer Review has teamed up with Dane101 and Furthermore Beer to present Beer Wars - The Movie on December 2, 2009 at The Majestic Theater here in Madison.

A convenient Facebook Event has been set up for your easy-rememberance here.

Here's some more info about this event:

Dane101, Madison Beer Review, and Furthermore Beer are excited to present the first Madison screening of the documentary Beer Wars. The film is described as "a no holds barred exploration of the U.S. beer industry that ultimately reveals the truth behind the label of your favorite beer. Told from an insider’s perspective, the film goes behind the scenes of the daily battles and all out wars that dominate one of America’s favorite industries." It explores what it takes to be an independent microbrewery in the shadow of the beer industry big dogs and what those smaller companies are doing to fight for a market share.

This December 2 screening at theMajestic Theater will feature a tasting with Furthermore Beer with a Q&A following the film with brew master Aran Madden and marketing master Chris Staples. We will finish off the night with a rousing and beer lifting performance from Madison's very own Pale Young Gentlemen. Watch a trailer for the film below the fold.

Doors will open at 8 p.m. so people can get a taste of what's on tap at Furthermore.

The film will start at 9 p.m. and will be followed by a question and answer session with Chris and Aran. Pale Young Gentlemen will take the stage shortly after 11 p.m. Admission is $7 for a fun night of libation and film.

Madison Beer Review Presents Beer Talk Today

2009-11-12T17:00:00.000-06:00

Continuing with this week's sort-of-theme of tasting beers from breweries we've talked about but never tried, we taste Lost Abbey's Avant Garde. Also, some sidetracks about carbonation and food pairings.

Here's the mp3

Cheers!

Press Release Thursday - Tyranena Turns 10!

2009-11-12T14:30:00.001-06:00

Saturday night. 3pm to 10pm. $2.50 pints. Big party. Lake Mills. Be there or be square.

--------------START PRESS RELEASE---------

Our Tasting Room opened its doors Friday, November 12, 1999…
Ten long, arduous, heartbreaking, fulfilling & successful years ago!

Old friends and new are welcome to join us this Saturday, November 14, for a night of remembrance and celebration, both of the last ten years and those surely yet to come.

~ 3:00 to 5:00 pm - Rewind to '99 ~
Enjoy a legendary Wisconsin beer for just $2.50 per pint, the price we charged back in 1999 when the Tasting Room first opened! And get your CLEAR Tyranena growlers filled for just $5.00 each.

~ 5:30 pm - An Evening Tour ~
Congregate in the lobby for an evening tour of our not-quite-as-modern-as-it-used-to-be brewing facility.

~ 7:00 to 10:00 pm - Party Like It’s 1999 ~
Beer & Cheese Pairing, Special Tappings & Live Music by Greg Boerner
Our friends at Roth Kase in Monroe have paired some of their fantastic, specialty cheeses with some very special Tyranena beers we've been saving for this occasion. Enjoy these pairings and the blues & rock ‘n roll stylings of one of our long-time and favorite performers, “GB” Greg Boerner.

Here's a list of what we plan to have on tap this Saturday for the Anniversary party; some beers will be on tap all day, others only from 7:00 to 10:00 pm.

*Paradise by the Dashboard Lights - Black as the back seat of a car parked in the deep dark night. A soft roasted and fruity perfume entices. The firm, full-body seduces. The tartness of freshly plucked cherries finishes it off. Tingling with anticipation? Open up your eyes, I got a big surprise.

*Imperial Oatmeal Porter brewed with Cocoa Nibbs - A variation of our base Imperial Porter brewed with oatmeal and roasted cacao beans (nibs). Nibs add a subtle chocolate flavor and a slight nuttiness, without added sweetness.

*Benji's Smoked Chipotle Imperial Porter - Brewed by the recently departed Benji. (He's alive, he just moved to California!) This variation of our highly reviewed Imperial Porter features a rich, smoky flavor and subtle heat from fiery chipotle peppers. Something to keep you warm on cold, Wisconsin nights!

Dirty Old Man Barrel-Aged Imperial Rye Porter - Dark black with a cappuccino head. Full-bodied with modest carbonation. Spicy rye, chocolaty malt and balanced oak barrel flavors.

*Painted Ladies Pumpkin Ladies - Painted Ladies is a pumpkin and spice-infused amber ale. Expect hints of cinnamon, clove, nutmeg, allspice and ginger and a rich body from pureed pumpkin.

*Bourbon-barrel Aged Spank Me Baby Barley Wine 2006 - Ruby appearance. Fruity nose. Rich, thick malty body. Stiff hop backbone. Thank you ma'am, may I have another? Oh yeah, baby! (The original release non-barrel-aged beer while this version is straight from the bourbon barrel!)

*Bourbon-barrel Aged Scotch Ale 2008 - Last year's Sheep Shagger Scotch Ale aged for nearly a year in oak bourbon barrels.

*Bitter Woman in the Rye - Brewed with an orgy of hops to satisfy the cravings of the most indulgent of hop heads. Hop flavors, aromas and bitterness dominate. Balanced with rich caramel malts and enhanced with the spiciness of rye. Catch a Bitter Woman in the rye.

Deb & Glenn's Barrel-Aged Blueberry Kinda Lambic - Post-fermentation brown ale, added to once-used bourbon barrels with hand-macerated blueberries and inoculated with Lambic yeast/bacteria blend. A wonderfully complex beer with hints of wood, berry and sour twist.

Sheep Shagger Scotch Ale - The Sheep Shagger Scotch Ale is another variation of our Peated Wee Heavy. A smaller percentage of the malt is peated, which means it is kilned while a peat-fire is burning nearby. From the burning peat this beer has a subtle, smoky flavor.

We will also have our 6-year-round beers on tap:

Three Beaches Honey Blonde - Three Beaches Honey Blonde Ale is a light-bodied beer with a sweet citrus flavor from orange-blossom honey and cascade hops.

Headless Man Amber Alt - The Headless Man is brewed in the "old way" of a Düsseldorf-style Altbier. This beer boasts a deep copper color, aromatic hops and Wisconsin caramel malt for a remarkably smooth and delicious taste.

Stone Tepee Pale Ale - Stone Tepee Pale Ale is brewed in the tradition of an American pale ale. This beer celebrates the American hop, with its characteristic bitterness, flavor and aroma.

