lawsuit against Bud and others for diluting beer...

http://money.msn.com/business-news/article.aspx?feed=AP&date=20130226&id=16168855

Not surprised.

beerloaf

I thought it was tasting better as of late.

I'm surprised AB cares enough about a $5m lawsuit to even bother to respond in the press the way they did. They probably spill more than that a day.

All joking aside I thought that was the usual process for them in making their beer. It makes sense doesn't it, we all know it is hard to exactly predict that your beer will come out at 5.1% but for us it doesn't matter. It makes good sense to brew a stronger beer then teste the ABV and then you know how much water to add to get you to 5%.
Funnest thing is it states the lawsuit is based on information from former employees. Whos to say they had any idea of the process and all they saw was beer being watered down

"Budweiser and Michelob each boast of being 5 percent alcohol, while some "light" versions are said to be just over 4 percent."

"The excess water is added just before bottling and cuts the stated alcohol content by 3 percent to 8 percent, he said."

I could be understanding this wrong, but taking the greatest ABV (5) and the greatest dilution (8) that would make 4.6% ABV...with the least ABV (4) and the least dilution (3) that would give you 3.88% ABV. It seems like a pretty big lawsuit for a loss of 0.12-0.40% ABV

Hmm, I see there are multiple threads on this. So, I'll copy some of what I said in another thread. I think it has been a practice of AB to brew a stronger beer and water it down for quite some time. The key is, the beer starts out stronger than the 5% ABV advertised on the bottle and then is blended down to the correct strength. I think this practice saves them tank space and allows them to brew more beer, saving them money.

Again, I suspect Josh Boxer got drunk one night, one of the AB Fairfield plant employees was at the same party, told him about this practice and, when he woke up the next day, he didn't remember it correctly, "AB adds water to their beer to save money?!?! Lawsuit time!!"

Just how much water would you have to add to a 5% ABV beer to remove 3% of that ABV? It would have to be 3/1 water at that point, wouldn't it?

Aboo said:

Just how much water would you have to add to a 5% ABV beer to remove 3% of that ABV? It would have to be 3/1 water at that point, wouldn't it?

Click to expand...

3% of 5% is .15% of delta. So that'd be 4.85% ABV final product.

Aboo said:

Just how much water would you have to add to a 5% ABV beer to remove 3% of that ABV? It would have to be 3/1 water at that point, wouldn't it?

Click to expand...

"The excess water is added just before bottling and cuts the stated alcohol content by 3 percent to 8 percent, he said."

I took this as a literal statement. If the stated content is 5% ABV, cutting that by 3% results in 4.85%. I could be wrong, but to me it seemed logical.

And the Attorneys will settle the suit, collect 60% and the US moves on to the next lawsuit.

Who f'n cares? RDWHAHB!

iaefebs said:

And the Attorneys will settle the suit, collect 60% and the US moves on to the next lawsuit.

Click to expand...

Wonder if it's the same guys who are going after Subway for the 11" footlongs.

First of all, it has to be 3-8% of the 5% advertised on the label -- unless they are selling Bud whose ABV is advertised at 5% but is actually -3%??

Secondly, it sounds like they're not diluting to hit the stated ABV on the head -- rather, they're knowingly diluting more than they need to, but not so much more that anybody will notice.

Let's say their average beer is 5% more diluted than it should be -- that adds up to more than one extra beer per case, which, given the number of cases they move, adds up really quickly. I'm surprised the lawsuits are for only $5 million!

feinbera said:

First of all, it has to be 3-8% of the 5% advertised on the label -- unless they are selling Bud whose ABV is advertised at 5% but is actually -3%??

Secondly, it sounds like they're not diluting to hit the stated ABV on the head -- rather, they're knowingly diluting more than they need to, but not so much more that anybody will notice.

Let's say their average beer is 5% more diluted than it should be -- that adds up to more than one extra beer per case, which, given the number of cases they move, adds up really quickly. I'm surprised the lawsuits are for only $5 million!

