These brand names don’t exactly roll off your tongue. That won’t stop Anheuser-Busch from bringing them to a TV near you. Keep your eyes peeled for these malt beverage products on TV and in the movies.

A few days ago, The Beersage raised good questions about these labels. At first it was not at all clear, but after some looking around, a good reason comes into focus.

This year’s approval for Bemdesor does not shed much light, nor does this year’s approval for Bod Liqbt. Go back a few more years, however, and it becomes clear. This 2006 approval for the mellifluous Bemdesor Seqyct quite clearly states:

THIS LABEL IS BEING USED FOR DISPLAY IN MOVIE/TV PROGRAMS ONLY. THE BOTTLE WILL BE FILLED WITH A NON-ALCOHOL PRODUCT IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH FCC REQUIREMENTS.

A-B has used labels of this sort since at least as far back as 2003; here is an early Bod and here is an early Bemdesor. So far there is no sign of the FCC rule at issue, and it’s not the rule cited here. TTB does require something similar at 27 CFR § 7.54(b)(2): “Any label depicted on a bottle in an advertisement shall be a reproduction of an approved label.” Here are ten famous product placements for beer (with nary a mention of Bemdesor).

Related Posts:

• What’s Your Poizin? (1)
• Sparks and Caffeine: Nearly Extinguished (7)
• PimpnHo: Almond Flavored Wine (3)

Hooters and Bud.

Related Posts:

• World’s Most Popular Wine (1)
• Wine Without Pretense (0)
• What’s Your Poizin? (1)

Perhaps it was too remote. Sadly, it closed a few months ago. The above is one of the last of about 12 approvals over just five months (for the most recent owner of the brewery). It’s a tough business and I suppose it’s even tougher when things like supplies and repairs and visitors are a few hours away. New West explains why the brewery could not carry on, complete with good photos. In the article, Lang’s marketing director confirms:

“The idea was great, the location was awesome — it’s such a gorgeous piece of property. … But business-wise it’s just hard to make a living when you don’t have consumers all around you.”

Was it really America’s most remote brewery? By what measure? What’s the most remote brewery now?

Related Posts:

• To Flame or Not: Czech Absinthe Hits the US (7)
• Champagne Battle Spills into Time Magazine (3)
• World’s Most Popular Wine (1)

As lawyers, we would never condone playing games on wine labels. But here are two examples where TTB was okay with it.

On the left, Puzzle Time wine has a word search game.

On the right, the Fetzer label features a “rebus.” That’s right, a rebus. The approval describes a rebus as “a kind of word puzzle that uses pictures to represent words or parts of words.” Can you read the rebus on this label? I don’t want to spoil the fun here, but the answer can be found on the label approval.

Related Posts:

• Wine Without Pretense (0)
• Water 2 Wine (4)
• Punk Bubbles: Do You Prefer the 2004 Stench, or Filth? (2)

Once upon a time, the federal government prohibited the disclosure of alcohol content on malt beverage labels. The rationale was to protect public health by discouraging brewers from competing in “strength wars,” to sell more product. It took years of persistence by Coors Brewing Company and a ruling from the Supreme Court in 1995 to persuade TTB (then ATF) to allow the practice.

Did the strength wars ever materialize, once the rules changed? Among the major brewers, not really. In fact, we noted that there is war of a different kind — increasingly lighter beers (in alcohol and caloric content) from Anheuser-Busch and MillerCoors.

But the craft beer movement appears to have its own strength war.  “Extreme beers” — beers with intense flavors and alcohol contents at three, four or even five times the amounts in a typical American lager — help small brewers stand out in an increasingly crowded marketplace. And yes, they have many more calories too.

Boston Beer Company offers one of the strongest beers available for sale in the United States, with their Utopias, at 24% alc./vol. and a whopping 732 calories per 12 ounce serving (as per Skilnik).

Dogfish Head Craft Brewery’s 2002 release of World Wide Stout is listed at 23.04% alc./vol. and has approximately 666 calories per 12 ounce serving.

Although the offerings from Boston Beer and Dogfish Head top 20% alc./vol., the labels do not disclose the actual alcohol content. Sonoran Brewing Company’s Sonoran 200 is not so coy. It weighs in at 19.37% alc./vol. and has the highest alcohol content we’ve seen listed on a TTB-approved beer label. No caloric content details are readily available, but one might reasonably expect this 13.2 ounce bottle to be roughly equivalent to a Big Mac (at a scant 576 calories).

Related Posts:

• What’s Your Poizin? (1)
• Sparks and Caffeine: Nearly Extinguished (7)
• Highly Flammable Spirits (1)

At a 2009 National Alcohol Beverage Control Association (NABCA) panel discussion, Boston Beer Company’s Jim Koch boldly proclaimed that “beer is the new wine.”

According to Wine and Spirits Daily, Koch said:

With the emergence of the new mentality about beer driven by small craft brewers, America is starting to create a beer culture in the same way America has created a wine culture.

Is Koch right? The labels tell part of the story. Lately there are many examples of beer labels with terms and elements formerly associated only with wine.

First is Sierra Nevada’s Estate Brewer’s Harvest Ale. TTB sets forth strict rules for wine labeled with the word “estate.” One such rule is that the wine must be produced from grapes grown on land owned or controlled by the bottling winery. According to Greg Kitsock of the Washington Post, Sierra Nevada produces their Estate Ale with hops and barley grown only at their brewery in Chico. The label adds that “this ale reflects the flavors of our surroundings in California’s fertile Central Valley.”

