Eat local is a big movement. Drink local should be just as important to those who drink. It supports the local economy. It’s more environmentally friendly. And the beer is usually way better to boot.
I will honestly quit drinking altogether first. I hate these big corpos who buy up what was a good brewer and a line with several good beers and immediately start changing the recipes and the process to destroy the beers. I've suffered through it too many times now to call it anything but malicious. What is the point in damaging an established brand, tarnishing an established product which will bring in money from people happy to pay for those flavors other than spite.
In twenty plus years I've only seen a buyout happen once without it destroying the beers.
No, if my only choices are the swill that companies like InBev produce I'll find something else to drink. It's about the flavor. Take that away and I'm gone and so are a lot of people.
As I said, I'm here for the flavors. Take those away and I leave with them.
They believed, correctly, that at least some consumers wouldn't care about or even notice a change in recipe, maybe because people broadly associate Goose Island with good-quality craft beer and continue to buy it.
Consider this model:
Goose Island with the old recipe sold K units per year at $P profit per unit. The new recipe can sell K/l units per year at $P×i, where l is the % of customers who switch away and i is the % increase in profit. If K × P < (K/l) × (P×i) then it's profitable to switch to the new recipe.
For example, one of the brewmasters moved back to his hometown in Michigan and started a pretty well-regarded hard cider place. Speaking of, the “wine trail” in Southeast Michigan is worth it - not for the wine so much (it’s not bad, but it’s not anything to write home about), but that excellent small independent distilleries and breweries have popped up and now a large group of people with a wide variety of tastes can have fun alternating between the 3.
<Cries in Ballast Point>.