"Steve Jackson" > wrote:
> "Scott T. Jensen" > wrote:
> > > (and what are you going to do about the huge number
> > > of draught-only beers in that scenario?)...
> >
> > I'm not seeking a beer contest that takes into consideration
> > all the different beers. Just store-bought beer. The beer
> > most us will be able to purchase from our local retail store
> > and not need to live within reasonable driving distance to
> > taste. Now I'm not saying there's anything wrong with
> > draught-only beers ... or home-brewed beers for that
> > matter. It just isn't what I'm seeking in a contest.
>
> That makes no sense to me at all. If we're looking for a
> contest that is judging the best beers as people can buy
> them - well, people buy a lot of draught beer. In some parts
> fo the country, draught sales are huge and is the primary way
> people drink their beer. Why rule that out right off?

Because unless you live within reasonable driving distance of that
draught-only brewery, you'll very likely never have an opportunity to sample
and enjoy their beer. What I'm seeking is a contest amongst those that
distribute their beer thus are more available for the consumer to possibly
purchase, drink, and enjoy. Just as GABF doesn't accept home-brewed beers,
my contest wouldn't accept draught-only beers.

> > > And, knowing how judging often plays out - the biggest
> > > or bitterest beer wins 90 percent of the time - I find the
> > > results even more worthless.
> >
> > That's your opinion and that's fine for you to have.
>
> That's an opinion shared by many more people than just me.

Did I say it wasn't? And are you saying your opinion is everyone's opinion?

> > We've already established that you don't care about beer
> > contests.
>
> You've established that, and it's not very accurate. I don't
> care about beer contests for making my purchase decisions.

That was what I was referring to.

> > > Sure, everyone finds out about beers they might not have
> > > otherwise via these contests, but I've seen enough cases
> > > where an award winning beer isn't any better than a lot
> > > of similar beers out there.
> >
> > Again, that's your opinion. Perhaps your tastebuds are
> > not that discriminating.
>
> Perhaps you have no clue who I am...

I have no clue who you are.

> ...how refined my tastebuds are...

Note that I said "perhaps".

> ...and therefore have no basis to make such a statement.

Given your statement that winning beers taste like "a lot of similar beers
out there" and that I used the word "perhaps", I think my statement was
reasonable.

> I could play that little game too and say that perhaps
> you're too lemming-like and will just appreciate
> whatever the "experts" tell you to appreciate. I don't
> think that's a fair statement to make, however.

Have I ever said in this entire thread that I'd only appreciate what experts
say is the best? No. What I have said is that I'd like to know what the
experts would say if a contest was more geared for the average consumer.

> Just like saying my tastebuds are not that
> discriminating isn't a fair statement to make.

I stand by my statement for the reasons I've just given above.

> Especially on the basis of a statement like I've seen
> plenty of cases where award-winning beers weren't
> better than other beers available out there. Why does
> that seem such an absurd statement?

Did I say it was an absurd statement? Please don't go the strawman route.

> > Yeah, I'd say that's probably just you. By profession,
> > I'm a marketing consultant so I do understand the
> > importance of winning awards for businesses.
>
> Oddly enough, my job is marketing as well.

Odd. I would have then assumed that if you're a marketing consultant you
would have always had a spellchecker look over your posts before letting
them go.

> There's a difference between what I'd recommend for a
> business to do and what I do. Let's take awards. My
> current client is an automaker. They have a new car that
> has won gobs of awards, including some of the most
> prestigeous ones out there. Has it helped their sales?
> Nope. They are well, well below their sales targets.

Perhaps that's due to the one that is handling their marketing. ;-)

> Awards are important for one thing: creating recognition
> and getting a product more visibility in the marketplace.

That's incorrect. Awards can also help in the consumer decision process.
Many consumers do pay attention to what awards products and services earn
and they are wise to do so. If you're a marketing consultant, it is rather
odd you don't know this.

> It does not mean the product is better...

It does, however, lend credence to that view.

> ...- or that it's going to be commercially successful.

Quality does help sales, but no business should depend on just that to
generate sales.

> > Any business that was a client of mine that would take your
> > attitude towards awards would be one that I'd consider to
> > have a problem.
>
> Tell that to, say, Victory then. A brewery which, IIRC, has
> stopped entering contests. Are they a "problem," even though
> they're one of the most highly respected and sought-after
> breweries in the business?

I think you misunderstood what I wrote. Victory brewery would not "be" a
problem if they didn't enter contests. I would, however, view their lack of
participation as a problem that I would need to address if I was their
marketing consultant. Perhaps there's sound reasoning behind not entering
such contests. Then again, perhaps things have changed at their brewery
that now they don't feel they can adequately compete and have thus withdrawn
to insure their past glory isn't tarnished. It is hard to say. It could be
other factors as well. Again, as I said, I'd consider their lack of
participation a problem and one that I'd look into if I was their marketing
consultant.

Scott Jensen
--
Peer-to-peer networking (a.k.a. file-sharing) is entertainment's future.
If you'd like to know why, read the white paper at the link below.
http://www.nonesuch.org/p2prevolution.pdf