1
Visitor and trade festival
feedback
Research findings for
Norwich City of Ale 2014
July 2014
Prepared by Insight Track Ltd.
T: 01603 626800
E: intouch@insighttrack.co.uk
Structure

Background

Research objectives

Pub visitor feedback







Methodology
Respondent profile
Awareness of NCoA
Impact of NCoA
Perceptions of NCoA
Summary of visitor feedback
Trade feedback:








Methodology
Overall experience
Financial outcomes
Increasing footfall
Individual preparations for the festival
Organisational aspects
Future outcomes and thoughts for 2015
Summary of trade feedback
2
Background
3

Norwich City of Ale Limited (NCoA) is a not-for-profit organisation with a mission to
promote Norwich, nationally and internationally, as the UK City of Ale

One of the key activities undertaken by the organisation is to organise an annual
festival toward the end of May as a celebration of real ale from local breweries to be
held throughout the city in real ale pubs and other venues selling real ale

In order to evaluate the success of the event, NCoA wish to monitor performance
against key performance indicators:
 Pub visitors: in respect to how awareness of the event is generated, distances
visitors tend to travel to the event and overall impressions of it
 Publicans and brewers: in respect to the effects of the festival and opinions of
both 2014 and future events

Therefore, the management team wished to undertake a modest research
programme amongst these two audiences
Research objectives
4
The scope of the research covered the following in brief fully-structured surveys:

Pub visitors:
 Publicans and brewers:
 Basic profiling of visitor
 Overall success
(gender, age, where travelled from)
 Specific success indicators including
 Who visited with
footfall and sales
 Frequency of drinking real ale
 Individual preparations for the event
 Role of NCoA in prompting pub visit
 Expectations of future benefits
 Awareness of NCoA
 Considerations for the 2015 festival
 How heard of NCoA
 Impact of NCoA on frequency of
visiting pubs and real ale drinking
habits over the festival period
 Rating and impressions of NCoA
 Suggested improvements for NCoA 2015
 Favourite ‘new beer’ of the festival
5
PART 1:
PUB VISITOR FEEDBACK
Methodology: pub visitors
Overall we achieved 194 completed surveys
 134 were in-pub face-to-face interviews, spread across
pub opening periods


Using a brief fully-structured questionnaire

Fieldwork conducted on 23rd and 29th May (see next
slides) to avoid the opening night, between 12-2pm
and 6-8pm (working in twos for health and safety)
Interviews achieved were deliberately not
demographically quota’d, to ensure that
respondents were likely to reflect the natural
fallout of pub visitors
 Self-complete versions added a further 60 completes:
 Paper print-outs in pubs (N=32)
 Distributed by a volunteer, Rob Whitmore –
thanks Rob!
 Online version accessed via the City of Ale Website,
a URL link and QR code (N=28)
 Publicised via Twitter and beer mats

6
START:
Wig and Pen
Ribs of Beef
Lawyer
Maid’s Head
7
Friday 23rd: 6-8pm
Friday 23rd: 12-2pm
Interviewer locations
Plough
Rumsey Wells
START:
Micawbers
Wildman
Vine
Walnut Tree
Shades
Sir Garnet
Lamb Inn
START:
Murderers
Thursday 29th: 6-8pm
Thursday 29th: 12-2pm
Take 5
Lord Rosebery
Angel
Gardens
Whalebone
Duke of Wellington
START:
Fat Cat
Brewery Tap
Survey response rates, by pub
Pub
8
No. of
responses
Pub
No. of
responses
Murderers
35
Lawyer
6
Vine
25
Micawbers
5
Fat Cat Brewery Tap
22
Ribs of Beef
5
Plough
18
Lord Roseberry
3
Wig and Pen
12
Walnut Tree shades
3
Rumsey Wells
10
Fat Cat
2
Whalebone
9
Plasterer’s Arms
1
Lamb Inn
8
Wildman
1
Duke of Wellington
6
Unknown
(online and no reply)
23
9
Findings:
Respondent profile
Respondent profile: gender and age

