RateBeer is scheduled for maintainence and will be unavailable from 03:00 EST - 04:00 EST Jan. 23, 2018

Why are bombers such a ripoff compared to sixers, and generally accepted?

Reads 8795 • Replies 48 • Started Friday, March 2, 2012 11:20:07 PM CT

The forums you're viewing are the static, archived version. You won't be able to post or reply here.
Our new, modern forums are here:
RateBeer Forums

Thread Frozen
 
iowaherkeye
beers 2804 º places 29 º 23:20 Fri 3/2/2012

Discuss.

 
fly
beers 1487 º places 273 º 23:23 Fri 3/2/2012

fair question, curious of the response.

 
maneliquor
beers 3514 º places 153 º 23:54 Fri 3/2/2012

Im also pretty curious actually

 
DYCSoccer17
beers 3714 º places 336 º 23:59 Fri 3/2/2012

Economy of scale for the purchaser. I personally will be more willing to buy just a bomber of a new beer that I have never had before, despite it seeming to be a relative rip-off in 6 pack terms. It’s rare that a beer is available in both 6ers and 22’s, so it’s not like the consumer really has much of a choice anyway.

I think it’s the same reason that wine for the most part is sold in 750mL bottles rather than 5 liter containers. People are more willing to pay $20 for a 750mL bottle of wine than say $75 for a 5 liter container of wine they have never tried before.

 
billk
beers 353 º places 60 º 02:01 Sat 3/3/2012

the more you buy the less you pay per ounce. 12 pks are usually cheaper than 2 6ers. Handling is more time consuming with lots of smaller units.

 
left_bank
beers 106 º places 104 º 02:16 Sat 3/3/2012

maybe because you call them "bombers",and maybe they are today.(i haven’t bought a 625 ml beer in more then 25 years).where i was a teen in montreal,LARGE bottles were always cheaper then 6 packs.when i later traveled through other parts of canada,mostly ontario,i found "knee-highs" to be more expensive then 6 packs and i asked why!the answer i got was that they were the most stolen beers at the lcbo.

 
left_bank
beers 106 º places 104 º 02:18 Sat 3/3/2012

-should of said large bottles were always cheaper then 6 packs for the same amount of beer.

 
billk
beers 353 º places 60 º 02:28 Sat 3/3/2012

When I came of age Yuengling was 3 qts for a buck on sale. We drank Iron City instead for the same price.

 
jesskidden
places 1 º 03:42 Sat 3/3/2012

It’s one of the, uh, unique aspects of the craft industry that give lie to the romantic myth that they’re only in it for the love of brewing, not to make a profit, etc.

As noted by others, traditionally in the US brewing industry larger bottles were always a better value- quarts cost less per ounce than 16’s, 16’s were a better value than 12’s, and 7 oz. nips were the least economical. True returnable/refillable "deposit" bottles were the best value, because the bottle was reused numerous times, so the consumer did not have to pay for it and then throw it away.

Craft brewers have turned that old convention on it’s head and even tho’ a case of 6 packs obviously have much more packaging costs than a case of 12 bombers (almost twice the crowns, twice the labels, twice the bottles plus the additional 6 pack "baskets") they are still cheaper per ounce.

The "growler" is maybe an even bigger joke. Instead of "renting" the returnable/reusable bottle, you are now required to BUY it (often sold with a large profit margin built-in) AND to clean it yourself. There are NO extra packaging costs (no labels, crowns, cardboard inner or outer shippers, etc.) yet often a 64 oz. growler costs more than a 72 oz. six pack of the same beer.

While the old quart beer bottle had a sort of "downmarket" image (tho’ not as much as the 40 oz. bottle that’s replaced it in many cases), the craft brewers have given the "bomber" (despite it’s nickname) an "upscale" image - sort of wine-like, to be shared with friends, sophisticated, etc. The 750 ml. bottles even moreso. I’ve seen people discussing BYOB’s and saying things like "Well, I’d bring a bomber or 750 or two to a nice restaurant, but never a "sixpack"..."

Now some will claim that the sixpack is the "larger" package, so that’s why a bomber cost more but, usually, in markets that sell singles, the single 12 oz. bottle will ALSO be the better value per ounce. Brewers complain that the changeover from 12’s to 22’s is costly in manhours, but, of course, after running the 22’s they’ll have to change back to 12’s, yet don’t add additional costs to those bottles. Retailers often are more likely to add a new bomber to their shelves (usually warm shelf), since it takes up less space than a sixpack row in the cooler.

So, why do they charge more per ounce for a bomber? Because they can and many people will still buy them.

 
tjohn2401
06:37 Sat 3/3/2012

It’s been a while since I’ve bought a 40oz Bud Light...how is it priced compared to a six pack? Is it a better deal per ounce?

And it’s interesting to me that a large format bottle of craft beer is considered more "sophisticated" while a large format bottle of BMC is perceived as a poor man’s drink. At least that’s how I’ve perceived it. I always kinda felt like a scum ass walking up to the counter with a couple 40’s or 22’s.

 
MacBoost
beers 1963 º places 35 º 06:45 Sat 3/3/2012

Originally posted by tjohn2401
It’s been a while since I’ve bought a 40oz Bud Light...how is it priced compared to a six pack? Is it a better deal per ounce?

And it’s interesting to me that a large format bottle of craft beer is considered more "sophisticated" while a large format bottle of BMC is perceived as a poor man’s drink. At least that’s how I’ve perceived it. I always kinda felt like a scum ass walking up to the counter with a couple 40’s or 22’s.


Don’t know about the 40’s, but around here, a 24oz can of Bud is $1.19 while a 6 pack is $5.99.