The Portman group strikes again........ Fourpure hit this time.

[Alex.mc]

Pasted below is one of a number of reports from the last day or two regarding Fourpure falling foul of the Portman group for having Oranges on its Juicbox IPA.
The Portman group has a role to play for sure, for example I am not a fan and have never been (aside from when I was dumb teenager) of sexist and misogynist branding, anything homophobic, or using twists of very bad language etc. That's just cheap shot branding and was usually lazy and unpleasant. The Portman group has done much to stop this.
However........ Having gone after Tiny Rebel for it's Teddy bear due to one complaint, yes... one complaint! and ruled against them, they have now ruled against Fourpure for having oranges on its cans of Juicebox Citrus IPA. Once again it's down to one complaint. The article pasted below reveals that the complainant was one "Zenith Global" A quick search reveals they are a marketing consultancy with a big portfolio and the only alcohol clients represented by them are Guinness, Pernod, and Moet Chandon and Suntory Whisky.
Reading between the massive great big lines, it's pretty clear to me that this is market share shenanigans, and the worry that children will be demanding Fourpure's IPA (let alone the fact that it's the retailer's responsibility not to sell it to them!) is probably very low down, if actually even on their list.
This is foolish in the extreme, as people will see the Portman group as not toothless, but swayed by big buisness too easily, and stuck in a world of jobsworth, pedantic, rulebook adherence with no nod to common sense at all. The Portman's group's reputation can only be degraded even further by this.
Perhaps the answer is to cave in the whole current, stupid system? I'm very tempted indeed to start making complaints against every single bottle of alcohol I can find that isn't beer, and make complaints about them. The wine shelves in any supermarket will be rich hunting grounds. Got a Cat in the label? Children love cats! You're making Cat-loving children want to buy Wine you evil gits! Ooh look that one's got a Bicycle on it... children love bikes.....

Thoughts?

https://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2020/01/portman-group-finds-fault-with-fourpures-juicebox-beer/

 

[Clint]

More nonesense...I hope they clobber Cadbury for its Olde Jamaica chocolate bars. ...there's definitely NO ships in it!

 

[marshbrewer]

Funnily enough, they found in favour of Moretti (e.g. Heineken) and Leffe (e.g. InBev) in the same week.

Why, it's almost as if the Portman group is a massive case of regulatory capture, using it's rules to stifle potential newcomers into the industry? Who'd a thunk it, huh?

Oh, that's right, Adam Smith did in the 1700's, lol.

 

[Ajhutch]

Funnily enough, they found in favour of Moretti (e.g. Heineken) and Leffe (e.g. InBev) in the same week.

Why, it's almost as if the Portman group is a massive case of regulatory capture, using it's rules to stifle potential newcomers into the industry? Who'd a thunk it, huh?

Oh, that's right, Adam Smith did in the 1700's, lol.

Fourpure is owned by Australian giant Lion Brands.

 

[marshbrewer]

Is it? Well I stand corrected.

 

[Ajhutch]

Your point is fair though, I shouldn’t have been an arse about it. The Portman Group is basically controlled by big beer and has a bit of history of going after smaller guys as the OP details

 

[marshbrewer]

They've been after Tiny Rebel again since then, even after its revised packaging was designed after taking advice from them, of you see what I mean.

As you say, if you look on their website at their senior personnel and board members, it's mostly an unholy alliance of nanny state / health care lobbyists and UK big beer reps.

The nanny statists love it that way because a market dominated by a few big players is easy to collude with; big beer likes it like that as it screws over the little guy.

 

[MrRook]

More nonesense...I hope they clobber Cadbury for its Olde Jamaica chocolate bars. ...there's definitely NO ships in it!

Probably no old Jamaicans either.

 

[Richie_asg1]

And certainly doesn't come from the Jamaica region, so you would think should suffer the same fate as Champagne?
.....where is my pen.

I would also think Old Peculiar is neither old nor peculiar, and may be targeting pensioners.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

I would also think Old Peculiar is neither old nor peculiar, and may be targeting pensioners.

It targets me most weekends

 

[Brew_DD2]

They've gone after BrewDog numerous time over the years as well. Best ignored.

 

[Alex.mc]

Their twitter seems locked down, no way to comment.
Just noticed that Zenith global has Guinness as a client, and of course Diageo owns them and Diageo is a financier of the Portman group.
It's also unclear whether Zenith global was the complainant, or the auditer, or even worse both the complainant AND the auditer!
I might email the Portman group and ask? Any bets on a response?

 

[Richie_asg1]

Sounds like a case for the monopoly and mergers commission.

as it is acting in a way that is in favour of one of it's financial supporters and is an unfair marketplace practice.
(Monopolies and mergers commission has now merged into some other organisation now)

 

[Pavros]

I would also think Old Peculiar is neither old nor peculiar, and may be targeting pensioners.

It's Old Peculier and the name has historical origins far older than some silly old bunch called the Portman Group, (who seem to have undisclosed vested interests in anything they poke their noses into) so I would tell them where to go in this case!

 

[Alex.mc]

That's the question! What can a brewer do? Fourpure will probably comply, because they have the money to, and won't want to upset their supermarket customers. Tiny Rebel have stated that they strongly disagree and the Portman group is wrong. But what are their options? I'm not sure what happens if they just say no, we're not changing it.

 

[marshbrewer]

But what are their options? I'm not sure what happens if they just say no, we're not changing it.

I think that in that case, any retailer that was also signed up to the Portman group would be duty bound not to stock that product. As nearly all retailers are, they would be screwed.

 

[Pavros]

You see, I know they administer the codes of practice over the selling and marketing of alcohol BUT... if Fourpure have oranges on the cans of Juicebox and Tiny Rebel have a teddy bear, they are still NOT marketing directly to underage consumers as their products are in the beer aisle in a supermarket, not right next to the pick'n mix. Supermarkets/retailers have strict rules over where to place alcohol in the stores and rules/fines if they sell to underage customers. This just smacks of the big boys being frightened of healthy competition and using their friendly consumer group to apply pressure under the guise of trying to be 'responsible'.

 

[jceg316]

The Portman Group is annoying, but a lot of complaints to get dropped. I think there were some complaints over Beavertown which came to nothing. If a brewery doesn't listen all PG can do is recommend to stockists not to stock that beer. I can imagine Supermarkets might be swayed but smaller places probably don't care.

They also went after Arrogant ******* for some stupid reason, not sure if anything came of it other than a lengthy response from Stone telling them to prove it or F off.

 

[dad_of_jon]

They also went after Arrogant ******* for some stupid reason, not sure if anything came of it other than a lengthy response from Stone telling them to prove it or F off.

Clearly the Portman Group weren't worthy

 

[Alex.mc]

[QUOTE="jceg316, post: 864387, member: 11691"They also went after Arrogant ******* for some stupid reason, not sure if anything came of it other than a lengthy response from Stone telling them to prove it or F off.[/QUOTE]

Stone brewing is a US company though, so I would imagine that if they were not concerned with their sales figures in the UK then they would quite happily tell them where to stick it.