![]() This left us with some burning questions. If you’re wondering, there do apparently exist at least a few breweries out there with 50/100 scores, although that may be tied to having very few ratings. It’s a pretty sensible system, even if by definition it means that the lowest rating a brewery can achieve would be 50-the score it would get if its beers were in the 0th percentile. Which is to say, if a brewery’s full lineup of beers put it in the 90th percentile, then its final Brewer Rating will be 95/100. That one is straight-up statistically impossible.īack in Sept., MolsonCoors was batting a miserable 68/100.Īccording to RateBeer founder/executive director Joe Tucker in a forum post when the feature was introduced, Brewer Rating is meant to be calculated as (percentile/2 + 50), where “percentile” refers to the percentile of scores into which the brewery’s full range of beers fall. In their case, a mere 1.4% increase in the total number of beer ratings somehow produced an insane 138.9% increase in total Brewer Rating. One of the best examples is MolsonCoors, the Canadian brewing giant, which went from a Brewer Rating of 68/100 in Oct. But as we dove into the numbers of more breweries, we began to see other things that also didn’t seem to make sense, unrelated to AB-InBev. So yeah, it’s profoundly easy to see why this reader was suspicious, and why we quickly became suspicious as well. Taking into consideration that this is actually a 50-100 scale, it’s as if the score changed from 24/50 to 40/50, which is a 66.7% increase since October-which is of course also when AB-InBev happened to invest in RateBeer. It at first appears to be a significant 21.6% increase in the overall Brewer Rating, but because the actual range of the scale is 50-100 rather than 1-100 (for reasons we’ll explain shortly), 50 being the lowest possible score a brewery can have, the relative percentage of increase in Brewer Rating is even higher. In the interim, only a superficially small number of new ratings have been added to the brewery-1.3% more reviews, to be precise-which is not nearly enough to reasonably expect them to influence the score from 74 to 90. Not exactly rosy.ĪB-InBev, back when their rating was a “C” letter grade. ![]() ![]() of 2016, the Brewer Rating of Anheuser Busch-InBev stood at 74/100. When the system was introduced, and at least into Oct. ![]() The number is meant to be an at-a-glance indicator of how well that brewery’s full lineup of beers has rated the purest and most simple condensation of which breweries are “good” and “bad” for an average user who isn’t going to deep-dive among the entire lineup of brews. ![]() of 2016, RateBeer introduced a feature called “Brewer Rating,” which appears on every brewery’s profile page. What he found was deeply concerning, and seemed to give credence to the fears of craft brewers such as Dogfish Head’s Sam Calagione, who along with others publicly requested their breweries be removed from the RateBeer service due to the investor’s obvious conflict of interest. 2016 without disclosing that investment to media or breweries, he wondered how statistics on RateBeer may have been affected since the autumn, so he set about to doing some research via the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine. In the wake of the revelation that RateBeer had received investment/a partial buyout from AB-InBev back in Oct. It’s safe to call this person, a criminology professor with a background in quantitative methodology, something of a statistics geek. Last week, I was contacted by a Paste reader with something very interesting and unusual to share about RateBeer. Update: Since this story was first published, the “Brewer Ratings” feature on RateBeer has been eliminated entirely. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |