Tag: Heineken

| Advertising, Beer, Beer Marketing, Marketing

How Big Lager Lost The Plot And Developed Narcissistic Personality Disorder

As anyone who has read Man Walks into a Pub will know, my entry into the world of beer was via Big Lager.

I loved lager ads when I was growing up as a teenager.   

Later, once I was helping make those ads, I was fascinated by the tribal loyalty people had to their favourite beer brands. If you were a group of mates in your twenties, Carling or Heineken or Carlsberg was like another one of your gang, always there when all the best times happened. In research groups you sometimes do an exercise where you ask people to imagine what brands would be like if they were people at a party. Beer brands were always characterised as confident, friendly guys, witty and popular without being an arse, enjoying a drink but never getting too drunk. This guy was never the pack leader, not necessarily the most popular or pushy guy in the room, but everyone liked him.  

Things started go go wrong around 1997. Advertising regulations grew ever tighter and the funny campaigns of the eighties were no longer possible. And beer started to take itself seriously. It wanted to provide a bit of substance behind the good-natured banter. Fair enough. But the picture started to blur.  

As sales of Big Lager shifted from pubs to supermarkets, price became a more decisive factor than brand image. It was widely believed that all these brands tasted the same. Not true, but if you’re drinking your lager ice-cold straight from the can, you’d have to have a delicate palate indeed to spot the difference in flavour.   

With very similar products, preference had been shaped from the mid-seventies to the mid-nineties by who had the best ads, the most likeable personality. (I once looked at thirty years worth of image research, and perceptions of which lager was the most ‘refreshing’ tracked the brand that had the funniest ads, rather than the brand that was banging on about refreshment specifically).   

By the mid-noughties, that differentiation was based on price.   

Incredibly, most shopping is still done by the wife/mother in a family. The person who buys Big Lager is usually not the person who drinks it. As the distinct personalities created by ‘Reassuringly Expensive’, ‘This Bud’s For You’, ‘I Bet He Drinks Carling Black Label’,  ‘Follow The Bear’ and all the rest receded, the lager buyer knew her fella had a set of big brands that were all OK – nothing special but fine, all as good as each other – and she knew she could buy the one that was on the best deal and he’d be happy enough.   Brewers hate offering these deals. Headlines like ‘lager is cheaper than bottled water’, whether they’re true or not, don’t do anyone any favours. Margins shrank to almost nothing. If any big brand could get away with not doing supermarket deals, they’d jump at the chance.  

So it’s completely understandable that in the last few years Big Lager has started trying to build a sense of value and worth back into brands. Beer is cheap and commoditised, so how can we make it special again?   

The strategy of putting some premiumness back into mainstream beer is a good one. The execution of that strategy, however, is starting to look pretty horrible.   

I haven’t worked on any of these brands for a long time, but I know exactly the kind of language that’s being used in meetings. I’d bet my house on the fact that most Big Lager brands have a creative brief in the system that’s about ‘creating differentiation’, ‘making lager special again,’ by ‘making the brand more iconic’ and ‘improving perceptions of premiumness’. I’ll bet they also all have research that shows you don’t do this by banging on about the quality of ingredients and provenance. These might be mildly interesting copy points, but as Kronenbourg has demonstrated recently, it doesn’t wash as your main message to a typical mainstream lager drinker, especially when the substantiation behind your claim is paper-thin.   

So what do you do?   

You create an iconic, premium image. High production values. Brand fame.    And before you know it, you turn your brand from the genial bloke at the party into an arrogant, preening narcissist.   

From Psychology Today: “Narcissistic Personality Disorder involves arrogant behaviour, a lack of empathy for other people, and a need for admiration-all of which must be consistently evident at work and in relationships… Narcissists may concentrate on unlikely personal outcomes (e.g. fame) and may be convinced that they deserve special treatment.”

    You demand to be revered, claiming outrageous titles for yourself with no justification.  

      You start telling your drinkers they’re drinking the product wrong, or using the wrong terminology. You demand they start showing some respect.

    You imagine that you are some kind of treasured prize, rather than a simple, straightforward beer.  

