Pubs with beamish

2ndcoming

Lapsed Catholic wrote: »

Any l*nger can follow Man Utd and their seemingly endless supply of trophies, it takes a l*nger with character and a sense of loyalty to follow Bohs.

All this l*nger talk, your cognitive bias is backed by local pride I would say...;)

beardedmaster

I quite like Beamish, I gotta say. Would definitely prefer Guinness though.

€3.50 a pint in UCD Student Bar.

Lapsed Catholic

2ndcoming wrote: »

All this l*nger talk, your cognitive bias is backed by local pride I would say...;)

Then you'd be wrong ;);)

You order a drink you don't like because you'll get 3 pints for €10 and you dare to lecture on taste, begone sir!

2ndcoming

You seem to have forgotten my earlier post, I told you, I'm an alcoholic! I'd drink any oul pish!:D

the beer revolu

2ndcoming wrote: »

On point 1, thank you sir, I do try.

On point 2, I do like Guinness, I think it tastes great. Can't stomach more than about 5 or 6 before I have to move on to a wee small drink but that's me. I've tried Beamish, don't like it. On occasions I've chose to drink it when it was €3.20 in our local as I'd get 3 out of a tenner, but if both were the same price, I would never choose it. I do like the Porterhouse's stout, but I suppose that can't be compared to the large scale operations.

As fantastic and famous as Guinness advertising is and has been over the last 100 years or more, it is not the sole reason that nobody outside Cork drinks Beamish and Guinness is a worldwide brand of great repute.

People buy what they prefer. In life, as in stout, the cream always rises.

LOL

Ah yeah, the popularity equals quality argument!
I love it.

That means that Brennan's is the best bread in Ireland!
And there is no better fast food than Mc Donald's.
Anyway, I made no mention of Beamish. To claim that it is of better quality than Guinness would be as ludicrous as claiming the opposite.

The way that marketing works is that the people to whom they are marketing actually believe that the product is superior to the competitor's product.
See, it works! You not only prefer Guinness to Beamish you actually believe that it is a product of superior quality.
Them marketing boys are good and Guinness have the best of them.
There was someone on here arguing about Guinness before and he always wrote it as GUINNESS. That is how strong their branding is. No shame in being a victim of it.;)

time lord

Explosive_Cornflake wrote: »

Which bar is that?

Its the Old Stand. Front bar not for me but lounge is like another pub;)

thelynchfella

I drink the odd pint of Guinness myself from time to time, but feck me, the blind loyalty that some Irish people show towards the brand is mind boggling. Their marketing team really is worth their salt!!!

Oh and Beamish is also available in the international bar on Wicklow Street and O'Neills on suffock street!!

2ndcoming

the beer revolu wrote: »

LOL

Ah yeah, the popularity equals quality argument!
I love it.

That means that Brennan's is the best bread in Ireland!
And there is no better fast food than Mc Donald's.
Anyway, I made no mention of Beamish. To claim that it is of better quality than Guinness would be as ludicrous as claiming the opposite.

The way that marketing works is that the people to whom they are marketing actually believe that the product is superior to the competitor's product.
See, it works! You not only prefer Guinness to Beamish you actually believe that it is a product of superior quality.
Them marketing boys are good and Guinness have the best of them.
There was someone on here arguing about Guinness before and he always wrote it as GUINNESS. That is how strong their branding is. No shame in being a victim of it.;)

I must be a mindless victim of marketing, allowing myself to be led past the uncertainty of decision by majestic horses rising from the sea.

Either way GUINNESS TASTES better. And Burger King is far nicer than McDonald's by the way.

thelynchfella

We need another Stout blind test challenge!!!!!!!!!

the beer revolu

2ndcoming wrote: »

I must be a mindless victim of marketing, allowing myself to be led past the uncertainty of decision by majestic horses rising from the sea.

Either way GUINNESS TASTES better. And Burger King is far nicer than McDonald's by the way.

I have no argument with anyone saying they prefer the taste of Guinness over any other stout. What I'm ranting about is that so many people believe that any other stout is actually inferior in quality (a claim that you made).

I, also prefer Burger King to McDonald's but using your success and popularity argument, McDonald's must be of better quality.

2ndcoming

I apologise, there was little basis for the quality remark, but where it stems from is probably the Beamish marketing team's own fault. Their official placards and posters they put in pubs (around the East anyway) always have a space for the publican to write how cheap it is compared to Guinness. This to me gets you lumped in with Foster's and Bavaria, the budget alternatives of the lager world.

The implication to the punter is always that they are "cheaper". Marketers should ALWAYS try and put forward that you should drink their product because it is "better", not because it is cheap. It comes across as, "well yeah it's pish, but you'll get 3 for a tenner!"

