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

231–240 of 358 posts

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

#231

Post by Arainach »

kshahkshah wrote: post #69
chubot wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The obvious follow up is I think they must not have kept up with the times I’d guess bottles are the majority of the business and I think that product is inferior I don’t know what the other breweries do, maybe it’s just freshness and inventory, or a better or more consistent bottling — I should also add that I lived in SF, so it’s definitely possible that most customers out of city think of them as a bad bottled bee…

Other breweries do cans. Easier. Cheaper. Tastes better. Keeps the art fresh.

>Other breweries do cans. Easier. Cheaper. Tastes better. Keeps the art fresh.

Canning has significant upfront costs that mean that for small operations it's not easier or cheaper. At the scale of Anchor, it's viable, but does require a significant investment in retooling.

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

#232

Post by nemo44x »

whartung wrote: post #128

I'm not a beer guy, but as I understand it many craft beers are actually made through contract brewers. That suggests that beer can be, well, "reduced" to a recipe that can be replicated. I've heard that Samuel Adams uses contract breweries, and, in fact, a fellow who used to work with us had his own private label that he went and got a bunch of cases brewed, made up a label, found a bottler, and sold locally. Now, I…

> I'm not a beer guy, but as I understand it many craft beers are actually made through contract brewers.

Same thing with spirits like whiskey. There's massive distillery named MGP that makes a ton of whiskey but they don't market or sell any direct. They sell to companies that want to sell a whiskey brand. They're known as a "production contractor". This way you can bring a product to market but you don't have to vertically integrate the production of it.

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

#233

Post by greesil »

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.

Time to go out for a beer tour!!

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

#234

Post by hyperbovine »

munificent wrote: post #225
necubi wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trend isn't away from drinking, it's away from beer. Seltzers and other malt-based drinks have had huge growth in the past few years, mostly at the expense of beer sales, and liquor sales are up as well. Slate's been doing a great series over the past week about these trends if you're interested: https://slate.com/tag/beer-package .

I wonder how much of this is the beer industry eating its own seedcorn by focusing more and more on super bitter IPAs that beer snobs love at the expense of more middle of the road palatable beers. The long term consequence of that plus beer snobbery looking down on light beers is that younger drinkers with sweeter palates just don't drink beer at all because the beer that is socially acceptable is too bitter for the…

I really despise this about the American beer industry. Your typical tap list these days is 8 IPAs, 1-2 dIPAs, 4 sours, something that contains coffee, some other weird shit (cucumber göse e.g.), and like one normal everyday lager or pilsener that isn't making some sort of personality statement and pairs well with food. Worse, this appears to be catching on among trendier bars in Europe, even in places like Munich and Vienna that have had spectacular beer for centuries and should know better.

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

#235

Post by tptacek »

MarkMarine wrote: post #189
sfpotter wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a little surprised Anchor didn't do better. I personally got worn out by all the craziness and experimentation in the craft brewing scene. Really unique IPAs or sour beers were fun for a while, but after a while, I realized I just wanted something reasonably good and predictably normal, i.e. a Normal Good Beer. It seemed like Anchor was delivering on this, but maybe there were enough other options that they just…

This seems to be a conclusion in the beverage world as well, the craft beer wave has broken and people are just trying to drink something that tastes like what it says on the label. I home brew beer and the instinct is to make something crazy, but I get sick of my own experiments and double sick of paying 18$ for a 4 pack of someone else’s experiments. I could never stand being told that hop burn was a sign of craft…

Some of the highest-status beers during Peak Beer were well-executed straightforward beers; Pliny comes to mind. As does Zombie Dust.

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

#236

Post by [deleted] »

sfpotter wrote: post #117
bartread wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I'm a little surprised Anchor didn't do better. I personally got worn out by all the craziness and experimentation in the craft brewing scene. Really unique IPAs or sour beers were fun for a while, but after a while, I realized I just wanted something reasonably good and predictably normal, i.e. a Normal Good Beer. It seemed like Anchor was delivering on this, but maybe there were enough other options that they just…

[deleted]

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

#237

Post by tptacek »

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…

My understanding was that the Sapporo transaction was a fire sale; is that wrong? If it isn't, it doesn't much matter what Sapporo did; Anchor was a dead brewery walking anyways.

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

#238

Post by zerocrates »

chrisweekly wrote: post #211
voidfunc wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is right. When I was in my 20s I was really into beer. Now I'm older and I split my time between the usual light beer culprits when I'm drinking out and enjoying a few craft favorites when I'm drinking in and gaming/doing hobbies. Also when a four pack of 16oz cans is approaching $20 (or exceeding that) I'm less likely to be exploratory because who the he'll wants a fridge of rejects they don't like.

I (rarely) homebrew, for fun, but when it comes to beers in the fridge I have so many great local options to choose from (here on the south shore of MA, near Cape Cod), it's ridiculous: Second Wind, Stellwagen, Mayflower, Timberyard.... typically canned just a week or two before purchase. A few times a year I'll make a trip to Treehouse (worth it), otherwise the local package stores are well-stocked. I do remember en…

My understanding is that this is kind of the pattern of the beer downturn. The huge operations are doing okay, shifting around amongst their sub-brands, introducing seltzers, etc. And the hyper-local stuff is still doing well it seems. But the "pretty big" craft brewers that went nationwide, they're facing the brunt.

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

#239

Post by deadballcretin »

jeffbee wrote: post #207
deadballcretin wrote: post #190

Simply put, par for the course when it comes to what little of San Francisco's soul is actually left. Slowly dismantling the weird to make way for the boring. Saporro has mismanaged this from the very start, they had no plan when they bought the company and will almost certainly turn to victim blaming and crying foul amidst their successful unionization effort in 2019.

The idea that in the absence of Anchor we will be at a loss for "soul" breweries is somewhat hilarious. Over my 40+ years of life the number of breweries in America has exploded 100-fold. In San Francisco and the immediate area craft breweries are almost a menace. There must be 5000 of them in California. If you insist that your beer be sourced from your immediate political jurisdiction, you could get beer from Fort…

I'm talking about the city, not the brewing scene. The brewery is a staple of the city and it is a shame to see it shutter in such a fashion. Looking at the rest of the scene and not what the brewery represents is intentionally missing the point of what I was trying to say. The city is being dismantled, bit by bit, being replaced with facsimiles of what people think San Francisco is supposed to be instead of letting the city be.

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

#240

Post by jamiek88 »

giantg2 wrote: post #216
spookthesunset wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those light beers are also low ABV, which is ideal for warm summer days where to just want something refreshing without getting plastered. A simple tasting 4% beer works great for that. A complex, bitter 12% double IPA? Not so much. I’d much rather drink an amber ale on a nice warm day than yet another IPA.

Just a point to the marketing and shifting norms... I would call a 4-5% beer normal, not low, ABV.

5% used to be considered high or an ‘export’ lager when I was a lad. We called Stella Artois at a massive 5.2% “wife beater”.

Typical session lagers like Heineken were around 3.5%.

Post reply on HN