Random Beer Thoughts

[BadJustin]

Joking aside, I am interested to see what the plans are for this facility. They have a pretty decent capacity in Brooklyn now with their recent expansion and they have, incrementally, taken over much of the commercial space on the block they're on.
I could see this facility as a place where they can brew, at a larger scale, beers like Green City, Forever Ever, All Green Everything, etc and expand their distribution pretty substantially. While also focusing on expanding their repertoire into farmhouses and sours, and a larger barrel program upstate.

I don't see them buying this place just to do the same exact thing as they are in brooklyn. Maybe smaller smaller, less frequent batches of the ever-changing DIPAs that bring out the masses, but not 4 new beers a week, every week.
but what do i know.

you know the brew capacity of this space, BadJustin ?

If I had to guess 30 bbl.

 

[BadJustin]

Confirmed- barrel program.


https://www.democratandchronicle.co...dloh-building-open-east-bloomfield/826707002/

 

[Lutter]

FWIW I've met both Jeppe and Mikkel (who have both done collabs with ... [a local Austin brewery] ... which is why they were here). Mikkel was nice. Jeppe was kind of an enormous ******.

I got the impression that Jeppe couldn't even brew from the [local brewery's] brewers (he just came up with recipe ideas and watched them brew).

 

[jammery]

Confirmed- barrel program.


https://www.democratandchronicle.co...dloh-building-open-east-bloomfield/826707002/

Sounds like they’re going big with plans for 2 buildings as well. Jester King style.

 

[nathanmiller]

[a local Austin brewery]

Jester King

 

[Lutter]

Jester King

 

[user 306926]

Wave at 3CG for me on your way out the door.

Thanks fam.

3CG?

 

[trickytunadicky]

3CG?

Hanson’s studio, 3CG records, is literally right next door to Prairie.

 

[Josh2]

3CG?

3 cute girls

 

[trickytunadicky]

3 cute girls

They are looking less cute these days. Do I look that old?

 

[JulianB1]

They are looking less cute these days. Do I look that old?

3 curmudgeonly guys

 

[Josh2]

They are looking less cute these days. Do I look that old?

Jesus they look old.


I dont know how old you are to begin with, so I'm going to go with no. No you dont look that old.

 

[trickytunadicky]

Jesus they look old.


I dont know how old you are to begin with, so I'm going to go with no. No you dont look that old.

Hahahaha. Not to derail this further, but the same age as the one in the middle, they are lined up youngest to oldest.

Thanks for the laughs. I hope drinkypoo enjoyed Prairie and got to enjoy the finest of the Tulsa beer scene.

 

[user 306926]

Hahahaha. Not to derail this further, but the same age as the one in the middle, they are lined up youngest to oldest.

Thanks for the laughs. I hope drinkypoo enjoyed Prairie and got to enjoy the finest of the Tulsa beer scene.

Yeesh.... nevermind the 3CG.

But I am heading back to Tulsa tonight with a flight early in the morning back to the D.
Meeting up with jupiter6xx at Heirloom (awesome spot) and will do that American Solera too. Tulsa has a fantastic beer scene, imho.
Just wish these places stayed open later.

 

[drgarage1]

Jesus they look old.


I dont know how old you are to begin with, so I'm going to go with no. No you dont look that old.

The one on the right legit looks like old Dane Cook

 

[jivex5k1]

FWIW I've met both Jeppe and Mikkel (who have both done collabs with ... [a local Austin brewery] ... which is why they were here). Mikkel was nice. Jeppe was kind of an enormous ******.

I got the impression that Jeppe couldn't even brew from the [local brewery's] brewers (he just came up with recipe ideas and watched them brew).

I still don't understand how they make money. They didn't brew, didn't have breweries, somehow sold other breweries recipes and got them to stick a label on them looking like the beer was from a brewery that never existed in the first place.

What the **** did the say at first? Did they pay the breweries to brew for them? Package, label, and distribute? Or do breweries pay them for rights to brew? I just don't get it.

 

[Lutter]

I still don't understand how they make money. They didn't brew, didn't have breweries, somehow sold other breweries recipes and got them to stick a label on them looking like the beer was from a brewery that never existed in the first place.

What the **** did the say at first? Did they pay the breweries to brew for them? Package, label, and distribute? Or do breweries pay them for rights to brew? I just don't get it.

They way I understand it is they pay the brewery for labor and materials and receive the packaged beer off the dock. End of transaction.

They (the contracting party) then sell that beer for a slight markup to their distro which is their profit.

 

[stupac2]

I still don't understand how they make money. They didn't brew, didn't have breweries, somehow sold other breweries recipes and got them to stick a label on them looking like the beer was from a brewery that never existed in the first place.