10
The majority of respondents were male and aged between 35-64
18-24
7
25-34
86%
16
35-44
14%
24
45-54
21
55-64
21
65+
11
0
Base: 192 – all respondents giving an answer; single response
Q: Are you…?
10
20
30 %
Base: 192 – all respondents giving an answer; single response
Q Which of the following age brackets do you fall into?
Respondent profile: where do they come from?
11
Nearly two thirds of respondents (58%) were from Norwich itself and a further fifth were
from wider Norfolk
 Nonetheless, a fifth (21%) came from outside the county – nearly double that of the 11%
found last year
 Most commonly Suffolk and other East of England counties, although some travelling
much further (with the majority going to the pub specifically for the festival)

Most commonly
Outside
Norfolk
21%
Wider Norfolk
(NR9-NR32)
58%
Norwich
(NR1-NR8)
Travelled the furthest
Suffolk (N=7)
Northern Ireland (N=1)
Cambridgeshire (N=6)
Greater Manchester
(N=1)
Essex (N=5)
Yorkshire (N=3)
Greater London (N=4)
Wales (N=4)
21%
Base: 193 – all respondents giving an answer; single code, open response
Q: Just so we can understand where people have travelled from, can I please ask what the first part of your postcode is e.g. NR1 NR13?
Respondent profile: who did they come with?
12
Respondents typically visited with friends (45%) or their partner (23%)
 Nonetheless, over a quarter (27%) said that they visited by themselves, with a third of
these visiting specifically for the festival

Q: Who did you come here with today?
Friends
45
No-one
27
Partner
23
Colleagues
12
Other family
7
Other
1
0
Guide dog
10
Base: 193 – all respondents giving an answer; multicode
20
30
40
50 %
Respondent profile: real ale drinking habits
13
The majority (83%) of the people we spoke to were regular real ale drinkers
 However one in six (17%) said they typically drink real ale once a month or less often

Q: Broadly speaking, how often do you usually drink real ale?
Daily
23
2-3 times a week
43
Once a week
17
Once a month
9
Once every 2-3 months
2
Once every 6 months
Regular ale
drinkers –
83%
Occasional ale
drinkers – 11%
1
Once a year or less
Irregular ale
drinkers – 6%
2
Never
3
0
Base: 194 – all respondents; single response
10
20
30
40
50 %
14
Awareness of NCoA
Awareness of City of Ale
15
Nearly nine out of ten respondents (87%) surveyed were aware of NCoA
 Although only 43% were in the pub for the festival, this is a rise of 19% on last year (24%)
 Around three quarters (77%) of those in the pub anyway were actually aware of the
festival

Q: Had you heard about the Norwich City of Ale festival before
coming to this pub today?
Q: Did you come to this pub today for the City of Ale festival…?
Aware of NCoA?
87
Going specifically for NCoA?
13
43
0%
20%
Base: 194 - all respondents; single response
60%
80%
Yes
23%
No
Of these…
57
40%
Q: Had you heard about the Norwich
City of Ale festival before coming to
this pub today?
77%
100%
Base: 110 - all respondents going to
location anyway; single response
Visiting specifically for NCoA

16
The groups most likely to be visiting the pub specifically for the festival were…:
 …those having travelled the furthest (e.g. from outside Norfolk)
 …those aged 35+
 …and interestingly, women were more likely to have done so than men (although noting
that women only represented a small proportion of the overall visitor sample)
Q: Did you come to this pub today for the City of Ale festival…?
18-34 (N=43)
Outside Norfolk
(N=41)
80
Wider Norfolk (NR9NR32) (N=40)
43
Norwich (NR1-NR8)
(N=112)
30
30
20
58
70
Yes
35-64 (N=127)
47
53
65+ (N=22)
50
50
No
0%
Men (N=165)
20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Base: all those giving an answer; single response
20%
40%
60%
41
Women (N=27)
0%
70
100%
59
56
0%
80%
20%
44
40%
60%
80%
100%
How found out about City of Ale
17
People who were aware of NCoA were most likely to have found out through word of
mouth, most frequently from friends
 Those who saw an article or advert were most likely to have seen it in the EDP