Bitter Woman IPA - Bitter Woman IPA is our Wisconsin variation of an India Pale Ale. This beer is intensely bitter, almost grapefruit-like, with a mighty hop flavor and aroma.

Rocky's Revenge - Rocky's Revenge is an American brown ale with a portion aged in bourbon barrels. Each bourbon barrel will contribute its own unique character to this rich, satisfying ale.

Chief BlackHawk Porter - Chief BlackHawk Porter is a robust black and sharply bittersweet ale. This full-bodied beer is complimented by chocolate, caramel and roasty flavors.

*Indicates that the beer will be on tap ONLY from 7 to 10 pm... or until the keg blows!

PorterPalooza #8 - Samuel Smith Taddy Porter

2009-11-11T05:30:00.027-06:00

Ok, this is the end of the porter tastings, I promise. I've had probably double the number of porters that I've actually written about, and I imagine, you're probably sick of reading about porters. Either later this week or next week, I'll do a recap of what I've learned during this Porterpalooza. But, let's just say it was surprising in some respects, not so surprising in others.

But before we get to the conclusion, let's look at a beer that is considered a classic in the style, the Samuel Smith Taddy Porter.

The Old Brewery at Tadcaster was founded in 1758 and is Yorkshire’s oldest brewery. Samuel Smith is one of the few remaining independent breweries in England, and further is the last to utilize the classic Yorkshire Square system of fermentation solely in stone squares.

Just this one paragraph of the importer's description of Samuel Smith raises some pretty interesting issues. First, Samuel Smith's Tadcaster brewery was founded before the advent of porter in the late-1800s. Tadcaster is 20 minutes southwest of York, UK in Central England.

Although the statement that Samuel Smith's is one of the few independent breweries in the UK is a bit of an understatement, it's still important to note that despite (or perhaps because of) its success, it remains unassociated with Diageo, Heineken, AB-InBev, SABMiller, and all of the other brewing giants. Indeed, the Society of Independent Brewers, of which Samuel Smith's is not a member, shows dozens of independent brewers just in the Northern counties of the UK.

But most interesting is the reference to the Yorkshire Square system of fermentation. A Yorkshire Square is a unique system of quasi-open fermentation. An open vessel is constructed out of 5 slabs of local, Yorkshire, stone (4 sides and the bottom). Heat is maintained from the existence of a second, outer, square that is a little lower and about 2 inches bigger all the way around. In this outer square, water of the correct temperature is kept to keep the inner square at the appropriate temperatures. There is a second square above the first square with a series of ramps and pipes.

The beer is added to the inner vessel and long-fermenting yeast is added. This particular strain of yeast takes a long time to fully ferment (about 6 days), but its fermentation is very active. The yeast overflows from the bottom vessel into the top vessel and wort is frequently pumped out of the bottom vessel into the top to reincorporate the yeast. Thus, the process is (was) high manual in that it required frequent skimming of the top and rousing and aerating of the yeast to keep it active. After primary fermentation, residual yeast is often used for cask conditioning.

Beers of this system tend to be very smooth and fuller bodied.

Samuel Smith's Taddy Porter
Appearance: A huge tan, almost brown, head; dark, dark brown body; almost black; crystal clear
Aroma: roasted and tangy with almost a sour note or two (is this a blended porter?!); a bit of a coffee aroma underneath, and a pretty strong earthy, grassy hoppiness is present
Flavor: Something like sourness is the first thing that I notice, then a pretty strong roastiness comes rushing in; hoppy bitterness remains in the finish, as does the metallic tanginess of the sourness - while it's going to sound worse than it is, imagine the taste in your mouth after biting down on tin foil when you had braces - you know the part that you liked about it, the excitement, the tingle, the strangeness? That's sort of what is present here.
Body: the body thickens up as it warms up, but it is still thinner than I might have expected
Drinkability: See the summary, because this beer changes completely as it warms up; but I really like this beer at all temperatures and it would do well for those that like stout, but don't like the huge fullness
Summary: As mentioned above, this beer does a 180 as it warms up; from an aggressive, sour bite, to warm, smooth and chocolately; I love the complexity here and keep drinking it if only to see what flavor will come next. I suspect that this beer is exactly what people had in mind when Dan Carey said he was going to brew an "Old English Porter" - and it is very, very similar. Except New Glarus amped up the sour to reflect Dan's taste for sour beers, and included some more historically accurate smoke that brought a more pronounced dryness in the finish. Otherwise these are very, very similar beers and an appropriate end to a journey that began with the New Glarus Old English Porter.

ps. This beer paired perfectly with the sweet dry-rub beef ribs and squash and sweet potato in coconut milk that I had this evening.

Press Release Tuesday - IndieHops

2009-11-10T12:00:00.001-06:00

OK, normally I don't use press releases for non-Wisconsin stuff, but these guys seem genuine (they included a picture of themselves with the press release - how can they not be genuine?). Plus, given the craziness of the hop crops the past few years, it probably makes sense to add another supplier to your Rolodex.

------------START PRESS RELEASE------------------
We are pleased to announce the launch of our new business, Indie Hops, LLC.

Our mission is to supply 100% Oregon grown aroma hops to the craft beer industry. Everything we do will be driven by the need to serve craft brewers exclusively.

100% of our hops will be grown from acreage in the heart of the Willamette Valley, the finest terroir for aroma hops in the U.S. We will be working with heritage Oregon farmers who have a reputation for growing premium hops in a certified sustainable, Salmon Safe fashion. We are Oregon's first and only hop pellet milling operation.

We are dedicated to learning from you, no matter how big or small your brewery, the varieties hops you need and want. The craft beer movement today is strong, thanks to the relentless pursuit of quality beer by craft brewers. To insure further gains in market share, that spirit needs to carry through to suppliers of key brewing ingredients as well.

We at Indie Hops are committed to coaxing peak quality out of existing hop varieties, and investing in the future to introduce new aroma hops for craft brewers to further showcase your skills. And we'll do this using a sustainable, transparent and fair pricing structure.

Indie Hops is looking ahead. In our quest to bring to you new aroma hop cultivars, we are investing in collaborative breeding and fermentation research. We have pledged $1 million to establish the "OSU Aroma Hops Breeding Program Sponsored by Indie Hops" in Corvallis, Oregon. We are optimistic that in the next five years, we can deliver even more flavorful and aromatic hop varieties to your brew kettle.

