[James K]

https://www.brewbound.com/news/2018/lagunitas-layoffs-hit-100-workers-as-heineken-owned-company-cuts-12-percent-of-workforce?utm_source=Brewbound&utm_campaign=11cb15501d-mailchimp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6026cb3473-11cb15501d-169468101

What you think about this? Personally every time I hear about a brewery going under the wing of a bigger brewery, I stop buying from them entirely.

I also think that the BA should not allow breweries like this to claim small local and independent. (Not sure how that works)

[Gary Glass]

Lagunitas does qualify as a Brewers Association-defined craft brewery. https://www.brewersassociation.org/statistics/craft-brewer-defined/

Since Lagunitas is 100% owned by Heineken, it doesn't meet the independence requirement:

Independent
Less than 25 percent of the craft brewery is owned or controlled (or equivalent economic interest) by a beverage alcohol industry member which is not itself a craft brewer.

[BrewBama]

My concern is for the 100 employees and their families. I surely hope that they can find a replacement source of income quickly to lessen the impact of this decision.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[denny]

https://www.brewbound.com/news/2018/lagunitas-layoffs-hit-100-workers-as-heineken-owned-company-cuts-12-percent-of-workforce?utm_source=Brewbound&utm_campaign=11cb15501d-mailchimp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6026cb3473-11cb15501d-169468101

What you think about this? Personally every time I hear about a brewery going under the wing of a bigger brewery, I stop buying from them entirely.

I also think that the BA should not allow breweries like this to claim small local and independent. (Not sure how that works)

As Gary pointed out,  the BA does not define small or local.  And Lagunitas already does not meet the definition of independent.

[Chris S]

Or, maybe there's a new market to saturate?

https://lagunitas.com/hifihops

[Wilbur]

This is in the same thread as a ton of other larger craft breweries, independent or not. Sometimes the brewery is closing, sometimes expansions are cancelled, sometimes people are laid off. I think there can be a bit more press about it, due to the association with Big Beer. The better focus on business may also be a reason why it's layoffs and not closures.

[biestet]

Not to downplay the effect of big beer buying up smaller companies, but there are market challenges as well that are likely contributing to these layoffs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James K]

I hate to be rude but. A subsidiary of Heineken or what not, probably shouldn’t be allowed to keep the title of craft brewery. That’s just my opinion. But it sounds like the definitions need some updating. People purposely seek out craft beer. It’s like if a walked into a grocery store and most of what was being sold in the craft section was owned by ABInbev. (Which it is).

Personally I think the Brewers Association should/could help with some brand awareness. The consumer should know, because ultimately we vote with our wallets. 

Also, is lagunitas small? Not really. Is Sam Adams. No. Sierra Nevada, no. New Belgium, No.  all the breweries (7) in my town produce less than 25,000 bbls combine.

So while I see your effort in the past of solidifying craft beer through definition. There comes a point in time where “craft lagunitas” is just an effort to take market share from the little guy. It’s not a craft, it’s another label on the shelf put there by a multinational corporation.

IMO.

[tommymorris]

I hate to be rude but. A subsidiary of Heineken or what not, probably shouldn’t be allowed to keep the title of craft brewery. That’s just my opinion. But it sounds like the definitions need some updating. People purposely seek out craft beer. It’s like if a walked into a grocery store and most of what was being sold in the craft section was owned by ABInbev. (Which it is).

Personally I think the Brewers Association should/could help with some brand awareness. The consumer should know, because ultimately we vote with our wallets. 

Also, is lagunitas small? Not really. Is Sam Adams. No. Sierra Nevada, no. New Belgium, No.  all the breweries (7) in my town produce less than 25,000 bbls combine.

So while I see your effort in the past of solidifying craft beer through definition. There comes a point in time where “craft lagunitas” is just an effort to take market share from the little guy. It’s not a craft, it’s another label on the shelf put there by a multinational corporation.

IMO.

The BA is helping. That’s what this is for: https://www.brewersassociation.org/business-tools/marketing-advertising/independent-craft-brewer-seal/

I am seeing it more and more.

[Robert]

I see two different issues here.  One is supporting local or small businesses.   

The other is the idea that this is inextricably related to seeking out "craft" (whatever we decide that is) beer.  It's not, IMO.

