Vice President, Publisher: Tim Mooreptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/images/9780137065073/...means, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in the United States of America

Vice President, Publisher: Tim MooreAssociate Publisher and Director of Marketing: Amy NeidlingerAcquisitions Editor: Kirk JensenEditorial Assistant: Pamela BolandOperations Manager: Gina KanouseSenior Marketing Manager: Julie PhiferPublicity Manager: Laura CzajaAssistant Marketing Manager: Megan ColvinCover Designer: Alan ClementsManaging Editor: Kristy HartProject Editors: Jovana San Nicolas-Shirley and Kelly CraigCopy Editor: Geneil BreezeProofreader: Seth KerneyIndexer: Erika MillenSenior Compositor: Gloria SchurickManufacturing Buyer: Dan Uhrig© 2011 by Pearson Education, Inc.Publishing as FT PressUpper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458FT Press offers excellent discounts on this book when ordered in quantity for bulkpurchases or special sales. For more information, please contact U.S. Corporate andGovernment Sales, 1-800-382-3419, [email protected]. For salesoutside the U.S., please contact International Sales at [email protected] and product names mentioned herein are the trademarks or registeredtrademarks of their respective owners.All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, in any form or by anymeans, without permission in writing from the publisher.Printed in the United States of AmericaFirst Printing October 2010ISBN-10: 0-13-706507-8ISBN-13: 978-0-13-706507-3Pearson Education LTD.Pearson Education Australia PTY, Limited.Pearson Education Singapore, Pte. Ltd.Pearson Education North Asia, Ltd.Pearson Education Canada, Ltd.Pearson Educación de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. Pearson Education—JapanPearson Education Malaysia, Pte. Ltd.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Bamforth, Charles.Beer is proof God loves us : reaching for the soul of beer and brewing / Charles

Bamforth. — 1st ed.p. cm.

ISBN 978-0-13-706507-3 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Beer—History. 2. Brewingindustry—History. I. Title. HD9397.A2B36 2010338.4’766342—dc22

2010023040

IX

Contents

Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XI

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XIII

Chapter 1: Global Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Chapter 2: The Not-So-Slow Death of a Beer Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Chapter 3: Barbican, Balls, and Beyond . . . . . . . . . . 39

Chapter 4: On The Other Hand: The Rebirth of aBeer Ethos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Chapter 5: So What Is Quality?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Chapter 6: Despite the Odds: Anti-Alcohol Forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

Chapter 7: Societal Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

Chapter 8: Looks Good, Tastes Good, and… . . . . 101

Chapter 9: Whither Brewing? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

Chapter 10: God in a Glass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

Appendix A: The Basics of Malting and Brewing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213

Appendix B: Types of Beer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

About the Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223

Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225

X BEER IS PROOF GOD LOVES US

Preface

This is not the book that I thought it was going to be.

Some while ago I started writing a book with the word“God” in the title. It wasn’t really about beer. It wasn’t reallyabout God. It was rather more to do with me. Call it what youwill. Midlife crisis? Narcissism? Writing therapy?

Whichever it was, or whether it was something entirelydifferent, it clearly wasn’t the right book. And, yet, there was amessage in that manuscript that I felt I needed to put into theworld.

Which is when Kirk Jensen called. I had worked with himon my first beer book.1 I told him that I had a manuscript thatwas fundamentally autobiographical. I said it was part beer,part spirituality. I said I was feeling uncertain about it. He waskeen to see what might evolve from the idea.

Which is how we arrived at what you have in your hands.It is indeed a book about beer, albeit perhaps one that comesto the subject from a somewhat unusual, even obtuse angle.And yet, egotistically perhaps, it is also a somewhat personalperspective. To a large extent I have employed endnotes tocollect many of these nostalgic ramblings, so that they do notdetract from the hoped-for flow of the main text. However,perhaps the perusal of those notes might just strike a chordwith the reader. The endnotes are also intended as a reposi-tory of other facts, figures, and clarifications (and I see that Ihave already used my first endnote). I do realize that manypeople studiously avoid endnotes, but I really do encourageyou to read mine, for there is more than the occasional take-home message there. And some of them may even make yousmile.

People often ask me how I find the time to write somuch.2 The answer is that, of course, I enjoy it, and that isnine parts of achieving anything. The other reason of course isthat I am blessed—not to have talent, but rather to have themost beautiful wife, Diane. I have known her since February12, 1972, and we have been married since October 9, 1976.3

She is the heart of our growing family in every respect. With-out her I would not be who I am today. She is the one whoshould really write a book about God.

In writing this book I am grateful to a number of people,not least Kirk Jensen for his steady and forthright guidance. Ialso acknowledge Larry Nelson, the indefatigable editor of theBrewers Guardian, in whose pages over the years I havedeveloped many of the ideas that are built upon in this book.

XII BEER IS PROOF GOD LOVES US

Introduction

My regular haunt as a boy was a pub called The Owl (seeFigure 0.1). I was not yet 17, and the legal drinking age inEngland was (and still is) 18. Friday evenings. One or twopints of Walker’s Best Bitter.1 A bag of crisps (a.k.a. chips) witha tiny blue bag of salt in every pack.2 And Woodbine ciga-rettes, of which perhaps three or four would tremble on mylips. I would observe the comings and goings, mostly of themale gender (women then, as now, pleased my eyes more, butin those days they were heavily outnumbered in the pub).Many of the men were tough-as-teak workers, some clad inclogs, leaning against the bar, throwing darts, or rattling domi-noes as they took their accustomed places in the dusty oakenfurniture solidly set on rustic flooring. No television, no pipedmusic. The food was restricted to pickled eggs, crisps, scratch-ings,3 and perhaps the offerings from the basket of the fishman who did his rounds of the pubs, with his cockles, whelks,and mussels.4 He jockeyed for position with the bonnetedSally Army woman and her War Cry.5

XIII

Arthur Koestler6 wrote, “When all is said, its atmosphere(England’s) still contains fewer germs of aggression and bru-tality per cubic foot in a crowded bus, pub or queue than inany other country in which I have lived.” Not once in the pubsof 1960s Lancashire did I witness anything to contradict thistruth.

Who were these men, in their flat caps and overalls, ortheir simple and well-worn woolen suits? What unfolded intheir lives? Were they drinking away their babies’ orteenagers’ futures, or were they rather savoring preciousmoments of content amidst the harsh cruelty of their labors?Were they stoking the fire of violence that would afterwardsroar through the family home or were they merely rejoicing inbonds of brotherhood with others who knew only too well therocky roads and unforgiving fields that each of them traversedas laborers and farmers, bricklayers, and quarrymen? This wasno less their sanctuary than St Thomas’s church7 or Central

XIV BEER IS PROOF GOD LOVES US

Figure 0.1 The Owl in Up Holland, with thanks to Sarah Mills.

INTRODUCTION XV

Park, the home of nearby Wigan’s prestigious Rugby Leagueteam.8 This was oasis.

And in their glasses would be English ales, nary a lager insight. Pints (seldom halves) of bitter or mild.9 The occasionalbottle of Jubilee or Mackeson.10 Perhaps a Bass No. 1 or a GoldLabel.11 Beers with depth and warmth and, yes, nutritionalvalue to complement their impact on conviviality and thirst.

Wigan, immortalized by George Orwell in his Road toWigan Pier,12 was a few pennies away on a Ribble13 bus. Thepier was a landing stage by the Leeds-Liverpool canal, a placefor goods to be offloaded, notably cotton for the mills of thegrimy but glorious town. The folks lived in row upon row ofsmall houses, all joined together in grey, damp blocks. Tworooms down and two up and a toilet a freezing trek away downthe narrow back yard, with newspaper to clean oneself up andoften no light to ensure a satisfactory result. Baths were takenin front of the coal fire in the living room, in a pecking order offather first, mother next, then the children. For those withcoal-miner dads it was no treat to be the youngest offspring.

Was it then a wonder that the pub held appeal? Warm, cozy,buzzing with camaraderie and escape.

In England today, pubs are shuttering their doors at a rateof 52 every week. I blame Thatcher, whose ill-judged BeerLaws of the late 1980s led to revered brewers like Bass andWhitbread and Watney selling their breweries to focus on serv-ing the brews of others in spruced-up pubs that are now morerestaurant and sports bar than back street boozer. Cleaner,smarter, livelier? Sure. But do they have heart or soul? Yes, theyare smoke-free zones,14 but there are as many folks on thesidewalk outside, spilling into the roadway and littering thepavement with butts and spittle.