We are also committed to organic hop production. In 2010, our farming partner Goschie Farms will be planting for us 20 acres of organic aroma hops. We are investing in the future to make organic hops a more viable option than they are today

We are mindful that most of you are locked into long term supply contracts. We hope that if new needs arise, or you're looking for a fresh start, you will consider Indie Hops - we are in it for the long haul. In the meantime, we'll be calling from time to time to learn more about your particular needs, as well as to keep you abreast of new developments on our research front.

Please take a look at our website at www.indiehops.com. Our phone number in Portland, Oregon is 503.452.4677 and our toll free number is 877.719.4677. We are excited to have a chance to earn your trust.

In Hop Pursuit,
Jim & Roger, Co-founders
Indie Hops, LLC
jim@indiehops.com & roger@indiehops.com

Madison Beer Review Presents Beer Talk Today

2009-11-10T05:30:00.000-06:00

We're back! Now that we've gotten the swine flu out of our systems, we got a chance to sit down and chat about recent craft beer related experiences and to taste a beer by a brewery that has come up many times on the podcast, but whose beer none of us had ever had, Brewdog. Today we get to try Brewdog's Riptide Stout.

Here's the mp3

Bonus clip: Kyle talks about brewing bum wine and his offensive costume choices:

When In Chicago...

2009-11-04T05:30:00.001-06:00

I'll warn you ahead of time, that I have no pictures. But I've been asked for more beer and food related posts, so here you go.

I was in Chicago for a Halloween Party and Mrs. MBR and I stayed at a friend's place. This friend is a bit of a bachelor and his culinary skills are a bit ... limited. But, we like to show him that cooking isn't really that hard, and it's a great way to get the ladies. So, when we go down there, I like to make meals that look much more impressive than they actually are. This weekend:

Beef Roulade with spinach, goat cheese and roasted red peppers
Roasted Carrots in maple syrup glaze
Baked Sweet Potato Fries

I know, you're wondering: "What does this have to do with beer"? Well, as you'll see the braising sauce for the roulade was Goose Island Harvest Ale. The Harvest Ale lends a nice malty profile that compliments nicely the red pepper and goat cheese.

Here's some recipes that I made up on the spot to the best I can recall them. I made the Sweet Potato Fries first and we ate them as an appetizer because we were hungry. If I'd thought about it, I would have made a lemon-pepper aoli for a dipping sauce. This made enough for 3 people with not much left over

Baked Sweet Potato Fries
5 medium ~~baked~~sweet potatoes, peeled, cut into fries [ed note: duh, you haven't baked them yet]
2 tbsp olive oil
salt and pepper

preheat oven to 400 degrees
Cover potato fries in olive oil and salt and pepper
bake for 30-40 minutes, stirring and turning frequently

Maple Syrup Carrots
1/2-3/4 lb small carrots (I just cut the tips and tails off, didn't peel them and only cut the larger ones in half length-wise)
2-3 tbsp maple syrup

Preheat oven to 300 degrees
Combine carrots with maple syrup in small casserole, cover in aluminum foil
Bake for 25-30 minutes

Goose Island Harvest Roulade
1 largish red pepper, roasted, peeled, sliced into thin strips
1 large (or 2 small) red onion, sliced
2 cloves garlic, crushed and diced
1 tsp thyme
1.5 tbsp butter
.5 lb spinach (I think it was about 1/2 lb, it was a small-ish "container" of pre-washed organic spinach), stems removed
5 oz goat cheese
2.5-3 lb round steak (my friend didn't get a round, though and we had 3 top sirloins totaling around 2.5 lbs or so - worked pretty darn well)
1/2 c Goose Island Harvest Ale
1 tbsp butter

Preheat oven to 350 degrees

Sweat onion and garlic in butter and a dash of salt and pepper, approx 10 mins; add red pepper and thyme, cook an additional 3-5 mins; Add spinach, and continue to sautee until wilted; remove from heat, add to bowl and mix with cheese

Pound beef into thin, flat steaks (I used the bottom of a bottle of wine, because I didn't have a meat tenderizer); spread thin layer of spinach and cheese onto top of steak; roll steak loosely, tie with string

Add olive oil to same pan and bring to med-high heat; sear roulade on each side, about 2 mins per side; add beer, cover and put into oven for 25-30 mins

Remove beef from pan, remove string and let sit while making pan sauce

Bring remaining juices to boil and scrape bottom of pan, reduce to 1/4 c or so, add 1 tbsp butter

Slice beef into 1/4 inch rounds, cover with sauce and serve

Press Release Tuesday - Hop-A-Tui

2009-11-03T12:00:00.000-06:00

A pretty awesome event going down in Racine on Saturday, the 21st. From the guys that brought you Great Lakes Beer Fest ... is ... Hop-A-Tui

--------------Start Press Release---------
Hop-A-Tui

The Ultimate Beer Social

Sip ~ Taste ~ Share
Sat. November 21

Memorial Hall (basement bowels cir. 1932)

Racine, WI
7-9 pm Sampling From Six Secret Brewers

9-11 pm Hop-A-Tui Sampling (participant shared beer)

Tickets (Limited to 400)

Advanced: $25 plus two bottles of craft beer or equivalent or home brewed beer to share $10 Designated Driver (complimentary soda)

Live Reggae Music by King Solomon
Sponsored by the Great Lakes Brew Fest and Kilties Drum & Bugle Corps.

Brewers Featured as of 10-28
Futhermore

O’so

Central Waters

Ommegang

Left Hand

More to be added
Food Available for purchase

The Business Geek Strikes Again

2009-11-02T09:00:00.000-06:00

Wanted to point out an article over at Wine and Spirits Daily from last week because a) the article has some really interesting things to say, and b) to give some link love to a pretty darn cool virtual rag.

The 2010 Census will show that "the concept of an 'average American' is gone, probably forever," says demographics expert Peter Francese. ... Peter said results will likely find that "no household type neatly describes even one-third of households. The iconic American family -- married couple with children -- will account for a mere 22% of households." The most prevalent type of U.S. household? Married couples with no kids, followed closely by single-person households. There will be more "blended families, single-parent families and multigenerational families, as well as multiple families doubling up in one household."

