DEBC seeking handout to sue TABC

These guys are douchebags.

 

I'm glad you're pointing this out. I'm sure all the hipster DEBC fanboys (there are a lot in Dallas, too) are going to hand over their velcro wallets soon enough for the "cause." The top seven contributing breweries then form a panel on how to appropriately spend the money? How about all the breweries that want to participate just pool all of their money together to begin with without including consumers? I don't recall other Texas breweries look for handouts when they have brought suit against the state. Classy!

"hey, we're so noble to do a favor for youuuu the consumer that we think youuuu should pay for it!"

Anyway, as @nathanmiller said, this isn't progress, it's impatience.

 

This makes the @FreetailBrewing lambo seem reasonable.

 

Kind of makes me want to just say fuck it and figure out a way to smarmily crowd-fund lasik for myself. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

 

When I first heard there was going to be a "Deep Ellum Brewery"...I knew they would be douche bags.

 

Random thoughts:

I'm no DEBC fanboy, but good for them for trying to get things changed for all TX breweries.

I remember JK sued the TABC - was this the unsuccessful lawsuit that led to no progress being made last session? They won the "malt liquor" argument, but I think there were additional parts of the lawsuit.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the silent partners of DEBC lawyers?

Why don't the lawyers of TX craft beer get together and sue (Jeffrey Stuffings, Michael Peticolas, et. al)

 

I don't get why they are not asking other breweries for help on this (or if they have, why not mention it) as opposed to reaching out to the public first.

I am fully supportive of anyone doing this (in whatever means they feel like), but the counter argument has some valid points.

Even if AB did this, I would be supportive.

Granted, the clear winners are the breweries (who they mention in their article who will make more money).

2nd would be the consumer.

 

Maybe they should stop being drama queens about it.

If they are that petty, they likely will only vote where their money is coming from anyways. I am guessing they just used that as an excuse to vote the way they did.

 

So some of the "bigger" breweries (SA, Rahr, Lakewood, JK, anybody else who is a brewpub or has already sold distro rights) have nothing to gain.

 

Harsh responses.

If craft beer drinkers want the laws changed, why would you not support the cause? Put your money where your mouth is. Im not a "Deep Ellum Fanboy" but I am a fan of changing the antiquated laws.

 

According to the Indigogo they are reaching out to other breweries but doing so while they also reach out to the general public by offering up a "perk" reserved for fellow breweries. See any perk valued at $500+

I'm for changing the laws too. I'd love nothing more than the ability to go to a brewery and get a growler fill or take home packaged beer. I take issue with a brewery only willing to put up $10K of their own money to fight this and instead rely on the general public to help fund the remaining $90K for the lawsuit. Bring other breweries into it privately. There are enough breweries in Texas to go above and beyond the $100K that they are trying to raise.

 

it will be a good day when Deep Ellum goes out of business. absolute pathetic brewery.

 

I completely disagree. They make a lot of good beer and a nice brewpub that is enjoyable to visit. They are kind of assholes with some of their actions, but at least they are trying to make a step to improve the laws, even if the way they go about it is all wrong. I use to be their biggest hater because of their customer service, but to say that a brewery that makes good beer needs to go out of business because of their annoying actions just doesn't make sense to me. A good example is Three Floyds, where they are kind of smug assholes about how "great" they are, but I will still buy some of their beers because I enjoy it.

 

So... And I know this is a really simplistic thought that has already been stated above but...

Can someone explain why I need to give my money to a brewery to support a law change that benefits the brewery 1st, and maybe me second? (with the far-fetched assumption that maybe buying beer direct from the brewery will be cheaper than picking it up at a retail store? - something tells me this won't happen with DEBC, but might with others)...

Secondly... with DEBC's track record, why would I want them leading the charge? If I was willing to hand over my money for something that benefits breweries more than it does consumers, I would rather nominate one of the more reputable brewers in the state to handle the process than DEBC.... and one that is friendlier and more personable when I come to visit....

anyway, that is all. Sure, I'd like the law changed too and I'm pulling for you - but seeming how y'all tend to see 98% of the benefit from this law change - I'll save my money to spend at the brewery picking up a six pack to go when you succeed.

 

Why would SA, Lakewood, (larger breweries/not brewpubs) have nothing to gain? I would think that selling from the brewery would not involve a distributor like it works for brewpubs. JK has a distributor, but they do not need to go through it to sell on site, so why would SA/Lakewood?

I would think places like SA would have quite a bit to gain.

 

This is a joke, right?
DEBC gives TX craft beer a bad name with stuff like this.

 

People are happily willing to support JK and give them money to help bring Cantillon in with not a single complaint, but if it is Deep Ellum, threads turn to shit shows. JK is putting a chunk of money in for it, but they are also charging $50/ticket for a reason.

Sure, it helps the brewery first, but the convenience factor for me and being able to get limited release bottles straight from a brewery is a huge advantage that I would be willing to support.

 

They're also giving the rest to a non-profit that purportedly* furthers the cause of craft beer improvement in Texas. Deep Ellum a) is not a non-profit and really should not be crowd-funding a lawsuit that benefits them, it looks terrible^ and b) has a history of asking for handouts for things that benefit themselves. If you need money, get legit investors; if your legit investors don't want to give you money, there's probably a reason.

* - only because I don't actually know the inner workings of Open the Taps

^ - I would say the same thing if it was JK or Saint Arnold... odd, by the way, you don't see Saint Arnold asking for handouts... wonder why that is?