TOPIC:

"TheBeerNut":1brv8kve wrote:

"UpsidedownA":1brv8kve wrote: We don't always know what decision making structures exist in an organisation but we can be confident they get more complicated and less authorial the larger the organisation gets.[/quote:1brv8kve]On what is such confidence based? If it's simply an assumption based on the brewery size, is this any different from having output as a criterion?[/quote:1brv8kve]
Well, I haven't investigated it personally, it's true. My confidence is based on experience with large organisations and authors. I think I've seen enough to be confident that the in large organisations you're not very likely to have someone there with the sort of responsibility for a product that an author has.

It's not like a criterion based on size because if you say authorship is the issue, you're not naming any size. One could imagine that different organisations would cross over the line from having a craftbrewer author to having a more industrial decision making structure at different points. And unlike drawing the distinction simply on size grounds you're not choosing an arbitrary point and saying once this is achieved the brewery is no longer a craft brewery.

"Stitch":24o2pqs1 wrote: Is it not fair to say that a craft brewer does not have economic interest at the foremost of there mind? Don't get me wrong if some of the breweries were not making money (at least to cover bills) they would not be making beer. When you look at Diageo they have profit at the foremost of beer making. SPA, when you consider it, is a fairly (I would think) save crack at the craft beer market. Again SPA it is nothing to radical and have found that again it is served cold (usually trick)[/quote:24o2pqs1]

I think that's right. I think the brewer as author idea is a way of putting some flesh on this idea.

"TheBeerNut":5avi0vbh wrote:

"UpsidedownA":5avi0vbh wrote: Their attitude is that if the public don't like it, get a new public. The product will come to be appreciated as an acquired taste (like a cult classic). They don't change the product to conform to the public's tastes, but try to change the public's taste to match the product. [/quote:5avi0vbh]... and I think there are plenty of microbrewers who don't follow this. It's not the spirit in which Porterhouse Chiller is produced. Is Chiller not a craft beer?

&amp;quot;UpsidedownA&amp;quot;:5avi0vbh wrote: The product reflects the author's personal style because the author has taken such a personal interest in it.[/quote:5avi0vbh]Peter [i:5avi0vbh]hates[/i:5avi0vbh] brewing Porterhouse Chocolate Truffle Stout <!-- s:D --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_biggrin.gif" alt="" title="Very Happy" /><!-- s:D --> [/quote:5avi0vbh]

Well, I was generalising to try to characterise the authorial attitude. I think it's broadly right, but maybe an author doesn't have to feel the same way about all their works. They can produce the odd potboiler too to keep bread on the table.

&amp;quot;TheBeerNut&amp;quot;:5avi0vbh wrote: Personally I don't think it's possible to get a universal definition of craft beer. I like the approach taken by UK bloggers Boak & Bailey, that the best we can do is look for [i:5avi0vbh]signs[/i:5avi0vbh] of craft-ness[/url:5avi0vbh]: run it on a sort of points scheme, and the criteria will vary from country to country.[/quote:5avi0vbh]

Thanks for the link. I don't see what Boak and Bailey offer as necessarily inconsistent with my brewers as authors suggestion. OK, they think it 'makes more sense' to just find some hallmarks of craft beer and then say anything with sufficiently many of those hallmarks is craft beer. They could be taking a Wittgensteinian line that 'craft beer' is a so-called family resemblance concept. That would mean it has no real definition and the best you'll get is a list of family resemblances among the things we take to be craft beer. But maybe they don't have a principled reason to think there is no definition to craft beer. Maybe they just can't think of one and using hallmarks to identify craft beer is a good practical measure. I think the brewers as authors conception explains why craft beer has many of the many of the features Boak and Bailey cite. It is because brewers are the 'authors' of what they produce that the beer tends to reflect their individual decisions (like concept beers single hopped beers, no hop IPAs, variability in vintages and so on).

According to Peter Drucker the purpose of companies is to create customers. Without customers companies seek to exist. Breweries that don't sell their beer go out of business. Authors who don't sell books go out of business.

Breweries may be started by people who love what they do, but if they don't sell beer and turn a profit they will close down, that's as true for a macro as it is for a micro.
The micro brewer may not have the constraints of a finance department or a shareholder hovering but they will have the constaints of a bank loan so they do need to brew and sell commercially viable quantities of beer of an acceptable quality. To imagine that the head brewer at a macro is less concerned / excited / motivated by their work than their micro counterpart is making large assumptions.

&amp;quot;CDow&amp;quot;:3id7md0i wrote: According to Peter Drucker the purpose of companies is to create customers. Without customers companies seek to exist. Breweries that don't sell their beer go out of business. Authors who don't sell books go out of business.

Breweries may be started by people who love what they do, but if they don't sell beer and turn a profit they will close down, that's as true for a macro as it is for a micro.
The micro brewer may not have the constraints of a finance department or a shareholder hovering but they will have the constaints of a bank loan so they do need to brew and sell commercially viable quantities of beer of an acceptable quality. To imagine that the head brewer at a macro is less concerned / excited / motivated by their work than their micro counterpart is making large assumptions.[/quote:3id7md0i]

I wouldn't suggest that brewers at the macros aren't as excited or motivated by their work as brewers at smaller outfits. I'm suggesting that because of organisational structures they don't have the same control over what the company ultimately brews as smaller brewers. I'm saying that in the breweries we want to call craft breweries, the brewers are pretty much like authors, in that they have a lot of personal control over the product.

&amp;quot;CDow&amp;quot;:317839m4 wrote: The micro brewer... need to brew and sell [i:317839m4]commercially viable quantities of beer of an acceptable quality.[/i:317839m4] [/quote:317839m4]

That's the crux of the definition for me.

The craft brewers decides the level of quality and then figures out how to make it commercially successful.

The macros determine the margins then work backwards to tweak the beer.

It's product v profits.