Perhaps it is small wonder that many choose no longer to head to the pub and prefer to stay in front of their 70-inch

surround-sound televisions, chugging on canned lager boughtat fiercely competitive rates from a supermarket chain thatcommands one in every seven pounds of disposable income inthe British Isles and which squeezes the remaining UK brew-ers to the measliest of margins as they entice the shopper tobecome solitary suppers of beers with names very differentfrom those of yore.

Beers from breweries like the multinational behemothAnheuser-Busch InBev, which commands nearly 25 percentof the world’s beer market, more than twice as much as thenearest competitor, South African Breweries-Miller. StellaArtois, Budweiser, Becks: all brands owned by the biggest ofbreweries. Excellent beers, of course, but at what risk to othersmaller traditional labels?

The world of beer is hugely different from that I firstglimpsed as a too young drinker close to the dark satanicmills15 of my native Northern England. Has beer, I wonder,lost its soul?

Or is it, rather, me that is the dinosaur? Is the enormousconsolidation that has been the hallmark of the world’s brew-ing industry for decades nothing more than business evolutionwrit large as survival of the fittest? Do the beers that folksenjoy today—and the latter day “near beer” which is the mal-ternative (think Smirnoff Ice)—speak to a new age of Kindle,Facebook, and fast food?

In truth, there remains much for this hoary old tradition-alist to delight in: the burgeoning craft beer sector in his newmotherland, the United States. A growing global realizationthat beer, rather than wine, is the ideal accompaniment tofoods of all types and (whisper it) is actually good for you, inmoderation.

All is not lost in the world of beer. Let’s go there.

XVI BEER IS PROOF GOD LOVES US

Global Concerns

I was on the legendary Fifth Floor of the time-honored St.Louis Brewery of Anheuser-Busch. A dozen or more glasses ofBudweiser were before me. Around the table was the creamof the company’s corporate brewing staff and me, the newlyincumbent Anheuser-Busch Endowed Professor of Maltingand Brewing Sciences at the University of California, Davis.1

Doug Muhleman, a wonderful Aggie alum2 and god ofmatters technical within the august brewing company, invitedcomments on the beers before us. One by one, the folksaround the table proffered their opinion on the samples,which represented the venerable Bud as brewed in all of thelocations worldwide where it was produced. In due sequence,my turn arrived. I gulped, thought about my new job title, andsaid “well, they are all great, all very similar, but this one I findto be a bit sulfury” as I gestured to the lemon-colored liquid inone of the glasses. I needed to demonstrate that I was onesmart dude.

1

1

A hush fell over the surroundings. I felt all eyes on me.And then I heard someone tapping into his cell phone, as thejourney of investigation started into what it was that theesteemed professor had “discovered” in the brew.

I had visions of airline tickets being purchased, jobs beinglost, brewers consigned to the Siberia of the company wher-ever that was (Newark perhaps?). And in an instant I knewthat it would be the last time I would pass critical comment inthat room. For on the one occasion that I had, with a remarkfounded on a desire to be perceived as being knowledgeablerather than any genuine ability to find fault with the remark-ably consistent product that is Budweiser, the potential impactwas too immense to even think about.

There are many people in the United States and beyondwho decry Bud. They would be wrong to. For here is a prod-uct that, for as long as it has been brewed, which is for rathermore than 130 years, has been the ultimate in quality controlexcellence.3

Let there be no confusion here. That a product is gentlynuanced in flavor does not make it somehow inferior. Thereality is that it is substantially more challenging to consis-tently make a product of more subtle tone, there being far lessopportunity to disguise inconsistency and deterioration thancan be the case in a more intensely flavored beverage. And tomake such an unswerving beer in numerous locations world-wide, with none but the acutely attuned brewmasters residentin the corporation able to tell one brewery’s output apart fromanother, is a truly astonishing achievement.

***

Doyen of the company from 1975 was August A. BuschIII. I recall a former student of mine, newly ensconced at theFairfield brewery in Northern California, telling me of hisfirst encounter with Mr. Busch. “It was awful,” he said. “Mr.

2 BEER IS PROOF GOD LOVES US

Busch breezed in and spent the whole time firing out ques-tions, challenging and finding fault with pretty much every-thing that we were doing. Being really critical.” I smiled,replying, “You know, that is really a very high class problem.To have a man whose name is on the label showing such inter-est, commitment, and determination for the best is a wonder-ful thing. This is someone who will throw money at quality,who believes in being the best. Never knock it. Would youprefer to have a bean counter in corporate headquarters,someone who never comes near the brewery, making decisions solely on the basis of the bottom line and profit margins?”

The stories about August Busch are legion. He is sup-posed once to have pulled up alongside a Budweiser dray in amidwest city and, noticing that it needed a wash, gave the dis-tributorship five days notice to get their act together or facelosing the Bud contract. I am told of the time that a youngbrewer was summoned to the Busch home to bring some beerfor the great man to taste. The youngster duly opened all thebeers and placed the bottles in a line alongside sparkling freshglasses. In came Mr. Busch, took one look at the scene andremonstrated with the young man for throwing away thecrown corks from the bottles, for he needed to smell those tomake sure that they were not going to be a cause of any flavortaint in the beer.

The same attitudes pervaded the entire company. Thecommitment to the best started in the barley breeding pro-gram of Busch Agricultural Resources in Idaho Falls, Idaho,and the hop development program in the same state and everonwards through all aspects of the company’s operations. Themotto in the breweries was “taste, taste, taste.” No raw mate-rial, no product-in-process, no process stage was excludedfrom the sampling regime. Brewers would taste teas made ofthe raw materials, they would taste the water, the sweet wort,

CHAPTER 1 • GLOBAL CONCERNS 3

the boiled wort, the rinsings from filtering materials, and soon. Nothing (except the caustic used to ensure the pristinecleanliness of the inside of vessels and pipes) was excludedfrom such organoleptic scrutiny.

Small wonder, then, that the Anheuser-Busch Corpora-tion grew to become the world’s leading brewing company interms of output as well as quality acumen. And yet they couldnot control everything.

In April 2008 I was a guest at an Anheuser-Busch techni-cal meeting in Scottsdale, Arizona.4 I was honored to kick offthe proceedings with a talk based on my newly published bookwhere I was comparing the worlds of beer and wine.5 Straightafterwards came a man to the podium from the business oper-ations nerve center in St. Louis. I was reassured to hear himsay that Anheuser-Busch was too big to buy when judgedagainst the available dollars that a suitor might have at theirdisposal. But, in a cautionary afterword, he did stress that thecompany would never be invulnerable and that it was alwaysprudent to be mindful of size and, therefore, acquisitionsshould be seriously considered. I knew already that the com-pany had for the most part achieved its magnitude by organicgrowth, albeit with some additional major investments inChina, Mexico, and the United Kingdom.6

Less than three months later the aggressive bid of InBevwas announced and thus in November 2008 Anheuser-BuschInBev was formed.7 August Busch III was out.

To search for the root of InBev, we must locate seeds inBelgium and Brazil.

***

The history of beer in Brazil commenced early in thenineteenth century with its import by the Portuguese royalfamily. It was an expensive commodity, accessible only to theprivileged classes, and it was not until 1853 that the first


domestic brewery was opened in Rio de Janeiro, producing abrand called Bohemia. In 1885, a group of friends startedCompanhia Antarctica Paulista in Sao Paulo, at first to sell iceand prepared foods but, not long afterwards, beer. Within fiveyears Antarctica was brewing more than 40,000 hectoliters.8

Meanwhile in 1888 the Swiss Joseph Villiger began brewingbeers in the style of his European roots and named it for theHindu god, Brahma. As the twentieth century dawned, thesubstantially grown Antarctica and Brahma began to stretchtheir hinterland deep into other regions of Brazil, addingbreweries and brands, such as Chopp,9 which enabled theBrahma company to gain ascendancy. Brahma and Antarcticawere fierce rivals in both the beer and soft drinks markets.Each grew organically but also through acquisitions as theyexpanded throughout Brazil. Among the key investments byBrahma was the Skol10 brand in 1980, a move that soon shiftedthe company into one of the top ten beer producers world-wide.