Q: How did you find out about the Norwich City of Ale festival this year?
Someone told me about it
Poster/banner
CAMRA: Norfolk Nips
CAMRA: other
City of Ale website
Newspaper/magazine article
Leaflet
City of Ale programme
Twitter
Other: went previous years
Other: 'general' awareness
Facebook
Beer mat
Newspaper/magazine advert
Other: in-pub advertising
Bookmark
Mustard TV
Beer blog
City of Ale newsletter
Dragon Hall Beer festival
Other
1
0
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
5
5
5
6
12
11
10
8
15
14
14
31
23
Most commonly:
• Friends
• Colleagues
• Bar staff
Most commonly:
• EDP
• Evening News
Email
10
Base: 169 – all respondents who were aware of NCoA; multiple response
20
30
40 %
18
Impact of NCoA
All respondents saw or were read the following information for consistent
understanding:
Norwich City of Ale is a ten-day celebration of local pubs, breweries and real ale. Events are taking
place between 22nd May and 1st June across the fine city. From barbecues to "meet the brewer"
evenings, live gigs to pub quizzes there is a vibrant calendar of events with something for everyone
Impact of City of Ale on pub visiting/drinking habits

19
Over half the sample said they would visit more pubs or drink more real ale during the festival
 Around half of occasional or infrequent real ale drinkers thought that they would visit more
pubs or drink more real ale than usual (50% and 52% respectively)
 Of those who did not specifically visit the pub for the festival, around a third said they
would visit or drink more real ale than usual (32% and 29% respectively)
Q: Compared to usual…?
…how many pubs in Norwich will you be
visiting during the City of Ale festival?
1
47
52
Less
The same
...how much real ale will you be drinking
in Norwich during the City of Ale
festival?
1
0%
48
20%
Base: 193/191 – all respondents giving an answer; single response per row
51
40%
60%
80%
More
100%
Favourite ‘new beer’ of the festival so far
20
(key responses)

Overall, the Wolf Brewery’s ales were the most popular ‘new beers’, although Norfolk
Brewhouse’s ‘Tidal Gold’ was the single most frequently quoted favourite beer of the
festival
Q: What has been your favourite NEW beer so far that you hadn’t tried before this City of Ale festival?
Wolf Brewery
Norfolk Brewhouse
Adnams
Woodforde's
Fat Cat
Humpty Dumpty
Grain Brewery
Buffy's Brewery
Orkney Brewery
Lacons
Yellow Belly Brewery
Chalk Hill
11
9
9
7
6
4
4
3
3
3
2
2
0
5
10
15
No. of each brewery’s beers mentioned
Base: 95 – all respondents who had tried a new beer; open response
8
Mentions
21
Perceptions of NCoA
Rating of City of Ale experience
22
Three-quarters (74%) rated their experience of the City of Ale positively
 Rising to 92% amongst those who visited the pub specifically for NCoA
 No-one said they had a poor experience

Q: How would you rate your experience of the City of Ale festival on the following scale?
0 0
25%
35%
Excellent
Good
Neither good nor poor
Poor
Very poor
39%
Base: 193 – all respondents giving an answer; single response
Mean = 4.1 out of 5
Positives about City of Ale
(key responses)

23
Some of the key themes emerging as perceived positives were the promotion of…
Q: What do you think are the best things about the Norwich City of Ale festival?
…real ale
…local pubs
…Norwich
 Promoting real ales / trying new ales
 Variety of real ales available
 Promoting the pubs / new pubs to try
 More vibrant pubs / atmosphere / socialising
 Promoting local businesses
 Ale trail / pub crawl / meet the brewer
 The different venues and their character / friendly staff
 Promoting Norwich / opportunity to explore city
Base: all respondents who gave a response; open response – size of text indicates frequency of mentions
What could be improved about City of Ale
(key responses)

