Comments

• What about aluminium bottles?
  
  Aluminium bottles are ligther than cristal ones, almost unbreakable, recyclable and you can print it 360º.
  Moreover, they will keep the distinction of bottles...
  
  The problem could be the cost ...
  
  Daniel R.02.06.2010
• just one? 77 lager would probably - from a marketing perspective be the best bet as it is "lager" first and foremost. 440ml can at least.
  
  personally would love punk ipa in a 440ml can though.
  
  a mixed four would be great though, even three 77s and one punk for the curious out there.
  
  lloyd chambers22.05.2010
• Thanks Tim, I didn't realise that. That makes me wonder about the coating tainting the beer/drink?
  Peter Hodgson21.05.2010
• To know which beers to put in a can and how big the can should be, one should ask the question of why is BrewDog being put in a can? If the answer is to gain more drinkers - the lager louts, or 'regular' drinker - then the answer is 77, Trashy, and Tokyo in 440 or 500ml cans.
  
  If the answer is for cheaper transport then I'd argue the same.
  
  Why are so many people supporting the 330ml cans? I don't get they hype. I think the bigger cans always look more attractive to the drinker. Think marketing... Think appetite...
  Colin Sabia20.05.2010
• Hi Peter,
  
  every beverage can, be it beer or soft drink, has had a lining between the can and the beverage since the 1930s. If the beer DID touch the can (as it did originally) then this would react with the can and make it taste bad, so literally the only time that the beer hits the can is when it briefly hits the external lip when you pour it out.
  tim19.05.2010
• Have nothing against beer in cans, I just don't like cr*p beers in cans which s all you can get in the UK. I say put some decent beer in a can! I vote for Trashy Blond. Bring back the party 7 :) :)
  Alan19.05.2010
• Would Brewdog in a can be cheaper. If so I'd give it a try. Would it taste the same. I've had Marstons Old Empire in a can and it wasn't as nice as in a bottle. Don't know why though.
  To Tim, how does the beer not touch the can?? It is IN the can.
  Peter Hodgson19.05.2010
• We need brew dog in cans.
  
  How about a 4 can multi-pack.
  -1 punk, 1 77 lager, 1 zeitgeist etc...
  
  Don't know if it's ever been done.
  Big Andy19.05.2010
• Jeezus. Wehn are the anti-can neoluddites goign to realise that there are NO benefits to bottles over cans than a (mistaken) perception that the beer tastes better. The beer doesn't touch the can apart from the brief moment that it slips past the lip of the can on its way to the glass or your mouth. Cans are better for the environment, better for storing, lighter to transport and don't break like bottles. But you Brewdog guys know this already, because you're ahead of the pack. At the risk of repeating myself- Punk in cans! Like I said, I'd prefer 440ml cans, but this might be cost prohibitive or also add fuel to the Portman fire, so 330ml at a pinch!
  tim19.05.2010
• To those who think inferior beers go in cans, you couldn't be more clueless. Fortunately James knows the truth.
  
  I'd love to see some Punk in cans.
  Rick19.05.2010
• Don't can any Brewdog beer. That's what the other inferior brewers do, and you don't want to fall in line with those. Just imagine browsing the canned beer shelf at the supermarket: Carling, Fosters, Carslberg, Brewdog, Budweiser... It just doesn't fit.
  
  Mind you, if you did can some 'dog and have it sat amongst the rubbish, just think of how much further you could push your rants on the label. Something like: so you meant to pick the rubbish that's sat alongside this beer. You thought you'd have a change and try Brewdog. Bad choice. Get your doctor on standby. (I'm sure you can finish off from here).
  
  If you do have to can something, make it the 77 lager. Lager in cans works better than other beer styles in cans.
  
  Rich19.05.2010
• I think you should definately start with Punk IPA as it does seem to be your flagship brew but the questioning comes down to the sizing again. On a supermarket shelf if you put a 330ml can next to several 440ml or worse 500ml it will look tiny and insignificant. People who dont already buy BrewDog beers still wont buy them. It would seem like the whole effort of doing the research, designing the cans, pushing them to the supermarkets etc would have been completely pointless. To grab peoples attention they need to at least compete with the mainstream. I personally wonder about the effects of a pint can or better yet a 660ml 'double' can
  Richard Boyden19.05.2010
• personally, beer from a can tastes worse than beer from a glass so 77 would be safe although I wouldn't buy it in a can. punk in a bigger can would be good although gimme a bottle any day. any chance of starting 500ml bottles?
  jimmy smith18.05.2010
• I personally dont agree Brewdog should be in a can...BUT if its going to be then I'd go with the 77 lager - lager in cans feels more acceptable than IPAs & stouts - I think of these as superior beers & therefore suited to bottles.
  Surely its not about being mass market though is it
  JH18.05.2010
• 77 in a 440ml can sounds like a great idea, though i would welcome and applaud The Physics!
  MG18.05.2010
• I'd seen the report about you on German Television...
  
