The month of January brought a significant milestone for me. Mill Road Craft Brewing is now a licensed LLC in the state of Virginia. Virginia actually makes this step pretty easy and its all on-line at the State Corporation website. For $100 you can apply for licensing and get your Articles of Organization and LLC Certificate at the end of the process. As of January 10, 2012, Mill Road Craft Brewing LLC is official.
Since I was on a roll, I went to the Department of Treasury website (located here) to file for by EIN online; a few clicks and minutes later I had an EIN and now can pay taxes (YIPEEE) and open a small business bank account.
So now Mill Road Craft Brewing (MRCB) has a domain name, facebook presence, drink coasters (from Canada Coaster), Articles of Organization, EIN, and Bank Account. In the next couple months I will be ordering new brewing equipment for my pilot system, updating my fermentation chamber and start brewing and giving away some beer to build up the buzz.
In the meantime I continue to Home Brew, share with my friends, and submit my favorites to competitions all across the US. I've had a few judging successes and am learning from the feedback. I'd also like to thank the many home and nano-brewers across the country that have shared information through boards, blogs, and websites, especially Hess Brewing.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Our first draft of bottle labels
This is the first cut at a set of labels for our core set of beer offerings
Starting a nano-brewery. It’s a lot of work.
One thing for sure, brewing beer may be the easiest part (and the most fun). There is a lot that goes into starting a brewery, in fact part of it is determining if its even feasible for you to start one. In my case I’ve started a feasibility study; call it a pre-business plan. A good study will provide you with that gut check so you can evaluate a decision to move ahead or not.
I’ve spent about 6-8 weeks on my study so far and I have looked at many topics which I will enumerate below. I’ve gone down a few rabbit holes (too much detail in some cases), but my study is a reflection of me, I like to know the details and be as informed as possible before making a decision such as this. Even with all the numbers and information there are some questions that you have to answer for yourself.
1) How will this impact my family?
2) How will this impact my current job?
3) Do I have the time and capital to invest in this?
4) Can I afford to operate at a loss for an extended period of time?
5) How much money can I pump into this to make it successful?
6) Do I need partners to help with this?
So what is in my study….. here is my list
1) Mission statement, vision, goals, and objectives
2) Legal Structure (Sole Proprietorship, Partnership, LLC, etc)
3) Legal requirements at the federal, state, and local level
4) Zoning and permit requirements
5) ABC licensing
6) Brewing
8) Cost and Revenue estimation and break even analysis
9) Distribution
10) Promotion and Brand
11) Suppliers
12) Trademarks
13) Packaging
14) Financing and Fundraising
Perhaps this is too much detail, but its helped me to understand the complexity of starting a brewery and how to make decisions and the impact of one decision upon another. Much of this information will serve as input into a longer range business plan. In my case phase 1 is the nano, phase 2 is a much larger 30-30 bbl capacity system. This is likely enough of a post for today, going forward I'll dig into some of these aspects in more detail along with my successes, pains, and learnings,
I’ve spent about 6-8 weeks on my study so far and I have looked at many topics which I will enumerate below. I’ve gone down a few rabbit holes (too much detail in some cases), but my study is a reflection of me, I like to know the details and be as informed as possible before making a decision such as this. Even with all the numbers and information there are some questions that you have to answer for yourself.
1) How will this impact my family?
2) How will this impact my current job?
3) Do I have the time and capital to invest in this?
4) Can I afford to operate at a loss for an extended period of time?
5) How much money can I pump into this to make it successful?
6) Do I need partners to help with this?
So what is in my study….. here is my list
1) Mission statement, vision, goals, and objectives
2) Legal Structure (Sole Proprietorship, Partnership, LLC, etc)
3) Legal requirements at the federal, state, and local level
4) Zoning and permit requirements
5) ABC licensing
6) Brewing
a. Hardware and sizing (how many bbls, number of fermenters required, etc) - b. Gas, electric, steam, RIMS, HERMS
- c. Cooling and Filtering
- d. Keg options and requirements (rent or buy)
8) Cost and Revenue estimation and break even analysis
9) Distribution
10) Promotion and Brand
11) Suppliers
12) Trademarks
13) Packaging
14) Financing and Fundraising
Perhaps this is too much detail, but its helped me to understand the complexity of starting a brewery and how to make decisions and the impact of one decision upon another. Much of this information will serve as input into a longer range business plan. In my case phase 1 is the nano, phase 2 is a much larger 30-30 bbl capacity system. This is likely enough of a post for today, going forward I'll dig into some of these aspects in more detail along with my successes, pains, and learnings,
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Experiments in Yeast - last update
This past week I brewed up a batch of Sam’s Red Ale, an Irish Red ale, and a batch of Uncommon Ale, a California Steam ale. In both instances I split the batches into half and used style specific yeast in one fermenter and a standard yeast in another. Very early on there were noticeable differences. Here are the specifics;
Batch 1: Uncommon Ale
Brew Date: 12/27/2011
OG into primary: 1.052
Strike Temp: 69.5f
Ferm temp: 67.5f plus/minus 1.5f
Volume: 2.5 gallons into each fermenter
Fermenter 1: Fermentis US-05 America Ale Dry Yeast; FG 1.012
Fermenter 2: White Labs WLP051 California Ale V, FG 1.015
Results: US-05 started fermentation sooner (4 hours versus 7 hours) and was consistently more vigorous through out the first several days and completed fermentation sooner. Upon racking to secondary the US-05 SG was 1.012 and had less esters, but was noticeable cloudy (lower flocculation than the WLP051). Conversely WLP051 was much more clear (very clear in fact) and reached a SG of 1.016 which aligns with its documented attenuation range. I did notice more sulfur like odors from the WLP051 batch. Tasting results will be posted at 4 weeks and final results at 6 weeks.
