I hadn't really kept up with that side, but Anchor had a distilling operation as well, with a rye whiskey that was unusually 100% malted rye (Old Potrero).
From what I can see, that's now owned by Hotaling, and not affected.
SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years
81–90 of 358 posts
Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years
#82Honest question: how did this SF brewing company survive prohibition? If it really is 127 years old, it must have existed during prohibition. How was it not shut down then? I'm curious.
They started selling at scale 1 or 2 days after prohibition ended. This is logistically impossible if they were truly shut down during the entirety of prohibition.
Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years
#83Why aren’t we celebrating the market efficiency?
Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years
#84Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years
#85It’s important to note that Anchor as a division is being shut down as a cost-saving measure by its owner Sapporo, a transnational, publicly-traded corporation. Sapporo says they have tried to find a buyer for Anchor, but to no avail. Meanwhile Sapporo recently purchased Stone Brewing in San Diego and are beginning Sapporo production there while still making Stone beers. If Sapporo hadn’t also bought Stone, presumabl…
It would seem that Sapporo did not do enough diligence when they bought Anchor. Anchor's facilities are far too small, their infrastructure and their team not setup to brew at that sort of scale. Stone is a much better fit for what they seem to be trying to do.
Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years
#86It’s important to note that Anchor as a division is being shut down as a cost-saving measure by its owner Sapporo, a transnational, publicly-traded corporation. Sapporo says they have tried to find a buyer for Anchor, but to no avail. Meanwhile Sapporo recently purchased Stone Brewing in San Diego and are beginning Sapporo production there while still making Stone beers. If Sapporo hadn’t also bought Stone, presumabl…
I think we can start dropping useless affectations like "it's important to note" now that ChatGPT has utterly co-opted them and revealed how meaningless they are. You could have simply stated that Anchor division is being dropped. I'm already reading your comment. You don't have to sell me on why you're noting it.
[dead]
Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years
#87Sort of went the way of Pete's Wicked Ale. Interestingly, Anchor was really bad beer before Maytag bought the company, updated the equipment, and started using quality ingredients. You have to give him credit for taking it from 0 to being influential in developing the American craft beer market and making Anchor something you could reliably find nationwide.
I guess time sort of passed it by. So many more interesting brews are around today. But saying that, I always sort of enjoyed an Anchor. Sad to see it go.
Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years
#88Many this really sucks. Many a cold summer day did I spend sipping a pint of Anchor at Kennedy's on Columbus, at the Albatross in Berkeley, and at various other water holes around the city and in the East Bay. Feels like my 20s just died.
Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years
#89I wonder what will happen to the term "Steam Beer" now.
If I remember correctly, after the end of prohibition Anchor claimed ownership of the term "steam beer" even though it is a name of a style of beer and forced any other brewery to use the names "Steam Ale" or "California Common".
With Anchor being shuttered it would be great for Sapporo to release ownership of the style name so the BJCP can update the category back to the historically accurate title.
Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years
#90It’s important to note that Anchor as a division is being shut down as a cost-saving measure by its owner Sapporo, a transnational, publicly-traded corporation. Sapporo says they have tried to find a buyer for Anchor, but to no avail. Meanwhile Sapporo recently purchased Stone Brewing in San Diego and are beginning Sapporo production there while still making Stone beers. If Sapporo hadn’t also bought Stone, presumabl…
I think that is an important point but, with that said, I'd suggest that perhaps the reason Anchor were struggling is they didn't really innovate. Rather they rested on the laurels of that 127 year heritage.
Certainly a very personal opinion but the first time I tried Anchor beers sometime in the noughties I was underwhelmed. Don't get me wrong: they're certainly better than Bud, Coors, etc., but as a Brit coming from somewhere with a by then thriving real ale scene, Anchor's beers just weren't that great. More than that, they weren't up to the standards of many other US-brewed craft beers I'd tried, many of which are at least as good as anything the UK or mainland Europe has to offer[0].
The microbrewing scene in the US has really taken off over the past 20 years so, to me, it felt like Anchor just got left behind by it. And maybe Stone Brewing have a bit more to offer[1] and it was easier for Sapporo to buy them and roll with it than to try and revitalise a brand seen as ailing? I'm not saying I like it but I can certainly imagine that perspective within the company.
[0] By the mid-2010s there did seem to be a tendency to overegg IPAs by making many of them ludicrously strong, and just trying to cram in too much flavour, not to mention the consistency of many was borderline gloopy (more like drinking blood than beer) - mercifully I think this trend may be reversing.
[1] Pure speculation: I don't remember ever trying any of Stone's beers so have no comment to make on their quality or otherwise.