Perhaps it was 1990 when the surge of Brahma trulybegan, with a new chief executive, Marcel Telles, who intro-duced incentive programs while slashing the payroll and intro-ducing new production and distribution technology. The eraof least costs had dawned, as well as global horizons, withArgentina being a first target. For their part, Antarctica wasbuilding up their Venezuelan interests. Meanwhile those out-side South America were interested in the burgeoning beerbusiness, and thus Brahma made arrangements with Miller todistribute Miller Genuine Draft while Antarctica formed Bud-weiser Brazil with Anheuser-Busch, while rebuffing a takeoverby the US giant. Ironically, when viewed against subsequentevents, Antarctica merged at the end of 1999 with Brahma, toproduce Companhia de Bebidas das Américas, better knownas AmBev, thereby becoming the fourth biggest brewingcompany in the world, controlling 70 percent of Brazil’s beer


market, and with expansion plans throughout South America,soon acquiring companies in Uruguay, Paraguay, and under-cutting the Quilmes rivals in Argentina to the extent that theytoo were acquired in 2003. Thus did AmBev control 70 per-cent of the Argentina beer market, 80 percent in Paraguay,and 55 percent in Uruguay to add to the 70 percent control ofthe Brazilian business.

***

If the Brazilian beer market is not much more than twocenturies old, that in Belgium is rather more long-standing.The Artois brewery, which lends its name to the historic andnow global brand Stella Artois (established 1366), wasfounded in Leuven in the late fourteenth century. Anothergreat brewing company, that of Piedboeuf, was established in1853. By the 1960s both companies started a three-decadeexpansion into the Netherlands, France, Italy, and elsewherein Belgium by acquisitions. They cooperated on the purchaseof a third Belgian brewery and, in 1987, merged and hired asCEO José Dedeurwaerder, a Belgian-US joint citizen, torationalize the operations and deal with organized laborissues. Interbrew, as the company now was known, continuedits expansion through acquisition, buying Belgium’s Belle-Vue, Hungary’s Borsodi Sör, Romania’s Bergenbier, and Croa-tia’s Ozujsko.

Interbrew was Europe’s fourth largest brewer in the early1990s, distributing beer in 80 countries. Signs of decline in theEuropean market, however, made the company hierarchy lookbeyond, and they purchased Canada’s John Labatt Ltd. in1995, the latter company preferring a brewing concern overthe Onex Corporation as buyer. Interbrew quickly divesteditself of Labatt’s nonbeer interests, such as its hockey and base-ball clubs. At a stroke, Interbrew gained an extensive NorthAmerican distribution system that could now ship products


such as Stella Artois and Hoegaarden. It brought, too, a 22 per-cent interest in Mexico’s Dos Equis brand as well as the iconicRolling Rock.

Interbrew began exporting Stella Artois to China via jointventures, recognizing the world’s fastest-growing beer market,while continuing doubts about the European market led to itrationalizing some of its European interests, such as Italy’sMoretti, sold to Heineken. However, Interbrew built majorstakes in breweries in Bulgaria, Ukraine, Russia, Bosnia,Ukraine, Slovenia, and Germany, such that by 2000 it oper-ated in 23 countries and was number three worldwide, behindAnheuser-Busch and Heineken.

Interbrew’s next two major acquisitions were Bass fromthe UK and Beck’s in Germany. As we see in Chapter 2, “TheNot-So-Slow Death of a Beer Culture,” Margaret Thatcherhad severe misgivings about what she perceived to be amonopoly scenario in the UK and very rapidly a number ofmajor brewing companies came into the market. Bassenjoyed 25 percent of the British market, and competitorWhitbread had almost 16 percent. Both companies went onthe market in 2000 as Interbrew declared its intention to gopublic. By June, Interbrew had bought the breweries andbrands of both Whitbread and Bass (the British companiesthemselves survived as hotel and retailing concerns), althoughthe perception that this huge inroad into the UK industrywould also constitute a monopoly situation led to Interbrewdivesting itself of Bass’s major brand Carling Black Label andthe breweries that brewed it to Coors. Even then, Interbrewhad 20 percent of the British beer business.

The public listing of Interbrew shares now made cashavailable for further international acquisitions, and Beck’s was first. Rumors were that the next purchase would be South African Breweries, but that company itself was intent


on globalization, shifting its headquarters to London, and pur-chasing the likes of Pilsner Urquell in the Czech Republic andMiller from Philip Morris, thereby becoming SAB-Miller, thesecond biggest brewing company on the planet.

On March 3, 2004, Interbrew and AmBev merged into asingle company named InBev, at a stroke giving it a 14 percentshare of the global beer business, with interests in 140 countriesand making it the world’s number one, pushing Anheuser-Busch into second place. And on November 18, 2008, theacquisition of Anheuser-Busch by InBev closed at an inconceiv-able $52 billion, creating one of the top five consumer productscompanies in the world and a company producing around 400 million hectoliters of beer annually, with the next biggestcompetitor, SAB-Miller, standing at 210 million hectoliters.

***

As 2009 dawned, Anheuser-Busch InBev announced theclosure of the Stag Brewery in Mortlake, London, with the lossof 182 jobs. Anyone who has watched the Oxford-Cambridgeboat race will know of it, right there by the River Thames, closeto the finishing line. Rationalization. And what stories thatbrewery can tell about brewery history and the march of themegabreweries.

The brewery dates from 1487 when it was associated witha monastery. By 1765 it had become a major common brewer11

and a century later was rebuilt as the 100-acre site that wouldbe bought by Watney in the 1890s and would go on to be a pri-mary brewery for the production of the reviled Red Barrel.12

Watney’s became part of the Grand Metropolitan leisuregroup and was soon brewing Germany’s Holsten and Aus-tralia’s Foster’s under license. Come Thatcher (see Chapter2), Watney’s sold all its plants, including Stag, to Courage,which in turn became part of Scottish & Newcastle, who


leased the Mortlake brewery to Anheuser-Busch for the brewing of Budweiser. Scottish & Newcastle became the lastof the “big six” British brewers to survive PMT (Post-MargaretThatcher) and sold out to a Heineken and Carlsberg jointassault, the latter two dividing up the company betweenthem.13

Thus did the Stag Brewery find itself vulnerable withinthe new Anheuser-Busch InBev giantopoly. Result: More than520 years consigned to the history books and a prime piece ofreal estate available for regeneration.

***

It was ever thus. Brewing companies have been boughtand sold for generations. Take, for instance, the Bass companythat was acquired by Interbrew and then rent asunder in theCoors deal.

The monks started brewing in Burton-on-Trent in thetwelfth century. Among the commercial brewers that wouldmake the East Midlands town truly famous, surely the “bigcheese” was William Bass who started his operation on HighStreet in 1777 after previously being a transporter of beer forBenjamin Printon. Bass shot to international fame in 1821with its famed East India Pale Ale, shipped to the Raj.14 By1837, the company had become Bass, Ratcliff & Gretton,reflecting the partnership of Bass’s grandson with JohnGretton and Richard Ratcliff. As the railways expanded, so didthe fame and hinterland of the company, and by 1860 thebrewery was churning out more than 400,000 barrels a year.There were some 30 or more brewing competitors in thetown, but Bass became Britain’s biggest brewing company.The popularity of its bottled ale obliged the company tobecome the first firm to use the Trade Marks Registration Actof 1875 with the registration of the red triangle emblem.15


In 1926, the company bought another Burton brewer witha countrywide reputation, Worthington & Company Ltd. Ayear later, the company bought Thomas Salt’s brewery, and sixyears later, that of James Eadie. But the company, under thechairmanship of Lord Gretton, who was seemingly somewhatstubbornly resistant to change and distracted by a politicalcareer,16 did not embrace the change that it might have done,in particular not buying into tied public houses for the sellingof its beer. It was Arthur Manners, assuming the chairmanshipin 1947, who drove the company forward in a more busi-nesslike way. Bass acquired holdings in William Hancock &Company and Wenlock Brewery Company. Soon there were17 subsidiaries throughout the British Isles.

In 1961, then-chairman Sir James Grigg, who had been inWinston Churchill’s government cabinet,17 merged Bass, Rat-cliff & Gretton with Birmingham’s Mitchells & Butler, a com-pany that itself had grown through acquisitions and which hadruthlessly rationalized production operations, but most impor-tantly had rejoiced in a strong tied house portfolio. This wasfollowed with the merging in 1967 with London-based Char-rington (founded 11 years before Bass), with Sheffield’sWilliam Stones Ltd. coming under the umbrella a year later.And Hewitt’s of Grimsby was snaffled in 1969. So it was now acase of Bass, Mitchells & Butler and Bass Charrington in dif-ferent regions of the country.

