DannyW wrote:We had about 15 people in a 240 person theater in Sarasota FL. No beer, no food, nothing like that. I'm glad the projection and sound worked just fine after hearing some of the other stories.
Agreed. We called ahead, supposedly there was 50 out of 250 seats sold and there were only like 30 people there. We snuck beer in (Thank God). I am also thankful that our video/sound worked so well (other than a couple of sound explosions between the live/movie switches after hearing those stories.
DannyW wrote:I'm left wondering what was their point, and did they achieve it? I saw no reason why the big deal about having a "live" event when there was nothing (other than miscues and mumbling) that being live added. I actually expected a proctor to be on hand in every theater to take questions from each local audience, submit the questions, and have some of them answered right then. The twitter thing was cool I guess, but didn't need to be done live.
I agree. We're talking about this in a review thread somewhere too. I don't see any reason to have had it live. It should have been rehearsed, edited, and shown on more than one night. It looked really amateur the way it was and didn't add anything.
DannyW wrote:If the point was about the 3 tier system, I wanted more detail. Get some of those lobbyists that are there to preserve it to describe why it deserves preserving! I bet they sound like idiots. We need 3 tier available but not legislated. Does any other industry or product have legislated requirement for separation between producer and consumer?
How about any industry where there is a tariff? Smoking? Alcohol? Sugar? Tariffs, regulation, and trade barriers create disincentives for consumers to buy one product over another.
Cigarettes would be 2 bucks a pack and sugar .10 cents a pound for the good stuff without trade restrictions. (if you're interested in the de-regulation argument read anything by the Nobel Prize winner Douglass C. North, though I disagree with him on some points given things like Enron and Madoff etc. that could have been prevented with better regulation). The only things that I think should be heavily regulated are domestic food production and production of military vehicles. Then you're not F*ed in wartime.
DannyW wrote:I guess their point was not to make money, as $15 per head times the small number of heads less the theater cut can't be much. We thought it would have been a better event shown on the Discovery channel or something. Even a $60 pay-per-view would have let us see it in a more beer friendly venue.
Sneak beer in like the rest of us
but I totally agree with you.DannyW wrote:I did leave feeling I had just been subjected to a 2 hour infomercial for DFH and Moonshot. They should have handed us a six pack of each on the way out the door.
and a hand job and apology for having to listen to Rhonda Kallman for an hour and a half too long.
DannyW wrote:Other than Orval, what brewery can make it on a single niche product? I guess Pete's Wicked Ale started that way, but his beer was more unique than gimmicky. We have a similar product here in FL called Honey Amber Rose. As I understand it, a woman gets this contract brewed and it is her only product. Marketed to women, it's a light lager without much else as far as I recall. I'm suprised it is still around, but it certainly isn't getting any bigger.
I'm sure there are many. Gennessee cream ale before it got bought? The vast majority of breweries pre-prohibition and English breweries often got famous on one beer. Variety is a recent thing.
DannyW wrote:Anyone call DFH's toll free number this morning to see if Sam answers?
No but I really want to now
) ... this led me to watch some YouTube Stone blogs and then I liked him better. I think he just gets a little ampped up on a camera and wants to be 
