FIB War Room

[stxSS07]

Is trading your own beer a bad thing though? I'd do the same if I were them. Would way rather trade for something I can't otherwise get than get another $10-20 for one more bottle sale. It's not like all breweries don't hold back plenty for events, future releases, personal consumption, etc. Maybe I'm in the minority here though.

EDIT: also don't see this as much different than breweries that are also distributors and keep enty of the good stuff for their own events, bars, etc. If anything, would think what TG allegedly does is better since they're holding back their own beer, which they can of course do whatever they want with.

As long as they're not the ones setting the high water mark for the bottles, I see zero problems with it.

 

[middlebrow]

the bigger problem (if its even a problem) going on is the distributors & their employees taking and trading the rareish product of the big national boys. I highly suggest everyone get a side job with shelton bros.

 

[Alum]

I've known the TG guys for a good long while now.

And I guess while I understand how what they do (Like cryptic social media posts that insinuate a rare release when there isn't, pandering the the bro crowd and working them into a mad frenzy, etc) can (and does) come off poorly.. I've never once thought trading your own beer was a faux pas. I've been involved with several people over the years (some regularly) who have traded their own beer from California to Oregon to Florida and on..

 

[tinypyramids1]

As long as they're not the ones setting the high water mark for the bottles, I see zero problems with it.

the only problem i see is the 'official' bottle count creating an initial perception of (higher) scarcity which they then exploit by trading bottles not reflected in that number. my problem isn't with them trading their beer, it's with the deception in the limitation of supply (i.e. seeing bottles with number 370/300) to inflate the trade value.

in any case, i don't have the ammo or the money to want to trade for the highest tier of tg stouts so this doesn't affect me directly. i'm only talking about things i've read or heard through the grapevine.

 

[Leafhouse]

Them trading their own beers feels wrong to me even though rationally I think it's fine. I would imagine that people would be really upset if they found TG selling KBBS on mybeercellar for 400 bucks but trading it for beer worth that much on the secondary market is fine? Brett Porter were all over BA trading away Nuthulus for market value I think people would get pissed. Are we giving TG a pass because they're a smaller brewery?

I've never really considered this situation. It's interesting to think about.

 

[jermy]

Hard to beat Lakeview HQ IMO. Especially on off-hours.

lakeview HQ + sheffields + big & littles for the lakeview trifecta

 

[Leafhouse]

the only problem i see is the 'official' bottle count creating an initial perception of (higher) scarcity which they then exploit by trading bottles not reflected in that number. my problem isn't with them trading their beer, it's with the deception in the limitation of supply (i.e. seeing bottles with number 370/300) to inflate the trade value.

Though isn't the bottle count supposed to be indicative of the number of bottles released into the wild? AFAIK we don't include bottles held back by the brewery in the total bottle count, or am I mistaken?

 

[tinypyramids1]

Though isn't the bottle count supposed to be indicative of the number of bottles released into the wild? AFAIK we don't include bottles held back by the brewery in the total bottle count, or am I mistaken?

the reason i consider it deceptive is that those bottles held back are not normally considered to be in the trade market, and when you're at a "300 bottle" level of release, those extra few bottles held back matter, and when it's the head of tg adding those bottles to the supply in a back channel, that's where i think the line starts to get crossed.

 

[danbanana]

Brett Porter were all over BA trading away Nuthulus for market value I think people would get pissed. Are we giving TG a pass because they're a smaller brewery?

Porter has nothing to do with GI Clybourn, which runs independently from the greater GI/InBev group.

That said, I tend to agree that it feels shady, but it is their beer. Wasn't DeGarde pretty active here on TB, trading their own stuff? I think I remember in the early days of this site seeing them offering 3Ls and such. I could be wrong.

 

[Leafhouse]

the reason i consider it deceptive is that those bottles held back are not normally considered to be in the trade market, and when you're at a "300 bottle" level of release, those extra few bottles held back matter, and when it's the head of tg adding those bottles to the market in a back channel, that's where i think the line starts to get crossed.

