That 18.6 fl oz bottle translates to exactly 550 mL, so that may be a standard size (or a purposely downsized Imperial pint). Anyway, great observation. Due to foreign ownership, this would be a good time to push for metric measure in the malt beverage industry. I think BATF has changed their name, and is TTB, whatever that stands for. In the last year or two, they were proposing new requirements for nutrition labelling on wines, spirits, beer and had a notice of proposed rule making out for public comment. I suggested metric net contents for beer as well as several recommendations on the nutrition info. I don't know where the final rule stands. They have been quiet for a while. There is some background here: http://forum.gometric.us/jforum/posts/list/94.page
--- On Mon, 5/11/09, Al Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote: From: Al Lawrence <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:45059] A proposal for another step towards metrication To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Date: Monday, May 11, 2009, 7:21 PM #yiv1630447577 .hmmessage P { margin:0px;padding:0px;} #yiv1630447577 { font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;} In 1979 and 1980 wine and distilled spirits converted to metric, and, in fact, currently only use metric unit labeling, they do not use supplemental units. This was not done as a result of pro metric groups or by fiat, it was done because the industry requested it. Beer and malt beverages did not go metric because the industry “showed no interest in doing so” according to the BATF. Wine and distilled spirits were widely exported at that time, beer was not. This is a good example showing that if industry does not actively support a metrification proposal it is unlikely anything will happen. However, things have changed. Anheuser-Busch is now owned by InBev (headquartered in Belgium), Miller brands is owned by a SABMiller, a South African company and Coors has merged with Molson (Canadian) and SABMiller also has an interest in the new company. Eight of the top ten selling brands of beer in the US are made by those companies. The other two brands in the top ten are Heineken (Dutch) and Corona (Mexican). Malt Beverages in the US are currently labeled in US units only. They are regulated by the BATF, and unlike most other products, no metric units are required on the labels and are seldom used. On a recent trip to a nearby supermarket I saw Foster’s cans (Australian) labeled 25.4 fl oz, bottles of Stella Artois (Belgium) labeled 11.2 fl oz and Newcastle bottles (British) labeled 18.6 fl oz. The Foster’s was obviously a 750 ml can relabeled for the US. .330 liters is a common glass size in parts of Germany and Belgium, so the Stella bottles were probably a standard European size relabeled for the US, and the Newcastle bottle was presumably a relabeled Imperial pint, although someone was a little off on the math with that one. I have also seen a lot of half liter bottles relabeled as 16.9 fl oz sold at stores that carry a lot of imported beer. If InBev and SABMiller are interested in converting beer sold in the US to metric units they would have the power to do it. Since, unlike 30 years ago, a lot of beer is now both imported and exported, the conversion would save relabeling costs in both directions. Package sizes do not have to be changed. The vast majority of beer in the US would still be sold in 12 oz cans and bottles, they would just be marked 355 ml instead. No costs would have to be incurred by changing package sizes, there would only be cost savings due to fewer label changes and by simplifying inventory control. All that is required is ruling by BAFT that malt beverages be labeled in metric, like wine and distilled spirits. If InBev, SABMiller and a few other companies are interested in this it could be done virtually overnight. What is the position of InBev and SABMiller on this? What can USMA act as a catalyst or intermediary to help accomplish this? Alan Lawrence Hotmail® has ever-growing storage! Don’t worry about storage limits. Check it out.