      You start to think you embody and represent something much bigger than yourself. 

    And lose all sense of perspective.

      On the bar, you make your fonts ever bigger – sorry, more ‘iconic’ – until punters can no longer see the people serving them and bar staff have trouble passing the drinks across the bar.   

Who do you think you are helping here? How exactly do you think you are ‘enhancing the consumer experience at the point of purchase?’      

My aim here is not to slag off any individual campaign – some of them have merits, and like I said, I understand where they’re coming from up to a point.   

My aim is to demonstrate the aggregation of so many big brands taking this approach at the same time. Brands demanding to be worshipped and respected, rather than liked and tolerated. The cumulative effect is dreadfully cold and alienating, aloof. This, for a drink that is supposedly all about the good times, about kicking back and relaxing with your mates.    Big Lager has lost its way and forgotten its place. This collective arrogance is not credible, and it’s certainly not appealing. Where’s the warmth gone? Where’s the sociability?   

Premiumness in beer is not about this kind of cock-waving, and it never was. It’s about the premiumness of the experience the beer creates – the experience for which the beer is the catalyst, not the central focus.   

Big Lager should be reclaiming its territory as the catalyst for the perfect occasion with friends. Ale is more for savouring, more introverted. Craft beer is more exploratory, adventurous and product-focused, and cider is more refreshing, but has a limit on how much of it you can drink in a session.   

Yet all these drinks are stealing share from lager. All are looking more interesting, engaging and appealing than that big lager at the moment.    Mainstream lager should be solid, dependable, and reliable, and I’m sorry if that’s not sexy enough for career marketers.   

As the Beer Marketing Awards demonstrated, in some areas – particularly social media and trade marketing, where you actually have to talk to people and deal with them on a one-to-one basis – Big Lager is doing some brilliant stuff.   

But in advertising and branding, it has collectively lost the plot. If you think your brand should be revered and worshipped by its drinkers, you need to get out of beer as soon as possible and into therapy. Or maybe Scientology. They’ll love you guys.

| Uncategorised

The Big Boys

Last week I posted yet another piece dissing A-B Inbev for their increasingly entertaining wrong-headedness.  It’s almost a weekly occurrence these days, and I got to wondering why I do it.  
I’m so glad I no longer spend much time in rooms like this.  Just as well really, given this post.
It must look like I have a vendetta against that particular company, perhaps motivated by sour grapes over the fact that I used to work for one of their advertising agencies.  I don’t, honestly – it’s just that they’re the only company who send me really stupid press releases, or who I see in the newspaper doing something so disturbing that I feel compelled to have a go at them for it.  If any other brewer – oh hang, on, sorry, they’re not a brewer, they’re an “FMCG marketing company that happens to sell beer” – if any other brewer sent me press releases about pointless line extensions, or had FIFA arrest and harass innocent civilians on their behalf, or systematically raped and killed one of the greatest beer brands ever, I’d be just as critical.  But, with the odd exception, they tend not to.
Some readers – people who are die-hard craft beer devotees – often comment on the fact that all I’m doing is calling attention to the universal follies perpetrated by big, ‘macro’ multinational brewers.  There’s a sense in some parts of the beer community that they’re all just as bad as each other.  But the frequency with which I attack A-B Inbev suggests they’re not.  
So I thought it might be fun to just look at the big megabreweries here in the UK and give a fair assessment of each of them, from a beer lover’s point of view, and from the point of view of someone who understands the realities of marketing a megabrand.  
These brewers can never just say “You know what? Let’s just stop selling these cheap but enormously successful tasteless lager brands and invest all our money in intriguing craft brews which are preferred by only a small minority of beer drinkers.”  But successful big business management is all about shrewd portfolio brand management. The niche beers of today may be the giants of tomorrow, and with a market that’s shrinking (except the craft beer part) you’d hope to see some consideration given to serious beer (which is also the only part of the beer market that can charge serious profit margins) , as well as a level of thoughtfulness in the big beer brands that doesn’t just approach drinkers from the lowest common denominator.  So here goes.
I know, I know.  Where to begin?