In one respect: duh. But, it is interesting to see these things being spelled out explicitly. I think there are couple things at work here to change these family units. First, people are marrying and having kids later. My super-scientific survey of "people I know" reveals that all were married after the age of 25. And the one who wasn't is now divorced. My survey group also reveals that people are having kids later - mostly in late-20s and early-30s. Third, people are moving out of the house and becoming independent earlier. For the most part, 21 year olds are not living at home, like they might have in the past, but are out on their own - often living with roommates.

So, aside from the interesting demographics, what does that mean? Well, it means that people have significant piles of disposable income from the ages of 21-29. They aren't supporting families at a young age (like their parents probably were), they aren't living at home if they are single, and they are employed in jobs that allow them to pay rent. This also happens to be a group that likes beer, as opposed to wine. So, if these consumers can be shown that beer is "respectable" and "dignified" I would't be surprised to see the 40-70 demographic (typically wine drinkers) change to a greater percentage of beer drinkers in the coming years.

While 80% of people age 65-plus will be white non-Hispanics, just 54% of children under age 18 will be white non-Hispanics, and will account for fewer than half of births by 2015. Hispanics will be both the nation's fastest-growing and largest minority. ... And in the nation's 10 largest cities, Peter says, "no racial or ethnic category describes a majority of the population....with the younger population substantially more diverse than the old."

Wow. Just. Wow. So beer for rich white kids will be a bad idea. More importantly, though, is that trends in Hispanic and non-white cultures are going to become even more important. A bad omen for those of us that don't like clam juice anywhere near our beer, but a good omen for breweries that play with convention and attract a wide audience.

PorterPalooza #7 - O'So Nighttrain

2009-10-28T05:30:00.001-05:00

Based on the lines at pretty much every recent beer festival I've been to, O'So is a strong, up-and-coming brewery. In business for the past two years out of the side/back of their brewing-supply store in Plover, WI, early batches tended to the spotty. But, a few years in now, most of the kinks worked out, Brewmaster Marc Buttera is starting to hit his stride.

O'So brews a number of styles: by my count off of their website is 15 just in the "current" styles, and an additional 4 that have been retired - almost 20 styles in less than 2 years of operation. While I wasn't personally a fan of the Picnic Ants Saison, the Jack O'Lantern smoked rye pumpkin belgian beer thing made me take notice, as did the Lupulin Maximus, Dominator, and Oktoberfest. I reviewed the Hopdinger as part of the IPA kick I was on this past summer and found myself really liking it despite some questionable reviews from RateBeer and BeerAdvocate.

Based on the notes on the outside of this bottle, I expect the Night Train to be a robust, as opposed to brown, porter:

This complex Porter is black as the coal that fueled locomotives for generations. Made with judicious amounts of crystal and chocolate malts for a rich, smooth, creamy experience. Go ahead and jump on the night train. Enjoy.

O'So Night Train Porter
BA (). RB (84).
Appearance: As the label promises, it is jet-black; a thick, tan head makes think there might a judicious use of hops as well
Aroma: the aroma jumps out of the bottle and up to the nose as soon as liquid hits the glass; chocolate and caramel with a hint of hops and roastiness lend it a dark espresso quality
Flavor: If this were on nitrogen, it would taste like chocolate milk; a lot of chocolate, with a hint of roastiness; the caramel comes through on the back but there isn't a big hoppiness that I wouldn't have been surprised to find
Body: Full to medium bodied with a bit of a lingering flavor of dark-roasted espresso
Drinkability: the body militates against sessionability, but I'd put this up with the Edmund Fitzgerald in terms of heavier-bodied porters that I would drink as much of as would fit in my belly.
Summary: Very nice for a cold winter-evening porter; my only real complaint is one that I have generally with "Porters" of this body - what's the difference between this and a stout? With this one in particular, without the strong roastiness typically associated with porters of this heft, I'm not sure I could make a logical argument for classifying this as a porter instead of a stout. Indeed, it's heavier and bigger than many stouts. So, nomenclature aside, it's really enjoyable.

Big(ish) Beer In The Governor's House?

2009-10-26T05:30:00.006-05:00

I'm all for recklessly publishing unconfirmed reports, so I'll join Madison television's WKOW blog "Inside Scoop" in perpetuating the rumor that Dick Leinenkugel might get into the Governor's race.

Sources tell Inside Scoop Leinenkugel has increasingly been approached to consider the upcoming governor’s race. They say Leinenkugel’s intial, polite deflection of the flattering prospect has transformed into subtle consideration of the idea.

From my sources in the beer industry (probably not nearly as impressive a list as "Inside Scoop"s "sources") support for Leinenkugel as Commerce Secretary was relatively tepid. About the most support anyone could muster was "well, at least he likes beer." And, for folks in the beer industry, I guess that's all you really need.

At this point, about the best the industry would expect is not to have legislation that would move the industry backwards. Forwards may not happen. But at least it wouldn't go backwards, like, if say, Kathleen Falk were to somehow end up in the Governor's seat.

I don't know enough about Leinenkugel's political leanings to make an informed decision about his fitness for the highest office in the state. It seems that not a whole lot of others do either. He has a bit of an "outsider" reputation here, which could be a good thing.

It seems that Republicans are content to sit on the sidelines and snipe instead of wasting resources. Which, to my unpolitical mind, seems like a good idea; staying out of the Governor's race would give them more resources to dedicate to Assembly and Senate seat elections - which they'll need before the Governor's seat would do them any good. In the meantime, Republicans can let the Democrats waste their time with a relatively unexciting choice for 4 years, not let anything get through, blame the Dems for not getting anything done, then have good numbers for a solid Gubernatorial bid in 2014 when they'll have a better idea of Paul Ryan's political ambitions.

Unless Tom Barrett gets in the race.

A Useful Conversion Chart For You

2009-10-19T09:00:00.004-05:00

Sorry but this is going to be a busy week for me and I'm not sure how much I'll get to post. But for something else I am working on, I came up with this super-handy conversion chart. Hope you find it as useful as I have.