24
Some of the key themes emerging as suggested improvements for City of Ale 2015 included
addressing…
Q: What, if anything, could be improved about the City of Ale festival in the future?
…promotion
of the
festival
…getting to
and from
pubs
More advertising / advanced publicity / calendar
More advertising for special events
Larger street presence
Improve accuracy of the maps
Transport / minibus / pickup points
Cheaper ales
…the real
ales available
More samples
Food and ale matches
Promote speciality / unusual beers
…dates
Last longer than 10 days (too many pubs to fit in)
Base: all respondents who gave a response; open response – size of text indicates frequency of mentions
25
Summary of visitor feedback
Summary: pub visitors
Of our respondents…:
 86% were male
 66% were aged 35-64
 87% were aware of Norwich City of Ale
 43% were in the pub specifically for NCoA
 80% of people visiting from outside Norfolk went to the pub specifically for the festival
 31% heard about the festival through word of mouth and 23% saw a poster or banner
 52% said they would be visiting more pubs than usual during the festival
 51% said they would drink more real ale during the Norwich City of Ale, including 52% of
occasional or infrequent real ale drinkers
 74% rated their experience of Norwich City of Ale positively
Our respondents thought that…:
 Wolf Brewery beers were their favourite new beers
 Tidal Gold of The Norfolk Brewhouse was the single best new beer
 Key positives were the variety of real ale and promotion of local businesses
 Key suggested improvements are earlier promotion and advertising and provision of
transportation to and from pubs
26
27
PART 2:
BREWER AND PUBLICAN FEEDBACK
Methodology: publicans and brewers

51 self-completion surveys
 29 Publicans
 23 Brewers
 (N.B. one completed as both a publican and a brewer)

Using a brief structured questionnaire
 Predominantly closed questions
 Fieldwork conducted after the festival in June 2014

Paper and online survey made available for distribution by Norwich City of Ale
28
29
Findings:
Overall experience
Was it enjoyable?
30
(Publicans and brewers)
The vast majority agreed that NCoA 2014 was
enjoyable!
 As with last year, publicans appear to have
enjoyed the festival slightly more than
brewers

“The event is great for the city and for the profile
of craft beer. Brilliant - well done!” (Brewer)
“It’s a wonderful idea”
(Publican)
“The vibe is great”
(Publican)
Q: I enjoyed taking part in Norwich City of Ale 2014
No reply / don't know
Overall (N=51)
Strongly disagree
2
Agree
31
62
4
0%
Base: all respondents; single response
Strongly agree
67
Publicans (N=29)
Brewers (N=23)
Disagree
38
74
20%
40%
22
60%
80%
100%
Was Norwich City of Ale 2014 considered a success?
(Publicans and brewers)
31
Over two-thirds (69%) agreed that Norwich City of Ale 2014 was a success for them
 As in 2013, publicans showed the strongest agreement (80% agreed compared to 56% of
brewers)

Q: Norwich City of Ale 2014 was a success for my pub/brewery
No reply / don't know
Overall (N=51)
44
Publicans (N=29) 3 7
Brewers (N=23)
Strongly disagree
24
0%
51
10
4
20%
60%
13
80%
Strongly agree
“It’s always good to help raise
awareness amongst the people
who may not usually drink cask
beer that these products exist
and are generally very good”
(Brewer)
21
43
40%
Agree
18
59
39
Base: all respondents; single response
Disagree
100%
“I'm afraid anything would make
little difference to pubs out of
the city centre” (Publican)
32
Financial outcomes
Increase in beer sales?
33
(Publicans and brewers)
Overall, three quarters (76%) of publicans agreed that they sold more beer than usual,
while two-fifths of brewers (43%) saw an increase in beer sales
 The percentage increase amongst brewers who saw a change was typically under 10%,
although one saw an increase of over 25%

