[Clemenza]

Sounds more like Barlywine to me. Heck, it’s stronger than most fortified wines (that are usually around 20%).

[gundog]

Yeah. Wine tops of at about 13% alcohol because that’s when the yeast are killed by their own waste. (Are you listening, San Francisco?)

Probably tastes pretty bad, by beer standards. At $240 a pop, hard pass. But, hey...at that price, you don’t have to sell too many.

[whitney69]

“Sounds more like Barlywine to me. Heck, it’s stronger than most fortified wines (that are usually around 20%).”

I agree with you on the alcohol content problem. But don’t buy into the illegal serving problem. I’m willing to bet it has to do with each state tax and federal excise tax on sales. The states set their limits and base it on content. The feds do also.

The U.S. government collects these alcohol taxes per gallon: Beer…….$18.00... Wine…….$1.07 to $3.40 depending on alcohol content...Spirits……$13.50

The federal government collects about one billion dollars per month from excise alcohol taxes on spirits, beer, and wine.

https://www.alcoholproblemsandsolutions.org/alcohol-taxes-on-beer-wine-spirits/

So I think it is safe to assume (hate that word) that the problem is not getting it served, but each state that disallows it is not able to get it into the proper tax status since it is called a beer and not wine or spirits. They may get more for beer, but it creates a slippery slope as to the proper alcohol content versus how the estimation is made. Slippery slope.

wy69