After the restaurant we went to the pub for a couple of drinks.  The pub we visited again used to be a regular haunt, but hadn’t been visited in a long time.  This is mainly due to a nearby competitor being one of our favourite pubs in the whole of Calderdale, however we decided to visit this particular establishment for a change, something I won’t be repeating again.  The couple of hours we spent there started well enough, but soon went downhill. I asked the barman which beer he recommended for someone who likes a nice hop flavour, a question I asked many times and usually elicits a recommendation or an offer to sample a beer if the staff member is not quite sure.  However on this occasion the response included the phrase “it’s not all about the bitterness you know”.

I probably try hundreds of different beers a year and know damn well that too much bitterness can ruin a beer, balance is essential.  The weekend before this incident I purchased a bottle of Magic Rock 8 Ball, a beer I have been waiting to try for a long time and was willing to invest quite a lot more money into than my usual tipples.  This beer is hopped, filtered through whole leaf hops and then dry hopped to really infuse the flavours.  The result is a 7% black IPA which has bags of flavour, but keeps a lovely balance between the bitterness of the hops, the citrus elements and a light fresh taste.  I am not as much of a hophead as I used to be, but it is still an essential part of my beer diet and this one hit the spot.

I have no problem with the beers at the pub, they are good brews, with a nice range on offer, and most I could happily drink as a session ale all day, but would rather not be spoken to like I have absolutely no beer knowledge whatsoever.  However this just the start, the bell was rang for last orders at about 11.10pm, so I went to buy a pint of cider for my wife and a set of ? pint sampler size beers to finish up.  About 11.35pm, when there was still about 15 people in the bar, I ordered a taxi back home.  Whilst I was on the phone and discussing with my wife what time to order it, the landlord interrupted this private call whilst clearing the empty glasses from the previous round with “I wouldn’t, I close in 5 minutes”.  This was totally out of order from a privacy and tone of phrase point of view, had he said “I’ll be closing up in 10 minutes, so you’ll have to wait outside I’m afraid”, I would not have took offence.

However the “Basil Fawlty” moment came at about 11:45pm, when the Dyson made an appearance and he started hoovering around the remaining 10 or so customers.  Of the other parties left in the pub there was a look of incredulity passing between the members of at least one other apart from ourselves.  By the time we left, he still had a handful of customers drinking up and was merrily polishing up the wood on the front of the bar.  The whole experience has ensured that any plans for future visits have been put on hold, which is a pity for a pub which used to rank as one of my favourites.

I have said before, the triumvirate of elements which make up a pub is service, beer and surroundings.  Surroundings you can forgive on a regular basis if the other two elements are good, the beer as long as it is fresh can be standard big brewery fayre for the occasional visit, but poor attitude towards customers will wipe out any benefit gained from the other two.  This is a case in point.

Both Carlsberg and Fosters are really pushing their “posh shandies” this summer with Carlsberg Citrus and Fosters Radler being watered down versions of their parent beers (2.8%  and 2% ABV respectively) mixed with some variation of citrus flavouring.   Carling are extending their Zest range to include a ginger variation, joining its citrus brethren with a similar watered down strength of 2.8%.

Breweries love to create new terms to avoid having to use the words “low strength” or “shandy”, and this years is “New Mid Strength Moderation Category”.  Heineken are using this term to describe this market.  It is not, as I have discussed before. Mid strength would typically be a 3.5% – 4.5% ABV beer or cider, anything which sits at 2.8% of below is low strength, hence the reduced rate of beer duty.  They cannot use the term “low alcohol” for the reasons described below, but a more accurate and acceptable term would be “lower alcohol” which can be used for products of this strength.  This mealy mouthed term created to mask the true weakness of the beer by Heineken is simply marketing gibberish.

These companies will fall back on the newly issued Portman Group Guidance on Alcohol Marketing regarding claims made concerning strength when defending this terminology.  This says that defines low alcohol as “a drink with an abv of above 0.5% but not more than 1.2%”.  Using this definition almost no beer or cider based products could be defined as “low alcohol”.  The new guidance allows for a term “lower alcohol” to be used where the strength of a drink is of a lower percentage than a typical “similar beverage”, currently 4.2% for beer and 5% for cider.  There is also a lot of guidance included regarding the naming and branding of strong alcohol drinks, but nothing regarding the middle range and breweries are using this grey area to their advantage.