The most critical aspect of the Charrington move was thatit had previously merged with United Breweries, owners inthe UK of the rights to the Canadian Carling Black Labelbrand, which would go on to become by far and away Bass’sbiggest beer.18 Under ruthless chairman Alan Walker therefollowed tremendous rationalization as breweries were closedand production consolidated in strategic locations. And the


company now had a huge estate of tied houses, to go along-side growing interest in hotels, betting shops, and otherleisure activities. By the end of the century, with MargaretThatcher’s Beer Laws that we will visit in the next chapter, thehotels (notably Holiday Inns) became the focus—and Bass asa brewing legend died. The cask Bass brand19 is these daysowned by Anheuser-Busch InBev and is brewed under licensein Marston’s—a brewery in Burton since 183420 and thus alongtime competitor of Bass.

***

So what of this consolidation, ancient and modern? Doesit represent nothing more than an incessant quest for domina-tion, profits, and shareholder satisfaction, with the invariablereduction of choice and quality in the products available to thecustomer? Or is it an unavoidable consequence of economicreality (survival and growth of the fittest) and might it evenbenefit the consumer?

Consolidation and growth invariably lead to a reduction inemployment, as a consequence of the pooling of productioninto fewer, larger, strategically placed breweries with the clos-ing of inefficient, highly staffed smaller locations. Further-more, advances in sensor and control technology mean thatbreweries are increasingly automated: Go into even thelargest of breweries and you will see very few employees, withthe greatest numbers to be found in packaging, warehousing,and distribution. As can be seen in Figure 1.1, a major compo-nent of the cost of a bottle of beer is personnel in production(including packaging). How much more efficient, for exam-ple, to have one 2,000-hectoliter fermenter as opposed to tenvessels of 200 hectoliters. The latter are unavoidably less effi-cient as they individually need to be filled, monitored, emp-tied, and cleaned.


Responsible brewing companies enter into consolidationissues with their eyes and minds open from a technical per-spective. (I wonder, however, quite what their hearts aredoing, should they give pause for thought about the humani-tarian issues surrounding job losses and the inevitable slicingat the heart of local communities when a major employer cen-ter is lost.)

Consider, for instance, the act of changing the type of fer-menter. A perfect example was given by the shift within Bassduring the early eighties from the Burton Union system21 tocylindro-conical vessels22 for the fermentation of the legendaryBass Ale. This was not a consequence of any takeover activity,merely the desire of the company to move away from a tradi-tional mode of beer production, one that is more labor inten-sive and associated with a greater spoilage rate, to a moremodern, streamlined, and controllable approach. A reputablecompany only makes such a move after a very large number of


Figure 1.1 The costs within a bottle of beer.

Tax

PackageSales

Production

Malt

OtherIngredients

AdjunctsHops

trials, in which process variables are tweaked to ensure that, atthe end of the day, there is no impact on smell or taste or anyother manifestation of product quality. The changeover in fer-mentation approach predated me at Bass, but the variablesthat they played with must have included fermentation tem-perature, wort composition, and the amount of oxygen sup-plied to the yeast.23 I know—because Bass’s mentality asregards quality was identical to that of August A. Busch III—they would have ensured that the product “match” was perfect.And yet, inevitably, when it became known that the change hadbeen made, there were the draught Bass aficionados whoinsisted that the product was “not a patch on what it was beforethey started buggering about with it.” Perception becomesnine parts of reality.

Brewers particularly run into this type of problem whenthey acquire companies with very different technology orwhen they seek to have their beers brewed under franchiseby companies with alternate philosophies when it comes tobeer production.24 I very quickly learned when I was Directorof Research at BRF International25 and trying to identifyresearch projects that would satisfy all my customers, thatbrewers quickly become adherents to favored brewingapproaches. Perhaps the most strident are the Germans, butthey are not alone. Some insist on “bright worts,” others on“dirty worts.”26 Related to this, some prefer lauter tuns, othersmash filters.27 There are those who use horizontal fermenters,others vertical ones.28 The list goes on. And each and everyone of these differences impacts the flavor of the beer. How-ever, by changing parameters of the type referred to previ-ously, so can the differences be eliminated. It truly is possibleto produce wonderfully matched beers in widely divergentbreweries.


It is also axiomatic that recognition be taken of the impor-tance of the raw materials. The correct yeast strain must beused (although this can be debated for some of the morestrongly malty and hoppy brews29). The malt and hops must bewithin the declared specification; not least they must be of thedeclared variety. And the water must be right.

Much is said about the importance of water in brewing.Rightly so, for most beers are at least 90 percent water. Thereality is that technology is such that the water specified forthe brewing of any beer anywhere in the world can be pro-duced very straightforwardly.30 To make the very soft waterprized in Pilsen involves simple filtration technology toremove salts. By adding calcium salts one can easily makewater to match the very hard stuff from Burton-on-Trent—heck, the Germans even have a word for it (“Burtonization”).Rocky Mountain water is a charming concept (and I love thefolks in the Golden brewery31—they are smart, capable, andfun), but that water is not magical. I can make it right here inDavis.

An old boss of mine (a chemical engineer and thereforecoldly logical) once described beer as being “slightly contami-nated water.” I would contend that if such it is, then it is anawesome form of impurity, but nonetheless the observationdoes speak to the fact that beer is an extremely aqueous com-modity. That being the case, it simply does not make sense toship it vast distances. It is so much more sensible to brew asclose to the drinker as possible; therefore the concept of fran-chise brewing.

The other reality is that of beer’s inherent instability.There is more than a grain of truth in the adage that beer isnever better than when first brewed and when drunk close tothe brewery. For the majority of beers it is downhill from themoment that the crown cork goes on the bottle, the lid goes


on the can, or the keg is racked. Beer is susceptible to a num-ber of changes; the most challenging of all being staling. InChapter 5, “So What Is Quality?,” I discuss this issue, whichspills into matters philosophical and psychological, even phys-iological. And indeed there are a very few beers, notably thoseof very high alcohol content, that may actually benefit fromstorage.32 But for the vast majority of beers there will be a pro-gressive development of cardboard, wet paper, dog pee, straw,and other aroma notes that I, at least, find reprehensible,characteristics that detract from drinkability.

This issue of flavor instability is highly pertinent in consid-eration of the globalization of the beer market and the growthof the mighty brewers. On the one hand, these brewers cer-tainly should (and often do) have better control over the keyagent that causes the flavor deterioration of beer, namelyoxygen. They have invested in the latest in packaging linesthat minimize air levels. They can afford the most accurateoxygen-measuring equipment and the systems to put in placeto respond to it. And in theory at least, by brewing in plantslocal to the consumer base, they are able to deliver youngerbeer than would be the case if they were exporting their prod-ucts. As we have seen, as long as the raw materials andprocesses are specified and controlled, it is entirely possible tore-create any brand in any brewery in the world (see my ear-lier Budweiser experience). Nonetheless, there are plenty ofinstances of major brands continuing to be exported to mar-kets many thousands of miles from home base, taking advan-tage of the cachet of a certain provenance. Heineken,Guinness, Bass, and Corona are examples of imported brandsin the USA that each speak to a national heritage, respectivelyHolland, Ireland, England, and Mexico. The US drinkerseems to prize the import imprint, despite inevitable agedcharacter in the products.33, 34


The bigger the company, the bigger the marketingstrengths it possesses. And so brands such as Corona, practi-cally unheard of in the US 25 years ago, have reached hugevolumes very much on a platform of a trendy beverage fromsouth of the border: the flint glass bottle, the slice of lime,with images of gently rolling surf, wide sandy beaches, andbeautifully bronzed bodies. Silence to be savored. The risk, ascompanies get ever bigger, is that such marketing-forced con-sumerism will lead to a rationalization of brands and the lossof esteemed beers that are simply beyond the numbers capa-ble of being handled efficiently, whether from a productionand packaging, distribution, or promotional perspective. If weconsider Anheuser-Busch InBev, for instance, then at the lastcount it owned more than 300 brands, from Bud to Bodding-tons, Harbin to Hoegaarden, Michelob to Murphy’s, andSpaten to St. Pauli Girl. One must wonder how many of theseproducts will still be extant 10 or 20 years from now. There isalready an approach in this (and many other) brewing compa-nies to developing numerous new beers, trying them in themarketplace, and quickly withdrawing all but the most suc-cessful.35 But there are also brands of much longer standingthat seem to be hot potatoes.