Lead brands in UK: Stella Artois, Becks, Budweiser
They used to be good – I think that’s where my background level of anger and frustration comes from – but increasingly they resemble the beer world’s Evil Empire.  To understand them properly you have to look at their constituent parts, and how they came together.  
In the late 90s Interbrew was a Belgian brewery that had gone global.  Stella Artois was a phenomenal success story in the UK which they attempted to replicate all over the world (something they’ve had a reasonable amount of success with, despite the disaster the brand has become in the UK).  They had a clever positioning as ‘The world’s local brewer’, which recognised the importance of local brands and regional differences.  
People talked about how Stella was an ‘ordinary’ lager in its home country, but this is Belgium we’re talking about – it was a perfectly decent, respectable pilsner style beer, even attracting praise from the likes of Roger Protz in the context of its home country.  
In taking Hoegaarden and Leffe international, Interbrew created the commercial end of the global ‘speciality beer’ market, a move that made things much easier for smaller craft brewers to reach a wider, curious market.  
Then came the merger with South American conglomerate Ambev, to form Inbev.  After boardroom politicking didn’t quite go as planned, the South Americans emerged as the dominant strategic force driving the company.  Whereas Inbev had had a culture focused on brand building, and enjoyed a deep heritage in interesting beer, Ambev was all about cost cutting – something that was easy to sell to a company that was cash-starved after the takeover.  Brands were rationalised, mainstream marketing principles were applied, and a focus was put on a few lead global brands.  At this point, any notion of beery romance left the company.  They clearly thought it was merely sentiment that saw Hoegaarden brewed in the town of Hoegaarden, or Stella matured for something resembling a decent lagering period, not realising that money invested in brands made them premium, and therefore loved, and therefore able to charge higher prices.  Inbev’s unofficial corporate slogan was surely “show us a cost and we’ll cut it”, with no thought given to how that cut might affect brand health long term.  Anyone who still believed beer was special in drinkers’ hearts and could not therefore be marketed the same way as washing powder or dog food was disappeared from the company, and replaced by marketing executives from Coca Cola Schweppes or Procter & Gamble – many of whom didn’t actually like beer.   
And then came the merger with Anheuser-Busch – a brewery that has long enjoyed a reputation for being fearsomely aggressive, and extraordinarily litigious.  They seem to actually resent the existence of any competitive brewer.  Interestingly though, as I argued in a recent lager seminar, while Budweiser may not be a very nice beer, it is certainly a high quality beer – look at the spec for it’s manufacture and I dare you not to at least admire them, even if, like me, you’d rather drink your own urine than the resulting beer.  I can see the bullying attitude surviving much longer than the commitment to brewing quality, sadly.
In the UK they’ve had some success, with Artois 4%, and helped make that 4% ‘quality’ band credible.  But at such a cost to the main Stella Artois brand, which used to be so good, but seems to have had everything that was good about it deliberately stripped from it: flavour, quality ingredients, a very successful association with film, great ads, the distinctive embossed can, the Queens tennis tournament – all gone.   
They also have Becks, a great survivor in the beer wars.  It still tastes of beer, but is a touch too metallic for some.  The Becks association with art is something I constantly refer to as a good example of successful sponsorship.
They have quite deliberately run Bass and Boddington’s – two beers that, in their own way used to be great – into the ground, withdrawing all marketing support, and have openly said they are completely uninterested in ale.  Hoegaarden and Leffe also seem increasingly unloved – they called the former spectacularly wrong when they tried to close the brewery. I’d argue that aggressively divesting from the only sectors of the market showing volume growth and significant margin shows you simply don’t understand the business you’re in.
So there you have it – a rapacious, all-devouring conglomerate, the world’s biggest brewer, run by people who neither respect nor understand beer.  That’s your problem, right there.  I’d dearly love someone from A-B Inbev to challenge me and prove me wrong.  But remember the Stella Black launch, the beer that’s “matured for longer”?  They’ve ignored my query about how long it’s actually brewed for.  The press release proves everything I’ve said – here’s a launch of a ‘quality’, ‘premium’ beer, with not one word of detail on the ingredients, brewing process or flavour profile of that beer.

