Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Beer News & Releases' started by Todd, Jul 9, 2020.
"Compromise" = hush money payoff.
The people who make the laws, are bought and paid for. Does not matter which of the two sides they're on. They are all that way!!
Likely this was a negotiated amount that A-B was willing to pay without going to court.
Would the government, using (probably) unclear rules, be able to prove enough over (or even) $5,000,000 worth of damages to other breweries to justify the time and expense of hearings, trials, and appeals? Are there small breweries using similar deals with local minor league teams or providing “discounts” to local bars that could have been exposed if A-B claimed discriminatory enforcement?
The money is going to the Treasury Dept., not other breweries and A-B has made an admission of guilt which can be used against them if (when) they do it again. Realistically this was probably as good a deal as either side was going to get.
Just an anecdote...I attended my first European soccer match last fall in Turin Italy (Juventus)...the only beer they sold at the stadium was Bud friggin weiser. Now I know why. Other than that, the food at the stadium was pretty good.
Not exactly, but close. Based on my experiences in a 30 year career with U.S. Treasury, Offers In Compromise are proposed by the offending party, and then accepted by the Government of rejected, with a counter offer then suggested. Same shit, different explanation, we all get boned and Buttweiser laughs all the way to the bank.
Just dribble down my chin . . .