Tied house sales

I was looking for some statistics on UK beer exports. So I had a dive in "The British Brewing Industry 1830 - 1980". Didn’t find exactly what I was after. But I did find this: a breakdown of sales for various breweries between their tied houses and the free trade.

It's a topic I’d wanted to get some hard facts on. I was aware that the percentage of sales in their own tied estate varied a lot between breweries. With some not really selling into the free trade at all. Holts used to be like that in the 1980’s. They wouldn’t even sell to beer festivals. While others, especially Scottish brewers, had almost no tied trade.

The numbers below confirm this diversity. Though there are a couple of caveats. Scottish brewers may have owned very few pubs, but they made extensive use of loans ties. They controlled far more outlets than they owned.

And the club trade is counted as free. Even though most clubs were really tied. All the Liberal clubs in Leeds, for example, seemed to be tied to S & N. Bass Charrington also had a large chunk of the club trade tied up, as well as the many pubs they owned.

Also counted as free are a lot of off sales. Though not all, as breweries often owned off-licences as well as pubs. Off-sales also made up a much smaller percentage of sales back then.

One thing that stands out is the huge difference in the trade of three London brewers: Barclay Perkins, Meux and Whitbread. The first two had the typical tied estate model, with the vast majority of their beer sold in their own pubs. While Whitbread sold almost half their beer in the free trade. I think I understand why: they had long bottled a large percentage of their beer and had managed to get their bottled products into rivals’ pubs. Later clever use of the Whitbread “umbrella” got their bottles into even more other breweries’ tied houses.

I was surprised at just how big Ind Coope and Allsopp already were in the 1940’s, with an estate about half the size of one of the smaller members of the Big Six in the 1970’s.

Brewers' tied estates and free-trade distribution, 1948/9
Brewing company	Barrelage distributed to on/off licensed premises		Tied estate	Tenanted	Managed
	Tied estate %	free trade/clubs canteens %	(numbers)	%	%
All (Brewers' Society Survey)*	69	31	54,940	83	17
Average of 22 Companies**	73	27	12,914	82	18
Barclay Perkins	88	12	1,005	96	4
Boddingtons'	99.9	0.1	209	75	25
Brakspear	93	7	141	97	3
Bristol Brewery Georges	94	6	756	98	2
Matthew Brown	87	13	550	93	7
Cameron	93	7	362	93	7
Eldridge Pope	81	19	192	92	8
J. W. Green	89	11	358	100	0
Greene King	88	12	502	82	18
Hall & Woodhouse	95	5	140	100	0
Ind Coope & Allsopp	68	32	2,697	79	21
McEwan	19	81	57	7	93
Meux	90	10	341	75	25
Mitchells & Butlers	77	23	873	14	86
Newcastle	85	15	324	59	41
Russells & Wrangham	37	63	93	90	10
H. & G. Simonds	63	37	1,222	94	6
John Smith's	74	26	842	75	25
Steward & Patteson	95	5	614	99.8	0.2
Strong	91	9	468	92	8
Tetley	64	36	378	86	14
Whitbread	51	49	808	96	4
Source:
"The British Brewing Industry 1830 - 1980" by T.R. Gourvish and R.G. Wilson, 1994, page 436.
* Barrelage data include Scotland, tied house data England and Wales only.
** Companies = earlier selection of 35, excluding Bass, Guinness and Tamplin (who made no returns) and Arrol, Colchester and Style & Winch (the subject of takeovers, but adding Simonds, Strong and Eldridge Pope.
Source: Brewers' Society, Brewing Returns, 1949, BS.

Brewing materials 1945 – 1960

I can’t believe I haven’t already published this stuff as part of my series on brewing in the UK after W II.

After all, what could be more fascinating than a load of numbers about malt and adjunct usage? Well, I find it fascinating. You can bugger off if you disagree.

I’ll start with the numbers. You’ll have to admit, they are an impressive-looking bunch.

