TOPIC:

"Tube":18i0atzl wrote: Absolutely, I agree. There could well be reasons not to package here.[/quote:18i0atzl]

I know of 2 bottling lines in Ireland. Bottling is an expensive process unless the bottling line is continuosly working, the workers just operate as an assembly line style. Whitewater told me the difficulties invlolved in bottling for others, which in turn would incur extra costs.

But would a bottling line owned by a brewery be willing to bottle anothers beer, or even keep the prices low, given the competition nowadays ?

"silenus":gsfbg5ff wrote:

"Tube":gsfbg5ff wrote: Absolutely, I agree. There could well be reasons not to package here.[/quote:gsfbg5ff]

I know of 2 bottling lines in Ireland. Bottling is an expensive process unless the bottling line is continuosly working, the workers just operate as an assembly line style. Whitewater told me the difficulties invlolved in bottling for others, which in turn would incur extra costs.

But would a bottling line owned by a brewery be willing to bottle anothers beer, or even keep the prices low, given the competition nowadays ?[/quote:gsfbg5ff]

Porterhouse originally claimed that the excess capacity on their new fancy bottling line could be rented by other breweries. Not sure whether anyone took them up on this or whether the costs were competitive or not.

Adam

"silenus":1u2m3fxe wrote: But would a bottling line owned by a brewery be willing to bottle anothers beer, or even keep the prices low, given the competition nowadays ?[/quote:1u2m3fxe]

I think this is really common for the small-fry beers to be brewed and bottled under contract by the big boys. At least that's the case in the states.