The beer market dynamics in Russia is approaching zero, yet major brewers are divided into those who developed considerably in 2017 and those who considerably reduced their volumes. For instance, company Efes has managed to substantially extend their sales due to restrained pricing policy and activity in the modern trade. Heineken has also demonstrated an excellent performance promoted by significant increase of advertisement budgets launching a non-alcohol sort of the title brand and unusual activity in the economy market segment. Carlsberg and AB InBev have been focusing on margins and lost a market share of their inexpensive brands. Serious dependence on PET package and mass enthusiasm about Zhigulevskoe have negatively impacted the most of big regional brewers, that have been for the first time pressed by the leaders in the key sales channels, especially in Volga and Central regions. In the small business there has been a noticeable slowdown in appearing of new restaurant breweries, yet the number of craft breweries has been growing rapidly. In 2018, the beer market is likely to grow a little, while the share of AB InBev Efes may decrease due to the integration. ...
“Catalogue of Russian Beer Producers 2018” includes 1070 businesses ranging from large subsidiaries of international companies to rather small restaurant and craft microbreweries.The catalogue includes 32 large breweries, 75 regional breweries, 693 industrial mini- and microbreweries as well as 270 restaurant breweries. ...
Global hop marketA local alternative to mass beer suggested by independent brewers has been successful and is now altering the global market. Beer is becoming more diversified, so transnational companies have to accept the new game rules and to switch focus to young and fast growing markets. All these processes increased the demand for aroma and bitter hop as well as their acreage expansion on two continents. However now there appeared a downward trend of alcohol consumption in the world, so even special sorts can soon turn to be sufficient. In this connection the dynamic American hop market is already facing some problems. EU hop producers have become more cautious, they are not racing to exceed the demand and look forward with more confidence, judging by the contract terms.
Hop Market in RussiaGermany still dominates the Russian market, yet over the recent two years one has been able observe a continuous success of Czech hop suppliers. Their expansion and growing popularity of hops from the United States became the drivers of supplies growth in 2016 despite the preceding modest harvest crop in the EU, as well as the factor of relative stability in 2017. In this connection, in 2017, the ratio of the varieties continued to shift towards the aroma ones, and the supplies of Magnum hop and other alpha varieties were reduced. However, the import of bitter hop pellets is partially replaced by extracts, especially from the major beer manufacturers. Total volumes of alpha acid supplies, according to our estimation, decreased by approximately 5% and returned to the level of 2015. Barth Haas Group continues dominating the hop products market; HVG also increased its weight. At the same time, Morris Hanbury significantly reduced the supplies in 2017.
Tanzania Breweries could pay $22m in beer war
TBL, which commands a 70 per cent share of the market and is a subsidiary of the world’s second biggest brewer SABMiller, is accused of anti-competitive branding agreements with outlet owners and removing SBL’s posters and signage in the market. The two brewers have taken their competition wars to the Fair Competition Tribunal of Tanzania (FCT). (See: EABL set to sell off its 10pc stake in Tanzania brewer)
In September 2009, SBL lodged a complaint at the Fair Competition Commission (FCC) against TBL for allegedly restricting competition in the beer industry.
Following the hearing, the Commission penalised TBL and ordered it to pay a fine of five per cent, refrain from removing SBL poster materials at the outlets and directed that all branding agreements between TBL and outlet owners be declared null and void.
FCT has already started proceedings against the company for anti-competitive behaviour, and the penalty could be worth up to five per cent of TBL’s turnover for the year of its latest audited accounts.
Going by the results for the year ending March 2011, when TBL’s turnover stood at $455 million, the firm could pay up to $22.7 million in damages.
TBL has subsequently filed an appeal at the FCT on two grounds; that it has not been given a reasonable opportunity to be heard and that FCC failed to conduct its investigation fairly.
Battles between manufacturers and distributors of consumer goods has been on the rise in East Africa’s second biggest economy, reflecting the fierce competition for customers.
On December 13, 2010, upon an application made by TBL, the tribunal granted the appellant leave to add FCC as a respondent in Appeal No. 4 of 2010 and accordingly an amended memorandum of appeal was duly lodged in the tribunal on December 17, 2010.
Upon hearing the matter, chairperson of the tribunal Justice Razzia Sheikh, noted that FCC had objected to Appeal No. 4 on the grounds that the amended memorandum of appeal was bad in law for non-compliance with the provisions of the Fair Competition Act No. 8 of 2003, the fair Competition Commission Procedure Rules, 2010 and the FCT Rules, 2006.
29 Aug. 2011