Coopers Take Over

[mikem108]

This has turned into a "which is the best aussie stout " thread

 

[voota]

Piss off that the stout is thin. It is imho the fullest beer on the Australian market these days. Yes, coopers is becoming more and more trendy and mainstream. But the stout is a winner.

[post="75154"][/post]​

Voota and Murray

I drank the stout off tap recently and it was thin as. Haven't had a bottled version for a while so can't comment. I think Mountain Goat Surefoot Stout craps all over Coopers STout. Now that beer has some body!

And I agree with Kai that Coopers is better than the other Adelaide megaswill, but when the bar is set so low, you don't have to jump too high to take the gold.

Cheers
MAH

[post="75465"][/post]​

Mah, not meaning to have a go at you again, but i disagree that mountain goat stout has more body than Coopers Stout. Mountain goat make some decent beers (and I know I should be behind them, being a Victorian), but imo their stout is fairly weak, unbalanced, and has an average malt profile. Its not bad, just feels a little rough. And as i've said, has nothing on Coopers. I also agree with the general consensus that Southwark is a nice drop, just as good as Coopers imo, but a little harder to come by in Victoria.
I think once you get over the novelty factor of Mountain Goat, their beers are just decent beers, and not much more.
As with the other coopers beers, I agree, they are good compared to the competition and that is about all.
Also as Murray said, you are entitled to your opinion,

, Voota

 

[Mercs Own]

The only reason a brewery drops the alcohol content is to produce a cheaper beer. Less alc equals less malt equals less cost. Guiness have done it a couple of times over the last 18 months and it is now down to 4.1. When I worked at the bottle shop last xmas people were coming in buying tooheys red thinking it was a bargin at 24.99 a case. What they didnt realise was that the alc had droped down to 4. something - I think around the 4.1 when it originally came out at 4.7 or so. Forgive me if I am out on the figures but I am sure you get the idea! If Coopers have dropped the alcohol level on the stout it is so that it is cheaper to produce. The fact that they now sell the beer cheaper than ever maybe has pushed them to it but I would rather pay $16 a six pack for the original recipe!!!!

For the record I have always enjoyed the Southwick Stout which I think was also up around the 6.8?? Swan stout was good too but then when you looked at the bottle you saw that it was made by Coopers!

 

[Mr Bond]

I'm with MAH, and wally on this one.
I purchased a long neck of coopers stout a couple of months ago and was dissapointed by the body and mouthfeel,lacked that good old oilyness with a satisfying finish for me.As with all coopers ales they promise more in malty aroma than they deliver in the flava and mouthfeel.

Maybe its just my HB adjusted palate,but all commercial beers seem to lack body,and substance.

I have made tastier extract based stouts with the reculture from a coopers sparkling than the current commercial version.

Its been at least 10 years since i had a southwark stout,and I hav'nt had a m,goat stout yet so i might just toddle off to the bottlo in the next coupla days to purchase a couple.
Thanks for stimulatin the old taste testing gene everyone(yeah mike is right its a hijack alright)

B is for brauluver, B is for BORK :excl:

 

[tangent]

I'm a big Coopers man, but the Coops stout is too dry, almost like they sparged with boiling water, all i can taste is "freshly dug dirt" also the same taste i get from that bloody aweful Squire Amber Ale.
Southy Stout is slightly better IMHO etc.

 

[joecast]

the email below was posted on BA about supporting coopers. thought id add it here as im sure most people want them staying family owned.
this may help in filling lion nathans inbox, but if they arent checking ahb, then they dont have their finger on the pulse of australian craft beer (well, at least the hombrewing part)!!!
joe



Dear All,

You may be aware that Lion Nathan has launched a hostile takeover bid for Coopers Brewery. With the family owned Coopers Brewery being the only remaining significant independent brewery left in Australia, to have it consumed by a corporate like Lion Nathan, turning 145 years of history into just another brand in a long list is an absolute tragedy.

Please show your support for Coopers by buying a six-pack this weekend and consuming a beer that has been brewed by the same family for six generations. Either a Coopers Pale Ale or a Coopers Sparkling Ale will show you why this brewery must be saved.

Please send this email to everyone you know (and between you all you know a lot of people!), and cc to the following address which is the Lion Nathan customer service address. They do get the mails and they do read them, I have already had a very pleasant call from the Corporate Affairs Director in response to emails I have sent so far.

