• Please visit and share your knowledge at our sister communities:
  • If you have not, please join our official Homebrewing Facebook Group!

    Homebrewing Facebook Group

Random Beer Thoughts

Homebrew Talk

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
At least when they started marketing the light lagers and they overtook the the regular Bud/Coors products as number one sellers somebody must have. Even something as recent as Miller 64 is marketed based on caloric content.
Sure, I get the light lager is reduced calorie wise. But I always thought of it as people care in that they can feel better/are able to more easily drink 12+ beers in a night type of way, not in a hugely caloric conscious type of way.
 
Initially I too thought ABInBev ran the nutrition info commercial for some sort of advantage/nefarious plot to show how much fewer calories their beer has compared to typical craft beers. Turns out 'the labels aren't legally required, but major beer makers agreed in 2016 to voluntarily disclose nutrition facts on their products by 2020.' One of many articles on it below.

Guess ABInBev just felt like really owning the fact they're meeting their promise and felt like touting it in a commercial.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/11/bud-light-debuts-bigger-nutrition-labels.html

Their fastest growing brand is Mich Ultra, so they're trying to use similar tactics to grow BL back to the king. https://www.goodbeerhunting.com/blog/2018/10/3/michelob-ultra-unrated
 
Initially I too thought ABInBev ran the nutrition info commercial for some sort of advantage/nefarious plot to show how much fewer calories their beer has compared to typical craft beers. Turns out 'the labels aren't legally required, but major beer makers agreed in 2016 to voluntarily disclose nutrition facts on their products by 2020.' One of many articles on it below.

Guess ABInBev just felt like really owning the fact they're meeting their promise and felt like touting it in a commercial.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/11/bud-light-debuts-bigger-nutrition-labels.html
The nefarious aspect doesn't lie in showing the caloric difference, it's that they're almost certainly lobbying to make it a requirement down the road. It costs virtually nothing per can of Miller Lite to run nutritional info, but for breweries with smaller production runs, frequently spread across many brands, it will be disproportionately onerous if it's ever made compulsory.

As loose analogue, remember a month or so ago when Amazon, after many years of profiting off of grossly underpaying their workers, putting many brick-and-mortar competitors out of business and generating historic inequity, decided to pay their workers $15/hr? And then they called on all their competitors to do so? They know their competitors are in their death throes, and that a good, moral $15 min. wage will hasten the end of, say, Barnes & Noble, whose sales will then invariably divert primarily to Amazon, thereby concentrating the monopoly.

Anything that disproportionately aids monopolies/fosters homogeneity can **** itself to death, even if it appears on its face to be good.
 
I looked at it with more sinister intent. Start adding the information, hope it becomes required eventually, forcing everyone else to do expensive nutritional analysis for all their beers.
Yup, that was my first thought as well. I looked into nutritional analysis out of curiosity cause people kept asking but it's expensive as hell.
 
Not guilty enough to not do it.
tenor.gif
 
**** it. Stick it to consumers and no brewery should release any new beer in 2019. Make them buy **** they've already drank.

Whether or not you're exaggerating/joking, there's actually another aspect of this that's already causing some ripples: breweries cannot get label approval even for beers that they already make (but didn't need label approval on before, because they were not distributed at all, or not distributed out-of-state) in order to bring them to festivals.
 
Whether or not you're exaggerating/joking, there's actually another aspect of this that's already causing some ripples: breweries cannot get label approval even for beers that they already make (but didn't need label approval on before, because they were not distributed at all, or not distributed out-of-state) in order to bring them to festivals.

I was joking but then again people really like the Smokey and the Bandit movies...
 
At least when they started marketing the light lagers and they overtook the the regular Bud/Coors products as number one sellers somebody must have. Even something as recent as Miller 64 is marketed based on caloric content.

up until not that many years ago i worked a 2nd job vending beer at a local arena. the highest end option was probably Labatt's Blue. we also MGD, Miller Lite, High Life, Bud and Bud Light.

then some stands introduced Miller 64, Michelob Light and... one other that i can't remember.

the number of people who came up and commented either "give me a Bud heavy, i don't drink that lightweight ****" or "oh, good, you've got light beer.. i can't handle the calories in MGD or Budweiser" was not insignificant.

i'd bet it was close to 20% depending on the event. and it wasn't women calorie counting.
 
Deschutes puts the caloric values for their beers on the website, kinda fun and depressing.

Fresh Squeezed IPA - 225 calories/12 oz
Mirror Pond - 170/12 oz
Hop Henge IPA - 225/12 oz
Inversion IPA - 228/12 oz
Jubelale - 230 oz/12 oz
Black Butte Porter - 192 calories/12 oz.
Black Butte XXX - 740 calories/22 oz bottle.
Abyss 2018 - 639 calories/22 oz bottle
 
Here's a press release on the new Dogfish Head low calorie IPA

https://www.esquire.com/food-drink/drinks/a25891073/dogfish-head-low-calorie-ipa-beer-monk-fruit/

Dogfish Head made an IPA that is as low-cal and low-carb as a Michelob Ultra. Dubbed Slightly Mighty, the beer is the result of a year-and-a-half of molecular research and a push by Dogfish Head's founder and president Sam Calagione to be healthy-ish. However unlikely it may seem, it is a legitimate IPA both geeks and average folks will dig.