Batch 2: Sam’s Red Ale
Brew Date: 12/30/2011
OG into primary: 1.054
Strike Temp: 70f
Ferm temp: 67.5f plus/minus 1.5f
Volume: 2.5 gallons into each fermenter
Fermenter 1: Danstar Nottingham Dry Yeast (re-pitched first generation) FG 1.017
Fermenter 2: Wyeast 1046 Irish Ale FG 1.015
Initial Results: Wyeast started fermentation sooner (6 hours versus 18 hours) and was consistently more vigorous through out the first several days. The Wyeast batch completed active fermentation on 1/3/12 as was moved to secondary at a SG of 1.016; estimated FG is 1.013. Danstar batch still showing some activity in the ferm lock. Additional results will be posted at transfer to secondary and 4 weeks and final results at 6 weeks.
Update 1/9/11: Bottled uncommon ale. US05 1.012, Cali V 1.015. Both were very clear. Cali slightly more clear. The lower attenuation gave more malt flavor leaving the malt and caramel notes that US05 mostly wiped out. US 05 with the higher attenuation really accentuated the hops with a bit of warmth. Cali V has more balance also noticed it was more carbonated out of the fermenter
Update 1/23/11: Bottled Irish Ale last week and took final readings. The Wyeast Irish Ale finished at 1.015, 2 points more than the Nottingham. The Wyeast was less clear than Nottinghan and more grainy with less malt flavor. Medium-light body feel and a bit dryer. Nottingham at 1.017 was more clear, balanced, little hop bitterness or dryness. Medium body feel. While there was a difference in clarity, it was barely noticable.
Below are side by side images of the two versions on Uncommon Ale. For my purposes I prefer the WLP051 and Nottingham varieties. I can see the US-05 used for American Pale Ale where a higher attenuation is preferred
Batch 1: Uncommon Ale
Brew Date: 12/27/2011
OG into primary: 1.052
Strike Temp: 69.5f
Ferm temp: 67.5f plus/minus 1.5f
Volume: 2.5 gallons into each fermenter
Fermenter 1: Fermentis US-05 America Ale Dry Yeast; FG 1.012
Fermenter 2: White Labs WLP051 California Ale V, FG 1.015
Results: US-05 started fermentation sooner (4 hours versus 7 hours) and was consistently more vigorous through out the first several days and completed fermentation sooner. Upon racking to secondary the US-05 SG was 1.012 and had less esters, but was noticeable cloudy (lower flocculation than the WLP051). Conversely WLP051 was much more clear (very clear in fact) and reached a SG of 1.016 which aligns with its documented attenuation range. I did notice more sulfur like odors from the WLP051 batch. Tasting results will be posted at 4 weeks and final results at 6 weeks.
Batch 2: Sam’s Red Ale
Brew Date: 12/30/2011
OG into primary: 1.054
Strike Temp: 70f
Ferm temp: 67.5f plus/minus 1.5f
Volume: 2.5 gallons into each fermenter
Fermenter 1: Danstar Nottingham Dry Yeast (re-pitched first generation) FG 1.017
Fermenter 2: Wyeast 1046 Irish Ale FG 1.015
Initial Results: Wyeast started fermentation sooner (6 hours versus 18 hours) and was consistently more vigorous through out the first several days. The Wyeast batch completed active fermentation on 1/3/12 as was moved to secondary at a SG of 1.016; estimated FG is 1.013. Danstar batch still showing some activity in the ferm lock. Additional results will be posted at transfer to secondary and 4 weeks and final results at 6 weeks.
Update 1/9/11: Bottled uncommon ale. US05 1.012, Cali V 1.015. Both were very clear. Cali slightly more clear. The lower attenuation gave more malt flavor leaving the malt and caramel notes that US05 mostly wiped out. US 05 with the higher attenuation really accentuated the hops with a bit of warmth. Cali V has more balance also noticed it was more carbonated out of the fermenter
Update 1/23/11: Bottled Irish Ale last week and took final readings. The Wyeast Irish Ale finished at 1.015, 2 points more than the Nottingham. The Wyeast was less clear than Nottinghan and more grainy with less malt flavor. Medium-light body feel and a bit dryer. Nottingham at 1.017 was more clear, balanced, little hop bitterness or dryness. Medium body feel. While there was a difference in clarity, it was barely noticable.
Below are side by side images of the two versions on Uncommon Ale. For my purposes I prefer the WLP051 and Nottingham varieties. I can see the US-05 used for American Pale Ale where a higher attenuation is preferred
 |
WLP051 - US-05 |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)