Brewing materials 1945 - 1960 (cwt)
year	malt	unmalted corn	rice, maize, etc	sugar	total malt & adjuncts	hops	prepar-ations of hops	hop substi-tutes	bulk barrels
1945	10,435,212	245,751	1,332,032	1,784,064	13,797,059	244,822	714	139	31,990,334
1946	9,976,998	137,750	1,132,748	1,790,021	13,037,517	226,197	1,414	168	31,066,950
1947	9,454,253	92,974	614,335	1,601,186	11,762,748	217,759	1,423	191	30,103,180
1948	9,499,794	69,939	606,881	1,443,558	11,620,172	231,470	630	547	28,813,725
1949	9,087,351	60,709	505,071	1,303,212	10,956,343	233,158	164	74	26,744,457
1950	9,094,097	56,174	454,500	1,285,877	10,890,648	232,979	114	90	25,339,062
1951	9,282,152	57,681	452,581	1,355,152	11,147,566	229,106	178	82	24,870,564
1952	9,312,437	51,992	467,189	1,385,836	11,217,454	228,512	114	177	25,285,589
1953	9,085,688	58,012	426,396	1,405,154	10,975,250	225,569	335	222	24,789,130
1954	8,629,252	52,219	462,005	1,484,605	10,628,081	216,841	286	188	24,153,387
1955	8,635,522	46,556	478,150	1,529,256	10,689,484	217,716	92	27	24,324,623
1956	8,630,145	40,038	486,838	1,544,258	10,701,279	218,820	110	42	24,187,096
1957	8,872,468	13,834	532,214	1,564,673	10,983,189	215,114	91	28	24,839,755
1958	8,642,500	10,717	543,467	1,527,997	10,724,681	208,870	102	24	24,129,462
1959	8,885,364	8,007	590,006	1,569,002	11,052,379	216,037	107	29	25,023,044
1960	9,406,860	8,994	573,252	1,650,843	11,639,949	226,371	111	24	26,313,796
Sources:
Brewers' Almanack 1955, page 62.
1971 Brewers' Almanack, page 54.

You can see that while the use of unmalted adjuncts declined steeply after the war, the amount of sugar used was more stable. There’s a simple enough explanation. Brewers were forced by the government to use flaked barley during the latter war years. The idea being that flaking consumed less energy than malting. While brewers had a limit on the amount of sugar they could use in wartime, when they would have preferred to use more.

The quantity of hops used was very stable in the 1950’s, despite beer production falling.

It’s hard to make too much sense of those numbers. Far easier if you look at percentages rather than absolute numbers. Which is why I’ve derived this table:

Brewing materials 1945 - 1960 (%)
year	malt	unmalted corn	rice, maize, etc	sugar	lbs hops per barrel	lbs hops per quarter
1945	75.63%	1.78%	9.65%	12.93%	0.86	5.96
1946	76.53%	1.06%	8.69%	13.73%	0.82	5.83
1947	80.37%	0.79%	5.22%	13.61%	0.81	6.22
1948	81.75%	0.60%	5.22%	12.42%	0.90	6.69
1949	82.94%	0.55%	4.61%	11.89%	0.98	7.15
1950	83.50%	0.52%	4.17%	11.81%	1.03	7.19
1951	83.27%	0.52%	4.06%	12.16%	1.03	6.91
1952	83.02%	0.46%	4.16%	12.35%	1.01	6.84
1953	82.78%	0.53%	3.89%	12.80%	1.02	6.91
1954	81.19%	0.49%	4.35%	13.97%	1.01	6.86
1955	80.79%	0.44%	4.47%	14.31%	1.00	6.84
1956	80.65%	0.37%	4.55%	14.43%	1.01	6.87
1957	80.78%	0.13%	4.85%	14.25%	0.97	6.58
1958	80.59%	0.10%	5.07%	14.25%	0.97	6.54
1959	80.39%	0.07%	5.34%	14.20%	0.97	6.57
1960	80.82%	0.08%	4.92%	14.18%	0.96	6.53
Sources:
Brewers' Almanack 1955, page 62.
1971 Brewers' Almanack, page 54.