"That’s why I started developing these beers,” says Calagione when I finally get him on the phone between playing games in an ice hockey tournament at Chicago's United Center. “I thought, ‘Well, I’m not going to slow down my drinking. So I better start innovating.’”

Calagione maintains a very active lifestyle, the kind you might not expect for a beer mogul pushing 50. But pounding the high-ABV “extreme” ales that put him on the map, like the 18 percent ABV World Wide Stout, had been getting harder and harder. SeaQuench Ale was the first of his new projects, released in 2016—his vision was to make the most “thirst-quenching” beer ever. Packed with electrolytes like black limes, sour lime juice, and sea salt, its production was aided by a scientist from the Gatorade Sports Science Institute. Calagione’s latest vision was Slightly Mighty, which has only 95 calories and 3.6 carbs. Compare that to Michelob Ultra’s 95 calories and 2.5 carbs. (A 12-ounce serving of Dogfish Head’s 90 Minute IPA, on the other hand, has 294 calories.)

While craft breweries tend to loathe the big business “macro” beers, any brewery would want a piece of Michelob Ultra’s remarkable success. It’s one of the few conglomerate-owned factory beers whose sales have trended upward this decade—and a whopping 21 percent in the last year alone—making it the sixth best-selling beer in America. As Good Beer Hunting noted back in October, “It has become so popular, Ultra has essentially created its own untouchable sub-segment.”

slightlymighty-12pk-cans-1547584370.jpg


Calagione is acutely aware of this, noting that younger people are more cognizant of living a healthy lifestyle, even while drinking, and a major trend across the the entire alcohol industry at the moment is creating healthy (or healthier) products. That concept usually makes me roll my eyes—booze is inherently poison, and most low-cal beers and spirits taste terrible, because fewer calories generally means less alcohol, and thus less flavor. That’s why Michelob Ultra resembles beer-flavored LaCroix. Calagione realized he needed something that would help maintain flavor. He found it in an all-natural Chinese monk fruit extract.

“It’s almost as expensive per ounce as cocaine,” he says. “Luckily you don’t have to use a lot. If you put just a little in your mouth you’re like, ‘Oh my ******* god that is sweet!'”

Even at 300 times the sweetness of raw sugar, monk fruit extract doesn’t add any calories or carbs. Calagione tells me that it has become “hot ****” in the health and wellness industry of late—it’s seen as a Stevia competitor—but, to his knowledge, no brewery has ever used it before. (Dogfish Head needed to spend $10,000 in lawyer’s fees and four months’ lobbying time to get the FDA to approve its use in this beer.) Even if another brewery wanted to employ the pricey extract, they wouldn’t know the proprietary enzyme technique Dogfish Head engineered to dry out the monk fruit so the beer isn’t sickly sweet.

In fact, Slightly Mighty is bone dry—definitely not a "fruit beer." It has a fragrant hop presence with pleasant tropical notes of pineapple and mango. The body’s palate, however, is more brut champagne-like; likewise, the monk fruit creates a thicker mouthfeel, which makes the beer feel less like your typical thin, "diet" brew. It’s fizzy and quite refreshing, though hardly just hoppy water like many session beers.

Now appearing on draft at Dogfish Head’s Delaware tasting room, in April bottles will also start landing in several states. So will a special “Off-Centered Activity Box,” which is essentially a cardboard cooler filled with cans of Slightly Mighty, SeaQuench, and SuperEIGHT, another recent brewery innovation made with superfoods like prickly pear and toasted quinoa.

Before heading back for another hockey game, Calagione tells me he’s bullish about Slightly Mighty’s market potential: “We just know there’s a **** ton of drinkers out there that want a lot of flavor but don’t want all those calories and carbs.” Seems like this IPA fits the bill.
 
i've had the 7bbl batch of slightly mighty at their tasting room and it smells great but has an off-putting aftertaste that i guess i'll attribute to the monkfruit. i'll be interested to see if that remains in the distributed version
 
i've had the 7bbl batch of slightly mighty at their tasting room and it smells great but has an off-putting aftertaste that i guess i'll attribute to the monkfruit. i'll be interested to see if that remains in the distributed version
Stevia gives me the same ****** aftertaste as artificial sweeteners. I'm not sure if I've tried the monkfruit stuff, but it wouldn't surprise me if it also had a ****** aftertaste.
 
That's one of the great things about all the Resilience versions out there. When done well it's like having SN fresher that I ever see it.
The only mediocre Resilience I’ve had so far was at Great Notion. I think they were confused about when to add the lactose and maple syrup
 
Back
Top