The Portman Group is “the social responsibility body for alcohol producers”. Its membership is made up of nine of the largest brewers, spirit and cider makers in the country, including AB InBev, Carlsberg, Diageo, Heineken and Molson Coors.  These big companies make up most of the advertising spend regarding alcohol promotion in the UK.  The same organisation also operates the drinkaware website which you see referenced in most alcohol advertising.  They, as a body, periodically publish code of practice guidance for suitable advertisements in the alcoholic drinks sector and also administer the Independent Complaints Panel which deals with possible breaches of the code of practice.

However, despite non membership, alcohol producers who are not part of the big 9 may be referred to this panel who can request the “offending” advert is pulled from circulation within a reasonable time if they find it breaches the code of practice.   Recent complaints which have been upheld include those against Hardknott Brewery Vitesse Noir because of its use of the phrase “it’ll be just the tonic that you needed.”  which implied a health benefit from consuming the product.  They also objected to use of the phrase “this beer is so packed full of beans it could have you dancing on the ceiling’”.  They disliked this phrase as it implied the Vitesse Noir “could affect physical capabilities”.

A lot of the other upheld complaints are mainly related to the promotion of “knocking back” drinks, disproportionate attention being given to the high strength of a beer / cider / ready to drink product and marketing which could be seen as targeting younger persons than the legal age of consumption.   All these I agree with, however the complaint against Hardknott seems to lack a sense of humour, if you really believe you will gain anti gravity abilities by drinking a bottle of this, you are probably on something else already.  If the brewery can prove this claim, its price would rocket up overnight and I would be ordering several cases.  The Portman Group should give adults some credit and assume they have a grasp on reality. Minors certainly need some protection, but adults can make their own decision.

In fact what lets down British pubs is related mitigating factors.  We do not suffer from extreme cold or heat compared to other places in the world, but merely just muddle along getting fairly average weather all year round which can be inclement very regularly.  A period of sunshine can convert the trade at a public house from ticking along to creating a healthy profit, with a good summer being the saviour of many a pub.  Despite the scrapping of the beer duty escalator, tax on beer is still too high compared to other countries, and a good pint in many places will cost you close to £3.  A reduction in beer duty would bring people back into the pubs and spending more money when they are there.

An example of this price reduction effect can be seen at my local cricket club, Southowram, who recently moved their beer supply from Theakstons to Samuel Smiths, and as a result was able to cut their prices to members by 40-50p per pint.  This may sound like a bad move financially, but the club is making more profit from beer overall.  The logic behind this is quite simple, the prices previously were £2.60 to £2.80 for bitter and lager, now dropped to £2.10 and £2.30.  People can now bring out a fiver and get a couple of pints of beer, whereas with the old prices, this was not possible, ergo a couple can go out for a couple of hours for less than a tenner.

The difference is only a few quid, but the psychological trigger in peoples minds is saying “we’ve not even spent a fiver (each)” and they return to spend more another day. Of course there is the cost of two drinks to the club, compared to one, but the profit made on a second pint that isn’t sold is nothing, compared to a smaller profit on two pints more than rolling up to a greater overall profit per visit.  If a tax cut could bring prices down by double digits then a similar mental attitude could take place more generally across the population as long as pubs gave customers the benefit of the full tax cut.

Some people will say that we will get increased binge drinking, however if people are addicted to alcohol or want drink and cause trouble, then a price difference this small would make little difference to the situation as it would mean one extra pint for every 20 drank and after the first 10, however many over that amount will lead to the same issues.  Pubs which may have problems from the increased consumption are probably having issues already.

Of course some of our pubs are at more of a handicap than others, as you know from the topic arc from the last few weeks in this column, we have many pub landlords who suffer unfair conditions from the owners of the properties otherwise know as the pub companies, with unfair beer prices and rent levels.  There is a level of grouped ownership in the UK licensed premises market that you would not see an any other country, could you imagine France, Germany, Spain or Italy putting up with the same commercial conditions placed on large number of the countries cafes, kellers or bars that tied pubco premises are typically.