You can see the trends much more clearly in that form. Malt usage increased from 75% to a peak of 83.5% in 1950, then slowly fell back down to 80%. While unmalted corn all but disappears. Maize and rice usage dropped quickly after the end of the war then plateaued at around 5%.

The fall in the proportion of sugar used in 1949 and 1950 probably wasn’t voluntary, but as a result of government restrictions. Pre-war, it clocked in around 15% and you can see that when brewers were free to use as much as they liked in the later 1950’s, it returned to around that level.

The rise in hopping levels after 1947 is partly because of an increase in average gravity, though not totally, as the hopping rate per quarter of malt tells us. There was an increase of more than 1 lb per quarter between 1945 and 1950, after which it declined but still remained above the 1945 level.

The 1960 numbers – 80% malt, 5% adjuncts, 15% sugar, 1 lb hops per barrel – do look like a typical late 1950’s beer’s ingredients.

Beer in 1958 (part four)

It’s time to look at the financial aspect of the brewing industry. And by that I mostly mean tax.

For centuries, the tax on beer has formed a considerable part of its price. And, conversely, the tax on beer has been a vital source of revenue for the government. This was even more the case during the first half of the twentieth century, with two expensive World Wars that needed to be paid for.

“More efficient methods - the brewing industry invests from £8m. to £10m. a year in new plant, buildings, and vehicles, roughly a tenth of its net output — have kept the rise in the cost of making beer to below the rise in the prices of its main constituents and below the rise of prices in general. But prices of beer do not fully reflect this because of the great increase in excise duty, which averaged just over 2d. a pint before the war and now averages about 8d. In the cheapest mild (1s. 2d. a pint now. compared with 4d. until almost the eve of war in 1939) the duty represents almost half the price. According to the Census of Production, in 1951 it represented nearly two-thirds of the value of beer when dispatched from the brewery. The duty is based on the gravity of the malt extract before it is fermented.”
"Beer in Britain", 1960, pages 5 - 6.

Consolidation was responsible for some of the fall in the cost of production. We’ve already seen how average output per brewery rose by around 50% during the 1950’s.

Want to see if they’ve got their numbers right on the tax per pint? I have the odd number or two:

Beer tax 1939 - 1960
Year	Bulk Barrels	Std. Barrels	Tax/Std. Brl	Total Tax £	Tax/Bulk Brl.	Av. sg	tax pint
1939	24,674,992	18,364,156	80s	62,370,034	50s 7d	1040.9	2.11d
1940	25,366,782	18,738,619	80s / 104s	75,157,022	59s 3d	1040.6	2.47d
1940			104s /135s / 165s
1941	26,203,803	18,351,113	135s / 165s	133,450,205	101s 10d	1038.5	4.24d
1942	29,860,798	19,294,605	165s /240s 7.5d	157,254,430	105s 4d	1035.5	4.39d
1943	29,296,672	18,293,919	240s 7.5d / 281s 10.5d	209,584,343	143s 1d	1034.3	5.96d
1944	30,478,289	19,193,773	281s 10.5d / 286s 5.5d	263,170,703	172s 8d	1034.6	7.20d
1945	31,332,852	19,678,449	286s 5.5d	278,876,870	178s	1034.5	7.42d
1946	32,650,200	20,612,225	286s 5.5d	295,305,369	180s 11d	1034.7	7.54d
1947	29,261,398	17,343,690	286s 5.5d	250,350,829	171s 1d	1032.6	7.13d
1948	30,408,634	18,061,390	325s 5d	264,112,043	173s 9d	1032.7	7.24d
1949	26,990,144	16,409,937	364s 4.5d / 343s 4.5d	294,678,035	218s 4d	1033.4	9.10d
1950	26,513,997	16,337,315	343s 4.5d	263,088,673	198s 5d	1033.9	8.27d
1951	24,891,746	16,739,464	321s	249,146,244	200s 2d	1037	8.34d
1952	25,156,489	16,958,628	321s	248,165,812	197s 4d	1037.1	8.22d
1953	24,883,227	16,681,119	321s	243,372,425	195s 7d	1036.9	8.15d
1954	24,582,303	16,525,316	321s	242,031,712	196s 11d	1037	8.20d
1955	23,934,215	16,161,698	321s	237,452,121	198s 5d	1037.1	8.27d
1956	24,551,158	16,618,162	321s	243,682,807	198s 6d	1037.2	8.27d
1957	24,506,524	16,674,001	321s	245,374,441	200s 3d	1037.4	8.34d
1958	24,647,978	16,799,108	321s	246,077,234	199s 8d	1037.5	8.32d
1959	23,783,833	16,226,433	321s	238,722,997	200s 9d	1037.5	8.36d
1960	26,115,012	17,688,007	277s 5d	206,221,271	157s 11d	1037.3	6.58d
Sources:
1955 Brewers' Almanack
1971 Brewers' Almanack
Brewers' Society Statistical Handbook 1988, p.7
Brewers' Society Statistical Handbook 1973, p.11