Q: I sold more beer (than I usually would)
during Norwich City of Ale 2014 (Publicans)
3%
Strongly agree
21%
Q: By how much, if at all, did you increase sales of
beer during Norwich City of Ale 2014? (Brewers)
0% (no increase)
21%
Agree
57
1 - 10%
26
11 - 25%
13
26 - 50%
Breweries
seeing some
increase in
sales: 43%
4
51 - 75%
Disagree
75+%
Strongly disagree
Base: 29, all publicans; single response
55%
0
20
Base: 23, all brewers; single response
40
60 %
Increase in firkin sales?
34
(Publicans only)


Of the 23 publicans who gave
an answer, over two-thirds
(70%) saw an increase in sales
On average this was an
increase of four extra firkins,
although one publican reported
extra sales of 20 firkins!
Only five reported seeing no
change to the number of
firkins sold, although two said
they actually sold fewer than
normal (averaging at -4)
Q: Please indicate approximate total number of firkins sold
during Norwich City of Ale 2014 and during a comparable 10
day period (NOT) during City of Ale
20
15
12
10
8
6
5
4
3
2
No change
Fewer
No reply
1
1
1
Increase in number of
firkins sold

2
3
3
•
Mean average increase:
+4
•
Range of
increases: +2 to +20
2
5
2
6
0
Base: 29, all publicans; single response
Positive
outcome: 70% of those
giving an answer
1
1
1
5
10
15
20
Number of publicans
25
Increase in revenue?
35
(Publicans and brewers)
Around two-thirds (65%) of publicans and a quarter of brewers (25%) confirmed that they
saw an increase in takings
 Those seeing an increase typically calculated it to account for up to a 10% increase in
revenue across the period compared to expected takings without the festival

Q: By how much, if at all, were takings/turnover up in relation to a comparable 10 day period
NOT during City of Ale?
10
No reply
22
24
0% (no increase)
1 - 10%
52
48
17
11 - 25%
4
3
26 - 50%
4
51 - 75%
Confirming some
increase in revenue:
• 65% of publicans
• 25% of brewers
14
Publicans (N=29)
Brewers (N=23)
75+%
0
Base: all respondents; single response
20
40
60
%
The Brewer’s Market
36
(Brewers only)
Although around half did not comment on the Brewer’s Market, those who gave an answer
generally disagreed that it was a success for their business
 Nonetheless, there was some indication that it was still considered a good attraction, and for
some was their main opportunity of increasing sales

Q: The Brewer’s Market was a success for my business
0
Strongly agree
13%
Agree
Disagree
26%
52%
“Though we have said we
‘disagree’ that the Brewer’s
Market was a success for us, I
would still like to see it continue
into 2015, I believe it is a nice
attraction for City of Ale and a
way for the brewers to support
the festival” (Brewer)
Strongly disagree
No reply / don't know
Base: 23, all brewers; single response
9%
“Sales only increased during the
week due to me doing the Brewer’s
Market” (Brewer)
Selling to new pubs
37
(Brewers only)
Around a third (34%) said that they sold to new pubs
 However, there does appear to be some feeling that this is an area which could be improved
in next year’s festival:
 Some brewers suggested that publicans didn’t try and stock from them, while conversely
some publicans mentioned that they weren’t actually contacted by the brewers.