Why we do is due to decades of allowing breweries and the pub companies to gobble up huge numbers of pubs even when legislation is designed to stop it (think Beer Orders) is introduced, the same has not happened elsewhere.  Why do we, who have some of the best drinking establishments and brewery scenes in the world allow this abuse.  The new legislation going through Parliament currently needs to help undo decades of poor control, lets hope it does.

Brian Mannion runs and owns a pub in Kilburn, London called the Black Lion.  Under the deal agreed after Enterprise sold him the property and tie for £1.3 million, Enterprise lease the building for £80,000 per annum, which he in turn rents back from them for £50,000 per annum.   Being effectively paid up front £30,000 per year to run your pub before you sell a pint seems a good deal, but he also has to buy his draught beer and cider from Enterprise, with some of the list prices per barrel being 66% more than what he could pay under a freehold deal.   He previously purchased the freehold of another pub, this time from Punch, who put no restrictions in the conditions of sale, thus allowing him to operate at a reasonable margin with a free choice of beer.

Brian must have known of this condition of sale before he signed as Enterprise would not give away £30,000 without knowing they could make it back in profits on wet sales.  Given that he already owns 3 other pubs, we can assume he is clued up on contracts (and if his lawyer did not alert him to this then he deserves to be fired).  The rising extra draught beer costs from Enterprise are now giving him “no incentive” to sell the product.  In an unusual move, he is trying to avoid paying these excess prices by removing all draught from the premises and going bottled only, where he is free to buy from the best value supplier.   Enterprise had no comment on the situation, which is not like Ted Tuppen, who normally has plenty to say to tenants.

On the 1st of June, the last beer will be pulled through the pump and draught offerings will disappear after 800 years on the site.   I’m a massive fan of good draught beer, both lager and ale, but I am fully supportive of this move by Brian.  Where a contract does not allow you to trade effectively, then bending the rules as far as you can is a legitimate business tactic.  In this case he is exploiting the fact there probably isn’t a minimum order stipulated contractually, so although he has to buy his draught beer from Enterprise he also doesn’t have to buy any at all, the option he is taking.

He will lose some locals from this, of that there is no doubt, but there are plenty of bottle drinkers and the publicity from this move which has hit national and specialist press will do him no harm at all.  The higher prices forced on customers by him having to pass on the costs of purchase would probably do at least as much harm to his custom.  Bottled beer is no longer the poor relation, it can supply a very good range of different beers to suit all tastes, many of which are bottle conditioned.  It also allows a easy route to support local microbrewers on a sliding scale, allowing a small order to escalate to a more substantial one in reaction to public demand.  There is also the increased shelf life over draught beer.  Just look at the popularity of craft beer shops and bars now who sell a range of 100’s of bottles and real ale and craft beer fans are happy to buy pre-packed versions of their favourite brews regularly.

It will never replace a freshly poured pint in my personal opinion and in cases where I’ve had the same beer in both forms the freshly poured one wins every time, but given I do a lot of my drinking at home now, there is no reason not to be happy to drink strictly bottled brews on visits to such a place if they had the right selection and were kept correctly.  The best of luck to him, it would be nice to see Enterprise get a bloodied nose.

Their chief executive is Ted Tuppen, whom personally I think resembles Al Bundy out of the 80’s hit sitcom “Married with Children”.   Last week he came out against some elements of the Statutory Regulations of Pub Companies proposed by the Government to make the pub industry a more level playing field.   To quote, he stated that there could be “damaging unintended consequences” for the industry.  This kind of language is designed to scaremonger, something which I do not approve of at the personal, business or government level.

The system proposed by the Government would save each pub which is tied to one of the big six companies (Enterprise, Punch, Marston’s, Greene King, Star Pubs & Bars and Admiral Taverns) approximately £4000 each year by allowing them to trade on more level terms with free of tie pubs.   This is obviously not in Enterprise Inns interest.  Tuppen claims that the reduced income from each pub would “leave companies with no incentive to offer support”, following up later with “The training, the support, advice and assistance we give would be chocked off as we are forced to consider different ways of running our business”.