Nothing against Bavaria or Foster's either, particularly Bavaria, it's as good as you'll get on the majority of lager taps around the country

the beer revolu

2ndcoming wrote: »

I apologise, there was little basis for the quality remark, but where it stems from is probably the Beamish marketing team's own fault. Their official placards and posters they put in pubs (around the East anyway) always have a space for the publican to write how cheap it is compared to Guinness. This to me gets you lumped in with Foster's and Bavaria, the budget alternatives of the lager world.

The implication to the punter is always that they are "cheaper". Marketers should ALWAYS try and put forward that you should drink their product because it is "better", not because it is cheap. It comes across as, "well yeah it's pish, but you'll get 3 for a tenner!"

Nothing against Bavaria or Foster's either, particularly Bavaria, it's as good as you'll get on the majority of lager taps around the country

Just different marketing strategies. I guess Beamish reckoned they could never compete with the giant that is and was Guinness' marketing team and budget so they decided to compete on price. The fact that Beamish is still in production indicates that the strategy wasn't altogether unsuccessful.

horse7

Are there any pubs in dublin 15 selling beamish.

grenache

I absolutely loathe the way you can walk into any pub outside Munster, particularly in Dublin, and when you ask if they do Beamish, they give you this look of amazement and the whole "now why would we do that" look :rolleyes: Ooh i dont know, maybe because it's one the top three stouts in a country that's famous for producing....you've guessed it....stouts!

I was a fan of Beamish ever before I moved to Cork. It's by far the creamiest of the 3 main Irish stouts. I find Guinness to be rather watery in comparison. Plus it's made by Diageo, which is another reason to boycott it. In Limerick the cheapest i could find Beamish at was €3.50. In Cork, i can get it for €3, just down the road from the old Beamish & Crawford brewery at South Gate bridge This maketh grenache a very happy boy.

Because why pay a euro extra for an inferior pint of plain?!

rubadub

2ndcoming wrote: »

The implication to the punter is always that they are "cheaper". Marketers should ALWAYS try and put forward that you should drink their product because it is "better", not because it is cheap.

Yep, I still maintain beamish would sell more if it was around the same price as guinness, it has a stigma being cheap, people presume it must be worse and some might not want to appear stingy having it, even if they cannot tell any difference.

They did have posters up saying awards it won before. I am surprised they do not do pepsi challenge style tests, pepsi never claimed they were better, just wanted you to decide. They could have beamish reps visiting pubs, and hand out half or 1/4 pints to people already drinking guinness. Or do a proper blind taste there & then. I can imagine initial slagging "haha, you like the cheap muck" and then slowly copping on this is a good thing.

BeerNut

grenache wrote: »

Plus it's made by Diageo, which is another reason to boycott it.

Interesting! You reckon they're worse than Heineken, the company which closed the Beamish brewery?

grenache

BeerNut wrote: »

Interesting! You reckon they're worse than Heineken, the company which closed the Beamish brewery?

Ha ha! I was expecting this question from somebody :-) It was a disgrace that Heineken decided to move production to the Murphy's brewery. I supported the South Main Street Heritage committee and threw them a few quid in the hope that they would be successful in keeping the Beamish brewey open. But alas, cost cutting always wins out over heritage

I'm no fan of Heineken or any multi national corporation, but they are not nearly as evil as Diageo.

Seaneh

grenache wrote: »

I'm no fan of Heineken or any multi national corporation, but they are not nearly as evil as Diageo.

They are though, probably more so.

Seaneh

grenache wrote: »

Ooh i dont know, maybe because it's one the top three stouts in a country that's famous for producing....you've guessed it....stouts!... It's by far the creamiest of the 3 main Irish stouts.

Right, I'd say it's one of the better of the "big 3" Irish fry stouts but miles beind O'Hara's.

Also the "creamy" thing has nothing to do with the beers, it's down to the Nitrogen used to gas the kegs and as such, it would be near impossible to tell Murphys, Guinness, Beamish or even O'Hara's apart in a blind test!

_blank_

I reckon you could tell the O'Hara's apart, every O'Hara's drink has the same distinct "O'Hara'sey" background. Don't know if it's a certain hop they use, or the yeast strain, but I've found it in their Stout, Leann Follain, Red, PA and Curim.

Seaneh

_blank_ wrote: »

I reckon you could tell the O'Hara's apart, every O'Hara's drink has the same distinct "O'Hara'sey" background. Don't know if it's a certain hop they use, or the yeast strain, but I've found it in their Stout, Leann Follain, Red, PA and Curim.

schtick a blind fold om, have a pint of each and then try to figure out which is which if you are that confident.