Yeah that's a good point, typically the excess would only be for promotional purposes and special events etc.

Porter has nothing to do with GI Clybourn, which runs independently from the greater GI/InBev group.

That said, I tend to agree that it feels shady, but it is their beer. Wasn't DeGarde pretty active here on TB, trading their own stuff? I think I remember in the early days of this site seeing them offering 3Ls and such. I could be wrong.

Yeah I know, it was just an example.

 

[ClCardinal84]

Them trading their own beers feels wrong to me even though rationally I think it's fine. I would imagine that people would be really upset if they found TG selling KBBS on mybeercellar for 400 bucks but trading it for beer worth that much on the secondary market is fine? Brett Porter were all over BA trading away Nuthulus for market value I think people would get pissed. Are we giving TG a pass because they're a smaller brewery?

I've never really considered this situation. It's interesting to think about.

They made the beer and it's their business to run how they choose. If they don't want to sell the beer to the consumer to make money and want to hold some for themselves to trade & consume, then I think that's fine. However, if they were selling rare bottles on the black market for highly inflated values, then I think I would have a problem with it.

If I recall correctly, Cory King was trading B1 BA Abraxas when it first came out on TOS for Fou Foune's and other lambics. I don't think this practice is uncommon.

 

[ApocalypseZombie]

I have no problem with TG trading their own beer, just verifying that they do.

 

[ClCardinal84]

I have no problem with TG trading their own beer, just verifying that they do.

At the end of the day, I think majority of us would like to be in a situation working for a highly revered brewery and able to trade our highly sought after beers that we made for some beers we really would like to try. That would rule.

 

[Leafhouse]

However, if they were selling rare bottles on the black market for highly inflated values, then I think I would have a problem with it.

This is the part that seems inconsistent to me. Why is it okay to trade a beer for other beer at a hugely inflated value but it isn't okay to sell it for market price? Would it be okay for them to trade a KBBS for a PS4 or is it only acceptable when trading for other beers?

 

[LSMroz]

in any case, i don't have the ammo or the money to want to trade for the highest tier of tg stouts

I know a guy if you are interested...

 

[LSMroz]

but it isn't okay to sell it for market price?

I'm guessing they could run into tax and liquor license issues if they did this.

 

[Thorpe]

This is the part that seems inconsistent to me. Why is it okay to trade a beer for other beer at a hugely inflated value but it isn't okay to sell it for market price? Would it be okay for them to trade a KBBS for a PS4 or is it only acceptable when trading for other beers?

First, the legality. A brewery selling beer on the black market is definitely illegal and I imagine would have huge consequences for them. An individual trading beer is much more of a gray area (and could be done in a completely legal manner through IP trades, etc).

Also, how is it at an inflated value? If TG trades one of its beers for another beer that was sold for the same amount, the dollar value is equal, though the perceived value may be more. Either way, dollars and desire both match for the trading partners. If it were a PS4, that's way off and more like selling for an inflated value, though I wouldn't have a problem with it. I don't think numbering "X/300" is an issue when keeping 50 bottles behind, as who doesn't expect that the brewery is keeping bottles behind for their own consumption, friends, future events, festivals, competitions, etc? The 300 to me indicates what is available to the public, not the production.

 

[Leafhouse]

I'm guessing they could run into tax and liquor license issues if they did this.

I'm talking from an ethical standpoint.

 

[LSMroz]

I'm talking from an ethical standpoint.

ETHICS?! Take that trash over to the Serious, Taboo, Toxic thread!

Spoiler: SPOILER

People don't do unethical things because they can go to jail.

 

[ClCardinal84]

This is the part that seems inconsistent to me. Why is it okay to trade a beer for other beer at a hugely inflated value but it isn't okay to sell it for market price? Would it be okay for them to trade a KBBS for a PS4 or is it only acceptable when trading for other beers?