What the **** did the say at first? Did they pay the breweries to brew for them? Package, label, and distribute? Or do breweries pay them for rights to brew? I just don't get it.

Didn't they just sex up the idea of contract brewing? It's been a thing forever (at least since Sam Adams got started) but call it "gypsy brewing" and now it's all exciting, apparently.

 

[Lutter]

Wife apparently NEEDED this Growler, lol.

Austin Beerworks logo on the other side.

 

[JulianB1]

Didn't they just sex up the idea of contract brewing? It's been a thing forever (at least since Sam Adams got started) but call it "gypsy brewing" and now it's all exciting, apparently.

I always felt like there was a difference between the two

"gypsy" = no physical location, supplies recipes to other breweries and has them brew exactly that

"contract" = either has a physical location and are farming out brewing to other breweries for additional capacity OR no physical brewery and are having breweries brew a "cheap" version of something that brewery already makes (Trader Joes store brands etc)

but I suppose that's a distinction without much of an actual substantive difference.

So you may be correct, it might just be a branding thing.

 

[stupac2]

I always felt like there was a difference between the two

"gypsy" = no physical location, supplies recipes to other breweries and has them brew exactly that

"contract" = either has a physical location and are farming out brewing to other breweries for additional capacity OR no physical brewery and are having breweries brew a "cheap" version of something that brewery already makes (Trader Joes store brands etc)

but I suppose that's a distinction without much of an actual substantive difference.

So you may be correct, it might just be a branding thing.

Contract brewing from the very beginning was paying a brewery with excess capacity to make beer. FX Matt didn't make an "expensive" version of Boston Lager, it was Koch's recipe. I think that the term "gypsy" is really just trying to make contract brewing sound sexier.

 

[primebeer]

Contract brewing from the very beginning was paying a brewery with excess capacity to make beer. FX Matt didn't make an "expensive" version of Boston Lager, it was Koch's recipe. I think that the term "gypsy" is really just trying to make contract brewing sound sexier.

Agreed. I think it’s more of an optics matter than anything. At the outset, most breweries that contract some or all of their production don’t necessarily advertise the fact that they do that. I’ve read some things about the evolution of BBC and Jim Koch and he’s taken heat several times for contracting as a result of the perceived lack of transparency.

Gypsy brewing, on the other hand, seems to be more of an attempt at making contract brewing more glamorous, where the brewery emphasizes the ‘art’ of brewing rather than the science or process of it.

Then those that contract some of their production do so out of necessity and won’t necessarily want to say anything since they care about the process and ownership over their liquid and perceive it as more of a stopgap.

 

[seedavid]

Agreed. I think it’s more of an optics matter than anything. At the outset, most breweries that contract some or all of their production don’t necessarily advertise the fact that they do that. I’ve read some things about the evolution of BBC and Jim Koch and he’s taken heat several times for contracting as a result of the perceived lack of transparency.

Gypsy brewing, on the other hand, seems to be more of an attempt at making contract brewing more glamorous, where the brewery emphasizes the ‘art’ of brewing rather than the science or process of it.

Then those that contract some of their production do so out of necessity and won’t necessarily want to say anything since they care about the process and ownership over their liquid and perceive it as more of a stopgap.

I think you have to evaluate on a case-by-case basis.

Jeppe is, by many accounts, kind of a bullshitter. He doesn't brew, but he does come up with a lot of eye catching gimmicks, so he has some value. But just because he calls himself a gypsy brewer doesn't make even that concept bad. Grimm just finally opened a brewery, but Joe was gypsy brewing at a few different facilities for awhile. Joe knows what the **** he's doing, brewed personally on other people's systems, and managed to do it very well for awhile despite not having his own setup to dial in to his personal specifications. Joe is (or I guess was) the good version, no doubt.

To keep things semi-local, Carton was contract brewing out of Two Roads for awhile. They were building a larger space and expanding capacity in house, but wanted to be able to expand distro on some of their flagship offerings in the meantime. I happen to know that while Two Roads was technically brewing the beer, Carton always had at least one representative there on brew days to make sure things were going the way they ought to. They were outsourcing the capacity and most of the labor, but it isn't like they would just set it and forget it. I don't see an issue with this. More Boat Beer to go around is good news to me.

I don't know, there's no perfect or one right way to do things. If you're an ******* and/or you make bad beer, but you otherwise do everything else "the right way," are you really better than a good guy that nails everything, but brews on someone else's system? Does it really matter?