Colonel Sanders

rubadub wrote: »

Yep, I still maintain beamish would sell more if it was around the same price as guinness, it has a stigma being cheap, people presume it must be worse and some might not want to appear stingy having it, even if they cannot tell any difference.

They did have posters up saying awards it won before. I am surprised they do not do pepsi challenge style tests, pepsi never claimed they were better, just wanted you to decide. They could have beamish reps visiting pubs, and hand out half or 1/4 pints to people already drinking guinness. Or do a proper blind taste there & then. I can imagine initial slagging "haha, you like the cheap muck" and then slowly copping on this is a good thing.

I was in a pub in college one night, reps were giving out pints of Murphy's for free yet very few people in the pub would even try it.

Losty Dublin

rubadub wrote: »

Yep, I still maintain beamish would sell more if it was around the same price as guinness, it has a stigma being cheap, people presume it must be worse and some might not want to appear stingy having it, even if they cannot tell any difference.

I seem to recall that the cheaper price thing came in around autumn 1993 after Guinness hiked their price up 10P in a year. Beamish made it a point that their pint was always selling for 20P less than Guinness and at the time it did get their beer into pubs and more importantly into the eyes of punters. As a result it has a reputation of being inferior but as it's an alternative version of an iconic brand it will always have to deal with such a perception so it has to deal with it in some way.

BTW, is it true that Beamish have been brewing porter/stout longer than Guinness?

BeerNut

Losty Dublin wrote: »

BTW, is it true that Beamish have been brewing porter/stout longer than Guinness?

Don't think so. There are records of Guinness porter in 1778, and I think he'd been brewing it for some years before then. Beamish & Crawford was founded in 1792. However, both sites were breweries before Guinness and Beamish & Crawford took them over and I understand the Cork brewery was much older than the Dublin one. But I don't know when porter production started there.

Paz-CCFC

Paddy Kearney's on Dame Street in Dublin City centre serve Beamish, but they charge €4.50 for a pint. They sell it for €3.80 before a certain time (either 5 or 7), which is still a bit on the high side. I suppose it's the Temple Bar area, so all drinks are expensive there.

Any places around Dublin 7 or Dublin 9 that sell it at a reasonable price (in and around €3.50) for the whole night?

BeerNut wrote: »

However, both sites were breweries before Guinness and Beamish & Crawford took them over and I understand the Cork brewery was much older than the Dublin one.

Isn't the Cork one the oldest brewery in Ireland?

BeerNut

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

Isn't the Cork one the oldest brewery in Ireland?

Not since 2009, when it ceased to exist. But yeah, it was recognised as the longest continuously operating brewery in the country up until then. It was the biggest too, from the 1700s up until 1833.

grenache

Seaneh wrote: »

They are though, probably more so.

Not saying you're wrong, as I have not studied either corporation in detail. But from what i've read Diageo have closed down more breweries than Heineken. Heineken put their efforts into conquering the world beer scene but Diageo seem intent on taking over as many markets as they can - spirits, beer, wine could be next.

BeerNut

grenache wrote: »

But from what i've read Diageo have closed down more breweries than Heineken.

I don't have the numbers to hand, but I very much doubt this. Heineken is a global beer company and closing breweries is par for the course. Diageo is a spirits company. It has few beer interests and fewer plants to close.

grenache

BeerNut wrote: »

I don't have the numbers to hand, but I very much doubt this. Heineken is a global beer company and closing breweries is par for the course. Diageo is a spirits company. It has few beer interests and fewer plants to close.

Well yes this would make more sense. Diageo did close plants in Kilkenny and Dundalk in this country though.

spoofilyj

BeerNut wrote: »

I don't have the numbers to hand, but I very much doubt this. Heineken is a global beer company and closing breweries is par for the course. Diageo is a spirits company. It has few beer interests and fewer plants to close.

As someone who has a relative directly connected with the Heineken (Formerly Murphys Brewery) in Cork the future is by no means bright for Irish brewing at least where Murphys and Beamish are concerned.

Heineken are reducing their headcount in Ireland favouring lower cost locations such as poland to do most of their Accounting and Admin.

At present they are reducing the number of people employed in Cork through Voluntary Redundancy.

Now Beamish and Murphys are produced from the same location in Cork but with a long term view I would speculate since Heineken purchased Scottish and Newcastle that Brewing will be relocated to Manchester where there is a super brewery and will ship all Irelands requirements over at a locer cost then producing them here through economies of scale.

This is why I favour locally brewed craft beers these days... Rant over