How do we know what exactly they traded it for though? Maybe they trade it 1:1 with Hommage or Framboos or something else of similar value/rarity. I guess my point is that once you buy beer, it's a sunk cost because the cash has been spent. You aren't getting money back unless you sell the beer. Trading beer for beer exchanges no cash, so there is nothing here except swapping commodities based on how the market drives the "price" for lack of a better word.

Also, think about it from a brewer's perspective who has spent hours brewing the beers, cleaning the tanks, checking the barrels, etc. Time is money also, so if you want to get really deep into it, trading one TG stout that took months to brew and perfect for 3-4 loons that someone could have purchased at a store potentially could be looked at monetarily from that standpoint also.

There are a million different ways to look at this, but at the end of the day, no cash is being exchanged, so I don't think there is a huge issue.

 

[Leafhouse]

I don't think numbering "X/300" is an issue when keeping 50 bottles behind, as who doesn't expect that the brewery is keeping bottles behind for their own consumption, friends, future events, festivals, competitions, etc? The 300 to me indicates what is available to the public, not the production.

Well, like tinypyramids said, the market is placing a value on the beer based on how many are available to the public. If they are trading them on public forums then those bottles should be included in the total number available. Price is loosely based on supply and demand. In this case we are told that the supply is lower than it really is, which increases the price. The problem is that all the bottles held back are not being used for fests, they are being traded on the open market.

 

[JulianB1]

I think it's pretty cut-and-dried:

TG selling beer on the black market: clear violation of their licenses under the 3-tier system.

TG trading beer: it's in a general legal grey area (at least with regards to shipping, as some have said an in-person swap presents no legal issues that I can see), no money is exchanging hands, and "you can't rape the willing": if people are willing to offer up huge "value" for their beers, why shouldn't those guys take them up on them?

As far as "messing up bottle counts" and so on goes, I don't really see that as a negative because the trading game is getting way too obsessed with "X bottle count aged in Y barrels" and anything that throws a wrench into that kind of calculus is actually welcome in my opinion.

 

[Alum]

Well, like tinypyramids said, the market is placing a value on the beer based on how many are available to the public. If they are trading them on public forums then those bottles should be included in the total number available. Price is loosely based on supply and demand. In this case we are told that the supply is lower than it really is, which increases the price. The problem is that all the bottles held back are not being used for fests, they are being traded on the open market.

Is it really the brewery's job to give a $%&# about perception in the secondary market though?

 

[stxSS07]

Butts.

 

[Thorpe]

Well, like tinypyramids said, the market is placing a value on the beer based on how many are available to the public. If they are trading them on public forums then those bottles should be included in the total number available. Price is loosely based on supply and demand. In this case we are told that the supply is lower than it really is, which increases the price. The problem is that all the bottles held back are not being used for fests, they are being traded on the open market.

I don't think bottle counts on labels are saying what the total supply is in terms of number of bottles. I'd say those numbers should be viewed as what is being offered for public sale.

 

[lb304854]

Is it really the brewery's job to give a $%&# about perception in the secondary market though?

When they actively try to affect certain perceptions about their own beer on that secondary market......maybe?

 

[JulianB1]

When they actively try to affect certain perceptions about their own beer on that secondary market......maybe?

Are they really doing that though? Legit question, I haven't noticed one way or the other.

I feel like the hype around KBBS in particular blew up so fast it's not like there was any extra fuel they could add to it.

 

[danbanana]

Butts.

As long as it's your butt, you can do what what you want with it. Trade it, put numbers on it, whatevs.

Except selling. You cross a legal threshold if you try to sell your butts. FYI.

 

[kawilliams81]

I can tell you with 100% certainty that the TG guys trade their own beer. Usually for lambics/american wilds.

I know Central Waters used to trade their own beer at their anniversary parties. I traded some Two Brothers sours back at the 14 anniversary party for some vintage barleywine and 1414. I don't have a problem with breweries doing this.

 

[lb304854]

I know Central Waters used to trade their own beer at their anniversary parties. I traded some Two Brothers sours back at the 14 anniversary party for some vintage barleywine and 1414. I don't have a problem with breweries doing this.

Especially when you can get THAT kind of deal.