Brewed in Yorkshire? Not for long, matey.

Lead brands in UK: Carlsberg, Tetleys, Tuborg
Feels lost, somehow.  
Carlsberg bought the remains of what used to be Allied Breweries, which had a bunch of interesting brands, and some infamously bad ones.  Renaming the company Carlsberg Tetley showed their direction, and then dropping the Tetley from the corporate name left no one in any doubt.  The decision to move Tetley’s cask production out of Yorkshire has led to a righteous outpouring from beer fans, but as an Evil Empire, Carlsberg is unconvincing.  They definitely called it wrong with Tetley’s, but they’ve been neglecting the brand for years.  I know specific people within the organisation and I know their commitment and enthusiasm for quality beer.  Clearly, their voices are not loud enough at the top level.  
Carlsberg UK is now seemingly no more than a branch office of Carlsberg in Denmark.  I’ve never had anything against Carlsberg the beer itself.  The proper ‘export’ beer is fine if unremarkable, and if pushed the 4% version is bland without being offensive to the palate like some of its competitors.  They’ve done a very successful job of marketing the beer with its association with the English football team and sponsorship of the European Cup.
What confuses me is that in Denmark Carlsberg responded to the rise of craft brewing with its Semper Ardens range, which were really good.  There were a couple of special ‘Jacobsen’ beers launched half-heartedly in the UK but no serious push was put behind them – I’ve never been sent any information about them, offered samples or anything like that, and I don’t know anyone who has – it’s a real shame.
Instead they put far more effort behind launching Tuborg in the UK.  When you already have a leading standard lager and a 5% export version, in a market that is declining and has too many interchangeable brands already, I’m baffled as to what the thinking was behind this.
They could be quite good, but they just seem to drift rather aimlessly in the wake of their bigger competitors.    

You can’t build a brand as successful as this without being a pain in the arse.

Lead brands in UK: Fosters, John Smiths, Kronenbourg, Newcastle Brown
An interesting company.  Before its takeover by Heineken, S&N was clearly focusing on lager.  It was good for them and good for the beer when they sold the Courage beers to Wells & Young’s, who took a neglected brand and made it feel loved again.  They regard John Smiths as a brand just for ageing working class men in working men’s clubs in the north, which I think is a travesty.  They’ve lost their way with it, totally.  When Smoothflow beers appeared in the mid-nineties, there was at least a commercial logic to taking out failed cask beer and launching a brand that was consistent (if dull) across the country.  But they also took cask out and replaced it with Smoothflow in its heartland, where the cask version had been working perfectly well.  This did more to send cask ale into a seemingly terminal decline at the time than any other single action.  
They’ve never totally got their lager brands but on the back of excellent distribution and advertising that occasionally hits the spot they’ve done well.  Fosters I find to be undrinkable – not just tasteless but offensive, and my failure to understand its popularity makes me wonder if I understand beer at all.  Kronenbourg, however, I kind of like.  Within its market it’s a good beer and one I order in pubs that don’t have any beer I really like.  They did some good line extensions on it, but I’ve spoken to people who worked on the launch of Kronenbourg Blanc (the wheat beer) and even they find it undrinkable.
We still don’t know what the takeover by Heineken is going to mean long term.  I have found the Dutch Heineken company incredibly frustrating to work with – they’re very arrogant.  But this arrogance was borne of a cultural belief that Heineken was simply the world’s best beer.  It’s not of course, but compare it to other big lager brands and it is a class apart.  It has a distinctive flavour profile, a bit sweet for some, but it’s a world away from what Stella has now become.  And the decision to simply axe the 3.4% cooking lager variant and launch Heineken as the genuinely imported, full strength beer they adore so much shows the opposite of the short termism evident in so many other parts of the market.
By buying S&N, Heineken now also owns Caledonian, home of Deuchars IPA.  There are already people saying that this beer has been dumbed down by its new owners – there are always people who sill say that.  But word is that Heineken like what they have there, and are at least doing some research into the cask beer market.
They’re always going to be about Fosters and Kronenbourg first and foremost, and a perusal of the UK website makes me feel distinctly uneasy.  I also wish they’d stop fucking up John Smiths.  But I suspect we’ll see some interesting things from them in the near future.  

