15 grams of yeast.. instead of 11.5..

[GalBrew]

Not even remotely the same. Aside from the fact that amarillo is a patented hop variety and various distributors are authorised to onsell those to retailers

How is that even relevant to this discussion? Who distributes the hop is irrelevant. Who the buys bulk amounts of Amarillo and repackages it for homebrewers is what I am talking about. Amarillo is a
Trademarked brand that can be damaged like anything. Also like galaxy which is owned by HPA, if I got a **** bag of hops labelled with galaxy that had been mishandled by a retailer or cut with an inferior hop, I may come to the conclusion that Galaxy is a rubbish hop and so are HPA. Explain to me how that is different to the yeast situation? Or the growler example?

Also I don't give a **** who does what to yeast or hops or whatever and on sells it. Again the point I am trying to make is that people are getting awfully uptight about yeast and not the countless other examples listed. Do you think that loose grain sitting in a bin in some homebrew shop for a year will still match its spec sheet? Or the LME from a bulk drum that has been split and re-labelled in a plastic bucket is how the manufacturer intended?

 

[Ducatiboy stu]

Liquid yeast in sealed activator packs...FTW

 

[manticle]

For once I agree with stu.

 

[manticle]

The reason it differs galbrew is because it's yeast - micro-organisms that are prone to being outnumbered by other microorganisms.
Microorganisms added to cold side in an environment where we want them to thrive while keeping out other organisms.
I don't really care either as I don't use dried yeast but it is very different to those other things you mention.
Grain is not isolated and packed in a lab.

 

[Ducatiboy stu]

For once I agree with stu.

And lets keep it that way :lol:

 

[manticle]

Ok. Do you like beer?

 

[Bridges]

gday alll just wondering why yeast packs have increased up to 15g. my mate reckons they were around the 11g mark. any suggestions?

As some HBS are repacking yeast.
Are we done here now or what?

 

[zeggie]

EDIT: the new Act is called Competition and Consumer Act 2010

Haha, thanks for the legal lesson. I'm well aware of the CCA as I'm in the industry. Was just making you aware it's bad form to quote law that is repealed. I'm glad you managed to google the latest Act.

Without a lengthy legal explanation that will bore everyone to tears, Kegking are not 'passing off' their product. It is indeed Fermentis yeast in the packages and they are within their rights to buy in bulk, split and sell the product same as many different industries.

 

[Feldon]

Haha, thanks for the legal lesson. I'm well aware of the CCA as I'm in the industry. Was just making you aware it's bad form to quote law that is repealed. I'm glad you managed to google the latest Act.

Without a lengthy legal explanation that will bore everyone to tears, Kegking are not 'passing off' their product. It is indeed Fermentis yeast in the packages and they are within their rights to buy in bulk, split and sell the product same as many different industries.

Its bad form to not read the postings in this thread before replying. We're not arguing whether or not its Fermentis yeast. Its passing it off as factory packed Fermentis yeast that is in question.

It is passing off. Bit like you passing yourself off as some legal expert.

 

[zarniwoop]

I can't comment from a legal point of view (not being a lawyer and such like...) but I deal with this several times a year for the multinational I work for. We produce a technical product that is used to manufacture end products that are sold to the general market, as our brand name is well known for quality etc a lot of our customers are quite keen to add our logo to their packaging.

The problem is that if there is an issue with the end product then everyone will assume the failure is due to our product as it's the main component in the finished product. We don't like this obviously so we have a very rigid process for allowing our customers to use our logo (product assessment, company assessment etc etc). If a customer goes ahead and uses our logo without permission then it goes all legal post the cease and desist stuff, of course the real risk is that they label it with our logo and put something of lower quality inside (doesn't really happen in Aus so far but well known O/S). It's really about the branding and reputation that's at stake, if they want to use our product in something that's been badly built or designed we don't care provided they don't use our logo on it.

I'd have to say that if I worked for Fermentis I'd be very unhappy with our logo etc being used on something as delicate as yeast that had been repackaged by anyone other than us. I've been in the manufacturing game for a long time and generally people will stuff it up. It's about brand reputation.

 

[wambesi]

Seeing as there is a strong opposition to this business carrying out this practice - has anyone actually got in contact with them to say something along the lines of "I bought this and it looked like a factory sealed product but isn't"?

If the issue is indeed that they're advertising factory sealed official packages but sending out repackaged bags then you simply did not receive what you purchased and pretty sure you'll be covered under the consumer laws. Sometimes we just need to call the people involved - as much as we don't like doing that these days.

