Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years

abc7news.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 358 posts

Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years

#191

Post by ecocentrik »

bartread wrote: post #90
krustyburger wrote: post #21

It’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 fro…

This news has nothing to do with lack of innovation. The entire beer market is currently contracting.

Also, not everything needs to innovate. Every field needs a canon of notable creations that have stood the test of centuries or millennia and beer brewing is no exception.

Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years

#192

Post by bink »

jimmychoozyx wrote: post #29
bink wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has nothing to do with politics: > “We recognize the importance and historic significance of Anchor to San Francisco and to the craft brewing industry, but the impacts of the pandemic, inflation, especially in San Francisco, and a highly competitive market left the company with no option but to make this sad decision to cease operations.” You really think California is "collapsing economically" or are you just t…

I am mostly referring to the exodus of citizens who find California can no longer sustain them economically. As a result, they're moving in substantial proportions to conservative states. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_exodus There has also been a significant exodus of businesses. "An exodus of California businesses is gaining steam, with the number of departing establishments nearly doubling from 2012…

Your own links suggest that peak migration was in 2021, when California lost 360,000 people. That's less than 1% of the population.

You're also ignoring the fact that Anchor Steam is owned by Sapporo and has been for the last 6 years. This isn't a decision being made by people working in the factory who are angry that they had to wear masks or upset about a rise in homelessness.

Despite Musk's political nonsense claims about moving the Tesla HQ, he's still expanding the Fremont factory: https://www.tesla.com/fremont-factory

The most common reason cited for normal companies to leave California is the cost of living, especially housing and labor costs. If the economy were collapsing those costs would be decreasing.

California's GDP has also continued to rise, with only a brief blip at the beginning of 2020: https://www.statista.com/statistics/187834/gdp-of-the-us-fed...

California saw historic budget surpluses from 2021 to 2023: "As a result, in the last two years, the state saw historic budget surpluses—including $47 billion in 2021‑22 and $55 billion in 2022‑23. https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4687

Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years

#193

Post by bink »

jimmychoozyx wrote: post #37
athinggoingon wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you expect these corporate announcements to contain anything but PR and euphemisms?

Exactly. One of the cardinal sins in statistics is: Self-reports are biased. A corporation is telling you about that same corporation? You can expect some bias ;) I find it quite telling this attitude of "If someone tells you something, it's got to be true! Especially if it's a corporation!!" quite telling, regarding those folks who are saying "Hey you can't criticize California! You conservative!" It's like... Reall…

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. "

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years

#194

Post by Rapzid »

bartread wrote: post #90
krustyburger wrote: post #21

It’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 fro…

Their Porter is fantastic and on par with Fuller's.

Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years

#195

Post by smugma »

dehrmann wrote: post #146
avisser wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the fact that I can get Stone at my corner liquor store in Rhode Island? You know, the one that doesn't have a great selection.

I remember seeing Lagunitas all over Sweden.

Makes sense.

Heineken, the world's #2 beer producer, bought them for ~$1B (half in 2015, rest in 2017).

Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years

#196

Post by joshstrange »

crazygringo wrote: post #134
sfpotter wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't the pandemic accelerate drinking, if anything?

I think stopping drinking was a response to exactly that -- it got out of control, then people quit. At least in NYC that's when we saw the first non-alcoholic "liquor" stores emerge. Because people still want a sophisticated treat to sip to mark the end of the day.

> it got out of control, then people quit

Can confirm, that's how it went for me and at least a few friends who I've talked to about it. I went from rarely drinking to heavily drinking to now drinking even more rarely. I let it get way too out of control (mostly in frequency, nothing life-destroying or dangerous to anything/anyone but my body potentially) and even after admitting it was an issue it took a while before I kicked it. Glad I did. It made me look at drinking in a whole new light, especially about just how pervasive it is in society. The joke I've heard a number of times before along the lines of "It'd never get approved if it was introduced today" feels pretty apt. Even something like marijuana seems many times safer than alcohol.

Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years

#197

Post by stickfigure »

ryaneager wrote: post #47
greesil wrote: post #19

I got to do a tour of the place, it was really fun. It's located near Potrero Hill. I can't say anything about their cost structure but having a location that's in SF probably has some disadvantages. But, there are a lot of other craft brewers in the bay area that are quite good. Drake's, Faction come to mind. You don't have to go much further afield to find Bear Republic, Russian River Brew Co. I would not consider…

There’s 50+ smaller breweries sprinkled across the North Bay within 1.5hrs of SF. Civilization, Fog Belt, Cooperage, Iron Ox, Henhouse, Barrel Brothers, Moonlight, Shadyoak… just to name a few.

The comically small town of Winters has two - Berryessa Brewing and Hoobies. Both great. Closer to Dixon/Davis, Ruhstaller is a blast - especially on weekends.

Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years

#198

Post by gffrd »

ChainOfFools wrote: post #175
codyb wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've certainly been moving back towards lighter beers... those IPAs are too strong. You think 5% to 6% isn't a big deal cause it seems so small, but it's a 20% increase in alcohol content. 5% - 7% is a 40% increase! If you're drinking pints, it's like adding half a shot to every beer you drink. It adds up quick.

I'm a little concerned about the phenomenon I've noticed on the shelves lately which is that every brand seems to be first, putting the ABV content in larger and larger font and a more prominent position on the label with each new offering, and that they are now starting to clock in at doppel and trippel and barley wine levels of alcohol on a regular basis. The number of casual drinking beers that have hit 10% or eve…

I once had a homeless fella ask me to buy him a beer by name: Voodoo Ranger. Which is like 9% alcohol, sold in 16oz cans.

As casual drinkers drink less, maybe we're not the target market …

Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years

#199

Post by gffrd »

WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #174
nilespotter wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Got any example of this new wave of sophisticated non-alcoholic liqour?

Around here, the rising alt is kratom. Non-alchoholic=yes. Liquorous=no. Sophisticated? I have no idea.

It's advertised in window displays at mini marts and cigarette/vape shops, so a big no to that last one.

Re: SF's Anchor Brewing Company shutting down after 127 years

#200

Post by jms703 »

bartread wrote: post #90
krustyburger wrote: post #21

It’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 fro…

Why does a beer have to innovate?
Post reply on HN