	12 oz bottle	1 gallon	1 case	1/6 bbl	1/2 bbl	1 bbl
12 oz bottle	1.0000	10.6667	24.0000	55.1111	165.3333	330.6667
1 gallon	0.0938	1.0000	2.2500	5.1667	15.5000	31.0000
1 case	0.0417	0.4444	1.0000	2.2963	6.8889	13.7778
1/6 bbl	0.0181	0.1935	0.4355	1.0000	3.0000	6.0000
1/2 bbl	0.0060	0.0645	0.1452	0.3333	1.0000	2.0000
1 bbl	0.0030	0.0323	0.0726	0.1667	0.5000	1.0000

AB 287 Hearing Recap

2009-10-15T12:00:00.003-05:00

Unfortunately, I wasn't able to attend the hearing on Tuesday. But I asked Chris Staples of Furthermore Beer for his thoughts and he was more than happy to provide some notes. He makes some excellent points and I can only say that I'm disappointed by the extremes and ignorance displayed by both sides of the debate.

While these extremes make for incendiary sound-bites, they add nothing to constructive negotiation and only foster ill-will from the other side and in the public. I expect it from the lobbying groups (health care and the tavern league), I am sorely disappointed to see it in our elected officials.

With that said, Chris Staples:

Chris Staples here. I own a small brewing company in Spring Green, Wisconsin called Furthermore Beer. I used to work for Information for Public Affairs in Sacramento, California where I dealt with legislation from all fifty states and the Federal government on a daily basis. My father was killed in a car accident that was not related to alcohol. My father-in-law (son of the former Chair of the UW-Madison Political Science Department and now deceased) was responsible for killing someone in a drunk-driving accident for which he spent significant time in prison. My wife and her siblings live with the fallout of that destruction every day. I was also at the hearing on Assembly Bill 287 ("The Beer Tax") from 10 am until 2:15 pm. I am still working on sorting through everything I heard and saw, and am will try to put a finer point on my observations, concerns and criticisms in the coming days. But here are a few of my initial reactions:

* I believe the author of the bill is well-intentioned, despite being hard to like: being willfully ignorant or grossly uninformed as regards the three-tier nature of the brewing industry and being very dismissive and smug about how Bill 287 would affect not only our State's brewers, but the economy as a whole is no way to achieve reasonable debate, partnership and cooperation in addressing social ills.

* From the outside looking in, the two most persuasive sound-byte arguments for increasing the tax is that 1) it's only 2.5 cents per bottle of beer, and that 2) the beer tax hasn't been raised for 40 years. As regards the former argument, the Bill's author, Rep. Berceau and her allies seem content to hold on to this notion that it's only going to cost the drinker 2.5 cents, and that consumers shouldn't complain because it affects people based on how much the drink (ergo we tax "problem drinkers" disproportionately), and that industry will simply be able to pass the tax on with no ill effects (or grossly exaggerated negative impact at worst). What was incredibly insulting to me was the lack of willingness or worse, lack of understanding, that the supporters of AB287 showed by adhering to these notions. A tax at the production level gets inflated at the distribution level by 30% and gets again inflated at the point-of-sale by about 30% (depending on the particular retailer or bar.) The suggestion seemed to be that we, as brewers, could somehow bypass the MANDATED three-tier system to make sure this tax doesn't get inflated. Supporters also fail to acknowledge that as craft brewers, we know that our sales will decrease as the price of our product goes up. And yet, our fixed-costs don't change. Therefore, we have to raise the price further. It's unavoidable if we wish to stay in business. So the consumer, whether a light, moderate or heavy drinker, will be paying much more than 2.5 cents per bottle. On top of which, it is my political instinct that a) the author of the bill WANTS THE TAX TO BE INFLATED, despite insisting it is only a 2.5 cent tax increase per bottle and that b) the author knows it would be political suicide to do the thing that would actually achieve the result she seeks, which is to tax all alcohol (not just beer, and not just WIsconsin producers) at the at the point of purchase/consumption and not make this an issue about whether breweries are paying their fair share. Which leads me to the latter argument. Yes, it is true that the beer tax has not been increased for forty years. A fair enough point. But what no one has said is that that fact is a failure of past Legislatures, not of contemporary brewers! If today's legislature suggested raising the beer tax $1 per barrel, it may not provide Rep. Burceau for all the money she seeks for treatment and law-enforcement programming but it would be hard for industry to argue against. Instead, today's Legislature will have the opportunity to enact a tax on the brewing industry that seeks, in one fell swoop, to compensate for a FAILURE OF THE LEGISLATURE FOR THE LAST FORTY YEARS by crippling my business at a time when our industry is already struggling. Rep. Ott asked "where is the money going to come from?" Well, I know one thing for certain: it can't come from me if I'm out of business as a result of a beyond-the-pale tax increase the extent of which I could not have foreseen when I wrote my business plan in 2004. In other words, I am happy to help contribute my fair share. By I can't contribute enough to compensate for the lack of an appropriate and sane tax predating my business by 36 years. And to those who spoke about how unfair it is to have to pay for services we don't use through taxation, I say "get a grip": we all do it all the time. People without kids pay property taxes which benefit the schools. People whose homes aren't on fire or aren't the victims of a crime pay for fire and police services. People who don't drive much pay for roads. People of means pay for social programs that help people without means eat, clothe themselves and their children, provide shelter for a variety of reasons, cover health care costs, etc. Such is the nature of our democracy. And before scapegoating the brewing industry as being irresponsible and not paying its fair share relative to other states, please acknowledge the levels of taxation on our industry relative to other industries and our state compared to other states. As an industry, we pay an astonishing amount in the form of taxes and would appreciate it today's Legislature would consider that fact as opposed to being insultingly dismissive of our concerns.

