Bulmer's 300ml/330ml..Question

fussyonion

Not sure if this is the right forum or Beers and Wine..mods, move as you see fit.

For the past few months, I've been buying a box of 20 x 330ml Bulmers bottles in Tesco. The price has gone from €20-€22 and this has been fine.

Today in Tesco they were selling a box of 20 x 300ml for €23.15.

My question is:

Have they done away with 330ml bottles as this price seems steep for bottles containing less?

I notice Tesco were stocking a 6 x 330ml pack of Bulmers for €10.

bluecherry74

As far as I know the box of 20 bottles has always been 300mls and not 330mls, at least for as long as I've been buying them which is a few years. I don't know the reason for it, but I remember remarking on it with some friends the first time I bought one of the boxes.

rubadub

I always believed 300ml was the size of ones intended for the UK market, but they would be labelled magners then.

8x500ml cans are €10 in superquinn now, 3x1L bottles for €10 too.

You should try blind tasting with cans vs bottles if you have a bias against cans. It usually turns out people are drinking from the can, or just have their mind made up that bottles "must be better".

I think the whole bulmers & ice thing is a bit weird. Before pint bottles came out I knew of nobody who drank bulmers with ice. And now the drinkers I know will insist on getting pint bottles in pubs with loads of ice but will not do the same at home with cans. Now it is a key part of their marketing, almost as much as the guinness 2 stage pour.

http://www.candcgroupplc.com/brands/ciders/bulmers

How To Serve
Bulmers is best served with copious amounts of ice. The best way to serve it is to half-fill a standard pint glass with ice, pour a well-chilled pint bottle of Bulmers cider into the glass, fill to the top and enjoy!

fussyonion

Oh no I don't mind drinking cans..I sometimes buy them, but then I buy bottles too.
Got this reply from Bulmers today:

Thank you for getting in touch. We sell both 330ml and 300ml. The 20 pack that we sell is 300ml. It would depend on what the retailer orders in what size bottle as to what is available in your local shop but you would often find both sizes for sale. In the pubs however the long neck is the standard 330ml. I hope this information helps.

It's probably been an oversight on my part, thinking I had been buying 330l bottles when all along they were 300ml.

rubadub

fussyonion wrote: »

In the pubs however the long neck is the standard 330ml.

Nothing to stop pubs selling the 300ml too though, it will probably be in the rip off forum soon!


20 x 300ml for €23.15 this works out as €1.93 per 500ml can or €2.19 per pint.

irish_goat

I'd guess there's two reasons. One would be to stop pubs buying them cheaply in the supermarket and cynically, the other would be as a profit making exercise. Bud Light quietly dropped their alcohol content a while ago in a similar move.

Ravelleman

There's a general trend in food/drink manufacturing towards reducing the quantity given rather than raising prices outright. As irish_goat says lots of alcoholic drink manufacturers are also reducing the ABV of their products, presumably to get them into lower excise bands. Of course that saving isn't passed on to the consumer. Smithwicks is another notable example - it's now 3.8%.

As said above its usually to stop publicans from raiding Dunnes and tesco whenever there's an offer on.
We had a guy in once looking to buy a pallet of miller, back when they were 24x330ml and not 20x300ml.

poitinstill

has smithwick always not been 3.8% ?

rubadub

poitinstill wrote: »

has smithwick always not been 3.8% ?

Yes, I hjave read it is higher in north america though.

Many are unaware its so weak. I think this is since few people buy it in cans so never get to read it anywhere, not sure if it is mentioned on the taps.

to stop publicans from raiding Dunnes and tesco whenever there's an offer on.

One would be to stop pubs buying them cheaply in the supermarket

Still nothing to stop them though. If people are willing to buy them and drink them at home I imagine people will be willing to buy them in pubs.

I never understand this bizarre divide people put between pubs & off licences. You will see pubs with a piss poor selection of beer with an attached off licence with huge variety. Then there's the aversion some people have at the thought of drinking a can in a pub, but are fine to do it at home.

EDIT: just checking that terribly bad law on price displaying.

A 16 item list of prices needs to be displayed prominently either inside or directly outside the entrance of the premises. The following is a list of 16 items that need to be displayed by publicans to comply with the order:

Pint (568 ml) of draught stout
Pint (568ml) of draught ale
Pint (568 ml) of draught lager
Pint (568ml) of draught cider
Bottle (330ml) of stout
Bottle (330ml) of ale
Bottle (330ml) of lager
Bottle (330ml) of cider
Measure (35.5ml) of whiskey
Measure (35.5ml) of gin
Measure (35.5ml) of vodka
Bottle (200ml) of carbonated drink
Bottle (200ml) of carbonated cola drink
Bottle (113ml) of a mixer
Bottle (250ml) of water
A bottle (187ml) of wine

I still think there is no issue selling 300ml bottles of cider, in fact they do not have to display the price so it might be an advantage! Some bars would not have all these 16 items so it must not be an issue.

Ravelleman

poitinstill wrote: »

has smithwick always not been 3.8% ?

There you go, I was absolutely certain that it was above 4%. I can no longer be sure of anything.

I thought that the higher ABV set it apart from Bass in the bland canned ales category.

I can't say I drink it anyway so the truth doesn't hurt!

poitinstill

Smithwicks was always my day drinking beer. eg a wedding etc. 8 pints of smithwicks and id be like i was after 4-5 normal ones

rubadub

poitinstill wrote: »

Smithwicks was always my day drinking beer. eg a wedding etc. 8 pints of smithwicks and id be like i was after 4-5 normal ones

I find a lot of difference between apparent small changes in %.

My theory is that the true comparison value should take off a few %. e.g. take 2% off every value, which may vary depending how fast you drink. Those drink driving advisory boards used to go on about people processing a certain amount of drink over a certain time. So you might be able to drink 1 4.3% pint per hour all day long and it may have little or no effect on your blood alcohol level, it might rise slightly and just stabilise. There has got to be a break even point where nothing is really happening. So if you change to 5% its like you have gone from 0 to 0.7%.

So smithwicks becomes 1.8%, while the common 4.3% beers become 2.3%, so using that regular beer is 28% stronger than smithwicks (2.3/1.8), while if you compare 3.8 and 4.3 it is only 13% more.

I believe this is the main reason stella got such a bad rep for bad hangover and being a beer that sends people crazy, it was 5.3% years ago when you heard it said more. Some would say it was "only 1% more", but I think they greatly underestimate what that value results in, esp. when they might be drinking at the exact same pace.

the beer revolu

Or to put it simply:
A 5%abv beer has 25% more alcoho in it than a 4% abv beer.

rubadub

the beer revolu wrote: »

Or to put it simply:
A 5%abv beer has 25% more alcoho in it than a 4% abv beer.

My point is that while it has 25% more alcohol, it might lead to a lot more than a 25% increase your blood alcohol levels (or drunkeness).

the beer revolu

rubadub wrote: »

My point is that while it has 25% more alcohol, it might lead to a lot more than a 25% increase your blood alcohol levels (or drunkeness).

I get ya now.
But as you say, many people see it as having 1% more alcohol.