Q: I sold beer into pubs I don’t normally deal with
52%
Strongly agree
17%
Agree
4%
30%
Disagree
“Pubs should have to stock local small
brewers beer to join in City of Ale”
(Brewer)
“Retailers (need) to be more
committed to taking beers from
sponsors and local brewers” (Brewer)
Strongly disagree
No reply / don't know
Base: 23, all brewers; single response
48%
“I had no sales calls from local
breweries other than those I normally
deal with” (Publican)
38
Increasing footfall
Increase in footfall?
39
(Publicans only)
The vast majority of publicans (82%) saw an increase in footfall
 Where seen, the increase in footfall was typically up to 25%, although one publican saw an
uplift of over 50%

Q: By how much, if at all, did footfall increase in your pub?
0% (no increase)
17
1- 10%
41
11 - 25%
38
26 - 50%
51 - 75%
Publicans seeing
some increase in
footfall: 82%
3
75+%
0
Base: 29, all publicans; single response
10
20
30
40
50
60 %
More new faces and visitors from out of the region?
(Publicans only)
40
The festival appears to have attracted new visitors, with 79% of publicans saying they saw
more new faces than usual, and 72% reporting more people from out of the region
 However, there is perhaps some feeling that if the festival is primarily aimed at local
residents it would be less reliant on national support

Q: I saw more new faces in my pub during
Norwich City of Ale than at other times
00
21%
Q: I noticed more visitors in my pub from out of the region this year
“It seemed to bring in an increasing
number of visitors from outside of
Norwich and Norfolk” (Publican)
3% 0
10%
17%
“It did bring a lot of people to
Norwich!” (Publican)
24%
62%
62%
Strongly agree
Agree
Base: 29, all publicans; single response
Disagree
“Getting the support of the people
of Norwich first, I believe, is the way
forward rather than relying on
people from out of the county to
make the event” (Publican)
Strongly disagree
No reply / don't know
Ale trails worked?
41
(Publicans only)
The ale trail was considered to have worked
well in getting people to try new pubs
 However, perhaps different label pins would
prove a good incentive to complete more than
one trail

Q: The ale trails worked well in getting people
into pubs they wouldn’t usually visit
“The ale trails
were a key driver
for people visiting
a good number of
pubs” (Brewer)
10%
31%
14%
45%
Strongly agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Base: 29, all publicans; single response

“Different rewards for different ale trails, the
general consensus was that most customers didn't
want the same pin badge for different trails and
openly claimed that they weren't going to do any
more for this reason” (Publican)
“Different coloured pins for each trail” (Publican)
More people collecting ale stamps?
42
(Publicans only)

Ale trail ‘growth rates’ were seen by just over half of publicans (55%)
Q: I noticed more people collecting Norwich City of Ale stamps this year
2014
2013
31%

10%
3%
Disagree
Strongly disagree
No reply
24%

52%

20%

0%
?
4%
Strongly agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
No reply


7%
48%
Strongly agree
Agree

Base: 29 (2014), 25 (2013), all publicans; single response

?
43
Individual preparations for the festival
Stocking more and ordering different beers?
44
(Publicans only)

The majority said they both stocked more beer than usual and ordered different beers for
Norwich City of Ale 2014
Q: I stocked more beer (in volume) than
usual during Norwich City of Ale 2014
Q: I ordered different beers (increased range of options)
to my regular stock for Norwich City of Ale 2014
3% 0
3% 0
10%
17%
31%
38%
55%
41%
Strongly agree
Agree
Base: 29, all publicans; single response
Disagree
Strongly disagree
No reply / don't know
Brewing more beers? Beer a fair payment?
45
(Brewers only)
Three quarters (74%) did not brew more beers than usual, although just over a quarter did
increase production
 The donation of beer was generally considered to be a fair payment

Q: I brewed more beers than usual during
Norwich City of Ale 2014
00
Q: I felt the donation of beer was a fair payment
9%
17%
22%
26%
4% 0
65%
57%
Strongly agree
Base: 23, all brewers; single response
Agree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
No reply / don't know
Running more events?
46
(Publicans and brewers)
As in 2013, there was a mixed response towards running more events
 Pubs were slightly more likely to put on more events than breweries