  But about that topic:
  I would like to have these 1 liter cans because beer tastes as better as bigger the can is!
  That's what I think.
  Lucian18.05.2010
• Put trashy in can!!!!!
  Beef jerky18.05.2010
• Best-suited beer would be the 77 lager. If this is indeed the selected beer, then I agree with Dale on the sizing: consider going for 500ml cans as this is the familiar format of beer can (in the UK- I accept not necessarily elsewhere).
  If the target is someone who'd ordinarily buy a few cans of beer in the supermarket, it's futile to offer Brewdog up to them in a small can. Like it or not, many people will simply be scanning the shelf on the basis of price, ABV and volume. We can educate them on the folly of their ways later, after they've had a few 77s!
  Andrew M18.05.2010
• Bashah!!!
  Justin18.05.2010
• Punk IPA in 500ml cans would be great - even better in 2 litre PET bottles :-)
  Rob Rait18.05.2010
• This is a good move. Harpoon, in the states is making the move to cans as well. I assume they are going to can their IPA. I hope you send some or contract it to the states. I would love to buy 5am, Punk and Hardcore in cans.
  Brian Henrici18.05.2010
• Got to be 77, ay. In a 500ml can though. And Tokyo in a bit one litre fella.
  Iain Louden18.05.2010
• Good idea! but will the consumer accept it?
  In the Netherlands NOT. Special beers don't go in cans! That is for a lager (can)
  Peter van der AREND18.05.2010
• I'd pick up Punk, Trashy Blonde, and 5am Saint for sure... I'd probably still go for 77, who am I kidding?
  Jimbo18.05.2010
• Personally I feel that 330ml beer cans are totally and utterly pointless.
  
  if you are going to do it, then it would have to be Standard 500ml cans all the way. You are already packaging most of your Product in 330ml bottles, so why made a can for the same size and extra expense to do so, when that product is already available...
  
  I'd have to say, 500ml - 77 Lager would be the safest, because you are pushing forward a beer that should be doing battle with the the big brands in the supermarkets...
  Dale18.05.2010
• I understand the argument for putting out 77 lager, but as others have pointed out, this is a heavily-saturated market. Be daring and go with the punk. I can handle a 440ml can of this because I'm not a big girl's blouse, but I know that the BGB market is a big one, so go for Punk in 330ml. (My dream would be 5am saint in cans, but I'll settle for Punk right now.) Keep it up!
  tim18.05.2010
• I'd love to see pint cans of Punk IPA
  Hendrik Duerkop18.05.2010
• 77
  
  I think as gareth says - try and get some of the lager market.
  
  People would be more likely to want to buy it in cans rather than IPA.
  
  
  Chris18.05.2010
• Id go with Punk IPA, but I remain curious as to what in the "Alpha Dog" can in Sweden.
  Don18.05.2010
• Hardcore IPA!
  But also 5am Saint or Punk IPA would be nice!
  Mo18.05.2010
• Punk and 77 are the obvious choices. I think Mark Dredge is right, keep it to 330ml for a bit of a unique selling point.
  
  I personally would buy Hardcore in 330ml cans too.
  Chunk18.05.2010
• Not 77. Not lager. Not Punk. Brew something new - light, hoppy, 5% or less. Make it truly distinctive.
  Reluctant Scooper18.05.2010
• 77 in 330ml cans.
  Dom Welsh18.05.2010
• I think it would be best from the point of view of changing perceptions of canned beer to put punk in a can. If its 77 lager, people will be more likely to think that its only lager that goes in cans and that theres some good reason that ales shouldnt be. When there isnt.
  Punk IPA and 5am Saint would be my choices.
  Gareth Young18.05.2010
• 77 would be the ones to interest new consumers... Then if it's successful maybe you could try Trashy Blonde and Punk.
  Jock18.05.2010
• Mixed 4 packs? Something no-one does, why not? 2 x punk, 2 x 77. And what about .
  
  What about something lighter for a can too, something sub 4.5%, or sub 4%. Who can honestly keep going at a bbq on 5%+ beers (or 4.8%+ beers in this case)
  Mark, Real-Ale-Reviews.com18.05.2010
• Chaos Theory
  fatboab18.05.2010
• 77 in 330ml cans would be great, even though I'm not really a can fan!
  Woody18.05.2010
• 77! As much as i love IPA, 77 is the logical choice.
  Dan18.05.2010
• Either beer as long as it's in 330ml cans! I hate 440ml cans, they make you feel like a carling-drinking lout.
  GeoPaul18.05.2010
• I think the lager makes more sense too. But, still reckon it should be Punk. Making sense is over-rated.
  
  And, yeah, 330.
  Tony Kiernan18.05.2010
• Punk FTW!!
  Steve Armstrong18.05.2010
• 77 in 330ml cans, I think (I'd buy lots of them and I think it's the beer which will work best, although Punk would be good too)). 440ml cans will look wrong, keep the size small and they will look more unique on the supermarket shelf. 440/500ml cans are unattractive, in my opinion - look at US canned beer, it's 12oz cans.
  
  mark dredge18.05.2010
• Lager 77 Please
  Dominic Holt18.05.2010
• Well I'm not a massive fan of the 77 so i'd go for the punk. Besides, I bet when you were making a business plan or thinking of what you want to do, you never thought about putting canned lager into supermarkets.
  Will18.05.2010
• Punk!
  Chris Dickie18.05.2010
• What about Punk in a 440ml can, as i'm sure you will charging the same price, might be worth getting a little more for our money.
  Spooner18.05.2010
• Can 77 - it's probably the most 'normal' beer you guys do and it'll push people who are in the habit of 'just picking up a few tins' towards your more unique beers. The more people exposed to craft beer the better and 77 is a good place to start.
  Chris Hammond18.05.2010
• I would prefer to see Punk IPA in a can first, it seems to be your flagship beer, the one that you see in Supermarkets the most
  Kristoff18.05.2010
• Definitely put 77 in cans, put those cans into big slabs of 12 or 24 in gorgeously printed boxes, and stack 'em next to the mainstream lagers in supermarkets, priced to sell to the people stocking up for BBQs etc. If people buy it instead of Carling / Stella / Heineken then you've just grabbed a huge potential market...
  Gareth18.05.2010
• 77 Lager without doubt!
  Jonas18.05.2010
• It makes sense to me that the lager be the first beer to be canned.
  LC18.05.2010

Post a comment