Second is Trader Joe’s 2009 Vintage Ale, produced by Unibroue of Canada. For wine labels, it is clear that a vintage date means one thing: the year in which the grapes were harvested. What exactly does it mean on beer? The Trader Joe’s label tries to explain. “You might be used to seeing vintages on wine; perhaps not so much on beer. And that’s what makes this ale so special.” The label also says that the 2009 Vintage Ale was produced in 2009, in limited quantities, and that it tastes and looks different than those released in previous years.

Third is Blue Moon Grand Cru Limited Edition from MillerCoors. The labeling takes design cues from traditional Champagne labels. It has a vintage date and also mentions “Grand Cru” (meaning “great growth” in French), which is a term generally associated with French wines. Our last and maybe most famous example is Miller High Life, “The Champagne of Beers.”

From a labeling and marketing standpoint, it appears that some beers are trying to develop the same prestige that wine enjoys with the American public. So Koch may well be right. After all, he sells a single bottle of beer for $150, a price near or above that for many of Napa and Bordeaux’s finest.

Related Posts:

• What’s Your Poizin? (1)
• That’s A Lot of Beer for a Buck (5)
• Sparks and Caffeine: Nearly Extinguished (7)

First there was Miller Lite, at about 96 calories per 12 ounces (back around 1975).

In later years the non-alcoholic malt beverages (or “near beers”) became more common, with leading brands such as Clausthaler and Kaliber at about 80 calories (as per Skilnik).

Now, in the past year, it appears we have a race to the bottom. That is, Miller Genuine Draft 64 came out about a year ago. It is, not surprisingly, 64 calories per 12 ounces (and 2.8% alc./vol.).

Lower and more recent still is Bud Select 55. It is only 55 calories and 2.4% alc./vol.

This is one important trend over the past 34 years. In a future post we will look at a countervailing trend toward very high calorie/alcohol malt beverages.

All of this leads us to wonder, where will this go in the next 34 years? When the Jonas Brothers hit middle age, will they be drinking Bud Exträ Epic Mega Select 11 (down near the lower limits for the legal definition of beer)? Hops flavored Perrier?

Related Posts:

• Beer with Oysters and Clams (3)
• Wine Without Pretense (0)
• Whey Neutral Spirits (0)

We got to thinking that the much-ballyhooed swimsuit issue, published in Sports Illustrated every winter, might shed some light on trends in the economy, alcohol beverage advertising, and print advertising more generally. In the past, the swimsuit issue has been a prime place for beer and spirits advertising.

This year’s issue is 178 pages, chock full of bikinis. Only 7.3 pages are devoted to alcohol beverage ads. This is nearly a 50% drop off from two years ago, when the economy (and print advertising) were flying a lot higher.

A big part of this is due to one brand. Budweiser advertising was at seven pages in 2007 and down to a skimpy two pages in 2009.

Almost all of the 2009 ads seem to be customized for the swimsuit edition. Back in 2007, it was about half and half. There is essentially no wine advertising in any of these three issues, and beer accounts for 2/3 while spirits are at about 1/3.

Herewith, two of the better alcbev-centric ads tailored to this magazine.

The text on this Glenlivet Scotch ad may be hard to read, and is worth repeating. It says:

THE GLENLIVET was ESTABLISHED when SWIMWEAR was a lady’s SAFEGUARD from the elements. Back in 1824, even the SLIGHTEST display of ANKLE could put the FIRE in any gentleman’s HEART. While such MODESTIES have been cast aside, FORTUNATELY, the QUINTESSENCE of good taste is still to be ENJOYED with the SINGLE MALT that STARTED IT ALL.

They are both from 2007 and the later ones don’t seem as good.

Related Posts:

• Champagne Battle Spills into Time Magazine (3)
• World’s Most Popular Wine (1)
• Wine Without Pretense (0)

It’s a wonder that Red Bull (of Austria) has not yet come out with with an alcohol beverage. It would be likely to be a smash, in that the product is so very popular as a mixer.

Perhaps things are going so well with the energy drink that there is no need to mess with it. But more likely, these two products beat the Austrians to the punch. Miller Brewing Company has approvals for Red Bull Malt Liquor going back at least as far as the early 1980s. Likewise, Majestic Distilling has approvals for Red Bull Vodka going back to 1990 or so.

This Dog Style Vodka is one of the few TTB products to make explicit reference to the famous energy drink.

Related Posts:

• Hello Kitty Wine (7)
• To Flame or Not: Czech Absinthe Hits the US (7)
• Sparks and Caffeine: Nearly Extinguished (7)

One of the main warnings says, “Do not use this product for flaming dishes or drinks.” It’s a little bit like a Maserati with a warning that you should not exceed 55 mph.

We kind of thought flaming drinks were one of the main purposes for this product. If not, we went in search of the more conservative uses for this product. We found very little, with no trace of this product on Bacardi’s US website. This group seems to have no idea what to do with it either.

At an even higher concentration of alcohol is Golden Grain Grain Alcohol. It is 95% alcohol and is also plastered with warnings throughout the front, back and neck labels. This is a rare example of TTB allowing warnings other than the specific health warning mandated by Congress (see this for an example of a warning not allowed). It’s hard to say the extra warnings are not warranted here.

Related Posts:

• What’s Your Poizin? (1)
• Sparks and Caffeine: Nearly Extinguished (7)
• Forty Proof Beer (0)