* Those in attendance heard devastating testimony from Wendy Calvillo, whose twelve year-old son and husband were killed in a head-on collision near Fort Atkinson in February of this year. I don't think anyone in that room will ever forget what we heard. My deepest sympathies go out to Mrs. Calvillo and her surviving children. As the father of two and as a person who's own father was killed in a non-alcohol-related automobile accident, all I can think to say about the injustice she and her family have suffered is horrible, senseless, violent and criminal. And yet, I was left with a competing feeling which I'm reluctant to even voice given the magnitude Mrs. Calvillo's loss: she is seeking emotional solace in the form of a punitive measure on a responsible and heavily-burdened industry which, given the legislative analysis available for Bill 287, has dubious capacity to effect the change it seeks given the vague allocation guidelines and the lack of protection for the funds raised. And I'm very sad to say that I don't imagine that raising the beer tax is going to decrease Mrs. Cavillo's pain. I think that the logical extension of her reasoning and experience is that there is absolutely no acceptable circumstance or condition by which someone loses their loved one in a drunk-driving "accident". And while no reasonable person would disagree with this assessment, the only way to ATTEMPT to achieve this is with total prohibition of alcohol. And we know that even then, people with the desire and/or need will find/make it/consume it anyway. There is a certain risk to individuals and society to permitting any number of products and behaviors: guns, jet-skiing, fast food, alcohol, cell phones, automobiles, unpasteurized cheese. And yet, as individuals and a society, we routinely accept these risks and call it the price of choice and liberty. With all due respect to the Calvillo family and with a heart that cries out in sympathetic agony for their loss, I don't accept that it is suitable to beat-up on the beer industry given the great unlikelihood of prohibition.

* "Smartest Dude in the Room" award goes to Michael M. Miller M.D., President of the American Society of Addiction Medicine and the Medical Director of NewStart Treatment Program based at Meriter Hospital in Madison. He did a great job of cutting through the b.s., identifying the problem, suggesting that the status quo isn't working, offering that Assembly Bill 287 is better than nothing, but also noting that beer, wine and liquor aren't the problem: that alcohol is the problem, and that a tax on alcohol makes more sense than a tax on beer. If anyone in that room was going to win fence-sitters over to the affirmative side of the debate, it was Dr. Miller. My only qualm was his characterization that we grow our businesses by growing our audience, and that the way we all do that is by making our product attractive to children. I think this carryover argument from the cigarette debate doesn't apply to our industry, particularly the craft-end of the industry where neither price nor flavor profiles make the product conducive to consumption by children. Nor do smaller producers possess the resources to reach-out to a younger audience via advertising and marketing. That disagreement aside, I think everyone involved in this debate could learn from Dr. Miller, and I believe he had the best grip on the root issue and would be a great partner both for the industry and for the pro-tax folks. I would personally be willing to help Dr. Miller in any way within my means.

* "Rabid Dog" awards go to the woman from Colorado who has been involved with providing some manner of treatment services for six years and who told the Committee she was there for "informational purposes" (if you wish to speak before the committee, you have to declare whether you are there to speak for the issue, against the issue or are there for informational purposes) and proceeded to go on a five-minute ill-informed industry-bashing tirade. Whatever. Equally asinine was the Tavern League of Wisconsin who proceeded to go on a five-minute embarrassingly ill-supported legislation-bashing tirade that amounted to: "our members can't take any more taxes!" Well that may be true, but why? In both cases, raising one's voice does not add clarity to the debate.

* "Biggest Disappointment" award goes to my own Representative, Steve Hilgenberg, District 51. He gave the least passionate, least detailed and least engaging address to the Committee. "You know, it's time. And people want it." Ug.

* Also notable were three of the Committee members: Reps Bies, Ott and the gentlemen sitting second from the right (as facing the Committee) seated nest to Rep. Berceau. Rep. Bies quite surprised me, perhaps more because of my own assumptions and prejudices: I am a life-long Democrat with a deep anti-authoritarian streak. Rep Bies is a retired law enforcement officer and a Republican. And to be truthful, he was the only member of the Committee who made any damn sense at all. He spoke well. He asked pointed questions. And he seemed to actually follow the debate with an eye toward advancing to a conclusion. I really appreciated his presence on the Committee and his repeated questioning of speakers regarding the efficacy of treatment and the protection/earmarking of the proposed additional funds. Rep. Ott, on the other hand, seemed quite content to admonish and lecture both speakers and audience. I found him to be patronizing and annoying while offering little of merit to consideration of the question. And the third Representative (whose name placard I could not read. Apologies.) seemed constitutionally incapable of understanding the three-tier system, and why, if a tax was applied at the production level, it would increase as it went up the supply chain such that the politically defensible 2.5 cents per bottle became much more at the cash register or bar rail. I literally bounced my head off the table when for the fourth time he became exasperated and asked for clarification on this issue. For goodness sake: do your homework!

Anyone who has read this far probably stands in opposition to this Bill. But on the off chance you are a supporter of AB287 and are still reading, please consider that this proposal has dubious merit: the funds will be poorly protected and questionably allocated, and while the status quo may not be acceptable, there is more than one way to go about change. This Bill truly will hurt an important industry which is already contributes disproportionately and operates on razor-thin margins. In any case, these are my impressions, based on my time at the hearing. Take them as you will, and please know they are offered in good faith and as an attempt to enliven debate surrounding this important issue, not stiffle it. Feel free to pass this along.

Sincerely,

Chris Staples

Madison Beer Review Presents Beer Talk Today

2009-10-14T05:30:00.001-05:00

On Part one of this week's podcast we get into the fall spirit with a tasting of Avery's The Kaizer Imperial Octoberfest. How is an Imperial Octoberfest different from a Doppelbock? Can a 9.3 % abv lager taste good? Listen in to find out.

Here's the mp3

Cheers!

2009 Assembly Bill 287 - The Beer Tax - In-Depth Analysis

2009-10-13T05:30:00.008-05:00

Hearing on 2009 AB 287 (pdf) is at 10am this morning. Unfortunately, I can't make it. But, Here's a blow-by-blow on this relatively short (6 page) bill.

June 2, 2009 − Introduced by Representatives BERCEAU, ROYS and HILGENBERG, cosponsored by Senator RISSER. Referred to Committee on Public Safety.

Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau
This bill increases the tax rate for the tax on fermented malt beverages from $2 per barrel to $10 per barrel. In addition, an amount of the taxes collected on fermented malt beverages equal to $2 per barrel will be used by the Office of Justice Assistance in the Department of Administration to provide grants to counties and municipalities to reduce crimes related to alcohol use by employing additional law enforcement officers and obtaining equipment and training, and an amount of the taxes equal to $4 per barrel will be used for community aids related to alcohol and drug abuse treatment services. Finally, an amount of the taxes equal to $2 per barrel will be used for grants for substance abuse treatment and prevention programs.

