$400?!?
Carlsberg has introduced a $400 beer, the most expensive in the world.
Why, you ask?
Probably to get some media attention.
Details:
Carlsberg has produced 600 bottles of the 10.5 percent proof beer, each four-fifths of a pint. Another version costing just a bit more will be introduced next year and again in 2010, the company said.
The company has already admitted that it does not expect to make a profit off the beer.
Hmmm... so, pricing a product with no regard to market prices won't net a profit? That's far from shocking -- otherwise, Hanes would charge $1,000 for a pair of socks.
Sam Adams tried this marketing approach with its Utopias beer, but unlike Carlsberg, distinguished its ale by giving it an extremely unusual taste and the highest alcohol content of any beer on the planet (take that, Dogfish Head). So far, it's done pretty well. I'd be surprised if Calrlsberg enjoys similar success.
Shaken, Not Served?
As Jacob Grier notes, the Washington Post ran an excellent article highlighting a silly Virginia law that bans sangria. The law does not specifically outlaw sangria, but states that restaurants cannot serve beverages in which spirits are added to beer or wine. Sangria is a traditional Spanish beverage that runs afoul of the law because it is typically made from red wine and brandy. A restaurant in Northern Virginia is currently facing a $2,000 fine for violating the law.
As the article indicates, the law has broader implications
It’s not just sangria. Other popular drinks are also off-limits, including kir royals, which are made with sparkling wine, and boilermakers, which include beer and a shot of liquor.
This invites a question: does the law also make martinis illegal? Martinis are a mixture of gin or vodka and dry vermouth, which is a blend of fortified wine and herbs. Can a bartender in Virginia add fortified wine to spirits? The text of the law says you cannot “sell wine to which spirits or alcohol, or both, have been added,” but does not clarify if it is illegal to add wine to spirits.
Regardless of the legal implications for martinis, Manhattans, and other cocktails with vermouth, this is a silly and unnecessary law. Unfortunately this is just the tip of the iceberg, as many other states still have outdated, Prohibition-era laws on their books. The U.S. is riddled with ridiculous state liquor laws that impose restrictions on the size of beer bottles, the number of ounces of spirits allowed in a particular beverage, and the percentage of alcohol in beer, just to name a few. These attempts to reduce alcohol consumption are misguided and often counterproductive. State governments should get out of the nanny business and allow responsible adults to enjoy the alcoholic beverage of their choosing.
Crossposted at Cato-at-Liberty.
Repeal Day, Part II
Also, Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) delivered an excellent speech on the floor of the House of Representatives yesterday.
Some highlights:
[Prohibition] created organized crime in America, crowded our jails with nonviolent prisoners, corrupted our police, increased urban violence, and destroyed the lives of thousands of victims of unadulterated and poisoned substances, substances which if they were permitted would have been subject to normal market protections of fraud and quality standards. However, during prohibition, these substances which were consumed by the American people often poisoned them and caused them to lose their lives...Rohrabacher goes on to make a very compelling argument about similiarities between Prohibition and the War on Drugs. Good stuff.
Why did America reject the prohibition of alcoholic beverages? Well, when government attempts to control the peaceful behavior of its citizens, it often sets in motion forces that are more dangerous than the social evil that they are trying to control.
For a run-down of other Repeal Day themed links, check out this post by Jacob Grier. (Jacob, time to start sending me cash for all the traffic I'm sending your way
)
Repeal Day
For my take on this merry day, please check out my op-ed that ran in today's Examiner.
I also highly recommend this piece by Jacob Grier.
Cheers!
Westvleteren
The Wall Street Journal ran a great article on the St. Sixtus monastery and their legendary Westvleteren ales.
From the article:
Two American Web sites, Rate Beer and Beer Advocate, rank the strongest of Westvleteren's three products, a dark creamy beer known as "the 12," best in the world, ahead of beers including Sweden's Närke Kaggen Stormaktsporter and Minnesota's Surly Darkness. "No question, it is the holy grail of beers," says Remi Johnson, manager of the Publick House, a Boston bar that has Westvleteren on its menu but rarely in stock.
As the article explains, the beers are extremely hard to find because the monks brew in very small quantities and don't want their beer to be resold. I've never had any of the Westvleteren beers. A quick internet search confirmed that these beers are rare and pricey. You can find them, but once you factor in shipping, a single bottle could cost you $30 (depending on which of their 3 beers you want and how old the bottle is).
But there's a moral question here: if these monks don't want their beer to be sold to the masses, should we ignore their request and buy it online?
While it won't be tremendously affordable, I think I'd prefer to pay a visit to St. Sixtus to sample their wares.