We all know some HBS do this, but most usually label it American Ale Yeast or something similar as mentioned above, but even if it had the manufacturer name and product name on it I don't see a problem as you can see it is repackaged - but as I said above, if they're using a false image then that's not so good. If a bunch of people rang in to complain I'm sure they'd do something about it.

On the other hand, I have no problem with repackaging of yeast and have used it with no problems, so much so I just split two bricks myself at home. But, that doesn't seem to be the issue here.

Just my thoughts.

 

[wide eyed and legless]

I don't think anyone is in any doubt that KK are not trying to pass off any of their repackaged yeasts,as Safale Fermentis packaged yeasts, the discussion is about the legality and the environment in which the yeast is repackaged.
As SF has not taken any steps to halt the practice (as yet) shows they are not overly concerned, so the only discussion is the health of the yeast after repackaging, we have a split in the AHB community of those who will use repackaged yeast and those which will not.
I for one is with wambesi and have repackaged yeast my self as too I suspect a few others would do also, and have bought the repackaged yeast and not had a problem.

 

[Danwood]

Personally, I would definitely put the splitting of yeast by a middle man in a different category than grain, hops etc.

Yeast has a potential to completely ruin an otherwise good beer.

Brew 3 'identical' batches, one with potentially infected yeast, another with cheap base malt passed off as maris otter (say), and the third with quality hops cut with cheaper/older hops.

They will all likely turn out beers which are fine, to varying degrees. Even the yeast one.

But, I'd rather not put that 'question mark' on a beer I'd just spent 6 hours making, by using re-packaged yeast.

If a pack of yeast is infected during splitting, it was not done intentionally, just through lack of proper practices.

If grain or hops are cut with inferior substitutes, it is done intentionally, by unscrupulous retailers.

Legally the same, perhaps. But from a brewing perspective, they are entirely different situations in my mind.

 

[GalBrew]

Personally, I would definitely put the splitting of yeast by a middle man in a different category than grain, hops etc.

Yeast has a potential to completely ruin an otherwise good beer.

Brew 3 'identical' batches, one with potentially infected yeast, another with cheap base malt passed off as maris otter (say), and the third with quality hops cut with cheaper/older hops.

They will all likely turn out beers which are fine, to varying degrees. Even the yeast one.

But, I'd rather not put that 'question mark' on a beer I'd just spent 6 hours making, by using re-packaged yeast.

If a pack of yeast is infected during splitting, it was not done intentionally, just through lack of proper practices.

If grain or hops are cut with inferior substitutes, it is done intentionally, by unscrupulous retailers.

Legally the same, perhaps. But from a brewing perspective, they are entirely different situations in my mind.

FFS, I only brought those examples up in the context of the legality of product splitting by homebrew stores, not how it may or may not negatively impact the quality of a beer.

 

[Bridges]

Doesn't make it clear it's repackaged.

 

[Camo6]

At least the 15gm packs don't need to be rehydrated.

 

[Danwood]

....how it may or may not negatively impact the quality of a beer.

Thanks. This is what I took away from that post.

 

[Blind Dog]

At least the 15gm packs don't need to be rehydrated.

yes they do, just with 30% more water of the generic non-trademarked variety

 

[wide eyed and legless]

ret2515-fermentis-safale-us-05-yeast-15g.jpg

Doesn't make it clear it's repackaged.

No its not the best advertisement, and they should think about changing it, but panzerd 18 mentioned it was repackaged early on in the thread

 

[zeggie]

Its bad form to not read the postings in this thread before replying. We're not arguing whether or not its Fermentis yeast. Its passing it off as factory packed Fermentis yeast that is in question.

It is passing off. Bit like you passing yourself off as some legal expert.

Haha, no need to get your back up. Simply pointing out the TPA is repealed. Also for your info if you google the CCA you'll actually *not* find the words "passing off" anywhere in it. There is a reason for that - since I'm 'passing off' as a 'legal expert' in your opinion, I'll let you work out why it's not in the CCA for yourself.

Kegking are not passing off. "factory packed" hasn't anything to do with elements required.
IF they were (which they are not), it would set a dangerous precedent and would mean your local coffee shop wouldn't be able to buy coffee beans in bulk, sell them to customers, brew them for customers, and advertise the source/brand of their beans wouldn't it? Have a great day!