Anheuser-Busch begins Push Against Stone Bill

While I am fully in support of easing restrictions on alcohol production and sales, I am fully against hastily writing legislation for the specific benefit of one company. So call this one a "meh."

 

There really should be room for everyone, but it's so telling to see how scared AB is of a 7.8% overall market share of craft beer(% from Brewer's Association). I guess it's their business to try to steal as much money from the competition as possible, and I cannot blame them for trying. But it makes them look like the bad guy when they complain about only employing 72 people per brewery. Don't they want to expand the job market? Where's the "American" work ethic? Guess it went by the wayside when they sold out? I am not sure legislation is a necessity for Stone, but I can't fault them for trying to expand either. They make a great product, why shouldn't they be able to try to expand their market? I say let the free market work this one out. I actually think this article made the two seem as though they were very evenly matched competitors over all.... it's not the numbers as much as both are fighting the good fight to make more money!

 

Personally, I think there is a simple solution to this and issues similar to it.

Vote!

Keep track of those legislators that vote against your interests and hold them accountable.

In a democracy, we get what we vote for, unless you don’t participate. Than you get what the other guy votes for.

 

I wholeheartedly agree with most of what you said. But the one issue I do have is that I think the "good fight" becomes not so good when one party does things like spend millions to lobby (see: bribe) legislators to institute and/or uphold laws and regulations that give them an unfair competetive advantage. At that point, the "free market" is just an illusion.

 

What I fail to understand is why there is any kind of limit imposed at all in the first place. Why shouldn't a brewery be allowed to have all the production and sales it can generate?

 

While legislation is always on a level of complexity, moving the barrel number upward and allowing distribution certainly isn't complex. They probably just copied another states or slightly modified one. For the audacious goal of landing a job-creating, economy boosting brewery like Stone or not, the fact remains that breweries in the state have been pushing for it for years. The bill is definitely good because it will allow for more brewery expansion and it will spur some to maybe open new ones. It's hard to be against more beer.

 

It actually isn't being done just for Stone as there are many breweries in the state (current and in the planning) that would benefit from it. Right now a brewpub in SC is really limited as far as their growth potential (capped at 2k barrels a year and not allowed to distribute or attend beer fests, not allowed to bottle/can etc). This is why the SC Brewers Guild is fully behind this bill. The name "Stone Bill" was given because it's catchier than SC H.3512 and because they are clearly using Stone as an example of SC missing out on potential jobs and investment by a brewery looking to build that won't begin to consider the state under current laws.

So while it isn't being done only for Stone they do provide impetus for getting it passed. It's unfortunate but many politicians are only looking as far ahead as the next election, so if they were handed a bill and told it might create x number of jobs and $y amount revenue over the next 10 years they won't have a lot of urgency to pass it. In this case though they are handed a bill and told "this could attract a company bringing 400 jobs and tens of millions of dollars into the state THIS YEAR, plus allow for more economic growth in the future." That's a win/win for a politician: something they can campaign on now....and something they can campaign on later.

 

Very much agreed, it's a fine line

 

What Kevin said. The legislation is anything but hastily written, @kdb150. It's been in the works for months and wasn't just some last-minute thing. And "Stone Bill" is a colloquial name. Stone isn't mentioned specifically anywhere in the bill itself. It's aimed directly at supporting SC brewpubs and breweries with the hope it'll lay the groundwork for a brewery such as Stone to open up a satellite facility in the state if wanted.

 

I have been doing my part by emailing all the house and Senate members to find out where they stand on the bill and letting them know they should support it. If my house or senate member doesn't vote in favor of this bill they will not get my vote come election time.

 

::singing:: "I always feel like somebody's watching me".......

 

I work for an AB distributor and they have us sign these prewritten letters to our representatives concerning laws in our state. So, this doesn't surprise me, they have had us do it about 5 times. And yes, they are scared of craft beer. They tell us in meetings that craft beer is destroying the beer market because drinkers will consume 2-4 craft beers at a bar or restaurant instead of consuming 6 or more AB products. They even tell us if we have friends who drink craft to inform them of the damage craft is doing to the beer industry and instead to try an AB product. I think its really funny how a giant like AB fears craft beer.

 

We just went through a similar situation here in FL where ab-in bev backed politicians tried there best to hurt the craft beer community in FL . Thank goodness they wouldn't even here it on the floor once the bill made it there. The best thing you can do is vote those idiots out but that's easier said than done when they have such heavy hitters as lobbyist . Butt-wiper should be concerned about there crappy product. Maybe if they spent as much money on developing good quality products as they do on trying to lobby against other breweries or making commercials then they might actually put something out there that's worth drinking.... or maybe not.

 

AB is scared shitless of the 7.8%.


AND THEY SHOULD BE!!!

 

Do you point out that Craft Beer is as much a part of the beer industry as they are? Probably not, and I don't blame you, but that mindset is so full of cognitive dissonance as well as disgusting sense of entitlement. Like people should buy 6 AB beers just because they exist?!! How about actually appealing to customers' needs instead?

 

I used to work for an independent AB wholesaler. We were never given such a speech. Quite the opposite, with Goose Island and CBA brands being pushed hard as high margin alternatives.

 

Back about 6 or 7 years ago when the North Carolina legislature had a bill before it to allow the sale of beer above 6%, the A-B folks were dead-set against it and continually made stupid poker faced arguments against raising the limit. Even the most stodgy old legislators eventually realized that increased REVENUE would result if the bill passed. With great lobbying, the bill did pass. This entire exercise now exists as a great piece of state beer law history. The beer industry has boomed here since this dismal backward era. Had the A-B guys had their way, this bill would have been squelched and dismissed. It's all about big retail space allocation.

 

If I remember the history show I watched, breweries were fully integrated with saloons before prohibition. The 3 tier system was set up so prevent giants from flooding the market to kill off competition which also resulted in massive drunkeness. There was an article a month or so ago about how pubs in England are still integrated and the effect on consumption there. As other posters have mentioned, SC really limits craft brewers. It works in NC, we need it here. No A-B for me.