You can see that the tax did, indeed, come to about 8d per pint. Though this is for a beer of average strength, around 1037º. Ordinary Mild was around 1030-1032º and the tax on it would have been a little less.

Average tax per pint was 2d in 1939. But the cheapest 4d Milds had an OG well below the average of 1041º, usually around 1027º. The tax on a beer of that strength was 1.67d, still a considerable percentage of the retail price.

The rate of tax was remarkably stable: 321s from 1951 to 1959. And then something really unusual happened. Tax fell by almost 2d per pint.

“The scale of tax—which contributed £260m. to the Exchequer last year—is such that the tax rises steeply as beer is made stronger. Some brewers complain that this discourages the sale of the belter beers. But it is likely that the better beers nevertheless usually get a larger percentage of profit, and people do not seem as sensitive about their prices as they are about the price of the successor to the 4d. mild. If the tax is in its form and perhaps in its weight anomalous, it does not dismay the brewers or daunt the enterprise and initiative of this vigorous industry with its 3,000 brands of mild and bitter, pale ale and brown ale, lager, stout and stingo.”
"Beer in Britain", 1960, page 6.

A word of explanation. Tax was levied per standard barrel. A standard barrel being 36 gallons of beer with an OG of 1055º.  Stronger or weaker beers were taxed in proportion to that, so one of 1100º would be double the standard barrel rate, while one of 1027.5º would pay half. It makes strong beers expensive to brew, as the article says. Though before WW I, when the same tax system was in place, there were lots of strong beer about.

More about beer and money next.

Let's Brew - 1912 Thomas Usher 48/- Stout

It’s fascinating to see how Scottish Stout gradually diverged from English versions. In particular, from London Stouts which were, after all, the originals.

By the eve of WW I, English and Scottish had split wide apart. As the 20th century progressed, that gap became even wider.