Take for instance Rolling Rock. Let’s shoot back to 1893and the founding of the Latrobe Brewing Company in the tinytown in the foothills of the Allegheny Mountains in Pennsylva-nia. The locals reckon that it was a local enclave of Benedic-tine monks that first did the brewing, but with rather morecertainty we can say that the company was victim of Volstead,36

and the brewery closed as Prohibition was enacted. Undernew owners, the Tito family, the brewery reopened in 1933,with two beers called Latrobe Old German and Latrobe Pil-sner. Six years later, though, they launched the beer that madeLatrobe famous: Rolling Rock, named in reflection of theriver with its smooth pebbles that supplied water to the


brewery and packaged in a green glass bottle bearing a horsehead-and-steeplechase icon that to this day renders the brandunmistakable on retail shelving. The beer was barely mar-keted, yet fetched an intensely loyal following in southwestPennsylvania as well as a presence in several states in thenortheast. In 1974, 720,000 barrels of Rolling Rock were pro-duced. As other companies aggressively promoted theirbrands, Latrobe held back, and volumes of Rolling Rockdeclined significantly. The Titos sold the company in 1985 to abuyout concern called the Sundor Group, which sought toturn around the business prior to a resale. Sundor boostedmarketing strategies but throttled back on capital investment:a classic conflict between going gung-ho on sales, while jeop-ardizing the quality of the very product on offer. Two yearsafter Sundor came in, it sold Latrobe to Labatt. Now theRolling Rock brand was in the hands of a company that totallyrespected quality but also possessed a keen eye for marketing(witness its original concept of Ice Beer37). Indeed Labattmade a big play of the mysterious number 33 long since foundon the green bottle, and this came at the heart of the market-ing strategy. The June 20, 1994, issue of Brandweek gave theLabatt marketing man John Chappell’s description of RollingRock as being “A natural, high-quality beer with an easy, gen-uine charm that comes from the Rolling Rock name and thetraditional, small-town Latrobe Brewery that uses the moun-tain spring water in special green bottles.” The sentence con-tained 33 words—by accident or to encourage brand devoteesto come up with their own theories for the origin of the num-ber? Whatever the reason, Rolling Rock was rolled out aroundthe United States, and by the early 1990s the Latrobe brewery(which was attracting investment from Labatt) was churningout more than 1 million barrels per annum. And the productcould be now marketed at a higher price.


Interbrew, since 1995 owners of Labatt and thereforeLatrobe, seemed committed to the Rolling Rock brand. In2000 the declared intention was to double production capacitywith the expenditure of $14.5 million on a new packaging line.But what is constant in this world? In May 2006 the newInBev company decided it could offload the brand—and dulysold it for $82 million to Anheuser-Busch, subsequently sell-ing the brewery to the company in La Crosse, Wisconsin, thatruns the old Heileman brewery.38 The good folks of Pennsylva-nia were up in arms: How could Rolling Rock possibly bebrewed by Anheuser-Busch, especially anywhere other thanby the Latrobe River? I had a different question of my friend,Doug, the chief technical officer at Anheuser-Busch. For Iknew as well as he did that the overwhelming characteristic ofRolling Rock is a dimethyl sulfide (DMS) note39 that mostbrewers consider a serious defect when present at the levels tobe found in Rolling Rock. I remember offering “I guess youwill gradually lower the DMS level over a period of time, sothat nobody will notice that the product is changing.” “No,Charlie,” Doug replied, “we will learn to brew a defect.” Andthey did, faithfully adhering to the recipe that they had inher-ited and sticking to the principle of delivering to the customerwhat the customer expects. In fact, knowing Anheuser-Busch,the product would, batch-to-batch, be more consistentlyadherent to its recipe and provenance than would have beenthe case prior to the acquisition.

With what irony, then, was the brand restored to theInBev portfolio with the acquisition by the latter of Anheuser-Busch. And so no surprise to read the Wall Street Journalarticle on April 13, 2009, saying that “Brewing giantAnheuser-Busch InBev is exploring the sale of its storied butstruggling Rolling Rock brand, according to people familiarwith the matter.” The article went on to say, “When Anheuser


bought Rolling Rock in 2006, it sought to reposition the brandto compete in the fast-expanding, small-batch ‘craft’ beer seg-ment. But sales, which already were declining under InBev,have continued to wane. Last year, Rolling Rock sales slipped13 percent from a year earlier in volume terms to 7.4 millioncases, according to Beverage Information Group, a market-research firm in Norwalk, Conn. In 2004, Rolling Rock soldnearly 11 million cases.”

As I say, when push comes to shove, there are only somany brands that a company can handle.

***

Every year the indefatigable Emeritus professor MichaelLewis and I generate new recruits eager for brewing pasturesin companies large and small. In 2010 there were 66 studentsin my main brewing class on campus, 32 in the practical brew-ing class, and 40 in the extension class.40 Not all of the campusstudents aspire to the brewing industry (some set their sightsrather lower—winemaking, for instance), but all those in theExtension class are already in the industry, or the greaternumber aspire to be.

Over the years there has been a gratifying flow of Davisgraduates into the brewing industry. I fear for the future. Ascompanies consolidate, the most recent example being Millerand Coors in the US,41 it can only mean fewer openings. Manyof the students, it must be said, are intent on the craft sector,however mistakenly regarding the big guys as corporateAmerica, and some of them naively buying into the notion of“industrial beer.”42 The reality is that a rather more comfortableliving, founded on the greater range of career-advancementopportunities, can be had in the “majors.” The smaller compa-nies do not generally pay well: Some appeal to one’s passion tobe hands-on in all aspects of the operation, allied of course to


copious free beer and the opportunity to converse with thecustomer—“Hi, I’m Jack. I brewed this beer!”

Those joining the big guys need to recognize three things.First, the need is for brewers (more strictly speaking, brewerymanagers) in all of their locations, even the less sexy places.There is a big world outside California. Second, the candidatemust never, ever have had a DUI.43 Brewers need to be gen-uine role models for responsibility.44 And, third, the companywill be snipping a hair sample to check for any interestingsocial activity.45 I swear that some of my students fail on atleast two of the three, although to the best of my knowledgenobody has been rejected on all counts.

And so the reservoir of talent seems to be very full rightnow. While there is a trickle going to replace retirements andfeed the gratifyingly growing craft sector, there is inevitableseepage for want of openings. I look to my conscience: Can wehand-on-heart continue to encourage all those who want to livetheir dreams through becoming brewers?

I was dismayed to hear a little while back of one chiefexecutive saying that only a tiny proportion of his employeesreally mattered to him, because they represented the differ-ence between success and failure. It straightway put me inmind of my old boss, Robin Manners, chief executive of BassBrewers and grandson of the company’s erstwhile chairman.He said to me one day, “Two things matter to this company,Charlie: One is people, and the other is quality. And if youlook after the people, they will ensure the quality.” What acontrast.

It is fashionable to talk of a War for Talent, the argumentbeing that really worthwhile recruits that will move a companyforward are thin on the ground. I rather think that there isample human resource available, either already employed inthe brewing industry, located in other industries, or emerging


through the academy. And I know of far too many excellentpeople downsized from the world’s major brewing companies,surely a consequence of companies ripping out expense topresent themselves as least-cost operators, thereby impressingthe stock markets as they join the fight to get their products acompetitive edge on the shelves of equally ruthless supermar-kets. If only companies of all shapes and sizes consideredemployee and customer alike as an individual human being ina nurturing environment.

Buddhists speak of loving kindness. I think that is what myold boss, Robin, was really referring to: Treating everyonefrom the main board to the janitor as equally deserving ofrespect and regard for their contribution to the whole—andthat esteem and goodwill extended to suppliers on the onehand and to the beer market on the other. We at Bass weresimply great guys to deal with, and that counted for a greatdeal and made us the most successful company in our market.That is, we were, until the bean counters arrived.46

It is far too easy for in-your-face business sultans to screamthe old adage that nothing is as inevitable as change and that itis only through change that success can be achieved. The sim-ple reality is that business decisions, especially in publiclyowned companies, are made on the basis of the bottom lineand no consideration of tradition or status quo, unless it satis-fies a marketing strategy. In relation to this, ponder for amoment Pabst Blue Ribbon, once the quintessential blue-collar low-cost beer. These days it is trendy, maybe even sexyfor all I know, to be seen with a can of PBR. It is not for anyrediscovered uniqueness about the brand. It is because “retro”sells. The traditionalists of course might legitimately arguethat it would have been better still if the original brewers47 ofPBR had never been subsumed in the first place.


