Break Up Budweiser. (And Molson Coors too.)

What I mean is like how AB has used their power/money/business for aggressive corporate tactics like buying up competition, controlling distributors, etc. You might say, well if they can do it with their money why not? My point is that it isn't fair. Why couldn't AB just keep competing fairly and be the biggest producer in the country without these aggressive corporate tactics? They are cheating the competition, and yeah all business is competition at the end of the day, but we need regulators to stop the largest from preying and feeding on all the smaller guys, or else we could end up with a monopoly like the article is arguing. Some might say the competition should never be slanted. Part of their rewards were gained through unfair, corrupt, and even illegal practices. The question we might have to ask is, how big is too big?

 

I understand their business practices now are frowned upon , but that wasn’t the case in the beginning. That business was built one brick at a time from the ground up forever ago, their customers built their empire by buying their beer, and I don’t think they should be penalized because they did it better than anyone else, and with market share obviously comes it’s privileges. It’s not popular obviously, but some of their a acquisitions have left the former owners quite wealthy and still in charge of running the daily business they built, so it’s a win win. I’m sure there’s some that didn’t fare so well, but that’s jesskiddins territory.

 

I don't think they should be penalized for how successful or popular they became, I think they and others should be penalized for their illegal business actions and maybe for entering into a different tier of the industry even if it was legal. The problem with large corporations is after a point they become so big, so wealthy and so powerful they are able to influence the laws that govern what they do, and they usually use their power to benefit themselves and mitigate their competitors. That is unfair business territory that I don't think any business should be able to enter, when businesses are able to help influence the laws and regulations that govern them. That's why certain businesses should never get too big. We're at a point where industry leaders control our political leaders to benefit themselves at the expense of others.

 

How many large and successful businesses got where they are today without disadvantaging the competition? If the shoe were on the other foot, I'm sure craft brewers would have no qualms doing the same. Its a business at the end of the day... we've seen how people's thoughts, actions, change once they hit a certain milestone

 

As a small distributor, I sold against AB before the current ownership structure. But they haven't changed too much. These guys have always wanted everything both ways. Definite bullies that I relished as a competitor. They were easy to best in the independent markets, and our mix of products was not bill-boarded everywhere so they found placement quickly. It drove them mad. They thought they deserved it all.

 

I'm pretty sure John D. Rockefeller, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and James Duke said that too. They did eventually donate their palatial estates to the public... so we all won?

 

There are certain ways to go about it that aren't so wrong though, like making a better more efficient product possibly for cheaper, but rigging the system shouldn't leave us complacent.

 

I think it’s ultimately simple if you don’t like their products which under that broad umbrella is pretty vast, don’t buy it.

Could be the bourbon you love is also under that umbrella, or Tequilla, etc... so... I drink what I happen to like, I’m not looking at a flow chart to dictate my purchases.

 

Sounds like your dealing with the issues of Total.

 

Duke and Vanderbilt are very nice legacy pieces. Biltmore Estate is an amazing place, but it's too much for me. I just finished Rachel Maddow's Blowout. It is a pure and lucid indictment of the advent and history of the American oil industry. It is a deep, thoughtful, funny book, and is a must read.

 

It's not just about what products you buy, it's about their business' impact on other brewers' ability to have a chance in the market. They've tried to rig the system to benefit themselves so that it is hard for any competitors to survive, and they haven't gotten there through fair and legitimate means. Less competition means less options for the consumer, and being stuck with all that we have available, which could be lessened further.

 

That's not what's happening at all. They're being "penalized" (others have noted the vanishingly small value of this fine) for violating laws established with the hope of keeping the opportunity for others to compete in this business.

 

How long has Deschutes been around? How many barrels do they pump out a year (or how much do they rake in)? Already we've heard how there's this "we're in this together" when competitors are small, but some of the bigger craft producers are suing one another, buying out others, working with the "big boys"...

I also think our nation fosters this idea that you can and should earn as much as possible, win at all costs, look after one's self. Your story sounds a lot like how I've heard Edrington buy up many of the best sherry casks. If there's a way, someone will use it. Also keep in mind the beer landscape was a very different place when Anheuser started.

To be fair, when you're the size of AB (who are far more than just a brewery at this point), you do need a lot of... everything. Calculated is the right word for it; I doubt they're doing it to hurt your brewer friends feelings. Are they even competing on the same field? You did get me thinking, with "beer community" - is there just one? And will AB ever be a part of it? How does it compare with other countries?

 

RIP

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budweiser_Budvar_Brewery

 

To add to what @John_M said, I'm pretty sure both stone and nightshift operate distributors that actively help fellow brewers. I agree that you don't get the size of a company like ABInBev without trading in all your morals but I don't believe that that is where all small brewers are trying to go. Even large ones often continue to be great community members. That doesn't mean. That all small brewers are great people, of course, just that the "max profit at any cost" mindset is a choice that companies like abinbev make and not a requirement for succeeding in business

 

Definitely a confusing article. He seems to see the issues but fails to put it all together, I suspect due to a lack of an understanding about economics. The problem is the horrible patchwork of bad regulation of the alcohol industry in the US. We desperately need de-regulation of the industry in order to level the playing field and let all breweries compete fairly. That means no more three-tier laws at all, which would allow all industry parties to figure out the most effective and efficient industry structures. As long as we are playing in an arbitrary system shaped by years of political corruption influenced by the biggest players, we will all suffer as beer drinkers/makers/distributors.

 

That was in the "old days" and broke my heart. Total BS now and then.

 

No, but you're not far off.