Thomas Usher vs London Porter and Stout 1909 - 1912
Year	Brewer	Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl
1912	Whitbread	P	Porter	1054.3	1013.0	5.47	76.08%	4.92	1.16
1912	Whitbread	LS	Stout	1055.3	1013.0	5.60	76.50%	4.92	1.18
1912	Whitbread	Exp S	Stout	1068.4	1020.0	6.41	70.77%	13.05	4.24
1912	Whitbread	SS	Stout	1079.9	1030.0	6.60	62.43%	8.48	3.12
1912	Whitbread	SSS	Stout	1095.8	1039.0	7.51	59.28%	8.48	3.74
1910	Barclay Perkins	OMS	Stout	1053.2	1016.5	4.86	68.98%	7.50	1.82
1910	Barclay Perkins	BS Ex	Stout	1076.0	1022.5	7.08	70.39%	12.00	4.12
1910	Barclay Perkins	EIP Ex	Porter	1063.5	1020.0	5.75	68.50%	12.00	3.40
1911	Barclay Perkins	RDP	Porter	1068.2	1023.5	5.91	65.54%	8.00	2.52
1909	Truman	Imperial Stout	Stout	1094.2				5.6	2.72
1909	Truman	SS?	Stout	1072.0				5.6	2.08
1909	Truman	Runner L & C	Porter	1054.3				6.1	1.38
1909	Truman	Country Runner	Porter	1058.2				7.5	2.01
1909	Truman	Bottling	Porter	1052.6				7.5	1.82
1909	Truman	Export Stout	Stout	1069.3				9.9	3.35
1909	Truman	Runner	Porter	1058.2				8.2	2.31
1909	Truman	Keeping Stout	Stout	1069.3				9.5	3.29
1912	Thomas Usher	48/-	Stout	1046	1023	3.04	50.00%	6.50	1.36
1912	Thomas Usher	54/-	Stout	1054	1026	3.70	51.85%	6.50	1.60
1912	Thomas Usher	Stt	Stout	1070	1029	5.42	58.57%	6.50	2.07
Sources:
Barclay Perkins brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number ACC/2305/1/602
Whitbread brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number LMA/4453/D/09/106
Truman  brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number B/THB/C/112
Thomas Usher brewing record held at the Scottish Brewing Archive, document number TU/6/1/5.

What were those differences? Scottish Stouts generally had lower gravities and a poorer degree of attenuation. Not even London Porter had a gravity under 1050º. 1046º is very low for a pre-WW I Stout. Usher’s strongest Stout, Stt, is only about the same strength as the weakest London Stouts.

Note that the degree of attenuation increases with the OG. Leaving the FGs of the three Stouts very similar. This is a trick I’ve seen before in Scottish beers. Maclay did something similar with their three Pale Ales. I guess the point is to have a similar level of body and sweetness in all three.

Interestingly, one area where there is no real difference is the level of hopping. Contrary to what some would tell you about Scottish beers. Usher’s Stouts have similar levels of hopping as London beers of a similar gravity. The only exceptions being the London Export Stouts which naturally would have been more heavily hopped.

The biggest change in the grist compared to their 19th-century Stouts is the absence of black malt, which has been replaced by chocolate malt. Before WW I, London brewers stuck with black malt, but Whitbread also swapped over to chocolate malt in 1922.

The original recipe contains six types of sugar: 4 cwt. CDA, 1 cwt. Maltosan, 2 cwt. oatine, 3 cwt. DL, 10 cwt Penang. I assume oatine contained oats in some form, so feel free to throw in some flaked oats if you fancy. CDA is some sort of proprietary dark sugar. No idea what Maltosan and DL are, but Penang will be some type of cane sugar. I’ve simplified it to just No. 3 invert.

The very long boil is probably because 48/- was parti-gyled with the stronger Stout. Or maybe they wanted to darken the wort. I won’t get angry if you stick to a more conventional, shorter boil.

1912 Thomas Usher 48/- Stout
pale malt	6.75 lb	69.23%
brown malt	0.50 lb	5.13%
choc. Malt	0.50 lb	5.13%
crystal malt 60L	0.50 lb	5.13%
No. 3 invert	1.50 lb	15.38%
Fuggles 90 min	1.00 oz
Fuggles 60 min	1.00 oz
Fuggles 30 min	1.00 oz
OG	1046
FG	1023
ABV	3.04
Apparent attenuation	50.00%
IBU	37
SRM	24
Mash at	148º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	240 minutes
pitching temp	60º F
Yeast	WLP028 Edinburgh Ale