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.
10+1 trends of Russian beer market 2015-2017Despite of the moderately negative prognoses for 2017, the beer market can be stabilized soon. Yet the years of the negative dynamics have resulted in marketing being limited just to “optimization” and the art of balancing between price and volumes. Bigger supermarkets share means stronger trade marketing. These processes are connected to the majority of the described trends. At the same time, the federal brands inflation leads to searching for new tastes, sales channels and contact formats that expand the product range and diversify the beer market, but do not imply a substantial volume increase. Let us enumerate and further discuss the ten trends of the beer market we can see in 2015-2017 as well as the major event of 2017.
Beer market of Ukraine 2017In the first half of 2017, the Ukrainian beer market goes on decreasing slowly. Yet, the companies manage to compensate their lost volumes by raising prices and improving the sales structures. This results in the mid price market segment reduction while the sales of premium brands are rising. These processes are connected to position strengthening of companies Carlsberg Group and Oasis and the market share reduction of Obolon. Most of the novelties by the market leaders belong to craft or hard lemon categories.
Beer market of Russia 2016: PET goes to draftThe beer market of Russia was warmed up by the hot summer, but the preparation for large volume PET prohibition has already impacted it negatively. The year was successful for Efes, MBC and regional producers; Carlsberg’s positions were virtually stable but AB InBev and Heineken lost a part of market share having focused on the sales profitability. The dynamics of big brands was determined by how much the companies were willing to keep the prices down or by their promotional activity. In this context the economy segment of the beer market and sales of inexpensive draft beer were increasing. The premium segment started shrinking due to license brands migrating to the mainstream segment.
SABMiller plc : 45p minimum unit price for alcohol to cost consumers ?659m each year
The report focuses on the impact on consumption, alcohol expenditure and disposable incomes across a number of demographic groups. The research shows that a 45p Minimum Unit Price for alcohol will:
cost all consumers ?659 million more each year. 2
mean the poorest 20% of people pay an additional ?318m each year while the richest 20% will only pay ?7m - the richest 10% will pay nothing in addition from this policy. 3
hit under-30s households hardest. 4
mean that non-retired couples with children (working parents) will face an increase in alcohol expenditure of ?162m. 5
disproportionately impact different regions so that people in Yorkshire and Humber will see an increase in alcohol expenditure of ?109m compared to London at ?42m. 6
Commenting, SABMiller's Senior Vice President of Industry Affairs, Mike Short said:
"Minimum pricing is a poor piece of policy that will do little to address the damage caused by alcohol misuse and much to exacerbate the financial challenge facing moderate drinkers on lower incomes.
"We absolutely believe that action needs to be taken to address alcohol related harm but that would be best achieved through targeted policies which would genuinely help harmful and hazardous drinkers."
Senior Economist at Cebr and author of the report, Scott Corfe, said:
"Our analysis shows that minimum unit pricing is not a targeted measure and would hit responsible drinkers in certain parts of society much harder than others.
"Those on the lowest incomes will be particularly hard-hit financially, bearing the brunt of the measure. This is despite the fact that health surveys show that those on higher incomes are more likely to drink to hazardous levels.
"Yorkshire & the Humber will be the region most financially hit by the measure, reflecting the fact that incomes in the region are relatively low and households are more likely to purchase cheaper alcohol products. The North West and Wales will also be affected significantly."
Notes to editors:
The report was produced by Cebr, an independent economics and business research consultancy and commissioned by SABMiller. The main authors of the report are Oliver Hogan, Cebr Head of Microeconomics and Scott Corfe, Cebr Senior Economist.
Analysis by the Centre for Business and Economics Research, Minimum Unit Pricing: Impacts on consumer spending and distributional consequences, pg. 16
18 Dec. 2012