Q: I ran more events than usual during Norwich City of Ale 2014
No reply / don't know
Overall (N=51)
8
Publicans (N=29)
7
Brewers (N=23)
Strongly disagree
8
Disagree
Agree
43
24
48
17
0%
Base: all respondents; single response
9
20%
Strongly agree
18
21
35
40%
24
30
60%
9
80%
100%
47
Organisational aspects
Well organised?
48
(Publicans and brewers)
Publicans and Brewers both largely agreed that Norwich City of Ale 2014 was well
organised
 Organisers were praised for their enthusiasm and thanked for making the festival such a
success

Q: I thought Norwich City of Ale 2014 was well organised
No reply / don't know
Overall (N=51) 4 4
Publicans (N=29)
Brewers (N=23)
59
7
28
52
20%
40%
Base: all respondents; single response
39
60%
80%
Disagree
Agree
“Really well
organised and
brilliant event!”
(Publican)
33
66
9
0%
Strongly disagree
100%
Strongly agree
“A big thank you to the
organisers - a great
success” (Publican)
“I thought it was well organised and publicised and
brought consumers into the city. I felt that there
was plenty of enthusiasm for the event this year”
(Brewer)
Enough publicity? (Yes)
49
(Publicans and brewers)
The vast majority (92%) thought that this year’s festival was well publicised
 Professional promotional material and a national reach were particularly noted this year

Q: I thought Norwich City of Ale 2014 was well publicised
No reply / don't know
Overall (N=51)
Publicans (N=29)
8
57
14
48
Brewers (N=23) 4
0%
Strongly disagree
65
Agree
Strongly agree
35
“The image and promotion was very professional”
(Publican)
38
“Very well publicised, picked up by national
publications” (Brewer)
30
20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Base: all respondents; single response
Disagree
“Publicity was well handled and more wide
reaching than last year, this certainly supported
events which were held by individual pubs. Design
and promotional material is well and consistently
designed” (Publican)
Enough publicity? (No)
(Publicans and brewers)
50
However, the timing of receiving banners and posters is generally seen as too last minute,
with a feeling that more display time would be more productive in generating interest
 One publican also noticed a few mistakes in the programme

“Locally, we need to have posters, even if just generic with the dates, out there MUCH sooner, as,
although the social media is amazing, it's still quite a ‘traditional’ market on the street - by the time
posters, programmes etc. got out there into the pubs, where the more (traditional, local) drinkers are it
was too late for most to get interested and sign up for crawls/events” (Publican)
“Every year we are charged for a banner which turns up less than a week before the event and this year’s
was two days before the event. This is absolutely pointless and a complete waste of money. The banners
should be supplied at least a month before the event, enough time to be put up by the pub and for the
event to be advertised” (Publican)
“Ensure that details of events at participating pubs are correct up on publishing the booklets – for
example, barbecue events and phone numbers of pubs were incorrect this year” (Publican)
Base: all respondents; single response
Enough copies of the programme?
(Publicans only)
Nearly all publicans said that they had enough copies of the 2014 programme
 In fact, one publican suggested that a more economical distribution would be to provide
more programmes to central pubs rather than those at the end of trails

Q: I had enough copies of the Norwich City of Ale
2014 programme
“Outlying pubs don’t
need as many
programmes as I only
got rid of about 10 as
most pick them up in
the city first before
doing the outer trails…
perhaps this money
could be used
elsewhere?” (Publican)
3% 0
31%
Strongly agree
Disagree
Base: 29, all publicans; single response
66%
Agree
Strongly disagree
51
52
Future outcomes and thoughts for 2015
Expect to gain more future business as a result?
53
(Publicans and brewers)
Overall, just over half (59%) expect to gain more future business
as a result of participating in Norwich City of Ale 2014
 However, there is some feeling that the financial benefits of
participating are limited to the festival period

“Publicans appear to buy
more beer, but what is
unsold detracts from our
sales in subsequent weeks”
(Brewer)
Q: I expect to get more future business as a result of Norwich City of Ale 2014
No reply / don't know
Overall (N=51)
Strongly disagree
4 4
Publicans (N=29)
3
Brewers (N=23)
4
Disagree
Agree
33
49
24
Base: all respondents; single response
10
59
9
0%
Strongly agree
48
20%
40%
60%
14
35
4
80%
100%
Like to take part in 2015?
54
(Publicans and brewers)