Click to expand...

But really, who cares? So you're being shorted by a few measly percentage points of alcohol even if you drink the whole case at once.

forstmeister said:

But really, who cares? So you're being shorted by a few measly percentage points of alcohol even if you drink the whole case at once.

Click to expand...

It's about consumer rights as well as corporations abiding by the law

nthammer said:

It's about consumer rights as well as corporations abiding by the law

Click to expand...

I'm glad nobody is this up-in-arms over craft brewers stiffing them out of a few points. After listening to brewers talk on podcasts, and reading what they have to say, it's common for some of them to be off on percentage on both ends of the spectrum.

Teromous said:

I'm glad nobody is this up-in-arms over craft brewers stiffing them out of a few points. After listening to brewers talk on podcasts, and reading what they have to say, it's common for some of them to be off on percentage on both ends of the spectrum.

Click to expand...

I have friends in the craft beer industry. I have taken part in many aspects of the process and its not an exact science no matter how hard you try. Yes, you can measure everything perfectly and replicate steps perfectly, but we all know how easy it is for things to not turn out perfectly. Stated abv on a label is, at best, an average. It's nothing to get pissed about really.

It could be a big ATF issue. Alcoholic beverage labeling has fairly strict requirements. According to TTB.gov (http://www.ttb.gov/beer/bam.shtml), stated ABV must be within 1% and the allowable tolerance to the ABV stated on the label is 0.3%. So a 5% labeled beer could have 4.885% to 5.115% ABV.

The main claim consumers could make is in taxes. If your State taxes retail sales per % alcohol, besides being shorted on the alcohol, you're also being over taxed.

feinbera said:

First of all, it has to be 3-8% of the 5% advertised on the label -- unless they are selling Bud whose ABV is advertised at 5% but is actually -3%??...

Click to expand...

hahaha, that is how I read it untill I did the maths and realised it would mean they are making beer that actually sobers your up

Beernik said:

It could be a big ATF issue. Alcoholic beverage labeling has fairly strict requirements. According to TTB.gov (http://www.ttb.gov/beer/bam.shtml), stated ABV must be within 0.1% and the allowable tolerance to the ABV stated on the label is 0.3%. So a 5% labeled beer could have 4.885% to 5.115% ABV.

The main claim consumers could make is in taxes. If your State taxes retail sales per % alcohol, besides being shorted on the alcohol, you're also being over taxed.

Click to expand...

Again this is how you read it, I would expect it would be that you must express it to the closest 0.1% (fixed your quote by the way) but the beer in the bottle can be 0.3% higher or lower = a 4.6% beer could actually be 4.3-4.9%. Really being acurate to 0.015% is a bit impossible
And while this might be exploited to have the beer consistantly 0.3% lower than stated that would leave them with a problem if a hickup in production (which will happen) dropped that by another 0.1%

Thanks for fixing the quote. I'm a bit punchy. I just finished a 300 mile drive.

Accuracy to the thousandth, yes. Accuracy to the hundredth is not impossible for a company like InBev. I would be surprised if their QC staff didn't test their process to 0.05% accuracy monthly.

Off topic: you know what's really odd about the labeling requirements?

If they use FD&C Yellow #5 is has to be stated on the label.

Because aparently someone must have been doing that.

Beernik said:

Thanks for fixing the quote. I'm a bit punchy. I just finished a 300 mile drive.

Accuracy to the thousandth, yes. Accuracy to the hundredth is not impossible for a company like InBev. I would be surprised if their QC staff didn't test their process to 0.05% accuracy monthly.

Off topic: you know what's really odd about the labeling requirements?

If they use FD&C Yellow #5 is has to be stated on the label.

Because aparently someone must have been doing that.

Click to expand...

