Carling - I wouldn't wash our dog's feet in it.
Obviously not, until they make a shower mixer with hot, cold and lager valves. I quite like the sound of it though but not for pet ablutions.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Carling - I wouldn't wash our dog's feet in it.
what, as opposed to people who won't metaphorically won't drink sub-4% lager?There are people who literally won't drink sub-4% lager.
Tuborg is bloody lovely.If you want a really bad lager, try tuborg. Good god that is horrible. In fact good idea for a thread.
what, as opposed to people who won't metaphorically won't drink sub-4% lager?
Tuborg is bloody lovely.
They're the milkmans.I like it. It's decent session lager. I'd be pissed off me face if I drank 8 pints of Stella. I've got four kids and I'm virile as fuck too, before anyone pipes up, ya bastards.
They said, amazingly, that they didn't change the branding as the wholesalers would want a slice of the money they'd saved in ingredients and taxes.Point being that if Carling was advertised at 3.7%, custom would be lost. And you being a case in point makes me think that it's a bit of careful wordplay from the company.
That's exactly it. Mainstream lager is practically a sterile as fuck chemical process measured down to the gram.Let's quote the full sentence shall we:
<< Molson Coors said beer was allowed to have a natural variation of 0.5%, and said customers had not been misled. >>
But this was not a natural variation - as you might get with a real ale - now was it dear Messrs Molson and Cours?
They're not because the tax is up to 5%. You can go 0.5% either way.If theyre only paying tax on 3.7% then they are knowingly misleading the public
They're not because the tax is up to 5%. You can go 0.5% either way.
a - the article says otherwisw
b - why has stella dropped from 5 to 4.8
Was 5.2%
Nah. Very little that you drink in a normal bar will have more than 0.1% variance.Didn't know this 0.5% leeway existed like.
Explains why some beers of the same abv get you way more blattered.
Nah, the tax is down to the last drip of actual alcohol.They're not because the tax is up to 5%. You can go 0.5% either way.
That's exactly what they're doing.So they're not ripping off HMRC because they're legally permitted to drop the alcohol level by 0.5%, but have been deliberately producing it at that lower level for donkeys, but maintaining the higher sale price (which must factor in the expected higher tax on 4% ABV) so they're ripping off the rest of the entire supply chain, mainly those who drink it.
Or a meringue?
A) I fill in our tax duty form and write the cheques.a - the article says otherwisw
b - why has stella dropped from 5 to 4.8
Sorry but that's all wrong. They'd pay the same tax on 3.7 than they would on 4, plus no money will be saved at all on time, ingredients yes but barely noticeable.That's exactly what they're doing.
Saving money on ingredients, time and tax. And not passing a penny of that saving on.
Is this not against the trade descriptions act and misleading the buyer4.0% on the labels, 3.7% in reality.
They're allowed a 0.5 PP variation though so not illegal...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41059610
Is this carlings ratner momentThey said, amazingly, that they didn't change the branding as the wholesalers would want a slice of the money they'd saved in ingredients and taxes.
Bloody right they would too.
That's exactly it. Mainstream lager is practically a sterile as fuck chemical process measured down to the gram.
There's literally no variance between batches. Everything is utterly controlled. It's not a craft.
They're simply utilising the leeway they've been given, to utterly deceive their customers. Customers who should now dump them and try something new.
From what I've checked before, and from the evidence that everyone is downgrading to save on tax, this doesn't seem to be correct.A) I fill in our tax duty form and write the cheques.
B) I don't work for Stella but I'd guess it's to save on tax, 5% or more is more expensive than 4.8. For our 9gallon casks we pay £9.64 tax for 3.8-4.3% ales.
Sorry but that's all wrong. They'd pay the same tax on 3.7 than they would on 4, plus no money will be saved at all on time, ingredients yes but barely noticeable.
I guess it depends where the Tuborg is brewed. I like the Tuborg that is brewed in Switzerland. It's made in the same brewery that makes Swiss Carlsberg - and is cheaper - but I much prefer it.If you want a really bad lager, try tuborg. Good god that is horrible. In fact good idea for a thread.