So, this is a quick summary of the bill. Basic gist: tax up from $2/bbl to $10/bbl. $2/bbl of the tax will be used to provide grants to local law enforcement "to reduce crimes related to alcohol", $4/bbl will be used for "community aids", another $2/bbl will be used for grants to substance abuse.

Section 1. [Grants will be provided out of the beer tax fund] to counties or municipalities to employ additional law enforcement officers, to obtain equipment and training, and, subject to [conditions below], for overtime work if the officers, equipment, training, and overtime assist in reducing crimes related to alcohol use. ... A county or municipality applying to the office for a grant under this subsection shall include a proposed plan of expenditure of the grant moneys. The grant moneys may be used only as described [above]. ... The use of all moneys distributed under this section shall comply with evidence−based practices established by the department. ... The office may not award an annual grant in excess of $250,000 to any county or municipality. ... The grant that a county or municipality receives under this subsection may not supplant existing local resources. ... For each year that a county or municipality receives a grant, the county or municipality shall provide matching funds of at least 10 percent of the amount of the grant."

So, counties and/or municipalities just need to front 10% of the grant and they can use the money to pay for "officers, equipment, training, and overtime" so long as those items or activities are used to "reduce crimes related to alcohol use." So, presumably up to $250K per year can be used to buy new cops to write speeding tickets, since traffic work might "reduce crimes related to alcohol use." Notice that the "officer, equipment, training, and overtime" don't actually have to reduce crime related to use - there is no responsibility or accountability for the funds - just that to get the funds the department must show that alcohol-related crime could be reduced with "evidence-based practices" (of course, it's up to the department what constitutes proper "evidence" that the practice will reduce alcohol-related crime).

So far, a beer tax is underwriting the ill-effects of not just beer, but wine, low-end vodka, bourbon, brandy, long-island iced teas, rum, gin, wine coolers, jello shots, fish bowls, and jagermeister.

The department shall distribute grants from the [beer tax] to counties, municipalities, school districts, nonprofit organizations, ... and cooperative educational service agencies to provide alcohol and drug abuse treatment and prevention programs.

And weed, coke, meth, lsd, barbituates, tranquilizers, aerosol, heroin, ....

129.02(1)
An occupational tax is imposed upon the removal for consumption or sale or selling of fermented malt beverages at the rate of $2 $10 per barrel of 31 gallons and at a proportionate rate for any other quantity or fractional parts thereof. Not more than one occupational tax shall be required to be paid on any one container of fermented malt beverages.

This is the part that raises the non-credited part of the excise tax to $10/bbl. It's not entirely clear that the "more than one occupational tax" applies to out-of-state barrels here. In theory, barrels going out of state will pay "more than one" if they have to pay both a Wisconsin and a foreign occupational tax. This is not entirely clear and I would want to see this made explicit. The only change to the existing code is to increase from $2 to $10 though - so presumably it will still be interpreted as it was.

129.02(2)(b)
In this section “eligible producer” means any producer of fermented malt beverages, whether or not located in this state, producing less than 300,000 barrels of fermented malt beverages in the calendar year for which credit under par. (a) is claimed. In determining the number of barrels, all brands or labels of a producer shall be combined and all barrels exported out of this state shall be included. All facilities for the production of fermented malt beverages owned or controlled by the same person shall be deemed a single producer.

It's important to note what this section does NOT do: namely, destroy the producer credit. It does not amend or destroy 129.02(2)(a). Breweries under 300K bbls will still get a 50% credit on the first 50K bbls. So, unless you are producing more than 50K bbls your tax will go up from $1/bbl to $5/bbl. If you make between 50K and 300K barrels you will still get a 50% credit on the first 50K bbls, but you will pay $10/bbl on the remainder. If you make over 300K bbls you are not eligible for the credit on any of your barrels. This is not a substantive change except in the $2 -> $10 number.

What it DOES change is that it now includes exported barrels in the counted barrels. Interestingly, this could end up affecting everyone's favorite "small" big brewery, Minhas, the most. Prior to this change, barrels that left the state were not counted in "how big" you were vis-a-vis the tax credit. If you, say, produced 40K bbls that stayed in-state, but produced 500K bbls that went out of state, you were eligible for the tax credit, because only in-state barrels were counted. Now, both in-state and out-state barrelage are counted to determine eligibility for the credit. Thus, this hypothetical brewery would have been eligible for the credit under the prior law (only paid $1/bbl on the first 50K bbls) but will not be eligible for the tax credit under this law (all 40K bbl will be subject to the full $10/bbl).

THIS section does not apply the tax to those out-of-state barrels. It ONLY establishes that out-of-state barrels count towards your credit eligibility.

The remainder of the bill just sets out the $2/$4/$2 distribution as set forth above. That's all that 2009 AB 287 does, folks.

A Penny For Your Thoughts - Sprecher Brewing Co

2009-10-12T15:00:00.000-05:00

Finally, from Jeff Hamilton, Vice-President and General Manager of Sprecher Brewing Company

-------------------------

The negative impacts to our state if the proposed bill were to pass are multi-faceted and reach many parts of our economy. The state’s brewing industry is one of the few business sectors that have remained relatively healthy in spite of our current economic downturn. The business of beer sustains Wisconsin families by providing jobs in not only breweries, but also malting plants, factories making packaging materials (glass, aluminum, paper products), wheat, barley, corn, and hop growers, distribution companies, restaurants and taverns, and grocery, convenience, and liquor stores. These employees and companies pay taxes and insurance premiums that provide healthcare for thousands of people.

Beer is also a major export product for our state. Breweries in Wisconsin produce products that are shipped to other states and abroad. All states collect tax on beer sold in their state. Under this proposal, Wisconsin would also collect this increased tax on all beer leaving the state, which would make it impossible for beers made in Wisconsin to compete with beers made in other states.

The bottom line is that this bill costs Wisconsin jobs. The loss of taxes as a result of these job losses will likely be more than the additional tax collected from the increased beer tax. This will also further burden the healthcare system with additional uninsured.

Wisconsin, and particularly Dane County taxpayers, should be outraged that the majority of the efforts to increase the beer tax are being sponsored by employees of government agencies with taxpayer money. UW Health and the Dane County Coalition to Reduce Alcohol Abuse are using government resources to organize rallies and arrange testimony for the upcoming hearing which clearly a majority of Wisconsin and Dane County citizens are against. If you are one of the majority of Wisconsin citizens over 21 that enjoys beer responsibly, that obeys state laws, that doesn’t drive intoxicated, and that isn’t an abuser of alcohol, make your voice be heard that you are not only against the tax increase, but also against the use of taxpayer funds to promote the tax.