Enthusiasm about taking part in next year’s festival is strong from both publicans and
brewers
Q: I would like to be a part of Norwich City of Ale 2015
No reply / don't know
“Will do it again for sure!”
(Brewer)
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Overall (N=51) 2
Publicans (N=29)
“Count me in next year!”
(Publican)
Brewers (N=23)
Base: all respondents; single response
Strongly agree
49
49
52
48
4
0%
Agree
48
20%
48
40%
60%
80%
100%
2015 to focus exclusively on local beers?
(Publicans and brewers)

55
Opinion was split about keeping the festival exclusively focussed on local beers
 Publicans typically want to be able to showcase a wider variety of beers
 Brewers, conversely, would prefer if priority was given to their local offerings
Q: Norwich City of Ale 2015 should continue to focus exclusively on local beers
Strongly disagree
Disagree
Overall (N=51) 4 14
Publicans (N=29)
7
Brewers (N=23)
9
0%
Agree
31
17
51
34
26
20%
Base: all respondents; single response
Strongly agree
41
“Open up the festival to brewers from
outside the region. This was mentioned by a
lot of people” (Publican)
“It's nice that locally brewed beers have
such a large presence in the media at this
time, but it is still true that managing to get
and keep local ales into local pubs is a
mighty struggle” (Brewer)
65
40%
60%
80% 100%
“How about Norfolk (or even Norwich)
breweries being listed first?” (Brewer)
Interest in producing special beer for 2015 festival?
(Brewers only)
Around three-quarters (73%) of brewers showed some interest in
producing a special beer for next year’s festival
 However, there are perhaps some concerns that this should be a
truly unique beer rather than a re-branded blend

Q: I would be interested in brewing/mixing a special beer for Norwich City of
Ale 2015
4%
“Please stop encouraging brewers to make
‘festival specials’ as there are mostly a
standard beer re-badged which I think
does nothing to support the diversity and
variety of beers on offer and is simply a
money spinner for the brewer” (Brewer)
4%
30%
17%
43%
Strongly agree
Agree
Base: 23, all brewers; single response
Disagree
Strongly disagree
No reply / don't know
2015
56
Suggestions for the future
57
(Publicans and brewers)
Q: How could Norwich City of Ale be improved in the future?
Encourage publican/brewer networking
“Pubs should have to stock local small
brewers beer to join in NCoA” (Brewer)
“A list of pubs taking part available to
brewers for direct sale/contact to be easily
made for the event” (Brewer)
Finalise details earlier
“More advanced
planning.... pubs signed
up earlier” (Publican)
“Program available further
in advance to encourage
pre-booking” (Brewer)
“Advertising material needs to be delivered earlier than
four days prior to event” (Publican)
Involve smaller breweries
“Rally more support from smaller breweries, maybe as a co-operative of small producers” (Brewer)
“Showing more support for smaller breweries as larger breweries seem to overrun the campaign with their
marketing, leaving little room for others” (Brewer)
Base: all respondents; unprompted, open response
58
Summary of trade feedback
Summary: trade
Of the trade respondents…:
 98% found participation in the festival enjoyable
 92% thought that the festival was both well organised and well publicised
 69% considered it to be a success for their business
 76% of publicans and 43% of brewers saw an increase in beer sales
 +4 was the average number of extra firkins sold by each pub during the festival
 82% of publicans saw an increase in footfall, 79% said they saw more new faces than usual
and 72% saw more visitors from out of the region
 79% of publicans stocked more beer (in volume), and 26% of brewers brewed more beer
 86% of publicans stocked more varieties of beer for the festival
 59% expect to gain more future business as a result of taking part
 98% are keen to take part next year
 73% of brewers showed interest in producing a special beer for the 2015 festival
59
60