 

[Der Fuchs]

As I've come to understand it, the difference between "gypsy" and "contract" is (roughly) consistency of location brewed. Both obviously brewing at 3rd party locations, but the "gypsy" brewers tend to use multiple 3rd party locations, or at least more on average than the typical contract brewer.

 

[stupac2]

I think you have to evaluate on a case-by-case basis.

Jeppe is, by many accounts, kind of a bullshitter. He doesn't brew, but he does come up with a lot of eye catching gimmicks, so he has some value. But just because he calls himself a gypsy brewer doesn't make even that concept bad. Grimm just finally opened a brewery, but Joe was gypsy brewing at a few different facilities for awhile. Joe knows what the **** he's doing, brewed personally on other people's systems, and managed to do it very well for awhile despite not having his own setup to dial in to his personal specifications. Joe is (or I guess was) the good version, no doubt.

To keep things semi-local, Carton was contract brewing out of Two Roads for awhile. They were building a larger space and expanding capacity in house, but wanted to be able to expand distro on some of their flagship offerings in the meantime. I happen to know that while Two Roads was technically brewing the beer, Carton always had at least one representative there on brew days to make sure things were going the way they ought to. They were outsourcing the capacity and most of the labor, but it isn't like they would just set it and forget it. I don't see an issue with this. More Boat Beer to go around is good news to me.

I don't know, there's no perfect or one right way to do things. If you're an ******* and/or you make bad beer, but you otherwise do everything else "the right way," are you really better than a good guy that nails everything, but brews on someone else's system? Does it really matter?

You don't even have to be that recent, IIRC Stillwater did the same thing at about the same time as Mikkel. I believe they called themselves gypsies but borrowed it from Mikkel, I may be wrong there.

As I've come to understand it, the difference between "gypsy" and "contract" is (roughly) consistency of location brewed. Both obviously brewing at 3rd party locations, but the "gypsy" brewers tend to use multiple 3rd party locations, or at least more on average than the typical contract brewer.

Yeah, but to me that reads as a distinction without a difference. At best it means nothing, at worst that there's likely to be consistency issues. I'm very much of the belief that it's just trying to make contract brewing seem less vulgar (as primebeer pointed out there's always been a bit of shame associated with it, "not a real brewer", etc).

For the record, I'm not being judgmental about contract brewing. I am being judgmental about Mikkeller/Evil Twin being all marketing and no substance, and I think the "gypsy brewing" thing is part of that, trying to romanticize some pretty quotidian business decisions.

 

[FoudreGuy]

I think you have to evaluate on a case-by-case basis.

Jeppe is, by many accounts, kind of a bullshitter. He doesn't brew, but he does come up with a lot of eye catching gimmicks, so he has some value. But just because he calls himself a gypsy brewer doesn't make even that concept bad. Grimm just finally opened a brewery, but Joe was gypsy brewing at a few different facilities for awhile. Joe knows what the **** he's doing, brewed personally on other people's systems, and managed to do it very well for awhile despite not having his own setup to dial in to his personal specifications. Joe is (or I guess was) the good version, no doubt.

To keep things semi-local, Carton was contract brewing out of Two Roads for awhile. They were building a larger space and expanding capacity in house, but wanted to be able to expand distro on some of their flagship offerings in the meantime. I happen to know that while Two Roads was technically brewing the beer, Carton always had at least one representative there on brew days to make sure things were going the way they ought to. They were outsourcing the capacity and most of the labor, but it isn't like they would just set it and forget it. I don't see an issue with this. More Boat Beer to go around is good news to me.

I don't know, there's no perfect or one right way to do things. If you're an ******* and/or you make bad beer, but you otherwise do everything else "the right way," are you really better than a good guy that nails everything, but brews on someone else's system? Does it really matter?

Adam at Floodland brews on Seapine’s setup in South Seattle then hauls the wort up to the Floodland space in North Seattle where everything ages over time. It’s just cost effective for him with such a small operation.

 

[NClambicguy]

Adam at Floodland brews on Seapine’s setup in South Seattle then hauls the wort up to the Floodland space in North Seattle where everything ages over time. It’s just cost effective for him with such a small operation.

Troy Casey did that too. The difference is that they both brewed the beer and have the talent. They just didn't have the space to have their own systems.

 

[Gaseous Clay]

I believe the correct term is Romani brewing.

 

[drgarage1]

Troy Casey did that too. The difference is that they both brewed the beer and have the talent. They just didn't have the space to have their own systems.

Actually, Casey didn’t make his own wort.

 

[NClambicguy]

Actually, Casey didn’t make his own wort.

He did initially but then let Roaring Fork take over once he knew they wouldn't screw it up. At least I'm pretty sure that's how it went down. I could be wrong though