In effect he is saying if we get £4000 less from you, we will withdraw the same value of support from you to compensate.  This comes across as extortion akin to the loan shark threatening to hobble the debtor if he doesn’t get his money, in this case hobbling the business with lack of support.  The picture of business practices within the company is not building to be a pretty one.   This response to new regulation would of course look good on the short term balance sheet, but a long term growth strategy it is not, both financially and regarding its obligations to tenants who have sunk ten of thousands of pounds into deposits to take over an Enterprise Inns property.

Increased income for pub tenants, especially those which are struggling, would allow them to develop and market the pub to the local drinkers better, have the money to put on regular event nights and invest in updating the look of the premises.  This would hopefully drive more footfall, ensuring more beer is drank, hence Enterprise make more money in the long term from the lower purchase cost of drinks via increased bulk discounts from brewers.  In turn the pub landlords would still retain that extra £4000 per year to keep investing in the business to increase beer sales even further.

Of course even if he was not too short sighted to see the long term benefits of nurturing their pubs and tenants, I suspect he would advocate hammering them with rent increases which would all but negate the financial benefits of the increased business.  The Enterprise Inns empire was built on a pile of debt which still sits at £2.5 billion, down from £3.3 billion three year ago, and is under pressure to further reduce its outstanding liabilities.  That pressure is being put directly on the shoulders of pub tenants.  A drop in sales of 4.2% in their last set of half yearly results is only adding to that pressure.

Just like Belhaven, the Greene King owned pub company tried to use the courts to stop the competition opening outlets in Stirling where they hold a significant share of the towns drinking establishments, Tuppen and Enterprise are threatening legal action if they don’t get their way including judicial reviews and legals challenges within the European courts.  So from this we can conclude that the triumvirate of scaremongering, extortion of tenants and legal threats seem to be business ethics that Ted Tuppen embraces, a fact which does not inspire confidence in the company either as a tenant or investor, both of which the company is relying on.

(note : you can find a piece about my local pub which was an enterprise inns property until 2010 here and a previous piece about Enterprise here)

Courts had asked Stirling Council to review the evidence and reconsider their decision on this basis.  This week they duly did this and concluded that they were right the first time, voting 4-1 to confirm the original declaration.  The development on the site will now start creating 50 jobs and investing £1.5m in the town.   In a week where it was reported that the rate of pub closures had increased to 26 per week up from 18 per week last year, any pub that serves decent ale opening up is a good thing.  Ideally it would be the small local pubs or independent premises which were opening, but we are in a economic situation where idealism sometimes does not come into play.

However it is exactly one these local pubs which appears to have a chance of a more secure future after it was granted the status of “asset of community”.  The Fox and Goose just outside Hebden Bridge was put up for sale because of the owner’s Julia Warren ill-health and there was fears that it could be purchased by one of the big chains and lose its identity and reputation for serving many lesser known beers.   To gain the status the “Friends of the Fox” had to show that it benefits the ‘social wellbeing’ of the local community. The council said it fitted the bill because “it was used by numerous groups and clubs including walkers, fell runners, cyclists, real ale enthusiasts, a bridge club, environmental groups and a history society and it runs a range of activities for the community such as music nights, quizzes and beer festivals”.

The successful campaign to secure the status which now means that local people have a six month window to raise the money to purchase the pub before other parties can make an offer was backed by many local community groups, the Calderdale CAMRA branch and other regional organisations.  The pub, which specialises in beers from smaller and medium sized independent brewers now has a group numbering over 100 aiming to raise the funds to purchase this community pub.

They have issued a draft share offer to anybody who is interested in investing in the project.  They plan to raise enough to purchase the pub outright and invest some money in refurbishing the public areas.  The pubs finances are profitable, with room for efficiency savings in stock management on its expected turnover of £166,000.  The group need £130,000 to purchase the pub (£85,000) and then invest in the premises (£23,000), the additional costs being fees and ongoing running costs post purchase.  The projects point to a five figure net profit within 5 years after all costs.