As we have seen from Figure 1.1, a huge slug of the cost ofa bottle of beer goes to sales and marketing. Without doubt, acustomer needs to be receptive, and no matter how catchy theadvertising, a beer that is intrinsically wrong will not sell.48 Yetnobody can mistake the power of persuasion and the ability ofmarketing (allied to technical advances) to shift drinking pref-erences. Thus we have, for instance, the baffling (at least tome) surge toward the iciest of lagers in soggy old England, anation generally believed to cling to “warm” ale.49

It would be very easy for me to be perceived as a dinosaur,yearning for a better time much as a bicyclist50 might resentthe advent of Maserati. Yet the contemplative and meditativeme savors what I like to call the Slow Beer Movement: Tradi-tional brewers with long-standing names and values brewingbeers of heritage and culture, rather than fast beers of shortlifetime and dubious provenance that search out the lowestcommon denominator. I even hear that within one companythe management don’t speak of beer, but rather call it “liquid.”

And so I applaud the craft sector, though even here theHyde of extreme brewing (ludicrous hopping rates, bizarreingredients) all too frequently escapes the common-sensecalm and beauty of Jekyllian values. We go there in Chapter 4,“On the Other Hand: The Rebirth of a Beer Ethos.” Let usfirst, however, head back to my heritage.


225

INDEX

AAbbot Ale, 157acetaldehyde, 110aerobic water treatment, 168Aggies, 137Alcohol Flush Reaction, 165alcohol-free beer, 39-42Alcohol: Its Action on the

Human Organism(D’Abernon), 103

alcoholic strength of beers,table of, 219-221

alcopops, 95aldehyde dehydrogenase

enzyme, 165ales

brewing, 216-217types of, 219-220

alpha-acids, 215alt ale, 219Alzheimer’s Disease, reduced

risk with moderate beerconsumption, 109

Amalgamated Union ofEngineering Workers, 24

AmBev (Companhia de Bebidasdas Américas)acquisition by Interbrew, 8history of, 5

American Bar Association,resolution for repeal ofprohibition, 89

American HomebrewersAssociation, 62-63

American Society of BrewingChemists, 171

American Temperance Union(ATU), 87

amylases, 215anaerobic water treatment, 168Anchor Brewing Company,

54-58Anderson, Ray, 203Anheuser-Busch. See also

Anheuser-Busch InBevacquisition by InBev, 4acquisition of Rolling Rock

brand, 18donation to University of

California, Davis, 136investments, 4, 137quality control, 1-4

226 INDEX

Anheuser-Busch InBev, xvi, 34brand rationalization, 16-19closure of Stag Brewery

(London), 8-9formation of, 4size of, 137

Antarctica Paulista, 5-6anti-alcohol forces

anti-alcohol organizations inU.S., 90-91, 186

Mothers against DrunkDriving (MADD), 89-90

prohibition, 88-89religious condemnation of

alcoholbiblical interpretations of

religious right, 79-82Islamic prohibitions,

82-83, 179temperance movement,

86-88, 183Anti-Saloon League, 88antioxidants in beer, 108arabinoxylans in beer, 108Artois brewery, 6Asian Flush, 165Asian Glow, 165Association of Brewers, 62atherosclerosis, reduced risk

with moderate beerconsumption, 110

Atkinson, Bernard, 147ATU (American Temperance

Union), 87Australian beer

consumption, 46

BB vitamins in beer, 108Babylonians, consumption of

beer by, 81Bacillus bacteria, 160Bamforth, John William

(“Jock”), 189-190, 194Bar at the Folies-Bergère

(Manet), 139Barbican, 39-42Barbican With Lemon, 40Barkley, Don, 54barley starch

availability and demand, 116-118

contribution to maltingprocess, 213

barley wine, 220barrels, 138Barton, John, 206Baruth, Ernst F., 57Bass, xv, 33

acquisition by Interbrew, 7Bass Charity Vase, 153Bass No. 1, xv, 135Carling Black Label, 154Coral, 95Gibson’s, 95history of, 9-11Lamot Reserve, 143red triangle emblem, 9, 139Right First Time performance

criteria, 148soccer sponsorship, 154union issues, 25-27

Bass Charity Vase, 153Bass No. 1, xv, 135

INDEX 227

Bass, William, 9Beck’s, acquisition by

Interbrew, 7Beecher, Lyman, 87beer belly myth, 112beer consumption by country,

45-46The Beer Orders (UK), 28-33beer pong, 98beer production by country, 43Beer Soaks America, 91Belgian beer market, 6-8, 46Belgium Brewing Company,

Fat Tire Ale, 120, 203Belle-Vue, 6Bergenbier, 6Best, Jacob, 145biblical times, beer

consumption in, 80Biersch, Dean, 58biological oxygen demand,

52, 167BIRF (Brewing Industry

Research Foundation), 141Bitter Ale, xv, 134, 219bitters, 183Blake, William, 136block lager, 221blood pressure and alcohol

consumption, 110Bohemia, 5Bonds, Barry, 179Booer, Chris, 208Borsodi Sör, 6Boston Beer Company,

59-62, 93

bottlesreturnable versus

non-returnable, 118versus cans, 68-71

Brahma, 5brand rationalization, 11-19Brazilian beer market, 4-6

consumption, 45production, 43

Brekle, Gottlieb, 57Brett, Simon, 40Brew Dog, Tactical Nuclear

Penguin, 94Brewers Society, 28brewing companies in UK,

34-35Brewing Industry Research

Foundation (BIRF), 141brewing process

carbon footprint, 119-120English versus German

brewing traditions, 190as example of Buddhist

concept of successiveexistences, 124-127

explained, 214-217hops

alternative outlets for, 116availability and demand,

115-116transcendentalist link between

a higher power andfermentation, 124

waste from, 120water conservation by

breweries, 118yeast, 201, 216

228 INDEX

BRF International, 13, 141, 211BRi, 141bright worts, 13, 141brine, dipping meat into, 172British Beer and Pub

Association, 148British food, 66Briton, 177Brown, Michael, 137The Brown Cow (Helsby), 70brushes with death, 161-165Buchner, Eduard, 124, 204Buddhism, acceptance of

alcohol in, 84Budweiser, 1-2Bulmer’s, acquisition by

Scottish & Newcastle, 138Burton Union system, 12, 140Busch Agricultural

Resources, 3Busch, August A. III, 2-3Butcher, Kim, 76

CCagniard-Latour, Charles,

124, 203Califano, Joseph Anthony Jr.,

90, 187calorie content of beer, 201Campden & Chorleywood

Food Research Association, 141

Campden-BRi, 141Camusi, Paul, 51Canada

beer consumption, 45beer production, 43

Canadian Breweries Ltd., 139cancer risk factors, 110-111cans versus bottles, 68-71carbon dioxide, 35, 158carbon footprint of brewing,

119-120carbonation of beer, 77Carling Black Label, 7, 10, 154Carling O’Keeffe, 139Carling, Thomas, 139Carlsberg, 9, 34, 139Carter, Jimmy, 62, 170CASA (Center on Addiction

and Substance Abuse), 90Casey, Troy, 84cask ales, 139Cask Marque, 157cask-conditioned ale, 34-36,

139, 157casks, 157celiac disease, 112Center for Science in the

Public Interest, 187Center for Substance Abuse

Prevention, 187Center on Addiction and

Substance Abuse (CASA), 90, 187

Center on Alcohol Marketingand Youth, 187

Chappell, John, 17Charrington, 10Chhaang, 84childhood remembrances of

author, 195-199Chinese beer market, 42, 45Chirac, Jacques, 200Chopp, 5, 138

INDEX 229

cider, 193clarity of beer, 73-75Clifford, Andy, 108color of beer, 76common brewers, 8, 138Companhia Antarctica

Paulista, 5-6Companhia de Bebidas das

Américas (AmBev)acquisition by Interbrew, 8history of, 5

consolidation of breweriesAnheuser-Busch InBev case

study, 2-9Bass case study, 9-11brand rationalization, 11-19and costs of bottle of beer,

11-12franchise brewing, 13impact on employees and job

market, 19-21issue of flavor instability,

14-15technical brewing issues,

12-13Cooper’s Sparkling Ale, 73-74copper, 215copper sulfate, 159Coral, 95Cornish pasties, 171Corona, 16coronary artery disease,

reduced risk with moderatebeer consumption, 105-106

costs of bottle of beer, 11-12country liquor, 166Courage, 8, 138

Craft Brewers Conference, 63craft sector

American HomebrewersAssociation, 62-63

Anchor Brewing Company,54-58

Boston Beer Company, 59-62Gordon Biersch brewpubs,

58-59New Albion brewing

company, 53-54Sierra Nevada Brewing

Company, 49-53Cranston, Alan, 170cricket, 157, 207-211crown corks, 69Cullis, Stan, 150curry, 172cylindroconical vessels, 12, 140Czech beer consumption, 46