InBev probably could but the little guys not so much.
Apparently the Yellow#5 can cause all sorts of side affects which might be the reason for listing it. It has been claimed to cause asthma attacks in children... but then again you should probably not be given them your beer anyway
By the way I'm not all bad on additives but that was the only reasonable reason for having to list it I could think of... I mean it's not like they want to turn bud light into a "dark" beer by adding yellow#5 do they
Edit: just saw another thread on this with this link that has a bit more info http://m.yahoo.com/w/ygo-frontpage/...ref_w=frontdoors&view=today&.intl=US&.lang=en
sounds like your were right beerik! But really anyone invloved in that suit makes me think that they just care about getting drunk if they are arguing over having there beer being 92.5% water instaed of 93% water!

Mongrel said:

Wonder if it's the same guys who are going after Subway for the 11" footlongs.

Click to expand...

!!!

forstmeister said:

I have friends in the craft beer industry. I have taken part in many aspects of the process and its not an exact science no matter how hard you try. Yes, you can measure everything perfectly and replicate steps perfectly, but we all know how easy it is for things to not turn out perfectly. Stated abv on a label is, at best, an average. It's nothing to get pissed about really.

Click to expand...

Oh, but the alcohol percentage is what gets you pissed!

sorry, I couldn't resist!

forstmeister said:

I have friends in the craft beer industry. I have taken part in many aspects of the process and its not an exact science no matter how hard you try. Yes, you can measure everything perfectly and replicate steps perfectly, but we all know how easy it is for things to not turn out perfectly. Stated abv on a label is, at best, an average. It's nothing to get pissed about really.

Click to expand...

Oh, but the alcohol percentage is what gets you pissed!

sorry, I couldn't resist!

nthammer said:

It's about consumer rights as well as corporations abiding by the law

Click to expand...

This.

In spite of the Supreme Court's repeated finding that "corporate personhood" is a thing, you can't throw one in jail for fraud. The only way to keep corporations from misbehaving is to make misbehavior so expensive that it's more profitable to follow the rules, and given the speed and efficiency with which our regulators and lawmakers work (cough, cough), lawsuits with hefty punitive damages are the only realistic way to make misbehavior sufficiently expensive as to be unprofitable.

feinbera said:

This.

In spite of the Supreme Court's repeated finding that "corporate personhood" is a thing, you can't throw one in jail for fraud. The only way to keep corporations from misbehaving is to make misbehavior so expensive that it's more profitable to follow the rules, and given the speed and efficiency with which our regulators and lawmakers work (cough, cough), lawsuits with hefty punitive damages are the only realistic way to make misbehavior sufficiently expensive as to be unprofitable.

Click to expand...

Guess if you don't drink that SH-T, should'nt bother U!! Bunch of BS to me, just like McD HOT coffee back in the days!!!

Is Ruination really 100+ IBU's?
I smell a law suit! :cross:

Many years ago (70s) at the Heineken Breweries, if the beer came out too low in alcohol they turned it into "shandies." Soda pop with beer added to get a 1% Alc. beverage. Allegedly youngsters went wild on those as they could just buy them in the corner store/supermarket. Mind you, in those days there was not that kind of money around to really go wild. And they could get a real Pilsner (Heineken, Amstel, Grolsch, etc.) for a dime or 2 more.

feinbera said:

This.

In spite of the Supreme Court's repeated finding that "corporate personhood" is a thing, you can't throw one in jail for fraud. The only way to keep corporations from misbehaving is to make misbehavior so expensive that it's more profitable to follow the rules, and given the speed and efficiency with which our regulators and lawmakers work (cough, cough), lawsuits with hefty punitive damages are the only realistic way to make misbehavior sufficiently expensive as to be unprofitable.

Click to expand...

I agree with your general philosophy regarding watchdogging corporations. I just find it very hard to believe that a couple of redneck brothers who drink 2 cases of bud a week are worried about justice. This is a frivolous lawsuit at best, and just a complete joke at worst.

I'm all for getting back at the man and all, but InBev is a pretty silly target to make a stand against. Especially when we're talking about .15% delta ABV.