[email protected]

Brenton Edwards
PO Box 2
LYNDOCH SA 5351
Coopers Club member 08508

 

[Murray]

I'll just stick to the carton of sparkling in the fridge. I've done my bit

 

[peas_and_corn]

Well, when I heard about the takeover bid I didn't think it would go through. I'm sure people will buy less of it if it's not SA family owned.

 

[Mr Bond]

On the flipside,Coopers is sure getting a lot of free mainstream media exposure of late(helpful I'm sure).
They don't do big budget TV adds ,and I've only ever seen billboard and bus advertising in Adelaide,so all the copy in papers is priceless and will help their cause :beer:

 

[homebrewworld.com]

Give me a Sheaf Stout over a Coopers Stout anyday............
Give me a Coopers Sparkling Ale over the Coopers Pale Ale anyday............
Coopers shnoopers,
Homebrew everyday !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[peas_and_corn]

Well, I don't think the takeover will be successful at all, despite all the PR going around... Ahh, Coopers.

 

[Trough Lolly]

This just in on the news wires:

Print Email
Last Update: Tuesday, September 20, 2005. 3:00pm (AEST)
Trial looms in Coopers shares fight

A Supreme Court judge has warned that a battle over control of almost 9 per cent of South Australian family brewery Coopers could soon head to trial.

Mary Phyllis Henderson wants control of 114,000 Coopers shares that were part of a family will almost 15 years ago.

In the Supreme Court today her lawyer, Lindy Powell, indicated Mrs Henderson could stand to gain $30 million if she sells the shares to Lion Nathan.

The Public Trustee and three members of the Coopers family are battling to prevent that from happening.

Justice John Perry adjourned the matter until later this week but warned all parties he was likely to set the matter for trial.

Also in the Supreme Court today, Lion Nathan won its right to appeal against a recent judgement that crippled its bid to gain control of Coopers.

 

[Murray]

I guess she is off the Christmas card list then.

 

[Trough Lolly]

And definately off the Xmas Case list!!!

Let her drink Tooheys!

 

[Jazzafish]

Hate to see another brew spoiled by a cut corner profiteer

 

[Jazzafish]

Yes I have Coopers next to my own brew... and it isn't only for the yeast culture!

 

[spog]

bit like having a will read,everyone wants their piece of the pie. nothing like the smell of money to turn people into @#$^holes :angry:

 

[peas_and_corn]

Yeah, but Coopers will still be majority SA... let's hope lion nathan gets incredibly little... hopefully nothing.

 

[Trough Lolly]

Coopers' approach to sale attacked - September 23, 2005

Lion Nathan has attacked the board of its takeover target, Coopers, over what it says is Coopers's "unusual" approach to the sale of its shares. The big brewer has made a $352 million bid for Coopers at $260 per share. Coopers has rejected the offer as opportunistic.

In the past few weeks the two companies have been arguing over a pre-emptive rights schedule which determines the process of selling the shares, the order in which they are made available to buyers, and a fair value for them if the the seller and purchaser disagree on price.

Under the Coopers constitution, shares must first be offered to another Coopers shareholder or relative, then to AMP or any other Coopers employee superannuation fund, and then to Lion Nathan.

Lion Nathan said the Coopers board thought it could determine who the shares were sold to. It also said the board thought it did not have to sell to a shareholder willing to pay the best price.

"Coopers has advised the [Takeovers] Panel that it considers that the board of Coopers has a discretion as to whom it seeks to have the shares sold to under the pre-emptive rights regime and that discretion does not require it to have the shares sold to a purchasing member who is willing to pay $260," Lion Nathan said in a letter to Coopers shareholders yesterday.

Lion Nathan chief Rob Murray said in a separate statement that this seemed "extraordinary" and "surely not in the best interests of all shareholders". "Given that many members of the Coopers board themselves hold shareholdings, it certainly seems an unusual governance arrangement."

Coopers was not immediately available for comment.

Earlier this month the South Australian Supreme Court allowed Coopers to ask its shareholders to remove Lion Nathan's pre-emptive rights.

Shareholders are yet to vote on the move but Lion Nathan is appealing against the court ruling.

Lion Nathan gained the rights in 1995 in exchange for a 19.9 per cent stake in Coopers that Lion Nathan held after buying South Australian Brewing Co.

AAP