DD’Abernon, Edgar Vincent, 102Denmark


Darby, Otto Charles, 153Death, Steve, 205decision-making process

in purchase of alcoholicdrinks, 102

decoction mashing, 191Dedeurwaerder, José, 6dharma, 83diabetes, reduced risk


230 INDEX

diacetyl, 166, 173Diageo, 157Dickens, Charles, 201Dimbleby, Gordon, 151dimethyl sulfide (DMS)

explained, 144in Rolling Rock beer, 18

dipping meat into brine, 172dirty worts, 13, 141DMS (dimethyl sulfide)

explained, 144in Rolling Rock beer, 18

Dos Equis, 7Drake, Francis, 54, 168drinking ages worldwide,

193-194drinking games, 97-98drinking to excess, 99-100Driving Under the Influence

(DUI), 145dry hopping, 216Dubbel, 220Dug Gap Baptist Church, 82DUI (Driving Under the

Influence), 145Dunkel, 221Dunkley, Don, 199duty (excise taxes), 38

EEadie, James, 10East India Pale Ale, 9egg white, potential to boost

foam of beer, 171Eighteenth Amendment, 88Eightfold Path, 84, 181Eisbier, 144

electron spin resonancespectroscopy, 49, 167

Ellison, Curtis, 105Emerson, Ralph Waldo, 123employees, importance of, 201English brewing tradition, 190Enterprise Inns, 34Episcopal Church, 131Etudes Sur La Bier (Pasteur),

58, 168European Brewery Convention

Foam Sub-Group, 71European tax rates, 158excessive drinking, 98-100excise taxes, 38export stout, 219Express and Star, 150-151

FFABs (flavored alcoholic

beverages), 95Fagan, Joe, 152Fat Tire Ale, 120, 203fermentation, 112, 216fermenters, vertical versus

horizontal, 13, 141ferulic acid, 108, 200Finest of All: Local Men on the

Somme (Holcraft), 189Finlayson, Malcolm, 205Finney, Tom, 152flavor of beer, 77

FABs (flavored alcoholicbeverages), 95

flavor instability, 14-15flavored alcoholic beverages

(FABs), 95

INDEX 231

Fleming, A., 86Flowers, Tim, 156foam, 71-73, 174-176foam stabilizer, 41, 160folic acid, 108Four Noble Truths

(Buddhism), 181franchise brewing, 13, 141French Paradox, 105freshness, perception of, 142

Ggallstones, reduced risk with

moderate beer consumption,110

gan bei, 165Gaskell, David, 206Germany

beer consumption, 45beer production, 43brewing tradition, 190

germination (malting process), 214

Gibson’s, 95global beer consumption, 45-46global beer production, 43globalization of beer market

Anheuser-Busch InBev casestudy, 2, 4-9

Bass case study, 9-11brand rationalization, 11-19and costs of bottle of beer,

11-12franchise brewing, 13impact on employees and job

market, 19-21

issue of flavor instability, 14-15

technical brewing issues, 12-13

glum, 84glycemic index, 112, 201goalkeepers (soccer), 206Gold Label, xv, 135Gordon Biersch brewpubs,

58-59Gordon, Dan, 58-59gout, 110Grahame, Kenneth, 139Grammar School, 193Great American Beer

Festival, 62green brewing, 52, 121Greene King, 34, 157Gretton, John Frederic,

9-10, 139Grigg, Percy James, 10, 139Gronbaek, Morten, 106Grossman, Ken, 49-53Guinness, 35gushing, 166

HHalwood, Edith, 194Halwood, Richard, 197hangovers, 110Happoshu products, 121, 203hard cider, 193Harrer, Heinrich, 182Hartley, Brian, 147Hartwall, acquisition by

Scottish & Newcastle, 138Hayes, Rutherford B., 87

232 INDEX

haze in beer, 75, 178health benefits of moderate

beer consumption, 101-104beer belly myth, 112reduced risk of Alzheimer’s

Disease, 109reduced risk of

atherosclerosis, 110reduced risk of coronary

artery disease, 105-106reduced risk of diabetes, 110reduced risk of kidney

stones/gallstones, 110reduced risk of stroke, 110reduced risk of ulcers, 110nutritional merit of beer,

107-108popular misconceptions,

102-105silicon in beer, 84, 182

Heath, Edward, 23, 146hectoliters, 138Hedges and Butler, 95Hefeweissens, 74, 167Heileman brewery, 18, 144Heilemann, Gottlieb, 144Heineken, 34

acquisition of share of Scottish& Newcastle, 9, 139

purchase of Moretti, 7Helicobacter pylori, 110Helles, 221Helsby, England, 174Het Koelschip, 191Hewitt’s, 10Hinduism, acceptance of

alcohol in, 83

Hodgkinson, Alan, 205Holcraft, Fred, 189Hooper’s Hooch, 96Hoover, Herbert, 89Hopkinson, Eddie, 205hops, 215-216

alternative outlets for, 116availability and demand,

115-116horizontal fermenters, 13, 142Hudepohl-Schoenling Brewing

Co., 61

IIce Beer, 17, 143Ignatius, Bishop of

Antioch, 188Imperial College, London,

24, 147imperial stout, 219imported beers, perception of,

15, 142In Keeping with the Wolves

(Bamforth), 156InBev, acquisition of

Anheuser-Busch, 4Independent Pub

Companies, 34India pale ale, 219Indian beer consumption,

43-45industrial beer, 19, 144Institute for Fermentation and

Brewing Studies, 62Institute of Brewing and

Distilling, 171

INDEX 233

Interbrew, 7-8acquisition of AmBev, 8acquisition of Bass, 7acquisition of Beck’s, 7acquisition of John

Labatt Ltd., 6acquisition of Whitbread, 7history of, 6

Irish beer consumption, 46Islamic prohibitions against

alcohol, 82-83, 179

JJames I, 178Japanese beer market

consumption, 45production, 43

Jefferson, Thomas, 86Jerusalem, 136Jewish tradition, acceptance of

alcohol in, 82John Labatt Ltd., 6Joseph Schlitz Brewing

Company, 75Jubilee, xv, 135

KKabat-Zinn, Jon, 182Kaplan, Norman, 105Kastenbaum, Robert, 109kegs, 36, 158Kent, Jeff, 179kettles, 215Keukeleire, Denis De, 116kidney stones, reduced risk


King James Bible, 178kiu, 42, 165Klatsky, Arthur, 105Koch, Jim, 59-62, 93Koestler, Arthur, xiv, 135Koran, 179Kölsch, 220Kraus, Joseph, 57Kronenbourg, acquisition by

Scottish & Newcastle, 138krystallweizens, 74

LLabatt, acquisition of Latrobe

Brewing Company, 17lagers, 191

brewing, 216-217types of, 221

Lambic, 220Lamot Pils, 39Lamot Reserve, 143late hopping, 216Latrobe Brewing Company,

16-17Latrobe Old German, 16Latrobe Pilsner, 16lauter tuns, 13lautering, 215Lea, Harold, 206Leake, Chauncey D., 103Led Zeppelin, 151legal drinking ages worldwide,

193-194Lewis, C. S., 131, 188Lewis, Michael, 19, 144, 182Lightner, Candy, 89Lob Scouse, 172

234 INDEX

MMackeson, xv, 135MADD (Mothers against

Drunk Driving), 89-90malt liquor, 221malting process

barley starchavailability and demand,

116-118contribution to malting

process, 213as example of Buddhist

concept of successiveexistences, 124-127

explained, 214maltose, conversion

into alcohol duringfermentation, 112

Manet, Édouard, 139Manners, Arthur, 10Manners, Robin, 20, 153Mansfield Brewery, 140Marin Institute, 90, 187Marmite, 127, 204Marston’s, 11, 34, 140Märzen, 221mashing, 214

decoction mashing, 191mash filters, 13, 141

Master Brewers Association ofthe Americas, 66, 171

Matthews, Stanley, 150Maytag, Fritz, 54-58, 122, 168McAuliffe, Jack, 53-54McCaig, Rob, 117McEwan’s, 138

Mercer, Joe, 152Mexico


Meyer, August, 57Mile Ale, xv, 135Miller Clear Beer, 145Miller Genuine Draft, 73Miller-Coors, 19, 144mindfulness, 84, 182Mitchells & Butler, 10The Moderation League, 88Molson Coors, 34, 139Moretti, 7Mothers against Drunk Driving