I’ve used this pub several times and it is a lovely little pub which concentrates on the beer and is welcoming to man and beast equally.  It would be a pity to see the place lose its distinctiveness just when Hebden Bridge is becoming a location for beer drinkers again after the devastation of the floods over the last few years.  Other local pubs like The Old Gate, White Lion, Shoulder of Mutton, Stubbing Wharf and The Railway are all doing good trade in the town, supported by venues like the Trades Club.   Although all of these pubs offer good beer, several offer something different, the Stubbing Wharf is known for its cider range and the Old Gate is known for supplying some very good craft beers, both cask and keg.   These pubs along with the Fox’s focus on smaller brewers and the other surrounding pubs simply supplying good beer all compliment each other, creating a balance which benefits the town as a whole.

Atmosphere is a hard thing to pin down, it is not down to the amount of customers, decor, price or time of day. One of my local pubs is the Shoulder and Mutton at Southowram. It is the only pub to open through the afternoon during the week in the village and as such it attracts a small but regular crowd certain days of the week. In total there are at most 10 people in the pub for these sessions, but it is not cliquey despite the small numbers. Non regulars are made to feel as welcome as anyone else and although the pub may look empty with the drinkers congregating around the bar, the banter and conversation pads out the positive atmosphere into the rest of the room.

Citing another local pub, the Cock and Bottle, Bank Top, this time at the opposite end of the spectrum. Saturday night at 10pm you are two people deep at the bar at times, lucky to get a seat or table and the loud background hum of the myriad of conversations taking place can overwhelm your own at times. But the welcome is still friendly even if you are a solo drinker popping in for a quick pint. Both pubs are basically of a traditional wood and stone decor, with the Cock and Bottle showing it relatively youth from being totally redeveloped only a few years ago against a more traditional decor exhibited by the Shoulder of Mutton which has been open in its current form for many years.

The Sportsman Inn at Ploughcroft, Works at Sowerby Bridge, Stubbing Wharf at Hebden Bridge and the Red Rooster at Brighouse are among many in the Calderdale area all have that same ability to have an atmosphere which draws you in regardless of how busy it is or when you visit. Some pubs however don’t pull this atmosphere off all the time. I visited Casa near Brighouse last week for a pint of the way home, mainly due to the fact I couldn’t get a parking space anywhere near the Red Rooster on their very popular quiz night, my usual port of call when coming home from that side of the hill.

Casa is clean, modern, has friendly staff, a number of decent lagers and a couple of good well kept ales so for a quick pint it ticks a lot of boxes. The bar had almost every table occupied to some extent with a mix of couples, groups of friends and a number of lads watching the Champions League semi final propping up the bar. The main area was nicely busy whilst still having seating available, but there was no real atmosphere, it was almost as if everyone was inhabiting their own private bubble in which only them and their friends exist. The place seemed a bit soulless, devoid of the personality which the pubs previously mentioned all possess.

The pubs I have mentioned already are mainly long established pubs (if you ignore occasional periods of closure) so time could be a factor in developing an atmosphere, but Casa has been open for significant amount of time so it not as if it hasn’t had time to build up its own personality. Just look at places like The Brewery Tap and Friends of Ham in Leeds, they built up an atmosphere conducive to new and existing customers within a month of opening and have maintained that ever since. I will happily admit that Casa is technically a good bar where I am happy to go for a beer, but it is just missing that “spark” that other pubs have.

That spark can come and go however even in the most established of licensed premises. Recently one of the best known ale houses in the area closed down for a short period suddenly. After it reopened it took 2 or 3 weeks to build back up to its former atmosphere which just shows that even a small time of disruption can affect the public perception of a place for period which can be longer than the disruption itself. However a good pub and good licensee will get it back.

Even before this monolithic giant was formed, the separated companies were rapidly swallowing up or merging with a number of smaller brewers.  Each of the original 3 companies, Interbrew, AmBev and Anheuser Busch were all effectively formed by the amalgamation of that region’s or country’s major brewing interests.  All this means that they have a massive portfolio of brands, their list of global brands has some of the most recognisable lager names in the world including Corona, Becks, Stella Artois and Budweiser.  In all there are over 200 brands contained within the company now and according to a 2010 report at least 14 of them had passed $1 billion in annual sales induvidually.  In 2012, they announced a profit after tax of $9.4 billion on sales of $40 billion as a group.