One of the world’s greatest beers.  Brewed by the same people who brew Carling.

Lead brands in UK: Carling, Grolsch, Worthingtons, Coors Light
A game of two halves.  I love Carling as a brand, hate it as a product,  but when I was forced to drink it recently it wasn’t as bad as I thought.  There’s no point to Coors Light at all.  Grolsch is quite decent, another survivor with a distinctive taste (compared to its peers).  
You can read some bias into this one of you must, because Molson Coors helped me out with Hops and Glory.  But they could only do that because they had taken ownership of Worthington White Shield and not fucked it up.  The White Shield brewery was left to do what it wanted, indulged by its American corporate parent, and they now seem culturally the most attuned of the big boys to the cask revival.  That’s not saying much, but it is significant.  The fact that they are launching a new cask ale – Red Shield – is something none of their competitors can claim.  
The problem is that being so big, they’re so bloody slow.  Why is the Red Shield launch taking so long?  Why is the new cask ale brewery still not being built?  They’re going to struggle if they really do want to compete in this market.
Molson Coors also imports and markets Grolsch Weizen – one of the best wheat beers around – Zatec lager, Palm and Kasteel Cru.  Not everyone is going to like each of these beers, but they do show a genuine desire to do something different.  And when they own the number one mass-market lager in the country, you can only praise their decision to not just go all monocultural.  The speciality beers (and White/Red Shield) are marketed through an offshoot company, Different World Drinks, which specialises in sampling, education, and beer and food matching events. 
Molson Coors is now surely the best of a bad bunch.  With a bit more fluency and speed, they’d be a class apart from their competitors in terms of understanding and promoting decent beer.

The best beer marketing campaign of the last decade?

Lead brands in UK: Peroni, Pilsner Urquell
Smaller by some way than the other brewers listed here, SABMiller are able to perform more like a boutique brand specialist rather than mass market.  Peroni is a fascinating brand.  It’s kind of where Stella was ten or twelve years ago, and its owners are determined not to make the same mistakes that brand did.  It may not be all that as a beer, but it’s fine.  Where it excels is that has a premium image, adds something to the beer category, people seek it out and think of it as special.  Marketing it as a fashion brand rather than a beer brand was a stroke of marketing genius and one that other brewers should study.
Pilsner Urquell is a legendary beer.  They’ve changed it a bit since they acquired it, and had one or two attempted relaunches too many, but if left to incubate and find its own feet it could still become as famous and respected as it deserves to be. 
SAB Miller also deserve kudos for the non-brand specific research and general beer category promotion they do.  I’m always getting press releases from them that are interesting to read – stuff on beer etiquette, exhibitions of photography of beer culture from around the world and so on.  
This is a company that gets beer, understands it.  Some readers will be nonplussed at how I can praise a beer like Peroni.  I’m sure this company will have something that will interest those readers too before too long.

I like Guinness.  So sue me.

Lead brands in UK: Guinness, Red Stripe.
I like Guinness.  I know it’s a dumbed down version of what it should be but I’ve written before about why that is.  I just hope they don’t give in to dumbing it down any more than it absolutely has to be.  Diageo is a spirits company, the world’s biggest, and it doesn’t really get beer.  They have some interesting brands in their wardrobe and it would be nice to see them do something with them. But the ‘Diageo Way of Branding’ – or ‘Dweeb’ as its known internally – is a hideously slow and inflexible checklist process that stifles innovation before it’s born.  It makes sense if you’re trying to keep emerging markets in line so they don’t screw up a brand like Smirnoff or Johnny Walker.  It stands in the way as a roadblock to the successful expansion of, say, Tusker lager from Kenya.
So: purely my (informed) opinion, but ‘the multinationals’ are not interchangeable, not all as bad as each other.  I think each has something, however small, that deserves praise.  On the whole, I find there are pockets of passion for beer.  But when you’re managing brands this big, you can also see how smaller, nimbler competition will run rings around them.  And you can hopefully see why, when one of them gets it really, disastrously wrong, consistently wrong, its necessary to call them out on it – because they could instead still be doing something interesting.

| Uncategorised

Getting grumpy about beer provenance

So Scottish & Newcastle – the company that has already closed all its breweries in both Scotland and Newcastle – is going to start brewing Newcastle Brown in Yorkshire.

