Thunder Rd Goes After The Big Boys

Australia & New Zealand Homebrewing Forum

Help Support Australia & New Zealand Homebrewing Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I wish them luck, the practice of running 1,000 cans through every 3 years to retain the trademark should not be considered a valid effort at production. However, sabMiller have very deep pockets and lawyers love deep pockets like sea gulls love a chip.
 
I wish them luck, the practice of running 1,000 cans through every 3 years to retain the trademark should not be considered a valid effort at production. However, sabMiller have very deep pockets and lawyers love deep pockets like sea gulls love a chip.
yeah but al u need is one patent lawyer with 100hrs of cmmunity service for being caught with a bad coke habit and they will take the case on probono. or if they smell free publicity in it for them if there is a snifter of taking a big company such as SAB down.
 
Boy did I get hammered for a week on Cairns Draught in 1982 B)
 
Looks like a publicity stunt to me.

It's working.

Joe Drinker couldn't care less about these old brands. He buys what makes him look cool to the chicks, and not-gay to his mates. Old brands from 1920 will do neither of these things.
 
Looks like a publicity stunt to me.

It's working.

Joe Drinker couldn't care less about these old brands. He buys what makes him look cool to the chicks, and not-gay to his mates. Old brands from 1920 will do neither of these things.
......or if they smell free publicity in it for them if there is a snifter of taking a big company such as SAB down.
well could be that i got lawyers doing the publicity instead of thunder road. either way it cant be bad for craftbeer
 
Yeah, like a Corona with a twist of lemon in the neck. Not-gay at all. <_<

250312gencorona01_17mv3h4-17mv3h5.jpg
 
Hate to sound like a naysayer but i tend to agree with the spokesperson from CUB. Taking someone else's intellectual property (even if its just a TM name) and reviving a product under the false pretence that it is the beer that was produced several decades ago now by another brewery for profit is pretty sneaky.

The only benefit I can see coming out of this is CUB wake up to the direction beer is heading in this country treat these historical brands with some dignity and try and push historical examples out as seasonal releases every now and then. Rather than relabelling a slightly adjusted (or not at all) recipe of VB as Ballarat Bitter etc.

Unless the new TM holders have access to the recipes and have the ability to reproduce a historically accurate example of that beer, "let sleeping dogs lie" IMO.

The idea of taking CUB's TM to protect it as an Australian 'identity' is utter rubbish. Especially when its being taken up by another profitable organisation. If it was secured by a not for profit or a craft brewers association ran by a collection of industry people for the industry it would sit better with me.

Rather than injecting money into taking CUB's brands, why are they not focusing further on getting their 6 million dollar investment off the ground? With an investment that grand, I'd be wanting to make a little more headway than what they currently have since launch.
 
I agree with 4star. It is painful to see the old brands not being used but that doesn't make them Thunder Road's for the taking. Thunder Road need to focus on building their brand as opposed to aquiring historical brands that have nothing to do with them aside from coming from the same company.

On a side note I hope the thunder road bitter I tried 6ish months ago was a bad batch, way too much acetylaldehyde. It was the day after their launch party at a sydney pub so maybe not.
 
Hate to sound like a naysayer but i tend to agree with the spokesperson from CUB. Taking someone else's intellectual property (even if its just a TM name) and reviving a product under the false pretence that it is the beer that was produced several decades ago now by another brewery for profit is pretty sneaky.

The only benefit I can see coming out of this is CUB wake up to the direction beer is heading in this country treat these historical brands with some dignity and try and push historical examples out as seasonal releases every now and then. Rather than relabelling a slightly adjusted (or not at all) recipe of VB as Ballarat Bitter etc.

Unless the new TM holders have access to the recipes and have the ability to reproduce a historically accurate example of that beer, "let sleeping dogs lie" IMO.

The idea of taking CUB's TM to protect it as an Australian 'identity' is utter rubbish. Especially when its being taken up by another profitable organisation. If it was secured by a not for profit or a craft brewers association ran by a collection of industry people for the industry it would sit better with me.

Rather than injecting money into taking CUB's brands, why are they not focusing further on getting their 6 million dollar investment off the ground? With an investment that grand, I'd be wanting to make a little more headway than what they currently have since launch.
...what he said.
 
So if Thunder rd wins who gets the right to the TM? If they are arguing that it is better for the Australian beer scene; then any Australian brewery should have the right to use them. I think thunder is better off trying to create their own history in beer. Rather then pick some other breweries up.
 
she might secretly like the big black ones..


IPA's that is..
 
I object to you stereotyping Indigenous Australians.











:ph34r:
 
Back
Top