Posted in Opinions and trends | 2 Comments »

Adam Avery and Vinnie Cilurzo are two of the major American brewers, respectively founders of Avery Brewing and Russian River. When the two met several years ago, they found out that both were brewing a beer named Salvation. It wasn’t a pleasant surprise, because the issue could raise a long dispute over rights owning and stuff like that. The two decided to avoid any legal trouble finding an unusual solution: blend the beers, call it Collaboration Not Litigation and sell it. Although it was somewhat risky, the beer meet successfully with the consumers’ favour, transforming it into an unprecedented business deal. It was 2004 and the collaborations between brewers fashion had officially begun.

Years later we were almost overrun by beer brewed with four, six or more hands. Not a single month goes by where a collaborative brew is not announced. The trend is impressive, so that is rightly considered one of the most profitable commercial tools for modern microbreweries.The success lies in the uniqueness of such productions, which feeds the main expectations of the most hardened beer geeks: they want new beers and they frantically search for the rare and unique. Add that these beers often are brewed on unusual recipes and you’re done.

Too bad that these are increasingly proving to be absolutely useless beers. Just today Alessio of Pinta Perfetta told me he had tasted a Strong Ale brewed together by Nøgne Ø and Dugges, proved completely meaningless: an undrinkable 11% ABV bomb, brewed with a load of honey and the addition of juniper berries ( almost indistinguishable). Unfortunately this is not an isolated case, as more often these collaborations tend to disappoint those who had the opportunity to taste them.

Certainly the trend taken by such beers is not accidental. Often brewed on impromptu recipes that are not tested and perfected as required. Almost never became regular, so they are creations designed to born and die within a batch. Unnecessary, excessive, often undrinkable, not exciting but rather tiring beers. The wordplay by Alan McLeod on his blog, who call them “Call O’Bore-a-tion” is genial. They should celebrate the mutual support among potential competitors in the market, but end up appearing more like mere business trades.

Ad of new partnerships are continuing at an impressive pace, but how many of these beers are remembered after years or even months? Very, very few I would say. Among those I remember I quote Juxtaposition (Brewdog – Stone – Cambridge) for being called a Black Pilsner, the Hopfen-Weisse (Brooklyn – Schneider) for having involved a major figure on the German scene, rarely prone to fashion; the Horal’s Oude Geuze Mega Blend, for its peculiarity and intent to set off a major regional specialty. And for the rest? Dozens of forgotten brews which I’ve never been interested in taste. When I did it I’ve repented the most of the times.

What about Italy? We had our own collaborations, though at a far slower pace than in the U.S. and Scandinavia. In the past we talked about Sparrow Pit and Suju ( Birrificio Italiano + Thornbridge Brewery), My Antonia and Stim Bir (Birra del Borgo, respectively, with Dogfish Head and Grateful Deaf), Utopia (Troll + BI-DU),  ‘Na tazzulella ‘e Café (Karma + Almond ‘22), Crismas CU + (Baladin + Birra del Borgo), San Diego IPA (Revelation Cat + BOA + Port Brewing). In this case some of them are rather good beers.

I look forward to your comments. Do you generally welcome or skeptically discard this kind of brews? Is there any collaborative beer that you particularly enjoyed? Or one that you wouldn’t recommend even to your worst enemy?