Now we all know that Yorkshire must be the best place in the world to brew beer, because Yorkshire beers are the best in the world. But this is a silly business decision because Newcastle Brown is a Newcastle beer and a Newcastle brand and a Newcastle legend.
OK, so Broon has been brewed in Gateshead rather than Newcastle for the last few years. That was bad enough. But it was just across the river and most people were prepared to overlook a technicality that only Geordies really cared about. It was still Newcastle really.
Now, S&N have taken a commercial decision which they think is a good one: to create vital cost savings by closing a brewery that, on paper, it no longer needs. There’s brewing capacity at Tadcaster, and Broon is produced on such a big corporate scale that moving it isn’t going to make the slightest bit of difference to the product as it now stands. In a declining market, big brewers can’t afford to be sentimental, and have to bow to the demands of the balance sheet and the stock market.
The problem for S&N is that this is not a good commercial decision. It’s a really, really dumb commercial decision.
It’s a dumb decision because it has really, really pissed off the brand’s core audience – in other words, the people who drink most of it. This decision is a slap in the face to the brand’s core drinkers. In fact it’s more than a slap in the face. It’s a happy slap and a really offensive “your mum” joke and pinning the drinker to the ground and farting on their head all rolled into one. It’s saying that local provenance in beer and local pride is less important than short term balance sheet savings.
It’s a dumb decision because even if you don’t live in Newcastle, beer provenance is part of why you choose a brand. A lot of people think Geordie style and culture is quite cool in a strange way, and they buy a bit of that cool when they buy a bottle of dog (which is what they call it cos they’ve heard that’s what real Geordies call it).
It’s a dumb decision because it’s called Newcastle Brown and has a picture of Newcastle on the label and if it’s brewed nowhere near Newcastle then it’s just a deeply average brown ale with no roots, provenance or authenticity.
It’s a dumb decision because premium bottled ale has been in steady growth for ten years – up 5% last year – as most other sectors of the beer market are in decline. Broon is the market leader in premium bottled ale. To make such a public statement of disinvestment and deprioritisation of a brand that is brand leader in the most successful segment of the beer market is, to put it a little too bluntly, really fucking stupid.
Next month, S&N are changing their name to Heineken UK, after being bought by the Dutch brewer at the start of 2008.
And that reveals why this decision is not just stupid, but really insulting too.
Because it would be easy to say that Heineken simply don’t understand the role of provenance and place in beer brands, in the way that, say, Inbev clearly don’t. But Heineken understands this very well.
Ten years ago Heineken in the UK was a standard lager brewed here under licence by Whitbread. It was the fourth biggest beer brand in the country, with over 1.1 million barrels sold annually. But it was an anomaly to a company that is passionate about the quality and consistency of its product. They axed the standard Heineken. Heineken in the UK is now a decent quality 5% premium pilsner lager, brewed in Holland and imported to the UK – because to build the brand, they feel it’s important that it comes from where it claims to come from.
So here’s a company that’s saying its own brand, with its name on it, is very important. Its provenance is a crucial part of its appeal and that’s why we only ever import it from Holland. But Newcastle Brown? This brand we inherited when we bought a company to get our hands on UK on-trade distribution for our beloved Heineken? Well it might be important to you northern peasants, but we couldn’t give a shit about it. Yorkshire? Newcastle? It’s all the north, innit? What are you complaining about? That’s what they’re saying. Honest it is.
I’m not one of those reactionaries who slags big breweries just because they’re big. I like some of what Heineken do. But this is nasty, stupid and offensive.