Carlton & United Breweries confirmed this morning that they will be brewing VB to its former ABV of 4.9% in an attempt to appease disgruntled loyal VB drinkers and return the iconic brand to the number one selling Australian beer.
In what is described by Chief Marketing Officer, Andy Gibson as “a victory for the beer drinkers of Australia” VB will also revert to the highly recognisable green and white livery of old as well as returning the words ‘Victoria Bitter’ to the labelling. In what will also be a boon to the estate of the late John Mellion, CUB will also revive the popular “Matter of fact – I’ve got it now!” advertising tagline and series of TV commercials.
Loyal VB drinkers had no trouble picking the difference.
What’s the big deal? Well, as I have written on Brews News previously and expressed in interviews and on Radio Brews News, it is this writer’s belief that very few ‘loyal VB drinkers’ could pick the difference between VB and Melbourne Bitter or Foster’s Lager in a blind tasting, let alone detect the difference between a 4.6% and 4.9% ABV VB. It is fairly common knowledge that brewers are allowed, by law, a margin of +/- .02% in the finished beer so that a VB (when it was ‘real’) at 4.9% could have been anything between 4.7 and 5.1% ABV and they couldn’t pick it then – they cannot pick it now.
It could fairly be argued that any business capable of producing beer of any quality would never willingly or deliberately mess with a proven formula (remember, not long ago 1 in every 4 beers drunk in this land was a VB) in order to decrease sales and alienate drinkers. When CUB announced the change in ABV, to save millions in excise, they promised that the taste would not change.
I believe them. I imagine someone at the testing table would have had someone tap them on the shoulder and whisper; “If you do a ‘New Coke’ on this one, I will personally punch seven different types of tish out of you before I drop your arse off at Centrelink” so as not to mess with what was still an extremely popular beer. So, if you concur with the supposition that the taste DID NOT CHANGE AT ALL when the alcohol level went south, what, then, caused VB drinkers to get so bent out of shape?
The ABV was not the significant change. What changed, at around the same time, was the look of the can, the tone of the advertising and, most significantly, the very name of the product. The ‘Victoria Bitter’ was replaced by the abbreviation VB and it is fair to assume that this was seen by some as a cynical attempt to trick those Northerners into drinking a Victorian beer. The white rings around the top and bottom of the can and the stubby labels had disappeared years earlier but many would have seen this as a ‘job lot’ shift in direction for the masses.
The new ads featured a parade celebrating ‘average blokes’ (The Regulars) like butchers, nerds-with-hot-wives, farmers and historical re-enactors marching alongside world famous cricketers and rugby league players striding under their various banners up a hill and past Molly Meldrum and Greg Evans to the pub where they all shared a VB. If you’re sitting there scratching your head as you read this, just imagine the headache the ‘average’ VB drinker worked up trying to work it out. Matter of fact, I’ve got one now.
Many must have perceived VB to be attempting to move away from who the drinker thought he was – loyal, steadfast, true and deserving of the best cold beer for his hard earned thirst. It was a short step, then, for these blokes to equate the move away from its original marketing to a feeling that ‘they’ve buggered around with it and it doesn’t taste the same anymore’. Many more must have felt that CUB had ‘retired’ John Mellion and the voice that will forever be associated with VB to replace him with a bunch of ‘Nevilles’ who’d had their arm up a cow, had ‘peaked in high school’ and had names ending in’Azza’ (G’day, Dazza, Shazza, Wazza and Bazza) As the ‘kids’ would say, “WTF?!”
Today, CUB pulled a ‘hand-brake 180’ and admitted that they had made a complete arse-up débâcle of the VB brand. The taste, which hadn’t changed (and Media Releases confirmed) would be changed back from what we didn’t change to what it was before they didn’t change it and John Mellion would metaphorically stride boldly back into that corner pub and shake your hand til head hurt then share a foamy pot of the good stuff with you and all your mates.
The Meat Tray Winners, Blokes Who Took a Sickie to be Here and the Cashed-Up Bogans will be fist-pumping, high-fiving and singing Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, Oi! Oi! Oi! til their voices give out and they end the night arm-in-arm singin’ Khe Sahn as last drinks are called. Bless their little cotton singlets.
“Ooorh, the last train outta Sydnoiys ormose gorn…”
*Author’s note; Yes, it is true. In my younger days I did appear in The Sun newspaper (Thursday January 30, 1986; page 4) and People Magazine (March 10, 1986; page 68) in a VB singlet, having constructed a 2 metre high staue of Ned Kelly out of 2372 VB cans.
Subscribe with iTunes
The taste did change and it’s changed again. It is noticeable to me. I drink a range of beers, usually hefeweizen, US styld IPA and most stouts. I picked this up out of curiosity, though to say the taste hasn’t changed is incorrect.
The world has change CUB. You might grab back some drinkers from Tooheys or XXXX, but most of that lost business has gone to craft beer (of course). Having seen the light, those customers wouldn’t go back to “Veebs” if you gave away gold bars with every carton.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but a deviation of 0.02% from 4.9% is a range of 4.88% to 4.92%.
A margin of 0.2% would give the ranges of 4.7%-5.1% which you state Pete.
The only other thing is that unless the difference between 4.6% and 4.9% is purely glucose (which it probably is) but let’s pretend it’s not. Well there is more malt content in the beer for a start, any malt conversion is never 100% efficient so an increase in 4.6 to 4.9 would (if they use more malt) also carry with it an increase in other unfermentables which could ostensibly alter the flavour profile. Whether that is detectable is another matter.
However I wouldn’t assume all VB drinkers to be of the profile you describe. I know scientists, professors, doctors, lawyers, international businessmen, who all drink VB and it’s ilk. Whether they are oi oi oi or how’d’you do, their tastebuds are as valid as anybody’s. Whether they are sheep following the herd is a different story.
Disclaimer: I never drink VB, nor work for any brewery. I drink my homebrew. So it’s not really a disclaimer, just pointing out a few important things about the nature of the brewing process.
I reckon that’s the second time I stuffed up the maths part of the ABV discussion. In my blog back in 2009 when the first change came about (from 4.9 to 4.8, I think, I arsed up the decimal pointing) Sorry. Again.
I still think (and tasting after tasting over ten years has proven to me) that taste is very subjective and blokes who swear on their kids that they can detect Vb from the pack have been left red-faced when they discover that they have sworn by either Crown Lager, Foster’s, Melbourne Bitter and even Toohey’s New.
I may have even worked in venues that have, at one time or another, poured a beer other than that displayed on the font decal without raising so much as an eyebrow.
My pidgeon-holing of the VB loyalist is, I think fair. He’s the one who drinks only VB and all else is inferior. There are many more who will also drink Crownies for special occasions and Heineken to impress friends and Cascade Premium on Fridays after work with the suits.
At the end of the day, most drink what their tellys tell them to drink in the same way as they wear the clothes, eat the food, drive the car and learn about the world from what TV says.
Yeah, but Prof, I still don’t know what they are apologising for. They’re sorry, even though they never accepted the premise of people’s complaints. “The beer doesn’t taste any different”, they swore black and blue, and “there are only noisy few complaining — most people don’t care”. They had focus groups to prove the beer didn’t taste different. Oh, hold on, didn’t Vincent Ruiu tell us recently that they had also focus groups telling them that people thought The Fifth Ingredient campaign meant Crown Lager has more than five ingredients? Well, based on the VB débâcle, I’m calling it.…unless Vincent comes up with the market research, then Vincent, liar, liar pants on fire!