(MADD), 89-90MRC Collaborative Center

for Human NutritionResearch, 182

Muhleman, Doug, 1, 73Mukamal, Kenneth, 106Myers, Mike, 25

NNation, Carry, 87National Homebrewers

Conference, 63neo-prohibitionism. See

anti-alcohol forcesNew Albion brewing company,

53-54New Brewer, 62New International Version

(Bible), 178Newcastle Breweries, 138nitrogen, 35, 158non-returnable bottles, 118

INDEX 235

Northern Irish conflict, 212nursing mothers and beer

consumption, 113nutritional merit of beer,

107-108

Ooatmeal stout, 220Oblix, 191Office of Alcohol and Other

Drug Abuse, 187Oktoberfest, 97, 166Old ale, 219Orwell, George, xvosteoporosis, reduced risk


Oud Bruin ale, 219Owens, Janel, 108The Owl (Up Holland), xiiioxygen

and flavor deterioration ofbeer, 15

effect on flavor deterioration, 68

Ozujsko, 6

PPabst Blue Ribbon, 21, 145Pabst, Frederick, 145pale ale, 219pancreatitis, increased risk in

heavy drinkers, 110Papazian, Charlie, 62-63Parker, Robert, 67Parkes, Phil, 156, 205

Parliamentary Beer group, 38Parry, Hubert, 136Parsons, Roy, 167Pasteur, Louis, 124, 203Pedigree ale, 140Pediococci, 173pentanedione (honey), 173per capita beer consumption by

country, 45-46Petty, Jane, 197PGA (propylene glycol

alginate), 160phytoestrogens, 113, 116Piedboeuf, 6pilsner, 221Pilsner Urquell, 8Plant, Robert, 151Ploughman’s lunch, 172polyphenols, 108polysaccharides, 108poms, 177porter, 219Powell, Jonathan, 109, 182Prahl, Hay, 167prebiotics, 108, 200The Presence Process

(Brown), 137Preston Brook, 24, 39Printon, Benjamin, 9probiotics, 200prohibition, 88-89propylene glycol alginate

(PGA), 160Provisional German Beer Law

of 1993, 170pseudouridine in beer, 111

236 INDEX

pubs, declining popularity of,xiii-xvi, 27, 36-37

Punch Taverns, 34Purim festival, 178

QQuain, David, 208quality of beer

bottles versus cans, 68-71clarity, 73-75color, 76flavor, 77foam, 71-73, 174-176subjective nature of, 65-68

RRaj, 139Ratcliff, Richard, 9Ratford, David, 173rationalization of brands, 11-19Rauchbier, 221ready-to-drinks (RTDs), 95red ale, 219Red Barrel, 8, 138red triangle emblem (Bass),

9, 139Redbridge, 113Reinheitsgebot, 60, 169Religion and Alcohol

(Robertson), 188religious condemnation

of alcoholbiblical interpretations of the

religious right, 79, 81-82Islamic prohibitions,

82-83, 179

prohibition, 88-89religious extremism, 130temperance movement,

86-88, 183resins, 215resveratrol, 105returnable bottles, 118Ribble bus, xv, 135Right First Time performance

criteria (Bass), 148Right Livelihood, 84, 182Rinpoche, Sogyal, 124Road to Wigan Pier (Orwell), xvRobert Wood Johnson

Foundation, 186Robertson, C. K., 188Robinson, Jancis, 67Rocky Mountain water, 14, 142Rolling Rock, 7, 16-19Roosevelt, Franklin D., 89, 186RTDs (ready-to-drinks), 95Rugby League, xv, 135Rush, Benjamin, 86Russian beer consumption, 46

SSaccharomyces, 216Saison, 220Salt, Thomas, 10Samuel Adams Boston IPA,

62, 170Samuel Adams Boston

Lager, 60San Francisco Giants, 179Saudi Arabian market for

alcohol-free beer, 40Savies, Fred, 205

INDEX 237

Scargill, Arthur, 23Schinkel, Otto Jr., 57Schlitz, 75Schorschbock 31, 94Schorschbock 40, 94Schwann, Theodor, 124, 203Schwarzbier, 221Schwarzenegger, Arnold, 168Scottish & Newcastle, 8,

33, 138Scottish ale, 219Scottish Brewers, 138scratchings, 134Scrumpy, 193secondary correlations, 104-105sediments, 75, 178Seven Years in Tibet

(Harrer), 182Se`udat Purim, 178Share of Throat, 46Sierra Nevada Brewing

Company, 49-53, 69silicon, 84, 109, 182Sink The Bismarck, 94Skol, 5, 138skunkiness, perception of, 142Slow Beer Movement, 22smoke-free zones, xv, 135Smythe, John, 72Snow, 43soccer journalism, 150-157societal issues

alcopops, 95beer strength/high alcohol

content beers, 93-94drinking games, 97-98drinking to excess, 98-100

South Africabeer consumption, 45beer production, 43

South African Breweries-Miller, xvi

sparklers, 35, 157St Thomas’s Church (Up

Holland), xiv, 135St. Mark’s Episcopal Church

(Georgia), 81Stag Brewery (London), 8-9Stanton, Don, 151steam beer, 57Steese, Lawrence, 57Stella Artois, 6Stevens, Sydney, 198Stewart, Graham, 143, 161storage of beer, 15, 142stout, types of, 219-220strength of beer, 93-94stroke, reduced risk


successive existences, 124Sumerians, consumption of

beer by, 81Sundor Group, acquisition

of Latrobe Brewing Company,17

supermarkets, power of, 36The Supply of Beer: a report

on the supply of beer for retail sale in the UnitedKingdom, 28-33

sweet stout, 220

238 INDEX

Ttable beer, 220Tactical Nuclear Penguin, 94Talbot, Neil, 26tap beers, quality issues with,

69-70tax rates in Europe, 158taxation of beer, 38, 90-91,

96, 159Taylor, Dean, 81Taylor, E. P., 139Taylor, Graham, 153Telles, Marcel, 5temperance movement,

86-88, 183temperatures guidelines for

beer drinking, 71, 146ten minute warning (drinking

game), 98Tennent’s Pilsner, 39Tennents, 154Thatcher, Margaret, xv, 7,

23, 38Third Way drinks, 121Thomas Hardy’s Ale, 142“3-2” beer, 186The Tibetan Book of Living and

Dying (Rinpoche), 124Tidbury, Sir Charles, 211tolerance, value of, 129-131Tolkien, J. R. R., 188top ten beer brands, 165Transcendentalism, 123-124Transport and General Workers

Union, 24Trappist beer, 178

tripe, 172Tripel, 220trub, 216Tsingtao, 42Tuert, Dennis, 152turbidity, 75Two Dogs, 96, 192types of beer, table of, 219-221

Uulcers, reduced risk


union issues, 23-27Union Temperance Society, 86unions, 147United Kingdom

brewing companies in, 34-35beer consumption, 45The Beer Orders, 28-33beer production, 43

United States beer consumption, 45beer production, 43

University of California, Davisbrewing program, 144endowment by Anheuser-

Busch, 136Utopias, 93

VVegemite, 127, 204vicinal diketones, 173Villiger, Joseph, 5vodka, “beer” created

from, 121

INDEX 239

Volstead Act, 16, 88, 143, 183-186

Volstead, Andrew, 143, 183

WWalker’s Best Bitter, xiiiWalker, Alan, 10Walker, Bill, 82Ward, Tim, 149water

conservation by breweries,118-119

importance in brewing, 14, 142

Watney, xvWatney’s, 8, 138Weihenstephan brewing

school, 58, 169Weisse, 220Weizenbier, 220Wenlock Brewery Company, 10What Bloody Man Is That

(Brett), 40Whitbread, xv, 7Whiting, Sam, 69Wigan Athletic, 206Wigan Pier, 135William and Mary Tercentenary

Trust, 212William Hancock &

Company, 10William Stones Ltd., 10William Younger’s Brewery, 138Williams, Bert, 156Wilson, John, 191

Wind in the Willows(Grahame), 139

Wit, 220Wolverhampton and Dudley

Breweries, acquisition ofMarston’s, 140

Wolverhampton Wanderers,149-152, 156

Women’s Christian TemperanceUnion, 87

Women’s Organization for National ProhibitionReform, 89

Woo, Sam, 72world beer consumption, 45-46world beer production, 43world’s top ten beer

brands, 165wort, 215Worthington & Company

Ltd., 10worts

clarity, 13, 141separation, 13, 141

Wright, Billy, 150-152Wright, Christine, 101

X-Y-Zyeast, 216

availability and demand, 201importance of, 14, 142

Zymurgy newsletter, 62

Documents

Vice President, Publisher: Tim Mooreptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/images/9780137065073/...means, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in the United States of America