Jeffrey Hamilton
Vice President/General Manager
Sprecher Brewing Company
Vice President
Wisconsin Brewers Guild

A Penny For Your Thoughts - RePublic Brewpub

2009-10-12T13:00:00.003-05:00

Joe Walts, Brewmaster of RePublic Brewpub soon-to-be of Sun Prairie, provides a more fact-based dissent. You can read an awesome point-by-point refutation at his website.

---------------------------

I've heard a lot of heated debate over the last week about what the new beer tax will actually do. Those of us who are planning on speaking at Tuesday's hearing: I suggest we all read the new bill very carefully so we don't appear uninformed. Here's what I think:

-The reference to producing less than 300,000 barrels does not mean the proposal is a tax for small breweries only. I can see how the language may suggest it, but the phrase is not a change to the current statutes. Given today's application of the law, I think the wording applies to the tax credit only. In other words, only breweries who produce less than 300,000 barrels annually can receive the 50% tax credit on their first 50,000 barrels. Another way of thinking about it is that the word 'section' refers to 139.02(2) specifically and not 139.02 in its entirety. Any lawyers care to weigh in?

-If I'm correct about the meaning of the word 'section', the statement "all barrels exported out of the state shall be included" does not mean that exported beer will be taxed by Wisconsin. It simply means that exported beer counts against the 300,000 barrel limit for the tax credit. I'm guessing that it always has, but that this is an opportunity for further clarification.

The proposal stinks, but I don't think it's as bad as some people are suggesting. Let's not blow our credibility by getting indignant about the wrong issues.

Here's what I told my representative about beer taxes (slightly modified for coherence):

-They're regressive. The excise taxes paid by a farmer will represent a much higher portion of his/her salary than the excise taxes paid by a CEO of a Fortune 500 company who drinks the same amount of beer.

-Reducing alcohol-related crime improves society as a whole. Responsible drinkers, who cause no more problems than non-drinkers, should not be required to shoulder a greater portion of the financial burden.

-Because the tax is collected from the producer, it will experience two additional markups - wholesale and retail - before reaching the consumer. The wholesale markup is typically around 30%. I'm not sure what the retail markup is at liquor stores, but it's in the same ballpark. In other words, the price increase to consumers will be far more than 2.4 cents per 12-oz bottle (the amount that will likely be claimed by proponents of the bill).

-Taxing volumes of beer instead of volumes of ethanol encourage producers to brew stronger beer. The reason why is because strong beer contains more ingredients than an equal volume standard-strength beer. With beers both taxed at the same rate, brewing ingredients are essentially taxed at a lower rate for strong beers.

-Although I generally oppose all excise taxes, AB-287 specifically targets beer to combat alcohol-related crime. However, the least expensive alcohol to purchase is bottom-shelf spirits. If the easiest way to become intoxicated isn't addressed, I believe the bill will be ineffective at achieving its stated purpose.

-The excise tax itself is taxed by the state sales tax.

A Penny For Your Thoughts - Pearl Street Brewery

2009-10-12T11:00:00.001-05:00

Joe Katchever, Brewmaster of Pearl Street Brewery, also writes to Theresa Berceau

----------------------------

Representative Berceau-

I find your "proposal to raise the Wisconsin beer tax by 2.4¢ a 12 oz. bottle for alcohol treatment and prevention" power point presentation to be very subjective and misleading. Factually, it is inaccurate and quite dated, and in merit it is injudicious. First off, this tax will very possibly result in a 50 cent per six pack increase by the time costs are added up along the supply chain. Many of the references you cited for your "facts" were published in the early 90's and even as far back as 1987. Many of your sources are neoprohibitionist organizations and can hardly be taken as fact. One of your slides bears the heading, "Most Wisconsin beer producers pay little in taxes." Tell me, what are the 26 Wisconsin breweries who paid less than $100 in taxes in 2007? Which ones paid less than $1000? I must be doing something wrong because my family-owned brewery paid more in beer taxes than I, personally, earned in 2007. That's beer taxes alone, not income taxes, or property taxes, etc. Who do you expect to believe that $1.08 is the "average price" of a craft beer? Most bars in Madison get about $4 or $5 for a craft beer and the average 6-pack of good beer is closer to $8. While you did point out that Wisconsin breweries are exempt from excise taxes on beer exported out of state, you failed to mention that we DO pay those taxes to the state that the beer is being shipped to, and as you pointed out, many of these states have even higher beer taxes than Wisconsin does. You also failed to mention that beer imported into Wisconsin is subject to the Wisconsin beer tax.

You exclaimed that beer taxes in Wisconsin haven't gone up in some time, but you didn't say in your presentation that Wisconsin beer taxes have not gone up in so long because beer is already, by far, Wisconsin's highest taxed industry. On top of high taxes, Wisconsin breweries collectively spend far more to promote responsible drinking and to prevent alcohol related problems than your legislature does. We would spend even more if we didn't pay so much in taxes. Contrary to what you'd have people believe, we'd like our customers to be alive and healthy.

Blaming the breweries and their workers for the abuses of alcohol is like blaming engineers for earthquakes. Or blaming cows for global warming. Or blaming politicians for corruption. We, the brewers and the responsible beer drinkers of Wisconsin take issue with that. I notice that the revenue from this tax increase is not even earmarked for any type of effort to reduce drinking fatalities, which can only mean the money will go to the general fund to be plundered by your colleagues' "social programs". Isn't that right? If your intentions are sincere, perhaps you wouldn't mind introducing some legislation where Wisconsin breweries' taxes would be decreased by the amount they spend on beer and alcohol education and the promotion of responsible consumption.

Furthermore, I am very curious as to why your proposal targets Wisconsin breweries and not wineries or distilleries. Perhaps you're a wine drinker.

Miss Berceau, you show no knowledge of Wisconsin's rich and wonderful brewing heritage, nor the history of beer and brewing and the important role it's played in our ancestory and in our country's prosperity. Your tax and spend notions have no place in today's economy. You are no friend of the beer drinker.