This is a company who knows how to make serious amounts of money, however even in this context, their latest attempt to make more money from their customers in the US even seems cynical.  For Budweiser in that country, they are marketing an additional new “box tie shaped” pinched can to ape their logo.  The new can will contain a reduced amount of beer (334ml v 355ml), use more metal to produce and cost at least the same amount for the customer to buy (making it more expensive per millilitre of beer).  However they do point out that it contains 8.5 calories less than a regular can of beer due to the smaller volume of beer, but are only selling it in packs of 8 rather the 6 pack which the traditional can is delivered to stores in, thus negating the health benefits as inevitably the two extra cans will just be drank anyway.

The difference in the pack size is also a deliberate decision as it removes the customers ability to compare prices quickly on a like for like basis.  It also contains double the amount of aluminium of a traditional can, so it feels heavier and has a very similar total weight to the older design with less beer inside.  The deliberate sizing of the packaging to fit into the same cube of space is also tactical ploy to convince customers that the same amount of beer is contained in both designs.  Many other product sectors have been doing this for years, but generally 99.9% of beers cans look the same if you strip the printed design off, some are just taller than others.  The only one I know which looks different is Sapporo which uses a tall, ribbed tapered can design.

Of course the ultimate goal of this exercise is to cut costs and make more profit on each sale while avoiding raising prices during what is still a stagnant economy. But they are also trying to revive a declining brand.  Sales have been declining in America for 25 years, in 1988, one in 4 beers sold in the US was Budweiser, in 2011 it was one in 12.  The same year Miller Lite overtook it to become the country’s best selling beer.   Budweiser has become more perceived as an “old mans” beer there.  Of course in the UK, the Budweiser brand is a lot younger and still has that perception as a younger persons beer.

When speaking to the media they state “We know there are a large number of consumers out there looking for new things, the trend-seekers” . The problem is these trend-seekers are discovering far superior beers from one of the hundreds of small craft breweries which exist, a number which is increasing at a healthy rate every year in the US (mirroring the healthy state of the UK brewing scene).  Following on from this they say “We expect both our core beer drinkers and new customers to try it.”, but why would a slightly pinched can make you buy Bud when you didn’t before.  I can see their point about existing customers and the curiosity purchase, but will it be more than a one off choice before returning to standard cans.  I have my doubts.

I’m as much of a fan of good cider as I am of good beer, both have their time in my fridge and get pulled out when in the mood.  What I have found is that I rarely mix them at home, it is either a cider or beer night.  When out I find myself mixing them more, but once I move onto cider I generally stay with the apple.   About 10 years ago when on holiday in Devon, many small rural shops sold 5 litre plastic containers of scrumpy for a lot less than a tenner.  Scrumpy is a flat slightly cloudy locally produced cider and I openly admit that it was slightly rough and although the strength was unspecified, it was definitely not less than 8%, but was still a drink you could enjoy.

Of course not all ciders are of such quality as those of those mentioned at the start of this piece.  The likes of Bulmers, Strongbow and Magners are pale imitations of the aforementioned brands, with a slightly sweeter more generic taste, generally sitting around 4-5% ABV.   Gaymers also are a respectably sized player in this area of the cider market, but are merely a sub brand from the owners of Magners.  As an interesting side note, Magners is sold as Bulmers in Ireland due to a complicated model of national rights over the Bulmers brand name.

Further down the quality chain you have a multitude of turbo cider brands which can be purchased in 3 litre bottles for less that £3 containing an 7-9% strength fermentation.  It is these cheap ciders that gave cider a bad name for many years, it being the drink of choice for the local wino.  In breaking this market perception over the last 5-6 years and bringing cider back to the front of peoples minds, the one thing that the likes of Bulmers and Magners can take a lot of credit for is just this.

Traditional lager brands have also tried to enter this sector of the drinks market.  Carlsberg have recently moved into the market with Somersby and Carling has recently entered the off sales market with Carling British Cider.  We can’t ignore Cidre from Stella Artois when discussing this sector of the market either.  This trio are directly competing with the Irish brands of Magners and Bulmers and the long standing draught brand Strongbow in the on-trade and off-trade market.