I don't necessarily seek out craft, or independent,  or local exclusively.   I seek out good beer and reject bad beer, no matter who makes it.

Once upon a time, big legacy brewers made good beer.  They abdicated.  There was an opening for imports, and new breweries.   Some of those imports have declined, as have some of the (then) new brewers.  Economy will always favor consolidation, and consumer demand will determine how big a niche there is for new (or old) alternative companies; part of that is down to how well the bigger, consolidated companies respond and fill that demand for different products.

Remember what the craft beer movement started out doing.  It was taking as its models the likes of Bass, Guinness,  Duvel, Pilsner Urquell, and so on.  Not exactly upstart microbrews.  And arguably, the rise of new brewers led in some degree to the decline of those  companies and their products. It can go both ways.

It is not always -- though it is sometimes -- a world where The Man is trying to grind the little guy down, and big success is only the result of shady practices.  No company, big or small, in any industry, will thrive long term except by filling a real demand.  And there seem to be cycles where that demand is over- and underestimated, then there's a correction.  I wonder what this era will look like from the perspective of 25 years from now.  If I'm still around and in posession of my marbles.

Support local business, but don't just throw charity at them out of pity if they suck.  (Most of the newer breweries around here suck.)  And if there's a really good beer out there, don't deprive yourself of the pleasure just because the company that makes it is really raking it in.

(And another perspective here.  If I had started a brewery 25 years ago, and it was still a going thing, and I had two choices -- keep at it day after until I was hobbling on a cane and dribbling in my soup,  or sell out and move somewhere warm and sunny to sit on my can -- well....)

[Bob357]

How can anyone support boycotting a brewery in one breath and complain about layoffs at that brewery in the next? You can't have your cake and eat it too. I understand those on either side of the boycott coin, but think about the ramifications.

If enough people quit buying a product it follows that the labor force that produces the product must be reduced accordingly. Pretty much economics 101. So, who is more responsible for the layoffs? Heineken or those who boycott the brewery?

[denny]

How do you know the layoffs were caused by a boycott (IS there a boycott of Lagunitas?) and not the same overall market conditions that have caused other brewery layoffs and closures?

[RC]

Ultimately, layoffs at any company are caused by its leaders’ failure to have foreseen the market conditions that would lead to a downturn in sales. Obviously no one has a crystal ball. But when a large, corporate conglomerate brewery (“We’re expanding our footprint and diversifying into more craft-centric products!”) buys a smaller, more regional brewery (“We’re tapping in to their larger distribution network!”), the outcome has generally been aggressive expansion that stuffs the pockets of senior management, then contraction, once said pockets are adequately stuffed. And who suffers from the contraction? Not Maria Stipp. Her pockets I'm sure will remain well-stuffed, even though it is her fault that sales have slowed. (Sidenote: IMHO, Lagunitas beer has always been awful, and that's why I don't buy it. But even if it was great, I'd only consider buying it if Stipp was fired along with the 100 workers she's laying off.)

[Big Monk]

You can’t lay the blame on Heineken for this one.

Lagunitas was all about aggressive expansion before Heineken ever entered the picture. You’d be hard pressed to say that this wouldn’t have happened in Heineken’s absence.

The truth of the matter is that if a business grows rapidly and expansion outstrips demand, the difference has to be made up somewhere. Would they be so quick to lay people of if they weren’t owned by a large company? Would pre-Heineken Lagunitas have taken a hit rather than layoff? Who knows. Surely not guys and gals on a homebrew forum.

[RC]

You can’t lay the blame on Heineken for this one.

You’d be hard pressed to say that this wouldn’t have happened in Heineken’s absence.

Only sort of true, probably, but again, no crystal balls. Stipp was installed a few months prior to the first 50% sale to Heineken. Surely, her ascension to CEO just prior to Lagunitas being 50% bought was coordinated between Magee and Heineken. So come on, she's been a "Heineken CEO" pretty much the whole time. Lagunitas's aggressive expansion really ramped up after the purchase. She could have put the brakes on it, slowed it down a bit, made it more organic. But...how would her corporate overlords have responded to that? Not well, probably. After all, it's not their jobs on the line.

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/business/4418467-181/petalumas-lagunitas-brewing-to-partner?gallery=4767234&sba=AAS