Craft Beer done Lite?… cute
Cats: Beer History|
Ever think to yourself, “wow this is a great craft brew. I just wish it was available in a watered down form, you know, one that hobbles it’s ability to carry the same malt character or unique hop combination”… nah, i didn’t think so. Ok, maybe I’m being too hard on the macro… here’s the skinny.
Miller Brewing Co. is test marketing the Miller Lite Brewers Collection, a trio of craft style beers that are lower in calories and carbohydrates than other craft beers, beginning in February 2008 Milwaukee-based Miller will test the products in four markets: Minneapolis; Charlotte, N.C.; San Diego, Calif.; and Baltimore.
The Miller Lite Brewers Collection will feature Blonde Ale, Amber and Wheat, each with significantly fewer calories and carbs than a typical beer for that style, according to Miller.
“Miller is seeking to again establish a whole new category for the beer industry - craft-style-light” (referring to the claim that they are responsible for the concept of light beer) said Miller chief marketing officer Randy Ransom. “The brewer who can provide a more refreshing and drinkable craft style can stake out a whole new niche in the market. That’s what we intend to do.”
So there it is, the macros have entered the craft game and they want to change the rules. I mean Coors has effectively made inroads into the micro market with the Blue Moon series and Killian’s Red. And though Killians as a “red lager” practically marketed as an Irish red ale represented a corporate approach to driving into the craft market. But this is a new creature. Miller, unlike Coors, is putting it’s own label forward, instead of creating a new one. Will it work? I don’t know.
Blonde Ale
Fermentables: Pale and caramel malt; maize
Hops: Willamette, Galena, Cascade, Chinook
IBU: 14
Ale fermentation
Wheat
Fermentables: Pale, caramel and wheat malt; maize
Hops: Willamette, Galena
IBU: 6
Lager fermentation
Amber
Fermentables: Pale, dark crystal malt; maize
Hops: Willamette, Mt. Hood
IBU: 15
Lager fermentation
Here’s my take; upon first being presented with this “light craft beer” idea i threw up in my mouth a little, at first it struck me that this product was appealing to a donut whole of a market. I mean if you want a craft brew you want a craft brew and vice versa, but then I started thinking of myself in real terms… what if these beers are priced the same as miller lite, what if i’m at a rock show and have already blown a chunk of coin on the tix. What if I had relegated myself to PBR for the evening and I see that I could actually have a beer that at least makes a head nod toward malt character or hoppy aroma instead of the ole maize body and a game of hide the hop? Maybe i would, though I may wrap my hand around the bottle to block the label, maybe i would. Tough call… at least it’s not Coors.
March 31st, 2008 at 8:51 pm
I’m trying to be open-minded about this, but I think I’m stuck on the “more drinkable” quote. Jeez, what could be less drinkable than a friggin Miller Lite?? (Answer: Bud Light). As far as I’ve noticed, drinkability is not really a problem with your average craft beer. Not even with your somewhat below-average craft beer, actually. Except for Blue Moon, which tastes like soap… oh wait, that’s made by a macro.
And don’t you think they’ll be expensive anyway, just because they can be? This is going to be like those shampoo companies that add flower smells to their regular old nasty chemical shampoos and then call them “Natural Essensces” or something. Same old crap, fancy new label. (How do you like my open-mindedness, by the way?)
Is this the longest comment in history? Because I think I could keep going…
April 1st, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Actually it looks like you’re right suggested retail is like $7.99. At that price this experiment in macrocraft is a joke.