There are also brands such as Kopparberg and Rekorderlig which in my opinion are just  flavoured alcoholic lemonade with a misjudged label.  Overly sweet, easy to drink, and leaving you not ever wanting to try another one.  They also have the gaul to call their “apple cider” Naked Apple, as if it should even contain anything else.  With this in mind, I’ll not darken this door with these drinks any longer.

However the definition of cider and perry has been bastardised by the big two Irish producers over the last few years.  Call me a purist, but cider is made from apples, perry is made from pears, if you add any other fruit to these basic ingredients you have an alcopop.   An alcopop in its classic definition is a fruit flavoured alcoholic drink at around 4 – 6% ABV.  These fruit ciders fit into this pigeon hole perfectly.

Magners and Bulmers both produce these “fruit ciders” in product ranges which mirror each other closely.  Both brands obviously offer classic apple and pear, but then add the “mixed fruit” versions of mixed berry, black cherry, red grape, a spiced apple and rhubarb winter drink and a spiced apple and honey variation according to brand. However it is not enough for them to discredit the cider name with these illegitimate children, they also call the Perry “Pear Cider”, somehow thinking that using the correct term for the drink would confuse consumers.

Just like beers such as Black Sheep and Copper Dragon can act as gateway beers to a more complicated taste in the brew, Magners and its like have the same gateway role in introducing people to more interesting ciders.  My wife has gone from being a big fan of these Irish brands to finding them far too sweet and drinking 7-8% higher quality ciders, educating people to these better products is ultimately the key.

I’m also not the world biggest fan of Wetherspoons any more.  The prices charged for all but the core range of beers no longer have the differential over other nearby pubs to make you want to choose them over the competition, and although I’ve not eaten there myself recently others who do regularly are noticing slightly tighter portion control on the food side.  However if you want somewhere with a good chance of a nice pint and a full stomach for a decent price they are a “banker” when somewhere you don’t know the local pub scene.  Their guest list normally has at least one beer which you are happy to drink a few pints of.

One of the pub chains main crimes in my eyes is that two of Wetherspoons core products are Greene King IPA and Greene King Ruddles (known to most people as Ruddles County).  These beers you will find in every one of their pubs with it normally being sold at the lowest price point in the establishment.  The pub also features three other of their beers on the guest list.  The fact that every one of their pubs serves the two core beers shows that many people disagree with me on Greene King products.  From a purely business view, when you multiply this supply of beer to a chain of 800 pubs, it is of the size of that would be classed as a major client by even the likes of AB Inbev.

So when you object to a new pub in a town where one of your subsidiaries control 7 pubs in the town, it smacks of protectionism of a local monopoly.  When the people who want to open the pub just happen to already have 800 pubs taking multiple products from your parent company, it could be considered a very dangerous game of russian roulette.  This scenario is happening right now in Sterling, Scotland.  Wetherspoons have been trying to open a pub in a disused shop for several years now and last year, after numerous objections were overcome, permission was granted.   Greene King via their Belhaven subsidiary are reportedly a major partner in the consortia who have now forced a judicial review of the decision.

Belhaven (part of the Greene King group) is a large player in the Scottish beer market with 300 pubs across the country and is based in the town itself.  The company is not far short of half the size of the Wetherspoons in terms of pub estate.  Stirling town centre (according to Google Maps) has about 60 pubs depending on how big you define the town centre as.  The Belhaven group own 7 of them, a share of 12%.  The main thing that strikes you about this number is that Stirling has a lot of pubs, one more is not going to bring down an otherwise health pub in this town, even if it has offerings that a Wetherspoons bring along.

Given this, it seems that risking, even slightly, probably your biggest supply contract outside your tied group of pubs for a small loss of market share of the pub estate in the town is not a wise business choice.   Is the main concern that the new proposed Wetherspoons pub will sell the beer which is at the heart of the 7 Belhaven offerings in the town at a lower price and pull customers directly from them, my suspicion is that it is just this.  Belhaven and Greene King should realise that competition is part of commercial life, even in the pub trade where a relatively small number of companies control a large share of the pub estate.   Every other pub has to deal with this, they are only playing the same game as the rest of them.