VSS and BA Speedway release

FFS, violating a company's TOS that they don't even really care about is not the same as violating the law. Even if it were it hardly matters, the logic here is simple:

1) This practice is illegal.
2) Some people don't like it, regardless of legality.
3) Some of those people will act on their dislike and report it to the authorities.

What is the problem here? It's illegal. Whether or not you think it should be legal is irrelevant, it's still illegal and if the store owners don't want to take the risk of getting shut down they shouldn't do it. Full stop. They know the risk, how the ABC finds out about it is irrelevant.

 

He's skeptical because he has a personal connection there with a friend. I was confused by his comments also until I found that out.


Del Mesa has some stand-up people, that's for sure.

"get ur shit fixed or ima toss all ur product in the trash and never carry u guys again"

 

You fucking kidding me?

Why you thought it necessary to google my username + del mesa, find a tweet from 6 months ago, and completely take it out of context is beyond me.

You may want to work on your detective skills.

 

I'm not entirely sure it really is illegal though.

Now, I haven't read the entirety of the ABC Act, but the relevant portion I read so far doesn't seem to address the situation of buying beer as a retail consumer; if the code or some other regulation/caselaw doesn't say that doing so is illegal, then it is not illegal. What it actually says is "No retail on- or off-sale licensee, except a daily on-sale general licensee holding a license issued pursuant to Section 24045.1, shall purchase alcoholic beverages for resale from any person except a person holding a beer manufacturer's, wine grower's, rectifier's, brandy manufacturer's, or wholesaler's license.” Cal. Bus. and Prof. Code section 23402. The problem here is that Alesmith has a beer manufacturer's license.

I wouldn't be surprised if the details are more complicated and I wouldn't be surprised either if the code never mentions this and the only way its "illegal" is some failure to file paperwork. I'll check it out later when I'm not so busy. And yes, I'm aware the ABC representative stated that she thought retailers shouldn't do that, but she also didn't cite to any particular provision that would explicitly make it illegal. She may or may not have even been aware that Alesmith is a licensed beer manufacturer under the code.

 

That's fine but if those people don't report themselves to the authorities every time they j walk, speed, etc. they are hypocrites.

As for point 2 I think that is really what this boils down to. People don't like those stores marking up the prices so they have to pay more for beer. Now those people are reporting these stores to the authorities in hopes of shutting down these stores. Which would be totally awesome if these people didn't have employees that depend on them, families of employees and their own families, distributors who count on their sales, and more. Many of them without the knowledge of the practice or the authority to convince the ownership and management to stop it.

 

why has a moderator not cut down the last 4 pages of this pointless shit. Where is the lengthy discussion of the varietals on tap at the Release?

 

And? Everyone's a hypocrite. It's called being a human.

 

Jaywalking doesn't impact anyone's ability to hoard cases of whales in the basement, though.

 

we are too busy whining about the audacity of a law not being followed

 

Uh, quite clearly the demand will go down as the price goes up. If demand is high and supply is scarce, raise the price or the supply.

People would prefer that craft beer and their favorite breweries not be run like solid economic engines. This is true not just of breweries but of restaurants, corner stores, gas stations, etc. We would, instead, like things to be fair. Fair for all of us.

So we don't want brewers maximizing their profits, charging for scarcity. We want them to charge the minimum amount we feel is fair given whatever the current pricing guidelines have been "established" in the community (and we grumble every time it eeks upwards... and lo'! The Bruery with Chocolate Rain and now Lost Abbey with DDG have introduced us to $40 bottles of beer. Look forward to $50 bottles in the next year or so. And $60 won't be far behind that). So it actually WOULD be bad business practice to jump prices too high all at one time, you have to massage things upward.

We have already reached a time and place where neckbearded middle-class beer dorks either can't or shortly will not be able to afford all the beers they want. Or in the quantity they want. Prices are inexorably going upwards. At some point more people will be more comfortable not being able to get everything they want.

At some point as Craft Beer becomes a healthier segment of the overall alcohol economy people are going to have to get comfortable with appreciating the wide variety of available beers at the expense of not being able to afford the upper tier items. If you love wine that does not mean you are entitled to Premier Grand Cru Bordeaux. No one is arguing the price of Premier Grand Cru Bordeaux should drop to a price that anyone can afford and that they then hold complicated clusterfucks of on-line ticket sales with bottle limits to attempt to most equitably distribute these wines (and no, DDG is not in the same class of beer as Premier Grand Cru Bordeaux is in wine).

I may not personally like the impact this has on my ability to try all of the best and most exclusive beer in the world, but the arrival of this inevitability is fantastic as a sign of health for the industry as a whole, which will by and large bring me ever more variety and increased quality at the same time.

It's instructive that all of those upset about this line of argument are immediately resorting to emotional, angry responses.

 

All of that is true, but it's more true that breweries sell their beers at what their MSRP is for a beer so as not to undercut the retailers who will ultimately be carrying their product.

 

Alright, please explain how beer is not an elastic good. It would seem to me to be the very definition of one.

And I'd love for you to explain how there being too much demand is not the source of the issue regarding, in your example, BA Speedway. If there was moderate/little demand for BA Speedway, if it didn't sell-out, for example, and sat at the brewery or was pushed out into distribution and rotted on shelves then why would anyone choose to not follow the rules regarding this beer? Again, it seems to me that the demand (and supply) is central. You seem incredibly certain that this is not the case.

So please explain why.

 

I've gotten very bored of this, perhaps because it is two drunks ago, so assume you are right and I am wrong. Work for you? My points are twofold:

1. I don't think that raising the price is a reasonable solution, and

2. If they doubled the price on the BASS, they'd still sell out. The elasticity of the beer in that scenario is "0". That is not elastic.

 

That guy must have something on these beer companies. I was just reading Ballast Point's Facebook post and it was advertising there whiskey would be at Freddie's little heat box.

 

1. That's not a point in an argument, that's stating your opinion.

2. You're describing a very specific scenario. If they quadrupled the price the beer would sit on shelves forever. All you're illustrating is that Alesmith is not maximizing their profit. And I disagree. They sold out in what, an hour or few? If they'd double the price they'd have sold their beer much more slowly. At some price point you will have most of your buyers drop out. Because demand is so high it's harder to see with the price so relatively low what the incremental effects of price increase are, but assuredly they are there. I'd buy 12 bottles at $15 and 6 at $30 maybe I'd buy 3 at $60 but I wouldn't buy any at $90, for example.

 

That's not what elasticity means. If they still sell out but sell out slower (which they would) then it's still elastic.

And your argument is also pretty ridiculous. If you raised the price to $30k they wouldn't sell any. It's clearly elastic, the question is just how elastic, but that's not something we can answer.

 

So since I've now been owned, what is the appropriate penalty?

 

can anyone give me a quick recap of the bottle counts on both? I'm sure it's in here somewhere but that's a lot of pages to read. Just interested in setting up a trade want to get an idea if I should add on my end. Cheers

 

Create a LIF with either of the Alesmith bottles.

 

I thought I heard somewhere on the order of 3500? It was the same for both.