In this week’s Beer with Strangers podcast, Doug Griffith of Xtreme Brewing in Laurel and I discussed the recurring news story that craft beer is running out of names. Among the concerns is that it makes it harder for new brewers to break in and it prevents smaller brewers from having big breakout beers. Craft beers allegedly have kooky names because they are the product of one brewery making many, many beers.
It makes sense, at some level, to have weird names for beers. Brewers like to be distinctive, to set themselves apart. And people who like craft beer get a kick out of kooky names. Raging Bitch made national news when there was a fight over whether it was an obscene name. Beyond that, as shelves get more crowded with bottles and cans, and as breweries continue to try and push the envelope with tastes and flavors, brewers want a name that is as distinctive as their beers. Plus, in absence of any other knowledge or review, lots of beer drinkers simply judge the beer book by its bottle cover.
But it’s important to see that this is a fad, especially now that it clearly is an unsustainable one.
The old production model was to make a lot of one beer and have that be the name: Anheuser-Busch made Budweiser, for example. If they instead had been cultivating a market where they made beers that were all things to all people, this naming issue would have cropped up 200 years ago.
Before that, when beers were named at all, they were named after the tavern. Doug was talking about his visit to Salzburg where the beers were named light and dark. The brewery probably only had been in operation for 400 years or so.
While it certainly is fun, naming beers only really matters a little bit. Boston Lager and 60 Minute IPA are uninteresting, obvious names for beer but they’ve done OK. Similarly, whatever the name of that Pale Ale Sierra Nevada makes found a niche and exploited it.